This Tuesday at the plenary session of the European Parliament at Strasbourg, Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) debated the components of the General Budget of the European Union for 2025. Every year, the Commission proposes an annual budget within the parameters of a longer-term budget, and then the Council and the Parliament review the draft annual budget and propose their revisions. On Tuesday, MEPs debated the items they wanted to be changed in the budget; then, on Wednesday, the Parliament’s proposed changes were voted on. The next step is to form a reconciliation committee, which works to bring the three institutions to an agreement, and then the revised budget is passed.
The budget is mainly composed of the Gross National Product of the member states, with members contributing in function of their economic weight. By sharing resources, Europe is more effective in combating problems that are better suited for higher-r level legislating than the national governments of its members. Around two-thirds of the budget is always set aside for agriculture policy and policy of regional development and cohesion. The last third of the budget is the subject of the debate which took place Tuesday afternoon.
The Council only ever makes cuts!
MEPs from across the board disagreed with the Council’s propositions to make cuts to the Erasmus+ allocation because it is a crucial program for supporting youth mobility and education and EU competitiveness. A number of MEPs testified to how the educational program had affected their own lives as students, explaining that without the grants provided by the EU budget, they would not have been able to afford their year abroad. These sentiments were neatly summarized by Anna Stürgkh from Renew Europe:
“Dear Council, keep your hands off Erasmus for the European youth and for the European future.”
– Anna STÜRGKH, Renew Europe
Many were concerned about the proposition to cut funding to scientific research, arguing that it’s important to prepare better for the future of the EU’s economic competitiveness with China and the US by funding innovation and technological development, preparing for a future that might include another Trump presidency.
Will the debt from NextGenerationEU affect the next generation of the EU?
In the wake of the economic crisis caused by Covid-19, a temporary recovery program called NextGenerationEU was developed to borrow grants to member states out of the EU budget. The interest on the debt from this program turned out to be higher than expected. This debt is intended to be paid off in the next few decades, and some MEPs are worried about the debt carrying on too long and affecting future generations. The EU’s revenue comes from customs duties, contributions based on Value Added Tax collected by member states, and direct member contributions from the Gross National Income, which citizen taxes contribute to. The EU budget represents around 1% of the total European GDP. Marcin Sypniewski from the far right group ESN was resigned to increase taxes for European citizens, whereas others from the center left argue we need to find new sources of revenue for the EU to pay off this debt.
The Right approach to security
Cybersecurity and border security came up a lot in the debates. A number of deputies from the center right EPP group supported more funding for Frontex, the EU agency working to fight cross-border crime in Europe and protect the external borders of the Schengen Area. They called for the EU to manage migration and border structure more effectively. Estrella Galán of The Left criticized this position, calling to shift the conversation from external security to saving migrant lives, citing the statistic that every day 13 people lose their lives at sea trying to get to Europe. Bogdan Rzońca from the far right group ECR spoke on behalf of European citizens in support of stronger border policy for member states including funding to build and maintain border fences, calling this “the highlight of our times”.
When Agriculture fits Climate
Unsurprisingly, a lot of deputies from the Green group spoke about climate. They stressed that policy for the environmental transition should support the health of European citizens and provide civil protection mechanisms for the disasters hitting the European continent as a result of climate change. To some applause, Kai Tegethoff of Greens/EFA reminded the room of the unmet goal for thirty percent of the EU budget to be set aside for climate-related actions and criticized the “insane practice” of traveling back and forth between Brussels and Strasbourg for plenary sessions.
MEPs from across the board emphasized a need for support for the agricultural sector, many arguing for funding agricultural technological development in order to improve competitiveness and more effectively combating climate change. On the other hand, Van Brug from Renew received much applause when he argued that the two-thirds of the budget always set aside for agriculture and cohesion should be reallocated to innovation, defense, and migration in a moment when economic prosperity is not guaranteed for the Union.
And above all, competitiveness
Danuše Nerudová from EPP cited President of the Commission Ursula von der Leyen’s imperative for the EU to strengthen its economic competitiveness with China and the U.S. Different groups have different approaches to this problem. Center and left groups continued criticizing the Draft Budget 2025 cuts to flagship programs like Erasmus+ and Horizons Europe, emphasizing a need for support of research, technological innovation, and agriculture to keep pace with other world leaders. On the far right side of the room, many pointed to systemic issues in the Commission’s allocation of budgetary funds, claiming it fails to reflect the public mood and wastes citizens’ tax money.
On Wednesday, the Parliament voted to amend the Council’s position on the Commission’s proposed Draft Budget 2025. The Committee on Budgets (BUDG) had voted to reverse all of the Council’s reductions and instead proposed increases for the Parliament’s priorities, which were focused on improving the lives of EU citizens and boosting the competitiveness and sustainability of the Union. Monika Holhmeier from EPP pointed out that we are looking at the most diverse EU budget to date. For the first time, in 2020 the EU’s long-term budget (for 2021-27) was revised mid-term, reinforced with an extra 64.6 billion euros mostly supporting the crisis in Ukraine. The U.S. presidential election was mentioned several times throughout the afternoon, notably with worries about what another Trump presidency would mean for the future of Russia-EU relations and climate. The crises of Covid-19, Ukraine, Israel-Palestine, and the environment greatly influence how the EU will use its around 200 billion euro 2025 budget. (European Commission)
During the debates, MEPs represent EU citizens as experts on the issues facing the Union. As an institution, the Parliament works in “trilogue” with the Commission and the Council to draw up the annual budget for the Union that will best support the economy of the Union and member states and the well-being of European citizens.
Follow the comments:
|
