MEPs and European Council oppose research super fund plan

The European Commission has been warned that it is on a collision course with Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and the European Council over attempts to absorb the next framework programme (FP10) for research and innovation into a giant Competitiveness Fund.

Christian Ehler, the European Parliament’s rapporteur on the Horizon Europe programme, was speaking after both MEPs and the European Council’s research ministers voted to oppose any attempt to subsume the successor to Horizon Europe into a catch-all European “competitiveness” super fund from 2028 onwards.

MEPs and EU research ministers fear the idea is being driven by Ursula von der Leyen, the powerful president of the European Commission (the EU’s executive arm), because she wants to centralise EU spending on applied research and innovation – and away from basic research – in a rush to catch up with the economic powerhouses of China and the US, as University World News reported.

‘Risks conflict with legislative bodies’

Ehler told a press conference after the two votes that such a move risks “confrontation” and “conflict with the EU’s two legislative bodies” – the European Parliament and the Council (which represents governments in EU member states).

Ehler claimed the Commission was carrying out a “kind of secret operation” over its future plans for the framework programme when Horizon Europe comes up for renewal in three years’ time.

“That is politically neither wise nor well-advised,” said Ehler, warning that it could jeopardise negotiations over the EU’s next long-term budget, known as the multiannual financial framework, or MFF, in Euro-speak.

In the plenary session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg on 11 March, MEPs voted by 472 to 75 to back a report from its Committee on Industry, Research, and Energy (ITRE), authored by Ehler.

This called for a stand-alone “user-oriented, science-led” R&I programme to take over from Horizon Europe in the next MFF and opposed centralising programming through a general competitiveness fund.

Decisive vote by MEPs

Ehler, a long-serving German MEP and member of the European People’s Party (EPP), described the vote in parliament as “decisive” and told MEPs: “This is about whether we are going to have a framework programme, an independent research framework programme, in the future or not, (or) whether it's squeezed into an absurd idea of an all-in-all competitiveness programme, which is squeezing together 35 years of independent research policies.”

EU research ministers meeting in Warsaw, Poland, also on 11 March, sent a clear message to the Commission that they also want a stand-alone Framework Programme, FP10, and are against subsuming the budget for research and innovation into a catch-all Competitiveness Fund.

The ministers adopted what they called the “Warsaw Declaration on the strategic role of the future EU R&I framework programme”, which called on the European Commission to “build on the legacy of self-standing framework programmes, in close cooperation with the member states”.

‘Stop signals’ sent

Ehler told University World News that both votes were “stop signals from the parliament and the Council” and a reminder to the European Commission not to touch the biggest civilian research programme in the world.

Ehler said those against the EU’s research and innovation programme being absorbed into an all-inclusive Competitiveness Fund would be stepping up their campaign to stop what he feared was an attempt at a ‘fait accompli’ by Commission top brass, who wanted to prioritise short-term economic interests over mid- to longer-term groundbreaking research and innovation.

“Since the parliament and the European Council are the co-legislators, it [the all-inclusive Competitiveness Fund] runs the risk that it will simply stay an interesting proposal from the Commission, but it’s not going to fly,” said Ehler.

Commission issues response

A spokesperson for the European Commission told University World News: “A stakeholder public consultation on the next multiannual financial framework was launched in February, and all stakeholders are welcome to contribute to this consultation.

“The Commission is committed to advocating for an ambitious and increased budget on research and innovation, focusing on better prioritisation and simplification.

“As indicated in the February Commission Communication (‘The road to the next multiannual financial framework’), the proposal on the next Multiannual Financial Framework is expected in July 2025.

“No decision has been taken yet on the architecture of the next MFF,” said the Commission spokesperson.

’Frontier research is vital’

In a speech to the European Parliament's ITRE Committee last month, Professor Maria Leptin, President of the European Research Council (ERC), welcomed their recommendations for an increased budget for the 10th Research Framework Programme (FP10) and told MEPs: “In times of crisis, it is easy to lose sight of the long term. Yet, even as we respond to immediate challenges, we must continue to lay the foundations for the future.

“History shows that investing in frontier research is vital to securing long-term prosperity.

“While Europe has world-class researchers, many of whom have contributed to the development of AI, we lack the conditions for scale-up and growth.

“The US and China dominate not just in AI research but in a range of other critical technologies,” she said: “Real breakthroughs come from long-term investment in curiosity-driven research – exactly the kind of work supported by the ERC.”

And with the “global innovation landscape shifting” and the policies of the current US administration likely to alter funding flows, “Europe must be prepared to act independently and decisively,” Leptin said.

“This means committing to research and innovation at both EU and national levels. We must ensure the right balance between supporting immediate economic needs and securing long-term scientific leadership.”

Call to US researchers

Jan Palmowski, Secretary-General of The Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities, told University World News that while the Trump administration in the US is cutting prestigious research funding schemes and focusing on removing what it calls ‘unnecessarily burdensome’ concerns as it invests in AI, “Europe needs to push what it's good at, building from the strategic advantages we already have”.

He urged Europe to stand together with research partners in countries like the United Kingdom and to “pool our resources” and “avoid making the mistake of putting all funding into Artificial Intelligence at a time when there are so many scientific transformations in other fields.”

He also called for Europe to “do all it can to welcome leading scientists who want to come and do their work here”, particularly from the United States.

“If the US stymies its flagship research programmes, Europe must do the opposite.

“Now is the time to boost the European Research Council and the Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions and support research across the entire disciplinary spectrum,” he said in an opinion piece for last week’s Open Access Government.

Nic Mitchell is a UK-based freelance journalist and PR consultant specialising in European and international higher education. He blogs at www.delacourcommunications.com