2020/2127(INI) | [ParlTrack]

download json

Changes: 2023/08/03docs, events, 2021/12/18events.summary, docs, 2021/10/27events.docs, events, docs, procedure.stage_reached, forecasts, 2021/10/21events, forecasts, 2021/10/12events.summary, docs, 2021/10/09forecasts.title, 2021/10/07docs, events.docs, 2021/10/02procedure.stage_reached, events, 2021/09/29procedure.Other_legal_basis, events, 2021/09/05forecasts, docs.docs.url, 2021/07/16docs.date, 2021/07/15docs, 2021/07/03docs.docs.url, 2021/07/01docs, 2021/06/29procedure.title, 2021/06/25docs.docs.url, 2021/06/23docs, committees.shadows

View current state | View Changes for this date

2020/2127(INI) How effectively did Member States use the money from the EU through the Solidarity Fund (in cases of natural disasters)

Progress: Awaiting committee decision

Role	Committee	Rapporteur	Shadows
Lead	CONT	CREȚU Corina ( S&D)	FERNANDES José Manuel ( EPP), CZARNECKI Ryszard ( ECR), OMARJEE Younous ( GUE/NGL)
Committee Opinion	BUDG	BIEDROŃ Robert ( S&D)	Georgios KYRTSOS ( PPE), Henrike HAHN ( Verts/ALE), Mauri PEKKARINEN ( RE), Silvia MODIG ( GUE/NGL), Hélène LAPORTE ( ID)

Lead committee dossier:

CONT/9/03594

Legal Basis:

RoP 54

Subjects

3.70.11 Natural disasters, Solidarity Fund

Events

2020/10/28

EP - CREȚU Corina (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in CONT

2020/09/30

EP - BIEDROŃ Robert (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in BUDG

2020/09/17

EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament

Activities

Fabio Massimo CASTALDO
Plenary Speeches (0)
Corina CREȚU
Plenary Speeches (0)
Karol KARSKI
Plenary Speeches (0)

