2021/2251(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Strongly advises that the RRF funding should be distributed by also and equally promoting social cohesion and therefore, social inclusion, cultural diversity and solidarity, ensuring diversity and equality, including gender equality, LGBTIQ+ people,youth, the elderly, supporting firstly and utmost the most vulnerable and in need, leaving no one behind;

Amendment 100 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)

6 d. Highlights that given the closure of sports-halls and events the audiences turned to the online portals of sports information that had to quickly react and invest without enough time to optimize their financial resourcing in order to upgrade their services in terms of content and equipment including software and hardware; notes that having done such investments, the cancellations and the postponements of all sports events due to COVID-19 brought further financial burden to sports websites; calls therefore the Commission and the Member-States to foresee funds of their RRF national plans in order to support, all sports-related websites with a special focus to small and medium-size sports news organizations, strengthening thus diversity and independence of sports journalism;

Amendment 101 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 e (new)

6 e. Calls on member states to target RRF funds in their national plans to support innovative and emerging CCS, education, youth, media and sports sectors; suggests that such initiative may support innovative education applications or the gaming and e-sports sectors;

Amendment 102 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 f (new)

6 f. Notes that especially touring cultural productions were particularly hit by the consequences and the unpredictable nature of the restrictions for the pandemic; calls therefore member states and the Commission to consider with special attention dedicating RRF funds to support mobility of cultural productions, as well as compensation schemes for all cultural productions financially damaged because of COVID- 19 consequences in the future and retrospectively;

Amendment 103 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 g (new)

6 g. Calls on the Commission and Member States to broaden employment opportunities for artists and arts experts by mainstreaming the teaching of arts in the curricula of schooling education, which would further contribute in development of fantasy,innovation and creativity for the citizens of tomorrow, while cultivating audiences to appreciate culture and strengthening social cohesion;

Amendment 104 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 h (new)

6 h. Regrets that the CCS and especially performing arts have been stigmatized as COVID-19spreading points; suggests therefore the Commission and member states to target resilience and recovery also by including communication and public awareness campaigns and tools to de-stigmatize the CCS from the blame and fear of being COVID-19 triggers and spread the message to the audiences that the CCS equally ensure the thorough implementation of the perspective hygiene protocols and thus are as safe as all sectors of the economy;

Amendment 105 #

6 i. Regrets that due the COVID-19 heritage sectors suffered loss of revenue and quality jobs, eventually resulting to losses on maintenance and preservation works; calls therefore on member states and the Commission to target RRF funds particularly to safeguarding heritage; notes in this context the continuously increasing needs for heritage support funds against the damages that environmental degradation and climate change causes to heritage monuments;

Amendment 106 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 j (new)

6 j. Regrets that due the COVID-19 heritage sectors suffered loss of revenue and jobs, less safety measures[1],higher numbers in thefts[2][3],as well as illegal excavations and marketing of heritage goods[4];calls therefore on member states and the Commission to target RRF funds particularly to safeguarding heritage against theft and illegal market circulation of heritage artifacts; [1] https://icom.museum/en/covid- 19/resources/ensuring-cultural-heritage- security-during-lockdown-a-challenge- for-museum-professionals-and-police- services/ [2] https://www.museumsassociation.org/mus eums-journal/opinion/2021/11/has-the- pandemic-left-collections-more- vulnerable-to-theft/# [3] https://www.euronews.com/2020/03/30/va n-gogh-painting-stolen-during-dutch- museum-s-covid-19-closure[4] https://www.artnews.com/art- news/news/interpol-art-crime-survey- 2021-illegal-excavations-1234607580/

Amendment 107 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 k (new)

6 k. Regrets that, most artists during the pandemic restrictions mainly depended on their internet-based income for their livelihoods, yet not getting enough income because of the “streaming value gap” and despite the sharp increase of online culture content consumption; calls therefore on member states and the Commission to collaborate with civil society and CCS representatives in order to design specific policies to address the disparity between the value that streaming platforms extract from content and the revenue generated by those who create and invest in creation, which is the “streaming value gap”[1]; [1] https://www.theguardian.com/culture/202 2/feb/08/unesco-warns-of-crisis-in- creative-sector-with-10m-jobs-lost-due-to- pandemic

Amendment 108 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 l (new)

6 l. Is deeply concerned that the COVID-19 restrictions led to the closures of the 90%of museums during lockdowns while nearly 13% face the threat of never re opening again[1];urges member states and the Commission to dedicate RRF funds to support museums and heritage against any permanent closures; [1] https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/05/1064 362

Amendment 109 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Stresses~~Recalls that COVID-19 crisis has made artists and cultural and creative professionals even more vulnerable, as the loss of earnings for non-standard workers, who make up the majority of the CCSI, has been exacerbated by weak or absent national social security schemes and dedicated support measures; Stresses therefore the need for sustainable structural reforms targeting education and the cultural and creative sectors, and in particular regarding social security and legal status in the latter; regrets that such reforms are planned in only a minority of Member States;

Amendment 11 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Calls on the Member States to use the available funding from RRF to bolster both the short-term recovery of the whole cultural ecosystem as well as the resilience, competitiveness, innovation and sustainability of the cultural and creative sectors and industries (CCSI) in the long term;

Amendment 110 #

Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Victor NEGRESCU, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the need for sustainable structural reforms targeting education and the cultural and creative sectors, and in particular regarding social security in the latter; regrets that such reforms are planned in only a minority of Member States; in this regard, welcomes reforms planned by some Members States and encourages all Member States to implement similar reforms to protect workers' rights and broaden the social security for authors, performers, freelancers and all professionals in cultural and creative sectors;

Amendment 111 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the need for sustainable investments and structural reforms targeting education and the cultural and creative sectors, and their workforce and in particular regarding social ~~security~~rights and working conditions for authors, performers, artists, technicians and all CCS professionals in the latter; regrets that such investments and reforms are planned in only a minority of Member States;

Amendment 112 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the need for sustainable structural reforms targeting education and the cultural and creative sectors, and in particular regarding social security in the latter; regrets that such reforms are planned in only a minority of Member States; Highlights the importance of boosting attention to developing and protecting authors' rights in all EU Member States;

Amendment 113 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the need for innovative and sustainable structural reforms targeting ~~education and the cultural and creative sectors, and in particular regarding social security in the latter; regrets that such reforms are planned in only a minority of Member States~~the cultural, creative, education and sports sectors on local, regional and national level, and in particular regarding social security in the latter; underlines the importance of these reforms not only for these sectors but for the entire economy;

Amendment 114 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the need for sustainable structural reforms targeting education and the cultural and creative sectors, and in particular ~~regard~~those targeting social security in the latter; regrets that such reforms are not prioritised and are planned in only a minority of Member States;

Amendment 115 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the need for sustainable structural reforms targeting education and the cultural and creative sectors, ~~and in~~ particular ~~regarding social security in the latter~~; regrets that such reforms are planned in only a minority of Member States;

Amendment 116 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the need for sustainable structural reforms targeting education and the cultural and creative sectors, and in particular regarding social security and financial and business training in the latter; regrets that such reforms are planned in only a ~~few Member States;~~ minority of Member States; Calls on the Commission and the Member States to step up their efforts andto achieve sustainable structural reforms in education and in the cultural and creative sector; notes that a significant number of skilled people are migrating to developed countries inside and outside the European Union and calls on the Commission and the Member States to adopt a strategy to reduce the brain drain and provide more opportunities for personal and professional development within the EU, including in less developed countries;

Amendment 117 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses the need for sustainable structural reforms targeting education and the cultural and creative sectors, ~~and in particular regarding social security in the latter; regrets that such reforms are planned in only a minority of~~reforms which could be initiated at the will of the Member States;

Amendment 118 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Educational reforms must be based on achieving excellence in our students through the reinforcement of STEAM subjects, the study of the humanities, financial education or the improvement in the level of knowledge of other languages; to this end, evaluations of our educational systems and of each of their stages are very necessary, with special attention to primary education in order to detect any needs or weaknesses that may exist and solve them at an early age; all of this, respecting subsidiarity in education , freedom of education and choice by families;

Amendment 119 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Highlights that beyond the RRF support, more measures will be necessary for a sustainable recovery and resilience of the cultural and creative sectors, e.g. structural changes with regard to the social security of authors, performers, artists and other cultural creators, or other barriers that prevent the improvement of their overall situation and working conditions, such as issues related to visa or taxation;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Underlines that Education has been affected severely by the Covid19 pandemic in all its levels; Stresses education’s key role in society and thus urges that more funds from the RRF should be distributed towards it, by having adequate space in classrooms, smaller- sized classes, employing more teachers and education workers, psychological support for students and teachers, while education and technological equipment tools should be provided for free to all students and pupils;

Amendment 120 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to adequately consider the actual needs of the cultural and creative sectors and to take a holistic approach to supporting their recovery and resilience, focussing on the segments impacted the most, including the distribution and exhibition of films to and in cinemas, and the entire live sector with performing arts, live music and theatre;

Amendment 121 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, François-Xavier BELLAMY, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Insists that the Commission calls on Member States to work more closely with key stakeholders, national authorities and agencies and civil societies and to improve their national recovery and resilience plans accordingly to address vital needs of the cultural, creative, education and sports sectors on local, regional and national level;

Amendment 122 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Recalls the importance of mutual recognition and cross-border portability of artistic competences and creative skills and qualifications facilitating cross- border mobility of workers in CCSI; Encourages the Member States to take action in this regard within their NRRPs;

Amendment 123 #

Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Victor NEGRESCU, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Reminds Member States of the possibility to request transfer to the RRF of resources allocated under share management programmes thereby fostering synergies for the benefit of the cultural and creative sectors, media, education, youth, and sport;

Amendment 124 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Digitalization is one of the main pillars of the RRF, which is why the Regulation requires member State to invest at least 20% of the funds in digitization. Education sector must be one of the main pillars of digitization: investment in digitizing educational centers and training in digital skills to education professional, as well as for students. Considers that priority should be given to both primary and secondary education and life long learning for adults, who need these skills, which are required in the labour market; training in excellence ( where the humanities cannot be absent) must also be accompanied by training in skills that will help our young and old to have more opportunities and the better prepared to look for a job.

Amendment 125 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Emphasizes that beyond the RRF, fundamental structural improvements must be taken for a true and long-lasting recovery and resilience of the cultural and creative sectors, in particular concerning the taxation periods for the often varying income of many authors and performers;

Amendment 126 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7 c. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to adequately consider the actual needs of the cultural and creative sectors and to take a holistic approach to supporting their recovery and resilience, focusing on the segments impacted the most, including the distribution and exhibition of films to and in cinemas, and the entire live sector including performing arts, live music, dance and theatre, as well as all live events such as those in the sectors of books, fashion, gastronomy, heritage, festivals ;

Amendment 127 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)

7 d. Calls member states and the Commission to increase investments in research and innovation for the development of new ways of making sports, education, culture and creative sectors and especially performing arts more accessible even under hygiene protocol restrictions and other crises situations that would require social and physical distancing;

Amendment 128 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)

7 e. Emphasizes that beyond the RRF, fundamental structural improvements must be taken for a true and long-lasting recovery and resilience of the cultural and creative sectors, in particular concerning the taxation periods for the often varying income of many authors and performers;

Amendment 129 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 f (new)

7 f. Recalls that the CCS are characterized by seasonality, precarious working conditions and income instability, including the possibility to have higher income for one year but no or least income for the next, as it was the case during theCOVID-19 restrictions; urges therefore member states to consider special taxation schemes for the CCS taking under consideration the income instability between successive years to the best interest of individuals, such as by counter balancing taxation based on the income of not only one but more fiscal years;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Calls for the promotion of cross- border approaches to culture and the search for European partners for the creation of major European cultural co- productions, fostering the mobility of artists and creators by reinforcing cooperation of all involved actors and exchanges of best practices;

Amendment 130 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 g (new)

7 g. Recalls that due to the consequences of the pandemic the EU audiovisual sector suffered almost 70% loss in box office revenues for cinemas and distributors in2020, totalling EUR 4 billion, alongside a reduction of 30% in active productions;updates previous requests by MEPs for member states urging them to target RRF funds in order to boost audiovisual production through investments andconcrete measures such as special tax policies, fiscal and financial incentives, the establishment of EU insurance guarantees for audiovisual co- productions and rules ensuring that catalogues of on-demand services contain a share of European works of at least 30%[1]; [1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/doc ument/TA-9-2021-0428_EN.html

Amendment 131 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 h (new)

7 h. Regrets that despite the crucial situation in audiovisual sector due to the pandemic and although 16 months after the deadline, a number of member states have not transposed the Audiovisual Media Services Directive[1](AVMSD) yet;urges all member states to act as soon as possible, also mobilizing RRF funds if needed, in order to fully and effectively transpose the AVMSD while allowing enough time and transparent procedures for open consultation, so that the civil society and stakeholders may be actively involved; [1] https://digital- strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/audiovisual -media-commission-calls-member-states- fully-transpose-eu-rules-audiovisual- content

Amendment 132 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 i (new)

7 i. Given the harsh times for the audiovisual sector due to the pandemic, urges member states to effectively implement the article 13 of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive ((EU) 2018/1808 ) according to which Member States shall ensure that on- demand audiovisual media services provided by media service providers under their jurisdiction promote, where practicable and by appropriate means, the production of and access to European works including interalia through the financial contribution made by such services to the production and rights acquisition of European works or to the share and/or prominence of European works in the catalogue of programmes offered by the on-demand audiovisual media service[1];calls the Commission to report on the European Parliament and the Council on the application of previously mentioned article 13, as well as on monitoring the overall implementation of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, and that member states adequately support European audiovisual production; [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32 010L0013&from=EN

Amendment 133 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 j (new)

7 j. Regrets that a number of member states have not yet transposed into their national law Directives (EU) 2019/789[1] and(EU) 2019/790[2];urges member states to proceed to relevant measures to act the soonest possible, also mobilizing RRF funds if needed, in order to fully and effectively transpose the 2019/789(1) and (EU) 2019/790(2) while allowing enough time and transparent procedures for open consultation so that the civil society and stakeholders may be actively involved;calls for special attention to be given to the effective implementation of article 18 of the Directive2019/790 ensuring appropriate and proportionate remuneration for authors and performers including by online services; [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EL/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:3201 9L0789[2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EL/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:3201 9L0790&from=pl

Amendment 134 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 k (new)

7 k. Regrets that a significant proportion of artists and CCS professionals are often in eligible for social protection schemes because of the precarious conditions in the CCS, even in countries where there are in place social protection shcemes for freelancers or self- employed people (who constitute a large part of the creative economy workforce);urges member states to respond to the existing problems exarcebated by the pandemic by establishing minimum standards for labour protection of artists and cultural professionals, including guaranteed minimum wages, pensions, sick pay and overall labour rights in line with the general workforce and the relevant requests by Unesco[1]; [1] https://www.theguardian.com/culture/202 2/feb/08/unesco-warns-of-crisis-in- creative-sector-with-10m-jobs-lost-due-to- pandemic

Amendment 135 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 l (new)

7 l. Highlights that government spending on the CCS was already declining in the year spreceding the pandemic, and Covid-19 led to a collapse in income and employment, while Unesco warns of an unprecedented crisis in the CCS due to pandemic[1];regrets that there were different speeds among member states in terms of social protection schemes and support for artists and the CCS professionals during the pandemic;calls therefore the Commission and the member states to work together in order to target RRF funds for the establishment of a European framework of common labour conditions for artists and CCS professionals, guaranteeing minimum wages, pensions, sick pay and overall labour rights in line with the general workforce of the European Union; [1] https://www.theguardian.com/culture/202 2/feb/08/unesco-warns-of-crisis-in- creative-sector-with-10m-jobs-lost-due-to- pandemic

Amendment 136 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 m (new)

7 m. Calls member states to consider tools and motivation policies, including taxation and fiscal measures for legal persons and individuals to stimulate investment in cultural and overall CCS production, including for performing arts, books, paintings, traditional arts, fashion, heritage and all CCS;

Amendment 137 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Notes that the pandemic has adversly affected the quality of education, contributing to an increase in early school leaving, and calls on the Commission and the Member States to invest additional funding and resources in measures to improve the quality of education and reduce early school leaving;

Amendment 138 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Notes that the pandemic has adversely affected the mental health of individuals, especially young people, and stresses the need for measures supported by the RRF to help improve mental health through integrated psychological counselling and support services in schools and elsewhere;

Amendment 139 #

Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Victor NEGRESCU, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to commit to transparency and ~~to examine the possibility of redirecting unused or saved RRF resource~~evaluation of the process of implementing these funds; and its duty so that Member States implement them quickly and effectively, in compliance with the RRF Regulation; Recalls European,s Parliament role on the supervision and implementation of the RRF and European Commission,s obligation to inform and be transparent as a mens towards a greater end, bearing in mind its role as guardian of the treaties and regulations, taking an holistic approach in that and linking objectives, milestones, reforms and investments to the real and declared sprit of the norm as aforementioned: the Economic recovery of the European Union ; a demanding Commission in the evaluation of the implementation of each State, with a real control of expenditure and an impact assessment of reforms and investments. Recalls the importance of allocating funds to culture, education, youth, sports and media;

Amendment 14 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, François-Xavier BELLAMY, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

1 b. Recalls the strong need for the whole cultural, creative, education and sports sectors to be better addresed in NRRPs and receive greater support from the Recovery and Resilience Facility in the following period, in line with their digital and green transition;

Amendment 140 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. CRecalls ~~on the Commission to commit to transparency and to examine the possibility of redirecting unused or saved RRF resources to culture, education, you~~that the monitoring of the implementation of the RRF falls under the Commission's remit; calls on the Commission to reconsider the frequency and timing of reporting and evaluation as well as to define suitable indicators with a view to enabling maximum transparency and effectiveness; stresses the importance of gathering clear and reliable data on RRF resources allocation at regional level across Member States with the aim of ensuring that all actors, including th,e s~~ports and media~~mallest ones, are reached by the measures;

Amendment 141 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to commit to full transparency and accountability and stresses the need for Member States to have the necessary control and audit mechanisms in place to ensure respect for the rule of law, protect the EU’s financial interests, secure transparency and prevent corruption; calls on the Commission and the Member States and to examine the possibility of redirecting unused or saved RRF resources to Union programmes in the field of culture, education, youth, sports and media;

Amendment 142 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to commit to transparency and to examine the possibility of redirecting unused or saved RRF resources to culture, education, youth, sports and media; recalls that the RRF resources can and should be used in combination with other funds and programmes aimed for these areas, available on European as well as national and regional levels, in order to create synergies and speed up their recovery and strengthen their transformation towards more resilience;

Amendment 143 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Calls on~~Encourages the Commission and Member States to commit to transparency and to examine the possibility of redirecting unused or saved RRF resources to culture, education, youth, sports and media; keeping in mind specific needs of every part of those sectors; notes that a tailored approach will benefit all actors in the culture, education, youth, sports and media ecosystems;

Amendment 144 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to commit to full transparency ~~and~~of actions undertaken in the context of National Recovery and Resilience Plans; calls on the Commission to examine the possibility of redirecting unused or saved RRF resources to culture, education, youth, sports and media programmes;

Amendment 145 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to ~~commit to transparency and to examine the possibility of redirecting unused or saved~~examine the possibility of urging Member States, where possible, to redirect more RRF resources to culture, education, youth, sports and media;

Amendment 146 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission to commit to transparency and to examine the possibility of redirecting unused or saved RRF resources to culture, education, youth, sports and media; calls on Member States to redirect some of the unused or saved resources to support independent journalism and the local media and to raise awareness of RRF benefits at local level;

Amendment 147 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Recalls that 2022 is the European Year of Youth which aims to put young Europeans in the centre of the attention and to empower as well as support them in renewing their positive perspectives, especially in the context of the negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on them; calls on the Member States to adopt adequate measures in their NRRPs adressing this reality as a complement to the EuropeanYear of Youth actions, while calling on the Commission to ensure the funding of the legacy of those actions beyond 2022;

Amendment 148 #

Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Victor NEGRESCU, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Urges the European Parliament Working Group on the scrutiny of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF WG) to carry out a thorough scrutiny on investments and reforms put in place by Member States in the field of culture, media, education, youth and sport and to remind Member States the Parliament’s calls to direct an adequate proportion of the recovery measures in support of these sectors;

Amendment 149 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Calls on the Commission to add culture as one of the focus areas for the Recovery &Resilience Task Force and to ensure that steps will be taken to attract and integrate specific cultural expertise into the Task Force;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Strongly underlines the role of culture and education as shaping people’s minds and identities to the future of the planet in addressing the climate crisis and enabling a successful transformation and Green transition; calls member states and the Commission to invest RRF funds in education and cultural initiatives in order to enhance public awareness and as tools for the overall promotion of the Green Deal;

Amendment 150 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Regrets that there is no cultural expertise nor a focus area for culture in the Recovery & Resilience Task Force;

Amendment 151 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)

8 c. Regrets that there were no clear answers by the Commission to written questions for a written answer submitted by Members of the European Parliament regarding the response of members states in their RRF national plans on dedicating 2% for culture;

Amendment 152 #

Petra KAMMEREVERT, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 d (new)

8 d. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to commit to full transparency and promote public awareness at all stages of actions undertaken in the context of National Recovery and Resilience Plans, including specific open calls and tenders put in place, to ensure that support mechanisms remain available to all cultural organizations, including in particular grassroots initiatives as well as micro and small organisations, free-lancers and self- employed individuals;

Amendment 153 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. calls on the Commission to state clearly whether, for what purpose and to what extent the Member States are using funds from the Recovery and Resilience Facility to mitigate the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic for young people, especially as the European Year of Youth was also launched in 2022 in response to the pandemic;

Amendment 154 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. URegrets the lack of adequate and substantial consultation with all relevant stakeholders in the preparation of the national recovery and resilience plans; Urge surges the Commission and the Member States to ~~extend the~~guarantee extend the adequate and continuous involvement of stakeholders to the implementation and monitoring of the RRF ~~plans.~~and the national recovery and resilience plans, in particular social partners and civil society organisations, allowing for their more continuous involvement, better monitoring and improved transparency;

Amendment 155 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Urges the Commission and the Member States to extend the continuous involvement of stakeholders to the implementation and monitoring of the RRF plans, taking full account of Articles 18 and 28 of the RRF Regulation, which clearly state that regions , municipalities and civil society must be involved in the planning and implementation of these funds, something that is not being done in some states that are receiving funding.

