Public Affairs Networking
EU Budget debate continues to draw coverage

The Commission’s proposal for the EU’s next Multiannual Financial Framework for the 2021-2027 period continues to make the headlines. This debate is about to no less than €1,279.4 billion, according to a commentary in Kronen Zeitung. The elites in charge of the EU want to increase Member States’ contributions, while the likes of Austria, the Netherlands and Denmark are calling for the EU institutions to be reduced in size in order to cut costs. According to the author of the commentary, the EU is used to going through crises, especially when it comes to as much money as in the case of the budget.

In an interview with Rheinische Post, Alexander Dobrindt, parliamentary leader of Bavaria’s CSU, expresses his scepticism towards Commissioner Oettinger’s budget proposals. “We are ready to contribute more money, but we also demand greater added value,” Mr Dobrindt stresses. Even with significantly lower contributions, there must be more than just additional bureaucracy coming from Brussels, Mr Dobrindt suggests. He calls for a greater commitment to major tasks such as the protection of external borders.

In an article in Libero, Antonio Socci claims that the recent EU budget proposal takes money away from Italy. In order to prevent Italians from protesting against this, the EU is putting pressure on Italy’s political parties. According to Mr Socci, Italy’s parties are dominated by the EU authorities, hence the inability to support Italy’s requests. In a commentary on Sic, Marques Mendes explains that the cuts in the European budget are bad news for Portugal. Mr Mendes states that despite the announced cuts of 7% in European structural policies, Portugal will suffer a bigger cut in terms of communitarian funds. Mr Mendes estimates that Portugal will be subject to cuts “between 10% and 15%, something like €3 billion”. LNT reports that Latvia is not satisfied with the Commission’s proposal. The country mostly objects to Commission’s proposal to cut funding for agriculture and cohesion policy.

Similarly, MEP Andrey Novakov (EPP) said in an interview with BNR that Bulgaria will oppose the intention to cut EU cohesion and Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). As regards the Commission’s idea to link the rule of law to EU funds, he says he unconditionally supports the strengthening of the rule of law in all EU member states, but adds that operational programme funding is deviating from its main purpose when it is turned into a tool to re-educate, encourage or sanction. Meanwhile, Eurosceptic pressure group Change Britain has claimed that the United Kingdom’s annual payment to the EU would soar to more than £22 billion if Brexit was cancelled, the trenchantly eurosceptic Daily Express reports.

Some news reports are more optimistic. Expresso writes that despite the Commission’s budget proposal, which includes cuts in the fields of agriculture and cohesion, the Portuguese government will continue to defend a higher budget for the EU. In a contributing article in Der Standard, Margit Schratzenstaller writes that the conditions are favourable and the Commission’s budget plans are ambitious. Communications specialist Ott Heinapuu from the Estonian Finance Ministry writes in Postimees that the reduction of structural funds allocated to Estonia may be partially or fully balanced out by the growth of options and financing in other areas.

A commentary in NRC Handelsblad says that the new EU budget proposal looks promising despite the negative reaction of the Netherlands to it. Acting as if the contribution to the EU is being deposited into a black hole in Brussels is simplistic and harmful. After all, Dutch taxpayers will get a lot in return for their money. Similarly, in an analysis in Het Financieele Dagblad, Dutch economist Mathijs Bouman criticises the reaction of the Dutch government, which dubbed the proposal “unacceptable”. The possible conditionality of the allocation of EU funds is one of the most debated issues. In an interview with Spiegel Online, European Parliament President Tajani said it would be a good thing to make the allocation of EU funds conditional, Vs.hu reports. “Solidarity should not only go from the West to the East. Eastern Member States get a lot of EU money. In return, they should show solidarity”.

Dziennik Gazeta Prawna estimates that linking the allocation of EU funds with the rule of law is a move aimed against the Law and Justice party (PiS). Even though EU officials, including Commissioner Jourová, stress that the decision is not meant to hit any EU Member State in particular, sources in Brussels say something different. The proposed reduction of subsidies in the field of agriculture is also discussed. El País writes that the whole agriculture sector is against the EU proposal to cut the budget of the CAP for the 2020-2027 period. According to estimates, the impact of the cuts could reach 16% of the current subsidies by 2027. Spain is expected to receive €35.7 billion in direct support and an additional €8.29 billion for rural development between 2014 and 2020.

In a commentary in Die Presse, Josef Urschitz agrees with the sector on the fact that the maintenance of small-scale structures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions requires greater assistance. However, the EU subsidies are designed as large-scale funding. Mr Urschitz calls for an evaluation. Poland’s Do Rzeczy considers that Poland should be most afraid of the Commissioner Oettinger’s budget for agricultural policy because it is to be reduced by 5%. Helsingin Sanomat interviews Finnish Agriculture Minister Jari Leppä, who says that not a single euro should be cut from the agriculture budget. Taking into consideration how bad the situation is for Finnish farmers, cuts simply cannot be accepted, he maintains.

In an interview on France Inter, French member of the National Assembly Amélie de Montchalin (LREM) comments on the project to reduce European aid for agriculture. As the CAP is a key policy for reasons of food security and sovereignty, France has denounced the announced cut and hopes to negotiate a delay so that the Commission’s budgetary choices reflect real political priorities, taking into account the results of the European elections. She adds that the CAP must favour modernisation and a change in practices, in order to produce more ecologically and to stimulate local distribution.

©EuropeanUnion2018

Comments
No comments yet
Submit a comment

Policy and networking for the digital age
Policy Review TV Neil Stewart Associates
© Policy Review | Policy and networking for the digital age 2024 | Log-in | Proudly powered by WordPress
Policy Review EU is part of the NSA & Policy Review Publishing Network