Europaudvalget 2019-20
EUU Alm.del Bilag 27
Offentligt
2085919_0001.png
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CHAIRPERSONS OF COSAC
Helsinki, Finland, 22 July 2019
AGENDA:
1. Opening of the meeting
- Welcome address by Ms Tuula HAATAINEN, Deputy Speaker of the Finnish
Eduskunta
- Introductory remarks by the Chair
2. Adoption of the agenda of the meeting of the Chairpersons of COSAC
3. Procedural issues and miscellaneous matters
-
Briefing on the results of the meeting of the Presidential Troika of COSAC
-
Draft agenda of the LXII COSAC
-
Outline of the 32nd Bi-annual Report of COSAC
-
Co-financing and Appointment of the Permanent Member of the COSAC
Secretariat for 2020-2021
-
Letters received by the Presidency
-
Any Other Business
4. Presentation on the Priorities of the Finnish Presidency of the Council of the EU
Keynote speaker: Ms Tytti TUPPURAINEN, Minister for European Affairs
5. What Budget for European Policies?
Keynote Speaker: Mr Alain LAMASSOURE, Former MEP and Former French
Minister
PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CHAIR: Ms Satu HASSI, Chairperson of the Grand Committee, Finnish
Eduskunta
1. Opening of the meeting
- Welcome address by Ms Tuula HAATAINEN, Deputy Speaker of the Finnish
Eduskunta
- Introductory remarks by the Chair
Ms Satu HASSI, Chairperson of the Grand Committee of the Finnish
Eduskunta,
gave the floor to
Ms Tuula HAATAINEN to open the meeting.
Ms Tuula HAATAINEN, Deputy Speaker of the Finnish
Eduskunta,
welcomed the participants to
the meeting and referred to the commemoration of two marking moments in the history of Finland:
- the 100th anniversary of Finland€s
constitutional democracy:
on 17 July 1919, the Constitution Act
of the Republic of Finland, was confirmed by the Regent of Finland one year after the Finnish Civil
War. The decision built the foundations for democracy, peaceful development of society and the rule
of law;
- the approval of the Parliament Act and State Electoral Law (May 1906) which established a
unicameral Parliament and guaranteed universal and equal unrestricted right to vote. With this Act,
Finnish women were the first in Europe to be granted the right to vote.
Ms HAATAINEN congratulated Ms Ursula VON DER LEYEN on her election as the first female
European Commission President. She also referred to the fragmentation of the political landscape in
Europe and the need of cooperation of the moderate forces, and of the importance of maintaining and
1
EUU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 27: Referat fra COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Helsinki 21-22/7-19
developing the legitimacy of the EU project, a task which COSAC could play an important role in
accomplishing. Ms HAATAINEN referred to the general theme of the Presidency - "From Discussion
to
Solutions”
- which aimed to show that it was time to identify the ingredients for compromise in
relation to important questions, such as climate change, the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF)
and migration, and declared the meeting opened.
Ms HASSI welcomed the delegations to the meeting and, in particular, Ms Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN,
Chair of the Committee on European Affairs in the Dutch
Eerste Kamer,
who was attending the
meeting for the first time. She also congratulated Mr Kristian VIGENIN on his election as Deputy
Speaker of the Bulgarian
Narodno Sabranie.
2. Adoption of the agenda for the Meeting of the Chairpersons of COSAC
Ms HASSI presented the draft agenda of the COSAC Chairpersons€ meeting, which was approved
without amendment.
3. Procedural issues and miscellaneous matters
- Briefing on the results of the meeting of the Presidential Troika of COSAC
- Draft agenda of the LXII COSAC
- Outline of the 32nd Bi-annual Report of COSAC
- Co-financing and Appointment of the Permanent Member of the COSAC Secretariat for 2020-
2021
- Letters received by the Presidency
- Procedural issues
Ms HASSI referred to the Presidential Troika meeting that had taken place the previous evening, in
which the Troika supported the Presidency proposals for the agenda of the LXII COSAC meeting in
Helsinki on 1-3 December 2019, including an invitation to the Commission President-elect Ursula
VON DER LEYEN to address the meeting. Ms HASSI referred to the main topics on the Plenary
agenda: a presentation by the Prime Minister of Finland, Mr Antti RINNE; the area of justice, home
affairs and fundamental rights marked by the anniversaries of the Tampere acquis and the Charter of
Fundamental Rights; and climate strategy and policy for Europe, from a point of view of opportunities
and business achievements.
