2021/2234(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)

45a. Welcomes the Operation Sentinel organised by Europol in cooperation with EPPO, Eurojust and OLAF, along with 21 Member States; the goal of the operation is to map vulnerabilities inherent to the national allocation systems, detect fraud schemes used to target the fund allocation system and support high-priority investigations concerning high-value targets;

Amendment 102 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46

46. Reiterates the unsatisfactory level of analysis provided in the annexes to the PIF report regarding cases of conflicts of interest stresses that in order to effectively fight corruption and protect the EU’s financial interests, the Commission should adopt a consistent approach to transparency, incompatibilities and conflicts of interest, strengthening internal control mechanisms, illegal lobbying and revolving door situations;

Amendment 103 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46

46. Reiterates the unsatisfactory level of analysis provided in the annexes to the PIF report regarding cases of conflicts of interest; calls for the Commission to engage in such analysis, following the amendment of the Article 61 of the Financial Regulation and the issue on 7 April 2021 to the benefit of the Member States of the ‘Guidance on the avoidance and management of conflicts of interest under the Financial Regulation’;

Amendment 104 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47

47. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission and the Member States.

Amendment 11 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Is of the opinion that the experiences earned during the COVID-19 outbreak require specific consideration in the framework of the post-evaluation of the MFF 2014-2020; asks the Commission to duly integrate in such evaluations the aspects related to risk assessment, risk management and mitigating measures in respect of irregularities and frauds, as components of a comprehensive analysis on effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, relevance and EU added value and as lessons for future design and conduct; is of the opinion that the post-evaluation of the MFF should be concluded latest before the midterm evaluation of the MFF 2021-2027 in order to learn from the past to better prepare for the future vis a vis allow the drawn conclusions/lessons learned to be channelled into the improvement of the MFF 2021-2027; asks the Commission to in the post evaluation of the MFF 2014-2020 examine how this multiannual framework reached its targets, how the spending of the programmes contributed to the goals of the EU and the Member States and how the EU funds were affected by fraud and corruption in this period;

Amendment 12 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that the total number of fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities reported in 2020 amounted to ~~9 726~~11 755 cases overall, and involved a value of approximately EUR 1.3346 billion; notes the new approach of the long-term budget 2021–2027, which focuses on the EU added value;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Takes note ofthat the number of ~~fraudulent irregularities reported in 2020 (989 cas~~irregularities reported as fraudulent varies extremely among Member States; reminding that the these figures measure the results of Member States’ work to counter fraud and other illegal activities) and ~~their related financial value (approximately EUR 361.42 million)~~should not be interpreted as indicating the level of fraud in the Member States territories, expresses some concerns about the different approach used by Member States of criminal law to protect the EU budget; calls on the Commission to address these differences between the Member States and to consider new harmonising measures;

Amendment 14 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Takes note of the number of fraudulent irregularities reported in 2020 (~~989~~1056 cases) and their related financial value (approximately EUR 3~~61.42~~74 million);

Amendment 15 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Takes into consideration the fact that the number of non-fraudulent irregularities registered in 2020 (~~8 737~~10699 cases, of which ~~5 371~~6696 cases related to expenditure) was lower than in the previous years, and that the drop in detection and reporting in certain areas of spending cannot easily be explained and is of concern; notes that the total related financial value of these cases is approximately EUR ~~967.02 m~~1.09 billion;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Takes into consideration the fact that the number of non-fraudulent irregularities registered in 2020 (8 737 cases, of which 5 371 cases related to expenditure) was lower than in the previous years, and that the drop in detection and reporting in certain areas of spending cannot easily be explained and is of concern; notes that the total related financial value of these cases is approximately EUR 967.02 million; underlines that the drop in total number of reported irregularities cannot be considered as a sign of positive or negative development, but should be seen in relation to new emerging challenges, linked to new ways of managing and spending EU funds; takes note that fraud is becoming increasingly appealing for organised crime[1a], which is a significant threat to the Union Financial interests but also for citizens trust in pubic authorities, eroding rule of law and fundamental rights; regrets that many Member states do not have any specific legislation to fight against organised crime including of mafia type; _________________ 1a ‘See ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the EU Strategy to tackle Organised Crime 2021-2025’. COM(2021) 170 final.’

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Observes that in 2020, 451 irregularities were reported as revenue related fraud, 9 % lower than the average number of cases reported each year for 2016-2020; notes, moreover, that the affected amount of TOR estimated and established (EUR 108 million) in 2020 was 6 % greater than the average estimated and established amount for each year in 2016- 2020; notes that most cases reported in 2020 as fraudulent or non-fraudulent affecting EU revenue relate to undervaluation, incorrect classification/mis-description of goods or smuggling; notes, moreover, that inspections by national anti-fraud services were the most successful method of detecting fraud and that they surpassed post-release controls and release controls in detecting fraudulent duty evasion;

