40 Amendments of Ilana CICUREL related to 2022/2081(DEC)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that 2021 was the first implementation year of the 2021-2027 MFF and that the legal bases of the new Erasmus+, Creative Europe and European Solidarity Corps programmes were formally adopted in May 2021; welcomes the various measures taken in those programmes in favour of inclusion as well as to support Ukrainian refugees, especially young people;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls its strong commitment to the fundamental principles and values enshrined in the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), including sound financial management as set out in Article 317 and the combating of fraud and protecting the financial interest of the Union as set out in Article 325;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that transparency, accountability, and integrity are essential ethics principles within the Union institutions; recalls the Court’s conclusions and recommendations in its special report 13/2019 on the ethical frameworks of Union institutions, as well as Parliament’s resolution of 16 September 2021 on strengthening transparency and integrity in the Union institutions by setting up an independent Union ethics body with, on the one hand, a preventive role via awareness-raising and ethical guidance, and, on the other hand, a compliance and advisory role with the ability to issue recommendations on ethical matters, including conflicts of interest;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Emphasises the role of the EPPO, the EU Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust), Europol and OLAF in the fight against corruption; calls for the capacities of and cooperation between the EPPO and OLAF to be strengthened further; calls for common anti-corruption rules applicable all staff of EU bodies;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the relevance of reporting on the performance of the Union budget’s programmes for the discharge procedure; draws attention to the fact that the added value of the invested resources is closely linked to the results achieved and their contribution to improving the daily life of Union citizens and the economic impact within the EU;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recognises the critical role performed by UNRWA in providing Palestine refugees with vital services; commends the results of the study on Palestinian schoolbooks performed by the Georg Eckert Institute, confirming that they adhere to UNESCO standards and adopt criteria that are prominent in international education discourse.
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Encourages DG Connect to implement as soon as possible the European Court of Auditors’s open recommendation to adopt a media literacy strategy with clear indicators to systematically measure the impact of literacy actions and underlines the need to continue the fight against disinformation;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes the progress made regarding personal data protection for beneficiaries of and participants in Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps, however noting the need to further reduce bureaucracy in project implementation;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the need to enlarge the areas where the EDES is used beyond direct management and requests the Commission to use it for all Union funds including funds under shared management: notes that, the EDES has to be used systematically to ensure that companies and beneficial owners who have been convicted in relation to fraud, corruption or other serious economic criminal activities cannot benefit from Union funds; stresses the need to harmonise the indicators in ARACHNE with the exclusion grounds of EDES to ensure that excluded economic operators are also visible in ARACHNE; calls for maximum interoperability between ARACHNE, EDES and other software to reduce the need to insert information items into various IT systems multiple times and keep the administrative burden as low as possible; believes that not more but better targeted control systems are needed, including the use of new technologies in order to fight fraud, corruption or other serious economic criminal activities that cannot benefit from Union funds;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Reiterates the imperative need of a single mandatory integrated and interoperable information and monitoring system provided by the Commission, allowing for the electronic recording and storage of data on the recipients of Union funding, including their beneficial owners and allowing for the availability of this information for data-mining and risk- scoring purposes; underlines that it is essential to get a clear overview of the distribution and potential concentration of Union funds disbursed, including through a functionality that allows for the aggregation of these funds; underlines that this would reduce the bureaucratic burden on the financial actors, on controllers and auditors, as well as on the recipients of Union funds, and should facilitate risk assessment for the purposes of selection, award, financial management, monitoring, investigation, control and audit and would also contribute to effective prevention, detection, correction and follow-up of fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest, double funding and other irregularities; notes that this digitalisation is overdue and indispensable given the cross-border nature of misuse of funds, fraud, misappropriations, conflicts of interests, double-funding and other systemic problems; underlines that this single datamining tool should be easily searchable and available for OLAF, EPPO and the Commission, in order to enhance the protection of the Union budget and Next Generation EU against irregularities, fraud and conflicts of interests;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Reiterates the need to better balance the further simplification of rules and procedures with better controls over the most repeated areas of irregular spending, develop mandatory training sessions and practical information for applicants, in particular new applicants, and improve the assistance and guidelines for SMEs, spin- offs, start- ups, administration and payment agencies and all other relevant stakeholders;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Reiterates the need to step up the efforts in the fight against fraud both at Union and Member State level, in close cooperation with the EPPO and OLAF; appreciates the remarkable efforts and stresses the role of the EPPO