WIREDGOV

The European Parliament is holding to a firm, united position in the deadlock over the EU budget for 2011.

This was confirmed in Tuesday's plenary debate on the 2011 budget negotiations with Commission President Barroso, Belgian Presidency representative Melchior Wathelet and Budgets Commissioner Lewandowski.

Discussions ranged over three key issues: the figures for the budget 2011; flexibility within the budget to deal with new priorities or upcoming urgencies; the question of Parliament's involvement in talks on the future Multi-annual Financial Framework and own resources.

Opening the debate, EP President Jerzy Buzek reminded the EP's guests that Parliament was prepared to accept Council's figures, in commitments and payments. "In exchange we wanted agreement on the question of flexibility in the budget and on how the Lisbon Treaty should be implemented with a view to future talks on the MFF and own resources", he said.

The first of the political group speakers, Joseph Daul (EPP, FR), said "The debate is not a battle for power. What it is about is making it possible for the EU to meet its promises... The reality is that the present budget does not take into account the EU's new competences; it does not take into account the budget review Parliament has asked for and contains no funding for the 2020 strategy. Council is adopting programmes but is not providing for their funding."

For the S&D group, Martin Schulz (DE) said "Parliament is being tested. The discussion is not about money anymore but about the direction in which the EU is developing. It is about the rights of Parliament as reflected in the Treaty of Lisbon... We are elected to deal with the EU and its budget. Now the national governments want control and monitor us. That is the wrong way around!" On flexibility, he said "it's in the interest of all the institutions to be able to react in a flexible manner if needed."

Liberal leader Guy Verhofstadt (ALDE, BE) then took the floor, saying "On the figures, there is no secret that Parliament is ready to accept the figures, within a global deal of course, but the second part, flexibility, is just as important. Flexibility is not a concession from the Council. It is needed to fund new projects."  "The most important thing is that we need to solve the problem of future financing of the EU. In this own resources must be a part of the deal. This is not about changing the treaty, but about applying the treaties!"

Daniel Cohn-Bendit (Greens/EFA, FR), on behalf of his group, argued that the EU had "reached a crossroads". "It is not about the money, it is about the question of furthering the European idea or not. We want the EU to solve problems that cannot be solved nationally. But Member States won't give the EU the means needed to do this. We have tabled three requests. To the Member States I would like to say: Take it or leave it! We are ready to wait as long as it takes. We are not going to stop the debate in the middle."

The ECR group was represented by Lajos Bokros (HU), who contended that "500 million tax payers cannot understand why there was no agreement in the first year of Lisbon...But there is a way to agree - if we can agree on flexibility. If we agree on flexibility, Parliament could promise not to force any political declarations on the governments. It would be yet another shame and a bigger shame if we cannot agree this time."

Lothar Bisky (DE) of the GUE/NGL group stressed "New tasks cannot, at least not entirely, be financed within the current budget. Member States have to discuss own resources with the Parliament. If we don't talk any more, we are abandoning the idea of European integration." He also warned that "net payers tend to forget what solidarity means".

The final group speaker was Marta Andreasen (EFD, UK), who told the House "Let us be honest. Negotiations on next year's budget collapsed because of this Parliament's ambition to get more powers over the budget. And the idea to have a European tax has always been unacceptable to us."

Replying for the EU Presidency, Belgian state secretary for the budget Melchior Wathelet singled out three issues: the 2011 budget, the question of flexibility and the political declaration regarding Parliament's involvement in discussions about the future MFF and the own resources debate. He believed the political declaration was the real problem in the Council, saying "But we can have this discussion. It is in the Treaty and we will have it, maybe at a later stage." 

Lastly, Commission president José Manuel Barroso said to the assembled MEPs "We must show that all stakeholders understand the implications of the Treaty fully, that close cooperation between the institutions at the highest political level is a natural consequence of our joint commitment to adopt the appropriate financial framework for the future".

"We will use our right of initiative to put forward proposals on own resources before the end of next June. Obviously, Parliament has to be consulted for this issue", he added.  Mr Barroso also backed Parliament's position on flexibility, saying "We should have a qualified majority on 0.03 % of GNI. I hope to get a positive message about this from Council."

Parliament will vote on a resolution on the budget negotiations on Thursday 25 November.