Amendment 18 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Notes from the 2021 VAT Gap Report that in 2019 the EU VAT Gap dropped to EUR 134 billion in nominal terms (a decrease of almost EUR 6.6 billion with respect to 2018); notes moreover that the study provides fast estimates for 2020 only for 18 Member States due to significant changes in the tax regimes and structures of the economies following the outbreak of the pandemic which do not allow yet to judge whether the EU-wide VAT Gap will decline or incline in 2020; notes that the econometric analyses confirmed that the VAT Gap is influenced by a group of factors, of which, within the control of tax administrations, the share of IT expenditure and the application of additional information obligations for taxpayers proved to have the highest statistical significance in explaining the size of the VAT Gap;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Calls on Member States to assess the risks and shortcomings of their national customs control strategies with aim to improve flexibility of customs checks, diminish the potential impact of unexpected future events, and ensure the implementation of uniform controls within the EU;

Amendment 2 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Citation 24 a (new)

— having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs on a European Parliament recommendation to the Council and the Vice- President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy concerning corruption and human rights (2021/2066(INI)),

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Takes note of the Advocate General’s opinion of 9 September 2021 concerning the Court of Justice of the European Union’s proceedings against the UK for alleged undervaluation fraud concerning textiles and shoes imported from China via the UK, based on the investigations carried out by OLAF and by the Commission’s own resources management; notes the Court’s judgement of 8 March 2022 declaring that the UK has failed to fulfil its obligations by failing to apply effective customs control measures and make available to the Commission the correct amount of traditional own resources in respect of the concerned imports;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Notes that the Court partly rejected the Commission’s calculation due to a considerable uncertainty regarding the accuracy of the amounts of own resources claimed by the Commission, the Commission has not established the full amounts to the requisite legal standard; notes that the Court approved the method used by the Commission for estimating the amount of TOR losses for part of the infringement period and stated that it is for the Commission to recalculate the losses of EU own resources remaining due; calls on the Commission to explain to the discharge authority what the errors in the calculation consisted of, how it intends to remedy the error in the calculation of the losses to the requisite legal standard and inform the discharge authority about the result of the new calculations;

Amendment 22 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Notes that over the past five years, the annual recovery rate has varied between 52 % and 71 % and that the recovery rate for cases reported in 2020 is currently 71 %; notes, however, that recovery rates vary among the Member States owing to factors such as the type of fraud or irregularity, or the type of debtor involved; notes that China remained also in 2020 the most important country of origin of goods affected by fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities;

Amendment 23 #

Alin MITUȚA, Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17 a. Notes that the PIF report mentions the importance of transparency with regards to the use of the public funds, as it constitutes a deterrent element and involves civil society in improving trust; calls on the Commission to work towards increasing transparency of beneficiaries, including contractors, sub-contractors and beneficial owners of EU funds; calls on Member States to also strengthen transparency in the use of EU funds, particularly for emergency procurement, since 8 Member States reported that they have still not done so;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Notes that, over the period 2016- 2020, the detection of fraud in the context of the common agricultural policy (CAP) was concentrated in a small number of Member States and that this was not substantiated by a similar level of payments to those Member States from the CAP budget; notes moreover that, the majority of fraudulent irregularities concerning support to agriculture involved the use of false documents or false requests for aid, and that their number remained largely stable; observes furthermore that, as a proportion of the payments received by the Member States, the rural development part of the budget was more affected by fraud than support for agriculture, with the exception of market measures, for which incidences of fraud were higher than for rural development; notes that in relation to rural development, the falsification of documents was the main fraudulent practice; Underlines that more investigations need to be carried out and further appropriate measures to be put in place against the use of EU funds in agriculture-related activities by companies that do not respect employment laws or fundamental rights of workers, as attested by the situation of workers in agriculture especially during the COVID19 pandemic;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Notes that, over the period 2016- 2020, the detection of fraud in the context of the common agricultural policy (CAP) was concentrated in a small number of Member States and that this was not substantiated by a similar level of payments to those Member States from the CAP budget; is concerned by the fact that the reporting of fraud related to rural development for 2014-2020 had a slow start, which might indicate insufficient detection efforts in EU Member States; notes moreover that, the majority of fraudulent irregularities concerning support to agriculture involved the use of false documents or false requests for aid, and that their number remained largely stable; observes furthermore that, as a proportion of the payments received by the Member States, the rural development part of the budget was more affected by fraud than support for agriculture, with the exception of market measures, for which incidences of fraud were higher than for rural development; notes that in relation to rural development, the falsification of documents was the main fraudulent practice;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Notes that, over the period 2016- 2020, the detection of fraud in the context of the common agricultural policy (CAP) was concentrated in a small number of Member States and that this was not substantiated by a similar level of payments to those Member States from the CAP budget; notes moreover that, the majority of fraudulent irregularities concerning support to agriculture involved the use of false documents or false requests for aid, and that their number remained largely stable; observes furthermore that, as a proportion of the payments received by the Member States, the rural development part of the budget was more affected by fraud than support for agriculture, with the exception of market measures, for which incidences of fraud were higher than for rural development; notes that in relation to rural development, the falsification of documents was the main fraudulent practice; expresses concerns that the slow start in reporting fraudulent irregularities related to rural development for 2014-2020 may indicates insufficient detection efforts in Member States;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Notes that between 2016 and 2020, the number of irregularities reported related to the Cohesion Fund, the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Fisheries Funds for the 2014-2020 programming period increased; stresses, however, that for all funds, and in particular the European Regional Development Fund, as regards non- fraudulent irregularities, this increase was limited, highlighting an exceptional fall in the number of detected irregularities (and related financial amounts) in comparison to the previous programming period; takes note that COVID 19 may bring new opportunities to fraudsters, with risks related to managing the emergency - requiring simplified procedures, which may be abused; the pressure on the authorities managing the EU Funds, with delays and new stress factors that could benefit fraudsters, via among others inflated costs; emphasis that all these new risks posed by COVID-19 outbreak require adaptation of the control strategies and more focus on prevention through specific mitigating measures and targeted actions to detect future irregularities and fraud;

