Clash over EU Budget: EP insists on ambition as Commission seeks to cut costs
The European Commission’s proposed Multiannual Financial Framework targets a financial allocation of almost €2 trillion
As the European Union gears up for its next long-term budget covering 2028–2034, institutional fault lines have deepened over the past days. The European Commission’s proposed Multiannual Financial Framework targets a financial allocation of almost €2 trillion, or approximately 1.26% of EU gross national income.
While the headline figure represents an increase, this budget includes massive repayments tied to the post-COVID recovery fund, meaning that the net available for the new period is smaller.
The key elements of the Commission’s proposals feature increased flexibility, including fewer pre-prog-rammed programmes, a dedicated flexibility instrument and a new crisis mechanism to provide loans in severe emergencies.
Second, simplification by cutting the current 52 funding programmes down to 16 and offering beneficiaries a single portal for access.
Third, tailored interventions via the National and Regional Partnership Plan, using one integrated plan per Member State covering cohesion, agriculture, fisheries, social policy, migration and security.
Yet the European Parliament is far from convinced.
It has voiced strong objections that the Commission’s blueprint is too small, too centralising and risks sidelining the EP’s democratic oversight role. Categorically, MEPs declared the budget was “simply not enough to meet Europe’s challenges” and warned the 1.26% ceiling would force cuts to key programmes.
Earlier this year, MEPs had lamented that the structural approach, especially the “one national plan per Member State” model and the pooling of cohesion and agriculture funding, threatens proven policies and undermines regional and local authorities.
Parliament also emphasises the need to defend its role as co-legislator and budgetary authority, demanding full transparency and accountability. In a statement, the group majority leaders insisted: “As the only directly elected EU institution, we strongly insist that Parliament’s legislative, budgetary and discharge prerogatives are fully respected at every stage of the process.”
The Commission, for its part, appears to have begun to soften the edges in recent days and weeks.
Faced with strong opposition in Strasbourg and a real risk of losing the consent needed to adopt the MFF, EC President Ursula von der Leyen has offered concessions: targeted safeguards for farms and regions, and enhanced oversight provisions to placate parliamentary concerns. However, MEPs remain sceptical, warning that these do not go far enough to address the fundamental issues.
The battle lines are set: the Commission seeks agility, simplification and strategic investment in the Union’s future, while the Parliament demands ambition, protection of traditional EU pillars, agriculture, cohesion and the preservation of democratic and budgetary control.
With unanimous member-state support required and the EP’s consent essential, the path to agreement is far from smooth. Negotiations between Brussels’ executive, national capitals and MEPs will determine whether the next budget truly equips the EU for emerging challenges or repeats past constraints under a newly streamlined guise.
MEPs have made clear they are ready to use “all powers at our disposal” to ensure the budget matches both ambition and accountability.
In a post on X, European Parliament President Roberta Metsola described the concessions as a “good step forward” but suggested that there is still work to be done.
