Activities of Ilana CICUREL related to 2023/2122(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Transparency and accountability of non-governmental organisations funded from the EU budget (debate)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the transparency and accountability of non-governmental organisations funded from the EU budget
Amendments (59)
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU has designed transparency and accountability mechanisms to ensure that EU funds awarded to interest representatives, including non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are used effectively, efficiently and in line with the EU’sEU values, objectives, policies and financial rules enshrined in, among other places, the Financial Regulation, which lays down transparency as one of its guiding budgetary principles, requiring the Commission to make available, in an appropriate and timely manner, information on EU funds;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas civil society spans from low-key community activities to large NGOs; whereas the latter play a key role in representing citizens and in implementing the EU budget; whereas public authorities are increasingly outsourcing to NGOs and entities; whereas the Commission manages EU funds directly, indirectly or in a shared way, and that unfortunately only the funds directly awarded to NGOs and entities have been subject to monitoring and reporting by the Commission so far;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the Commission’s Financial Transparency System (FTS) is the main source of publicly available data for large-scale analysis of grants and contracts managed directly by the Commission; whereas a clear distinction should be made between public transparency and transparency for the purpose of legitimate budgetary control given the sensitive contexts and issues NGOs work with;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas an analysis of FTS data shows that grants awarded from the EU budget to NGOs, after excluding EU programmes in the field of education and research, amounted to at least EUR 2.6 billion in 2022, under direct management, across all EU programmes and funds; whereas the total amount of grants awarded to NGOs is likely to be higher owing to the absence of a definition of an NGO or of clear differentiation between NGOs and not-for-profit organisations (NFPOs) in the FTS11 ; _________________ 11 Overall amount of grants awarded from the EU Budget to NGOs in 2022, based on FTS analysis – approx. EUR 3.7 billion.
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas 3 377 entities12 are registered in the EU Transparency Register under the category ‘NGOs, platforms and networks and similar’; EU transparency and accountability requirements and control should apply to all interest representatives benefiting from EU funds; 3 377 entities12 are registered in the EU Transparency Register under the category ‘NGOs, platforms and networks and similar’; and that the nature of requirements and control has to conform with the categorisation established in the Transparency register, in view to take into account all judicial forms of entities and not only NGOs; whereas EU requirement and control do not solely have to be linked to the Transparency register as some entities granted by EU funds could prefer to stay out of this register to avoid putting at risk their existence; _________________ 12 Source: EU Transparency Register, data accessed on 22 September 2023.
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas NGOMember States lay the legal basis for NGOs and that the latter have their status registerd at national level; NGOs and entities are required to maintain accurate and transparent financial records, including on the use of EU funds, as they are accountable to their members, donors, partners and beneficiaries regarding the actions they take, the sources of their financing, including EU funds, and the decisions they take on behalf of their stakeholders;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. Whereas the exploitation of EU funds against EU rules, principles and values is on the rise; individuals and front organisations, most often under foreign influence, seek to obtain EU financial support and the respectability that results from it, whatever the amount, but in reality use EU funds for activities that undermine European fundamental principles and values and our attachment to democracy;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
F b. Whereas the Commission has the responsibility to ensure the implementation of the EU budget and to respect EU regulations and values, and whereas in that perspective all ex ante and ex post controls have to safeguard that only NGOs and entities working in respect of EU rules, principles and values will be granted EU funds;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WStates EU transparency and accountability is most essential for democracy, fundamental freedoms, inclusion and diversity; welcomes the vital role played by NGOs in linkrepresenting civil society with political decision-making in all EU policy areas; highlights, in particular, their role in implementing the EU budget and representing civil society; providing support to citizens and communities in various areas; wishes to create a most favourable and just European transparency and accountability system;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Urges all stakeholders to embrace the need to increasingly place European Union principles and values at the heart of the EU funding partnerships; calls for common efforts towards stronger and further reaching transparency and accountability, in particular more continuous monitoring and control of the proper execution of the EU budget by the Commission in line with that aim, both within the EU and abroad;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights that volunteer and civil society organisations deserve the utmost respect and gratitude for the daily work they do in helping others in our society, particularly if they are supporting, for example, social work, cultural engagement, sports education, emergency aid; recognises the millions