Amendment 28 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Notes that between 2016 and 2020, the number of irregularities reported related to the Cohesion Fund, the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Fisheries Funds for the 2014-2020 programming period increased; stresses, however, that for all funds, and in particular the European Regional Development Fund, as regards non- fraudulent irregularities, this increase was limited, highlighting an exceptional fall in the number of detected irregularities (and related financial amounts) in comparison to the previous programming period; notes moreover, that in relation to the 2007- 2013 programming period the number of fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities decreased for the Cohesion Fund, the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Fisheries Funds, in line with the implementation cycle; notes that a number of implementation rules changed between the two programming periods;

Amendment 29 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19 a. Is of the opinion that companies and organisations which involve offshore companies and organisations into their ownership structures should be excluded from the use of EU funds;

Amendment 3 #

Joachim KUHS, Jean-François JALKH, Matteo ADINOLFI

Motion for a resolution
Citation 29 a (new)

— having regard to the Opinion No 1/2021 of January 2021by the OLAF Supervisory Committee on OLAF’s recommendations not followed by the relevant authorities,

Amendment 30 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3 a (new)

External dimension of Protection of the EU’s financial interests

Amendment 31 #

Petri SARVAMAA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Notes that Until the end of 2020, EU spending on development cooperation was spread over several funds and that with the new, the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI), all the earlier funding options are consolidated in one instrument and part of the annual budget and the MFF period 2021- 2027;Points out that the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument have overall allocation of 79.5 billion euros for the period 2021-2027; Is of the opinion that EU institutions and bodies should put more emphasis on the funds spent in non-EU countries in order to verify that those funds are spent in accordance with the rules and without the involvement of fraud or corruption, and to confirm whether they contribute to the goals of the Union’s development and external policy; Reminds for example that according to European Court of Auditors special report, EU’s 700 million financial support for the rule of law in Western Balkans between 2014 and 2020 has had little impact on fundamental reforms;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Is of the opinion that EU institutions and bodies should put more emphasis on the funds spent in non-EU countries in order to verify that those funds are spent in accordance with the rules and without the involvement of fraud or corruption, and to confirm whether they contribute to the goals of the Union’s development and external policy; reminds that the budgetary support to other countries is financed from the general EU budget and the ECA audit cannot trace what happens beyond the moment the Commission pays aid to the recipient country, since these funds then merge with that country’s own budget resources;

Amendment 33 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Is of the opinion that EU institutions and bodies should put more emphasis on the funds spent in non-EU countries in order to verify that those funds are spent in accordance with the rules and without the involvement of fraud or corruption, and to confirm whether they contribute to the goals of the Union’s development and external policy; recommends the suspension of budget support in third countries where corruption is widespread and where authorities manifestly fail to take genuine action, while ensuring that the assistance reaches the civil population through other channels;

Amendment 34 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20 a. Recommends the mainstreaming of an anti-corruption approach into EU external action instruments, including in the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI), the Instrument for Pre- Accession Assistance (IPA) and EU trust funds; calls for stronger priority for the fight against corruption in pre-accession negotiations and criteria with a strong conditionality framework and a focus on capacity building, such as specialised anti-corruption bodies;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Points out that complete transparency in accounting for expenditure is essential, particularly with regard to infrastructure works financed directly through EU funds or financial instruments; calls on the Commission to provide for EU citizens to have full access to information on co-financed projects;

Amendment 36 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)

20 b. Calls for an inclusion in all EU- third country trade and investment agreements a strong and mandatory conditionality framework with transparency provisions and binding and enforceable anti-corruption clauses; recommends that as a last resort, the EU should impose sanctions or suspend agreements in the event of serious acts of corruption;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)

20b. Stresses the need for complete transparency in accounting for the transfers and loans provided for under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and calls on the Commission to provide for the European Parliament to have full access to information;

Amendment 38 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)

20 c. Calls for a monitoring of corruption risks involved in authoritarian third countries’ large-scale construction and investment projects undertaken in Member States, with particular attention to transparency in these projects, which often raises concerns about non- transparent financing or fiscal risks;

