Von der Leyen backed away from his proposal for the EU’s multiannual financial framework. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen was forced to abandon her design for the €1.8 trillion European budget for 2028-2034 (known by the acronym MMF) after a revolt in the European Parliament. Conservative MEPs from his party and other formations that supported his presidency, such as the Socialists, the Neo-Liberals Party and the Green Party, announced a veto over the budget plan if there are no radical changes in their proposal.
On Sunday, von der Leyen sent a letter to the President of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola, and the Prime Minister of Denmark, Mette Frederiksen, who represents the 27 EU member states, in which she presented a series of changes to issues that had caused complaints from MEPs.
Von der Leyen’s initial budget plan was to merge regional and agricultural budgets into a single fund, allowing national governments to decide how to spend these funds and leaving the European Parliament outside the decision-making process in implementing the EU accounts. With this approach, MEPs warned that they would throw away the European budget. In fact, the leader of the European People’s Party group in the European Parliament, Manfred Weber, was one of the leaders of the revolution, which brought to light his confrontation with his brother-in-law in the European Commission.
In her letter, von der Leyen proposed a series of changes to salvage the situation: On the one hand, regional leaders would be given more power to decide how the money would be spent by giving them a seat in budget planning meetings between national governments and Commission officials. In addition, there will be some kind of safeguards to reduce the risk that national governments will reduce payments to the most developed regions, in addition to the $218,000 already allocated in the budget for the poorest regions.
In addition, a “rural target” was granted that would force national governments to spend 10% of this money on agriculture, which is in addition to the $300,000 million in direct financing that was already included in the draft agricultural budgets. Finally, a “guiding mechanism” was provided to give Parliament more decision-making power over the Fund’s funding and spending priorities.
European Parliament President Roberta Mitsola noted that the meeting with von der Leyen was “constructive” and that “the proposals are a good step forward,” although she also expressed “concerns” about the Commission’s proposals regarding the role of regional authorities, the Common Agricultural Policy and the role of Parliament.
After the meeting with Mitsola and Frederiksen, the President of the European Commission wrote on the social network
However, it remains to be seen what will happen on Wednesday when the European budget proposal is voted on in the EU chamber. Among other things, because neither MEPs nor other representatives from the left are clear about von der Leyen’s response. The Vice-Chairman of the European People’s Party Group, Siegfried Muresan, warned a few minutes before the end of the meeting between the President of the Commission and her counterpart in the European Parliament, that “the ball is in the Commission’s court.”
On the other hand, tensions are escalating between the President of the European Commission and the leaders of the 27 countries after her withdrawal. “It is a way to win an institutional battle” between the European Parliament and the Council, according to an EU diplomat, who adds that these changes could cause problems for some countries if there is a new budget draft.
“I think it is reasonable and fair for the Parliament to raise political concerns about the multiannual financial framework, which is negotiated between the member states of the Council and will end with an agreement at the level of countries and the European Council. Once this agreement is reached, the European Parliament will have to give its approval. This is the procedure stipulated in the treaties,” explains another European diplomat to explain the strong position the European Parliament has adopted to lay the groundwork, but he does not see any problems in agreeing on the proposal.
About The Author