Amendments	Dossier
20	2020/2127(INI) 2021/06/07 BUDG 20 amendments... Amendment 1 # Mauri PEKKARINEN, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Nils TORVALDS, Valérie HAYER, Moritz KÖRNER, Olivier CHASTEL, Vlad GHEORGHE Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Reiterates the importance of the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) in providing financial assistance to Member States and regions hit by natural disasters; takes note of the recent revisions made to the instrument; welcomes the recent extension of the EUSF’s scope to major public health emergencies; recalls the increases made to the advance payments of the EUSF, which increased the value of advance payments from 10 % to 25 % of the anticipated financial contribution and the upper limit from EUR 30 million to EUR 100 million; Amendment 10 # Hélène LAPORTE, Joachim KUHS Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Regrets the disparity in the means available in each country to assess the amount of damage based on data collected by local authorities and satellite surveys and the consequent errors in the proposed assessments; Amendment 11 # Henrike HAHN Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Insists that the role of the budgetary authority be fully safeguarded; notes that, under the new multiannual financial framework (MFF), EUSF appropriations are entered in the general budget and made available via transfers; stresses the need for timely information on such transfers; regrets, also, the absence of detailed background information on applications for EUSF support, which hampers scrutiny; demands, despite the new procedure, that the Commission provides the same level of information as it did in the previous MFF; Amendment 12 # Henrike HAHN Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Emphasises the curative nature of the EUSF, and therefore the need for effective synergies with other Union policies and programmes, in particular the European Green Deal and those supporting disaster prevention and risk management; calls for a revision of the EUSF to ensure that ‘build back better’ is ~~incentivised;~~ enshrined, while also stressing that climate change requires primarily a preventive policy in line with the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal; Amendment 13 # Georgios KYRTSOS Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Emphasises the curative nature of the EUSF, and therefore the need for effective synergies with other Union policies and programmes, in particular the European Green Deal and those supporting disaster prevention and risk management; calls for a revision of the EUSF to ensure that ‘build back better’ is incentivised, declaring that no funds will be assigned to repairing damage without a study on the viability of the projects; Amendment 14 # Mauri PEKKARINEN, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Nils TORVALDS, Valérie HAYER, Moritz KÖRNER, Olivier CHASTEL, Vlad GHEORGHE Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Emphasises the curative nature of the EUSF, and therefore the need for effective synergies with other Union policies and programmes, in particular with the European Structural and Investment Funds, the European Green Deal and those supporting disaster prevention and risk management; calls for a revision of the EUSF to ensure that ‘build back better’ is incentivised; Amendment 15 # Hélène LAPORTE, Joachim KUHS Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls on the Commission to avoid duplication of funds when the regions concerned are already beneficiaries of other EU programmes; Amendment 16 # Henrike HAHN Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Regrets the lack of visibility of the EUSF, which means the role of the Union is not always clearly demonstrated, especially in all European languages and via accessible channels; regrets that the EUSF Regulation contains neither an obligation to publicise EUSF support nor any reporting requirement on this.; calls on the Commission to present a targeted revision of the EUSF regulation by the end of 2021 including the obligation to make EUSF support visible in any approved cases; Amendment 17 # Mauri PEKKARINEN, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Nils TORVALDS, Valérie HAYER, Moritz KÖRNER, Olivier CHASTEL, Vlad GHEORGHE Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Regrets the lack of visibility of the EUSF, which means the role of the Union is not always clearly demonstrated; regrets that the EUSF Regulation contains neither an obligation to publicise EUSF support nor any reporting requirement on this.; highlights that good practices have been identified in affected Member States for communicating about EUSF support, such as the use of flags and EU logos; calls on the Member States to publicise the EUSF financial assistance and to signal the works and services that will be financed by the EUSF; Amendment 18 # Georgios KYRTSOS Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Regrets the lack of visibility of the EUSF, which means the role of the Union is not always clearly demonstrated; regrets that the EUSF Regulation contains neither an obligation to publicise EUSF support nor any reporting requirement on this., declaring 1% of the total expenditure to be targeted at national media and other outlets to inform EU citizens about EU support; Amendment 19 # Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Olivier CHASTEL, Martin HOJSÍK, Vlad GHEORGHE Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Recalls the importance of the respect of the rule of law principle and the importance of safeguarding the financial interests of EU and considers therefore that the Commission, the European Anti- Fraud Office (OLAF), the Court of Auditors and, where applicable, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) should be able to use the information and monitoring system within their competences and rights; Amendment 2 # Henrike HAHN Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Reiterates the importance of the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) in providing financial assistance to Member States and regions, including in the neighbourhood of the EU, hit by natural disasters; welcomes the recent extension of the EUSF’s scope to major public health emergencies; regrets that the extension of the scope has not been matched by an extension of the envelope; Amendment 20 # Hélène LAPORTE, Joachim KUHS Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls for justification, by means of an audit of the proper use of European funds, of the aid received by beneficiary countries which are at the end of the reconstruction process; Amendment 3 # Karlo RESSLER Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Reiterates the importance of the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) in providing financial assistance to Member States and regions hit by natural disasters; welcomes the recent extension of the EUSF’s scope to major public health emergencies; strongly supports the recent reform of the advance payment system, which raises the level of advances from 10% to 25% of the expected contribution and from a maximum of EUR 30 million to EUR 100 million; Amendment 4 # Hélène LAPORTE, Anna BONFRISCO, Valentino GRANT Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Reiterates the importance of the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) in providing financial assistance to Member States and regions hit by natural disasters; welcomes the recent extension of the EUSF’s scope to major public health emergencies, since the occurrence of new pandemics in the medium term cannot be ruled out; Amendment 5 # Mauri PEKKARINEN, Nils TORVALDS, Valérie HAYER, Moritz KÖRNER, Olivier CHASTEL, Vlad GHEORGHE Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Stresses that the number and severity of emergencies is unpredictable; remains concerned about the EUSF’s annual ceiling for the period 2021-2027; regrets that, due to budgetary constraints, countries applying for support as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 will receive under 50 % of the potential aid amountcalls that, for the budgetary period of 2021-2027, the EUSF was merged with the Emergency Aid Reserve in the Solidarity and Emergency Aid Reserve (SEAR), with a maximum annual ceiling of EUR 1,2 billion; notes that, due to budgetary constraints, countries applying for support as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 will receive under 50 % of the potential aid amount; considers it necessary to monitor the management of SEAR in order to see whether the funding amount and allocation key provided have an effect on the effectiveness of the EUSF, in view of the extension of its scope and the scale; Amendment 6 # Henrike HAHN Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Stresses that the number and severity of emergencies is unpredictable; highlights, however, that due to climate change, the number and severity of natural disasters will increase over time and will become costlier; remains concerned about the EUSF’s annual ceiling for the period 2021-2027; regrets that, due to budgetary constraints, countries applying for support as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 will receive under 50 % of the potential aid amount; Amendment 7 # Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Olivier CHASTEL, Martin HOJSÍK, Vlad GHEORGHE Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Regrets the lengthy process for the advance payments and final payments in such difficult circumstances and calls on the Commission to accelerate the process of assessment, ensuring that citizens in need can benefit from the Union's support in a timely manner; Amendment 8 # Mauri PEKKARINEN, Nils TORVALDS, Valérie HAYER, Moritz KÖRNER, Olivier CHASTEL, Vlad GHEORGHE Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. SNotes that on average, the time taken to deploy the full grant on the ground is about 1 year; stresses the need for rapid mobilisation of the EUSF; recalls that the effects of disasters and emergencies are often difficult to gauge; calls, therefore, for timely and flexible assessment of eligible expenditure, in line with the principles of sound financial management, as well as hands-on support to Member States, in particular for damage estimation; highlights that effective implementation of the EUSF grant is contingent upon effective governance structures and institutional coordination in the affected Member State; calls on the Commission to ensure the dissemination of good practices with regard to governance and the use of institutional coordination structures in disaster situations; Amendment 9 # Karlo RESSLER Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Emphasises that in cases of severe earthquakes, such as the ones recently witnessed in Croatia, the mitigation of the consequences inherently takes more time than with other natural disasters; stresses that any future revision of the European Solidarity Fund (EUSF) should recognise this substantial difference, specifically in regard to sufficient absorption time beyond the current application deadlines; source: 693.755

