Supermarket urges government not to ‘further aggravate’ pressure on costs for businesses in next week’s budget

Sainsbury’s has warned of a “pretty challenging” market in the run-up to Christmas as households are “finding it tough” and food producers face rising costs.

Simon Roberts, the chief executive of the UK’s second biggest supermarket, called on the government not to “further aggravate” pressure on costs for business in this month’s budget. He said it was “important this government does not repeat what we have seen in previous budgets” in raising business rates and employers’ national insurance contributions. “That’s been really hard,” he said.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Maureen McLean/REX/Shutterstock

© Photograph: Maureen McLean/REX/Shutterstock

© Photograph: Maureen McLean/REX/Shutterstock

CEO of Barclays tells reporters: ‘I deeply respect the responsibility that the chancellor has and he has our full support and backing’

The Office for National Statistics has also published a report on the gender pay gap. It says:

The gender pay gap for full-time employees has continued to decline in the UK. It was 6.8% in April 2026, down from 7.2% in April 2025. This compares with 9.4% a decade ago and 16.4% 25 years ago.

Secondly, I asked Healey whether he sees the banks as making excessive profits, which would be the coherent justification for him to increase the surcharge on bank profits – as he is expected to do in the Budget next week.

He said: “You know the banks are the engine of investment in this country. The banks are doing well at the moment and that is good to see.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Phil Lewis/SOPA Images/Shutterstock

© Photograph: Phil Lewis/SOPA Images/Shutterstock

© Photograph: Phil Lewis/SOPA Images/Shutterstock

Equating to the loss of 5% of its 93,000 global staff, job cuts come as bank announces jump in quarterly profits

• Business live – latest updates

Barclays is cutting 5,000 jobs as part of wider cost-cutting plans that its bosses say are being driven by advances in AI.

The job cuts will mean losing about 5% of the bank’s 93,000 global staff, with executives confirming they had already cut 1,000 workers since the start of the year.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: John Keeble/Getty Images

© Photograph: John Keeble/Getty Images

© Photograph: John Keeble/Getty Images

Kemi Badenoch has said a "red warning light" is flashing on the economy as Britain's debt tops £3 trillion for the first time and inflation surges to 3.5% ahead of the Budget next week.

The post Badenoch Warns of “Red Warning Light” on Economy as UK Debt Tops £3 Trillion and Inflation Surges to 3.5% Ahead of Budget appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.

The EU is pressing allies, such as the UK, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and Norway, to help close a €70bn shortfall in Ukraine’s funding for next year, after president Volodymyr Zelensky warned that the war will cost €155bn in 2027.

EU Council president António Costa told MEPs in Strasbourg on Wednesday (21 October) that member states already provided 80 percent of external aid to Ukraine and “international partners must also step up their efforts”. 

“Our commitment to peace must go hand in hand with sustained pressure on the aggressor,” he also said, after meeting Zelensky at an EU summit in Brussels last week.

European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen also told MEPs on Wednesday: “The war will not be decided on the frontline; the war will be decided in our political will, in whether we stand up for freedom and democracy and support our Ukrainian friends.” 

Zelensky’s €155bn figure refers to Ukraine’s total war-related spending in 2027, part of which Kyiv covers from its own budget.

But that still left a €70bn gap that Ukraine needed foreign partners to fill, as next year approached.

The EU has already agreed a €90bn loan covering 2026 and 2027, meant to meet two-thirds of Ukraine’s financing needs over that period.

The remaining third was supposed to come from other partners, but so far that money has been secured only for 2026, not for 2027.

Costa told MEPs on Wednesday that €16bn had been disbursed this year under the defence line of the loan, while another €17bn could be sent to Ukraine if anti-corruption reforms were implemented.

“Our determination to support Ukraine and its people is stronger than ever,” he said.

EU hopes for Ukraine cash from allies

Meanwhile, EU commissioner Maroš Šefčovič also indicated on Monday that Britain will be asked to increase funding to Ukraine, speaking ahead of an EU-UK summit on 20 November.

“Following the signature of a contribution agreement on 13 July 2026, the UK can now participate under the EU’s €90bn Ukraine support loan,” he said.

Both the EU and UK would support Ukraine “as long as it takes to bring Russia’s illegal war of aggression to an end”, Šefčovič added.

This article continues, but the full version is available only to EUobserver.com subscribers. Visit account.euobserver.com/membership

Consumer prices rise by more than expected while government’s debt interest payments surge to record high for September

• Business live – latest updates

Inflation surged to 3.5% last month while the government deficit was a worse-than-forecast £24.5bn, in a double dose of bad news for John Healey before next week’s budget.

