Good morning, I would like to have some comments on the Recovery Fund. First, I would say that the more logical way would be to finish the original MFF. Before the pandemic we were discussing the MFF and there was, let's say, the group of Friends of Cohesion and the net-payers, and the discussion was about how we will distribute money, we were fighting over traditional policies like cohesion agriculture. Now, there is a new Recovery Fund which I was criticizing mainly because of the criteria of unemployment, I think that the average of unemployment 2015-2019 has nothing to do with the pandemic. We will see the impact of the pandemic next year and this impact will be mainly in GDP. So GDP should be the biggest criteria. All member states are ready to take such a huge debt, which is the first time in history. And of course, now the new proposal of Charles Michel is better, but anyways I think this proportion of 70-30 we still have a problem with. In the Czech Republic we have low debt and growth. We don't want to be penalised because we are successful.
Also, regarding GDP in 2020 and 2021 we don't agree, we should discuss only the drop on GDP in 2020 because most countries are expecting growth in 2021.
There is this discussion on the position of Frugals. Before the pandemic we were criticizing these rebates that were introduced because of UK. Now UK left the EU. Originally these rebates were 14.5 Billion euro and now suddenly they are 45 Billion euro, and I will ask why. Why we are increasing the rebates which are not fair?
Then, the discussion is about loans. If Eurozone countries are able to take money from ESM, there are 240 Million euros at disposal for these countries but nobody has asked for Eurozone money so why is there loans in the Recovery Fund?
Of course, the mantra in Brussels is the Green Deal and digital evasion. It is interesting but we have to take care of our traditional industry. And the biggest danger is in car industry, European car industry. We know perfectly how we should use money, and we have to make reforms, mainly in healthcare and in construction and we need money for that. So, not only in Green Deal. The pandemic has a lot of influence on our industry and we have to maybe change our approach to traditional industries.
So, at the end, we of course understand and we will support the recovery of all member states but the money should be distributed correctly and fairly. Thank you.
[ Ссылка ] #eudebates
Special European Council, 17-18 July 2020. EU leaders meet physically in Brussels to discuss the recovery plan to respond to the COVID-19 crisis and a new long-term EU budget.
[ Ссылка ] #eudebates #NextGenerationEU #MFF #EUbudget
Following the bilateral discussions with EU leaders, President Michel has identified the six 'building blocks' for a possible agreement.
#Covid_19 #coronavirus #CoronavirusOutbreak #Corona #COVD19 #Health #EUCO #COVID #Eurogroup #EXITstrategy #Economy #Eurobond #Eurobonds
1. Size of the MFF
President Michel has proposed €1 074 billion to fulfil the long-term objectives of the EU, and to preserve the full capacity of the recovery plan. This proposal is largely based on the February proposal, which reflected two years of discussions between member states.
2. Rebates
Lump sum rebates would be maintained for Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Austria and Sweden.
3. Size of the recovery fund
The Commission would be empowered to borrow up to €750 billion through an own-resource decision. These funds may be used for back-to-back loans and for expenditure channelled through the MFF programmes.
4. Loans and grants
President Michel has proposed to preserve the balance between loans, guarantees and grants to avoid over-burdening member states with high levels of debt. "This is also key for the future of the Single Market and to prevent more fragmentation and disparities," he said.
5. Allocation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF)
This proposal ensures the money goes to the countries and sectors most affected by the crisis: 70% of the Recovery and Resilience Facility would be committed in 2021 and 2022, according to the Commission’s allocation criteria. 30% would be committed in 2023, taking into account the drop in GDP in 2020 and 2021. The total envelope should be disbursed by 2026.
6. Governance and conditionality
Based on the proposal, member states will prepare national recovery and resilience plans for 2021-2023 in line with the European Semester, notably country-specific recommendations. The plans will be reviewed in 2022. The assessment of these plans will be approved by the Council by a qualified majority vote on a proposal by the Commission.
Secondly, 30% of funding will target climate-related projects. Expenses under the MFF and Next Generation EU will comply with the EU’s objective of climate neutrality by 2050, the EU’s 2030 climate targets and the Paris Agreement.
...