Amendments

Dossier

2020/2127(INI)

2021/06/07 BUDG 20 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Mauri PEKKARINEN, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Nils TORVALDS, Valérie HAYER, Moritz KÖRNER, Olivier CHASTEL, Vlad GHEORGHE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Reiterates the importance of the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) in providing financial assistance to Member States and regions hit by natural disasters; takes note of the recent revisions made to the instrument; welcomes the recent extension of the EUSF’s scope to major public health emergencies; recalls the increases made to the advance payments of the EUSF, which increased the value of advance payments from 10 % to 25 % of the anticipated financial contribution and the upper limit from EUR 30 million to EUR 100 million;

Amendment 10 #

Hélène LAPORTE, Joachim KUHS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Regrets the disparity in the means available in each country to assess the amount of damage based on data collected by local authorities and satellite surveys and the consequent errors in the proposed assessments;

Amendment 11 #

Henrike HAHN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Insists that the role of the budgetary authority be fully safeguarded; notes that, under the new multiannual financial framework (MFF), EUSF appropriations are entered in the general budget and made available via transfers; stresses the need for timely information on such transfers; regrets, also, the absence of detailed background information on applications for EUSF support, which hampers scrutiny; demands, despite the new procedure, that the Commission provides the same level of information as it did in the previous MFF;

Amendment 12 #

Henrike HAHN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Emphasises the curative nature of the EUSF, and therefore the need for effective synergies with other Union policies and programmes, in particular the European Green Deal and those supporting disaster prevention and risk management; calls for a revision of the EUSF to ensure that ‘build back better’ is ~~incentivised;~~ enshrined, while also stressing that climate change requires primarily a preventive policy in line with the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal;

