EU's von der Leyen says new budget fit for 'new era'
She added that the plan proposes a shift in how the EU organises key funds, while linking funding closely to the rule of law and keeping member state contributions steady.
The proposal aims to triple the budget for migration and border management and to double the Horizon research fund, while 35% of the budget would be spent on climate and biodiversity.
An agreement on the new EU budget requires backing from all 27 member countries and sign-off from the European Parliament.
($1 = 0.8645 euros)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
18 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Households at risk of £12.7bn bill for switching off turbines on windy days
Households and businesses risk facing a £12.7bn-a-year bill to cover the cost of switching off wind turbines and solar farms under net zero plans. The grid operator has warned that the cost of paying energy firms to shut down renewables could surge by more than fivefold by the end of the decade. But it also said the Government could avoid the payments by abandoning its climate targets and prolonging the use of gas. Critics said that the latest net zero costs would come as a 'slap in the face to hard-pressed consumers struggling to pay their energy bills'. The payouts will be sparked by the huge expansion of intermittent renewable power sources under Mr Miliband's plan to decarbonise the energy grid. When the wind blows strongly and the sun shines, turbines and solar farms produce more electricity in a short period than the network can cope with. To stop the system being overwhelmed, potentially triggering widespread blackouts, the grid operator has to step in and tell firms to switch them off. Energy companies are then handed payments, known as 'constraint costs', to compensate them for the electricity those sites would have generated. Ministers said they would 'minimise' the increase in costs by fast-tracking new infrastructure such as pylons to connect offshore wind farms to the grid, despite opposition in areas where these are likely to be built. It comes after Ed Miliband was forced to increase subsidies for new wind farms to 'eye-watering' levels to get developers to build them. The Energy Secretary is already under pressure from No 10 over when his green electricity drive will deliver promised lower bills for households. In a new report the National Energy System Operator (NESO) warned that such subsidies could increase by more than fivefold by the end of the decade. It found that in the worst case scenario, compensation payouts could surge from £2.5bn a year at present to a high of £12.7bn a year in 2030. That would occur if the Government fails to force through any major upgrades to the grid, such as new pylon routes, over the next five years. In the report, the NESO said: 'Connection dates for new network build remain uncertain and changes to delivery timelines could significantly impact balancing costs, particularly around 2030. 'If no further network reinforcement takes place (current transmission network remains unchanged) constraint costs could peak at £12.7bn in 2030.' The NESO also projected a surge in the total rebalancing costs – including constraint costs – that taxpayers will face to fund the switch to net zero. If current policies work out, including 'strong consumer engagement' in reducing electricity usage, those total costs are still likely to rise by £8bn a year. The operator found that the best case net zero compliant scenario involved a rapid switch to hydrogen, reducing the financial burden to just over £6bn. But the cheapest option for households was a 'counterfactual' scenario in which Mr Miliband abandoned plans to phase out gas use and petrol cars. In that instance the NESO calculated that total rebalancing costs would rise only slightly, to just over £3bn a year at the end of the decade. The operator expects payouts to fall back after 2030, though only in the counterfactual scenario would they drop below current levels by 2035. Mike Foster, the chief executive of the Energy and Utilities Alliance, said the report showed that ministers should be focussing on a switch to hydrogen. He said: 'So-called constraint payments are a slap in the face to hard-pressed consumers struggling to pay their energy bills. 'The warning from the system operator, that they could reach £13bn by 2030, over £400 a year for the average bill, cannot be justified. 'What is worse, is all that surplus wind and solar power generation wasted could be used to produce green hydrogen – the holy grail in reaching net zero.' Octopus Energy, one of the country's leading providers, said that taxpayers have already forked out £700m on constraint costs this year. The business said that was already £250m more than at the same time last year, adding that the projected £8bn cost by 2030 was 'staggering'. It had previously calculated that subsidies would hit the £6bn mark by the end of the decade, at a cost of £200 per household in the UK. A spokesman for the net zero department said: 'These claims are fundamentally misleading, and wrongly assume that no network infrastructure will be built over the next five years. 'Through our clean power mission, we are working at pace to deliver the biggest upgrade in Great Britain's electricity network in decades, which will minimise constraint costs.'