In reply to a question by Mr Vaclav HAMPL, Czech
Sénat,
the Chair explained that the climate
session was split into two due to the different availability of the two speakers. Mr Gunther
KRICHBAUM, German
Bundestag,
suggested to have foreign policy feature on the agenda of the
plenary COSAC, in particular with regard to Ukraine and the Eastern Partnership, as well as the EU
MFF for 2021-2027. A similar suggestion to include a topic related to the MFF, as well as one
addressing the Banking Union, was also raised by Mr Jean BIZET, French
Sénat.
Acknowledging the
importance of being flexible, Ms HASSI took note of the requests, adding that these suggestions
would be discussed by the Troika. She noted that the MFF could be discussed in plenary as part of
the address by Ms VAN DER LEYEN, or the agenda could be adjusted accordingly. At the request
of Mr Hayke VELDMAN, Dutch
Tweede Kamer,
to have the topic of transparency within the EU at
the next Plenary, Ms HASSI asked for a more detailed proposal.
Ms HASSI explained the outline of the 32nd Bi-annual Report to which no comments were made.
The questionnaire for the 32nd Bi-annual Report would be circulated on Wednesday 31 July 2019,
with replies expected by 20th September.
2
EUU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 27: Referat fra COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Helsinki 21-22/7-19
2085919_0003.png
Ms HASSI referred to the co-financing and appointment of the Permanent Member of the COSAC
Secretariat for 2020-2021. Twenty-five Parliaments had confirmed their intentions to participate in
the co-financing mechanism. The remaining Parliaments were urged to submit their commitment.
Concerning the nomination for the post of Permanent Member of the COSAC Secretariat, a letter
inviting Parliaments/Chambers to nominate candidates would be subsequently transmitted to
Parliaments/Chambers, with 20 September 2019 as deadline for candidatures.
Ms HASSI referred to the letters received by the presidency regarding participation at COSAC
meetings, which included letters from the Parliaments of Andorra, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and
Kosovo
*
.
Lord Robin TEVERSON, UK
House of Lords,
read out a personal message on behalf of Lord Tim
BOSWELL, explaining his absence.
4. Presentation on the Priorities of the Finnish Presidency of the Council of the European Union
Keynote speaker: Ms Tytti TUPPURAINEN, Minister for European Affairs
Ms Satu HASSI, Chairperson of the Grand Committee, Finnish
Eduskunta,
gave the floor to Tytti
TUPPURAINEN, Minister for European Affairs to present the priorities of the Finnish Presidency.
Ms TUPPURAINEN, Minister for European Affairs of the Finnish Government, started her address
by stating that the Finnish Presidency of the Council of the European Union was taking place in an
important juncture at the beginning of a new parliamentary term preceded by European elections,
which were marked by the highest turnout in 20 years, a fact that had shown increased citizens€ trust
in the EU.
The Minister stated that the Finnish Presidency would work in a pragmatic manner, building its work
on the respect of common European rules and values. In view of this value base, the Finnish
Presidency had put rule of law at the centre of its agenda and was committed to developing
instruments to strengthen the rule of law, both through dialogue and through a mechanism within the
MFF. Ms TUPPURAINEN explained that the rule of law should be seen in a positive light as one of
the values upon which the EU was founded, embraced by all Member States and essential for the
functioning of the EU as a whole. The Minister also emphasised that a rules-based international order
and a multilateral trading system were similarly crucial for economic well-being and security, and
continuing efforts were needed to preserve these systems.
