Strasbourg, 27/10/2005 (Agence Europe) - At first reading or 27 October, the European Parliament voted on the general budget for 2006, amending the budget which had been cut by the Council at its first reading of last July. The sum total of payment appropriations adopted by the European Parliament rises to 115.4 billion EUR, which represents 1.04% of Community GDP, and to 121.4 billion EUR in commitment appropriations. The two rapporteurs, Giovanni Pittella (PES, Italy) and Valdis Dombrovskis (EPP-ED, Latvia) welcomed the vote of the Parliament which, they said, shows proof that it stands united against the Council, sending it out a strong political message not to underestimate the Parliament. The MEPs opted for a reasonable strategy, by trying to make the most out of the leeway made available to it by the inter-institutional agreement, and it is now waiting for the Council to show coherence by giving the EU the means it needs to answer the requirements of the citizens. "It is not certain that the Hampton Court Summit will oppose us", joked the president of the committee on budgets Janusz Lewandowski (EPP-ED, Poland) after the vote, "we, that is least, are talking about money, and people expect concrete actions", he told the press.
On the budgetary lines given over to agriculture and rural development, the Parliament re-established the credit proposed by the European Commission for the year 2006, and took position in favour of observing modulation, which provides for 655 million EUR to be moved from heading 1A to heading 1B (rural development), as part of the reform of the CAP. On the other hand, the MEPs rejected an amendment proposing to phase out subsidies for tobacco farmers in order to pay for anti-smoking campaigns. They even went so far as to propose that the sum initially put forward by the Commission, at a level of 919 million EUR, which the Council reduced to 914 million at first reading, be re-established. Furthermore, the MEPs went along with their budget committee by adding: 3.7 billion EUR to the sum earmarked by the Council for the structural funds, and 200 million to that planned for the "implementation of the Lisbon strategy". This money will go to the sixth framework programme for research and development and to support small and medium-sized enterprises. Funding for education programmes was also increased: Socrates is to benefit from an increase of 35 million EUR, Leonardo from an additional 20 million EUR and the e-learning programme will receive an additional 3 million. According to the EP, additional funds will also be put towards the reinforcement of the European Commission's information and communication policy, but not before it has published its White Paper on this subject. As for the external action of the EU, the MEPs would like the EU to provide financial support for the reconstruction of Iraq (to the tune of 200 million for 2006), and to help to rehabilitate the regions hit by the tsunami of December 2004 (180 million EUR). Transitional aid of 40 million EUR will also go to the sugar producers of the ACP countries to help them to overcome problems due to the reform of the sector. Thursday's vote will also take account of the agreement reached the day before between the Parliament and the Council to grant 93 million EUR to the victims of the earthquake in Pakistan, of which 20 million will be made available in 2006, adding to the 73 million allocated immediately after the disaster. Furthermore, Turkey is set to benefit from 470 million EUR in commitment appropriations and 155 million in payment appropriations, under the pre-accession policy.
According to Mr Lewandowski, the month of November will be decisive, because it will spell the end of the negotiation period with the Council before second reading is finished. If both institutions agree on the 2006 budget, the Parliament hopes to agree on new prospects for an agreement on the forthcoming period of budgetary programming 2007-2013, but "the Parliament is not prepared to get into major negotiations for small successes, and will not accept a narrow agreement", Mr Pittella warned. The speech by British Prime Minister Tony Blair in the hemicycle of Strasbourg on the eve of the Hampton Court was not enough to satisfy Mr Pittella, who wants "concrete, rather than just promises". Mr Pittella believes that Tony Blair will do all he can to reach agreement on the financial perspectives, because this will be the "only result of the UK Presidency". At the same time, the MEP is refraining from speculating too much about the scenario the British Prime Minister may choose (Juncker proposal as a basis for the negotiations, taking a step towards the European Parliament's position? Calling the CAP into question and increasing the budget for research?). Mr Dombrovskis feels that there will be progress if the United Kingdom proposes a compromise on the British rebate. In any case, via its vote on Thursday, the Parliament has expressed its unequivocal request for a clear message from the Council on both the 2006 budget and the financial perspectives 2007-2013.
