EU could bypass the veto of Hungary and Poland

Ghe “debate” of the heads of state and government on the Hungarian and Polish blockade of the EUR 1.8 trillion corona package from the EU budget and reconstruction funds lasted just 16 minutes on Thursday evening. According to diplomats, besides Chancellor Angela Merkel, who leads the negotiations for the German EU Council Presidency, and the President of the European Council Charles Michel, only the Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, his Polish colleague Mateusz Morawiecki and their new “ally”, the Slovene, took action Janez Janša, the word. A video summit is simply not the right format to resolve the conflict, it was said afterwards. That is why it was agreed among the other “bosses” not to react.

Hungary and Poland vetoed the package on Monday. They refuse to allow the EU to cut EU aid in the future because of violations of the rule of law. In its role as the incumbent Council Presidency, Germany will sound out what options there are to persuade them to approve, said Merkel after the meeting. “We are still at the very beginning.” At the same time, there is growing unrest in the European Parliament that this could no longer be in time so that the money urgently needed, especially in southern Europe, can flow at least halfway on time. From there now comes a new idea of ​​how the other EU states could increase the pressure on the two countries. The MEP Sven Giegold from the Greens is campaigning for the Corona Fund to be simply adopted as part of the so-called enhanced cooperation provided for in the EU treaties.

EU treaty keeps option open

This allows a group of “nine or more member states” to drive individual projects that are not supported by all 27 EU countries on their own. You would need the “approval” of the Council of Ministers for this. In this case, however, he could grant this with a qualified majority. Poland and Hungary could not block the decision. The fund itself would then still have to be passed unanimously, but only by the 25 member states involved – Slovenia, unlike Hungary and Poland, did not veto it.

The approach has charm. “The investment aid could flow quickly without weakening democracy in Europe,” says Giegold. At the same time, the rule of law mechanism rejected by Poland and Hungary could be adopted in the majority procedure without further dilution. For the mechanism itself, unlike the EU budget and Corona fund, no unanimity is required. “Then the pressure is out of the kettle and the governments in Warsaw and Budapest will have to explain to their citizens and companies why they will come away empty-handed for the time being,” says Giegold.

The approach is similar to the intergovernmental solution brought into play by Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte. He had threatened to simply adopt the Corona fund as an intergovernmental agreement with the 25 other countries, just like the euro crisis fund ESM once did. From a legal point of view, however, this would be much more complicated in the opinion of experts. In addition, this would leave the classic EU framework. The European Parliament would be left out.

Another blockade for the household

The proposal from the European Parliament would not change the blockade of the EU budget from 2021 to 2027. Hungary and Poland could block this further. In extreme cases, an emergency budget would have to come into force at the beginning of next year. The EU could then have a twelfth of the 2020 budget at its disposal every month. It would not be completely incapable of acting. However, only part of the money could actually flow out because there is no legal basis for many programs without a budget from 2021 to 2027.

The “way out” to resolve the corona crisis within the framework of increased cooperation has, according to reports, already been discussed in the European Commission. The enthusiasm for the idea is limited there, however. The EU Commission wants to avoid anything that could have a divisive effect, it says there. The approach of enhanced cooperation always harbors this danger. It could therefore not be more than an absolute stopgap solution. The EU would not be breaking new ground.

As early as 2010, 14 states adopted common rules on divorce law. In the following year, the way was cleared for the introduction of the EU patent in 25 member states. In addition, a group of currently nine member states, including Germany, has been negotiating the introduction of a financial transaction tax as part of enhanced cooperation for years.