5 Amendments of Gabriella GERZSENYI
Amendment 7 #
2024/2019(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the largest contribution to the climate-relevant spending in 2023 came from the RRFecovery and Resilience Facility (RRF); highlights that the delivery model of the RRF constitutes a significant change of EU financing in so far as the disbursement of funds is based on the fulfilment of targets and milestones and not linked to costs; in this context, is concerned about the Court of Auditors’(the ‘Court’) annual report for 2023 which, similar to previous years findings, states weaknesses in the design of measures and cases of vaguely defined milestones and targets, weaknesses in the Member States’ reporting and control systems and problems with the reliability of information that Member States included in their management declaration; also notes with concern the Court’s Special Report No 14/2024 that finds multiple shortcomings of the RRF framework and the national recovery and resilience plans as well as inconsistencies in the implementation of measures which call into question the achievement of its climate and environmental objectives, and that concludes that the contribution of the RRF to the green transition idoes not clearfulfil the intended objectives, particularly in the field of industrial decarbonisation;
Amendment 7 #
2024/2019(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that the increase in the error rate for cohesion policy funds is rather symptomatic of the complexity of the rules applicable to this spending area, the lack of intermediary managing bodies between the national and local levels and the insufficient administrative capacity of national authorities;
Amendment 9 #
2024/2019(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Considers that Member States have significantly underestimated the financing support required for the decarbonisation and overall modernisation of heavy industries when allocating funds under the RRF; calls on the Commission to minimise the risk of national misadministration and to reevaluate the capacity and ability of the Member States to act as intermediary between the Commission and final recipients regarding the financing of industrial decarbonisation and modernisation; further urges the Commission to consider adopting more straightforward direct financial instruments when planning future budgetary measures for protecting the environment, safeguarding public health and mitigating climate change;
Amendment 16 #
2024/2019(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Notes the findings of the Court’s Special report 13/2024 regarding the number of payment requests submitted and the limited funds of the RRF disbursed by the Commission to Member States and regrets the important gap between Member States in the administrative capacities to ensure absorption and implementation progress of that facility; recognises nevertheless the benefits of RRF pre-financing to facilitate the deployment of climate mitigation projects on the ground and for providing funding certainty to final recipients; acknowledges the responsibility for ensuring sufficient administrative capacity lies ultimately with each Member State;
Amendment 19 #
2024/2019(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Calls on the Commission to further think beyond the issuance of guidelines and to maximise the streamlining between application processes between directly and indirectly managed funds for climate, health and environmental matters, in particular for countries, which are recipients of both cohesion and RRF funds; welcomes in that regard the policy discussions that led to the creation of the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (STEP)1a, as a tool to support Member States in the management of European funding; _________________ 1a https://strategic- technologies.europa.eu/about/eu- programmes-supporting-step_en