The Multiannual Financial Framework is more than a budget for the European Union, it sets the priorities for Europe's action for almost a decade. What objectives do you consider the European Commission to be crucial for the EU's competitiveness?
The Multiannual Financial Framework is not just a set of figures, but a reflection of the priorities the European Union sets itself for the following years. From a competitive point of view, it is crucial that the European Commission's actions focus not only on the budget itself but besides on creating conditions conducive to the improvement of businesses and innovation across the Union.
It is worth remembering that the budget is only 1 of the many tools of EU policy – important, but not the only one. Equally crucial is the deepening of the single market, including the improvement of the Union of Capital Markets, as well as facilitating investment and saving on a European scale. specified actions could in the long word have a greater impact on competitiveness than simply expanding backing in individual programmes.
Nor should we forget the request to simplify rules and procedures, both on the part of beneficiaries and administrations. It is not only about reducing excessive reporting obligations, but besides about creating more transparent and predictable rules to make full usage of the possible of the European economy.
The competitiveness of the European Union depends not so much on the size of the budget but on the ability to make simple, predictable and innovation-friendly conditions for businesses.
What goals and interests is Poland fighting for in the framework of the MFF negotiations? Are we more committed to maintaining conventional funds – cohesion and agriculture – or to shifting funds towards fresh strategical areas specified as defence, digitisation and green technologies?
Strong support for cohesion policy and the Common Agricultural Policy remains crucial for Poland. These are 2 pillars that have been effectively supporting regional development, improving competitiveness and modernising the economy for many years. At the same time, they contribute to the financing of climate change and digitisation activities, supporting investments in modern technologies, sustainable agriculture and the improvement of digital infrastructure.
There are inactive crucial differences in the level of improvement between the countries and regions of the Union – the convergence process has not been completed. Cohesion policy should so proceed to play a central function in the EU budget. For Poland, many regions stay below the EU average in terms of GNI per capita, which shows how crucial further support for equalising improvement opportunities is.
The analysis of data from 2021 to 1923 shows that only 4 regions – Śląskie, Wielkopolskie, Dolnośląskie and Pomorskie – are present included in the group of intermediate developed regions (as defined by the EU classification). The Warsaw Capital Region has reached a level exceeding the EU average, which ranks it in the category of highly developed regions. The remaining 12 voivodships inactive belong to a group of little developed regions (GNI level per capita Under 75% of the EU average), which full justifies the request for further strong support from European funds.
At the same time, fresh challenges are emerging, requiring a common European response, especially in the area of safety and defence. Poland is actively participating in this discussion, in favour of a sustainable approach that will let fresh areas to develop, but without weakening conventional policies with proven effectiveness.
On defence issues, the EU budget can support industrial cooperation, technology improvement and dual-use infrastructure, but does not finance expenditure stricte military. It is so crucial that EU instruments in this area focus on strengthening the European industrial base and production capacity, including in conjunction with cohesion policy.
The measures provided for in the Agora EU programme will besides be crucial for Poland, which funds cooperation with the alleged 3rd sector in order to keep democratic standards in the associate States. We besides support the link between EU funds and the regulation of law – the European Commission maintains the existing conditionality regulation in this regard.
Poland advocates a balance between the fresh priorities of the Union and conventional policies that have been effectively supporting the improvement of regions for years – due to the fact that the sustainable competitiveness of Europe requires both innovation and solidarity.
What major differences of opinion can be seen present at the negotiating table – between countries, regions or EU institutions – and how can they affect the final form of the budget? Does Poland have the capacity to rise allies among the associate States within its priorities?
The first exchanges of views in ongoing discussions confirm that associate States mostly keep their conventional negotiating positions. any net contributors are in favour of a more conservative approach to spending levels, calling for a simplification in the EU budget to around 1% of EU GNI and maintaining discount mechanisms. another countries, on the another hand, place emphasis on greater spending ambition in key policy areas, which in turn requires compromises.
The Commission's current proposal, although mostly continuing the priorities of EU policies to date, introduces a fresh architecture for managing funds. This requires an in-depth analysis and balance of the expectations of all partners.
Poland actively participates in dialog in the framework of existing cooperation formats, including initiatives Friends of Cohesion, bringing together seventeen countries with akin cohesion policy objectives. This makes it possible to build common positions and strengthen negotiating positions on key issues. Naturally, there are differences among these countries due to different economic, geographical and social conditions – any confederate countries focus on migration and stableness issues of the region, while the key issues of external border safety stay for the east countries.
Unanimity required for the adoption of the Multiannual Financial Framework is simply a warrant of the protection of the interests of all associate States, although it makes the negotiation process lengthy and demanding. These negotiations are so a complex process, requiring permanent compromise, flexibility and common understanding. Poland, while maintaining open dialog and cooperation with partners with convergent priorities, seeks to influence the final form of the budget in a way that strikes a balance between conventional policies supporting regional improvement and the fresh strategical objectives of the Union.
Negotiations on the budget of the Union are not competition, but the art of compromise – Poland is building its position through cooperation and striving for a balance between improvement solidarity and the fresh strategical challenges of Europe.
Can it be estimated at this phase that the budgetary position for the period 2028-2034 will be more centralised at the expense of the decision-making of European regions?