The Office for National Statistics said annual inflation rose from 3.1% in August, overshooting City forecasts of a rise in the consumer prices index (CPI) to 3.4%, as a result of the surging cost of fuel.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Bryn Colton/Getty Images

© Photograph: Bryn Colton/Getty Images

© Photograph: Bryn Colton/Getty Images

Portugal’s Socialist Party is bringing together its main leaders today to discuss the position to take in the vote on the State Budget for 2027 (OE2027).  The party’s secretary-general, José

The post PS Socialists ‘decide today on how they will vote over State Budget’ appeared first on Portugal Resident.

Disy leader Annita Demetriou lambasted the government on Wednesday, saying its proposed budget did not rise to the challenges of the day and contained “inelastic spending, horizontal rises and untargeted measures”.

Speaking at a press conference, Demetriou said the government’s fourth budget “lacks a development and reform vision” and was more about managing problems than planning for the future.

Today, problems that must be addressed are inflation and the high cost of living, compared to unemployment, public debt and economic instability in the past, she said.

Inflation and the high cost of living, she pointed out, will persist, despite positive economic indicators.

A positive growth rate, Demetriou explained, could not address the cost of housing and starting a family.

Through its budget, the government supported high earners rather than those on low incomes, Demetriou said.

Demetriou presented her party’s priorities, including the need for more investments in the digitisation of the state and the digital economy to increase productivity, the downsizing of the civil service, improved services for individuals and businesses, and pushing the cost of bureaucracy downwards.

She said more investments were needed in research and innovation, development projects and infrastructure, to improve the quality of life and reduce the cost of living.

“Instead of expediting major projects and infrastructure, we are cancelling them or they are being carried out slowly. Accelerating development projects would lead to an increase in jobs and incomes, would strengthen the competitiveness of the economy in the medium term,” Demetriou said.

Other projects left behind are addressing traffic congestion and local authority development works, she added.

Demetriou also spoke of the need for “a real pension reform” that would improve pensions while securing the viability of the social insurance fund.

Disy, she said, also encouraged investments to reduce the cost of energy for individuals and businesses, particularly with photovoltaics and energy storage systems.

Other Disy priorities include withdrawing old vehicles, expanding intercity bus routes, encouraging remote work, further tax relief, the implementation of the all-day schools, improvements to the childcare plan, better child, student, single-parent and disability benefits, and measures to address the housing crisis.

Demetriou also called for measures to support the farming sector which is still reeling from increased production costs, rationed irrigation water and the foot and mouth outbreak.

“We are not asking for a continuous increase in spending […] We are asking for the better distribution of spending,” Demetriou said.

She explained that Disy did not disagree with the essence of the budget, but with the prioritisation of spending.

 

Europe wants cheaper energy, stronger industries, secure borders and the capacity to sustain Ukraine. Its budget negotiations are exposing the difficulty of paying for those ambitions while protecting established spending programmes and containing national contributions.

Wednesday’s European Parliament debate on the October EU summit brought that contradiction into focus. The dispute over the 2028–2034 Multiannual Financial Framework is becoming a test of whether Europe can translate geopolitical urgency into durable financial commitments.

According to Parliament’s account of the debate, European Council President António Costa wants agreement before the year’s end. He advocated an ambitious budget while keeping national contributions reasonable, alongside progress on new EU revenue sources.

Those objectives are politically attractive. Reconciling them will require difficult choices over spending, taxation and the distribution of authority.

MEPs challenged the assumption that the Union can keep expanding its responsibilities without providing additional resources. Speakers identified support for Ukraine, industrial competitiveness, agriculture, regional development and household living costs among competing priorities.

Their argument has force. A budget negotiated around yesterday’s compromises risks leaving Europe poorly equipped for tomorrow’s threats. Yet calls for ambition become less persuasive when they avoid specifying which programmes deliver measurable European benefits.

The emerging distribution of cuts illustrates the problem. As EU Today previously reported, the Irish presidency’s compromise proposed reducing the Commission’s plans by approximately €141 billion, with competitiveness and security facing proportionately deeper reductions than agriculture and cohesion spending.

That creates an uncomfortable possibility: the policies most closely associated with Europe’s strategic renewal could become bargaining chips in negotiations dominated by established beneficiaries.

Protecting farmers and poorer regions has clear economic and political justification. Nevertheless, preserving familiar allocations while squeezing newer priorities would undermine leaders’ repeated promises to strengthen European independence.

Energy offers perhaps the clearest example of why spending decisions and structural reform must advance together.

Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told MEPs that dependence on imported fossil fuels and the absence of a genuine European energy union were weakening Europe. Costa emphasised affordable production and modernised electricity grids.

The implication is significant. Industrial subsidies cannot indefinitely compensate for an energy system that leaves European manufacturers facing persistently high costs. Cross-border connections, infrastructure investment and better market integration therefore belong at the centre of competitiveness policy.

Von der Leyen also pressed governments to complete the single market and avoid making European rules more complicated through national implementation. Her argument highlights a limitation of the budget debate: additional money cannot, by itself, remove regulatory fragmentation.

The same distinction applies to China. The Commission president described heavily subsidised Chinese competitors and promised action on dependencies, supply chains and market access. Such measures require coherent enforcement and political resolve alongside investment.

Ukraine adds a security imperative that cannot readily be postponed. Costa linked Ukrainian and European security, while MEPs warned about the consequences of weakening support. Long-term commitments require predictable financing rather than recurring emergency bargains.

But the budget dispute also concerns who controls the money.

As EU Today’s reporting on regional concerns explained, local leaders fear that restructuring could concentrate investment decisions in national capitals, weakening regional influence and potentially widening disparities.

That warning deserves attention. A larger European budget would not automatically produce more balanced development. Allocation rules, accountability and local participation will help determine whether spending strengthens cohesion or reinforces existing advantages.

New revenue sources could ease pressure on national contributions, but they cannot make financing politically painless. Costs ultimately fall somewhere, and governments must explain the distribution honestly.

The central challenge is therefore broader than securing agreement on a headline figure. Europe needs a settlement that protects essential commitments, finances credible common priorities and demonstrates results.

MEPs are right to demand resources consistent with Europe’s responsibilities. Governments are entitled to demand discipline. The failure would be a compromise that satisfies neither requirement: expensive enough to provoke domestic opposition, yet too fragmented to provide the strategic capacity Europe’s leaders insist is indispensable.

Main Image: Denis LOMME: © European Union 2025 – Source : EP

University students, and those in other forms of higher education, will be protesting today in front of the government’s headquarters, at Campus XX1, against the proposal in the 2027 State

The post Students protest against proposal to unfreeze tuition fees appeared first on Portugal Resident.

Romania has formed a new government after six months of political deadlock, with parliament approving a minority administration led by independent diplomat Luca Niculescu on Tuesday, 20 October. The vote brings an end to repeated failed attempts to establish an executive, although the new prime minister faces considerable uncertainty over his government’s parliamentary support.

Niculescu secured 280 votes in favour and 58 against, comfortably exceeding the 233 required for confirmation. His ministers were sworn in before President Nicuşor Dan at the Cotroceni Palace in Bucharest later that evening, formally ending the prolonged government formation process.

The new administration comprises 18 ministers, including two delegated ministers. The Social Democratic Party (PSD) controls the majority of portfolios, while independent specialists hold several important positions, including finance and foreign affairs.

A government built on temporary parliamentary support

The appointment represents a political success for President Dan, who nominated Niculescu on 5 October following three unsuccessful attempts to assemble a functioning government.

EU Today reported earlier this month on Niculescu’s nomination, which followed the collapse of previous negotiations and growing pressure on Romania’s political institutions.

The new cabinet is heavily dependent on agreements between parties that have frequently disagreed over economic policy and public spending. Although the parliamentary vote demonstrated sufficient support for its installation, the arrangement does not provide the government with a permanent majority.

The National Liberal Party (PNL) and the Democratic Alliance of Hungarians in Romania (UDMR) supported the investiture while remaining outside the administration.

The arrangement gives Niculescu an opportunity to govern, but each major legislative proposal will require continued cooperation between parties with competing priorities.

The Social Democrats, who hold 11 of the ministerial positions, will exercise substantial influence over domestic policy, particularly decisions involving public-sector spending, welfare and taxation.

Budget deficit presents immediate challenge

Romania’s public finances represent the government’s most urgent problem.

The previous administration, led by Ilie Bolojan, collapsed in May following unpopular austerity measures. Political opposition to fiscal consolidation has complicated efforts to stabilise the budget and meet Romania’s commitments under the European Union’s fiscal framework.

Niculescu has indicated that addressing the deficit will be an immediate priority. Finance Minister Alexandru Nazare, appointed as an independent, faces the task of establishing a credible budget programme without provoking another parliamentary crisis.

The choices are politically difficult. Spending reductions risk resistance from public-sector employees and households already affected by higher living costs, while substantial tax increases could place further pressure on businesses and consumption.

Failure to establish a credible fiscal programme would prolong uncertainty over Romania’s borrowing requirements and its ability to comply with European budgetary obligations.