in the investigation and prosecution of fraud and other criminal offences affecting the financial interests of the Union; highlights the importance of the EPPO’s full independence and impartiality for the effective exercise of its functions; recalls the importance of providing the EPPO and OLAF with sufficient financial and human resources; invites the Commission to urgently take action on the requests made by the EPPO on its budgetary implementation, so that the EPPO can become a fully effective prosecution office;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Underlines the increasing need to ensure the transparency of NGOs and of their funding, as they are important actors in the implementation of the Union budget, especially in the area of external action; is concerned by the funding of projects carried out by or involving NGOs with links to radical religious and political organisations, such as the Muslim Brotherhood; urges the Commission to set up ex ante mechanisms clearly identifying NGOs operating on EU territory and abroad that have acknowledged ties to religious fundamentalist networks and push forward an agenda that is undermining EU values, such as the freedom of thought, the freedom of speech and equality between men and women, under the disguise of for instance promoting inclusion, fighting discrimination and providing humanitarian assistance; demands the Commission to re-evaluate its identification of entities as NGOs, improving the reliability of information (making sure to have them registered as lobbyists, having clearly established whether they stand for the topics they claim they represent, and having insight into their financing); demands the disclosure of their financing be it private (e.g. NGOs financed by the industrial actors) or public; recalls that as regards public funding, the Union basic acts regulate how transparency and visibility in this regard need to be handled, therefore reminds the Commission about the responsibility it has to check the compliance with rules and procedures, especially rules and procedures on sub- granting to NGOs; moreover, demands that the Commission provides the discharge authority with clear information about the total amount of Union funds implemented by NGOs;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Welcomes the RRF's contribution to preventing a strong economic downturn following the COVID-19 pandemic; notes that the RRF has been instrumental in making progress with the implementation of the Country Specific Recommendations (CSRs) stemming from the European Semester in almost all Member States; notes however that several CSRs remain unaddressed, despite the financial incentives stemming from the RRF;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Is concerned by the findings of the Court in its first annual assessment of the RRF; considers that the implementation of the RRF takes place under time pressure, with however a much more straight forward delivery model that puts much, lighter requirements on the Commission, and reduces the control burden from the Commission towards the Member States, in particular in comparison with the cohesion policy; is therefore concerned by the types of findings of the Court which fundamentally calls into question whether the Commission can handle even this reduced control burden; calls on the Commission not to apply the performance based delivery model as used in the implementation of the RRF for other policies until the advantages and disadvantages are more clear, following the evaluation of the implementation of the RRF by 20 February 2024; calls on the Commission to assess the advantages and disadvantages of this performance-based delivery model as part of the evaluation of the implementation of the RRF due by 20 February 2024; welcomes the publication of the Framework for assessing milestones and targets under the RRF regulation and the Commission methodology for the determination of payment suspension under the RRF regulation in the Commission Communication “Recovery and Resilience Facility : Two years on, a unique instrument at the heart of the EU’s green and digital transformation”;1a _________________ 1a https://commission.europa.eu/system/files/ 2023-02/COM_2023_99_1_EN.pdf
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Expresses concern about the limited number of cross-border projects under the RRF, which calls into question the Union added value of this instrument;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Asks the Commission to modify the spending rule N+3 years to the previous rule N+2 years in order to increase the budget execution and reduce the outstanding commitments;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Encourages the Commission, the ECA and the Council to work towards accelerating the discharge process to N+1;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)
Paragraph 20 c (new)
20c. Calls on the Commission to continue promoting a gender balance and gender budgeting approach as well as a better geographical balance in the allocated funds; calls on the Commission to urgently develop gender mainstreaming methodology in order to integrate a gender equality perspective in all policy areas;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. NoteConsiders that, despite the fact that the Court considers the RRF expenditure accepted in the accounts for the year ended 31 December 2021 as legal and regular in all material respects, there is one milestone in the payment to Spain that ia Member State found to be non-material can be regarded as not satisfactorily fulfilled, casting doubt on the Commission’s assessment of the milestone and targets associated with the related RRF expenditur did not assess all criteria associated with the milestone; recalls that the only reCommission has on the identified error was not quantified was the absence of a methodology for partial payments by the Commission21st of February 2023 published the framework for assessing the milestones and targets under the RRF regulation and welcomes this increased transparency;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 – point a
Paragraph 43 – point a
a. ensure the protection of the Union budget by making general and systematic use of digital and automated systems for reporting, monitoring and audit (ARACHNE, EDES etc.) and urgently establish a compulsory integrated and interoperable system building on, but not limited to, existing tools and databases in the context of the upcoming revisions of the Financial Regulation; develop the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard to ensure that the description of milestones and the target and outcome of the audit are transparent; ensure that all Member States use the systems and central registers to report on beneficial owners and end beneficiaries;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 – point e