Amendment 156 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, François-Xavier BELLAMY, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Urges the Commission ~~and th~~to advise Member States ~~to extend the continuous involvement of stakeholders to the implementation and monitoring of the RRF plans~~in monitoring the implementation of their national recovery and resilience plans and propose other actions and short-term and long-term measures that will address current and future challenges; notes that this kind of cooperation with Member States will create tangible, sustainable, social and economic benefits both at national and European level.

Amendment 157 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Urges the Commission and the Member States to extend the ~~continuous~~ involvement of stakeholders to the implementation and monitoring of the RRF plans., including local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, youth organisations and associations from the cultural and creative sectors as well as other relevant stakeholders;

Amendment 158 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Urges the Commission and the Member States to extend the continuous involvement of all relevant stakeholders to the implementation and monitoring of the RRF plans.

Amendment 159 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Urges the Commission and the Member States to extend the continuous involvement of stakeholders to the implementation and monitoring of the RRF plans. stresses that stakeholders at all levels of governance, including local levels, must be involved in RRF implementation and monitoring and regrets that certain Member States have failed to organise a structured dialogue for the drafting of recovery plans and to include stakeholders the governance thereof; calls on the Commission and the Member States to comply with the RRF Regulation and to involve the European Parliament and the specialised committees to a greater extent in the process of evaluating and implementing the plans;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Emphasizes the importance of adequate funding for digitisation, preservation and online availability of cultural and creative contents and our European cultural heritage;

Amendment 160 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Calls on the Commission to facilitate the exchange of good practices, mutual learning, and capacity building for national entities in charge of implementing national recovery and resilience plans for the benefit of the cultural and creative sectors, in order to ensure swift and timely absorption of allocated funds;

Amendment 161 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Calls on the Commission to facilitate the exchange of good practices, mutual learning, and capacity building for national entities in charge of implementing National Recovery and Resilience Plans;

Amendment 162 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9 b. Calls on the Member States to strategically include the topic of Recovery and Resilience Facility for the cultural and creative sectors in the upcoming Council Work Plan for Culture 2023- 2026, creating the context for knowledge- sharing and mutual learning among national administrations;

Amendment 163 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9 b. Calls on the Member States to strategically include the topic of Recovery and Resilience Facility for cultural and creative sectors in the upcoming Work Plan for Culture 2023-2026 of the Council, creating the context for knowledge sharing and mutual learning among national administrations;

Amendment 164 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9 c. Pleads the Member States and the Commission to focus on sustainability as well as on the socio-economic and environmental impact of foreseen RRF investments, ensuring that the actions undertaken go beyond financing the infrastructure, but focus on the actual needs and expectations of cultural stakeholders;

Amendment 165 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9 c. Pleads the Member States and the Commission to focus on sustainability as well as socio-economic and environmental impact of foreseen investments, ensuring that the actions undertaken go beyond financing the infrastructure, but focus on the actual needs and expectations of stakeholders;

Amendment 166 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 d (new)

9 d. Recognizes the need to exchange good practices regarding different safety nets and social security schemes among member states specifically for artists and CCS professionals, overall, the CCS and sports; calls the Commission to take action in order to have a mapping report about the different safety nets and social security schemes among member states specifically for artists and CCS professionals, as well as for sports workers, as in place before the pandemic and/or put into effect during the pandemic;

Amendment 167 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 e (new)

9 e. Regrets that some member states were reluctant to quickly react with support measures for the CCS to mitigate the consequences of the pandemic, because they lacked information of the extent of the damage; regrets also that the direct and indirect benefits of the CCS to the broader economy are not adequately visible because of the lack of such data; calls therefore on the member states and the Commission to proceed to the establishment of a continuously monitoring mechanism and gathering of all relevant data needed in order to design firm policy with specific data for each one of the different sectors consisting the CCS, up-to-date and comparable among member states; calls on the Commission to inform the EP and periodically publish reports updating the broad audience to the relevant information, stimulating public awareness on the benefits of culture to society and economy;

Amendment 168 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 f (new)

9 f. Regrets that some member were reluctant to take measures to support the recovery and resilience of artists and the CCS arguing that there is no common definition for artists nor for the CCS; calls therefore on the Commission to take relevant action in order to facilitate the process towards an agreement on a common definition of the CCS applicable for a common policy-making terminology, while involving artists’ and CCS’ representatives and stakeholders as well in the process;

Amendment 169 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 g (new)

9 g. Calls on the Commission to map existing definitions across Member States of artists and cultural and creative workers, including technicians, backstage and other staff, and to foster dialogue with the Civil Society in order to come up with one single and inclusive wording in the EU’s policy-making and in the European framework for working conditions in the CCS; suggests for a definition that would reflect the diversity of the CCS as well as the civil society’s self-definition, through a process-oriented approach, such as by recognising the labour intensity of the creative process, including research and preparation; also, this definition should be aligned with the 1980 UNESCO Recommendation concerning the Status of the Artists;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1 d. Strongly underlines the role of education as an enabler to the digital transition; calls member states and the Commission to invest RRF funds in education applications, including the relevant equipment, infrastructure and facilities needed, in order to accelerate the digital transition, using tools accessible to all for free and leaving no one behind;

Amendment 170 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 h (new)

9 h. Calls on the Member States to fully include access to art education as part of a holistic approach for the CCS recovery;

Amendment 171 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 i (new)

9 i. Calls on the Member States to proceed to public consultation and open dialogue with the CCS’ stakeholders, in order to collaborate and co-define alternative measures along with financial measures, to support the CCS; such measures may include compensation schemes of the CCS stakeholders for the seats that have to remain empty in cultural venues due to COVID-19 hygiene protocols, or for possible last-minute cancellations of cultural events due to COVID-19 restrictions, the free usage by artists and CCS organizations of public spaces or buildings not only for one-time cultural events but also for the long-term establishment or usage of artists of all arts as creative ateliers, workshops, laboratories, rehearsal spaces or other needs of the CCS;

Amendment 172 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 j (new)

9 j. Calls member states to consider taxation measures and fiscal incentives in order to support the CCS, education, media, youth and sports sectors that were particularly hit by the pandemic, including by reducing VAT rates and by taxation incentives and schemes for organizations and individuals;

Amendment 173 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 k (new)

9 k. Notes that during the pandemic there was a phenomenal increase in online audiovisual works consumption, as people turned to culture for comfort and well-being during the hard times of the lockdown and physical and social distancing restrictions;calls therefore the Commission to proceed to research the benefits of the CCS on audiences during the pandemic in order to document indirect but rather important benefits of culture to our society that are currently not visible and therefore not monetized as they should be in favour of creators and performers and the CCS in general; Calls also the Commission also include into research the mapping of people’s willingness to pay for CCS products that they consume, including online; recommends in this context the equal recognition of the multiple forms of artistic and cultural and creative work, including the activities that are not (or barely) monetised, among others;

Amendment 174 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 l (new)

9 l. Requests member states and the Commissions to take under consideration that the mostly needed support of the CCS equally includes a variety of different cost categories that are relevant specifically to the CCS including and not limited to compensating for the CCS’ losses due to the lockdowns, supporting for the extra financial burden of the hygiene protocols on top of the usual production costs, compensating for the lost audiences due to the hygiene protocols,compensating for the permanently closed CCS organizations which did not manage to overcome the financial struggles due to the pandemic, investing into re- establishing the lost connection with the audiences which lost the habit of and possible their interest to the live cultural experiences, support for the improvement of the hasty digitization of the CCS, accelerated due to COVID-19restrictions, yet on premature conditions and support for investing into research and development for innovative solutions for the CCS to manage to successfully enter to the digital and to the green transition, among others;

Amendment 175 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 m (new)

9 m. Regrets distance working makes less visible some forms of the CCS professionals, especially because they are labour-intensive and services-centered, including workers in the plastic arts, visual arts, performing arts, literary arts, books sectors, folk arts, culinary arts, handicrafts and textiles among others; calls on the member states to consider engaging in open dialogue with the CCS stakeholders in order to find common grounds on how to recognize and fairly monetize their work even in terms of distance working, and including ensuring social protection coverage;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1 d. Underlines that besides economic recovery of the CCSI, the support from RRF should be used also for the improvement of working conditions, training, up- and reskilling of workers in these sectors in order to keep up with the structural changes underway;

Amendment 19 #

Chiara GEMMA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the need to incorporate a specific and measurable spending target for young people, as envisaged for digital and green transition;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the strong need for culture and education, as the backbone of our democracy, society and economy, to receive support from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), also with regard to ~~the green and digital transitions~~social and working conditions as well as to the green and digital transitions; regrets that this need was not adequately considered in the Regulation of 12 February 2021 establishing the RRF;

Amendment 20 #

Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Victor NEGRESCU, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that the cultural and creative sectors ~~were among those hit first and the hardest by the pandemic and will be the last to recover~~as one of the EU's biggest employers, accounting for 8.7 million jobs across Europe, were among those hit first and the hardest by the pandemic and will be the las to recover, justifying the necessity to include in the priorities of the national recovery and resilience plans specific and targeted support measures particularly for the CCS and more financial support for cultural and creative sectors’ workers than what is already inadequately planned by the Member States;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that the cultural and creative sectors were among those hit first and the hardest by the pandemic and will be the last to recover to their full potential; in this regard, recalls that the pandemic has also triggered the deployment of innovative digital production, distribution and consumption patterns in these sectors; underlines that, in the medium to long term, this new trend could lead to the development of new business models which would need adequate support to unfold;

Amendment 22 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that the cultural and creative sectors and the people directly and indirectly employed in them were among those hit first and the hardest by the pandemic, were one of the last to be supported by the governments -- and often to an inadequate extent -- and will be the last to recover;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that the ~~cultural and creative sectors~~CCSI were among those hit first and the hardest by the pandemic and will be the last to recover, given the restrictions in capacity of cultural events and venues, as well as postponements or cancellations of events;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that the cultural and creative sectors were among those hit first and the hardest by the pandemic and will be the last to recover hence special attention is needed where Member States participation is of utmost importance;

Amendment 25 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Highlights that~~Underlines how deeply the cultural and creative sectors ~~were among those hit first and the hardest by the pandemic and will be the last to recover~~have been affected by the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, particularly given the fact that they are composed mostly of micro, small and medium sized enterprises or organisations;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that the cultural and creative sectors were among those hit first and the hardest by the pandemic and will ~~be the last to recover~~; have serious difficulties in recovering from the restrictions they have suffered;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that the cultural and creative sectors were among those hit first and the hardest by the pandemic and will be the last to recover; stresses the need for additional funding and initiatives at European, national and local level to support the rapid and full recovery of the cultural and creative sectors;

Amendment 28 #

Chiara GEMMA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights that the cultural and creative sectors were among those hit first and the hardest by the pandemic and will be the last to recover; stresses, therefore, the need for national recovery and resilience plans to contain ad hoc measures to support these sectors;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Highlights that the economic impact of COVID-19may bring severe challenges of financial and political pressure threatening the survival of media sectors and of independent and quality journalism, leading tothe loss of jobs and less workforce, eventually leading to higher misinformation, disinformation and reproduction of fake news, which are rather crucial threats for society especially in times of a health crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic; calls therefore for solid and targeted support for media in the national RRF plans, especially for small and medium media organization, in order to ensure media diversity, financial and political media independence and quality journalism, including online media;

Amendment 3 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, François-Xavier BELLAMY, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the strong need for culture and education, as the backbone of our democracy, society and economy, to receive support from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), also with regard to the green and digital transitioniterates the crucial importance that education, culture and sports receive support from the Recovery and Resilience Facility since they play a key role in our daily lives by shaping our identity, creating bonds between generations and deepening our social and democratic participation; recognises how paramount these sectors are for our economies;

Amendment 30 #

Niklas NIENASS, Alexis GEORGOULIS, Loucas FOURLAS, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Andrey SLABAKOV, Monica SEMEDO, Irena JOVEVA, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Niyazi KIZILYÜREK, Hannes HEIDE, Dace MELBĀRDE, Laurence FARRENG, Diana RIBA I GINER, Salima YENBOU, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Recalls that the European cultural and creative sectors including industries account for between 4 and 7 % of the EU’s GDP and for about 8.7 million jobs in the EU; emphasizes that these figures are not adequately reflected in the national recovery and resilience plans, leaving the cultural and creative sectors considerably underrepresented in the EU’s overall effort to overcome the pandemic and support the recovery and resilience of the European economy;

Amendment 31 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, François-Xavier BELLAMY, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Highlights the destabilising impact the pandemic has had on education and sports, causing enormous disruption and societal divides in the entire European Union; expresses concern that the education and sports sectors will not be able to recover without focused earmarking and increased support, namely through national recovery and resilience specific planning and through other EU, transnational and national programmes;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Highlights that the CCS, among those hit first and hardest by the pandemic and the last to recover, are the largest empoyer for young of 15 – 29 years old[1]and therefore, urges the Commission and the member states to take special measures targeting the youth workers in the CCS in the context of the implementation of the national RRF plans; [1] https://www.europecreative.be/images/cult ure/Pdfs/ccs-market-analysis- europe_fei2019.pdf#page=41

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Emphasizes that the European Parliament repeatedly and with an overwhelming majority - e.g. in its resolution of 17 September 2020 on the cultural recovery of Europe and in its resolution of 20 October 2021 on the situation of artists and the cultural recovery in the EU - called on the Commission and the Member States to include culture in the national recovery and resilience plans and to earmark at least 2 % of the RRF budget to culture;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2 c. Recalls that atypical employment (part-time and fixed-duration contracts, temporary work and economically dependent self-employment) is commonplace for authors, performers, artists and many other cultural creators, often leading to precarious working conditions; highlights that the pandemic has exposed and exacerbated this situation which poses a fundamental threat to the EU’s cultural ecosystem, to Europe’s cultural diversity and to our democracy and society;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2 c. Regrets that contrary to its title the Next GenerationEU Fund has no direct and overall inadequate funds for youth, as well as for education and sports which are strongly interlinked with youth; calls the Commission and the Member States for more targeted actions in the context of the RRF national plans to support youth, education and sports;

Amendment 36 #

Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Victor NEGRESCU, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)

2 d. Regrets that there is a massive loss of jobs and talent leakage from the CCS due to the consequences of the pandemic threatening the long-term sustainability and future of the CCS; calls therefore on member states to invest RRF funds in their national plans in order to strengthen recovery, resilience and competitiveness of the CCS to keep their labour force in terms of both, quantity and quality;

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Deplores the fact that only 14 Member States have included culture in their RRF plans and questions the Commission's approval of such plans, which in no way adequately respond to the recovery needs of the sectors ; fears that this heterogeneity of public investments leads to recovery at different speeds, causing increased disparities within the EU’s cultural ecosystem and threatening Europe’s cultural diversity; in this regard, underlines that the majority of Member States that have foreseen investments for culture in their RRF plans opted for short-term measures whereas the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic require long-term responses;

Amendment 38 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, François-Xavier BELLAMY, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Deplores the fact that only 146 Member States have included culture in their RRF plans; fears that this heterogeneity of public investments leads to recovery at different speeds, causing increased disparities within the EU’s cultural ecosystem and threatening Europe’s cultural diversity;insists that MemberStates review their RRF plans and put the necessary accent on their culturalrecovery as a corner stone of the general recovery of society, where funds set aside for this sector shouldideally reach 4% of the total RRF;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Deplores the fact that only 14 Member States have included culture in~~Recalls that the European Parliament called on Member States to allocate at least 2 % of their NRR~~F plans; fears that this heterogeneity of public investments leads to recovery at different speeds, causing increased disparities within the EU’s cultur~~Ps funds to culture and at least 10 % to education in its Resolution on Cultural Recovery for Europe; regrets the fact that not all Member States included these elements in their national recovery and resilience plans; calls on these Member States to amend their national reco~~system and threatening Europe’s cultural diversity;~~ very and resilience plans and dedicate enough funds through short-term and long-term investments;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the strong need for culture and education, as the backbone of our democracy, society and economy, to receive support from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), also with regard to the green and digital transitions; regrets that this exigency was not adequately considered in the Regulation of 12 February 2021 establishing the RRF;

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Deplores the fact that only 14 Member States have included culture in their ~~RRF~~national recovery and resilience plans; fears that this heterogeneity of public investments leads to recovery at different speeds, causing increased disparities within the EU’s cultural ecosystem ~~and threatening Europe’s cultural diversit~~, imbalances with regard to social protection and working conditions, and threatening Europe’s cultural diversity, eventually undermining our social cohesion and democracy;

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Deplores the fact that only 14 Member States have explicitly included culture in their RRF plans, while applauds those that have done so; fears that this heterogeneity of public investments may leads to recovery of CCS at different speeds, causing increased disparities within the EU’s cultural ecosystem and threatening Europe’s cultural diversity;

Amendment 42 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Deplores the fact that only 14 Member States have included culture in their RRF plans; fears that this heterogeneity of public investments leads to recovery at different speeds, causing increased disparities within the EU’s cultural ecosystem and threatening Europe’s cultural diversity; urges Member States to give more importance to the cultural and creative sector and to provide the funding necessary to sustain it; is concerned about the low level of concern for the cultural and creative sector in many Member States' recovery and resilience plans; reiterates the importance of assessing the quality of investment in the cultural and creative sector and the need to support creators from all sectors, including associative structures, independent creators or SME representatives;