Brussels has a direct interest in the outcome. Romania remains subject to EU fiscal oversight, and the European Commission will assess whether the new administration’s financial plans are consistent with the country’s obligations.

The government’s credibility will depend on whether its parliamentary supporters are prepared to approve the measures that fiscal consolidation requires.

European funds and political credibility

The change of government also comes at a sensitive moment in Romania’s relationship with European institutions.

Romania has faced scrutiny over reforms linked to the EU’s Recovery and Resilience Facility, particularly legislation concerning public integrity and institutional accountability.

EU Today previously examined the European Commission’s assessment of Romania’s integrity legislation and its implications for recovery funding.

Although the EU recovery programme reached its principal implementation deadline in August, outstanding assessments and financial decisions continue to carry consequences for national budgets.

A functioning government is therefore important not only for domestic legislation but also for negotiations with Brussels over fiscal commitments, investment and the wider EU budget.

Romania must also address longer-term weaknesses in public administration, infrastructure financing and the implementation of European legislation.

Political stability remains uncertain

Niculescu takes office against the background of Romania’s unusually turbulent political history since the annulment of the 2024 presidential election amid allegations of Russian interference.

The subsequent institutional disputes damaged confidence in the political system and contributed to the fragmentation of parliamentary support.

Opposition parties, including the nationalist Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR), are positioned to challenge the government’s legitimacy and economic measures as the administration begins work.

Romania’s strategic importance extends beyond its domestic political difficulties. As an EU and NATO member bordering Ukraine and Moldova, it plays a substantial role in Black Sea security, military logistics and regional infrastructure.

Prolonged instability in Bucharest has therefore affected a country whose decisions carry consequences for European security and cross-border economic cooperation.

For the new prime minister, the immediate objective is to translate Tuesday’s parliamentary majority into support for legislation. His first serious test will come when the cabinet presents the fiscal measures that its supporters have so far struggled to agree upon.

The parliamentary vote has ended Romania’s government formation crisis. It has not resolved the disagreements that produced it.

Senator Esmeralda Hernández says Colombia’s two legislative chambers approved different versions of a budget provision without reconciling them before the deadline.

---

A dispute over conflicting versions of a provision in Colombia’s 2027 national budget has raised questions about the bill’s legislative validity. Senator Esmeralda Hernández says the Senate and House of Representatives approved different versions of Article 65 but failed to reconcile them before the October 20 deadline.

RELATED: Colombia’s Congress Approves 2027 Budget Over Opposition Objections

The provision concerns the stabilization of funds against fluctuations in international oil prices and gasoline prices. The budget, approved at 634.9 trillion pesos, is at the center of a disagreement over whether the legislative process complied with the required procedure.

Hernández said she identified the discrepancy alongside Lina García Sierra, Bogotá’s regional ombudswoman. They presented their findings in an interview with journalist Daniel Coronell on his program El Reporte Coronell.

According to Hernández, the Senate approved the original version of Article 65, while the House adopted a different text that included a proposal by Senator Juan Fernando Caicedo of the Democratic Center party and two additional paragraphs.

¡Tumbamos el Presupuesto de Abelardo!

Tras una revisión rigurosa junto a @LinaGarciaSi, encontramos que Cámara y Senado aprobaron textos diferentes, sin la conciliación obligatoria. Por el afán de pupitrearlo terminaron haciéndolo mal, a medianoche y de espaldas al país.

¡A la… pic.twitter.com/nPpWeItzII

— Esmeralda Hernández (@EsmeHernandezSi) October 21, 2026

Text Reads: We’ve taken down Abelardo’s Budget! After a rigorous review alongside@LinaGarciaSi, we found that the House and Senate approved different texts, without the mandatory reconciliation. In their rush to ram it through, they ended up doing it wrong, at midnight and behind the country’s back. We confront mediocrity and lies with rigor and arguments!

Caicedo withdrew his proposal during a Senate plenary session, leaving it on record rather than seeking its approval. “As the sole author of the proposal, I withdraw it and leave it on record,” he said.

“In the Senate, they approve the original text, while the House approves the text with Caicedo’s proposal, signed by a House representative, resulting in a different text,” Hernández told Coronell.

The Senate’s General Secretariat confirmed on October 20 that Article 65 had been approved without proposals or amendments. In a statement, Secretary-General Diego Alejandro González González said he had instructed the chamber’s reporting office to publish the official link to all proposals approved by the plenary, noting that none concerned Article 65.