Amendment 39 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for a greater degree of digitalisation, interoperability of data systems and harmonisation of reporting, monitoring and auditing in the EU; calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of using AI in the service of the protection of the EU’s financial interests; Is of the opinion that all EU bodies working in the field of Protection of the EU’s financial interest including Eurojust and Europol should have access to data systems such as ARACHNE and EDES;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas according to Article 83 of the TFEU, corruption is one of the particularly serious crimes with a cross- border dimension whose consequences affect not only the EU economy, but also undermine democracy and rule of law standards across Europe and citizens’ trust in the institutions;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for a greater degree of digitalisation, interoperability of comparable data systems and harmonisation of reporting, monitoring and auditing in the EU; calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of using AI in the service of the protection of the EU’s financial interests and to this end, reiterates its call on the Commission to harmonise definitions in order to obtain comparable data across the EU;

Amendment 41 #

Petri SARVAMAA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. C~~alls on the Member States to~~onsiders that the use ~~the~~of ARACHNE risk scoring tool in the MFF 2021-2027 and the NextGenerationEU recovery plan, especially with regard to the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF)~~; believe~~ should be regulated mandatory as soon as possible; suggests that ARACHNE should be indicated as a one of the main tools endowing the national anti- fraud strategies (NAFS) that the Member States are expected to adopt in order to improve the integration of anti-fraud architecture;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls on the Member States to use the ARACHNE risk scoring tool in the MFF 2021-2027 and the NextGenerationEU recovery plan, especially with regard to the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF); believes that ARACHNE should be indicated as a one of the main tools endowing the national anti- fraud strategies (NAFS) that the Member States are expected to adopt in order to improve the integration of anti-fraud architecture; reiterates once more its urgent call on the Commission to establish an EU-wide mandatory integrated, interoperable system building on but not limited to existing tools, such as ARACHNE and EDES; recalls that this system must contain information on all EU co-financed projects, beneficiaries and beneficial owners, and allow to aggregate all individual amounts concerning the same beneficiary or beneficial owner;

Amendment 43 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls on the Member States to use the ARACHNE risk scoring tool in the MFF 2021-2027 and the NextGenerationEU recovery plan, especially with regard to the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF); believes that ARACHNE should be indicated as a one of the main tools endowing the national anti- fraud strategies (NAFS) that the Member States are expected to adopt in order to improve the integration of anti-fraud architecture; Calls on the Commission to assess, and to report to the Parliament, the reasons preventing the Member states from fully adopting and using ARACHNE; Calls on the Commission to make the use of ARACHNE compulsory for the MFF and the RRF as well;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. CReiterates its calls on the Member States to use the ARACHNE risk scoring tool in the MFF 2021-2027 and the NextGenerationEU recovery plan, especially with regard to the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF); believes that ARACHNE should be indicated as a one of the main tools endowing the national anti- fraud strategies (NAFS) that the Member States are expected to adopt in order to improve the integration of anti-fraud architecture; calls on the Commission to provide full direct access to ARACHNE for OLAF, EPPO and ECA;

Amendment 45 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Urges the Commission to extend the scope of the Early Detection and Exclusion System (EDES) to include the funds under shared management in the context of the revision of the Financial Regulation; recalls the observations of Parliament outlined in its resolution of 24 November 2021 on the revision of the Financial Regulation as regards the use of digital tools and the data on the final beneficiaries of EU funds;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23 a. Calls on the Commission to continue providing the Member States with full information on Direct Expenditures, for example by means of the Financial Transparency System (FTS), in particular in the frame of RRF, also in order to avoid double founding;

Amendment 47 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Notes that by June 2021, two thirds of the actions of the Commission’s 2019 anti-fraud strategy had been implemented, while implementation of the remaining third was ongoing; calls on the Commission to report on the implementation of the remaining actions; notes, moreover, that good progress was made on a number of actions aimed at increasing coordination and cooperation between Commission departments and equipping the Commission with a more effective system of anti-fraud oversight; notes that the monitoring of the follow up to OLAF recommendations was made more efficient in 2020, taking stock of about 1 400 financial recommendations issued between January 2012 and June 2019;

Amendment 48 #

Jean-François JALKH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Regrets that little support has been given to Member States in the first years of implementation of the CAFS, as has also been pointed out by some delegations during debates in the Council; reiterates that comprehensive and comparable data on the scale, nature and causes of fraud is essential to make even more meaningful the investigative actions by OLAF and, since it has taken up operational activities, the EPPO; reminds that Member States have a frontline responsibility for managing about 80% of the expenditure budget and for collecting almost all the revenue; highlights the important role Members States therefore play in protecting the EU financial interests, with the key role played by the national anti- fraud strategies (NAFSs), whose establishment should be a priorty in all Member States;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas corruption not only seriously harms the Union’s financial interests but pose also a threat to democracy, fundamental rights and rule of law across Europe, with a serious detrimental impact on the trust of citizens;

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)

26a. Calls on the Commission to provide for proper legal protection for investigative journalists along the lines of that provided for whistleblowers;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)

26b. Considers it advisable, with a view to both improving data collection and making controls more effective, for Member States to cooperate more closely with regard to exchanges of information;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)