Amendment 43 #

Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Victor NEGRESCU, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Deplores the fact that only~~Notes that 14 Member States have included culture in their RRF plans; fears that this heterogeneity of public investments leads to recovery at different speeds, causing increased disparities within the EU’s cultural ecosystem ~~and threatening Europe’s cultural diversity~~;

Amendment 44 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Welcomes the European Parliament resolution of 10 February 2021 on the impact of COVID-19 on youth and on sport from February 2021 and the European Parliament legislative resolution of 14 December 2021 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on a European Year of Youth 2022; expresses concern over the impact of the pandemic on mental health and overall wellbeing of citizens, especially young people; calls on the Commission and Member States to foster youth participation in democratic and decision-making processes and provide additional support that will help young people recover from the pandemic and continue their growth on all levels, including personal, social and economic development; notes that young people can largely contribute in creating more resilient and sustainable societies and economies both on European and on national level;

Amendment 45 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Welcomes the European Parliament resolution of 20 October 2021 on Europe’s Media in the Digital Decade: an Action Plan to Support Recovery and Transformation and the European Parliament resolution of 20 October 2021 on the situation of artists and the cultural recovery in the EU; notes that a more holistic and determined approach is vital for the whole cultural and creative sectors to fully recover and unlock their potential in the following period; highlights that all actors in the cultural and creative ecosystem need to be supported equally in all Member States, including the entire audiovisual, editorial and media sector, as well as independent players and micro, small and medium sized enterprises or organisations;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Stresses that RRF plans have failed to consider the needs of the entire cultural and creative ecosystem, in particular the audiovisual segment, and that a holistic approach to supporting the film sector must be taken, more specifically the segments that have been most impacted, including the theatrical distribution and exhibition of films;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Underlines that people with disabilities that are working in the creative sectors face greater financial difficulties, which have been exacerbated during the COVID 19 pandemic and therefore are more in need to receive funding from the RRF;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Recalls that women and the young had the hardest psychological and financial hit from the pandemic[1];notes that although the CCS are amongst the largest employers of women in the EU, female workers remain under-represented in leadership positions, have less access to public funding and their work is far less visible and acknowledged than their male counterparts[2];calls therefore the Commission and the members states to dedicate RRF funds to strengthen gender balance in the CCS; [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ nov/23/pandemic-hits-mental-health-of- women-and-young-people-hardest-survey- finds [2] https://www.theguardian.com/culture/202 2/feb/08/unesco-warns-of-crisis-in- creative-sector-with-10m-jobs-lost-due-to- pandemic

Amendment 49 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Welcomes the European Parliament resolution of 15 September 2020 on effective measures to ‘green’ Erasmus+, Creative Europe and the European Solidarity Corps and the European Parliament resolution of 23 November 2021 on EU sports policy: assessment and possible ways forward; stresses the need for additional financial and structural engagement in the education and sports sectors; urges the EU to encourage Member States to implement actions that will further the recovery, strengthening and resilience building at all levels of education and sports and prepare all actors in both sectors for the digital and green future while promoting sustainable development, especially new learning and mobility opportunities and digital learning tools, higher inclusion, cohesion, exchange of practices on European and national level and better monitoring of used funds;

Amendment 5 #

Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Victor NEGRESCU, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the strong need for culture and education, as the backbone of our democracy, society and economy, to receive support from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF)~~, also with regard to the green and digital transitions~~;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Regrets that only a few Member States have requested loans for the implementation of their RRF plans and only 3 Member States have requested the full amount of the loans available; recalls that loan support may be requested until 31 August 2023; therefore, calls on Member States to make full use of the loans available to support cultural and creative sectors, media, education, youth and sports;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3 c. Strongly suggests that all cultural, education, youth and sports facilities that have been closed or forced to cancel their activities or that their income has been reduced because of COVID 19 should be fully compensated by the RRF funds in the future and retrospectively, including those who were forced to close permanently;

Amendment 52 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Regrets that certain Member States have not included sufficient measures to support youth, sport or media policies; expresses concern that the effect of the RRF on young people is limited in many cases and does not produce results or structural reforms that enable them to have access to education; regrets that youth policy experts, youth associations and youth workers do not have an adequate platform to express and engage in RRF implementation providing decent paid work, adequate housing and real prospects for the future; expresses dissatisfaction that the sport sector has been ignored in many MRAs and is not sufficiently supported in its development as a mechanism for building resilience; urges Member States to ensure that the media sector is able to benefit from recovery and resilience policies;

Amendment 53 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Opposes the Commission’s approach to incorporate not strictly cultural interventions such as tourism and energy efficiency of cultural buildings in the calculations~~, resulting in misleading statistics; calls for a recalculation and reassessment of the data available;~~ of the overall RRF spending on the cultural sector, resulting in a lack of precise statistical information on Member States’ areas of action; calls for a recalculation and reassessment of the data available; calls on the Commission to collect, publish and periodically update comprehensive and disaggregated data on Member States’ interventions in the field of culture, as well as media, youth and sports in the framework of the implementation of RRF funds;

Amendment 54 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Opposes the Commission’s approach to incorporate not strictly cultural interventions such as tourism and energy efficiency of cultural buildings in the calculations, resulting in misleading statistics; calls for a recalculation and reassessment of the data available; calls on the Commission to provide for a comprehensive and detailed overview of the RRF money spent in each of the Member States, disclosing the investments made in each cultural and creative sectors’ branch;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Opposes the Commission’s approach to incorporate not strictly cultural interventions such as tourism and energy efficiency of cultural buildings in the calculations, resulting in misleading statistics; calls for a recalculation and reassessment of the data available; calls on Member States to separate tourism from culture in their RRF plans and to direct funds to the recovery of the cultural sector;

Amendment 56 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Opposes the Commission’s approach to incorporate not strictly cultural interventions such as tourism and energy efficiency of cultural buildings in the calculations on what constitutes spending on CCS, resulting in misleading statistics; calls for ~~a recalculation and reassessment of the data available~~the breakdown of the data so as to better understand the absolute sums devoted by Member States to CCS directly;

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Opposes~~Calls on the Commission’s approach to incorporate not strictly cultural interventions such as tourism and energy efficiency of cultural buildings in the calculations, resulting in misleading statistics; calls for a recalculation and reassessment of the data available to improve its approach in data analysis and statistics; notes the importance of accurate reviews that can serve as examples for future plans and strategies;

Amendment 58 #

Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 59 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 6 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the strong need for culture and education, as the backbone of oEuropean democracy, values, society and economy, to receive support from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), also with regard to the green and digital transitions;

Amendment 60 #

Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Opposes the Commission’s approach to incorporate not strictly cultural interventions such as tourism and energy efficiency of cultural buildings in the calculations, resulting in misleading statistics; calls for ~~the~~a recalculation and reassessment of available data; stresses that measures in the cultural and creative sector should be strictly focused on cultural/creative actions and events or target working conditions in these sectors;

Amendment 61 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. 4a. Underlines the importance of promoting sustainable and energy- efficient conservation, renovation and restoration actions on cultural heritage, spaces and buildings; calls on the Commission to assess separately interventions which may have an direct and concrete impact on cultural goods and heritage, by facilitating cultural participation and access, from those focusing solely on green and energy- efficiency dimension;

Amendment 62 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Notes that the thematic analysis of the National Recovery and Resilience Plans (NRRPs) in terms of education actions published on the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard website is incomplete and rather general; calls therefore on the Commission to conduct more detailed analysis also in this regard, including on citizenship education as well as on actions fostering media literacy and critical thinking;

Amendment 63 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Stresses that the RRF and the national recovery and resilience plans have met the actual needs of the cultural ecosystem only to some extent; calls on the Member States to take a holistic approach and focus on the segments that have been impacted the most, inter alia live music, performing arts, exhibitions and cinemas;

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Regrets the focus of the national plans on physical and digital infrastructure as the sole mean of helping the cultural sector to recover and facilitate its resilience; calls on the Commission to urge Member States to develop plans that put the CCS professionals at the center of the recovery strategy;

Amendment 65 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to dedicate RRF funds in order to foster the green and the digital transition, innovation and creativity, research and development as well as employment opportunities for artists by supporting cooperation across disciplinary domains, such as between the CCS and science and technology;

Amendment 66 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls previous requests urging the Member States to dedicate at least 2 % of the budget of each national RRF plan to culture and 10 % to education; criticises the fact that these already misleading numbers have been achieved at an aggregated EU level only;deleted

Amendment 67 #

Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Victor NEGRESCU, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls previous requests, by the Parliament and by representatives of the cultural and creative sectors, urging the Member States to dedicate at least 2 % of the budget of each national RRF plan to culture and 10 % to education; criticises the fact that these already misleading numbers have been achieved at an aggregated EU level only; Recalls previous requests urging the Member States to dedicate at least 1,5 % of the budget of each national RRF plan to sports;

Amendment 68 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls previous requests, from the European Parliament as well as the sectors concerned, urging the Member States to dedicate at least 2 % of the budget of each national RRF plan to culture, 10 % to education and 120 % to ~~educa~~the digital transition; criticises the fact that these already misleading numbers have been achieved at an aggregated EU level only and deplores that the majority of Member States are performing well below the levels requested;

Amendment 69 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls previous requests urging the Member States to dedicate at least 2 % and ideally 4% of the budget of each national RRF plan to culture and 10 % to education; criticises the fact that these already misleading numbers have been achieved at an aggregated EU level only; calls for specific remarking and follow up from the Commission on the implementation of the plans;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the strong need for culture and education, as the backbone of our democracy, society and economy, to receive support from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), also with regard to the green and digital transitions; reiterates the European Parliament recommendation that 10% of recovery and resilience plan resources should go to education and 2% to the cultural and creative sector;

Amendment 70 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls previous requests urging the Member States to dedicate at least 2 % of the budget of each national RRF plan to culture and 10 % to education; ~~criticises the fact that these already misleading numbers have been achieved at an aggregated EU level only;~~

Amendment 71 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls previous requests urging the Member States to dedicate at least 2 % of the budget of each national RRF plan to ~~culture~~CCSI and 10 % to education~~; criticises the fact that these already misleading~~ with concrete, inclusive measures accessible to all; points out that these numbers have been achieved at an aggregated EU level only;

Amendment 73 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls previous requests to the European Parliament and social partners urging the Member States to dedicate at least 2 % of the budget of each national RRF plan to culture and 10 % to education; criticises the fact that these already misleading numbers have been achieved at an aggregated EU level only; calls on the European institutions to give more prominence to education and culture in the European Semester, with a view to achieving better policy coordination in these areas, thereby helping to restore and improve quality standards in education and in the cultural and creative sector;

Amendment 74 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recalls previous requests ~~urg~~inviting the Member States to dedicate a~~t least 2 % of the~~ sufficient and adapted budget tof each national RRF plan to culture and ~~10 % to~~ education; ~~criticises the fact that these already misleading numbers have been achieved at an aggregated EU level only;~~

Amendment 75 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Recalls the importance of financially and politically independent media especially intimes of the pandemic and against the socially harmful uprising phenomena of misinformation, disinformation and massive spread of fake news, mainly due to the lack of funding for quality journalism jobs and urges therefore the Commission and member states to dedicate at least 1,5% of the RRF national plans to media, focusing especially on small and medium media organisations, freelancers and self- employed journalists and media workers, including online media;

Amendment 76 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Notes that only half of the Member States decided to include digital training of teachers and educators in their NRRPs; in the context of the digital transformation and the increased relevance of distance and blended learning during the pandemic, considers this number insufficient and encourages Member States to put more emphasis on teachers’ digital skills in their reforms of education systems;

Amendment 77 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Urges the Member States to put the recovery and resilience of the cultural and creative sectors at the core of their investments into culture, with a particular focus on improving the overall situation of authors, performers, artists and all other cultural creators who are the ones to create the cultural works that our democracy, society and economy benefit from;

Amendment 78 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Underlines that any action taken to help the cultural and creative sectors in their recovery should not only be aimed at economic recovery, but also be used for the improvement of the working conditions of authors, performers, artists and all other cultural creators as well as for their up- and reskilling with regards to i.a. knowledge of their rights, the opportunities of the digital era and the possibilities of international mobility;

Amendment 79 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Underlines that high-quality education systems provide the foundation for the EU’s global competitiveness, and recalls that well-functioning education and training systems require high levels of public investment; calls on the Member States to make ambitious use of funds available through the recovery plan to drive investment in education, with the objective of creating a genuine EuropeanEducation Area;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Recalls the strong need for culture and education, as the backbone of our civilisations, democrac~~y, soc~~ietys and economyies, to receive support from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF)~~, also with regard to the green and digital transitions~~;

Amendment 80 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Urges the Commission to monitor and periodically publish reports on the implementation of the percentages mentioned above, in order to hold the Member-States accountable and improve transparency;

Amendment 81 #

Niklas NIENASS, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5 c. Recalls that following a long recovery from the economic crisis (2007– 2013), young people in the EU proved to be more vulnerable to the effects of the restrictions put in place to slow the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, as more likely than older groups to experience job loss, financial insecurity and mental health problems, reduced trust in the institutions as well as life satisfaction and mental well-being associated with the stay-at-home requirements and school closures[1];highlights that COVID-19 disrupts education of more than 70% of youth, while the disproportionate effects of the pandemic on young people has exacerbated inequalities and risks reducing the productive potential of an entire generation[2];calls therefore the Commission and Member States to dedicate to youth at least 1,5% of the RRF national plans; [1] https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publicat ions/report/2021/impact-of-covid-19-on- young-people-in-the-eu [2] https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the- ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_753060/lang-- en/index.htm

Amendment 82 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5 c. Welcomes that some Member States have included sports in their national recovery and resilience plans; but reiterates the need for the Commission to provide further detailed data on sports-related investments;

Amendment 83 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)

5 d. Welcomes the measures introduced during the pandemic to support young people including the reinforced European Youth Guarantee, national initiatives to keep young people in education, and measures to reduce barriers to existing financial support and social protection specifically for young people, as well as the European Year of Youth 2022;regrets however that many of these policy responses were temporary and calls member states and the Commission to ensure greater resilience in future crises, through prioritising long- term measures for young people, such as permanent improvements in access to work and apprenticeships and measures to increase job security ;Welcomes the measures introduced during the pandemic to support young people including the reinforced European Youth Guarantee, national initiatives to keep young people in education, and measures to reduce barriers to existing financial support and social protection specifically for young people, as well as the European Year of Youth 2022;regrets however that many of these policy responses were temporary and calls member states and the Commission to ensure greater resilience in future crises, through prioritising long- term measures for young people, such as permanent improvements in access to work and apprenticeships and measures to increase job security[1] [1] https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publicat ions/report/2021/impact-of-covid-19-on- young-people-in-the-eu

Amendment 84 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)

5 e. Recognizes that the consequences of the COVID-19pandemic exacerbated pre-existing problems making artists and CCS professionals already particularly vulnerable for various reasons including atypical work models and precarious conditions, justifying therefore the need to firmly include the CCS in the national recovery and resilience plans with a minimum of2%;

Amendment 85 #

Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Predrag Fred MATIĆ, Victor NEGRESCU, Sylvie GUILLAUME, Marcos ROS SEMPERE, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Strongly believes that for the correct implementation of the RRF a special focus should be given to micro and small organisations and companies, including in rural areas; the initial idea of the RRF is to help economic recovery and increase European,s Union resilience: SMEs and micro SMEs are a fundamental pillar in the education, cultural and creative sector, therefore , we request the European Commission to be vigilant that the funding received by Member States is directed towards that end. Recalls that the RRF should not help increase structural spending , discriminate public entreprises over private ones or in any sense influence future budget commitments but to increase competitiveness. Therefore, investment targeted at SMEs and micro SMEs in the cultural, education and creative sector must be a priority;

Amendment 86 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Strongly believes that for the correct and successful implementation of the RRF to the benefit of the sectors in question as well as the authors, performers, freelancers and all creative professionals a special focus should be given to independent players as well as micro and small organisations, including those in rural areas;

Amendment 87 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, François-Xavier BELLAMY, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Strongly believes that for the correct implementation of the RRF a special focus should also be given to ~~micro and small organisations, including in rural areas~~independent micro, small and medium sized enterprises or organisations, including in rural and remote areas in all Member States; notes that these actors can contribute significantly to our economy if given proper support;

Amendment 88 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Strongly believes that for the correct implementation of the RRF a special focus should be given to micro and small organisations~~, including in rural areas~~ and individuals in all branches of the cultural and creative sectors, including in rural and insular areas, safeguarding at the same time quality jobs and descent working, remuneration and social security;

Amendment 89 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Strongly believes that ~~for the correct implementation~~in order to truly achieve the goals of the RRF, a special focus should be given to micro and small organisations, including independent ones; emphasizes at the same time the need to pay special attention to organisations in remote rural areas;

Amendment 9 #

Željana ZOVKO, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Peter POLLÁK, Asim ADEMOV, Theodoros ZAGORAKIS, Michaela ŠOJDROVÁ, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Highlights the commitment and efforts of the European Union to protect its economy and the wellbeing of its citizens with the current multiannual budget and the Next Generation EU package; welcomes the Recovery and Resilience Facility that is dedicated to help Member States to mitigate the consequences of the pandemic and continue their sustainable growth towards a digital and climate neutral future;

Amendment 90 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Strongly believes that for the correct implementation of the RRF a special focus should be given to ~~micro and small organisations, including in rural area~~grassroots initiatives as well as small, medium and micro-organisations, including in rural areas, through specific open calls and tenders;

Amendment 91 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Strongly believes that for the correct implementation of the RRF a special focus should be given to micro and small organisations, throughout the European Union including in rural areas;

Amendment 92 #

Peter POLLÁK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Strongly believes that for the correct implementation of the RRF a special focus should be given to micro and small organisations, in~~cluding in~~ particular in disadvantaged regions and rural areas;

Amendment 93 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Strongly believes that for the correct implementation of the RRF a special focus should also be given to micro and small organisations, including those operating in rural areas;

Amendment 94 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

~~(6)~~6. Strongly believes that for the correct implementation of the RRF a special focus should be given to micro and small organisations and associations, including in rural ~~areas~~, small urban, mountain or other remote areas of the Union;; stresses that RRF benefits must be accessible to all individuals, including those with disabilities; recalls that the RRF must also seek to reduce social inequalities between individuals, groups of individuals and regions of the European Union;

Amendment 95 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Strongly believes that for the correct implementation of the RRF a special focus should be given to micro and small organisations, ~~including~~especially in rural areas;

Amendment 96 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Emphasises that the cultural and creative sectors and industries (CCSI) are strategic for European citizens and economy, and that their workers must benefit from a genuine European recovery, in view of the fact that CCSI are an atypical sector made up of players characterised by the pre-eminence of small structures (SMEs or self-employed entrepreneurs) and often depending on irregular income; Deplores that the deteriorating economic situation of many households will lead to a diminishing rate of participation in many cultural activities, further jeopardising the remuneration of creators, particularly in terms of copyright, or even suspending it, for as long as productions are put on hold;

Amendment 97 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Regrets that cancellations of live events left art istsand CCS producers without income and also in debt because of financial obligations taken to third parties especially when touring; urges the Commission and member states to provide funds from the RRF to compensate in the future and also retrospectively, organisers and involved parties in cases of cancellations of live events in the CCS due to COVID-19 restrictions, especially for performing arts;

Amendment 98 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Urges the Commission and member states to support financially and by all means possible, local sports communities, clubs and academies having in mind that amateur sport events had to be cancelled or postponed due to COVID- 19measures, while still sports stadiums do not operate in full capacity in terms of audience, and therefore have almost no inflow of their main source of income;