Ms TUPPURAINEN also introduced the other priorities for the Finnish Presidency that included
making the EU more competitive and socially inclusive, strengthening the EU€s position as a global
leader in climate action and comprehensively protecting the security of citizens. She also called for
putting arctic
issues back on the EU€s agenda highlighting Finland€s role as a pioneer of EU€s
northern policy since the launching of the Northern Dimension in 1999. She stressed the need for a
comprehensive Arctic strategy that could show the potential of northern regions and the ways in
which the delicate environment of the Arctic could best be protected. The region could also serve as
an example of how the world could work together. As for the role of national Parliaments in the
functioning of the EU, Ms TUPPURAINEN pointed out the importance of increased awareness of
EU affairs by national politicians and parliamentarians who had a pivotal role not only in scrutinising
their governments but also in ensuring the successful implementation of EU legislation and in
communicating important developments in the EU in their home countries. The Minister also stated
* This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with Resolution 1244 of the United Nations
Security Council and to the opinion of the ICJ on the declaration of independence of Kosovo.
3
EUU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 27: Referat fra COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Helsinki 21-22/7-19
that the Finnish Presidency was committed to revisiting and revising
the Council€s working methods
and practices as part of the implementation of the new Strategic Agenda. Finally, Ms
TUPPURAINEN stressed that the Finnish Presidency would strive to make all Member States work
together in order to avoid the dissolution of the Union into discordant blocs and enhance it as a
transnational cooperation of peoples who faced similar challenges.
During the debate which followed, 25 speakers took the floor. In their interventions, parliamentarians
expressed their support for the programme of the Finnish Presidency, some of them praising its
ambition. Ms Mairead McGUINNESS, European Parliament, stated that the European Parliament
would support the Finnish programme and agenda and welcomed the commitment and clarity shown
by the Finnish Presidency.
A number of participants drew attention to the climate emphasis in the Finnish Presidency agenda.
Mr Sergio BATTELLI, Italian
Camera dei Deputati,
expressed his support for the decarbonisation
goals and called for a Green Deal policy. Mr Soren SONDERGAARD, Danish
Folketing,
stressed
that, when it came to fighting climate change, the EU should not prioritise internal market and
competition rules in a way that hindered taking climate measures. Ms Ivelina VASSILEVA,
Bulgarian
Narodno Sabranie,
drew attention to the significant financial resources that achieving the
climate policy goals would require and stressed fair distribution of costs. Ms Annika QARLSSON,
Swedish
Riksdag,
called for a positive attitude stating that climate change was not only a threat as it
also offered an opportunity that would lead to economic growth and jobs. Similarly, Mr Christian
BUCHMANN, Austrian
Bundesrat,
argued that contributing to the climate goals should also
contribute to more jobs and that the environment and economy should be better integrated to reflect
this goal. Mr Vaclav HAMPL, Czech Sénat, stressed that the EU€s contribution to the climate goals
should be closely tied to its international trade policies.
The commitment of the Finnish Presidency to facilitate the MFF negotiations, with the view of
reaching an agreement, was generally welcomed by participants. Ms Anneli OTT, Estonian
Riigikogu,
stressed the importance of finding compromises and working for the unity of the EU in
this regard. Ms Iren SARKOZY, Slovakian
Národná rada,
underlined that a smooth transition to the
next budgetary period would require finalising the negotiations within a reasonable time. On the other
hand, Mr Richárd HÖRCSIK, Hungarian
Országgyű lés,
suggested that more time would be necessary
in order to reach consensus among the Member States that were to adopt the MFF agreement by
unanimity. Furthermore, Mr HÖRCSIKcalled for a more balanced budget reflecting better the
objective of real convergence and avoiding drastic cuts of traditional policies. Mr Bojan KEKEC,
Slovenian
Državni svet
, emphasised that the MFF negotiations must enable the equal development of
the Union.
Parliamentarians also supported the deepening of the Single Market and enhancing a socially
inclusive economic environment. Mr Angel TÎLVĂR, Romanian
Camerei Deputaţ ilor
, expressed his
support for the emphasis on sustainable development in a comprehensive way. Mr Jean BIZET,
French
Sénat,
underlined the importance of completing the Capital Markets Union and drew attention
to the European space policy which he argued was a driver of innovation and could allow the EU to
lead in data technology. As for social Europe, Mr Ettore Antonio LICHERI, Italian
Senato,
and Mr
Sergio BATTELLI, Italian
Camera dei Deputati,
expressed their support for the idea of introducing
a European minimum wage. Mr Domagoj MILOSEVIC, Croatian
Hrvatski sabor,
called for finding
solutions to socioeconomic imbalances and differences within and between the Member States.
