Concerns are mounting regarding the future of the EU’s health budget following leaked plans suggesting that health funding may be merged with other financial streams, potentially threatening its existence. The European Commission is set to unveil its proposal for the next seven-year EU budget in June, yet early drafts indicate significant changes to the health sector funding, which are alarming stakeholders and lawmakers alike.
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, EU member states allocated €5.3 billion to the EU4Health program, representing a notable commitment given that health policy is primarily a national responsibility. However, the leaked restructuring draft indicates that health funding could be incorporated into a larger European Competitiveness Fund, aimed at bolstering the EU’s strategic autonomy and values.
This restructuring plan, discussed within the Commission’s budget services since January, is designed to establish clearer strategic priorities, potentially prioritizing overarching policies over distinct programs. According to the leaked document, prominent EU initiatives, including the Horizon Europe research fund, as well as those focused on space, digital advancements, and health, might be merged into a unified framework. This would entail a standardized set of rules governing participation and eligibility, disregarding the specific requirements of each program.
Despite being in preliminary consultation stages, the leaked proposal has ignited considerable debate. Green MEP Tilly Metz has voiced strong opposition to merging health funding into a broader competitiveness fund, fearing it may result in a repeat of past trends where health resources are diverted for other uses. This apprehension is heightened by recent budget cuts, such as the reallocation of around €1 billion from EU4Health to support Ukraine’s aid efforts in February.
Metz further emphasized that health encompasses more than just the development of innovative treatments; it also involves public health initiatives, prevention efforts, and awareness campaigns, which could be overlooked in favor of economic goals. Before the establishment of EU4Health, health stakeholders operated with significantly smaller budgets; from 2014 to 2020, the EU’s health program was allocated a mere €450 million, in stark contrast to the current EU4Health budget.
The EU4Health initiative has facilitated a variety of projects, including a recent €1.3 million program aimed at alleviating nursing shortages across Europe by promoting the profession in areas most affected.
Concerns about the sustainability of EU4Health are prevalent. Even the Commission’s director-general for health, Sandra Gallina, has suggested that the initiative might be temporary. An EU official, speaking anonymously, hinted that merging health funding with other programs could be a necessary strategy to maintain a meaningful health budget, which otherwise risks being entirely eliminated.
Former EU Health Commissioner and current socialist MEP Vytenis Andriukaitis has echoed these worries, stating that the current budget is inadequate, particularly in light of the upcoming EU enlargement. He asserted, “Our only solution now is to generate our own resources, specifically for health issues; otherwise, we will not be able to advance.”
A 2016 report by former Commissioner and Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti proposed several methods for the EU to establish its own funding sources, such as implementing a CO2 levy, a corporate income tax, and a financial transaction tax. Unfortunately, these proposals have not gained significant momentum since their introduction.
The discussion surrounding the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) is crucial not only for health policy but also for EU regions, which play a vital role in implementing and innovating health initiatives. Michele Calabrò from the network of regional and local health authorities, Euregha, emphasized the need to safeguard health-specific funding and programs from being weakened or diluted. He cautioned that the new funding model should not negatively impact essential instruments like cohesion policy, nor undermine multi-level governance or the pivotal role of regional stakeholders.