of hours of unpaid volunteer work done by thousands of volunteers across Europe and the world on a daily basis and affirms that these volunteer NGOs deserve the highest praise and support;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that national laws and the legislative process oftenes could neglect the voices of local, regional and national NGOs, while favouring the priorities of large NGOs, that the priorities and needs of smaller local and regional NGOs are often ignored or have less attention paid to them, despite the fact that these smaller and regional groups often do the majority of the workentities accomplish a huge amount of work and that EU funding should be accessible to them; emphasises that the work of small and regional organisations is to be paid the highest respect, as they represent the true diversity and variety of volunteer work performed across Europe and non EU countries;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Commends the crucial role of NGOs in the EU and elsewherenon EU countries in defending the rule of law and promoting respect for human rights and democracy; reiterates that in countries with authoritarian or non-democratic regimes, NGOs often represent the last line of defence of democracy; insists on the importance of adequate and are in need of support; calls the Commission to consider safeguards clauses and mechanisms in that respect; insists on the imperative for the Commission and Member States to truly protect NGOs and the public fundamental freedoms of our society, such as freedom of association and expression, and stresses the importance of securing adequate and transparent EU funding for NGOs active in these fieldnd entities;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is convinced that publicfinancial transparency and accountability is vital for NGOs to showcaseand entities, their valuable work, be and recognised and build their credibilitytion; believes that European citizens have to be assured that the EU knows exactly how all EU funds are used, this for the credibility of NGOs, any other interest representative or the European project itself; is therefore concerned that there is a lack of information, data and control on who or what we grand European Union funds to despite existing transparency requirements, as observed in past discharge procedures;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Is of the opinion that the alleged corruption case referred to as Qatargate and the role certain NGOs played in it could have been prevented through the consistent enforcement of existing transparency requirements and an obligation for NGOs to disclose their sources of funding and their internal structures; notes with concern that the relevant NGOs have profited from EU funding since 2015; considers it unacceptable that the use of fundsCondemns the increase in exploitation of EU funds against EU principles and values, the use and transfers to other organisations that are not entirely traceable; warns of the danger that EU taxpayers’ moneyfunds could ultimately be used within corrupt circles and be subject to fraud and irregularities, foreign interference or entrism; emphasises also the importance of ‘final beneficiary transparency’ for EU NGO funds;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Warns that it is of utmost importance to ensure that EU transparency and accountability obligations do not put final beneficiaries of EU funds at risk, or in any way threaten the existence of NGOs and people who work for them, for example due to the use of information by authoritarian regimes to attack them; reiterates the importance to not impose a heavy bureaucratic burden on the smaller organisations; calls on the Commission to ensure current or future EU transparency and accountability requirements for NGOs and entities remain strictly necessary and proportionate to the specific aims pursued and the size of the organisation;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Subheading 2
NGO definitions and entities in the context of budgetary control
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Reiterates the fundamental significance of public trust and support for NGOs; acknowledges that the terms used to describe these organisations are subject to different legal and public interpretations in Member States;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises that the term NGO is a broad umbrella term embracing many different kinds of organisation: from large international organentities: encourages the co-legislationors to small regional or local ones, from organisations run mostly by professionals to those consisting mostly of volunteers; highlights that the subject matter covered by NGOs and the method of implementation can also vary substantially, for instance, some NGOs may do work that is highly theoretical (for example the work of some think-tanks), or political (for example politically affiliated NGOs) whereas others may be verfind an agreement on a harmonised approach to NGOs and entities at EU level, which would considerably help European budgetary control procedures, especially in the case of cross border associations; reiterates it is most important to ensure transparency hands-on (for example the daily work that firefighting NGOs engage in across Europe); emphasises, therefore, that different types of NGOs should be differentiated when analysing levels of transparency and efficiency, and that a better definition of NGOs should be established at the EU level accountability for all entities that are granted EU funds; underlines that the databases registered should be confidential and accessible to the European budgetary authority upon specific request and without limit of the content and of time retention;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. HRegrets the difficulty but highlights the advantages of establishing a common definition forharmonised EU-wide approach for defining EU engagement with NGOs and entities, encompassing direct deliberative, political and financial interactions; acknowledges the advantage of enabling a common understanding of what these partners are in relation to the EU and its bodies in different contexts, beyond