{"id":3767,"date":"2020-07-01T16:36:57","date_gmt":"2020-07-01T14:36:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/?post_type=article&p=3767"},"modified":"2020-07-01T16:36:57","modified_gmt":"2020-07-01T14:36:57","slug":"hemm-bzonn-ta-pakkett-ta-irkupru-ta-e2-triljun-biex-il-covid-19-tigi-indirizzata","status":"publish","type":"article","link":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/article\/hemm-bzonn-ta-pakkett-ta-irkupru-ta-e2-triljun-biex-il-covid-19-tigi-indirizzata\/","title":{"rendered":"Parliament: EU27 need \u20ac2 trillion recovery package to tackle COVID-19 fallout"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

In a resolution on the post-2020 EU budget revision and economic recovery plans, MEPs demand a robust package, focused on citizens\u2019 needs and building on the EU budget.<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\u201cEuropean citizens must be at the heart of the recovery strategy\u201d, MEPs stress, adding that Parliament will stand firm in defending citizens\u2019 interests. The recovery efforts must have a strong social dimension, addressing social and economic inequalities and the needs of those hardest hit by the crisis.<\/p>\n

Parliament insists that the new \u201crecovery and transformation fund\u201d must be of \u20ac2 trillion in size, be financed \u201cthrough the issuance of long-dated recovery bonds\u201d and be \u201cdisbursed through loans and, mostly, through grants, direct payments for investment and equity.\u201d They urge the Commission not to use \u201cdubious multipliers to advertise ambitious figures\u201d, and not resort to \u201cfinancial wizardry\u201d, as the EU\u2019s credibility is at stake.<\/p>\n

Recovery investments must be added on top of MFF-financed programmes<\/strong><\/p>\n

The recovery plan must be provided on top of the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), which is the EU\u2019s long-term budget, not to the detriment of existing and upcoming EU programmes, MEPs warn. In addition, they insist that the MFF must be increased and underline that Parliament will use its veto powers if EP demands are not met.<\/p>\n

The recovery money \u201cshould go to programmes within the EU budget\u201d, to guarantee parliamentary oversight and participation. Parliament must also be fully involved \u201cin the shaping, adoption and implementation of the recovery fund\u201d. They warn the Commission to refrain from \u201cany attempt to design a European recovery strategy that is outside the community method and resorts to intergovernmental means.\u201d<\/p>\n

Plan must focus on priorities under the Green Deal and digital agenda<\/strong><\/p>\n

The \u201cmassive recovery package\u201d, which MEPs demanded already in their recent\u202fApril resolution, must last long enough to tackle the \u201cexpected deep and long-lasting impact of the current crisis\u201d. It must \u201ctransform our economies\u201d by supporting SMEs, and \u201cincrease job opportunities and skills to mitigate the impact of the crisis on workers, consumers and families\u201d. They call for investments to be prioritised according to the Green Deal and the digital agenda and insist on the creation of a new standalone European health programme.<\/p>\n

EU revenue reform becomes vital\u202f<\/strong><\/p>\n

MEPs\u202freiterate\u202ftheir call for the introduction of a basket of new \u201cown resources\u201d (sources of EU revenue), so as to prevent a further increase of member states\u2019 direct contributions to the EU budget to meet the needs of the MFF and the Recovery and Transformation Fund. As the ceiling for the EU revenue is expressed in GNI, which is expected to drop significantly due to the crisis, MEPs also call \u201cfor an immediate and permanent increase of the Own Resources ceiling.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

  In a resolution on the post-2020 EU budget revision and economic recovery plans, MEPs demand a robust package, focused on citizens\u2019 needs and building on the EU budget.   […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":3758,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"spay_email":""},"issuem_issue":[171],"issuem_issue_categories":[8],"issuem_issue_tags":[],"translation":{"provider":"WPGlobus","version":"2.8.8","language":"en","enabled_languages":["mt","en"],"languages":{"mt":{"title":true,"content":true,"excerpt":false},"en":{"title":true,"content":true,"excerpt":false}}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/3767"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/article"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3767"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/3767\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3769,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/article\/3767\/revisions\/3769"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3758"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3767"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"issuem_issue","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issuem_issue?post=3767"},{"taxonomy":"issuem_issue_categories","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issuem_issue_categories?post=3767"},{"taxonomy":"issuem_issue_tags","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/weekly.uhm.org.mt\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issuem_issue_tags?post=3767"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}