Tuesday

16th Aug 2022

Opinion

EU budget: Don't cut the left arm to save the right

  • The European Parliament can still veto a deal on the seven-year EU budget (Photo: Images_of_Money)

EU heads of state and government will congregate for their extraordinary EU summit in Brussels Thursday evening (22 November).

But the biggest losers of the power struggle on the Union's budget for 2014 to 2020 known as the "multi-annual financial framework" (MFF) are already certain: the European citizens.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

Promoting the argument of the general spending squeeze, big players in the European Council will almost exclusively focus on cutting EU's allocations aimed at stimulating growth and jobs across the Union.

Given that 94 cents of every euro spent by Brussels flow back to Europe's regions, allowing local communities to upgrade transport links, invest in new technologies, and regenerate city centres, cutting the EU budget can be seen as cutting off the left arm in order to save the right.

Regardless of the detailed outcome on the actual figures, member states' rhetoric suggests that they will be unlikely to find a solution which improves both the transparency and the flexibility of the EU's long-term budget.

Moreover, the zero-sum infighting over money, dividing member states into winners and losers without a clear focus on the actual financing needs, will once again take place.

The current - and parallel - negotiations on the 2013 EU budget illustrate this clearly: member states are always keen to come up with EU projects if they are high up on their own national agenda. Yet, when it comes to financing the commitments, they are reluctant to foot the bill, leaving little or no flexibility for short-term spending adjustments.

Worse still, having 27 member states argue over billions of euros in the early hours of the morning, with each national leader having to present at least a shred of victory to his national media, is an open invitation to a deal achieved through pork-barrel politics.

The current procedure centred on haggling over national envelopes also thwarts an allocation of money to where it is most needed. The solution would be to replace national gross income-based contributions and the linked rebates and correction mechanisms by real and viable own-resources for the EU budget.

The system would then not only become simpler and more transparent, but also fairer without putting an extra burden on citizens. Revolutionary? Hardly. The EU treaties actually foresee the financing of the EU's budget largely out of a share of taxes raised at national level.

The European Parliament has made it clear - by a broad majority comprising all major political groups - that it will slam the brakes on member states' attempts to once again resort to a behind-the-doors deal which does not serve the interest of the European citizens.

We need to go back to the future, allowing for a budget that is well equipped to tackle future-challenges, flexible to react to unforeseen needs, and above all transparent. That's the real debate which will start once the mist of the budget battle lifts over the Council building.

Agreement or no agreement at this week's Council: in any case, the European Parliament will get the final say over the MFF. It will push hard to put the interests of Europe's citizens back into the game.

Joseph Daul is chairman of the European People's Party group in the European Parliament. Reimer Boege is the Parliament's chief negotiator on the multi-annual budget.

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

Column

Global hunger crisis requires more than just the Odessa deal

International donors are playing hide and seek. Instead of stepping up their assistance programmes, richer nations are cutting overseas aid, or reallocating funds from other parts of the world towards the Ukraine crisis.

Exploiting the Ukraine crisis for Big Business

From food policy to climate change, corporate lobbyists are exploiting the Ukraine crisis to try to slash legislation that gets in the way of profit. But this is only making things worse.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic prime ministers: “We will deepen co-operation on defence”
  2. EFBWW – EFBH – FETBBConstruction workers can check wages and working conditions in 36 countries
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic and Canadian ministers join forces to combat harmful content online
  4. European Centre for Press and Media FreedomEuropean Anti-SLAPP Conference 2022
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic ministers write to EU about new food labelling
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersEmerging journalists from the Nordics and Canada report the facts of the climate crisis

Latest News

  1. Germany rejects visa ban for Russian tourists
  2. Iran responds to EU's 'final text' on nuclear deal
  3. Model minority myths
  4. EU must make public who really owns its fishing fleets
  5. Germany needs to cut gas use by 20% to stave off winter crisis
  6. Europe's wildfire destruction set to hit new record
  7. How Putin and Erdoğan are making the West irrelevant
  8. Defying Russian bombs, Ukraine football starts 2022 season

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us