A number of parliamentarians welcomed the objective to strengthen the rule of law framework. Ms
Gabriela CREȚU, Romanian
Senat,
highlighted the importance of democracy and rule of law stating
4
EUU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 27: Referat fra COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Helsinki 21-22/7-19
that the solution to financial and political issues could not be expected to be found in the market. Mr
Paavo ARHINMÄKI, Finnish
Eduskunta,
underlined the necessity for all the Member States as well
as EU candidate countries to respect common values that provide the foundation and strength of the
common action. Lord Robin TEVERSON, UK
House of Lords,
referred to principle of the rule of
law as a basis for EU membership and argued that democracy was not just about elections but about
the rule of law as well. Mr Antonio TAJANI, European Parliament, called for the Finnish Presidency
to pay more attention to human rights issues in the world, to address situations in Venezuela and
Russia in particular, and to protect freedom of the press also within the EU.
A number of
speakers referred to the EU€s enlargement policy, calling for
the EU to take a clear
position and advance negotiations in the Western Balkans (Mr BUCHMANN; Ms VASSILEVA).
Mr �½ygimantas PAVILIONIS, Lithuanian
Seimas,
expressed his support for the accession talks with
Albania and North Macedonia and called for a similar strategic approach for Eastern Neighbourhood
countries such as Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova. Parliamentarians from the candidate countries
stated that their countries wished to join the EU and emphasised the importance of constructive
dialogue in proceeding to or advancing in accession negotiations and when performing structural
reforms in candidate countries (Mr
Nenad ČANAK, Serbian
Narodna Skupština
; Mr Slaven
RADUNOVIC, Montenegrin
Skupština Crne Gore
; Ms Rudina HAJDARI, Albanian
Shqipëria;
Mr
Mehmet Kasım GÜLPINAR, Turkish
Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi,
and Ms Shpresa HADRI, North
Macedonian
Sobranie)
Moreover, Mr GÜLPINAR argued that the EU should have a strategic vision
when it came to terrorism, illegal immigration and energy, and stated it was unfortunate that the EU
did not understand the steps taken by Turkey. Mr GÜLPINAR also called for Finland to support
efforts for the liberalisation of visa regime and the revision of customs union. Mr
ČANAK
underscored that Serbia is participating in resolving challenges facing the EU such as climate change
and migrant crisis. Mr
ČANAK
also expressed his expectation that the new EU leadership, as the
facilitator of the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, would influence the withdrawal of
Pristina€s
decision to impose taxes on Serbian products.
Mr KEKEC spoke in favour of enhancing the Schengen border,
arguing that protection of the EU€s
external borders would be indispensable in order to manage the increasing pressure on the peripheral
Member States and for resolving the security and migration questions.
Speaking during the second session due to time constraints, Mr Nicolaos TORNARITIS, Cyprus
Vouli ton Antiprosopon,
referred in his speech to the Eastern Mediterranean, and accused Turkey for
occupying Cypriot territories, for threatening international maritime cooperation and for jeopardising
security in the region. He pleaded with colleagues to ensure the situation would be treated as a
European problem, and not just a Cypriot one.
In her replies, Ms TUPPURAINEN emphasised that the Finnish approach to the rule of law was a
positive and constructive one. Instead of naming and shaming or pointing out individual countries,
the objective was to enhance dialogue on the rule of law that enshrined the principle as a positive
asset of the EU that united the Member States. She then confirmed that the Finnish Presidency would
aim to achieve a 2050 climate neutrality goal. Finally, Ms TUPPURAINEN stressed that the Finnish
Presidency considered the MFF negotiations a priority and would aim to have the Negotiation Box
with concrete figures on the table by the end of the Presidency, calling on participants to support this
aim.
5. What Budget for European Policies?
Keynote speaker: Mr Alain LAMASSOURE, Former MEP and Former French Minister.