#Colombia | Congress approved a US$201 billion budget for 2027 amid opposition criticism of cuts to education, social programs, and peace institutions.
The Historic Pact coalition announced legal challenges over reduced funding for the Special Jurisdiction for Peace.#Colombia… pic.twitter.com/Dq6v6E2Ksh

— teleSUR English (@telesurenglish) October 20, 2026

The House maintained during the debate that both chambers had approved identical texts. John Édgar Pérez, a Cambio Radical representative and coordinating rapporteur for the bill, argued that reconciliation was unnecessary and proposed that the House adopt the version approved by the Senate.

The House passed the budget in the early hours of October 20, with 96 votes in favor and one against.

Hernández argues that the differences required a reconciliation committee to produce a unified text and submit it to the appropriate legislative procedure. She maintains that the House vote came too late to complete that process before the legal deadline.

García warned that the failure to reconcile the texts could jeopardize the legality of the entire budget. She said she would file a constitutional challenge if the government enacted the legislation despite the alleged irregularity. Her statements reflect her legal assessment; no judicial ruling on the budget’s validity was cited.

Carlos Meisel, the Senate’s coordinating rapporteur for the bill, disputed the argument that a potential change introduced during the House proceedings would invalidate the entire process.

Meisel said the version approved during the first debate by the joint economic committees could serve as the basis for issuing the budget by decree. He added that this version accounted for 95% of the content subsequently approved by the Senate and had been developed through agreements with the national government.

El Presupuesto fue aprobado ayer en la plenaria del Senado de la República sin ningún error ni vicio.
Lo que aparentemente ocurrió después en la Cámara de Representantes (de ser cierto), no vicia todo el proceso desde el inicio.
Queda para decreto el texto que se aprobó en primer…

— Carlos Meisel (@carlosmeiselv) October 21, 2026

Text Reads: The Budget was approved yesterday in the plenary session of the Senate of the Republic without any errors or flaws. What apparently happened afterward in the House of Representatives (if true) does not taint the entire process from the beginning. The text approved in the first debate in the economic committees remains for decree. So please, let’s not exaggerate the uncertainty, because in any case, there is a budget and it is the one from the first debate. This one also came from a collective construction with the government. (And among other things, it was 95% of what was voted on yesterday) At this moment, this country does not benefit from us adding more nerves, and that’s why we work so arduously and committedly on a calm construction and agreements.

The dispute centers on whether the two chambers approved different versions of Article 65 and what consequences that discrepancy could have for the 2027 budget. Hernández argues that the lack of reconciliation left the legislative process incomplete, while Meisel maintains that a potential irregularity at a later stage would not invalidate the preceding steps.

Government paid £10.9bn in debt interest, the highest September figure since records began

• Business live – latest updates

The Treasury ran a higher than expected budget deficit of £24.5bn last month as rising inflation pushed up the interest paid on government debt, increasing pressure on John Healey before his budget next week.

Official figures show the government paid £10.9bn in debt interest: the highest September figure since records began, and only the eighth time the monthly number has been above £10bn.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Kirsty O’Connor/Treasury

© Photograph: Kirsty O’Connor/Treasury

© Photograph: Kirsty O’Connor/Treasury

Colombia’s Congress approved the 2027 national budget of 200 billion dollars on October 20, igniting a backlash from opposition lawmakers who say the plan favors debt payments and financial interests over education, peace and regional development.

---

The approval of the General Budget of Colombia for 2027 capped a tense legislative session.

President Abelardo de la Espriella’s government secured passage of the law, worth 634.9 trillion Colombian pesos (about $200 billion), over the objections of the opposition, which was led mainly by the Historic Pact party.

RELATED: Colombia’s First National Strike Against De la Espriella Met With Police Crackdown

Representative María Fernanda Carrascal described the debate as a “disaster” and faulted the national government for refusing to accept any of the 700 proposals submitted by her party. The initiatives sought to channel more resources into public education, support for victims of violence and the regions, she detailed. Faced with the lack of agreement, the opposition walked out of the debate, stating it would not back a measure it considers harmful to the country.

The Historic Pact also questioned the law’s orientation, arguing that the government chose to protect financial entities, oligopolies and the most favored sectors. They further denounced that the project promotes over-indebtedness, which they say will end up shifting heavier tax burdens onto Colombian citizens.

🇨🇴 ¡Colombia tiene Presupuesto para 2027!
El Congreso de la República aprobó por $634,9 billones el Presupuesto de la Verdad, el primer paso para volver a encaminar la economía del país hacia el crecimiento, la responsabilidad fiscal y la atención de las necesidades del país. pic.twitter.com/pHiLhYzVTU

— MinHacienda (@MinHacienda) October 20, 2026

Text reads: “Colombia has budget for 2027! The Congress of the Republic approved the Truth Budget for $634.9 trillion, the first step to reorient the country’s economy toward growth, fiscal responsibility, and meeting the country’s needs.”

