The revision of the EU budget
Lo scorso 19 ottobre la Commissione Europea ha pubblicato la Comunicazione sulla revisione del budget dell’Unione Europea (.pdf) . Tale comunicazione era stata richiesta dal Consiglio Europeo di dicembre 2005, con lo scopo di esaminare tutti gli aspetti riguardanti le spese e le risorse europee. In questa richiesta era inoltre presente uno specifico riferimento a due delle questioni più controverse e politicamente sensibili del dibattito sul budget europeo, ovvero la Politica Agricola Comune (PAC) e il “ribasso britannico”. La Comunicazione si inserisce anche nel processo di definizione delle nuove prospettive finanziarie per il periodo 2013-2020.
Il budget dell'Unione
L’idea che the European Community should have a budget independent of that of the Member States is present from the beginning of the project of European integration. Originally the cost of the European Community were funded entirely from its own resources, mainly from the common customs duties imposed on imports from third countries. The gradual increase in the activities of the Community, together with the reduction in the duties as a result of various GATT agreements, soon made necessary the use of new sources of funding. To this end, was introduced in 1970 the value added tax (VAT), whose revenues are perceived nationally and later in part to the Community European Union. In the '80s, as noted, the integration process experienced a phase of momentum, with the transfer of many new responsibilities from the national to the Community. In addition, during the same period cohesion policy became one of the main political priorities of the Community, with obvious consequences in financial terms. Therefore, a new reform of the system of resources was needed. In 1988 it was decided that some of the resources of the Community was financed directly by Member States, in proportion to the national budget. In recent decades, this resource has become increasingly important, to food today about 76% of the EU budget. VAT and resources their traditional (mainly customs duties) amounted to around 12% both.
To this picture must be added the so-called "British decline". According to an agreement signed between the European Community and the United Kingdom, shall be entitled to a refund equal to 66% of the difference between its contribution to the European budget and the share of this budget that is allocated in the United Kingdom. This agreement remains in force, was signed in 1984 that the United Kingdom agreed to finance a budget at the time dominated by the Common Agricultural Policy, from which the UK has derived no benefit. Today, following further agreements, four other countries (Germany, Netherlands, Austria and Sweden) enjoy a discount on the bottom ", linked to the United Kingdom but are lower.
The magnitude of the European budget is stable with a unanimous decision of member countries for a period of seven years, corresponding to the EU's financial planning (financial perspective in terms of the Treaty of Lisbon), also run for seven years. The amount of the budget amounted to 864.3 billion euro for the period 2007-2013 (120.7 per 2008), equivalent to just over 1% of total EU GDP.
In terms of the composition of expenditure, the two largest items are represented by the CAP and cohesion policy, each of which represents just over 40% of total expenditure. The allocation of the EU budget is an issue much debated. The important role of the CAP, in particular, is criticized by many for reasons of efficiency - it is essentially grants a non-competitive sector at international level - and because to benefit from these funds are only the countries with a significant agricultural sector (especially France and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe). In any case, the weight of the CAP is much lower than in the past, and is intended to be further reduced in coming years.
communication on budget revuew
Communications Commission responds to a request by the European Council was preceded by a public consultation with which the Commission has received nearly 300 contributions from public and private institutions, research centers and individuals.
The Report will consider the following critical aspects of the budget of the Union:
Lo scorso 19 ottobre la Commissione Europea ha pubblicato la Comunicazione sulla revisione del budget dell’Unione Europea (.pdf) . Tale comunicazione era stata richiesta dal Consiglio Europeo di dicembre 2005, con lo scopo di esaminare tutti gli aspetti riguardanti le spese e le risorse europee. In questa richiesta era inoltre presente uno specifico riferimento a due delle questioni più controverse e politicamente sensibili del dibattito sul budget europeo, ovvero la Politica Agricola Comune (PAC) e il “ribasso britannico”. La Comunicazione si inserisce anche nel processo di definizione delle nuove prospettive finanziarie per il periodo 2013-2020.
Il budget dell'Unione
L’idea che the European Community should have a budget independent of that of the Member States is present from the beginning of the project of European integration. Originally the cost of the European Community were funded entirely from its own resources, mainly from the common customs duties imposed on imports from third countries. The gradual increase in the activities of the Community, together with the reduction in the duties as a result of various GATT agreements, soon made necessary the use of new sources of funding. To this end, was introduced in 1970 the value added tax (VAT), whose revenues are perceived nationally and later in part to the Community European Union. In the '80s, as noted, the integration process experienced a phase of momentum, with the transfer of many new responsibilities from the national to the Community. In addition, during the same period cohesion policy became one of the main political priorities of the Community, with obvious consequences in financial terms. Therefore, a new reform of the system of resources was needed. In 1988 it was decided that some of the resources of the Community was financed directly by Member States, in proportion to the national budget. In recent decades, this resource has become increasingly important, to food today about 76% of the EU budget. VAT and resources their traditional (mainly customs duties) amounted to around 12% both.
To this picture must be added the so-called "British decline". According to an agreement signed between the European Community and the United Kingdom, shall be entitled to a refund equal to 66% of the difference between its contribution to the European budget and the share of this budget that is allocated in the United Kingdom. This agreement remains in force, was signed in 1984 that the United Kingdom agreed to finance a budget at the time dominated by the Common Agricultural Policy, from which the UK has derived no benefit. Today, following further agreements, four other countries (Germany, Netherlands, Austria and Sweden) enjoy a discount on the bottom ", linked to the United Kingdom but are lower.
The magnitude of the European budget is stable with a unanimous decision of member countries for a period of seven years, corresponding to the EU's financial planning (financial perspective in terms of the Treaty of Lisbon), also run for seven years. The amount of the budget amounted to 864.3 billion euro for the period 2007-2013 (120.7 per 2008), equivalent to just over 1% of total EU GDP.