5
EUU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 27: Referat fra COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Helsinki 21-22/7-19
Mr Alain LAMASSOURE, Former MEP and Former French Minister, started his speech by
emphasising that, as a retired politician, he would not be speaking on behalf of any political party or
institution, but rather aim to share with participants the outcome of his personal experience,
developing on three points.
Firstly, Mr LAMASSOURE highlighted that the European budget was unique in the world, voted and
executed in a balanced manner. Moreover, it was financed, partly, by own resources. However, the
revenues had declined. He further noted that the European budget was within a Multiannual Financial
Framework (MFF), which had been voted by the only multi-national parliament in the world - the
European Parliament. Mr LAMASSOURE also acknowledged that the European budget had
particularities and drawbacks, giving as an example the fact that the revenue had escaped all
parliamentary control. The last characteristic of the European budget presented by Mr
LAMASSOURE was that, in practice, the level of the budget had been blocked for twenty years, and
thus could not take into account new political priorities. He referred to net beneficiaries who wanted
to preserve traditional policies, while net contributors refused to increase their share to finance new
policies. The practical consequence of this situation was the existence of parallel budgets, financed
through Member States contributions and which escaped any real parliamentary control.
Secondly, he underlined two political options: a conservative approach and a disruptive, or
revolutionary, approach to the MFF.
Mr LAMASSOURE explained that the conservative option meant adopting the proposals of the
European Commission, voted by the previous European Parliament, and which were not the object
of real political debate in the Council. He stressed that for each European programme and policy,
Members of Parliaments needed to check if the level of critical mass that allowed efficiency had been
achieved. As an example, he referred to the European Fund for Strategic Investments that focused on
a smaller number of operations and allowed several billions of euros in investments to be launched
in Europe, whereas cohesion and regional funds, rather than being concentrated in an effective mass,
were dispersed in thousands of micro-projects that did not always serve the interests of European
citizens. In his opinion, reforming the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) in a way that would
correspond to the contemporary economic policy was an urgently needed task. Furthermore, there
were two subjects for concern: on one hand, research and development, on the other, development
and cooperation aid. Parliamentarians were responsible for ensuring that the European budget and
national budgets regarding these policies were well designed and coherent with other policies and in
line with the general European objectives.
Finally, Mr LAMASSOURE presented the disruptive approach, which implied that if Europe wanted
to be credible and to deliver, there were certain choices to be made. For example, the European
Council should be asked, when taking decisions concerning certain objectives, to clearly adopt a
budget for achieving those objectives. Secondly, Mr LAMASSOURE suggested that, in line with the
principle of subsidiarity, and based on solidarity, the EU should adopt a principle of budget neutrality,
or what could also be called a principle of constancy. The principle implied that, for a greater
efficiency, European institutions had to demonstrate their added value. He recommended that the
COSAC, in cooperation with national courts of auditors and the European Court of Auditors, should
develop a network that would ensure that whenever a new competence or a new policy would be put
in place at European level, the mechanism would not cost more but allowed efficiency. He added that
without such a control mechanism, the EU would not be able to develop its own resources. Mr
LAMASSOURE underlined that the Commission had made several proposals on the own resources,
which he supported, and suggested that whenever a European policy entailed additional public
resources, those resources should contribute, at least partially, to financing the European budget.
6
EUU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 27: Referat fra COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Helsinki 21-22/7-19
Concluding, Mr LAMASSOURE stressed that the spirit of budgetary coordination, the European
Semester, had to change. He underlined that national budgets and the European budget had to be
aligned and responsive to the changes in the world, which would require developing a genuine
common budgetary cooperation.
In the subsequent debate, 25 speakers took the floor, with the vast majority of them praising the views
and ideas presented by Mr LAMASSOURE.