Amendment 99 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6 c. Invites the Member States and the Commission to ensure that the actions relevant for culture under the RRF go beyond financing infrastructure facilities or collaboration schemes and consortiums, but focus on the actual needs of small and micro organisations, as well as artists and CCS professionals and stakeholders, including improving their working conditions and social protection schemes;

source: 719.593

2022/03/21 BUDG, ECON 466 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)

— having regard to the Commission’s first annual report on the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (COM(2022) 75 final) published on 1 March 2022,

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Recital -A (new)

-A. whereas the COVID-19 outbreak in early 2020 changed the economic, social and budgetary outlook in the Union and in the world, calling for an urgent and coordinated response both at Union and national level in order to cope with the enormous economic and social consequences as well as asymmetrical effects for Member States;

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A (new)

A. whereas the RRF funding supports key policy areas such as green transition, digital transformation, economic, social and territorial cohesion, institutional resilience and crisis preparedness as well as children and youth and education and skills;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that by mid-February 2022, all Member States but one had submitted national recovery and resilience plans (NRRPs), requesting in total EUR 337.5 billion in grants and EUR 166 billion in loans; reminds that the benefits of economic recovery will only be achieved if the sustainability of public finances is in balance in long term;

Amendment 100 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates the importance of the six pillars in providing the Member States with a structure to propose and implement reforms and investments that tackle the green and digital transitions, the economy, productivity and competitiveness, social and territorial cohesion, health and institutional resilience, and measures for children and young people; highlights that all Member States are required by the RRF Regulation to include in their national recovery and resilience plans measures that address each pillar; deplores that not all Member States chose to respect the pillar structure of the Regulation;

Amendment 101 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

Amendment 102 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Emphasizes the aim of the Regulation to comply with social objectives and the importance to have methodologies in place for displaying the progress on the implementation to contribute to the European Pillar of Social Rights; therefore, is concerned that the delegated act on social expenditure and on the resilience scoreboard will not be sufficient to track and to report on the social dimension and impacts of the RRF; calls on the Commission to come forward with complementary social indicators tracking notably the implementation of the 20 principles of the EPSR through the NRRPs;

Amendment 103 #

Antonio Maria RINALDI, Marco ZANNI, Anna BONFRISCO, Valentino GRANT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Considering the unsustainable increase in raw material prices, strongly aggravated by the economic sanctions applied following Russian aggression in Ukraine, and the negative effects that this will have on a large part of the European economy, believes that is necessary a repositioning of the objectives, timeframes and conditionalities originally envisaged by the NGEU agenda in order to allow the requesting Member States to adapt their respective NRRPs to the changed needs;

Amendment 104 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Recognises that the conflict in Ukraine and related actions will have negative effects on the Member States’ economic situation and calls on the Commission to be flexible on the revision of the national plans in order for them to also address the economic and social consequences of the crisis;

Amendment 105 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Underlines that the Facility should take into account the new specific situation and challenges of each Member States, in particular related to the food and energy prices crisis, and calls upon the Commission to allow them to address them by optimising the national plans;

Amendment 106 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Johan VAN OVERTVELDT, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7 c. Calls on the Commission to examine the possibility to redirect unused or saved RRF resources to support reforms and investments in areas not yet covered by the plans;

Amendment 107 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Notes that in the 26 NRRPs that have been submitted so far, Member States have requested a total of EUR 337.5 billion in grants out of the EUR 338 billion available; notes furthermore that not all Member States, in their current NRRPs, have requested the full amount of grants available to them; notes that not all Member States have chosen to submit requests up to its maximum financial contribution, as referred to in Article 11 of the RRF Regulation, therefore have not acquired a maximum amount of the pre- finance payment, based on the financial contribution.

Amendment 108 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Notes that in the 26 NRRPs that have been submitted so far, Member States have requested a total of EUR 337.5 billion in grants out of the EUR 338 billion available; reminds that this should not come as a surprise, since free money is always taken out first; notes furthermore that not all Member States, in their current NRRPs, have requested the full amount of grants available to them;

Amendment 109 #

Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Dragoş PÎSLARU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Reminds that the current regulation on RRF already makes it possible for Member States to use the funds as remedy in recovering from unexpected problems in energy transition, caused by the war in Ukraine

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B (new)

B. whereas EUR 672.5 billion in grants and loans will be available to finance national measures designed to alleviate the economic and social consequences of the pandemic;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that by mid-February 2022, all Member States but one had submitted national recovery and resilience plans (NRRPs), requesting in total EUR 337.5 billion in grants and EUR 166 billion in loans; welcomes that by mid-March 2022 EUR 54.05 billion in grants and EUR 19.91 billion in loans were disbursed1a; _________________ 1a European Commission, retrieved 16/03/2022, https://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/rec overy-and-resilience- scoreboard/disbursements.html?lang=en.

Amendment 110 #

Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL, Nicola BEER, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Ondřej KOVAŘÍK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 111 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Is concerned, however, that only seven Member States have requested loans amounting to a total of EUR 166 billion out of the EUR 385.8 billion av~~Emphasises that all grants from the RRF should be invested in the implementation period of 2021-2026 to realise the EU’s objectives of sustailnable for loans, leaving a considerable amount available should Member States require loans at a later stage; is preoccupied that the limited interest for the loan component may lead to lost opportunities and prevent the RRF from reaching its full potential;economic growth, resilience and competitiveness; urges Member States to facilitate private investments in connection to the RRF-funded projects in order to increase volume of the recovery plan and close the major investment gap in the fields of green and digital transition.

Amendment 112 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Is concerned,~~Notes however, that only seven Member States have requested loans amounting to a total of EUR 166 billion out of the EUR 385.8 billion available for loans, leaving a considerable amount available should Member States require loans at a later stage; ~~is preoccupied that the limited interest for the loan component may lead to lost opportunities and prevent the RRF from reaching its full potential;~~

Amendment 113 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 114 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 115 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Markus FERBER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esther DE LANGE, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Is concerned, however, that only seven Member States have requested loans amounting to a total of EUR 166 billion out of the EUR 385.8 billion available for loans, leaving a considerable amount available should Member States require loans at a later stage; is preoccupied that the limited interest for the loan component may lead to lost opportunities and prevent the RRF from reaching its full potential; recalls, in this context, its previous position21a deploring the cuts to the grant components of the NGEU, which upset the balance between grants and loans and risk undermining the recovery efforts; __________________ 21a OJ C 371, 15.9.2021, p. 110

Amendment 116 #

Eero HEINÄLUOMA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Is concerned, however, that only seven Member States have requested loans amounting to a total of EUR 166 billion out of the EUR 385.8 billion available for loans, leaving a considerable amount available should Member States require loans at a later stage; is preoccupied that the limited interest for the loan component may lead to lost opportunities and prevent the RRF from reaching its full potential; considers that, in order to maximise the efficiency of available funds, and in the context of the new geopolitical situation, that Member States should use the loans under the RRF to advance investments into the energy transition to reduce their dependency on imported fossil fuel energy and to improve their energy security.

Amendment 117 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Is concerned, however, that only seven Member States have requested loans amounting to a total of EUR 166 billion out of the EUR 385.8 billion available for loans, leaving a considerable amount available should Member States require loans at a later stage; is preoccupied that the limited interest for the loan component may lead to lost opportunities and prevent the RRF from reaching its full potential; underlines that should Member States, whose NRRPs have been already approved, wish to request loans, it will require amending respective NRRP with the additional set of measures consisting of reforms and investments, without rolling back commitments in the plans already endorsed; encourages Member States to use full potential of the RRF; reminds that a Member State may request loan support at the time of the submission of a recovery and resilience plan or at a different moment in time until 31 August 2023;

Amendment 118 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Is concerned, however, that only seven Member States have requested loans amounting to a total of EUR 166 billion out of the EUR 385.8 billion available for loans, leaving a considerable amount available should Member States require loans at a later stage; is preoccupied that the limited interest for the loan component may lead to lost opportunities and prevent the RRF from reaching its full potential; underlines that should Member States whose NRRPs have been already approved wish to request loans, it will require amending respective NRRP, where relevant with the additional set of reforms and investments, milestones and targets; encourages Member States to use full potential of the RRF;

Amendment 119 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Is concerned~~Notes, however, that only seven Member States have requested loans amounting to a total of EUR 166 billion out of the EUR 385.8 billion available for loans, leaving a considerable amount available should Member States require loans at a later stage~~; is preoccupied~~, given the fact that these are not desirable by Member States which already had high levels of public debt; notes that the limited interest for the loan component may lead to lost opportunities and prevent the RRF from reaching its full potential;

Amendment 12 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Recital B (new)

B. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating effect on the employment and social situation of young people in Europe, with opportunities for personal development dwindling or being temporarily halted, employment rates falling, and corresponding numbers of young people not in employment, education or training (NEET) rising1a; whereas youth have significant decrease in personal income and a higher risk of poverty and social exclusion, as well as a considerable risk for the future labour market involvement; whereas immediate action is needed to secure and improve the future and well-being of young people; whereas the youth unemployment rate stands at 15,9%, 2.5 times higher than the general unemployment rates2a; __________________ 1a https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/ view/yth_empl_150/default/table?lang=en 2a https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics- explained/index.php?title=Unemployment _statistics#Youth_unemployment

Amendment 12 #

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

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

Amendment 120 #

Enikő GYŐRI, Tamás DEUTSCH, Andor DELI, Bogdan RZOŃCA, András GYÜRK, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK, Jadwiga WIŚNIEWSKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Is concerned, however~~Takes note, that only seven Member States have requested loans amounting to a total of EUR 166 billion out of the EUR 385.8 billion available for loans, leaving a considerable amount available should Member States require loans at a later stage; ~~is preoccupied that the limited interest for the loan component may lead to lost opportunities and prevent the RRF from reaching its full potential~~reminds in this regard, that some Member States have access to loans with better conditions from international markets;

Amendment 121 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Calls on the Commission to reassess the potential amount of RRF loan support that would not be requested by the Member States due to limited interest for the loan component, thereby calls on the Commission to exercise more flexible framework for the provision of support of the Facility to Member States particulary in respect to the fallout of the Russian aggression on Ukraine, namely related to social, children, housing infrastructure, etc. aspects.

Amendment 122 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Reminds all Member States and the Commission that the current war in Ukraine poses a serious threat to the EU recovery and resilience strategy; urges the European Commission to explore ways in which unused loans could be requested to tackle the economic, social and energy consequences following Russia’s aggression in Ukraine on February 24 2022;

Amendment 123 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Encourages those Member States that did not request loans to the full extent available, to do so and prioritise measures aiming at increasing their energy security and mitigating the economic effects of the crisis generated by the Russian invasion of Ukraine in the European Union.

Amendment 124 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, Markus PIEPER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9 b. Is of the opinion that the Russian invasion on Ukraine inter alia requires a recalibration of the European energy policy; highlights that cross-border projects should enhance synergies and cooperation between the EU-countries and reflect common concerns and shared priorities; believes that the Recovery and Resilience Facility plays a significant role in reorienting the EU towards energy- independency and to accelerate the energy transition; is concerned that only 13.68% of cross-border projects are investing in the green transition; believes that under the current policy paradigm shift, too few cross-border projects have been initiated under the framework of the RRF; urges the Member States to make use of Article 21 in the RRF regulation which allows for change to national plans upon request of the Member States; refers to Recital 49 where amending the national plan is possible upon a reasoned request;

Amendment 125 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Johan VAN OVERTVELDT, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9 b. Urges the Commission to reassess the potential amount of RRF loan support that would not be requested by the Member States due to limited interest for the loan component, in order to supplement the REPowerEU program in necessary ways to help make the EU independent from Russian fossil fuels in light of Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Amendment 126 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, Markus PIEPER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9 c. Recalls that the acceptance rate of loans by the Member States is so far and will remain low for the foreseeable future; stresses the need for an independent energy supply for the EU and corresponding investments in cross- border networks, interconnectors and hydrogen projects; calls on the Commission to make the full amount of loans available for Member States interested in investing into cross-border projects that are focused on energy- independence and transforming the energy-grid in the EU; calls on the Commission for a proposal on the revision of the Recovery and Resilience Facility Regulation to amend Art 14.5 of the RRF Regulation to allow Member States who are interested to request a loan higher than 6,8% GNI; calls on the Council to support the Commission in putting forward the proposal;

Amendment 127 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Tasks the Commission with analysing the reasons why the Member States have not requested loans to the full extent of their allocation; reminds that a Member State may request loan support at the time of the submission of a recovery and resilience plan or at a different moment in time until 31 August 2023; calls on the Commission, where relevant, to come forward with targeted measures to incentivise the optimal use of the resources available under the RRF; calls in this respect for spending financed by RRF loans to benefit from a qualified treatment in the EU fiscal framework in order to prevent borrower countries to reduce their non-RRF spending once the currently suspended fiscal rules are re- activated; suggests, therefore, to treat this RRF-financed expenditure as one-off and exclude it from the structural balance as well as the expenditure benchmark;

Amendment 128 #

Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL, Nicola BEER, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Ondřej KOVAŘÍK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Tasks the Commission with analysing the reasons why the Member States have not requested loans to the full extent of their allocation; observes that one such reason may be that spending financed by the loans allocated under the RRF is not exempt from the EU’s fiscal rules, with the result that such spending would be included in the structural deficit calculations; is concerned that this position would prevent the most indebted Member States, which need it the most, from harnessing the full potential of the RRF;

Amendment 129 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Tasks the Commission with analysing: a) the reasons why thsome Member States have not requested logrants to the full extent of their allocation;, b) the extent of loans adopted by central banks in Member States to supplement RRF grants and c) private investments generated from RRF-funded projects.

Amendment 13 #

Markus PIEPER, Angelika WINZIG

Motion for a resolution
Recital B (new)

B. whereas EUR 672.5 billion in grants and loans are being made available to finance national measures designed to alleviate the economic and social consequences of the pandemic;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Recalls that the acceptance rate of loans by the Member States is so far and will remain low for the foreseeable future; stresses the need for an independent energy supply for the EU and corresponding investments in cross- border networks, interconnectors and hydrogen projects; calls on the Commission to make the full amount of loans available for Member States interested in investing into cross-border projects that are focused on energy- independence and transforming the energy-grid in the EU; calls on the Commission for a proposal on the revision of the Recovery and Resilience Facility Regulation to amend Art 14.5 of the RRF Regulation to allow Member States who are interested to request a loan higher than 6,8% GNI; calls on the Council to support the Commission in putting forward the proposal;

Amendment 130 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Tasks the Commission ~~with analysing the reasons why the Member States~~to request from Member States, prior to the disbursement of funds, to provide detailed reasoning on why they have not requested loans to the full extent of their allocation;

Amendment 131 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Tasks the Commission with analysing the reasons why the Member States have not requested loans to the full extent of their allocation; calls on the Commission, where relevant, to come forward with targeted measures to incentive the optimal use of the resources available under the RRF, taking into account the new financial needs caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the side-effects of sanctions on Russia;

Amendment 132 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

Amendment 133 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Johan VAN OVERTVELDT, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Tasks the Commission with analysing the reasons why the Member States have not requested loans to the full extent of their allocation; and requests to come up with recommendations how this issue could be improved, provided Member States chose to update or amend their NRRPs

Amendment 134 #

Antonio Maria RINALDI, Marco ZANNI, Anna BONFRISCO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Tasks the Commission with analysi~~Believes that among the reasons why the Member States have not requested loans to the full extent of their allocation are the many conditionalities linked to these funds, which is why many countries have chosen to continue financing on their own in the markets;

Amendment 135 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Tasks the Commission with analysing the reasons why the Member States have not requested loans to the full extent of their allocation, which could prevent the RRF from reaching its full potential, and, where relevant, to come forward with a proposal of targeted amendment of the RRF Regulation to incentive the optimal use of the resources available under the RRF;

Amendment 136 #

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Nicola BEER, Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Tasks the Commission with analysing the reasons why the Member States have not requested loans to the full extent of their allocation~~Notes that Member States with high levels of public debt do not have incentives for requesting loans since they remain constrained by current SGP rules (even if they are suspended); notes that a reform of SGP, in order to do away with its pro-cyclical bias and its arbitrary targets for debt and deficit, is of crucial importance;

Amendment 137 #

Enikő GYŐRI, Tamás DEUTSCH, Andor DELI, Bogdan RZOŃCA, András GYÜRK, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK, Jadwiga WIŚNIEWSKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Tasks the Commission with analysing the reasons why the Member States have not requested loans to the full extent of their allocation; such analyses should focus on comparing the conditions of loans from international market with RRF conditions, which might be exaggerated;

Amendment 138 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Tasks the Commission with analysing the reasons why the Member States have not requested loans to the full extent of their allocation; stresses that depleting the funds available for loans is not a goal in and of itself; emphasizes that some Member States can borrow at a rate lower than the European Commission due to their fiscal prudence and are hence not in need of RRF loans;

Amendment 139 #

Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Dragoş PÎSLARU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Recalls that, under Article 21 of the Recovery and Resilience Facility, objective circumstances allow a Member State to make a reasoned request to the Commission to make a proposal to amend or replace the approved plan; recalls that if the Commission considers that the reasons put forward by the Member State justify an amendment of the NRRP, it shall assess the amended NRRP in accordance with Article 19 and put forward a proposal for a Council implementing decision according to Article 20 of the Regulation; recalls that such a request for amendment entails an assessment and approval procedure identical to the first assessment and approval procedure of the plans; notes that, so far, no Member State requested to amend or replace the approved plan;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C (new)

C. whereas the RRF funding will support key policy areas such as green transition, digital transformation, economic, social and territorial cohesion, institutional resilience and crisis preparedness as well as children and youth, including education and skills;

Amendment 14 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Notes that the Commission has received 5 payment requests so far and has made one payment in December 2021; notes that on 28 January 2022 the Commission had disbursed EUR 46,6 billion in grants (14 % of the EUR 338 bn available) and EUR 19.9 billion on loans (5 % of the EUR 385.8 bn available); welcomes that the calendar of payments is in line with the expected implementation phase of the Facility; encourages the Commission to continue to work closely with the Member States to maintain this positive development and to report any significant difficulty in its future implementation reports;

Amendment 140 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

Amendment 141 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Insists that any amendment of the NRRPs shall fully comply with the provisions of the RRF Regulation and supports the Commission’s approach that the mere change of the political situation in Member States does not represent an objective reason for requesting an amendment of the NRRP; reminds Member States that requests for modifications of NRRPs, must comply with the timelines of the Regulation and will likely lead to delays in the implementation of the reforms and investments, will, subsequently, increase the risk of failing to meet agreed targets and milestones and, ultimately, incapacity of using of the entire RRF allocation or losing part of the funding;

Amendment 142 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10 a. Calls for the spending financed by RRF loans to benefit from the same treatment in the EU fiscal framework as is the case for the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) in the context of the Commission Communication on flexibility, so as to ensure an optimal effect for the EU recovery;

Amendment 143 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10 b. Recalls that, under Article 21 of the Recovery and Resilience Facility, objective circumstances allow a Member State to make a reasoned request to the Commission to make a proposal to amend or replace the approved plan; recalls that objective circumstances do not include political developments in Member States and insists that the Commission should apply a strict definition of the objective circumstances that justify such an amendment;

Amendment 144 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10 b. Notes that the development of Member State GDP is currently forecast to differ significantly from the Commissions autumn 2020 forecast, therefore leading to expected changes in the grant amounts available to Member States for the second 30% funding window of the RRF; points out that significant changes in the allocated grant portion may require amendments of national RRPs;

Amendment 145 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)

10 c. Is of the opinion that, irrespective of any change in allocation, the ongoing war in Ukraine should be deemed as relevant objective circumstances and justify the request for amendment; encourages the Commission to propose modifications to NRRPs that will further increase energy independence and help counter the effect of the recent sanctions; considers it essential that, in this context, any new allocation of existing funds is directed primarily towards reducing fossil fuel energy dependency through investments and reforms for reduction in energy consumption, increased energy efficiency, supply diversification and phase-out of fossil fuels; urges the Commission to encourage Member States to modify their approved plans to this effect, and to offer guidance on the swift and effective implementation of such investment and reform measures;

Amendment 146 #

Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel FERNANDES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 d (new)

10 d. Calls on the Commission to assess whether the legally specified spending targets of 37% green spending and 20% digital spending are likely to be reached as planned during the implementation phase of the RRF and to recommend amendments of Member State RRPs where it anticipates that the targets could be missed;

Amendment 147 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Looks forward to more granular and disaggregated data allowing for a better understanding of the additionality impacts of the RRF; urges the Member States to provide detailed information to the Commission ~~in order to ensure effective reporting of the impact of the RRF;~~ , so that as guardian of the treaties should look out for the correct implementation of European Union norms and the Parliament as budgetary control organism, in order to ensure effective reporting of the impact of the RRF; Shows its concern over the difficulties encountered on its access to information received by the Commission and transmitted by the Member States; Parliament must have access to all documents and communications from the Commission to each Member State, both of its plans and their implementation, and of the evaluations made or received.