the question of financial support, in favour of public trust; believes that the added value of a common EU-wide definitionapproach lies in increased transparency, accountability and predictability for EU institutions, the Member States, NGOs and EU taxpayers; citizens; encourages the co-legislators to work towards harmonisation allowing for better budgetary control;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes that the spectrum of NGOs and entities receiving EU funding covers a wide range of structures, ways of functioning, sources of financing and focus areas, which translates into a variety of projects that are financed with taxpayers’ moneyby EU funds; notes that the Commission uses the terms NGOs and NFPOs without a clear definition in the FTS; regrets that this results in a lack of public transparency in the allocation and monitoring of EU funds and might lead to a lack of public trust;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3
Subheading 3
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Is concerned that public transparency requirements can be circumvented, especially when money isfunds are passed along a chain and used to fulfil the purposes of other donors; highlights that the FTS does not provide any information about how EU funding sub-granted under indirect and shared management is distributed among NGOs and entities, on what basis or for what purpose; considers this highly problematic, as large amounts of funding are committed through indirect and shared management; calls on the Commission to favour direct management and strengthen transparency and accountability in cases of shared and indirect management by verifying the re-allocation of funds and their use by the final beneficiary by imposing appropriate reporting and publication requirements in line with the financial regulation and annual reporting by the Member States and the Commission on the implementation of the European structural and investment funds;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Call on the Commission to reinforce ex-ante control mechanisms proportionately, including adequate random checks and is of the opinion that severe weaknesses exist in the ex post control on the use of EU funds and urges the Commission in cooperation with Member States to produce an in-depth analysis with clear proposals to reinforce their quality, amount and regularity, supported by a well-established and centralised budgetary control task force within the Commission for all interest representatives, disposing of a clear mandate, investigation capabilities and resources;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Regrets that a lack of transparency makes it possible for powerful actors to establish, fund and/or co-opt EU-funded NGOs in multiple Member States to promote false narratives, including through disinformation, apparently in order to influence EU policy through different actors, as happened in Qatargate; underlines that the EU budget must not be used to lobby against the EU’s democratic principles and values; reiterates that foreign influence on EU policymaking may be possible through NGOUnderlines that the EU budget must not be used to lobby against the EU’s democratic principles and values; reiterates that foreign influence on EU policymaking may be possible through NGOs or EU- based legal entities funded by third countries; recalls its resolution of 1 June 2023 on foreign interference in all democratic processes in the European Union, including disinformation, and of 13 July 2023 on recommendations for reform of the European Parliament’s rules on transparency, integrity, accountability and anti-corruption, highlighting the risks of foreign interference, entrism and disinformation stemming from some NGOs and entities funded by non-EU countries; calls on the Commission to require NGOs and entities in receipt of EU grants to publish details of any funding received from other sources in relation to projects co-financed by the EU over a five-year period14 ; _________________ 14 See: transparency and accountability study, recommendation 2.
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on national authorities to stop all organisations or entities that are acting against EU rules and take legal and administrative measures that facilitate action at EU level and make it easier and quicker for the Commission to include such organisations in the Early Detection and Exclusion System (EDES) and exclude them from EU funding; calls for such a requirement for Member States to be included in the proposal for an NGO regulationits systems; urges the Commission to include all interest representatives in violation of EU rules in the Early Detection and Exclusion System (EDES) and exclude them from EU funding accordingly;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Regrets that public transparency is negatively impacted by the publication of data in the FTS with a delay of between 6 and 18 months; calls on the Commission to publish information about EU grants awarded to NGOs and entities no later than 6 months after the date on which the grant was awarded15 , including funding received from other sources, such as foundations; calls on the Commission to develop and integrate data validation tools so that the FTS data validation process is automatic and continuous, is quicker and consumes fewer resources16 ; _________________ 15 See: transparency and accountability study, recommendation 5. 16 See: transparency and accountability study, recommendation 7.
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the Commission to use a common unique entity, such as a unique participant identification code, and project identification keys across all portals and databases, including on beneficiaries’ websites, to facilitate the reconciliation of publicly available information provided by different systems and websites; calls on the Commission to provide all NGO grant beneficiaries with code that extracts five years of funding data directly from the FTS and includes links to the corresponding project entries in the Commission’s programme databases17 ; _________________ 17 See: transparency and accountability study, recommendation 19.