Other voices in the legislature added their objections. Senator Jennifer Pedraza of the Dignity and Commitment party (Dignidad y Compromiso, in Spanish) criticized the absence of a fixed allocation to address the consequences of the earthquake that struck on August 10. She questioned the fact that assistance to hard-hit departments such as Risaralda, Chocó and Valle del Cauca depends solely on leftover budget balances.

Senator Ariel Ávila, in turn, lamented the underfunding of resources earmarked for electric infrastructure and energization in non-interconnected zones such as Vichada, Guainía, Arauca, Putumayo and Vaupés. He also pointed to a lack of concern for victims of the armed conflict and what he called a budgetary strangling of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP).

After the law’s validation, Congress gave the Executive 90 days to draft a fiscal adjustment plan, which the national administration has called the Rescue Law. The Ministry of Finance and the cabinet are already holding talks with the International Monetary Fund, a signal that new credit instruments and the conditions attached to them may be on the negotiating table.

Mobilization Set for November

The Historic Pact called on citizens to join a national mobilization on November 24 to reject the budget. The party maintains that the project raises debt service by 46% while cutting investment in the Special Jurisdiction for Peace by 82% and stripping 500 billion Colombian pesos (about $157 million) from the National Learning Service (SENA).

Lawmakers also warned that 14 departments will see their real investment shrink. They denounced that the norm prioritizes debt repayment over the financing of peace, education and regional development. “The complaint is clear: more resources for debt and less for peace, education and the regions,” the party stated on social media.

The mobilization announced for late November now stands as the opposition’s next test of strength. In the meantime, the government’s 90-day clock to deliver its fiscal adjustment plan is running, and the talks with the International Monetary Fund could define the conditions under which Colombia finances its 2027 spending. The opposition has vowed to keep the pressure on, both in the streets and in the legislature.

📢 ¡24 DE NOVIEMBRE: MOVILIZACIÓN NACIONAL!

La bancada del Pacto Histórico llama a la movilización frente al Presupuesto 2027 del Gobierno de Abelardo de la Espriella, por $634,9 billones.

Según la bancada, el servicio de la deuda aumenta un 46%, la inversión de la JEP cae un… pic.twitter.com/F5IYf2YDVb

— Pacto Histórico Oficial (@PactoCol) October 20, 2026

Text reads: “November 24: National Mobilization! The Historic Pact bench calls for mobilization against the 2027 budget of the government of Abelardo de la Espriella, for $634.9 billion. According to the bank, debt service increases by 46%, Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) investment falls by 82%, National Learning Service (SENA) loses $500 billion, and 14 departments will receive less real investment. The denunciation is clear: more resources for debt and less for peace, education, and regions.”

Budget watchdog UTAO (full title: Technical Budget Support Unit) is querying the government’s forecasts for employment growth and prices in 2027, highlighting discrepancies with recent data. In its analysis of

The post Budget watchdog queries government’s 2027 forecasts for employment, prices  appeared first on Portugal Resident.

MEPs have put themselves on a collision course with EU governments by rejecting plans for a 17-percent cut in foreign spending – instead demanding additional spending worth €25bn. 

Earlier this month, the Irish government, which holds the six-month rotating EU council presidency, proposed that €38bn of cuts be made from the ‘Global Europe’ heading, which covers foreign aid, as part of an overall package of €141bn of cuts to the seven-year EU budget, known as the multi-annual financial framework (MFF). 

But in a vote on Monday evening (19 October), the European Parliament’s development committee instead backed a dedicated minimum budget of €25bn for humanitarian aid, as well as dedicated budget lines for a Gaza reconstruction fund and for candidate countries. Put together, that would mean a €25bn increase on the EU Commission’s original budget of €200bn for the Global Europe heading. 

The position agreed by MEPs, by a 61-to-34 vote margin, will eventually form the basis of negotiations between MEPs and ministers when EU governments agree their position on the budget. 

This article continues, but the full version is available only to EUobserver.com subscribers. Visit account.euobserver.com/membership

European Union governments have agreed a negotiating position on new agricultural market rules intended to take effect under the bloc’s 2028–2034 budget, advancing reforms to support arrangements for farmers while leaving the most contentious financial questions unresolved.

The Council approved its partial negotiating mandate on Monday, 19 October, covering changes to the Common Market Organisation regulation, which governs agricultural markets across the European Union.