Amendment 13 #

Georgios KYRTSOS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Emphasises the curative nature of the EUSF, and therefore the need for effective synergies with other Union policies and programmes, in particular the European Green Deal and those supporting disaster prevention and risk management; calls for a revision of the EUSF to ensure that ‘build back better’ is incentivised, declaring that no funds will be assigned to repairing damage without a study on the viability of the projects;

Amendment 14 #

Mauri PEKKARINEN, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Nils TORVALDS, Valérie HAYER, Moritz KÖRNER, Olivier CHASTEL, Vlad GHEORGHE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Emphasises the curative nature of the EUSF, and therefore the need for effective synergies with other Union policies and programmes, in particular with the European Structural and Investment Funds, the European Green Deal and those supporting disaster prevention and risk management; calls for a revision of the EUSF to ensure that ‘build back better’ is incentivised;

Amendment 15 #

Hélène LAPORTE, Joachim KUHS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission to avoid duplication of funds when the regions concerned are already beneficiaries of other EU programmes;

Amendment 16 #

Henrike HAHN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Regrets the lack of visibility of the EUSF, which means the role of the Union is not always clearly demonstrated, especially in all European languages and via accessible channels; regrets that the EUSF Regulation contains neither an obligation to publicise EUSF support nor any reporting requirement on this.; calls on the Commission to present a targeted revision of the EUSF regulation by the end of 2021 including the obligation to make EUSF support visible in any approved cases;

Amendment 17 #

Mauri PEKKARINEN, Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Nils TORVALDS, Valérie HAYER, Moritz KÖRNER, Olivier CHASTEL, Vlad GHEORGHE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Regrets the lack of visibility of the EUSF, which means the role of the Union is not always clearly demonstrated; regrets that the EUSF Regulation contains neither an obligation to publicise EUSF support nor any reporting requirement on this.; highlights that good practices have been identified in affected Member States for communicating about EUSF support, such as the use of flags and EU logos; calls on the Member States to publicise the EUSF financial assistance and to signal the works and services that will be financed by the EUSF;

Amendment 18 #

Georgios KYRTSOS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Regrets the lack of visibility of the EUSF, which means the role of the Union is not always clearly demonstrated; regrets that the EUSF Regulation contains neither an obligation to publicise EUSF support nor any reporting requirement on this., declaring 1% of the total expenditure to be targeted at national media and other outlets to inform EU citizens about EU support;

Amendment 19 #

Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Olivier CHASTEL, Martin HOJSÍK, Vlad GHEORGHE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Recalls the importance of the respect of the rule of law principle and the importance of safeguarding the financial interests of EU and considers therefore that the Commission, the European Anti- Fraud Office (OLAF), the Court of Auditors and, where applicable, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) should be able to use the information and monitoring system within their competences and rights;

Amendment 2 #

Henrike HAHN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Reiterates the importance of the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) in providing financial assistance to Member States and regions, including in the neighbourhood of the EU, hit by natural disasters; welcomes the recent extension of the EUSF’s scope to major public health emergencies; regrets that the extension of the scope has not been matched by an extension of the envelope;

Amendment 20 #

Hélène LAPORTE, Joachim KUHS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls for justification, by means of an audit of the proper use of European funds, of the aid received by beneficiary countries which are at the end of the reconstruction process;

Amendment 3 #

Karlo RESSLER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Reiterates the importance of the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) in providing financial assistance to Member States and regions hit by natural disasters; welcomes the recent extension of the EUSF’s scope to major public health emergencies; strongly supports the recent reform of the advance payment system, which raises the level of advances from 10% to 25% of the expected contribution and from a maximum of EUR 30 million to EUR 100 million;

Amendment 4 #

Hélène LAPORTE, Anna BONFRISCO, Valentino GRANT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Reiterates the importance of the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) in providing financial assistance to Member States and regions hit by natural disasters; welcomes the recent extension of the EUSF’s scope to major public health emergencies, since the occurrence of new pandemics in the medium term cannot be ruled out;