Paragraph 43 – point e
e. work with the Court to align the respective risk categorisation methodologies and the audit working methodologies;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 71 – point f
Paragraph 71 – point f
f. increase awareness, coherence, and sustainability of the support to SME internationalisation; Reiterates the need to simplify rules and procedures, develop compulsory training sessions and practical information for applicants, in particular new applicants, and improve the assistance and guidelines for SMEs, spin-offs, start-ups, administration and payment agencies and all others relevant stakeholders;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82 a (new)
Paragraph 82 a (new)
82a. Regrets the insufficient use of the European Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Fund, stresses that out of an EMFF envelope of EUR 5.69 billion available in shared management for 2014-2020 only EUR 4.1 billion have been committed to the end of 2021, notes that the lack of use of the EMFF by its potential beneficiaries is probably due to the difficulty of submitting fund applications and the processing of these, asks the European Commission to analyse the reasons;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 91 – point b
Paragraph 91 – point b
b. make better use and encourage to systematise the use of AI and data from new technologies such as the Union owned Copernicus Sentinel satellites to monitor and control the correct use of all CAP funds;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 98
Paragraph 98
98. Furthermore, calls on the Commission to consider the activities employed by DG CNECT for the Horizon Europe Funds in support of SMEs, such as webinars and coordinator days, and copy successful elements of DG CNECT’s approach to the EDF, notably to give more specific knowledge of Union funding to SMEs and decrease the administrative burden for them;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 105 a (new)
Paragraph 105 a (new)
105a. Deplores that hateful material in Palestinian textbooks and study cards has still not been removed; is highly concerned by the rising implication of teenagers in terrorist attacks directed toward Israelis; urges the European Commission to ensure that salaries of teachers and education sector civil servants that are financed from Union funds, such as under PEGASE, be used for drafting and teaching curricula that reflect the UNESCO standards of peace, tolerance, coexistence, and non-violence, as was decided upon by Union education ministers in Paris on 17 March 2015; and Parliament decisions on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial years 2016, 2018, 2019 and 2020; requests therefore once more the Commission to closely scrutinise educational materials that are funded by the Union and that the Palestinian Authority (PA) and relevant experts modify the curriculum of the Palestinian textbooks and study cards expeditiously;
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 114 a (new)
Paragraph 114 a (new)
114a. Notes that the total budget of the European schools for 2021 was 356.3 million EURO and that the contribution from the EU budget has increased in recent years, representing 56.2% of the total budget; notes that staff costs totalled 87%, other administrative expenditure 10% and pedagogical expenditure only 3%; notes with concern that the funding of the European Schools is exclusively falling under heading 7, European public administration, of the EU budget; calls for a separate budget line for the European school system in the next Multiannual Financial Framework that should be established under the European Education Area in order to ensure synergies with the educational ambitions and objectives of the Union;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 115
Paragraph 115
115. Supports the recommendations of the Court in its Annual Report as well as in related special reports; calls on the Commission and the Central office of the European Schools in their respective remits to implement them without delay and to keep the discharge authority informed on the progress of the implementation; calls for full Parliamentary scrutiny of the European school system in order to increase accountability and improve governance;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 125
Paragraph 125
125. Is worried by the Court’s serious finding that for the payment made to Spaina Member State in 2021, one milestone was not satisfactorily fulfilled; regrets to according to the Court; notes that the Court was not able to quantify this error because of; notes the Commission’s Internal Auditor observed the absence of a methodology to quantify the impact of (partially) not achieving a milestone or a target; notes the Commission’s Internal Auditor also observed the absence of this methodology; considers it grave negligence of the Commission to not have this methodology in place before making payconsiders it necessary to have this methodology in place and therefore welcomes the inclusion in Annex I of the Commission Communication “Recovery and Resilience Facility : Two years on, a unique instruments, ast this calls into question the Commission’s sincerity of assessing the satisfactory fulfilment of milestones and targete heart of the EU’s green and digital transformation” which details the framework for assessing milestones and targets under the RRF regulation and the increased transparency that the publication of this framework provides;
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 126
Paragraph 126
126. NoteRegrets that the Commission’s Internal Audit Service did not perform any audit engagement as regards the NGEU programme in 2021; notes that the Internal Auditor draws attention to the need to continue work on control design and implementation of appropriate financial management, and audit and control strategies; considers the Internal Auditor to be an essential element of internal checks and balances within the Commission and that independent and objective information derived from its own audit activities is indispensable for the Internal Auditor to function effectively; underlines that the work by the Court as external auditor cannot substitute the work of the Internal Audit Service;
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 130
Paragraph 130