This has so far been the most talked about in the context of cohesion funds, but fresh objectives, specified as green transformation or security, requiring cooperation at the level of the central authorities of the associate States, may besides lead to an extension of this approach to another Union policies.
At this stage, it is inactive hard to find the final solutions. However, the European Commission's proposal is more akin to the approach known from the RRF and National Recovery Plans than from the erstwhile doctrine of cohesion policy. Poland will search to keep the appropriate function of the regions in the programming and implementation of future financial instruments. The regions know their local needs and conditions best, and their participation in the decision-making process remains crucial for the efficient and efficient usage of resources.
The Commission's proposal besides shows a clear increase in the importance of the instruments centrally managed by Brussels. These are mechanisms in which Polish entities have so far shown a comparatively weak absorption of funds. In the coming perspective, this will be a major challenge – for both the administration and the implementing institutions – to increase the ability to usage these tools effectively and to guarantee that funds from the fresh budget truly support the improvement of strategical areas of the Polish economy.
The expanding centralisation of the EU budget requires Poland not only to defend the function of the regions, but besides to strengthen the competences that will effectively scope for the resources managed from Brussels level.
Do the proposed fresh EU own resources – in the form of climate taxes or ETS2 – endanger to weaken the competitiveness of countries specified as Poland, which are inactive making up for the energy transition? Is there an knowing among European partners for the unique scale of challenges facing our country?
We are pleased that the European Commission has abandoned the establishment of the ETS2 as an own resource of the Union. This is an crucial decision from the point of view of countries which are inactive in the process of energy transformation – specified as Poland – due to the fact that it allows for greater flexibility in the implementation of national actions. However, there is inactive a proposal to usage revenues from ETS1, which, in the current form, is unacceptable for Poland.
With respect to the Commission's another proposals, we are dealing with open and ready dialogue, while stressing that fresh own resources should be a real origin of additional resources for the EU budget, not just shifting national resources. They should besides be fair and proportionate – they must not burden little prosperous associate States to a greater extent. Only then will cost sharing be equal and take into account the differences in the level of improvement of the different economies.
The Union's fresh own resources can only strengthen the common budget if they do not deepen the improvement gap – actual European solidarity requires that the common objectives do not become an uneven burden.
It is besides worth noting that the Commission's proposals for fresh own resources – both those presented present and those that have arisen in erstwhile discussions – are not limited to climate issues. possible sources of backing are much wider as the European Union generates crucial added value in many areas of the economy and regulatory activity. Therefore, the introduction of fresh own resources should be based on their link to this added value, so that they make real fresh revenues for the Union and not only shift existing national funds according to the fresh distribution key.
This approach will make fair, transparent and sustainable financial mechanisms that will full exploit the possible of the common market, innovation and investment in Europe.
In what areas could Poland build its competitive advantages within the framework of the European strategy – and how can the fresh budget help?
At the level of improvement at which Poland is presently located, conventional EU policies inactive play a key function – especially cohesion policy and the Common Agricultural Policy. These are instruments that proceed to play a fundamental function in equalising regional improvement opportunities, improving infrastructure quality and strengthening economical competitiveness. Cohesion policy de facto competitiveness policy – and should be strengthened alternatively than restricted.
At the same time, it is crucial that the fresh budget of the European Union continues to play an crucial origin of financing for climate and digital transformation in Poland. Appropriately targeted measures can accelerate the modernisation of the economy in these areas, support investments in renewable energy sources, improve energy efficiency and stimulate the improvement of modern technologies and advanced value-added industries.
Cohesion policy is not an expense but an investment in competitiveness – as long as Poland can combine conventional support with modern improvement directions, it can build a lasting advantage in the European economy.
Regardless of who will exercise power in Poland in subsequent years, 1 of the most crucial challenges will be to increase the participation of Polish entities in instruments centrally managed by the European Commission – especially those aimed at research, improvement and innovation. The proposal of the next Multiannual Financial Framework shows a marked increase in the importance of instruments where Poland continues to show a comparatively weak absorption of resources.
It is so essential to further strengthen national organization and organisational competences in order to increase our ability to make effective usage of these mechanisms. Only then will the fresh budget of the Union be able to effectively support the improvement of strategical areas of the Polish economy and contribute to building sustainable competitive advantages of our country within the European economical Community.
Does the fresh financial position give Poland an chance to strengthen its position as co-founder of European economical policy, not just a beneficiary of funds?
All associate States, including Poland, participate in the process of shaping the European Union budget on an equal footing. This ensures that the interests of each country are taken into account and decisions taken under the Multiannual Financial Framework are based on a compromise.
Poland should surely not be a net contributor at the current level of wealth, which is around 80% of the EU average. This position is clear and understands among our partners in the European Union, which confirms the budgetary talks to date.
Poland can be a co-founder and not only a beneficiary of European economical policy, provided that the community is built on the principles of justice, solidarity and common respect for the different levels of improvement of the associate States.
Poland has consistently stressed that at this level of improvement it expects fair treatment of EU funds – so that the usage of funds is adequate to our improvement needs and does not lead to an excessive burden on the national budget. This is the only way we can truly participate in the creation of a common European economical policy, keeping the balance between work and solidarity within the Community.
