80 likes | 101 Views
THE EU BUDGET ES3001 WEEK 17. BUDGET. Who decides the EU budget? How is the annual budget decided (acc. to Lisbon treaty)? (Art. 314) Commission proposes the draft by 1 September Co-decision: The Council and EP Council adopts its position (QMV) and send it to EP
E N D
THE EU BUDGET ES3001 WEEK 17
BUDGET • Who decides the EU budget? • How is the annual budget decided (acc. to Lisbon treaty)? (Art. 314) • Commission proposes the draft by 1 September • Co-decision: The Council and EP • Council adopts its position (QMV) and send it to EP • EP might amend it by simple majority and send it to Council and Commission • The Conciliation Committee makes decision with QMV and send it to C. and EP and so on
The multiannual financial framework • The multiannual financial framework • It lays down maximum amounts ('ceilings') for each broad category of expenditure ('headings' for a clearly determined period of time (several years). • It aims to ensure EU expenditure develops in an orderly manner.
Budget • Where does the money go? • Single Market (growth and employment) • Natural Resources (CAP, CFP, environment) • freedom, justice, security - citizenship • EU’s role on the global stage • Administrative costs • Compensations (new members)
Winners and Losers • List of net contributors and beneficieries • http://www.euo.dk/euo_en/spsv/all/79/
Literature • EU budget = Robin Hood? (take from the rich, give it to the poor) • Does the EU budget favour smaller member states? (Mattila 2006) • smaller member states are able to use the disproportional allocation of Council votes to their advantage (p.48). • small member states, such as Denmark, Ireland and Luxembourg, have received significantly more net transfers from the EU budget than their levels of economic prosperity would have justified (Ibid).
Budget Reform • Is easy or difficult to reform the EU budget system over time? Why? (Ackrill and Kay 2006) (Benedetto and Hoyland 2007) (Heinemann, et. al., 2010) • Path dependency • significant switching costs • treaty changes require unanimity of MSs, giving potential ‘losers’ a veto • Member State preferences, concerns for preserving shares