26c. Emphasises that a system enabling the authorities to exchange information would facilitate the cross-checking of accounting records for transactions between two or more Member States in order to prevent cross-border fraud in respect of the structural and investment funds, thus ensuring a cross-cutting and comprehensive approach to the protection of Member States’ financial interests;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 d (new)

26d. Points out that many Member States do not have specific laws against organised crime, while organised crime's involvement in cross-border activities and sectors affecting the EU’s financial interests is constantly growing;

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. ~~Notes~~Is concerned that by the end of 2020, only 14 Member States reported having adopted a NAFS, up from 10 in 2019; notes, however, that these strategies vary in scope and depth and that some need to be updated; is further concerned that 8 Member States have no yet started working on setting up their NAFS; calls for more Member States to adopt a NAFS and to report it to the Commission;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Notes with concerns that by the end of 2020, only 14 Member States reported having adopted a NAFS, which is anyhow up from 10 in 2019, with 5 others considering adopting or preparing a NAFS; notes, however, that these strategies vary in scope and depth and that some need to be updated; ~~calls for more Member States to adopt a NAFS and to report it to the Commission~~express concerns that some big countries in the EU do not have any NAFS at all, including Germany and Spain; calls for more Member States to adopt a NAFS and to report it to the Commission; stresses the importance of better coordinated, holistic anti-fraud efforts in Member States with NAFS to be updated to face the new risks posed by the COVID-19 and the new ways of managing funds; calls on the Commission to assess the NAFSs that have been adopted, to examine why Member States are lagging behind in adopting them, and to push the remaining Member States to progress with adoption; reminds that AFCOS should facilitates effective cooperation and exchange of information with OLAF , but regrets that only in some Member States they effectively coordinate the fight against fraud affecting the EU financial interests;

Amendment 56 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Notes that by the end of 2020, 14 Member States reported having adopted a NAFS, up from 10 in 2019; notes, however, that these strategies vary in scope and depth and that some need to be updated; calls for more Member States to adopt a NAFS and to report it to the Commission; calls on the Commission to provide tangible support and advice to the Member States, by way of guidelines on drafting NAFS, advisory services on the setting and functioning of AFCOS, and reiterates its call for analyses of the adopted NAFS and on the reasons why in some Member States a NAFS is not adopted;

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)

28 a. Commends OLAF on its invaluable contribution to the protection of the EU's financial interests; emphasises the importance of OLAF adhering to the hightest standards in its investigations and fully complies with all requirements of the rule of law; welcomes that Art 9a of the revised OLAF regulation foresees a controller of procedural guarantees, who is in charge of monitoring OLAF’s compliance with procedural guarantees and handling complaints by persons concerned; notes that the controller of procedural guarantees has not yet been appointed; is very concerned by complaints from persons concerned by OLAF investigations regarding violations of their rights that compromised their ability to defend themselves against the allegations made against them;

Amendment 58 #

Jean-François JALKH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Is concerned about the decrease of the indictment rate from 53 % in the 2007- 2014 period to 37 % in the 2016-2020 period in the cases put forward to the Member States by OLAF; calls on the Member States’ authorities to cooperate closely with OLAF and examine the transmitted investigation reports and the judicial recommendations carefully, and to open criminal cases wherever they are necessary to ensure that misused EU funds are recovered; invites OLAF to investigate the reasons for the low indictment rate; calls on OLAF to regularly follow up on its judicial recommendations and add data about them into its annual report;

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Is concerned about the decrease of the indictment rate from 53 % in the 2007- 2014 period to 37 % in the 2016-2020 period in the cases put forward to the Member States by OLAF; calls on the Member States’ authorities to cooperate closely with OLAF and examine the transmitted investigation reports and the judicial recommendations carefully, and to open criminal cases wherever they are necessary to ensure that misused EU funds are recovered; invites OLAF to ~~investigate the reasons for the low indictment rate~~follow the recommendations of the Supervisory Committee in its Opinion No 1/2021, such as the review the current system of monitoring procedures and the more timely cooperation with national judicial authorities; calls on OLAF to regularly follow up on its judicial recommendations and add data about them into its annual report;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the 32nd annual report on the protection of the European Union’s financial interests and the fight against fraud 2020 (PIF report) and welcomes the new graphic version adopted, which is certainly more accessible to European citizens;

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Is concerned about the decrease of the indictment rate from 53 % in the 2007- 2014 period to 37 % in the 2016-2020 period in the cases put forward to the Member States by OLAF; calls on the Member States’ authorities to cooperate closely with OLAF and examine the transmitted investigation reports and the judicial recommendations carefully, and to open criminal cases wherever they are necessary to ensure that misused EU funds are recovered; invites OLAF to ~~investigate~~review its previous analysis on the reasons for the low indictment rate; calls on OLAF to regularly follow up on its judicial recommendations and add data about them into its annual report;

