The European Parliament voted this week on the EU budget priorities for the period 2028–2034. Euro MPs agree that the current spending ceiling of 1% of EU-27 gross national income is not adequate to address the increasing number of challenges facing Europe. Among another things, we talk about the war in Ukraine, hard economical and social conditions and the worsening climate crisis. Euro MPs besides pay attention to global instability, including the withdrawal of the United States from its global role.
– The budget proposal for the next 7 years, which we voted on on on on 7 May in Parliament, is, of course, somewhat different from the proposal we had at the beginning, in January, due to the fact that we are inactive working with all the committees and shadow rapporteurs from the pro-European political groups. We have a negotiation process that is usually long-term. The rules are the same, we want a majority in committee for the budget and the majority we have present in plenary – says Newseria agency Carla Tavares, associate of the European Parliament from Portugal, rapporteur of the EP Budget Committee.
The resolution was adopted by 317 votes in favour. 206 Members voted against and 123 abstained. Euro MPs clearly point out that more resources must be allocated to the European Union budget. 1% of gross national income (GNI) of each EU country is no longer adequate to meet the challenges facing the Old Continent. Expenditure must so take account of Russia's war against Ukraine, very hard economical and social conditions, a gap in competitiveness and a deepening climate and biodiversity crisis.
Members say no to the European Commission's thought of individual national plans alternatively of individual funds. This mechanics was utilized in the Instrument for Reconstruction and Enhancing Immunity, in which funds are paid under national recovery plans. The alternate proposed by the Euro-Parliamentary is to make a structure that guarantees transparency and parliamentary accountability. It is to affect regional and local authorities and all stakeholders.
In the EP resolution, MEPs considered that megafunds combining existing programmes were not the solution. We are talking about the proposed "competitiveness fund". Instead, Euro MPs are proposing to make a fresh fund aimed at stimulating private and public investment supported by EU hazard simplification mechanisms.
Euro MPs have besides stressed that expanding defence spending is crucial, but this must not affect social, environmental and long-term EU policies.
– The budget provides for a part of defence, which is now very crucial for the European Union. erstwhile we started working on the Multiannual Financial Framework last October, the realities were very different from those present. We must look at the defence, invest in it, but besides in safety and readiness. We believe that we cannot invest in defence at the expense of cohesion. We request defence and we besides request cohesion, so we request to talk about new, real sources of funds – This is Carla Tavares.
Members point out in the resolution on the MFF that repayment of the costs of existing loans, including the NextGenerationEU programme, must not impede the financing of precedence EU actions. They item the request to separate debt from programme spending and call on the EU Council to adopt new, "real" sources of income. Among them, they list joint borrowing as a tool for resolving EU crises, including defence and security.
– We request to be able to respond to the request for defence measures, to search solidarity from all 27 associate States in this area, but we request to preserve funds for cohesion policy. present it is our occupation to fight for this within the European Commission. We hope that the cohesion policy we request will not suffer. We request cohesion in Poland, Portugal, all 27 associate States, but of course we besides request funds for defence. We must decently balance these 2 aspects - this is not a fresh issue, but it has now gained importance and urgency, as has cohesion policy for the 27 associate States - adds the Euro MP.
Members point out the request to introduce changes to subsequent long-term budgets to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy affecting beneficiaries. The financial plans are to be more transparent and flexible. Among another things, it is about building in the budget for each area of EU crisis consequence capacity policy, including the separation of humanitarian aid.
The priorities adopted by the European Parliament are to be taken into account in the European Commission's proposal for another MFF. It is to be published in July 2025.