The proposals include new arrangements for wine producers, protein crops and oilseeds, revised marketing standards, changes to the EU school food programme and provisions intended to improve preparedness for agricultural market disruptions.

However, the agreement does not settle future funding allocations or the broader structure of agricultural subsidies, which remain under negotiation as EU governments attempt to reconcile farming expenditure with competing demands for defence, industrial investment and regional development.

Agricultural markets under review

The Council’s negotiating position retains much of the European Commission’s original proposal while introducing amendments intended to accommodate national differences in agricultural production.

Under the proposed arrangements, sector-specific interventions would become mandatory in several areas, including beekeeping, fruit and vegetables and, under certain circumstances, wine production.

The Council has also proposed flexibility for countries where particular sectors are absent or relatively undeveloped.

For the wine industry, governments would be able to seek exemptions from certain obligations where national circumstances justify different arrangements.

This would allow the framework to retain common European rules while avoiding requirements that would be inappropriate for member states with little or no domestic wine production.

Sectoral interventions form part of the mechanisms through which the EU supports agricultural markets and producer organisations. They can cover measures intended to improve competitiveness, manage production and strengthen farmers’ commercial position.

New provisions for protein crops

The Council has endorsed the establishment of a separate sector for protein crops and oilseeds, replacing existing provisions covering dried fodder.

The objective is to encourage domestic production and reduce dependence on imported agricultural inputs, particularly crops used in animal feed and food production.

European livestock producers rely on protein-rich feed ingredients, including soyabeans, that are often sourced internationally.

Greater domestic production could reduce exposure to fluctuations in global commodity prices, transport costs and disruptions to international supply chains.

Under the Council’s proposal, member states would be encouraged to recognise producer organisations specialising in protein crops and oilseeds.

Such organisations can help farmers coordinate production, marketing and investment, although the effectiveness of the proposed measures will depend on how they are implemented nationally.

The proposals follow broader EU efforts to improve supply security in sectors extending from agricultural inputs to critical industrial materials.

School food and product labelling

The negotiating mandate also preserves the EU school scheme, which provides support for the distribution of fruit, vegetables and milk to schoolchildren.

Under the proposed framework, the programme would move from a school-year financing cycle to a calendar-year system, with transitional provisions intended to prevent disruption during implementation.

The Council has maintained the Commission’s objective of encouraging healthier eating habits by limiting products containing high levels of free sugars and fats.

The proposal also opens the possibility of additional marketing standards for several agricultural products, including protein crops, beef, pork, sheepmeat, goatmeat and rice.

These standards could provide consumers with more detailed information about product origins, subject to the final legislation.

Such measures would also have implications for producers and food businesses, which would need to comply with any new requirements concerning classification, marketing and labelling.

The Council additionally supports the harmonisation of rules covering industrial hemp, while retaining safeguards concerning seed certification and the permitted level of tetrahydrocannabinol.

Farming subsidies remain contested

The agricultural market agreement forms part of negotiations over the next Common Agricultural Policy, which will operate within the EU’s new seven-year financial framework.

Under the Commission’s proposed budget structure, several funding streams, including agricultural and cohesion programmes, would be brought together within national and regional partnership plans.

The restructuring has encountered opposition from governments and agricultural interests concerned that farming could lose protected access to EU funding.

As EU Today previously reported, 17 member states have called for agricultural and regional development expenditure to be protected against further reductions.

The Council’s latest position addresses how agricultural markets should operate rather than determining the size of the financial support available to them.

A separate debate concerns the conditions for receiving direct farm payments, including the definition of an active farmer and the degree of discretion granted to national governments.

Those questions remain central to the continuing CAP negotiations, which are due to return to the Agriculture and Fisheries Council on 26–27 October.

Negotiations move to Parliament

The Council’s partial mandate now provides a basis for negotiations with the European Parliament on the agricultural market provisions.

The legislation will still require agreement between the institutions, while its financing will depend on the eventual settlement of the 2028–2034 budget.

Governments must also complete negotiations on the wider CAP framework, including direct income support and the distribution of responsibility between Brussels and national administrations.

The market agreement reached on 19 October therefore establishes important elements of the proposed agricultural rules, but leaves unresolved the level of financial support available to European farmers after 2027.

The European Parliament has demanded €225 billion for the European Union’s foreign policy and development programmes between 2028 and 2034, challenging proposals by member states to reduce spending under the bloc’s next long-term budget.

The Parliament’s Foreign Affairs and Development committees approved their negotiating position on the Global Europe Instrument on Monday, 19 October, by 63 votes to 27, with five abstentions. The proposed allocation represents an increase of €25 billion over the European Commission’s original €200 billion proposal.