Amendment 61 #

Petri SARVAMAA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Is of the opinion that OLAF should also follow up on its financial recommendations in order to compare them with the amounts recovered at the end of the procedures by the Commission; in this regard, commends the invaluable work carried out by OLAF in combating fraud, money laundering and tax evasion, but stresses that OLAF is chronically understaffed and lacking financial resources;

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30 a. Notes that the Hercules programme III was deployed by OLAF to strengthen the operational capacity of national and regional anti-fraud authorities in the domain of training activities and IT support until 2020;notes that the assessment of Hercules III was finalised at the end of 2021 and concluded that the programme was highly relevant and effective in protecting the EU’s financial interests, as it successfully met its general, specific and operational objectives; notes that Hercules III has been replaced by the Union Anti-Fraud Programme for the duration of the multiannual financial framework 2021- 2027;

Amendment 64 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30 a. Recognises the principle of confidentiality of OLAF investigations; is of the opinion however that there is an overarching public interest and the EU citizens also have the right to access to those reports and recommendations in which OLAF investigations, and all national follow up procedures are closed as recognised by the CJEU in Case T- 517/19; therefore asks OLAF to set up a mechanism to publish those reports and recommendations for which there is no more legitimate reason to maintain the principle of confidentiality;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30a. Points out that, to prevent problems relating to overlapping and delays in proceedings, the cooperation agreements between OLAF and the EPPO should provide for a clear separation of powers;

Amendment 66 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Takes note of the working arrangement signed on 3 September 2021 for a framework cooperative relationship between both the EPPO the ECA; notes, moreover, the administrative arrangements signed in 2019 between the OLAF and the European Court of Auditors;

Amendment 67 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

32. Welcomes the fact that the EPPO became operational on 1 June 2021; ~~expect~~welcomes its first annual report ~~very soon; deeply regrets that there are still five Member States not participating in the EPPO; calls on these Member States to join the EPPO as soon as possible~~; welcomes that EPPO opened 576 investigations and that EPPO requested that €154.3 million be seized, of which the seizure of €147 million was granted; is concerned about the estimation of the EPPO on the total damages of EUR 5.4 billion caused by fraud and corruption; deeply regrets that there are still five Member States amongst them Poland and Hungary as biggest beneficiaries of the EU funds are not participating in the EPPO; calls on these Member States to join the EPPO as soon as possible; urges furthermore the non- participating Member States to sign cooperation agreements with EPPO; is of the opinion that the failure of Member States to cooperate with the EPPO has a direct effect on the protection of the EU’s financial interest; calls on the Commission to incentivise participation in EPPO with positive measures;

Amendment 68 #

Matteo ADINOLFI, Joachim KUHS, Jean-François JALKH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Welcomes the fact that the EPPO became operational on 1 June 2021; expects its first annual report very soon; deeply regrets that there are still five Member States not participating in the EPPO, including Poland, Hungary, Sweden, Denmark and Ireland; calls on these Member States to join the EPPO as soon as possible; is concerned that Poland refuses any kind of cooperation with the EPPO, while, from the non-participating countries, it counts the highest number of investigations involving its citizens;

Amendment 69 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Welcomes the joint efforts of OLAF and Europol to assess the threats and vulnerabilities of the RRF instrument; welcomes 'Operation Sentinel' launched by Europol which intends to focus on proactive intelligence sharing, information exchange and supporting the coordination of operations to tackle fraud against COVID-19 EU recovery funds; welcomes the involvement of EPPO and OLAF and 19 EU Member States; is concerned about the fact those Member States which are major beneficiary of the Cohesion Funds, amongst others Poland, Hungary or Bulgaria do not participate in the operation; calls on all Member States to join to the operation; furthermore calls on the Member States to cooperate closely with one another and the EU bodies to allow action to be taken against fraud involving several countries;

Amendment 7 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Reminds that 2020 is the final year of the Multiannual Framework (MFF) for 2014-2020 despite the fact that programmes need to be finished only in 2023 and at the same time the year of the adoption of the MFF 2021-2027, the NextGenEU and the Rule of Law conditionality mechanism;

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Welcomes the joint efforts of OLAF and Europol to assess the threats and vulnerabilities of the RRF instrument, and requires great vigilance in identifying and combating fraud related to the Recovery and Resilience Facility;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Welcomes the joint efforts of OLAF and Europol to assess the threats and vulnerabilities of the RRF instrument; welcomes the working arrangement between OLAF and Europol, which entered into force on 9 October 2020;

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Highlights the role of the EPPO in the new anti-fraud infrastructure; notes, moreover, the working arrangements agreed in 2020 and signed in July 2021 between the EPPO and OLAF, especially as regards the exchange of information, case management and operational cooperation; welcomes the agreement between Europol and the EPPO which entered into force on 19 January 2022 and the agreement between Europol and OLAF which entered into force on 9 October 2020;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Highlights the role of the EPPO in the new anti-fraud infrastructure; notes, moreover, the working arrangements agreed in 2020 and signed in July 2021 between the EPPO and OLAF, especially as regards the exchange of information, case management and operational cooperation; welcomes the working arrangement between EPPO and Europol, which entered into force on 19 January2021;