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Observes inconsistencies in the content and extent of the information displayed on project websites and notes NGOs’some entities' insufficient clarity on grant distribution among partners and on the connection to pertinent Commission databases; calls for a more proactive approach from NGOs and entities to public transparency and increased cooperation with EU budgetary authorities that goes beyond the current minimal requirements for EU grant funding18 and helps the monitoring and control of EU funding; calls for the Commission to establish a system for a commitment of NGOs and entities towards the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union when applying for EU funds and for the Commission to allow this by an online procedure; calls for a clearer and more systematic presentation of information on NGO and EU-funded project websites on the grant funding received from the EU and from other sources for both specific projects and overall, and on project objectives, results and impact; _________________ 18 See: transparency and accountability study, recommendation 17.
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Notes that, although the mainstreaming of the eGrants system as a common grants management tool and applicant registration system across Commission services has improved the quality and completeness of FTS data, more effort needs to be made to improve the reliability of such data; is concerned that there are still continuing shortcomings in terms of consistency in existing Commission transparency portals and systems; further calls for a more user- friendly FTS that is linked to the Transparency Register and compatible with specific programmes’ databases, and highlights that it should include final payments and a clear definition of NGOs, making it possible to identify beneficiaries by category; requests that the Commission prepare a proposal for further administrative action by 1 June 2024;
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to set up, based on Article 36 of the Financial Regulation, a singlecentralised, interoperable IT system for data mining and risk scoring to improve the efficiency of the internal control of budget implementation; underlines that this system must not only include recipients’ data, but also the data of beneficial owners in accordance with Directive (EU) 2015/84919 ; calls for this system to include risk indicators based on data from the EDES under all management modes; _________________ 19 Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC, OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p. 73.
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 234 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Notes that the coexistence of reporting obligations and accounting practices at the national and EU levels may lead to a disproportionate administrative burden for NGOs and entities; calls on the Commission to ensure that reporting obligations at the EU and national levels are consistent in order to guarantee easier monitoring of the fulfilment of obligations, especially for smaller NGOand medium ones; calls on the Commission to develop a common monitoring system to identify final beneficiaries, as is already the case in regional policy; recommends that such a system should be based on the monitoring principles under shared management that apply to EU Member States and that EU funds be tracked up to the final beneficiaries in a systematic, standardised and harmonised manner across information and transparency platforms at EU level;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Requests that the Commission provides a comprehensive analysis of whether and by what financial means it provides training for lobbyists, including NGOs, on the Financial Regulation and on the EU budget; requests that this analysis be provided by 1 February 2024 with a list of relevant training events and the names of beneficiaries; requests, if applicable, that the content of the training be made public; requests that the content of these training courses be made available to members of the Committee on Budgetary Control on request;
Amendment 238 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4
Subheading 4
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Calls on the Commission to ensure that all applicants or beneficiaries of EU funding, including NGOs, are required to publish annually the number of lobbying contacts they have, along with their nature and their monetary value; reiterates in this context the need for a comprehensive financial pre-screening of these entities before they are listed in the EU transparency register; calls for a transparency officer to be placed in all committee secretariats and relevant administrative units; recalls that, according to the transparency register guidelines, changes in the data provided should be communicated as soon as they occur and, in any case, within three months; insists that any changes in the board or leadership of EU-funded NGOs and entities should also be recorded in the transparency register; requests to have the transparency database only accessible to specific authorised persons and upon request to the budgetary authority, in order to avoid the dissemination of information that could endanger an individual’s life, personal safety or the existence of an NGO;
Amendment 246 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34 a. Calls on all NGOs and entities committed to full transparency and accountability, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and promoting democratic and EU values to request to be in the Transparency register when applying for EU funds;
Amendment 251 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 270 #
Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
Amendment 280 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
Amendment 286 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
Amendment 295 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
Amendment 299 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
Amendment 302 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
44 a. Encourages increased cooperation with the European Anti-Faud Office (OLAF) and the European Court of Auditors (ECA); calls therefore on the Commission to enhance in particular the access status for OLAF in order to obtain information on the financial misconduct of individual NGOs and entities, investigate them and impose appropriate sanctions in the event of fraud, corruption and other irregularities related to EU funds in compliance with the applicable regulations;
Amendment 304 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Paragraph 45 a (new)
45 a. Calls the Commission to launch with the co-legislators and in partnership with stakeholders an in-depth reform of the EU financial regulation before 2027 with objective of reinforcing EU transparency and accountability for all interest representatives, with a focus on NGOs and entities as categorised in the Transparency register and to create better budgetary control, including with safeguard clauses and without endangering the raison d’être and functioning of these organisations and their workers in any way and in line with the recommendations of this resolution;