Amendment 148 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Looks forward to more granular and disaggregated data allowing for a better understanding of the additionality~~Urges the Member States to provide detailed information to the Commission in order to ensure effective reporting of the impacts of the RRF; ~~urges the Member States to provide detailed information to the Commission~~ reiterates the importance of the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard in providing basic information for citizens on the global progress in the implementation of the RRPs; calls for more detailed reporting, focusing o~~rder to ensure effective reporting of the impact~~n outcome and impact indicators rather than output, to allow for better understanding the role and the additionality of the RRF;

Amendment 149 #

Alin MITUȚA, Olivier CHASTEL, Gilles BOYER, Ramona STRUGARIU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. LHighlights that RRF spending should adhere to the principle of additionality; looks forward to more granular and disaggregated data allowing for a better understanding of the additionality impacts of the RRF; urges the Member States to provide detailed information to the Commission in order to ensure effective reporting of the impact of the RRF; urges the Commission to take utmost care that RRF spending truly results in additional spending;

Amendment 15 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Recital C (new)

C. whereas countries that were particularly hard hit during the financial crisis once again saw an above-average rise in youth unemployment; whereas women, young people, older people, persons with disabilities and large families are more endangered by this development; whereas the Commission Autumn 2022 Economic Forecast shows promising figures with declining unemployment, and labour markets expected to complete its recovery in 2022 to pre-pandemic levels; however the crisis continues affecting particularly the young; whereas the number of young workers declined, compared to Q1- 211a; whereas in 2022 and 2023 3.4 million jobs are expected to be created2a, making it essential to ensure young people take part of these new employment opportunities; whereas an increasing number of young adults are now relying on the parental home to protect them from poverty, but 29 % of households with three generations are at risk of poverty and 13 % are severely deprived3a; __________________ 1a Source: European Economic Forecast, Autumn 2021 (COM) (p. 128) 2a European Commission Autumn 2021 Economic Outlook, p.2. 3a Source: Recital N – EP Resolution on Strong Social Europe for Just Transitions)

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Notes that out of EUR 385.8 billion available for loans, seven Member States have requested loans amounting EUR 166 billion, leaving a considerable amount available for Member States to request loans at a later stage if needed; urges the European Commission to explore ways in which unused loans could address the economic, social and energy consequences impacting Member States, following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine;

Amendment 150 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

Amendment 151 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Looks forward to more granular and disaggregated data allowing for a better understanding of the additionality impacts of the RRF; ~~urges the Member States to provide detailed information to the Commission in order to ensure effective reporting of the impact of the RRF;~~

Amendment 152 #

Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL, Nicola BEER, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Ondřej KOVAŘÍK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Looks forward to more granular and disaggregated data allowing for a better understanding of the additionality impacts of the RRF; regrets the lack of public information on how the NRRPs comply with the requirement of additionality; urges the Member States to provide detailed information to the Commission in order to ensure effective reporting of the impact of the RRF; ; stresses the importance of a transparent and public score board and thus the need of benchmarking reforms and investments

Amendment 153 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

Amendment 154 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

Amendment 155 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Believes that in order to demonstrate its added value, the RRF should focus on investments which could not be adequately financed through other funding instruments of the Union or would have difficulty in obtaining the adequate financing;

Amendment 156 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Notes that only nine operational arrangements have been signed between the Commission and Member States so far; calls on the Commission and Member States to sign operational arrangements as soon as possible and urges the Commission and all Member States to publish their operational arrangements, financing and loan agreements in a timely manner, in order to ensure better transparency and reinforce accountability;

Amendment 157 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Notes that only nine operational arrangements have been signed between the Commission and Member States so far; calls on the Commission and Member States to sign operational arrangements as soon as possible and urges the Commission and all Member States to publish their operational arrangements and financing arrangements voluntarily in a timely manner, in order to ensure better transparency and reinforce accountability;

Amendment 158 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Observes that 20 Member States have received pre-financing of up to 13 % of of their ~~total alloca~~financial contribution, that one Member State has not requested pre- financing and that five have so far requested first payments from the RRF;

Amendment 159 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13 a. Reiterates that delays in the implementation of the Facility and national recovery and resilience plans should not slow down the recovery process following the pandemic and diminish the level of resilience of the Union;

Amendment 16 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Recital C (new)

C. whereas, to be eligible for financing, the National Recovery and Resilience Plans (NRRPs) must include the reforms and investment related to the scope based on the six areas of European interest, respect general and specific objectives, horizontal principles and the 11 assessment criteria set out in the RRF Regulation;

Amendment 16 #

Markus PIEPER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Is of the opinion that the Russian invasion on Ukraine inter alia requires a recalibration of the European energy policy; highlights that cross-border projects should enhance synergies and cooperation between the EU-countries and reflect common concerns and shared priorities; believes that the Recovery and Resilience Facility plays a significant role in reorienting the EU towards energy- independency and to accelerate the energy transition; is concerned that only 13.68% of cross-border projects are investing in the green transition; believes that under the current policy paradigm shift, too few cross-border projects have been initiated under the framework of the RRF; urges the Member States to make use of Article 21 in the RRF regulation which allows for change to national plans upon request of the Member States; refers to Recital 49 where amending the national plan is possible upon a reasoned request;

Amendment 160 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Recalls that the RRF Regulation provides for the possibility to include in the NRRPs measures started from 1 February 2020 onwards and that some Member States have made use of this possibility rather extensively; believes that the entire concept of “retroactive reforms” and its extensive use is not in line with the spirit of the RRF objectives; urges the Commission to refrain from approving further “retroactive reforms”, particularly reforms which were already planned before the set up of the RRF and the emergence of the pandemic;

Amendment 161 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Recalls that the RRF Regulation provides for the possibility to include in the NRRPs measures started from 1 February 2020 onwards and that some Member States have made use of this possibility; urges the Commission to provide more granular and disaggregated data allowing for a better understanding of the additionality impacts of the RRF; deplores that some Member States have largely reused existing stimulus packages, thereby missing an important chance to use the RRF to provide for incremental growth and effectively transferring national sovereign debt into European debt without the desired effect;

Amendment 162 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Recalls that the RRF Regulation provides for the possibility to include in the NRRPs measures started from 1 February 2020 onwards and that some Member States have made use of this possibility; welcomes that some Member States have taken a proactive attitude to tackle the negative effects of the crisis by starting the implementation of measures ahead of the adoption of their NRRPs;

Amendment 163 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Deplores that Member States have made excessive use of the retroactivity clause thus undermining the notion of additionality; points out that many of the projects and reforms submitted by Member States as part of their RRPs were already planned before the RRF was either conceived or implemented and should thus have not received RRF funding; deplores that the Commission has failed to prevent Member States from making excessive use of the retroactivity clause; considers that the retroactivity clause and its excessive application ultimately undermine confidence in the RRF itself;

Amendment 164 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Welcomes the early dialogue between the Commission and the Member States in the preparation of the payment requests and Commission readiness in assessing payment requests; encourages it to continue thoroughly assessing whether milestones and targets are complied with consulting relevant experts where needed, in a timely manner; urges the Commission to ensure a fast deployment of payments and to closely monitor the implementation of reforms and investments;

Amendment 165 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Welcomes the early dialogue between the Commission and the Member States in the preparation of the payment requests and Commission readiness in assessing payment requests; encourages it to continue transparently assessing whether milestones and targets are complied with in a timely manner; urges the Commission to ensure a fast deployment of payments and to closely monitor the implementation of reforms and investments;

Amendment 166 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Regrets that among the initial payment requests, in some instances, some Member States make extensive use of the retroactivity clause, particularly as regards the reforms component; is of the opinion, that some of the reforms included in the first payment claims were already planned before the emergence of the pandemic and the set up of the RRF and thus should not receive funding from the instrument;

Amendment 167 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Reminds of the need to swiftly proceed with the introduction of new own resources to cover the repayment of the NextGenerationEU instrument, in accordance with the roadmap set out in the Interinstitutional Agreement concluded in December 2020 by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission;

Amendment 168 #

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Nicola BEER, Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Is concerned with the possibility of financing the RRF through cuts in future EU budgets; notes that such a scenario would undermine the nature of current grants conceded to the Member States, since these would eventually have to be paid for;

Amendment 169 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Recalls that the bonds issued to finance the RRF are to be repaid in a manner that ensures the steady and predictable reduction of liabilities, by 2058 at the latest;

Amendment 17 #

Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Dragoş PÎSLARU

Motion for a resolution
Recital D (new)

D. whereas, to be eligible for financing, the National Recovery and Resilience Plans (NRRPs) must include the reforms and investment related to the scope based on the six pillars, respect general and specific objectives, horizontal principles and the 11 assessment criteria set out in the RRF Regulation;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. INotes that the Commission concluded in its assessments that all NRRPs comply with the 11 criteria provided for in the Regulation 2021/241 and thus, gave a rating of A to most NRRPs; is concerned, however, about the fact that all Member States have received a B-rating for the criteria evaluating whether the estimated total costs of the NRRPs are reasonable; asks the Commission to monitor this criterion in its future implementation reports indicating whether the implementation corroborates this assessment or the costs estimation carried out by the Member States was in fact reasonable;

Amendment 170 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14 b. Calls on the Commission to present financing alternatives based on new own-resources, particularly regarding the taxation of financial transactions and digital multinationals; as an alternative, calls on the Commission to assess the role the ECB could play in financing the Fund;

Amendment 171 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14 b. Reminds that the Facility is subject to the sound economic governance and calls on the Commission to apply the existing rules scrupulously;

Amendment 172 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Johan VAN OVERTVELDT, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Welcomes the fact that 22 NRRPs have been approved and observes that as of early February 2022, one Member State had not yet put forward its NRRP; further notes that four NRRPs are pending assessment by the Commission; calls on the Commission to make the final assessment of the above mentioned plans as soon as possible; reminds the Commission that according to Article 19 of the RRF Regulation, the assessment needs to be done in close cooperation with the Member State within two months of the official submission of the NRRPs;

Amendment 173 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Welcomes the fact that 22 NRRPs have been approved and observes that as of early February 2022, one Member State had not yet put forward its NRRP; further notes that four NRRPs are pending assessment by the Commission; urges the countries with NRRPs pending assessment to engage in constructive discussions with the Commission in order for the plans to become ready for approval without further delay; calls on the Commission to apply diligently the RRF Regulation when assessing the remaining plans;

Amendment 174 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Welcomes the fact that 22 NRRPs have been approved and observes that as of early February 2022, four are currently undergoing Commission assessment and one Member State hads not yet put forward its NRRP; further notes that four NRRPs are pending assessment by the Commission; urges the countries with NRRPs pending assessment to engage in constructive discussions with the Commission to ensure full compliance with the 11 assessment criteria as set out in the regulation before presenting any draft Council Implementing Decision;

Amendment 175 #

Enikő GYŐRI, Tamás DEUTSCH, Andor DELI, Bogdan RZOŃCA, András GYÜRK, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK, Jadwiga WIŚNIEWSKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Welcomes the fact that 22 NRRPs have been approved and observes that as of early February 2022, one Member State had not yet put forward its NRRP; further notes that four NRRPs are pending assessment by the Commission; deplores the fact that the adoption of two NRRPs, namely the Polish and Hungarian, are blocked because of political reasons;

Amendment 176 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

Amendment 177 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15 a. Points out that the delay of assessment of the NRRPs by the Commission considerably hinders the main objectives of the RRF set out to help to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and to positively contribute to the recovery and resilience of every Member State; notes that these delays further contribute to suspiciousness of politically driven reasons.

Amendment 178 #

Antonio Maria RINALDI, Marco ZANNI, Anna BONFRISCO, Valentino GRANT, Gunnar BECK, Joachim KUHS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Notes the fact that the Commission’s assessments concluded that all approved NRRPs address all six pillars of the RRF and satisfactorily fulfil all assessment criteria as set out in RRF Regulation and represent a balanced package of reforms and investments; considers that ~~Member States could have better aligned their NRRPs to the six RRF pillars and the requirements of the RRF Regul~~the assessment criteria of the RRF Regulation should be however revised to allow greater investment in gas and nuclear infrastructures, in order to achieve a fast and stable energy independence of European countries from the Russian Federation;

Amendment 179 #

Enikő GYŐRI, Tamás DEUTSCH, Andor DELI, Bogdan RZOŃCA, András GYÜRK, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK, Jadwiga WIŚNIEWSKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Notes the fact that the Commission’s assessments concluded that all approved NRRPs address all six pillars of the RRF and satisfactorily fulfil all assessment criteria as set out in RRF Regulation and represent a balanced package of reforms and investments; ~~considers that Member States could have better aligned their NRRPs to the six RRF pillars and the requirements of the RRF Regulation~~reminds that these criteria are also fulfilled by the Polish and Hungarian RRP's, however their approval is pending on political blackmailing by the European left; deplores that this political blackmailing is damaging the level playing field amongst Member States' economies;

Amendment 18 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Recital D (new)

D. whereas the constant development of digital skills, as well as the development of skills with economic potential, such as green or entrepreneurial skills, is key for a healthy inclusive and future- oriented European labour market and should create access for every European to quality employment; whereas the same applies to vocational education, trade skills and life skills; whereas 40% of employers cannot find people with the right skills to fill their vacancies1a; whereas the EU needs to overcome all forms of skills mismatch in order to make effective use of its human capital2a; whereas access to proper digital infrastructure and training on digital skills should be available to all in order to avoid widening the gap between people on digital literacy and ensure equal opportunities for all in the education system and in the labour market; __________________ 1a Source : https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId =1146&langId=en 2a Source: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/BRIE/2016/573893/EPRS_BRI%2 82016%29573893_EN.pdf

Amendment 18 #

Alin MITUȚA, Olivier CHASTEL, Gilles BOYER, Ramona STRUGARIU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Is concerned about the fact that all Member States have received a B-rating for the criteria evaluating whether the estimated total costs of the NRRPs are reasonable; calls on the Commission to ensure that costs are plausible and that proper cost analysis is being conducted in order to tackle fraud and corruption; urges the Commission to evaluate milestones before accepting payment requests and performing disbursements of funds;

Amendment 180 #

Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel FERNANDES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Notes the fact that the Commission’s assessments concluded that all approved NRRPs address all six pillars of the RRF and satisfactorily fulfil all assessment criteria as set out in RRF Regulation and represent a balanced package of reforms and investments; considers that Member States could have better aligned their NRRPs to the six RRF pillars and the requirements of the RRF Regulation; stresses that the fast approval of the NRRP without direct participation by regional and local authorities is hindering its implementation; it expects the European Commission to collaborate with Member States on the improvement of these deficiencies.

Amendment 181 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16 a. Calls upon the European Commission to be open, transparent and available for the rapid correction of errors in NRRPs or revisions of NRRPs, especially if the reforms included risk to generate negative social and development effects; calls for the amounts allocated to national recovery and resilience plans to be removed from the deficit targets;

Amendment 182 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16 a. Regrets the lack of adequate involvement of local and regional authorities, civil society organisations, social partners and all other relevant stakeholders in the preparation of the NRRPs; calls on the Member States to ensure their proper involvement in the implementation of the NRRPs;

Amendment 183 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16 a. Stresses that the European Parliament should play a relevant role in assessing compliance with the Do No Significant Harm (DNSH) principle; notes that the involvement of the Parliament is crucial to avoid greenwashing;

Amendment 184 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)

16 b. Regrets the fact that local and regional authorities, social partners and other relevant stakeholders have not been adequately involved in the preparation of the NRRPs; stresses that this may also be the case during the implementation phase; calls on Member States to promote a meaningful involvement of these groups

Amendment 185 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)

16 b. Calls upon the European Commission to reduce the period of evaluation and approval of any changes requested by Member States to a maximum of 30 days and to allow the national plans to be implemented without interruption on the other chapters, not amended, during the evaluation process;

Amendment 186 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

Amendment 187 #

Enikő GYŐRI, Tamás DEUTSCH, Andor DELI, Bogdan RZOŃCA, András GYÜRK, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK, Jadwiga WIŚNIEWSKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Reminds the Commission that the rule of law conditionality mechanism is an essential component of the RRF; ~~calls on it to refrain from approving the NRRPs of Poland and Hungary as long as concerns regarding the observance of~~stresses that the situation with regard to Ukraine and the COVID-19 pandemic means that the rRule of lLaw ~~and the prevention and detection of and fight against fraud, conflicts of interest and corruption persist in those coun~~Conditionality Mechanism should not be applied; stries~~, and to ensure that all the measures set out in their plans comply with EU values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union~~ses further that all remaining national plans under the Recovery and Resilience Facility should be approved as a matter of urgency;

Amendment 188 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Reminds the Commission that compliance with the rRule of lLaw ~~conditionality mechanism is an essential~~and TFEU Article 2 values an essential prerequisite and component of the RRF; calls on ithe Commission to refrain from a positive assessment of the draft NRRPs and calls upon the Council not to approv~~ing~~e the NRRPs of Poland and Hungary as long as concerns regarding the observance of the rule of law and the prevention and detection of and fight against fraud, conflicts of interest and corruption persist in those countries, and to ensure that all the measures set out in their plans comply with EU values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union; and in particular, expects the three conditions for disbursing the Recovery and Resilience Facility funds to Poland mentioned by the Commission President on 19 October 2021 to be fulfilled; reminds Member States that the failure to fully comply with the provisions of the RRF Regulation and the subsequent delays in the approval of the NRRPs, seriously affect the capacity of local and regional authorities in adequately tackling the impact of the pandemic on their communities, businesses and citizens and can lead to a long term worsening of the local and regional economic situation; highlights that infringements of the Rule of Law, including of the independence of the judiciary, the right to free and fair elections and the freedom of the media, puts countries on the path towards autocratic leadership, undermines the values of our Union, and constitutes a serious and strategic security threat, especially, but not only, in the context of the Russian aggression;

Amendment 189 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Reminds the Commission that the rule of law conditionality mechanism is an essential component of the RRF; calls on it to refrain from approving the NRRPs of Poland and Hungary as long as concerns regarding the observance of the rule of law and the prevention and detection of and fight against fraud, conflicts of interest and corruption persist in those countries, and to ensure that all the measures set out in their plans comply with EU values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union; reminds Member States that the failure to fully comply with the provisions of the RRF Regulation and the subsequent delays in the approval of the NRRPs, seriously affect the capacity of local and regional authorities in adequately tackling the impact of the pandemic on their communities, businesses and citizens and can lead to a long term worsening of the local and regional economic situation;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D (new)

D. whereas dialogue and transparency between the EU institutions and the Member States is crucial for the successful implementation of the RRF;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 190 #