Amendment 74 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Notes that in July 2020 the Council appointed the 22 European prosecutors; recalls that the EPPO is to work hand in hand with national law enforcement authorities and that it exercises the function of prosecutor in the competent courts of the participating Member States while at the same time closely cooperating with EU agencies and bodies such as Eurojust, Europol and OLAF; notes that this peculiar position is designed to allow EPPO drawing upon the existing experience and best practices at national and EU level; expects the Commission to duly consider EPPO reassessment of its staff needs based on its workload experience and to implement the needed financial adjustments to guarantee EPPO operational effectiveness and efficiency;

Amendment 75 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Calls on OLAF, the EPPO, ~~AFCOS, and~~ the responsible EU agencies, and - where empowered by national legislation - the AFCOS to keep strengthening the exchange of information, to reciprocate support and ensure complementarity in their operational activities as agreed in the established working arrangements and regulations;

Amendment 76 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Calls on OLAF, the EPPO, AFCOS, and the responsible EU agencies to keep strengthening the exchange of information, to reciprocate support and ensure complementarity in their operational activities as agreed in the established working arrangements and regulations; highlights that the complex anti-fraud architecture in place requires close cooperation between the various players, at EU and national level; underlines that more efforts are needed to prevent and fight fraud, corruption and other illegal activities, including a closer cooperation with national authorities, between Member States and within the EU level;

Amendment 77 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Calls on OLAF, the EPPO, AFCOS, and the responsible EU agencies, along with Europol, to keep strengthening the exchange of information, to reciprocate support and ensure complementarity in their operational activities as agreed in the established working arrangements and regulations;

Amendment 78 #

Joachim KUHS, Jean-François JALKH, Matteo ADINOLFI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)

37 a. Notes observations and considerations expressed by the European Chief Prosecutor on the need to amend the EPPO Regulation1a; calls on the Commission to engage in a discussion with the EPPO to identify the needed improvements to enhance its operational effectiveness; asks the Commission to report to the Parliament in line with Article 119.2 of such regulation; _________________ 1a Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017

Amendment 79 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. ~~Welcom~~Notes the adoption of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget; reiterates that it entered into force on 1 January 2021 and that it has therefore been applicable since then;

Amendment 8 #

Jean-François JALKH, Joachim KUHS, Matteo ADINOLFI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Takes note of the fact that all 26 2. Member States bound by the PIF Directive have notified full transposition of its main provisions into national law; notes, however, that the Commission report on the implementation of Directive (EU) 2017/1371 highlights outstanding conformity issues to be addressed~~, including some to enable effective investigations and prosecutions by the EPPO~~; calls on the Commission to monitor the situation and encourage Member States to resolve these issues, and to report to the discharge authority in that regard;

Amendment 80 #

Joachim KUHS, Jean-François JALKH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. Welcomes the adoption of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget; notes the ruling of the European Court of Justice of 16 February 2022 dismissing he actions by Hungary and Poland against the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation, as well as the Court’s conclusions that the regulation is perfectly in line with EU law; reiterates that it entered into force on 1 January 2021 and that it has therefore been applicable since then;

Amendment 81 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 a (new)

38 a. Welcomes the judgements of the CJEU of 16 February 2022 and its conclusions confirming that the EU indeed has competences regarding the Rule of Law in the Member States that the Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism is in line with EU law;

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Is of the opinion that it is high time for the Commission to fulfil its duties as ‘guardian of the Treaties’ and to tackle the ongoing violations of the principles of the rule of law in several Member States, which represent a serious danger to the Union’s financial interests; calls on the Commission, therefore, to take urgent action and apply the Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism immediately by sending a written notification under Article 6(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092;deleted

Amendment 83 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Is of the opinion that it is high time for the Commission to fulfil its duties as ‘gGuardian of the Treaties’ and to tackle the ongoing violations of the principles of the rule of law in several Member States, which represent a serious danger to the Union’s financial interests; ~~calls on the Commission, therefore, to take urgent action and~~welcomes the announcement of the Commission to apply the Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism ~~immediately~~ by sending a written notification under Article 6(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 to Hungary; is of the opinion that the rule of law is a universal concept and the Commission should consider the application of the Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism against all Member States which fail to respect the rule of law without discrimination; warns that the delay might already have detrimental impact on the financial interest of the EU and the state of the rule of law in certain Member States;

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Is of the opinion that it is high time for the Commission to fulfil its duties as ‘guardian of the Treaties’ and to tackle the ongoing violations of the principles of the rule of law in several Member States, which represent a serious danger to the Union’s financial interests since compliance with it is a prerequisite for sound financial management and the efficient and effective management of EU funds; calls on the Commission, therefore, to take urgent action and apply the Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism immediately by sending a written notification under Article 6(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092;

Amendment 85 #

Jean-François JALKH, Joachim KUHS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Is of the opinion that it is high time for the Commission to fulfil its duties as ‘guardian of the Treaties’ and to tackle the ongoing violations of the principles of the rule of law in several Member States like Poland and Hungary, which represent a serious danger to the Union’s financial interests; calls on the Commission, therefore, to take urgent action and apply the Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism immediately by sending a written notification under Article 6(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092;

