Debate: Establishing the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform
Date: MONDAY, 16 OCTOBER 2023
Speaker: Johannes Hahn
Language: EN

Therefore, we need to stand by European companies at least to address the uneven playing field where competition is not always on fair terms. This is even more important as the global circumstances are, as you all know, not the easiest. The effects of high inflation, rising interest rates and increased energy costs to name just a few. This is why the Commission has proposed the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform – what we call ‘STEP’. We welcome the fast pace with which the European Parliament has worked on this file. This proves our shared understanding of the urgency and importance of these topics and may I say, listening to the rapporteurs, I think there are some very interesting elements for the future negotiations. I appreciate the clear support this House expressed to the proposal to increase the financing capacity of four programmes, and I very much welcome the fact that Parliament has kept the focus on critical technologies in the deep tech and digital, clean and bio sectors. This is in line with the recommendation on critical technology areas for the Union’s economic security, which was recently adopted by the Commission. We also agree that STEP should support the development and manufacturing of critical technologies, which are the weaknesses that we need to tackle. The STEP objectives will not only be implemented through programmes that we propose to reinforce, but also through programmes that we propose to make more flexible. This will give Member States the option to address those strategic dependencies with their cohesion policy funds in particular. Cohesion policy delivers on the core promise of our Union to ensure harmonious development throughout the territory of the Union. Cohesion policy is a built-in transformative power, and we need to use it by adapting rules for quicker implementation to successfully accompany Europe’s regions towards a greener and more sustainable future. The global green and digital transition will not wait for us. This means we have no time to lose – this would have severe consequences. Let me give you two compelling reasons for this. First, I would strongly caution against extending by one year the eligibility period for the 2014-2020 period. An extra year for the previous period means, in practice, one year less for the 2127 period and more crucially, one year less for STEP projects and objectives. We simply cannot keep our eyes on the past. Instead of prolonging, we should concentrate on promptly closing the 2014-2020 programmes. It is urgent that the adopted programmes start bearing fruit and that any reprogramming efforts linked to STEP happen as quickly as possible. STEP objectives, which we all agree are urgent, can only be programmed in this new period and therefore their delivery will be put at serious risk with such a prolongation. And may I say, in the Budgetary Control Committee and every time I ask, ‘What about the RAL?’ The  This ties into the second comment I would like to make – and this ties into my first point, I would like to remind you that our Multiannual Financial Framework limits how much we can pay out every year. Some of you may remember the situation we had with the previous MFF. We faced a significant backlog, and reimbursements owed to managing authorities, which had made the investments had to be postponed and spread out over a number of years. This is the situation we may be facing now if the payment cap for 2025, which the Commission had proposed to set at 1% of the overall funds, is raised to 10%. This increase could lead to a breach of payment ceilings for a number of years, with a very negative consequence – payments to recipients of EU funds could not be made. It sounds technical – it is somehow technical – but it has a huge impact if this idea is really implemented. Finally, the higher EU financing for the last accounting year of 2014-2020 programmes will lead to a lower level of ownership with a higher risk of errors and, most importantly, a lower level of much needed investments, and in general, it fuels the perception that there is too much money if there and/or is an absorption problem. So one should be aware about all the consequences. It’s a reputational issue, it is a financial impact, and these are all elements you should keep in mind if you vote on these proposals. I think, at the end of the day, what should guide us is our work together during the STEP negotiations. Therefore, I look forward to working on an ambitious agreement, an agreement which is focused on this STEP topic, and together I think we can be successful once again. The same applies, like for the previous item at the agenda: it is part and parcel of our MFF review and it should not be seen as something separate, but it is something which fits into our overall understanding to make the Union more competitive, to make our society, our businesses, our research area, more competitive, more attractive and therefore finally, more resilient.