Antonio Maria RINALDI, Marco ZANNI, Anna BONFRISCO, Gunnar BECK, Joachim KUHS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Reminds the Commission that the rule of law conditionality mechanism is an essential component of the RRF; calls on it to ~~refrain from approving~~evaluate objectively and without external political pressure the NRRPs of Poland and Hungary ~~as long as conc~~; considerns regarding the observance of the rule of law and the prevention and detection of and fight against fraud, conflicts of interest and corruption persist in those countries, and to ensure that all the measures set out paradoxical to block European funding to two of the countries at the forefront of migration management following the~~ir plans comply with EU values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union~~ invasion of Ukraine;

Amendment 191 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Reminds the Commission that the rule of law ~~conditionality mechanism is an~~mechanism and the conditionality regulation are essential components of the RRF; calls on it to refrain from approving the NRRPs of Poland and Hungary as long as concerns regarding the observance of the rule of law and the prevention and detection of and fight against fraud, conflicts of interest and corruption persist in those countries, and to ensure that all the measures set out in their plans comply with EU values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union;

Amendment 192 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17 a. Calls on the Commission to apply diligently the RRF rules when assessing the remaining plans; reminds the Commission that the RRF is subject to the Rule of Law conditionality regime and calls on refraining from approving NRRPs in case of concerns regarding the observance of rule of law and the sound financial management of EU funds, prevention, detection and fight against fraud, conflict of interests and corruption; furthermore, recalls that the observance of rule of law and the sound financial management of EU funds are to be evaluated continuously throughout the lifecycle of the RRF and that the Commission shall refrain to disburse funding and, where applicable, recover funds, in case such conditions are no longer fulfilled; reminds Member States that the failure to fully comply with the provisions of the Regulation and the subsequent delays in the approval of the NRRPs, seriously affect the capacity of local and regional authorities in adequately tackling the impact of the pandemic on their communities, businesses and citizens and can lead to a long term worsening of the local and regional economic situation;

Amendment 193 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Urges the Commission to monitor very carefully the risks to EU financial interests in the implementation of the RRF and any breach or potential breach of the principles of the rule of law; reminds the Commission to implement the conditionality regulation without any further delay in order to protect the sound financial management and the Union’s financial interests;

Amendment 194 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. UReminds that the Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism is fully applicable for the RRF; urges the Commission to monitor very carefully the risks to EU financial interests in the implementation of the RRF and any breach or potential breach of the principles of the rule of law and to take immediate action if the financial interests of the EU are negatively impacted;

Amendment 195 #

Enikő GYŐRI, Tamás DEUTSCH, Andor DELI, Bogdan RZOŃCA, András GYÜRK, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK, Jadwiga WIŚNIEWSKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Urges the Commission to monitor very carefully the risks to EU financial interests in the implementation of the RRF and any breach o~~r potential breach o~~f the principles of the rule of law; notes that the CJEU has explicitly stated that the Conditionality Regulation is not intended to protect the rule of law, but to protect the EU budget;

Amendment 196 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Urges the Commission to monitor very carefully the risks to EU financial interests in the implementation of the RRF and any breach ~~or potential breach~~ of the principles of the rule of law;

Amendment 197 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18 a. Notes that, in addition to the requirements laid down in the RRF Regulation, NRRPs can include supplementary commitments taken by Member States in order to address domestic challenges, such as spending thresholds on territorializable investments; considers such commitments as binding, to the extent that they make integral part of the approved Plans; calls therefore on the Commission to evaluate the implementation of the Plans and national performances against these commitments;

Amendment 198 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18 a. Furthermore, recalls that the observance of rule of law and the sound financial management of EU funds are to be evaluated continuously throughout the lifecycle of the RRF and that the Commission shall refrain to disburse funding and, where applicable, recover funds, in case such conditions are no longer fulfilled;

Amendment 199 #

Margarida MARQUES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18 a. Recognises the positive impact of necessary tax reforms in the Member States that are included in some national plans, while deploring that none of the Member States concerned with CSR on aggressive tax planning, tax avoidance, tax evasion and money laundering, have addressed those challenges in their NRRPs;

Amendment 2 #

Alexis GEORGOULIS, Rasmus ANDRESEN, Niklas NIENASS, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Irena JOVEVA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Andrey SLABAKOV, Giorgos GEORGIOU, Hannes HEIDE

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)

— having regard to its resolution of 17 September 2020 on the cultural recovery of Europe (2020/2708(RSP)) and to its resolution of 20 October 2021 on the situation of artists and the cultural recovery in the EU (2020/2261(INI)),

Amendment 2 #

Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Dragoş PÎSLARU

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas the Recovery and Resilience Facility (‘the Facility’), as set up by Regulation 2021/241, is the cornerstone of the stimulus package NextGenerationEU (‘NGEU’) and aims to provide funding to Member States, through grants and loans, in order to finance reforms and investments, helping citizens and economies to cope with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and laying the foundations for sustainable recovery;

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E (new)

E. whereas dialogue and transparency between the EU institutions and the Member States is crucial for the optimal implementation of the RRF;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 200 #

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 3 a (new)

The RRF’s contribution to the Green transition

Amendment 201 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Notes that the Commission’s assessment states that all approved NRRPs expect to reach the green target of at least 37 % set out in the RRF Regulation, and that the overall climate expenditure of all approved NRRPs reaches almost ~~50 % or~~ EUR 220 billion; points out, however, that external reviews of the spending identify lower figures with regard to Green spending; deplores that the Commission has defined milestones and targets, as well as their operational implementation, inconsistently in various Member States, even though they address the same intervention field; highlights in this regard that the milestones and targets associated with climate-related measures have not always been defined in a way to ensure that the implemented measures are as climate-supportive as announced; highlights the risk of “greenwashing” in the implementation of some national plans, where measures tagged as contributing 100% to the green spending target do not clearly address the requirements set out by the Regulation, including an engagement to produce 30% of primary energy savings for renovation measures;

Amendment 202 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Notes that all approved NRRPs expect to reach the green target of at least 37 % set out in the RRF Regulation and that the overall climate expenditure of all approved NRRPs reaches almost 50 % or EUR 220 billion; is concerned that, according to an independent analysis1a of planned recovery measures in 14 Member States, at least eight national recovery plans failed to meet the requirement of the 37% threshold for ‘green’ spending; __________________ 1a https://www.e3g.org/news/a-recovery- with-green-elements-but-not-a-green- recovery/

Amendment 203 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Notes that all approved NRRPs expect to reach the green target of at least 37 % set out in the RRF Regulation and that the overall climate expenditure of all approved NRRPs reaches almost 50 % or EUR 220 billion; underlines that the NRRPs should contribute to the green transition, including biodiversity; notes positively that several NRRPs contribute significantly to biodiversity but regrets that not all NRRPs contribute sufficiently to biodiversity;

Amendment 204 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Notes that all approved NRRPs expect to reach the green target of at least 37 % set out in the RRF Regulation and that the overall climate expenditure of all approved NRRPs reaches almost 50 % or EUR 220 billion; underlines, however, the concerns whether all relevant measures truly contribute to the achievement of the objectives of and the commitments under the Paris Agreement and the EU Climate Law;

Amendment 205 #

Antonio Maria RINALDI, Marco ZANNI, Anna BONFRISCO, Gunnar BECK, Joachim KUHS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Notes that all approved NRRPs expect to reach the green target of at least 37 % set out in the RRF Regulation and that the overall climate expenditure of all approved NRRPs reaches almost 50 % or EUR 220 billion; questions the real added value of these investments in order to improve the safety of the Union's energy supplies;

Amendment 206 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19 a. Regrets that in their NRRPs several countries have prioritised measures such as investments in fossil gas boilers over renewable energy sources; deplores that some countries planned to fund fossil gas boilers as part of broader measures for building renovation and heating, running the risk of extensive lock-in in gas infrastructure that contradicts EU climate objectives; reiterates its call to fully apply the guidance, in particular in light of the urgent need to phase out Russian gas;

Amendment 207 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19 b. Underlines that the RRF Regulation’s definition of new climate spending intervention fields is aimed at providing Member States and Commission with the necessary flexibility to fulfil the spirit and letter of the Regulation; deplores that in some Member States spending for hybrid cars has been added to list of intervention fields and asks Member States to redirect funds committed to this aim, as hybrid car technologies do not effectively contribute to the Green transition, lack long-term impact, and do not comply with the DNSH, given that a superior technology is available in fully electric vehicles;

Amendment 208 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)

19 c. Recalls the urgent need to halt and reverse the dramatic loss of biodiversity; reminds the RRF should contribute to the mainstreaming of biodiversity action and that pillar one of the RRF is the green transition, including biodiversity; is concerned that most Member States have not used the recovery fund as an opportunity to improve biodiversity; regrets that binding targets on biodiversity were not part of the RRF Regulation; stresses that the key objectives of the EU’s Biodiversity Strategy 2030 are in jeopardy without significant changes in EU spending;

Amendment 209 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 d (new)

19 d. Recalls that the NRRPs need to be consistent with the National Energy and Climate Plans (NECPs) and the updates of thereof; calls on the Commission to assess the contribution of the investments earmarked for the green transition under the NRRPs to the achievement of the new 2030 climate and energy targets set out in the respective revised (NECPs);

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E (new)

E. whereas the European Commission, which is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the RRF, must regularly inform Parliament of the status of the assessment of the NRRPs, and how the targets and milestones have been implemented by the Member States including their contribution to the progress of meeting the green and digital targets; whereas the European Commission is required to take Parliament’s views into account;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission to report on the implementation of the milestones pertaining to the missing elements in the plans on the structures in place to monitor, implement and control the funds allocated and the extent to which these missing elements have affected the timely absorption of the funds; stresses that swift implementation of NRRPs is a prerequisite not only for economic recovery but also to stimulate growth and therefore achieve its intended purpose;

Amendment 210 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 e (new)

19 e. Notes that the Commission largely relies on Member States to thoroughly audit the RRP implementation; deplores that there is no mechanism for regular and systematic auditing of Member States control systems in place; doubts that the Commission has committed sufficient human and financial resources to verify that legal requirements of the RRF, in particular those for complying with the 37% Green spending targets, are being fulfilled in the milestones and targets as well as verification of compliance with DNSH requirements under the regulation;

Amendment 211 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 f (new)

19 f. Urges the Commission to adopt all necessary steps to effectively monitor, audit and enforce the full implementation of these requirements, as well as on the non-regression of EU environmental law; calls on the Commission to analyse all payment requests in this light and ensure full compliance of all milestones and targets reached with the regulation before granting payments;

Amendment 212 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Notes that all approved NRRPs expect to achieve the digital target of at least 20 % set out in the RRF Regulation, while some Member States have even allocated more than half of their RRF funds to measures qualifying for the digital target; and that the overall digital expenditure of all approved NRRPs reaches almost 29 % or EUR 130 billion; welcomes a strong focus in NRRPs on the digitalisation of public services, including the health sector, and digital skills, digitalisation of business, connectivity, digital R&D and advanced technologies; notes that two thirds of Member States included a security self-assessment for investments in digital capacities and connectivity in their RRPs;

Amendment 213 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Notes that all approved NRRPs expect to achieve the digital target of at least 20 % set out in the RRF Regulation and that the overall digital expenditure of all approved NRRPs reaches almost 29 % or EUR 130 billion; welcomes a strong focus in NRRPs on the digitalisation of public services, including the health sector, and digital skills, digitalisation of business, connectivity, digital R&D and advanced technologies; notes that two thirds of Member States included a security self-assessment for investments in digital capacities and connectivity in their RRPs;

Amendment 214 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Notes that all approved NRRPs expect to achieve the digital target of at least 20 % set out in the RRF Regulation and that the overall digital expenditure of all approved NRRPs reaches almost 29 % or EUR 130 billion; notes that countries have taken different approaches to supporting SMEs and highlights different initiatives such as measures for tax relief, voucher schemes and R&D incentives, digitalisation and aggregators for available technologies and services to SMEs, or speeding of fund distribution to companies;

Amendment 215 #

Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL, Nicola BEER, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Ondřej KOVAŘÍK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20 a. Reminds the Commission and Member States that according to the RRF Regulation, investments in digital technologies should respect the principles of interoperability, energy efficiency and personal data protection, allow for the participation of SMEs and start-ups, and promote the use of open-source solutions; stresses that utmost attention should be paid in the design of digital procurement calls, that SMEs and start-ups are prioritised in public investment;

Amendment 216 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20 a. Regrets the lack of information on how NRRPs contribute to achieving climate neutrality as outlined in the European Climate Law; calls on the Commission to include data in the national scoreboards on how the investments in the NRRPs reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Member States.

Amendment 217 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Underlines the importance that the NRRPs dedicate almost 50 % of total expenditure or EUR 203 billion to measures to benefit the well-functioning of the single market, improving the business environment and promoting private investments; calls on the Member States to lift all unnecessary obstacles that would prevent SMEs from accessing the relevant RRF funding; asks Member States to implement the NRRPS according to a transparent schedule to allow the private sector to plan their activities and projects according to the relevant reforms and funding;

Amendment 218 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Underlines the importance that the NRRPs dedicate almost 50 % of total expenditure or EUR 203 billion to measures to benefit the well-functioning of the single market, improving the business environment and promoting private investments; calls on the Member States to lift all unnecessary obstacles that would prevent SMEs from accessing the relevant RRF funding; calls on the Commission to launch a legal complaints platform with the commitment of written answer;

Amendment 219 #

Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Dragoş PÎSLARU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. ~~Underlines the importance~~Welcomes that the NRRPs dedicate almost ~~50 % of total expenditure or~~ EUR 203 billion to measures to benefit the well-functioning of the single market, improving the business environment and promoting private investments; reiterates the importance of private sector in the successful implementation of the RRF; calls on the Member States to lift all unnecessary obstacles that would prevent SMEs from accessing the relevant RRF funding, and to this end, asks the Commission to provide detailed analyses;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F (new)

F. whereas the European Commission, which is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the RRF, must regularly inform Parliament of the status of the assessment of the NRRPs, and how the targets and milestones have been implemented by the Member States;

Amendment 22 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Observes, that by the nature of the instruments, the control focuses on the achievement of results instead of verifications of costs; notes that this approach can simplify the implementation and contribute to the achievement of the desired outcome; nevertheless, is worried that it also makes the detection of abuse of EU funds more difficult;

Amendment 220 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Underlines the importance that the NRRPs dedicate almost 50 % of total expenditure or EUR 203 billion to measures to benefit the well-functioning of the single market, improving the business environment and promoting private investments; reiterates the importance of private sector in the successful implementation of the RRF; calls on the Member States to lift all unnecessary obstacles that would prevent SMEs from accessing the relevant RRF funding, and to this end, asks the Commission to provide detailed analyses;

Amendment 221 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Notes that the Commission estimates social spending in the NRRPs to account for around 20 % of the grants and loans requested; observes that this expenditure focuses on employment incentives for specific disadvantaged groups, reforms of employment protection legislation and labour contract regulation; notes that the Commission should not impose deregulatory measures on Member States, as happened in the past; regrets that social investment measures have been rather limited to social infrastructure and that only some NRRPs contain measures for the development of proper care services and temporary support measures; supports the Commission’s aim, through the RRF, of building a more ~~resilient and~~ inclusive labour market, while contributing to promote real wage growth and tackle income inequalities;

Amendment 222 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Notes that the Commission estimates social spending in the NRRPs to account for around 20 % of the grants and loans requested; observes that this expenditure focuses on employment incentives for specific disadvantaged groups, reforms of employment protection legislation and labour contract regulation; regrets that social investment measures have been rather limited to social infrastructure and that only some NRRPs contain measures for the development of proper care services and temporary support measures; supports the Commission’s aim, through the RRF, of building a more resilient and inclusive labour market, while noting that relevant measures should promote high-quality employment and tackle the deregulation of the labour market;

Amendment 223 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Notes that the Commission estimates social spending in the NRRPs to account for around 20 % of the grants and loans requested; observes that this expenditure focuses on employment incentives for specific disadvantaged groups, reforms of employment protection legislation and labour contract regulation; ~~regre~~highlights that social ~~investment meas~~expenditures have been rather limited to social infrastructure and that only some NRRPs contain measures for the development of proper care services and temporary support measures; supports the Commission’s aim, through the RRF, of building a more resilient and inclusive labour markets a high likelihood of replacing recurring government expenditure, which would not be in compliance with the provisions governing the RRF; calls on the European Commission to scrutinise this aspect rigorously;

Amendment 224 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Notes that the Commission estimates social spending in ~~the NRRPs to account for~~Member States’ RRPs at around 20 % of the grants and loans requested; observes that thisose expenditure focuses on employment incentives for specific disadvantaged groups, reforms of employment protection legislation and labour contract regulation; ~~regrets that social investment measures have been rather limited to social infrastructure and that only som~~support the Commission to build through the RRF a more resilient and inclusive labour market; is of the opinion, however, that social expenditure financed though the NRRPs contain measures for the development of proper care services and temporary support measures; supports the Commission’s aim, through the RRF, of building a more resilient and inclusive labour marketF must not replace nor become recurring budgetary expenditure and shall be strictly linked with the overall objectives of the RRF, namely to support the post-crisis economic recovery;

Amendment 225 #

Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Notes that the Commission estimates social spending in the NRRPs to account for around 20 % of the grants and loans requested; observes that this expenditure focuses on employment incentives for specific disadvantaged groups, reforms of employment protection legislation and labour contract regulation; shows concern about certain measures might develop into budgetary compromises on a medium term basis regrets that social investment measures have been rather limited to social infrastructure and that only some NRRPs contain measures for the development of proper care services and temporary support measures; considers that it will be necessary to acknowledge investments due to the illegal invasion of Ukraine and the accommodation of refugees, supports the Commission’s aim, through the RRF, of building a more resilient and inclusive labour market;

Amendment 226 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. NRecalls that the social consequences of the pandemic have been manifold and have unevenly burdened lower income and vulnerable groups while at the same time reinforcing the need for public services; notes that the Commission estimates social spending in the NRRPs to account for around 20 % of the grants and loans requested; observes that this expenditure focuses on employment incentives for specific disadvantaged groups, reforms of employment protection legislation and labour contract regulation; regrets that social investment measures have been rather limited to social infrastructure and that only some NRRPs contain measures for the development of proper care services and temporary support measures; supports the Commission’s aim, through the RRF, of building a more resilient and inclusive labour market;

Amendment 227 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22 a. Points out that all approved NRPPs so far address social and employment challenges such as measures for improving labour market participation, promoting upskilling and reskilling, the modernisation of labour market institutions and services, as well as of social protection and healthcare systems but fail to invest on a sufficient scale into social services; calls for increased public expenditure to ensure the provision of accessible high quality public services;

Amendment 228 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

Amendment 229 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22 a. Regrets that in some NRRPs, due to extensive politicisation, anti-social and anti-development measures have been included among the reforms, including to keep pensions and salaries under the poverty ratio;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F (new)

F. whereas the Member States must set up and maintain robust control systems and conduct necessary audits to ensure the protection of the financial interests of the Union throughout the entire life-cycle of the Facility;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Notes that democratic control and parliamentary scrutiny over the implementation of the RRF is only possible with the full involvement of Parliament and the consideration of all its recommendations in all stages, and highlights that the European Parliament will continue to scrutinise the implementation of the RRF; recalls that Article 25 of the RRF Regulation requests the Commission to transmit relevant documents and information simultaneously and on equal terms to the European Parliament and to the Council; notes that, despite the slow start of the proper process of a document flow, appropriate communication procedures were put in practice;

Amendment 230 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Underlines the importance of reforms and investments in health, economic, social and institutional resilience to increase crisis preparedness and crisis response capacity, which account for more than 17 % of total NRRP allocations, representing EUR 76 billion; highlights that according to the Commission under this RRF pillar Member States have to implement 789 measures linked to 1 900 milestones and targets; emphasises that COVID-19 has demonstrated that improving the resilience of public institutions to shocks should be an ongoing reform and investment priority for many Member States;