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40

Amendment 87 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40

40. Recognises the importance of the annual rule of law report and the fact that the fight against corruption is an integral part of the report; is of the opinion, however, that it cannot substitute the anti- corruption report; welcomes the Commission’s intention to equip the rule of law report with specific recommendations to the Member States; is of the opinion that the Commission should consider the establishment of a “Corruption Index” based on a strict and easy to apply criteria should reflect upon the opinion about the performance of the Member states in fighting corruption and add it to the anti- corruption chapter of the Rule of Law report;

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 a (new)

41 a. Highlights that in order to combat corruption effectively and protect the EU’s financial interests, the Commission should adopt a holistic, coherent and systematic approach by developing better rules on transparency, incompatibilities and conflicts of interest, internal control mechanisms, illegitimate lobbying and revolving doors scenarios, which can be detrimental to relations between the institutions and interest representatives;

Amendment 89 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 a (new)

41a. Stresses the need to make the disbursement of direct and indirect loans conditional on the publication of country- by-country tax and accountancy data, and on the disclosure of information on beneficial ownership by the beneficiaries and financial intermediaries involved in financing operations;

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that the PIF report highlights the risks related to the COVID-19 pandemic both in terms of revenue and expenditure; ~~notes~~is concerned in particular that customs fraud appears to have affected EU Member States to differing degrees; notes, moreover, that the use of simplified procedures and the lower quality of tender specifications in the emergency pose high risks to competitive public procurement, in particular by increasing the risk of conflicts of interest and corruption, and by inflating costs or reducing the quality of implementation; calls on all Members States to keep a high level of checks and monitoring on emergency spending, in case of urgent procedures done as an ex- post control, use emergency procurement on the basis of a case-by-case assessment and finally complete the transition to e- procurement processes;

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 a (new)

41 a. Highlights the detrimental effects of corruption on the rights of the citizens; reiterates therefore its recommendation that the EU should become a member of the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), bearing in mind the specific nature of the EU, of its institutions and of UE law;

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 b (new)

41 b. Regrets the lack of follow up by the Commission on the request to establish an internal corruption evaluation mechanism for the EU institutions; calls on the Commission to present a plan on the setting up of this mechanism with all possible implications;

Amendment 92 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 b (new)

41b. Takes the view that funds should be repaid whenever cases of corruption or fraud have been proven;

Amendment 93 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 c (new)

41 c. 41c. reminds its recommendation for the EU to become full Member to the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO); calls on the Commission to present a possible plan for the Membership, within the framework of the Article 83 of the TFEU in conjunction with the Article 218 of the TFEU;

Amendment 94 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Considers that the financing of the EU has entered a new era with the adoption of the NextGenerationEU recovery plan and that this provides the EU’s anti-fraud architecture with additional challenges; is therefore strongly of the opinion that the anti-fraud architecture needs to be further strengthened; stresses that OLAF, the EPPO~~, Europol and Eurojust~~ are understaffed and lacking in financial resources; reminds the Commission and the Council that every euro spent on monitoring and investigation returns to the EU budget;

Amendment 95 #

Jean-François JALKH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Considers that the financing of the EU has entered a new era with the adoption of the NextGenerationEU recovery plan and that this provides the EU’s anti-fraud architecture with additional challenges; is therefore strongly of the opinion that the anti-fraud architecture needs to be further strengthened; stresses that ~~OLAF, the EPPO,~~ Europol and Eurojust are understaffed and lacking in financial resources; reminds the Commission and the Council that every euro spent on monitoring and investigation returns to the EU budget;

Amendment 96 #

Katalin CSEH, Olivier CHASTEL, Ramona STRUGARIU, Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Considers that the financing of the EU has entered a new era with the adoption of the NextGenerationEU recovery plan and that this provides the EU’s anti-fraud architecture with additional challenges; is therefore strongly of the opinion that the anti-fraud architecture needs to be further strengthened; stresses that OLAF, the EPPO, Europol and Eurojust are understaffed and lacking in financial resources especially in light of the new mandates adopted to Eurojust and Europol; reminds the Commission and the Council that every euro spent on monitoring and investigation returns to the EU budget;

Amendment 97 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 a (new)

42 a. Welcomes the NextGeneration EU – Law Enforcement Forum (NGEU- LEF), a joint initiative co-led by Europol and Italy, which brings together the EU Member States, Europol, EPPO, OLAF, Eurojust and CEPOL to establish a joint way forward in preventing and countering any threat against the NGEU funds and, more broadly, against the financial well- being of the Union;

Amendment 98 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43

43. Endorses the call of the Commission for ‘European vision’ in cooperation between and the coordination of the actions of EU bodies and national authorities; believes that a more structured holistic approach is needed in order to avoid overlapping, to share and exchange information and to foster the integration of the several existing layers of the anti-fraud architecture and achieve a result that is bigger than the sum of its components; underlines that improved transparency for beneficiaries of EU and national funding will also be important to cope with the new challenging international context;

Amendment 99 #