Authors Iain Begg | Gabriel Glöckler | Anke Hassel ... - The Europaeum

Authors Iain Begg | Gabriel Glöckler | Anke Hassel ... - The Europaeum Authors Iain Begg | Gabriel Glöckler | Anke Hassel ... - The Europaeum

europaeum.org
from europaeum.org More from this publisher
14.11.2014 Views

62 After the crisis: A new socio-economic settlement for the EU

Chapter 4 The EU budget: “not fit for purpose” but change is afoot, gradually Alan Mayhew The European Union budget is “not fit for purpose” in the global age. Its critics are numerous, from the European Parliament, across government and amongst economists, lawyers and political scientists. The criticisms are clear: First, instead of supporting new policies tackling future challenges, the budget supports a low productivity sector, agriculture, and relatively poor regions in rich countries; Second, large budget rebates to relatively rich countries, together with side payments, agreed to obtain unanimity in the Council, severely limit transparency and equity in the budget; Third, policymaking in the Union is plagued by the net budget balance concerns of member states; Fourth, the Union’s own resources are in fact transfers from the member states, which divorce the budgetary authority from the taxpayers, and which, in the electoral process, therefore divorce European parliamentarians from responsibility for expenditure; Finally, the medium-term financial framework of the Union is not subject to influence from the European Parliament and severely limits flexibility in the budget to tackle rapidly changing policy requirements. Identifying these problems is naturally far easier than curing them. The great difficulty is the need for unanimity amongst the 27 member states to make serious changes to the annual budget and the financial framework. While the overall budget is less than 1% of EU Gross National Income Chapter 4 – Alan Mayhew 63

Chapter 4<br />

<strong>The</strong> EU budget:<br />

“not fit for purpose”<br />

but change is afoot,<br />

gradually<br />

Alan Mayhew<br />

<strong>The</strong> European Union budget is “not fit for purpose” in the global age. Its<br />

critics are numerous, from the European Parliament, across government<br />

and amongst economists, lawyers and political scientists. <strong>The</strong> criticisms<br />

are clear: First, instead of supporting new policies tackling future<br />

challenges, the budget supports a low productivity sector, agriculture, and<br />

relatively poor regions in rich countries; Second, large budget rebates to<br />

relatively rich countries, together with side payments, agreed to obtain<br />

unanimity in the Council, severely limit transparency and equity in the<br />

budget; Third, policymaking in the Union is plagued by the net budget<br />

balance concerns of member states; Fourth, the Union’s own resources<br />

are in fact transfers from the member states, which divorce the budgetary<br />

authority from the taxpayers, and which, in the electoral process, therefore<br />

divorce European parliamentarians from responsibility for expenditure;<br />

Finally, the medium-term financial framework of the Union is not subject<br />

to influence from the European Parliament and severely limits flexibility<br />

in the budget to tackle rapidly changing policy requirements.<br />

Identifying these problems is naturally far easier than curing them. <strong>The</strong><br />

great difficulty is the need for unanimity amongst the 27 member states to<br />

make serious changes to the annual budget and the financial framework.<br />

While the overall budget is less than 1% of EU Gross National Income<br />

Chapter 4 – Alan Mayhew 63

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!