Brussels, 31/05/2005 (Agence Europe) - The parliamentary committee on economic and monetary affairs adopted, on 24 May, two reports by Othmar Karas (EPP-ED, Austria) on the proposals for review of the regulations relating to the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP), which are to be discussed in plenary on 6 June. Following the European Council's March agreement on recasting the Pact, the European Commission presented amendments to Regulation 1466/97 mid-April relating to strengthened surveillance of budgetary positions and coordination of economic policies, and Regulation 1467/97 aimed at speeding up and clarifying the implementation of procedure concerning excessive deficits (EUROPE 8932).
The parliamentary committee believes a real definition is needed of the notion of “exceptional and temporary deficit” under Article 104§2, on the basis of multiannual budgetary forecasts and common external hypotheses provided by the Commission. To what point and for how long can a deficit of over 3% be tolerated?, MEPs ask. Concerning the relevant factors to be taken into account by the Commission during the drafting of a report on the situation of a Member State (and during the later phases of the procedure), the parliamentary committee calls for suppression of the reference to contributions aimed at promoting international solidarity or the unification of Europe, which, according to Mr Karas, proves impossible to specify and therefore hardly “relevant”. MEPs hope to replace these elements which had been introduced in the reform of the Pact to take into account German claims about the impact of the country's unification, through a reference to “unforeseen and exceptional factors” independent of the will of Member States, such as natural or ecological disasters. The time allowed for correcting a budgetary deficit must under no circumstances exceed three years after the beginning of the deficit, the report stresses, whilst the Commission's proposal does not directly mention a buffer date. In the event of specific circumstances and negative or unexpected events, it would be possible to review the times allowed for correcting an excessive deficit by repeating a phase of the procedure.
When it comes to the preventive part of the Pact, the parliamentary committee hopes above all that the Commission will compare the figures forwarded by Member States with the data communicated by the national central banks to the European Central Bank (ECB), in order to increase the quality and reliability of statistics. The medium-term budgetary objectives should be reviewed at least once a year in the event of major structural or budgetary reforms, MEPs stress, finding that the formula used by the European Commission - “at regular intervals” - is too vague. They also call for financial audit missions by the Commission in Member States.
Not wishing to comment on specific changes to be made to the Commission's proposal as suggested by the two reports, the spokesperson for Commissioner Almunia recalled that the agreement finalised by the finance ministers and taken on board by the Heads of State and Government “is balanced and was difficult to reach” and that one should be “extremely careful before re-working it”. The decision-making procedure followed in this area does not provide the parliament with much margin of manoeuvre. The EP will give its stance on Regulation 1466/97 by cooperation procedure and on Regulation 1467/97 by consultation procedure.