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
German culture minister invites Berlusconi to discuss ProSieben bid
BERLIN, July 26 (Reuters) - Germany's culture minister invited Italian media magnate Pier Silvio Berlusconi on Saturday to a meeting to discuss his offer to buy TV group ProSiebenSat.1, and said any bid for the German company should protect journalistic independence. Minister of State for Culture Wolfram Weimer told Reuters he had invited Berlusconi to the chancellor's office for the meeting, "to discuss his plans". "A change of ownership at a media group like ProSiebenSat.1 would be far more than business as usual. The potential takeover would influence the media power structure of our country," Weimer said, adding that strong private, independent television groups were important to the country. "A change in ownership must not lead to a restriction of journalistic independence. Media power is never neutral - whoever buys it bears political responsibility," he added. A German government source said the government also wanted to ensure that ProSieben's headquarters remained in Germany and jobs were protected. A spokesperson for the Berlusconi family's MFE-MediaForEurope ( opens new tab declined to comment. Pier Silvio Berlusconi heads the media empire of his late father Silvio Berlusconi, who served as Italy's prime minister in three separate stints from 1994-2011. The elder Berlusconi's critics at the time accused him of using his control over Italian media properties to further his political aims. MFE-MediaForEurope owns around 30% of ProSieben. It made a cash-and-share bid for the German group in March as part of a push to create a pan-European broadcaster. That move triggered an all-cash counter-bid by ProSieben's second-largest investor PPF ( which owns private TV stations across six Eastern European countries. ProSieben called that counter-bid financially "inadequate", and Berlusconi has said his company may yet raise its bid.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Call to make wet wipe producers pay for polluting England's waterways
Wet wipe producers should be charged to remove their pollution from England's waterways, the author of a government review into reforming the sector has said. Sewage has been a critical factor in the devastating pollution of our waterways, but other sources of pollution include microplastics, consumer products such as wet wipes, and the byproducts of modern manufacturing, such asPfas ('forever chemicals'), as well as fertiliser and pesticides from farming. Many of these have been linked to harmful effects on human health and the natural environment. The fairest way to deal with this, Sir Jon Cunliffe, a former Bank of England deputy governor, said, could be to apply the 'polluter pays' principle, whereby the company behind the pollution contributes towards its removal. 'The alternative is for everyone to pay for it through their bills, and the question is, should we spread that among everybody, or should we go through a polluter pays route? So I think, really, we should look at those routes,' he said. It has been a landmark week for the water sector, after Cunliffe published a major review containing recommendations on how to clean up England's filthy rivers and seas. The regulator Ofwat is to be abolished, the government has pledged, and a new, powerful, super-regulator created to better hold water companies to account. Campaigners welcomed many of the recommendations, in particular ending the self-monitoring of water companies, which currently voluntarily publish information on how much sewage they dump. Citizen scientists have argued for years that this system is open to under-counting, and have tried to shed light on the true amount of human waste in waterways: under new proposals sewage spills will be automatically published online. But there are those who felt this was a missed opportunity. The environment secretary, Steve Reed, took nationalisation out of the scope of the review from the outset, and also told Cunliffe not to consider more radical approaches such as turning companies into not-for-profits. This despite the fact that it is the mismanagement of water companies as much as the dumping of sewage that has enraged the public. So what of the idea that polluters – the upstream companies that generate some of the worst pollutants in our waterways such as wet wipes and Pfas – should pay? 'One of the best ways to deal with stuff not going into our rivers is not to let it into the sewers in the first place,' Cunliffe said, 'Why do we need wet wipes?' 'I have some sympathy for the water companies,' he said, 'because the drinking water system is closed and no one can touch it unless authorised to do so. The wastewater system is open. Anybody can put anything down the loo, and then at the treatment works, I've seen literally huge machines taking wet wipe mountains out of the sewage system.' Water companies claim that wet wipes, which shed microplastic particles and also build up into major blockages, are the main cause of sewage pollution. John Penicud, Southern Water's managing director for wastewater, said recently that 'the majority of wastewater pollutions are caused by wet wipes, fats, oils and grease being flushed down toilets and sinks', and called for wet wipes to be banned. The EU is introducing quaternary treatment, a more advanced method than that used in the UK. This has powerful filters that remove these trace chemicals from the water supply, but is expensive, so the bloc is looking at making the producers of these chemicals pay a levy that would then be used to create these treatment plants. Producers would be required to cover at least 80% of the costs associated with the sewage treatment upgrades necessary for removing these substances from wastewater. Cunliffe thinks the UK could look at adopting a similar approach for wet wipes; as a side-effect this would make plastic wet wipes more expensive, which would discourage their use. His report has recommended looking at adopting the EU laws in the UK, and investigating the prevalence and impact of these micropollutants in the environment and on human health. This way, he says, 'it's not the water bill payer who pays to take it out, but the people who make and buy the products … Pfas and so on will require quaternary treatment, and there are currently three levels of sewage treatment. To build another would be expensive.' The question, he said, was whether the user or the polluter paid. A Water UK spokesperson said: 'Removing Pfas 'forever chemicals' and other micropollutants from the water environment is a huge challenge because current sewage technology was never designed to deal with them. We need a national plan from government for upgrading sewage treatment that is paid for by chemical manufacturers instead of water bill payers, as well as a ban on Pfas products that will otherwise keep making the problem worse.'