A number of speakers referred to the traditional policies, cohesion and agriculture policies, stressing
that adequate financing for these policies should continue to apply. Mr
�½ygimantas PAVILIONIS,
Lithuanian
Seimas,
voiced his country's support to all initiatives aiming at increasing competitiveness
and convergence throughout the EU and raised concerns with regard to the budgetary cuts in cohesion
and agriculture policies. Ms
Vita Anda TĒRAUDA, Latvian
Saeima,
followed this approach, pointing
out that cohesion was a success story, having enabled considerable economic growth in Latvia, and
that efforts were still necessary to achieve convergence goals. Mr Rainer ROBRA, German
Bundesrat,
also underlined the importance of traditional policies and stressed his wish to maintain
cohesion, pleading for development and arguing that social and territorial convergence were still not
ensured. Similar views were expressed by a number of participants who stressed the need to continue
financing cohesion and agriculture policies (Ms Ivelina VASSILEVA, Bulgarian
Narodno Sabranie;
Mr Josko KLISOVIC, Croatian
Hrvatski sabor;
Mr Sergio BATTELLI, Italian
Camera dei deputati;
Ms Regina BASTOS, Portuguese
Assembleia da República;
Ms Anneli OTT, Estonian
Riigikogu;
Mr
Igor PEČEK, Slovenian
Državni zbor
; Ms Gabriela CREȚU,
Romanian
Senat.)
Mr Jarosław
OBREMSKI, Polish
Senat,
argued that cohesion policy helped Member States to develop their
infrastructure, enhance their competitiveness and close the development gap between rich and poor
Member States.
A number of participants also referred to the need to reform the CAP. Ms Mairead McGUINNESS,
European Parliament, stressed that with the challenges in biodiversity and climate change,
agricultural policy was becoming an environment policy, and particular focus should be paid to food
security as well. Similarly, Lord Robin TEVERSON, UK
House of Lords,
underlined the need to
support farming industry for it to adapt into less carbon intensive practices. Some participants referred
to the new challenges and the need to invest in such fields as security, sustainability and
competitiveness while reforming the CAP (Mr Gunther KRICHBAUM, German
Bundestag;
Mr Pål
JONSON, Swedish
Riksdag).
Mr Jean BIZET, French
Sénat,
also agreed to reform the CAP, but
highlighted its strategic role and the need for it to take into account new technologies and development
in artificial intelligence.
Some participants drew attention to the new challenges and the need to reform the MFF to reflect the
changed priorities. Mr Reinhold LOPATKA, Austrian
Nationalrat,
stressed that the EU should focus
its attention to those objectives that can be better achieved at the European level and underlined the
need to focus on competitiveness, promoting sustainability and protecting external borders and
seeking efficiency gains in other areas. Ms Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN, Dutch
Eerste Kamer,
argued that
particular focus should be paid to efficiency and that certain programmes should be modernised, for
them to be adapted to new challenges. Mr BATTELLI underlined the need for the budget to be
flexible, in order to address unforeseen emergencies, and expressed support for new own resources
of the EU, such as capital gains tax, digital tax and Value-Added Tax (VAT). Similarly, Mr Antonio
TAJANI, European Parliament, pleaded for a visionary MFF that could build on the own resources
of the Union. He stated that better coordination between the EU and national budgets as well as
investment policies that reinforce the competitiveness of the Member States were necessary to give
more weight to Europe in a global scale. Mr TAJANI also referred to the need to focus on Africa
7
EUU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 27: Referat fra COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Helsinki 21-22/7-19
particularly in terms of investments into education and strategic areas. Other speakers called for
actions to increase stability in the Wester Balkans (Mr LOPATKA) or in Eastern Mediterranean (Mr
Mehmet Kasım GÜLPINAR, Turkish
Büyük Millet Meclisi).
As to the areas where additional funds were needed, speakers referred to:
Competitiveness and sustainability (Mr TAJANI; Mr LOPATKA; Mr PAVILIONIS);
Energy and electric power plants (Mr PAVILIONIS);
Trans-border infrastructures, such as Rail Baltica (Ms OTT) or Pan-European Corridor IX and
Rhine-Danube Corridor (Mr Gabi IONAȘCU,
Romanian
Senat);
Climate change (Mr JONSON; Ms BASTOS; Mr IONAȘCU);
Education and research programmes, such as Erasmus and Horizon Europe (Lord
TEVERSON; Ms OTT);
Internal security, migration and external borders' protection (Mr BATTELLI; Mr TAJANI;
Ms McGUINNESS; Mr JONSON; Ms VASSILEVA; Mr LOPATKA; Ms BASTOS; Mr Igor
PEČEK;
Slovenian
Državni zbor
; Ms OTT; Ms Senida MESI, Albanian
Kuvendi);
and
Neighbourhood and enlargement (Mr PAVILIONIS; Mr TAJANI; Mr LOPATKA; Mr
KLISOVIC; Ms MESI).
