EU BUDGET: PRESIDENCY SEEKS TO IRON OVER DIFFERENCES ON FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE.

The Presidencys text attempts to reflect the often different positions of the Member States as expressed through COREPER and the ad hoc group on the financial perspective (see issue 2867 for further details). The Irish Government has received final comments from the delegations but is only likely to amend its text in the margins.

France, the United Kingdom, Spain and Sweden feel the Conclusions should more clearly highlight the drive that led COREPER in its work to reconcile meeting commitments with budget discipline. Germany has pointed out that the big political questions have still not been addressed, notably paying for enlargement and increasing balances for net contributors. Spain has responded that the increase in costs as a result of enlargement was known in advance and cannot now be set against the principle of budgetary discipline.

Regarding the general financial framework, Austria, Sweden, Denmark and France have called for alternative scenarios to be considered in the report. Sweden has notably called for the delegations positions to be set in starker contrast and for a reference in the introduction to the rate of 1.26% of gross national income (GNI) in commitment appropriations at the end of the period alongside a rate of 1.14% for payment appropriations. Denmark and Finland feel the report should mention their position mid way between the Commission proposal and the six delegations calling for a budget restricted to 1% of GNI. Spain and Austria have reiterated concerns over the growing volume of outstanding balances.

Regarding the own resources system, the Netherlands feels the report over emphasises doubts expressed by several delegations regarding the merits of a generalised corrector mechanism for balances. Belgium would like to see its support for a European tax more clearly stated, whilst Finland feels the reports conclusions should address the issue of the...