The decision comes as negotiations over the wider 2028–2034 EU budget have become increasingly contentious, with Germany and several other net contributors opposing higher expenditure while Brussels faces mounting demands for defence, industrial investment, enlargement and support for Ukraine.

Parliament rejects proposed reductions

Under the position adopted by the parliamentary committees, at least €25 billion would be reserved for humanitarian assistance. MEPs also want dedicated funding for reconstruction in Gaza and financial support for countries seeking EU membership.

The committees are proposing that 20 per cent of official development assistance should be directed towards human development, alongside stronger provisions covering democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

Global Europe is intended to consolidate several existing financing instruments into a single framework governing much of the Union’s external expenditure. The programme would finance activities ranging from development cooperation and humanitarian assistance to economic partnerships and support for countries preparing to join the EU.

The Commission introduced the original €200 billion proposal in July 2025. However, subsequent negotiations among member states have raised the prospect of substantial reductions.

Germany, the Netherlands and several Nordic countries have argued that the next budget must reflect the financial constraints facing national governments. Their objections have complicated efforts to accommodate additional spending on European security and economic competitiveness.

The European Parliament has taken a different position, maintaining that reducing external expenditure would restrict the Union’s ability to operate internationally when European security and economic interests increasingly depend on developments beyond its borders.

Ukraine and enlargement funding

The parliamentary proposal would preserve support for Ukraine while seeking to prevent assistance connected with Russia’s invasion from reducing resources available to other partner countries.

Ukraine’s reconstruction, institutional reforms and integration with European markets will require substantial financing over the coming years. However, the precise allocation will depend on negotiations over the wider budget and the financing arrangements eventually approved.

For candidate countries, MEPs want clearer incentives linking EU assistance to progress on political and economic reforms. The proposed framework would also provide Brussels with greater powers to suspend funding where democratic standards, human rights or judicial independence deteriorate.

A separate provision would permit the Commission to suspend payments where partner countries seriously fail to meet obligations concerning the readmission of their nationals.

That measure reflects the growing connection between the EU’s development policy and its migration objectives. Brussels has increasingly sought cooperation on returns and border management as part of agreements with countries receiving European assistance.

The committees have also called for stronger parliamentary supervision of Global Europe, including more detailed reporting by the Commission and regular discussions with the commissioners responsible for implementation.

Difficult negotiations ahead

The financial disagreement extends well beyond external policy. The overall seven-year budget remains contested, particularly over agricultural subsidies, regional development funds, defence investment and repayment of borrowing undertaken during the coronavirus pandemic.

As EU Today previously reported, a group of 17 member states has opposed reductions in agricultural and cohesion spending, adding further pressure to negotiations.

The Parliament’s proposed €225 billion allocation has not been agreed by governments and does not constitute an approved spending commitment.

The committees also approved a mandate for negotiations with the Council, although their position still requires endorsement by the full Parliament, provisionally expected in November.

Meanwhile, member states must settle their own negotiating position, including the financial ceilings governing the programme.

The eventual settlement will determine how much Brussels can spend on development cooperation, humanitarian operations and international partnerships after 2027, and how those commitments can be reconciled with the EU’s expanding domestic financial obligations.

Andy Haldane writes that Conservative economic plans would be best for growth ahead of Healey budget

Badenoch says Britain needs tax cuts.

We need to get out of the way of job creators who make our country richer. We need to encourage risk taking, wealth creation, enterprise.

Britain’s tax burden has never been higher. You are taxed on the heating in your home. You’re taxed at the petrol pump filling up your car. You’re taxed when you insure that car. You’re taxed if you take the family away on holiday. You’re taxed if you stay in the UK thanks to Andy Burnham’s tourist tax. You’re taxed to buy a home, taxed to live in a home, taxed to pass on your home. This is clearly not working. Britain does not feel better off.

Andy Burnham wrote in The Times yesterday about the moral outrage of the current benefit system. But as far as I could work out, his answer is to spend even more on benefits.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images

© Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images

© Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images

Cabinet colleagues have previously called for an increase but chancellor feels it might ultimately cost the Treasury

• UK politics live – latest updates

John Healey will not raise capital gains tax in next week’s budget, despite previous calls to do so from cabinet colleagues including Louise Haigh and Wes Streeting.

The chancellor has decided that any increase might ultimately cost the Treasury if wealthy individuals defer the sale of assets or move them out of the country, according to Treasury sources.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Christopher Thomond/The Guardian

© Photograph: Christopher Thomond/The Guardian

© Photograph: Christopher Thomond/The Guardian