A “leaner” budget ” “

The European Parliament gave final approval to the 2014-2020 multiannual budget which represents also a go-ahead to the main Community programs that will become operational as of January 1 next year. The total budget is smaller compared to the previous seven years, since the 28 Member States hold that in times of crisis Europe should go on a with a “crash diet”. But at the same time EU funds will bring a breath of fresh air to continental economy thereby funding regional cohesion, the creation of infrastructure, industry, agriculture, culture and research. Funds for Europe. The Multiannual Financial Framework, adopted with a large majority vote by the European Parliament in Strasbourg during the plenary of November 18-21 will have 960 billion budget, amouting to 1% of EU’s GDP. “Compared to the 2007-2013 budget the new MFF has lost nearly 40 billion”, the figure was underlined by Janusz Lewandowski from Poland, EU Budget Commissioner. “The budget has been downsized and this is not good news. Yet we were able to insert more funds in some key areas”, namely in employment-boosting measures, social solidarity and external action. “Also the Erasmus program, thus the training of young people, has been adequately financed”. Alain Lamassoure, French MEP, who negotiated the budget with the Council, said that on the other hand “this MFF is neither the best nor the worst we could obtain, if anything, it was the only balance possible”. Lamassoure stressed that “the budget does not leave margins for intervention in case of emergencies or natural disasters, and it fails to allocate sufficient funds to the new responsibilities conferred to the EU by the Lisbon Treaty. “Without an adequate budget – he said – and without own resources, Europe does not stand the challenges and will be unable to give citizens the answers they expect”. A missed opportunity? Jean-Luc Dehaene, MEP (EPP, Belgium), who negotiated with the member states on behalf of the Parliament, reflected on the lengthy negotiations between Parliament and Council, the EU’s two budgetary authorities. “Parliament obtained a mid-term review, in order to give concrete expression to the principle of flexibility of accounts”. Dehaene pointed out the problem of “own resources”, which is the object of a dedicated working group whose goal for the two coming years will to give more autonomy to the EU budget compared to Member States’. “But this QFP – Dehaene went on – it’s also a missed opportunity: the total balance decreases, and in a time of crisis and savings” at national level, the EU budget, “which is essentially aimed at investments, could have done more for the citizens “, for business, for economic recovery e, for young people, for the territories. Once again, governments have given priority to the national interests”. With the plenary vote on the MFF the various chapters of the budget take shape, thereby enabling the co-financing of regional policy, agriculture, creation of infrastructure (transport, energy, communication), the culture, opportunities to study abroad for young people and countless other actions (social policy, migration, foreign policy …). Doubts on Horizon. The European Parliament has adopted the framework program Horizon 2020, a € 70 billion container into which flow the funds for research and innovation. But on this aspect the scientific community and the Churches have already released statements, as Horizon provides funding – however small compared to the total amount – for experiments on embryonic cells. COMECE (Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Community rejects the package for research, while Italian MEP Carlo Casini recalled: “the European Court of Justice has recognized in its judgment Brustle-Greenpeace 2011, the non-patentability of human cells and, in fact, the need to respect the human embryo. Therefore, it is inconsistent that the European Union encourage, directly or indirectly, with the economic resources of Horizon 2020, the destruction of human embryos. “The program – the MEP told SIR Europe – contains many positive aspects and practical support for research in many areas of economic and social life”. “Yet the fact that on the basis of the previous framework program Horizon has given the green light to experiments involving the use of stem cells raises a “dark shadow” over the new program. “Let’s be clear. The EU can neither impose nor prevent one or more Member States from financing destructive research on human embryos. But it should neither encourage it, adding Community funds to domestic ones”.