Amendment 231 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

Amendment 232 #

Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23 a. Underlines that the current situation in Ukraine impacts heavily the energy prices and exposes the risk of the EU dependency to imported fossil fuel energy; stresses the role of the RRF in the rollout of REPowerEU and, therefore, expects the RRF to contribute significantly to the just green transition and increase the resilience of the EU-wide energy system by developing clean energy, and accelerating the reduction of EU’s dependency to fossil fuel energy and improving energy efficiency while promoting a more circular approach in the EU’s production and consumption patterns;

Amendment 233 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23 a. Notes that the crises has affected disproportionally the most vulnerable ones and regrets that some Member States are lacking behind in strengthening the social dimension of their plans;

Amendment 234 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)

23 b. Underlines that the current situation in Ukraine impacts heavily the energy prices and exposes the risk of the EU dependency to imported fossil fuel energy; stresses the role of the RRF in the rollout of REPowerEU and, therefore, expects the RRF to contribute significantly to the EU energy sovereignty by energy diversification and the just green transition by developing clean energy;

Amendment 235 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Notes that approved NRRPs envisage expenditure on healthcare-related measures of EUR 37 billion, which corresponds to 8 % of total NRRP expenditure; expects these healthcare- related measures to contribute to increasing the resilience of universal public healthcare systems and their preparedness for future c~~rises;~~hallenges, such as ageing populations; acknowledges the importance of public healthcare expenditure and calls on the Commission to abandon the pre-pandemic recommendations for further cuts to this expenditure

Amendment 236 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

Amendment 237 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

Amendment 238 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Notes that approved NRRPs envisage expenditure on healthcare-related measures of EUR 37 billion, which corresponds to 8 % of total NRRP expenditure; expects these healthcare- related measures to contribute to increasing the resilience of healthcare systems and their preparedness for future crises; is concerned that many Member States did not include sufficient measures to make mental health care accessible and affordable for all age groups, especially in early ages and highlights that mental health should represent an integral part of the EU’s socio-economic recovery from the pandemic and an occupational health priority, in particular in educational and workplace environments;

Amendment 239 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Notes that approved NRRPs envisage expenditure on healthcare-related measures of EUR 37 billion, which corresponds to 8 % of total NRRP expenditure; observes that the highest contribution is earmarked for renovating and expanding hospital infrastructure, followed by strengthening primary care and prevention, digital transition in health care and long-term care; expects these healthcare- related measures to contribute to increasing the resilience of healthcare systems and their preparedness for future crises; is concerned that many Member States did not include sufficient measures to make mental health care accessible and highlights that mental health should represent an integral part of the EU’s socio-economic recovery from the pandemic and an occupational health priority;

Amendment 24 #

Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Dragoş PÎSLARU

Motion for a resolution
Recital G (new)

G. whereas the Member States must set up robust control systems and ensure the protection of the financial interests of the Union;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard that provides an overview of the progress made in the implementation of the NRRPs and thereby fosters the transparency, public scrutiny and accountability of the Facility; reiterates the importance of the Commission undertaking a continuous, including ex-post, monitoring of the Facility's expenditure; believes that full transparency is needed from the Member States, regarding implementation and management data, in order to analyse the results of the Facility and identify possible shortcomings;

Amendment 240 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Notes that approved NRRPs envisage expenditure on healthcare-related measures of EUR 37 billion, which corresponds to 8 % of total NRRP expenditure; expects these healthcare- related measures to have a direct link with the national healthcare plans and to contribute to increasing the resilience of healthcare systems and their preparedness for future crises;

Amendment 241 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24 a. Observes that public administration modernisation features prominently in many NRRPs with approximately EUR 1.8 billion expected investment in the enhancement of the public administration; underlines that the benefits of reforms go beyond of their associated costs, which should lead to concrete positive impact on citizens;

Amendment 242 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)

24 b. Highlights that the pandemic led the Union to prioritize reforms and investments to improve the resilience of public institutions to shocks; stresses that plans also aim to increase the capacity of public administrations to manage European funds effectively at national, regional and local levels; regrets that progress in this area is too slow, especially at regional and local levels, risking the effective and timely use of the funds assigned to each Member State in the context of the RRF;

Amendment 243 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Notes that approved NRRPs envisage expenditure dedicated to children and young people, including early childhood education and care, youth unemployment and skills, of EUR 49 billion, which corresponds to approximately 11.5 % of total NRRP expenditure; notes that the amount represents a first step in ensuring that coordinated measures dedicated to next generation are being implemented in all 27 Member States; is concerned that many NRRPs do not properly reflect the ambitions set by the European Child Guarantee and that they reflect only partially those of the reinforced Youth Guarantee; deplores that two Member States chose not to include in their plans measures specifically dedicated to children and youth but preferred to present measures that foster skills and digital skills for all citizens;

Amendment 244 #

Alexis GEORGOULIS, Rasmus ANDRESEN, Niklas NIENASS, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Irena JOVEVA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Andrey SLABAKOV, Giorgos GEORGIOU, Hannes HEIDE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

Amendment 245 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25 a. Regrets that only 16 Member States have included culture in their NRRPs; fears that this heterogeneity of public investments leads to recovery at different speeds, causing increased disparities within the EU’s cultural ecosystem and thus threatening Europe’s cultural diversity; recalls repeated previous requests by the Parliament and by stakeholders from the cultural and creative sectors, urging the Member States to dedicate at least 2 % of the budget of each national NRRP to culture;

Amendment 246 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25 a. Calls for the Commission to continue monitoring the implementation of the six pillars and ensuring granular data is made available in the RRF scoreboard; notes positively that several Member States provide data at regional level and invites the other Member States to provide data at regional level;

Amendment 247 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25 a. Recalls previous requests from the European Parliament urging the Members states to dedicate at least 2% of NRRP to culture and 10% to education and regrets that the majority of Member States are not performing at the levels requested;

Amendment 248 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25 a. Observes that almost all approved NRRPs contain investment in digital education, making up about 30% of the total spending on education; welcomes the focus on the modernisation of education infrastructure and equipment in the Member States;

Amendment 249 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25 a. Observes that almost all approved RRPs contain investment in digital education, making up about 30% of the total spending on education; welcomes the focus on the modernisation of education systems in the Member States;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G (new)

G. whereas the Regulation provides the possibility for a Member State to make a reasoned request to amend its NRRP within the period of implementation, where objective circumstances justify such a course of action;

Amendment 25 #

Alexis GEORGOULIS, Rasmus ANDRESEN, Niklas NIENASS, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Irena JOVEVA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Andrey SLABAKOV, Giorgos GEORGIOU, Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard that provides an overview of the progress made in the implementation of the NRRPs and thereby fosters the transparency, public scrutiny and accountability of the Facility; calls, however, for including more detailed and regional information about the implementation of the milestones and targets in the scoreboard; encourages the Commission to directly transfer the data regarding the implemented milestones and targets into the scoreboard in a timely manner and without any undue delay;

Amendment 250 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 b (new)

25 b. Urges the Member States to put the recovery and resilience of the cultural and creative sectors at the core of their investments into culture, with a particular focus on improving the overall situation and working conditions of authors, performers, artists and all other cultural creators who are the ones to create the cultural works that our democracy, society and economy benefit from;

Amendment 251 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 b (new)

25 b. Calls for the Commission to continue monitoring the implementation of the six pillars and ensuring granular data is made available in the RRF scoreboard; asks the Commission to facilitate more regional methods of monitoring implementation through the Scoreboard and welcomes monitoring initiatives at EU and national level enhancing monitoring of RRF implementation;

Amendment 252 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 c (new)

25 c. Notes that in total so far, Member States have put forward 228 measures with a focus on supporting children and youth; notes that 74% of the measures focus on general, vocational and higher education and training capacity, as well as accessibility; affordability, quality and inclusiveness; including digitisation and infrastructure; further notes that 14% of the measures are dealing with early childhood education and care, early school leaving and child poverty; notes that 12% of the measures focus on tackling youth unemployment through job creation, hiring, job transition incentives and support for self-employment;

Amendment 253 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. ~~Emphasis~~Underlines that the RRF ~~should~~must not be used to substitute recurring national budgetary expenditure~~, unless duly justified~~; notes that the Commission has only approved NRRPs to cover the initial costs of setting up and launching reforms;

Amendment 254 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. EStrongly emphasises that ~~the~~ RRF should not be used to substitute recurring national budgetary expenditure~~, unless duly justified~~; notes that the Commission ~~has~~ only approved NRRPs to cover the initial costs of setting up and launching reforms, which might become recurring costs, if the sustainable financing of the future costs shall be ensured from the national budget or other instruments and it fully respects the concept of sustainable fiscal policy; is deeply preoccupied by measures included in some NRRPs which foresee important amounts for salaries; believes that such expenditure has the clear potential to become recurring budgetary expenditure after the RRF implementation period; strongly questions the criteria on which the Commission has approved such measures; believes that RRF expenditure should not lead to an increase of public spending;

Amendment 255 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Emphasises that the RRF should not be used to substitute recurring national budgetary expenditure~~, unless duly justified~~; notes that the Commission has only approved NRRPs to cover the initial costs of setting up and launching reforms; underlines that in order to ensure that the RRF does not lead to negative effects in the light of moral hazard, the temporary and one-off nature of the RRF is essential; reminds that the instrument must be implemented in a way that it does not undermine the Member States' own responsibility for the management of public finances and the implementation of structural reforms that improve economic sustainability;

Amendment 256 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Emphasises that the RRF should not be used to substitute recurring national budgetary expenditure, unless duly justified, and calls on the Commission to ensure compliance with this principle; is concerned that independent fiscal authorities in certain Member States have warned that some investments in NRRPs have a high risk of becoming a recurring expenditure in national budgets; notes that the Commission has only approved NRRPs to cover the initial costs of setting up and launching reforms;

Amendment 257 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Emphasises that the RRF should not be used to substitute recurring national budgetary expenditure, ~~unless duly justified; notes that the Commission has only approved NRRPs to cover the initial costs of setting up and launching reform~~; notes, however, that current SGP rules encourage periphery countries to substitute national expenditures so as to ensure compliance with restrictive deficit targets;

Amendment 258 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

Amendment 259 #

Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Dragoş PÎSLARU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Points out that the principle of ‘do no significant harm’ was evaluated for each measure by the Commission in accordance with its technical guidance; notes that in order to comply with the principle, some Member States had to improve certain measures; is concerned that, according to an independent analysis2a, the application of the ‘do no significant harm’ principle under the RRF has failed to properly assess the environmental impact of proposed investments and reforms; calls on the Commission to develop sufficiently strong criteria in the remaining delegated acts under the Taxonomy Regulation and review the current ones to prevent environmentally harmful measures; __________________ 2a https://green10.org/wp- content/uploads/2021/11/Statement-of- the-Green-10-on-the-do-no-significant- harm-principle.pdf

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H (new)

H. whereas democratic control and parliamentary scrutiny over the implementation of the RRF is only possible with the full involvement of Parliament and the consideration of all its recommendations in all stages, and whereas the European Parliament will continue to scrutinise the implementation of the RRF;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard that provides an overview of the progress made in the implementation of the NRRPs and thereby fosters the transparency, public scrutiny and accountability of the Facility; notes that the Facility should not undermine the responsibility of Member States to manage their own public finances; stress that the Facility should not cover current expenditure in Member States; recalls that the facility should support reforms and investments that increase the productive potential of the economy in Member States;

Amendment 260 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. ~~Points out that the principle of~~Stresses that the application of the ‘do no significant harm’ wcriteria as dev~~aluated for each measure by the Commission in accordance with its technical guidance; notes that in order to comply~~eloped in the Commission’s guidance note must prevent environmentally harmful measures; is concerned that the quality of the DNSH assessments has been insufficient without resource to independent expertise and verification in the form of public consultation; notes with regret that currently most NRRPs do not contain enough detail to allow assessment of their environmental impacts; asks the Commission to disclose the submitted ‘do no significant harm’ assessments and provide an exhaustive list of projects that were included in the submitted recovery and resilience plans but rejected or amended on the grounds that they were not aligned with the DNSH principle~~, some Member States had to improve certain measures~~; calls on the establishment of a DNSH monitoring and tracking system throughout the course of investments that shall include avenues available for citizens to raise concerns regarding a specific investment; urges the protection and full application of the EU environmental acquis, with a specific focus on areas where infringement procedures are ongoing;

Amendment 261 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

Amendment 262 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

Amendment 263 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

Amendment 264 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

Amendment 265 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

~~28. Observes that a large majority of NRRPs include a specific section explaining how the plan addresses gender-related concerns and challenges;~~deleted

Amendment 266 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Observes that a large majority of NRRPs include a specific section explaining how the plan addresses gender- related concerns and challenges; debates the relevance of these sections, considering the core function of RRF, which is to finance reforms and investments, helping citizens and economies to cope with the COVID-19 impacts and setting up the basis of sustainable recovery

Amendment 267 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Observes that a large majority of NRRPs include a specific section explaining how the plan addresses gender- related concerns and challenges; deeply regrets that some NRRPs do not include a specific section explaining how the plan addresses gender-related concerns and challenges and calls on the concerned Member States to provide without delay those elements;

Amendment 268 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Observes that a large majority of NRRPs include a specific section explaining how the plan addresses gender- related concerns and challenges; regrets the fact that not all NRRPs have presented such an explanation;

Amendment 269 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Observes that a large majority of NRRPs include a specific section explaining how the plan addresses gender- related concerns and challenges; stresses, however, that all NRRPs should have included an explanation of how the measures are expected to contribute to gender equality and equal opportunities for all and the mainstreaming of these objectives;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H (new)

H. whereas the war in Ukraine and the economic sanctions in its response carry serious economic and social effects on Member States, including an urgent need to decrease energy dependency on imported fossil fuels, and thus present objectively changed circumstances compared to before the start of the war;

Amendment 27 #

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

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard that provides an overview of the progress made in the implementation of the NRRPs and thereby fosters the transparency, public scrutiny and accountability of the Facility; welcomes the development of other monitoring tools on implementation at national level by governments, civil society organisations or relevant stakeholders; calls on the Commission to consider the integration of these datasets in the Scoreboard;

Amendment 270 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Observes that a large majority of NRRPs include a specific section explaining how the plan addresses gender- related concerns and challenges; notes that NRRPs contain measures focusing on the participation of women in the labour market and the reduction of the gender pay gap but that these measures largely fall short of what would have been needed to ensure a gender-equal recovery; notes that, according to current available data, jobs are largely created in male- dominated sectors without accompanying measures to increase the presence of women in those sectors; underlines the concern that the focus on male job creation will further increase gender inequality; underlines the importance of high-quality public care services to alleviate the burden of unpaid care work which is currently largely covered by women with negative consequences on GDP;

Amendment 271 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

Amendment 272 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)

28 a. Highlights that independent studies in major Member States clearly show that the Regulation’s aim to make gender equality a horizontal goal has not been fulfilled; welcomes that the scoreboard contains gender-disaggregated data for indicators expressed with a headcount; deplores the fact that the scoreboard does not allow for a thorough quantitative analysis of investment beneficiaries since no gender indicators are required for funds flowing to businesses; underlines the lack of a qualitative analysis of gender aspects in the NRRPs; highlights the weak methodological assumptions on gender in several NRRPs;

Amendment 273 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)

28 a. Is concerned that the delegated act on social expenditure and on the resilience scoreboard will not be sufficient to track and to report on the gender dimension and impacts of the RRF; calls on the Commission to come forward with complementary gender indicators tracking notably the gender impacts of the NRRPs;

Amendment 274 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Believes that NRRPs would benefit from further cross-border projects in order to enhance spill-over effects and contribute to EU added value; underlines that the current situation of Ukraine shows how crucial is the diversification of the EU’s energy sources and calls for the improvement of the interconnection of European gas and electricity networks and to fully synchronise the power grids throughout the EU;

Amendment 275 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. ~~Believes that NRRPs would benefit from further cross-border projects in order to enhance spill-over effects and contribute to EU added value~~Notes that twenty Member States foresee cross-border projects in their NRRPs mostly focusing on infrastructure, such as rail or electricity connections, hydrogen, quantum technology, 5G connectivity, cloud capabilities and innovation hubs; believes that NRRPs would benefit from further cross-border projects in order to enhance spill-over effects and contribute to EU added value; notes that twenty Member States foresee cross-border projects such as Important Projects of Common European Interest in their NRRPs mostly focusing on infrastructure; calls on the Member States to clarify the role for relevant stakeholders in the roll-out and implementation of the multi-country projects, where relevant;

Amendment 276 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Believes that NRRPs would benefit from further cross-border projects in order to enhance spill-over effects and contribute to EU added value; believes that further cross-border measures should have been included in the NRRPs in order to enhance its spill-over effect and to boost its EU added value;

Amendment 277 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Believes that NRRPs would benefit from further cross-border projects in order to enhance spill-over effects and contribute to EU added value; notes, in particular, the importance of cross-border projects related with energy transmission across Member States; notes that adequate infrastructure is crucial to promote the use of renewable energy produced in Southern Member States and transported to others; stresses that these investments are crucial for achieving energy sovereignty and the green transition;

Amendment 278 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29 a. Reminds that according to the RRF Regulation the recovery and resilience plans shall also be consistent with the information included by the Member States in the partnership agreements and operational programmes under Union funds; reiterates that this provision is not only important to avoid double-funding or overlapping of objectives, but also to ensure a coordinated approach and maximise the benefits of EU funding; requests the Commission to provide an analysis how this coordination is ensured; calls on the Commission to avoid delays in the adoption of Partnership Agreements and calls on these delays to be addressed; reiterates its call on the Commission to discourage the practice of repackaging projects without a real added value, notably for lagging regions, especially when this risks widening the social, economic and territorial convergence gap of the EU;

Amendment 279 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29 a. Observes that one Member State proposed to transfer structural funds to its NRRP, that only two Member States plan to provision their Invest EU envelopes with RRF funds and that only three Member States foresee incorporating the costs of technical support in their NRRPs; regrets that the provision to transfer RRF funds to the InvestEU national compartments has not been used to its full potential; recalls that synergies among different EU funds is essential for a proper recovery and consolidated resilience of the Union and reminds Member States that the use of this provision contributes to enhancing synergies;

Amendment 28 #

Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Dragoş PÎSLARU

Motion for a resolution
Recital I (new)

I. whereas the Commission will present a review report on the implementation of the RRF to the European Parliament and the Council by 31 July 2022;

Amendment 28 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the large number of documents that are published on the Facility’s website, as well as the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard that provides an visual and user-friendly overview of the progress made in the implementation of the NRRPs and thereby fosters the transparency, public scrutiny and accountability of the Facility; calls the Commission to maintain or further increase this level of transparency and data visualisation in the future;

Amendment 280 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29 a. Observes that one Member State proposed to transfer structural funds to its NRRP, that only two Member States plan to provision their InvestEU envelopes with RRF funds and that only three Member States foresee incorporating the costs of technical support in their NRRPs; regrets that the provision to transfer RRF funds to the InvestEU national compartments has not been used to its full potential; recalls that synergies among different EU funds is essential for a proper recovery and consolidated resilience of the Union and reminds Member States that the use of this provision contributes to enhancing synergies;

Amendment 281 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)

29 b. Reminds that according to the RRF Regulation the recovery and resilience plans shall also be consistent with the information included by the Member States in the partnership agreements and operational programmes under Union funds; reiterates that this provision is not only important to avoid double-funding or overlapping of objectives, but also to ensure a coordinated approach and maximise the benefits of EU funding; requests the Commission to provide an analysis how this coordination is ensured; takes note that the adoption of the NRRPs has led in some instances to the delays in the adoption of Partnership Agreements and calls on these delays to be addressed;

Amendment 282 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)

29 b. Reminds that according to the RRF Regulation the recovery and resilience plans shall also be consistent with the information included by the Member States in the partnership agreements and operational programmes under Union funds; reiterates that this provision is not only important to avoid double-funding or overlapping of objectives, but also to ensure a coordinated approach and maximise the benefits of EU funding; requests the Commission to provide an analysis how this coordination is ensured; calls on the Commission to avoid delays in the adoption of Partnership Agreements and calls on these delays to be addressed;

Amendment 283 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 c (new)

29 c. Questions how the Commission has encouraged Member States to foster synergies with NRRPs of other Member States;

Amendment 284 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 c (new)

29 c. Questions how the Commission has encouraged Member States to foster synergies with NRRPs of other Member States;

Amendment 285 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 d (new)

29 d. Recalls that the EU objective to have 5G connectivity in all populated areas of the EU by 2030 is of utmost importance but at the same time particularly challenging to achieve; recalls that scattered and inconsistent approaches between Member States risk countries being left behind and the digital gap between them being exacerbated; notes that several RRPs contain investment proposals in 5G connectivity and recalls that Member States should complement these investments with measures for mobile broadband and infrastructure expansion;

Amendment 286 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 e (new)

29 e. Highlights that synergies between RRF and other Union funding programmes are essential in order to ensure a proper recovery and consolidated resilience of the Union; regrets that some Member States have postponed the presentation of their Operational Programmes for the implementation of the EU structural funds for the period 2021-2027; calls on the Commission to assess the causes of these delays and to address them;

Amendment 287 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 f (new)

29 f. Underlines the need for complementarity with other EU sources of finance to ensure synergies in EU spending efforts, in particular with cohesion policy funds which cover similar objectives to the RRF but with a focus on more long-term structural actions; calls on Member States and cohesion managing authorities to ensure that the Partnership Agreements are linked to and in complementarity with the RRPs.