The potential disruptive impact of Brexit on the next MFF also featured during the debate (Ms Regina
BASTOS; Ms Mairead McGUINNESS). Mr Terry LEYDEN, Irish
Houses of the Oireachtas,
affirmed that Ireland would stay in the EU, advocated to protect the Good Friday Agreement and
thanked the EU for its unity and solidarity shown towards Ireland on Brexit-related matters. Mr Pål
JONSON, Swedish
Riksdag,
warned that, in the coming years, some Member States might experience
recession, which would result in increased pressure on their own budgets. Mr JONSON underlined
that the size of the EU budget should remain at the current level, which was a view echoed in a number
of interventions (Mr Reinhold LOPATKA, Austrian
Nationalrat;
Ms Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN, the
Dutch
Eerste Kamer;
Mr Igor PEČEK, Slovenian
Državni zbor
). Some participants stressed that the
EU budget would need to be increased and own resources should be developed (Ms CREȚU; Ms
McGUINNESS; Mr TAJANI; Mr BATTELLI; Mr BIZET).
Ms Sabine THILLAYE, French
Assemblée nationale,
stated that national budgets should be better
coordinated with the European budget and called for a complementary approach between national
Parliaments and the European institutions, particularly the European Parliament, when taking forward
budgetary proposals. Finally, some participants expressed their support for concluding the MFF
negotiations by the end of the year (Ms VASSILEVA; Mr JONSON;
Ms TĒRAUDA), with Ms
McGUINNESS emphasising the need for solidarity between Member States in the negotiations. Ms
McGUINNESS also underlined the importance to inform citizens about the European budget's
sources of revenue, in order to build awareness.
In his concluding remarks, Mr LAMASSOURE expressed his appreciation regarding the quality of
interventions, the relevance of questions, and in particular those interventions that defended the
positions of their countries and their political formation, but within the European vision. He noted
that some participants were attached to the continuation of the Cohesion Policy while others would
have preferred a reorientation of budget priorities in line with political priorities. Addressing a
question regarding the size of the budget, Mr LAMASSOURE noted that as long as Member States
admitted that the level of the European budget could not exceed 1% of Gross National Income, any
8
EUU, Alm.del - 2019-20 - Bilag 27: Referat fra COSAC-formandsmøde og Trojka-møde i Helsinki 21-22/7-19
increase in funding would be done to the detriment of current EU policies, which was a reason to
contemplate the necessity of raising the level of funding for the EU budget.
With regard to the European Semester, he proposed to consolidate national budgets by considering
the EU budget as an addition to the twenty-eight national budgets. Consolidation would allow a better
understanding of the impact of the public policies at the European level. He further suggested that the
national Parliaments and the European Parliament should coordinate to control what he termed
satellite budgets that were agreed inter-governmentally and were not subject to parliamentary scrutiny
neither by the European Parliament nor by national Parliaments. He stressed that the satellite budgets
constituted a system in which decisions concerning public resources were made without a proper
public debate or parliamentary scrutiny. In this context, he commended the long-term vision
advocated by Mr TAJANI.
Mr LAMASSOURE acknowledged the solidarity showed by Ireland in the debates regarding Brexit,
and emphasised that the priority for Members States should be to show solidarity towards Ireland. He
noted that many speakers had not agreed with the disruptive approach, while others had shown
interest in financing new policies and priorities. He welcomed the support shown by some participants
regarding new own resources and concluded by emphasising that the solution to the difficult budget
negotiations would be to replace national contributions with own resources.
Concluding the meeting, Ms HASSI thanked Mr LAMASSOURE for the presentation and all the
participants for their contribution to the discussion. She expressed hope that the constructive debate
would continue in the COSAC plenary in December and said she believed participants€ contributions
would bolster the good work of the Finnish Presidency.
9