Amendment 5 #

Mauri PEKKARINEN, Nils TORVALDS, Valérie HAYER, Moritz KÖRNER, Olivier CHASTEL, Vlad GHEORGHE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that the number and severity of emergencies is unpredictable; remains concerned about the EUSF’s annual ceiling for the period 2021-2027; regrets that, due to budgetary constraints, countries applying for support as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 will receive under 50 % of the potential aid amountcalls that, for the budgetary period of 2021-2027, the EUSF was merged with the Emergency Aid Reserve in the Solidarity and Emergency Aid Reserve (SEAR), with a maximum annual ceiling of EUR 1,2 billion; notes that, due to budgetary constraints, countries applying for support as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 will receive under 50 % of the potential aid amount; considers it necessary to monitor the management of SEAR in order to see whether the funding amount and allocation key provided have an effect on the effectiveness of the EUSF, in view of the extension of its scope and the scale;

Amendment 6 #

Henrike HAHN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that the number and severity of emergencies is unpredictable; highlights, however, that due to climate change, the number and severity of natural disasters will increase over time and will become costlier; remains concerned about the EUSF’s annual ceiling for the period 2021-2027; regrets that, due to budgetary constraints, countries applying for support as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 will receive under 50 % of the potential aid amount;

Amendment 7 #

Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ, Olivier CHASTEL, Martin HOJSÍK, Vlad GHEORGHE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Regrets the lengthy process for the advance payments and final payments in such difficult circumstances and calls on the Commission to accelerate the process of assessment, ensuring that citizens in need can benefit from the Union's support in a timely manner;

Amendment 8 #

Mauri PEKKARINEN, Nils TORVALDS, Valérie HAYER, Moritz KÖRNER, Olivier CHASTEL, Vlad GHEORGHE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. SNotes that on average, the time taken to deploy the full grant on the ground is about 1 year; stresses the need for rapid mobilisation of the EUSF; recalls that the effects of disasters and emergencies are often difficult to gauge; calls, therefore, for timely and flexible assessment of eligible expenditure, in line with the principles of sound financial management, as well as hands-on support to Member States, in particular for damage estimation; highlights that effective implementation of the EUSF grant is contingent upon effective governance structures and institutional coordination in the affected Member State; calls on the Commission to ensure the dissemination of good practices with regard to governance and the use of institutional coordination structures in disaster situations;

Amendment 9 #

Karlo RESSLER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Emphasises that in cases of severe earthquakes, such as the ones recently witnessed in Croatia, the mitigation of the consequences inherently takes more time than with other natural disasters; stresses that any future revision of the European Solidarity Fund (EUSF) should recognise this substantial difference, specifically in regard to sufficient absorption time beyond the current application deadlines;

source: 693.755

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

2021-06-23Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

committees/0/shadows/1	name CHASTEL Olivier group Renew Europe group abbr Renew
docs	date: 2021-06-23T00:00:00 docs: title: PE693.827 type: Committee draft report body: EP

2021-06-09Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

committees/0/shadows/1

name: CZARNECKI Ryszard

group: European Conservatives and Reformists Group

abbr: ECR

2021-05-10Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

commission

body: EC dg: Regional and Urban Policy commissioner: JOHANSSON Ylva

2021-05-03Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

events/0/body

2021-05-01Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

events/0	date 2020-09-17T00:00:00 type Committee referral announced in Parliament
events/0	date 2020-09-17T00:00:00 type Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body EP

2021-04-13Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

committees/0/shadows/1/group

Old

Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left

New

The Left group in the European Parliament - GUE/NGL

2021-03-03Show (4) Changes | Timetravel

committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT associated False rapporteur name: CREȚU Corina date: 2020-10-28T00:00:00 group: Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D shadows name: FERNANDES José Manuel group: Group of European People's Party abbr: EPP name: OMARJEE Younous group: Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT associated False rapporteur name: CREȚU Corina date: 2020-10-28T00:00:00 group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group shadows name: FERNANDES José Manuel group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group name: OMARJEE Younous group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group
committees/1	type Committee Opinion body EP committee_full Budgets committee BUDG associated False rapporteur name: BIEDROŃ Robert date: 2020-09-30T00:00:00 group: Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/1	type Committee Opinion body EP committee_full Budgets committee BUDG associated False rapporteur name: BIEDROŃ Robert date: 2020-09-30T00:00:00 group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group

