• Eurogroup.The Sánchez fiasco with Calviño weakens Spain's position to negotiate the Reconstruction Fund
  • Eurogroup: Nadia Calviño loses the vote and Irish Donohoe will be the next president of the Eurogroup

Barely a week left for the Summit of all Summits, the European Council that has to serve to close an agreement on the EU Recovery Plan, a fund of up to 750,000 million euros in transfers and credits and, last but not least , the EU Budget for the period 2021-2027. Under normal conditions, fighting any one of those elements, separately, would be a nightmare. Mix everything in a moment of north-south and east-west divisions, with the leadership and authority of the Franco-German axis in question, with a rebellion of the small countries and also, mixing issues such as Brexit or the relationship between funds structural and respect for the rule of law makes it an almost impossible challenge .

This Friday, the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, presented his NegoBox , the term in community slang that includes a very wide negotiating box , with very specific figures. The European Commission put numbers on the table a few weeks ago, and Michel has tweaked and framed them in a larger package after consulting with the 27 capitals.

The main lines are as follows: a Multiannual Financial Framework, the Budget, of 1,074 billion euros for the period 2021-2027 . To understand what it means you have to look back and forth. The United Kingdom has left the EU, and since it was a net contributor, there are only two options: either all countries contribute more money and the level of the last seven years is maintained, or the total figure is low. There are supporters of all positions, but it seems inevitable that the total amount will be less.

The 2014-2020 Financial Framework amounted to 1,082 billion euros, 1.16% of European income. The Commission's first proposal, almost two years ago, reduced it to 1.1 trillion, but that represents only 1.11% of the EU's gross income. Finland's proposal, which presided over the Union last year, lowered the figure even further to 1.087 trillion, which is 1.07% of community income, something that for countries like Spain was unacceptable.

In February, taking over the negotiation, Charles Michel made a controversial proposal just before a lengthy European Council, which failed to reach agreement. Then he suggested a MMF of 1.094 trillion, but that was still just 1.07% of community income. The positions have remained at odds since then. The most frugal countries, like the Netherlands, Austria, Denmark and Sweden do not want the Budget to be more than 1% of the European gross income. The Commission continues to say that 1.1% is appropriate. And today, Michel, in his new proposal, offers a landing area of ​​1,074 billion euros . Halfway between the parties, but somewhat closer to the minimums defended by the most ambitious.

In exchange, the President of the European Council also proposes to keep juicy compensatory checks for net taxpayers. With his idea, that as everything mentioned has to be negotiated at 27, Denmark would receive a corrective 'rebate' of 197 million euros; Germany, one of 3,671 million. Netherlands, just over 1,500 million. Austria one of 237 and Sweden, just under 800.

Conditionality

One of the most important parts of the discussion has to do with conditionality and the decision-making process. Michel, despite the austere resistance, has chosen to maintain the same amount of loans and transfers that the Commission proposed: 750,000 million euros. He considers it essential and not debatable . However, access to money can be somewhat complex.

The proposed system has two phases. In the first, the member states will present National Reform Plans following the schemes of the Specific Recommendations that the European Commission sends every year to all capitals. The original idea was for these Plans to be discussed with the Commission, but Michel, after pressure from many members, suggests that they be analyzed and evaluated by the Council. It is not yet clear if it would be in Ecofin or in another format, but by the ministers. And they should be approved by them.

The Netherlands wanted those plans to be unanimously approved. Spain, for example, preferred that any possibility of blocking require an inverse qualified majority. But Michel, following the idea of ​​Germany (who preside over the EU this semester) has put on the table that a qualified majority is necessary . In this way, the frugal, by themselves, could not, for example, veto or stop a Plan from Spain or Italy, but would need the vote of many more or one of the greats.

For the second phase, the disbursement phase, the President of the European Council proposes that the European Commission be the one to take the decision taking into account an advisory (but not binding) report from the Economic and Financial Committee.

Rule of law

One of the most controversial parts is expected to be that of conditionality with the rule of law. Michel wants the disbursement of community funds to be subject to compliance with the rules as there are no violations of the rule of law , something that directly points to Hungary and Poland, which could end up vetoing everything if this is not removed or changed. Both have open infringement processes and a file according to the application of Article 7 of the EU Treaty, the most powerful (although very limited and not effective without unanimity) weapon of the Union.

Countries like Germany assume that this link will have to be given up or something symbolic accepted, because the package at stake is too important for it not to come out. But for the Nordics, it is vital that there is a clear message and strong conditionality.

Brexit

Listening to countries like Belgium, Michel has also decided to set aside 5 billion euros of the Budget for an emergency fund to alleviate the possible economic consequences of a tough Brexit from December 31.

Distribution keys

Regarding the distribution keys, as EL MUNDO has already announced, Michel has made an original contribution. He wants 70% of the money in the Recovery Fund to be distributed between 2021 and 2022 following the criteria of the Commission, which include the per capita income of the countries or the level of unemployment between 2015 and 2019. That makes countries like Hungary or Poland, whose economy is suffering less than the EU average, will receive proportionally much more than those most affected.

To compensate, Michel's idea is that the remaining 30% of the money be disbursed with another distribution key, which takes into account only the real impact of the pandemic on GDP . And it is done from 2023. Similarly, the President of the European Council considers it appropriate that at least 30% of the money be dedicated to projects linked to the fight against climate change.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

  • Coronavirus
  • Covid 19
  • Crisis

Reconstruction Economists (VI) Jordi Canals: "Politicians should lower their wages out of solidarity, as occurs in private companies"

CoronavirusThe perfect storm for the economy: hospitality and commerce are the sectors with the most weight and those that suffer the most from the crisis

According to the Bank of SpainThe big losers of the Covid-19 economic crisis: women and young people under 35

See links of interest

  • Last News
  • Programming
  • English translator
  • Work calendar
  • Daily horoscope
  • Santander League Ranking
  • League calendar
  • TV Movies
  • Cut notes 2019
  • Themes
  • Bournemouth - Tottenham Hotspur
  • Everton - Southampton
  • Eibar - Leganés
  • Mallorca - Levante
  • Albacete - Sporting de Gijón