130. Notes the Commission’s approach to adherence to procurement and state aid rules in the investments under the RRP is to rely on national systems, and revert to infringement procedures when cases of non-compliance in Member States are detected; considers that the protection of the Union financial interests is not timely guaranteed and does not necessarily target the beneficiaries that enjoyed an unfair advantage of the cases of non- compliance; acknowledges that the first responsibility in this regard lies with the Member States; recalls the repeated findings by the Court as reflected in previous discharge reports that the work of certain national authorities is too error- prone and unreliable; stresses therefore that the Commission has the residual responsibility to make sure that effective and efficient internal control systems are in place, and to step in where Member States do not act as is required by the RRF Regulation;
Amendment 261 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 136
Paragraph 136
136. Considers that the element of Union funding beingit is important to ensure that the additional to natity of Unional funding is not satisfactorily communicated by the Commission, and that it cannot be excluded with certainty that money from the RRF is used to replace national expenditure; considers an analysis of national expenditure is necessary to see if the funding made available through the RRF is truly additional and was not used to substitute recurring national expenditure, in accordance with Article 5(1) of the RRF Regulation; considers in this regard that it is unclear what has happened with the payments and pre-financing received by Member States for which no investment related costs were incurred yetshould be guaranteed throughout the implementation of the RRF; calls on the Commission to perform relevant audits and controls to certify such additionality;
Amendment 286 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 145
Paragraph 145
145. Notes the statements made by Commission representatives that all payments will go towards the investments made under the RRF, so that after a certain time lag where instalments are paid out for reforms as well, by August 2026, the total amount of payments will have been spent on investments; rRecalls the Court’s finding that the Commission, in its assessment of all National RRPs , gave a ‘B-rating’ for the cost estimates of these investments, calling into question the accuracy of the amounts involved; underlines in the light of the Commission’s statement the problematic fact that of front-loading reforms and back-loading investments in the RRPs; reiterates its concern that this only amplifies the risk that Member States might not request the last payment tranche, and thus might fail to fulfil all reforms and investments after having received the largest part of their total financial support under the RRF; emphasises that the discharge authority cannot wait to receive full clarity on the proper use of Union funds until after the end of made under the RRF;
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 145 a (new)
Paragraph 145 a (new)
145 a. Underlines in the light of the Commission’s statement the problematic fact of front-loading reforms and back- loading investments in the RRPs; reiterates its concern that this only amplifies the risk that Member States might not request the last payment tranche, and thus might fail to fulfil all reforms and investments after having received the largest part of their total financial support under the RRF; emphasises that the discharge authority cannot wait to receive full clarity on the proper use of Union funds until after the end of the RRF;
Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 146
Paragraph 146
146. Notes that it is important that all funds allocated to the Member States under the RRF will result in investments and reforms, as only then the discharge authority can be sure that all funds were allocated to final beneficiaries in full respect of the principle of additionality; recalls the criticism expressed in previous discharge reports of the practice that some Member States systematically overbook funding programmes in shared management and withdraw projects from Union funds when irregularities and/or fraud are discovered in its related expenditure, thereby effectively evading Union investigations and/or an effective follow-up and possible corrections; deplores that the burden of these irregularities and possible fraud is shifted to the national budget, and thus, the national tax-payer;
Amendment 346 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153 – point l
Paragraph 153 – point l
l. only accept milestones and targets for which is has received documentation supporting its implementation, and not just statements of Member States; requests in that regard a re-assessment of the fulfilment of milestone 215 in the Spanish payment request by a qualified IT-expert, accompanied by a declaration of assurance by an IT-auditor, taking account of the requirements of the milestone and its related measure, and the statements of the Commission in its assessment that the milestone has been satisfactorily fulfilled;
Amendment 350 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153 – point n
Paragraph 153 – point n
n. closely monitor fulfilment of milestones and targets, given negative experience with the first payment request handled by the Commission, and the non- satisfactory fulfilment of one milestone, in particular also those where additional milestones were considered necessary forrelated to audit, monitoring and control purposes;
Amendment 370 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153 – point t
Paragraph 153 – point t
t. include instrengthen, where relevant, its system audits in the Member States for each internal control system (in case of decentralised or implementation methods) a minimum; to ensure a minimum reasonable number of 25 tests of individual procurement files under the RRF in order to not just provide assurance on the set-up of the internal control system in all Member States, but also onin order to guarantee the effectiveness in practice of the internal control systems;
Amendment 373 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153 – point u
Paragraph 153 – point u
u. make sure checks on double funding are included in the Member States’ audit and control frameworks for the NGEU, Rural development and Cohesion programmes and to ensure its proper functioning through system checks; calls in addition on the Commission to verify that double funding does not take place by performing risk based checks on all payments to final beneficiaries under these programmes;