Contradictory figures (up to an additional €90bn) have however been spread by the Council presidency in an attempt to undermine Parliament’s offer.

Johan van Overtveldt, Chairman of the Committee on Budgets reacts to the distorted information circulated by the Council presidency:

“This Wednesday morning we read in the press a misrepresentation of yesterday’s EP compromise offer. The EP has been fully transparent all along: in public resolutions, press statements and open letters. Our constructive inputs have either not been read, or are deliberately misrepresented.

39 billion euros for our flagship programmes

Let me set the record straight: Parliament’s compromise offer is 39 billion euros. 39 billion more to increase our flagship programmes: for delivering the Green Deal, supporting the digital transition, building up our common health capacities and our networks, supporting our youth and researchers, tackling together migration, security and external challenges, and defending our cultural creation and our values. It would only mark a minimal (2%) change to the 1.8 trillion July package, but it makes a huge difference for the citizens who benefit from our common policies – severely cut by the Council.

An overall Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) ceiling equal to 2014-2020

We also proposed a financing architecture with two key elements at its core: 13 billion euros would come from the space released by counting recovery debt and interest repayments over and above the ceilings (given that it is exceptional expenditure that should not compete with Union programmes); and a 9 billion net increase of the MFF ceilings. Let’s put figures in perspective: in real terms, the overall MFF ceiling for 7 years would be equal to the 2014-2020 period (1 083 billion euros).

This is a huge step from our initial position, made in a spirit of compromise in view of reaching an agreement. From the Council side, however, there is still no such sign of willingness of “going the extra mile”, as they proposed themselves in a recent letter. And just like a few weeks ago, an unnamed ‘diplomat’ inflates Parliament’s offer to portray us as an unrealistic and unreliable partner. Parliament-bashing is always a very attractive story to tell, but clearly not helping our cooperation in this delicate negotiation.

Recovery instrument should be launched and fully implemented

Our compromise offer is 39 billion euros. The rest is made up of pure flexibility mechanisms to address future needs in the uncertain environment we live in. The bulk of it is not additional money, but merely about making sure that, out of the agreed spending, not a single euro can be lost due to underexecution.

We are very concerned about how some, in the Council, come to the additional figure released in the press today. Could it be that they factor in a severe underimplementation of the Recovery instrument, that should not be tackled? We trust that Council will stay true to the Leaders’ promise of a 390 billion stimulus in grants. Support to the citizens and businesses is urgently needed, and the Council needs to greenlight the launch of the ratification process to ensure relief can quickly reach those most hit by the Covid-19 crisis. Parliament did its part on this short-term support, and will continue negotiating to improve the MFF to strengthen resilience on the longer-term.”

On Wednesday, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety adopted its report on the programme for the EU’s action in the health sector, the so-called “EU4Health Programme” with 74 votes to 5 and 1 abstention.

MEPs want to raise the budget for the programme to EUR 9.4 billion, as originally proposed by the Commission, to enhance health promotion and make health systems more resilient across the EU. COVID-19 has shown that the EU is in urgent need of an ambitious EU health programme to ensure that European health systems can face future health threats. This is not possible if the budget is reduced to EUR 1.7 billion as proposed by member states.

To reach the programme’s objectives, the report proposes, inter alia, to:

• focus more on disease prevention
• reduce health inequalities
• digitalise healthcare through the creation and application of the European eHealth Record
• address resistance to vaccination in the EU
• strengthen the European Union’s fight against cancer in synergy with the Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan
• prevent and manage chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular diseases and type 2 diabetes
• take more specific actions to address medicine shortages and make better use of antimicrobials, such as antibiotics
• promote health by addressing health risks — such as the harmful use of alcohol and tobacco.

To ensure it is implemented effectively, MEPs propose to set up a Steering Group consisting of independent experts in the field of public health.

MEPs also want to increase cooperation at EU level to improve readiness in case of a health crisis. They call for the mandates of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) and of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to be strengthened.

Quote

After the vote, Parliament’s rapporteur Cristian-Silviu Buşoi (EPP, Romania) said: “The COVID-19 crisis has exposed the need for well-defined and adequately-financed health instruments as well as for boosting innovation and investing more in health in general. It will be crucial to increase funding for the EU4Health Programme to €9.4 billion, as proposed by the Commission in May, in order to have the capacity to deal with future pandemics and health threats, and to make our health systems more resilient.”