2021-02-24Show (4) Changes | Timetravel

committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT associated False rapporteur name: CREȚU Corina date: 2020-10-28T00:00:00 group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group shadows name: FERNANDES José Manuel group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group name: OMARJEE Younous group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group
committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT associated False rapporteur name: CREȚU Corina date: 2020-10-28T00:00:00 group: S&D - Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D shadows name: FERNANDES José Manuel group: EPP - Group of European People's Party abbr: EPP name: OMARJEE Younous group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group
committees/1	type Committee Opinion body EP committee_full Budgets committee BUDG associated False rapporteur name: BIEDROŃ Robert date: 2020-09-30T00:00:00 group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group
committees/1	type Committee Opinion body EP committee_full Budgets committee BUDG associated False rapporteur name: BIEDROŃ Robert date: 2020-09-30T00:00:00 group: S&D - Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D

2021-02-17Show (4) Changes | Timetravel

committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT associated False rapporteur name: CREȚU Corina date: 2020-10-28T00:00:00 group: S&D - Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D shadows name: FERNANDES José Manuel group: EPP - Group of European People's Party abbr: EPP name: OMARJEE Younous group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group
committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT associated False rapporteur name: CREȚU Corina date: 2020-10-28T00:00:00 group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group shadows name: FERNANDES José Manuel group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group name: OMARJEE Younous group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group
committees/1	type Committee Opinion body EP committee_full Budgets committee BUDG associated False rapporteur name: BIEDROŃ Robert date: 2020-09-30T00:00:00 group: S&D - Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/1	type Committee Opinion body EP committee_full Budgets committee BUDG associated False rapporteur name: BIEDROŃ Robert date: 2020-09-30T00:00:00 group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group

2021-02-16Show (4) Changes | Timetravel

committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT associated False rapporteur name: CREȚU Corina date: 2020-10-28T00:00:00 group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group shadows name: FERNANDES José Manuel group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group name: OMARJEE Younous group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group
committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT associated False rapporteur name: CREȚU Corina date: 2020-10-28T00:00:00 group: Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D shadows name: FERNANDES José Manuel group: Group of European People's Party abbr: EPP name: OMARJEE Younous group: Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/1	type Committee Opinion body EP committee_full Budgets committee BUDG associated False rapporteur name: BIEDROŃ Robert date: 2020-09-30T00:00:00 group: ??? abbr: Unknown Group
committees/1	type Committee Opinion body EP committee_full Budgets committee BUDG associated False rapporteur name: BIEDROŃ Robert date: 2020-09-30T00:00:00 group: Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D

2020-12-09Show (3) Changes | Timetravel

committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT associated False rapporteur name: CREȚU Corina date: 2020-10-28T00:00:00 group: Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D shadows name: FERNANDES José Manuel group: Group of European People's Party abbr: EPP name: OMARJEE Younous group: Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT associated False rapporteur name: CREȚU Corina date: 2020-10-28T00:00:00 group: Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D shadows name: OMARJEE Younous group: Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/1/rapporteur/0/mepref	197498

2020-11-01Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT associated False rapporteur name: CREȚU Corina date: 2020-10-28T00:00:00 group: Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D shadows name: OMARJEE Younous group: Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT associated False

2020-10-06Show (1) Changes

committees/1/rapporteur

name: BIEDROŃ Robert date: 2020-09-30T00:00:00 group: Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D

Progress: Awaiting committee decision

Lead committee dossier:

CONT/9/03594

Legal Basis:

Subjects

Links

Events

Activities

History

ParlTrack - 2011-2024