In terms of the composition of expenditure, the two largest items are represented by the CAP and cohesion policy, each of which represents just over 40% of total expenditure. The allocation of the EU budget is an issue much debated. The important role of the CAP, in particular, is criticized by many for reasons of efficiency - it is essentially grants a non-competitive sector at international level - and because to benefit from these funds are only the countries with a significant agricultural sector (especially France and the countries of Central and Eastern Europe). In any case, the weight of the CAP is much lower than in the past, and is intended to be further reduced in coming years.
communication on budget revuew
Communications Commission responds to a request by the European Council was preceded by a public consultation with which the Commission has received nearly 300 contributions from public and private institutions, research centers and individuals.
The Report will consider the following critical aspects of the budget of the Union:
- Issues of flexibility: the adoption of the budget process is long and complex, and is particularly difficult to make changes during construction to meet unforeseen emergencies.
- New challenges from economic downturn: during the economic crisis the EU budget proved an effective complement to national resources allocated to stimulate the economy. This role should be further enhanced in the future.
- Limits of "juste retour" the Commission criticizes the approach of many states to the European budget, marked by the logic of "fair return". Assessing Community action on the basis of their national allocation of resources could reduce the effectiveness of actions and the added value of EU funding.
- Importance of time to find agreement on a package of funding: complex procedures relating to budget often involves a long interval between the achievement of un accordo politico su un programma e l’effettivo inizio di questo. Questo problema è particolarmente rilevante per la spesa relativa alle politiche di coesione.
- Migliori regole sui programmi: una ridefinizione delle regole sulla gestione e sul controllo dei programmi comunitari possono migliorarne l’impatto. Ad esempio, le regole sui controlli sono spesso costose dal punto di vista amministrativo e orientate a un approccio formale, che non tiene in adeguato conto gli effettivi risultati.
- Budget dell’UE come integratore di altre fonti di finanziamento: il budget dell’UE dovrebbe agire maggiormente come fattore di stimolo ad investimenti pubblici e privati. Il dominio dell’approccio per sovvenzioni potrebbe aver limitato l’impatto del budget europeo.
Il documento della Commissione, come si vede, è orientato soprattutto a sottolineare i problemi di efficienza ed efficacia della spesa dell’Unione. Le questioni del volume complessivo del budget e delle fonti di finanziamento, molto delicate dal punto di vista politico, sono lasciate in secondo piano. In questo senso, è indicativo il rilievo dato all’obiettivo di ridurre i costi amministrativi dell’UE, pari oggi al 5,7% del totale del budget.
Si afferma poi che ogni riforma futura del budget europeo dovrà prendere in considerazione in maniera congiunta l’aspetto del volume e dell’allocazione della spesa and the sources of funding. This holistic approach to budget reform is inevitable because of both the political sensitivity of the issue is the need for unanimity of the Member States to adopt the reform. These elements ensure that every reform must come in the form of "package" of agreements between Member States, including all the highlights from the budget of the Union.
With particular regard to the question of own resources, the communication refers to the possibility of introducing a new tax to ensure the true European Union's own resources, now heavily dependent on contributions from Member States. This situation, As mentioned above, encourages the spread of the logic of "fair return" and limits the autonomy of EU policy with respect to national governments. A European tax could have social objectives (financial transactions), environmental (air, carbon tax) or other (a redefinition of VAT). About
of the two main sources of expenditure of the budget (CAP and cohesion policy), the Commission reiterates its essentially political positions, without dwelling on the issues of the volume of these items and the proposals for re-nationalization of these policies. In reference to CAP, it underlines the progressive evolution towards rural development and environmental policies. To quanto riguarda la coesione, si ribadisce che essa deve avere un ruolo non solo redistributivo, ma anche e soprattutto di supporto alla strategia di Lisbona. A tal fine, la Commissione propone di concentrarsi su pochi e determinati obiettivi, che convoglino le risorse dei vari fondi già esistenti. La Commissione si propone quindi di adottare un quadro strategico comune che traduca gli obiettivi di Europa 2020 in priorità di investimento. Inoltre, i Programmi Nazionali di Riforma per l’attuazione della strategia di Lisbona potrebbero includere una sorta di contratto di partenariato per lo sviluppo e l’investimento, che presenti in maniera più stringente gli impegni presi dagli Stati e dalle loro regioni.
Quale futuro per il EU budget?
An important point stressed by the Communication on the need to link more closely the political agenda of the EU budget. The budget will have to support and promote smart growth, sustainable and inclusive, in support of the renewed Lisbon strategy. In particular, the EU will provide financial support to the pursuit of Agenda 2020 and the achievement of the objectives it sets.
This attempt to "politicize" the budget is more important from a media point of view, since this area is often seen as technical in nature and not followed by the public. The EU budget the rest is not only a tool for the implementation of Community policies, but also a kind of litmus test of the weight that is actually given, particularly in capitals and in Brussels the European Union's priorities. In this sense, is also the Commission's proposal to extend the period of the financial perspective in five years (or more likely ten with a review after five). In this way, every financial programming document is clearly attributable to the European Parliament and the Commission in office.
Communications Commission may in some ways be considered the real start of the process of negotiation of the financial perspective 2013-2020. Il risultato di questa negoziazione sarà decisivo per l’evoluzione dell’integrazione europea nei prossimi anni. Le risposte sui punti cruciali, riguardanti il volume e l’allocazione del budget e l’ammontare delle risorse proprie, costituiranno un indicatore affidabile dell’ambizione politica dell’Unione.
0 comments:
Post a Comment