MEP Roberts Zīle: There are many new MEPs who would like to punish Poland and Hungary

Roberts Zīle, Member of the European Parliament, answers Neatkarīgā’s questions.

The European Union has just been shaken by a very rare event: Poland and Hungary have vetoed the EU budget. What could be the consequences of this move, and how is this issue likely to be resolved?

What happened comes as no surprise. Poland and Hungary have long said that if the decisions the European Council made in July are changed, they will veto the EU budget. The European Council compromise in July was also accepted by the Polish and Hungarian governments, as there was an idea that it would not affect the next seven-year budget or the Recovery Fund. If there are any objections against the legislation of a country, those countries will not be punished monetarily. However, under pressure from the European Parliament, Hungary and Poland were still punished, by linking access to money from various funds to the specific laws of these countries. Poles and Hungarians have already warned that they will veto it if it happens. Various center and left-wing groups in the European Parliament, working with the governments of some Western European countries, have put a lot of pressure on this monetary punishment to take place. What's next? I predict that under the German Presidency, a solution will be found in the coming weeks that is acceptable to Hungary and Poland, without creating financial risks for the EU as a whole. Namely, the operation of the Recovery Fund will not start at the beginning of next year, and the adoption of the seven-year budget will be delayed. This would have significant consequences for all EU countries, including Latvia. I anticipate that a way will be found so that access to the Recovery Fund will not be linked to so-called breaches of the rule of law [alleged against Poland and Hungary].

So a solution will be found that does not result in financial discrimination for Poland and Hungary?

Yes. You can also call it that. Everyone will interpret it differently. It is clear that everyone must keep face. Both those groups in the European Parliament who wanted to severely punish Poland and Hungary, and the Poles and Hungarians, who must be able to say that they will be able to get money from the funds. Why do I expect a solution to be found during the German Presidency? The German Foreign Minister, who is in fact a Social Democrat, said a few days ago that a solution was in place, and on Thursday in a remote sitting of the EP, Merkel, speaking on behalf of the German presidency, urged everyone to be calm. In other words, do not talk too much with the media, so that then it would not be difficult to find a compromise solution acceptable to all, which could also be "sold" to your voters.

What is the current mood in these negotiations?

There are a very limited number of people allowed to attend in person, and all these budget matters are mainly led by the German Ambassador in Brussels. He is very erudite. He also reached a compromise on the seven-year budget and the new tax plan. I think he will also deal with this situation. Not alone, but by cooperating with the German and other governments, including the EP. The leader of the European People's Party is Manfred Weber, a Christian Socialist, a member of the Merkel’s party (CDU/CSU). He is currently strongly condemning Poland and Hungary, but sometimes he knows how to find the right words to tell the whole group of the People's Party that this compromise is a good one, and we must therefore support it. So I think that even in this strange situation, although it could have been predicted beforehand, a solution will be found.

When I asked about the atmosphere, I wondered if these talks are not dominated by those who are stubbornly ready to do anything, just to put Hungary and Poland 'in their place'.

This position is very popular among the Liberal (where our Ījabs is) and Social Democrat (with Ušakovs) groups in the EP. However, even in many of the People's Parties, where our Unity (Latvian: Vienotība) colleagues are, it must be borne in mind that the role of parliament in these party groups is being mixed with that of governments, and there is a greater willingness to compromise. So I think the lever to adjust the situation will be found. Another thing is that there are a lot of new MEPs who have taken on the role of "bad cops" and who feel that the Hungarian and Polish people are complicit in electing such "wrong" governments time and time again. There is even a position in Parliament, but I hope it cannot go through, that the Recovery Fund includes a provision that if we punish the Polish Government for the injustice of the rule of law, we will not give Poland money, even though the Polish Government has promised its beneficiaries - non-governmental organizations, regions, businesses - that they will get this money, and it is obliged to give this money from its national budget. That, of course, would not work. Let's imagine that everyone in Latvia has already planned for those billions in a few months, tenders have already been announced, and suddenly Brussels says that you will no longer have money due to the injustice of the rule of law. You will not receive money from the EU, but you have an obligation to pay it to everyone you have promised. The elements of dissent of this policy are clearly visible. There are several regions in Poland, and in Warsaw, for example, there is not much support for the Kaczyński’s party, which should now receive support, but there will be no money from Brussels.

The administration of EU power is very complex and it is difficult to understand who is responsible for what. Which center of power will be the decisive one in resolving this situation?

There are areas where the Council of Europe, that is, governments, have more say, because the EU is made up of nation states. We are not a federal system, so the role of the European Parliament is not decisive. At the same time, there are many issues, including financial matters, where the European Parliament has a so-called codecision procedure. Why is the regulation for Recovery Fund being negotiated? Because we (MEPs) are on an equal footing with government representatives when negotiating the regulation and are negotiating the final version with the German Presidency; on how this money can be used, but we do not have the right to talk about a figure (amount) in this fund, because our only legal right in, say, a seven-year budget is to either agree or reject the Council of Europe's agreement on this figure, on 1,8 trillion. I must say, thank God, that Parliament has no greater rights, because even though I work there, I can see how things work. The mood is very populist. And not just on the right side, but on the left and center. So it is good that Parliament does not have much power on these monetary issues and not just on monetary issues. For example, I called on my group not to support Parliament's position on the Recovery Fund, because we are in the minority, and we very much hope that the government version, which also included representatives of the Latvian Government, will be adopted, because it is better than the one adopted by Parliament.

How good is this Recovery Fund offer for Latvia?

It is respectable. As a percentage, other countries - Italy, Spain, as well as Greece, which did not suffer so much from covid - will receive more, but in general, we are satisfied with these amounts.