Commissioner Grybauskaite, announcing new figures for agriculture, declares that she will be on the side of the Parliament
During Wednesday morning's debate, the Commission's budget rapporteur, Gianni Pitella (PES, Italy) immediately asked a fundamental question: do the choices made within the framework of this budget correspond to the priorities of the citizens, and is it up to the Union to finance these priorities? Yes, he answered, expressing his surprise that these topics were not on the Hampton Court agenda. To which areas do the resources of the Union bring irreplaceable added value? Mr Pitella cited cohesion policy, education, training and youth policy (the European Parliament has never requested such a large increase in funding for young people), and also the role of the Union in the world. Expressing regret at the gap between the statements of politicians and the funds devoted to action outside the EU, the representative of the Democrati di sinistra continued: Here we are like princes without sceptres. Addressing the Council, Mr Pitella wondered whether the stand-off with the Parliament between the first and second readings was really unavoidable. Do we have to come with the revolver of article 272 in our pocket, he asked. He hoped not, because what was at stake was not bizarre corporatist demands, but a legitimate request for adequate financial resources at this terrible time in the Union's life. Mr Pitella also asked the United Kingdom, which has often been more of a partner in, than a part of, European unification, to accept that some challenges can only be met by working together (for the result of the vote on the budget committee, see EUROPE No. 9054). Valdis Dombrovski (EPP/ED, Latvia), rapporteur on the other institutions, recalled the main priorities: strengthening of the 2004 enlargement and efficient use of funds. He insisted too on budgetary discipline, estimating that administrative spending in the Parliament could be reduced by 20 million euros. Mr Dombrovski cited travelling expenses for moving from one place of work to another and the cost of maintaining the EP's various buildings, but he was against any cost-cutting in the Parliament's information policy, which he considered fundamental.
Commissioner Grybauskaite told MEPs: I want a constructive debate, and we will be “on your side” She continued: - in a week's time, the Commission will present new estimates showing a reduction in agricultural spending and it will also present a correcting letter at the start of November on structural initiatives, since it has only now received the final requests from Member States; as far as internal policies are concerned, the Commission will accept amendments put forward by the Parliament on topics under codecision, on condition that there is agreement thereon between the two branches of the budgetary authority (thus, also the Council); with regard to external action which will require considerable funding, the Commission has calculated that, in 2006, the flexibility instrument could reach 493 million euro; on administrative spending, all the posts for the new Member States have been filled. During the course of the debate, those parliamentarians who intervened on behalf of the various committees put forward the case for their priorities (taken up sometimes, but not always, by the budget committee, which during its vote had to give its view on some 900 amendments). Here are some of the problems raised: Pasqualina Napoletano (foreign affairs): greater clarity in the use of funding for representatives outside the EU; Nirj Deva (development): further aid for the “three million people stuck at the top of a mountain who risk dying of cold” following the earthquake in Pakistan; Christopher Heaton-Harris: further explanation from Olaf, the anti-fraud office, which is requesting increases in funding and staffing, which Mr Heaton-Harris does not think are justified; Boguslaw Liberadkzi (transport): no cutting of funds for trans-European transport networks; Katerina Batzeli (agriculture): no unjustified cuts in agricultural spending; Gérard Deprez (civil liberties): increased funding, particularly for Eurojust, for the aid of victims of terrorism, Frontex the border control agency, the Schengen system of information (payment credits “stupidly cut by the Council”). The freedoms committee wants to retain reserve funds, so as to maintain the pressure on the Commission in its negotiations with the United States to conserve air travellers' rights; Alexander Stubb: funding for the debate on the future of Europe. “The Constitution is not dead. We need a debate, and money for that debate” said Mr Stubbs, who went on to say that no request from his committee had ever been accepted.
The rapporteur's analysis is largely shared by virtually all the groups, who note the existence of a problem of revenue at a time of increasingly heavy budgetary load (“We can't do more with less” declared the French Socialist Odile Guy-Quint) and request adequate provision from the Structural Funds (“they have to be given greater visibility” urged Nathalie Griesbeck, (ALDE, France, the permanent rapporteur of the committee on budgetary control on Structural Funds) of the budgetary control committee on Structural Funds). Some MEPs welcomed the presentation of an amendment (by British Labour member Neela Gill) calling for subsidies for tobacco production to be reduced. This could make funds available for research and education, German Green member Helga Trüpel considers, also urging for agricultural subsidies in general to be reduced. This is not the view taken by Jean-Claude Martinez (National Front), for whom agricultural policy is “under-funded” and who is the author of an amendment largely supported by other groups calling for a “Mothers' Day to take place on the same day throughout the Union. Polish national Wojciech Roszkowski (UEN) seized the opportunity to welcome the results of the presidential elections in his country and also to try to reassure his colleagues. This result is not a threat for Europe, the Polish are in favour of European integration, but hope that the democratic gap may be bridged, he said. French Green member Gérard Onesta denounced the “inconsistency” shown by the Parliament as it states it is willing to give up EUR 20 million but at the same time makes it quite clear that it will be ready to ask for that amount back if it is needed for real estate purchases. “The Council will laugh”, Mr Onesta said, adding: “as in four minutes' time, I shall be leaving the Chamber to negotiate a purchase of buildings”, an economically judicious choice which has allowed the Parliament to make major savings in the past, he recalled.