Next steps

Parliament is expected to vote on this report at the latest during the 11-12 November plenary session, after which Parliament is ready to start negotiations with member states so that the programme can be implemented from the beginning of 2021.

Background

On 28 May 2020, the Commission put forward a new stand-alone EU4Health Programme for 2021-2027 as part of the Recovery Plan to build resilient health systems in the EU by tackling cross-border health threats, making medicines available and affordable, and strengthening health systems. The Health Programme was previously under the initial EU long-term budget 2021-2027 as one element of the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+).

Despite a gradual increase in asylum applications since the initial easing of travel restrictions, August saw just over 40 000 registered, almost 40% fewer than in January.

Figures released by the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) show that the impact of COVID-19 restrictive measures remains evident across the EU+ . Data show that asylum applications in August were down slightly from July (almost 43 000 applications), and significantly below pre-COVID levels. In January 2020, 65 692 applications were registered.  

Since the beginning of 2020, 295 075 applications for international protection have been lodged in the EU+, a 31% decrease compared to the same period in 2019. This indicates that reduced mobility and pandemic emergency measures are still affecting the number of applications being lodged with national asylum authorities.

In August, Syrians (5 394; 13% of total) and Afghans (3 800; 10% of total) continued to lodge the most applications for international protection, followed by Venezuelans (3 600; 9% of total) and Colombians (3 300; 7% of total), but EASO analyses suggest that these applicants are not newly arrived to the EU+. Colombians and Peruvians were the only prominent citizenships lodging more applications so far this year. Other citizenships are universally lodging fewer applications due to the pandemic.

In August, 26% of applications received a positive decision, while in July only 23% received international protection. Overall, the recognition rate between January and August 2020 stands at 31%.

Despite the challenges, and because of new working arrangements in place, EU+ asylum authorities have been able to issue more first-instance decisions (over 43 200 in August) than there were applications lodged, which means that even in these difficult times, the backlog is being reduced.

The current public health situation makes it extremely difficult to make accurate forecasts about the EU+ asylum situation in the coming months. Nevertheless, the recent return of restrictive measures in some EU+ countries and the intra-EU travel restrictions in place are likely to also limit mobility for those in need of protection. Asylum applications are thus expected to remain at lower levels than in recent times. 

Any further information may be obtained from the European Asylum Support Office on the following email address: press@easo.europa.eu

I look forward to welcoming you to our upcoming European Council meeting on 15-16 October. We will meet in a difficult context. We are seeing COVID infections rise and we have a number of pressing issues on our agenda, including our relations with the United Kingdom.

The European Council will start on Thursday afternoon at 3pm with our traditional exchange of views with European Parliament President, David Sassoli.

We will then move on to EU-UK negotiations together with Michel Barnier. It is in the interests of both sides to have an agreement in place before the end of the transition period. This cannot, however, happen at any price. The coming days are decisive. I will invite our negotiator to update us on the latest developments. Key issues include, in particular, the level playing field, fisheries and governance.

Over dinner, we will hold an orientation debate on how to achieve our climate ambition. Last December we agreed on the objective of a climate-neutral EU by 2050. We now need to increase our emissions reduction target for 2030 to make sure we can achieve that ambition. The Commission has proposed a new target of at least 55% by 2030. I would like us to have a constructive debate on the issue, so as to pave the way for an agreement by the end of the year.

On Friday, we will reconvene for a strategic discussion on our relations with Africa, with a view to our upcoming meeting with African Union Leaders. Our objective is to renew and deepen our political relations, taking them to a higher level, based on mutual respect and the willingness to accommodate each other’s interests.

After our discussion on EU-Africa relations, we will address other foreign policy issues that require our attention.

Lastly, on COVID-19, we will address two issues. We will take stock of the coordination efforts undertaken at EU level, after the adoption of the Council recommendation on the restriction of free movement and receive an update from Commission President von der Leyen on vaccines. We will then discuss the next steps to take.

Visit the meeting page