Amendment 288 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. NReminds that all RRPs have to contribute to effectively addressing all or a significant subset of challenges identified in the relevant country-specific recommendations including fiscal aspects; notes the Commission assessment that all NRRPs address at least a significant subset of challenges identified in the relevant European Semester recommendations but that ~~not all challenges are addressed~~challenges remain; deplores that some Member States are not sufficiently tackling some long-standing challenges, particularly as regards the fiscal sustainability or the reform of the labour and pensions systems as well as other structural reforms; strongly questions in this regard the positive evaluation of the Commission of some of the NRRPs which fail to propose serious structural reforms deplores that in some instances, NRRPs have been approved although the final design of important structural reforms had not been finalised by the Member States concerned, nor finally agreed with the Commission;

Amendment 289 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Notes the Commission assessment that all NRRPs address at least a significant subset of challenges identified in the relevant European Semester recommendations but that not all challenges are addressed; regrets however that the Commission took a quantitative rather than a qualitative assessment approach and has thus allowed Member States to cherry-pick reforms and not to address long-standing economic, fiscal and administrative challenges;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I (new)

I. whereas the European Parliament declared a “climate emergency” already in November 2019; whereas according to the the latest findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of February 2022 the impacts of climate change represent an exceptional threat to humanity as global heating will trigger tipping points in Earth’s ecosystems;

Amendment 29 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Appreciates in particular the publication of the preliminary assessments of the satisfactory fulfilment of milestones and targets related to each Member State’s payment request for the instalments of grants under the Facility; notes the detailed analysis carried out by the Commission, which includes the evidence provided by the concerned Member State;

Amendment 290 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Notes the Commission assessment that all NRRPs address at least a significant subset of challenges identified in the relevant European Semester recommendations but that not all challenges are addressed, such as sustainability of public finances, tax evasion, tax administration and tax avoidance ensuring stability on the housing market and tackling homelessness, equal access to childcare, structural policies that consolidate competition, public administration red tape and malfunctions of state-owned enterprises, ensuring access to independent civil justice and tackling shadow economy and corruption;

Amendment 291 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. NReminds Member States that the NRRPS are expected to contribute to effectively addressing all or a significant subset of challenges identified in the relevant country-specific recommendations, including fiscal aspects thereof and recommendations made pursuant to Article 6 of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 where appropriate, addressed to the Member State concerned or challenges identified in other relevant documents officially adopted by the Commission in the context of the European Semester; notes the Commission assessment that all NRRPs address at least a significant subset of challenges identified in the relevant European Semester recommendations but that not all challenges are addressed;

Amendment 292 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30 a. Calls on the Commission to adequately evaluate the fulfilment of all milestones and targets, including those related to CSRs in the NRRPs in the disbursement phase of the Facility and to reduce proportionally payments, based on the importance of the milestones and targets, whether agreed milestones and targets are not satisfactory met, including not rolling back on previously achieved milestones and targets; furthermore, calls on the Commission, if necessary, to make use of the provisions of the Regulation, allowing it to recover grants or ask for early repayment of loans in case of breach of the obligations of Member States under the financing agreements;

Amendment 293 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30 a. Reiterates the fact that not all CSRs are equally important and regrets the quantitative approach of the Commission when evaluating the NRRPs in relation to the fulfilment of challenges identified in the relevant CSRs, whereby important structural challenges have not been properly addressed

Amendment 294 #

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Nicola BEER, Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30 a. Encourages the Commission to make sure that Member States address the Country Specific Recommendations adequately and that this foundational principle of the RRF is adhered to when scrutinising the NRRPs and their implementation;

Amendment 295 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 b (new)

30 b. Calls on the Commission to step up its evaluation of the fulfilment of CSRs in the NRRPs in the disbursement phase of the Facility and to refrain from making any payments if agreed milestones and targets related to challenges in the relevant CSRs are not adequately met, including not rolling back on previously met milestones and targets; furthermore calls on the Commission, if necessary, to make full use of the provisions of the Regulation, allowing it to recover grants or ask for early repayment of loans in case of breach of the obligations of Member States under the financing agreements, including in relation to the implementation of CSRs;

Amendment 296 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 c (new)

30 c. Calls on the Members States to look for ways on how to involve refugees fleeing Ukraine to the European Union, following the military invasion of the Russian Federation, in the practical implementation of the NRRPs, therefore, helping to alleviate their socio-economic situation;

Amendment 297 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 d (new)

30 d. Reiterates, in the context of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its possible consequences, particularly as regards the dependence on Russian gas, the importance of EU's energy security; welcomes in this regard the NRRPs containing measures to enhance energy security by decreasing dependence on Russian gas; furthermore, underlines the importance of measures relating to the climate component in order to mitigate the impact of the energy prices crisis upon the EU;

Amendment 298 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. RNotes that, according to the Commission assessment, all Member States received an A-rating for almost all criteria provisioned in the RRF Regulation; recalls that, according to the Commission assessment, all Member States received a B-rating for the criteria that evaluates whether the estimated total costs of the NRRPs are reasonable; calls on the Commission to ensure that costs are plausible and that proper cost analysis is being conducted in order to tackle fraud and corruption; urges the Commission to thoroughly assess the satisfactory fulfilment of milestones and targets before accepting payment requests, and also ensure that previously achieved milestones and targets have not been reversed;

Amendment 299 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Recalls that, according to the Commission assessment, all Member States received a B-rating for the criteria that evaluates whether the estimated total costs of the NRRPs are reasonable; Emphasises that prior to the disbursement of funds the rating should be upgraded to A;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)

— having regard to the Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions of 1 December 2021 on the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility5a, __________________ 5a OJ C 97, 28.2.2022, p. 21–25.

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

A a. Reiterates that the RRF was designed during extraordinary circumstances and is not a political instrument, but an unprecedented and unique opportunity for the EU; stresses that this unprecedented measure, which was exceptionally agreed upon, needs to prove a success not only for EU citizens and businesses but also for the EU’s reputation as a whole;

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is an unprecedented instrument of solidarity and a cornerstone of the NextGenerationEU (NGEU) instrument, ending in 2026, as the main tool in the EU’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic to prepare the economies of the EU to face the new challenges; As such, the Commission and the recipients of NGEU funding have to ensure its visibility and dedicate 0,5% of every funding to mandatory communication actions on the RRF contribution to investments and reforms;

Amendment 30 #

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Nicola BEER, Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Considers that the reliability of the performance data concerning the targets and milestones of the Facility is of the utmost importance; calls on the Commission to provide a statement of assurance on the performance data for the implementation of the Facility in its Annual Management and Performance Report (AMPR);

Amendment 300 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31 a. Underlines that means available for the RRF should be used in the context of REPowerEU before any new instruments are introduced; warns against the automatic reflex in some Member States to push for the creation of additional common debt for that purpose; emphasizes that Member States can use the existing RRF to finance their energy transition in this particular regard; stresses furthermore that the remaining amount of loans available must never become grants;

Amendment 301 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31 a. Urges the Commission and Member States to uphold the principles of transparency, equal treatment, open competition, and sound procedural management when launching public procurement for the implementation of investments; is firmly opposed to any type of misuse of powers or arbitrariness when allocating RRF funds;

Amendment 302 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31 a. Stresses the importance of promoting equality and fairness through the procurement processes and practices; calls, in this respect, the Member States to strive for ways to ensure equal and fair access to all, including the micro, small and medium size enterprises, in the procurement process;

Amendment 303 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31 a. Urges Member States to timely launch public procurement for the implementation of measures in order to ensure completion with the calendar of milestones and targets;

Amendment 304 #

Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL, Nicola BEER, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Ondřej KOVAŘÍK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31 a. Is concerned about the lack of control of additionality

Amendment 305 #

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Nicola BEER, Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 b (new)

31 b. Invites the Commission to reflect on ways to direct RRF resources towards defence spending, while respecting the distribution of competences in this policy area;

Amendment 306 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4

MTransparency, public participation, monitoring and control mechanisms

Amendment 307 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Observes, that by the nature of the instruments, the control focuses on the achievement of results instead of verifications of costs; notes that this approach can simplify the implementation and contribute to the achievement of the desired outcome; nevertheless, is deeply preoccupied that it also makes the detection of abuse of EU funds more difficult; Urges the Commission to take the appropriate measures to ensure early detection of abuse of EU funds; calls on it to monitor rigorously any possible occurrence of double funding and, if such occurrences are confirmed, to proceed with the recovery of funds without delay;

Amendment 308 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. UObserves, that by the nature of the instruments, the control focuses on the achievement of results and outputs instead of verifications of costs; notes that this approach can simplify the implementation and contribute to the achievement of the desired outcome; nevertheless, urges the Commission to take the appropriate measures to ensure early detection of abuse of EU funds; calls on it to monitor rigorously any possible occurrence of double funding and, if such occurrences are confirmed, to proceed with the recovery of funds without delay;

Amendment 309 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)

32 a. Urges the Commission to insist on the use of the integrated and interoperable monitoring system including a single data-mining and risk- scoring tool (ARACHNE), mentioned in Article 22(4) of the RRF Regulation for all RRF spending; urges Member States to collect and record data on final recipients and beneficiaries of Union funding in an electronic standardised and interoperable format and to use the single data mining and risk scoring tool provided by the Commission; calls on the Commission to ensure that ARACHNE is interoperable with other relevant datasets;

Amendment 31 #

Enikő GYŐRI, Tamás DEUTSCH, Andor DELI, Bogdan RZOŃCA, András GYÜRK, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK, Jadwiga WIŚNIEWSKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is an unprecedented instrument of solidarity and a cornerstone of the NextGenerationEU (NGEU) instrument, ending in 2026, as the main tool in the EU’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic to prepare the economies of the EU to face the new challenges; reminds that this instrument of solidarity could also be effectively used, in the current Ukrainian crisis situation, by those countries which bear the heaviest burden of the reception of refugees;

Amendment 31 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Considers that the reliability of the performance data concerning the targets and milestones of the Facility is of the utmost importance; reminds that the protection of the EU’s financial interests is a key element of the EU policy agenda to strengthen and increase the confidence of the public and ensure that taxpayer money is used properly;

Amendment 310 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)

32 a. Urges the Member States to collect and record data on final recipients and beneficiaries of Union funding in an electronic standardised and interoperable format and to use the single data mining and risk scoring tool provided by the Commission; calls on the Commission to ensure that ARACHNE is interoperable with other relevant datasets;

Amendment 311 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)

32 b. Recalls that Member States should collect and ensure access of data on beneficial owner(s) of the recipient of the funds and beneficiaries of the programme and reiterates the importance of ensuring the transparency of final beneficiaries; furthermore, reiterates the importance of digitalising all reporting, monitoring and audit; calls upon the Commission and Member States to publish data on final beneficiaries for the sake of public trust and transparency;

Amendment 312 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)

32 b. Recalls that Member States should collect and ensure access of data on beneficial owner(s) of the recipient of the funds and beneficiaries of the programme and reiterates the importance of ensuring the transparency of final beneficiaries, without providing an extra burden on the reporting; furthermore, reiterates the importance of digitalising all reporting, monitoring and audit;

Amendment 313 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 c (new)

32 c. Stresses that transparency is key for a strong monitoring system of the NRRPs that would allow meaningful public engagement; calls for the establishment of an open database that would disclose fiches of all projects funded under the NRRPs as well as the reports submitted by Member States on the progress made in the achievement of their recovery and resilience plans in accessible national web portals and integrated databases at EU level; reminds Member States and the Commission of their obligations to publish environmental information, inter alia, as parties to the Aarhus Convention and the full implementation of the Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment Directive; is of the opinion that material and data on the sustainability and DNSH profile of each investment should therefore be publicly available;

Amendment 314 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 c (new)

32 c. Reminds the Commission that in the evaluation of NRRPs and payment claims it can be assisted by experts and invites to make full use of this provision, where relevant, particularly if it lacks the in-house capacity to thoroughly scrutinise the plans or the fulfilment of milestones and targets; raises doubts about the Council’s sufficient capacity to analyse NRRPs properly or payment claims;

Amendment 315 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 d (new)

32 d. Urges the Commission to ensure that the evaluation of the milestones and targets achieved by the Member States as part of their NRRP will be based on rigurous quantitative and qualitative assessment; is concerned that a simple quantitative evaluation of the milestones and targets achieved would lead to a box ticking dynamic in Member States, which would then miss a historical opportunity for long-term structural reforms;

Amendment 316 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 e (new)

32 e. Urges Member States to publish periodically up-to-date data on the funds transfered to final recipients, thereby enabling the accurate monitoring of the NRRP implementation;

Amendment 317 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Recalls that Member States are required to set up a robust control system in order to guarantee the protection of the financial interests of the Union and to prevent fraud and tackle corruption, and that the Commission is responsible for assuring that these systems are in place before the first payments are approved; recalls that milestones and targets have been set to ensure the protection of the Union’s financial interests and need to be met before payments are approved; expects the Commission to ensure these are fully met and to monitor ongoing compliance with any such measure thought the entire lifecycle of the RRF;

Amendment 318 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Recalls that Member States are required to set up a robust control system in order to guarantee the protection of the financial interests of the Union and to prevent fraud and tackle corruption, and that the Commission is responsible for assuring that these systems are in place before the first payments are approved; reiterates the important role of EPPO, OLAF, Europol, and Eurojust in supporting Member States and the Commission to protect the financial interests of the Union during the implementation of NGEU; highlights the NGEU Law Enforcement Forum as well as the Operation Sentinel, which in a cooperative manner shall help to prevent and counter threats against NGEU funds and map vulnerabilities in national allocation systems;

Amendment 319 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Recalls that Member States are required to set up a robust control system in order to guarantee the protection of the financial interests of the Union and to prevent fraud and tackle corruption, and that the Commission is responsible for assuring that these systems are in place before the first payments are approved; underlines that corruption prevention policies cover many fields, typically including ethical rules, awareness-raising measures, rules on asset disclosures, incompatibilities and conflicts of interest, internal control mechanisms, rules on lobbying, and revolving doors; reiterates the role of national measures in preventing fraud and corruption;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is an unprecedented instrument of solidarity and a cornerstone of the NextGenerationEU (NGEU) instrument, ending in 2026, as the main tool in the EU’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic to prepare the economies of the EU to face the new challenges; recognises that the RRF alone will not be sufficient to achieve the green and digital goals the EU set for itself; highlights the role that national budgets will have to play in that regard; recalls that the current EU’s fiscal rules would render public investment impossible owing to the requirement to respect the debt and deficit rules;

Amendment 32 #

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

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Considers that the reliability of the performance data concerning the targets and milestones of the Facility is of the utmost importance; urges Member States to publicly provide detailed and timely information in order to ensure effective reporting of the impact of the Facility;

Amendment 320 #

Johan VAN OVERTVELDT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Recalls that Member States are required to set up a robust control system in order to guarantee the protection of the financial interests of the Union and to prevent fraud and tackle corruption, and that the Commission is responsible for assuring that these systems are in place before the first payments are approved. Europol, EPPO, OLAF Eurojust and other relevant EU Bodies and Agencies will support the Member States and stakeholders to protect the financial interests of the EU in the implementation of the NGEU;

Amendment 321 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

Amendment 322 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Recalls that Member States are required to set up a robust control and audit systems in order to guarantee the protection of the financial interests of the Union ~~and to~~, prevent ~~fraud~~ and tackle fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest and secure transparency, and that the Commission is responsible for assuring that these systems are in place and fully-functioning before the first payments are approved;

Amendment 323 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)

33 a. Calls on the Court of Auditors, OLAF, EPPO and national authorities to make full use of their prerogatives under the RRF Regulation and other relevant legislation and scrutinise thoroughly all RRF spending; notes that the 2022 EU Budget has allocated funds for 20 additional temporary staff for the Court of Auditors to audit the RRF implementation; urges the Court of Auditors to strengthen its efforts on implementation audits of milestones and targets, including the verification of specific criteria for Green spending, as defined by the RRF regulation;

Amendment 324 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)

33 a. Reminds the Commission that in the evaluation of NRRPs and payment claims it can be assisted by experts and invites to make full use of this provision, particularly if it lacks the in-house capacity to thoroughly scrutinise the plans or the fulfilment of milestones and targets; is concerned that the Council does not have sufficient capacity to analyse NRRPs or payment claims and warns against transforming this evaluation into a mere box-ticking exercise;

Amendment 325 #

Johan VAN OVERTVELDT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)

33 a. Welcomes the Next Generation EU – Law Enforcement Forum(NGEU-LEF), a joint initiative co-led by Europol and Italy. The Forum 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 326 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)

33 a. Calls on the Commission to cooperate with and to ensure that adequate control capacities are in place for OLAF, the Court of Auditors and where applicable the EPPO and that those bodies are granted full access by Member States to information to exert their rights according to the Financial Regulation and the RRF Regulation;

Amendment 327 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)

33 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to use the Commission’s annual rule of law reports to resolutely fight against systemic corruption and devise effective instruments for preventing, combating and sanctioning corruption and fighting fraud, as well as for regularly monitoring the use of public funds;

Amendment 328 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)

33 a. Recalls that the European Parliament, social partners, the civil society, academia and local authorities have to be actively involved in the governance and supervision of the implementation of the NRRPs in each Member State;

Amendment 329 #

Johan VAN OVERTVELDT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 b (new)

33 b. Welcomes the Operation Sentinel organized by Europol in cooperation with EPPO, Eurojust and OLAF, as well as 21 Member States, launched on 15 October 2021. The operation aims to map vulnerabilities inherent to the national allocation systems, detect the fraud schemes used to target fund allocation system and support high priority investigations against high value targets.

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is an unprecedented instrument of solidarity and a cornerstone of the NextGenerationEU (NGEU) instrument, ending in 2026, as the main tool in the EU’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic to prepare the economies of the EU to face the new challenges; highlights the stabilising effect of NGEU for Member States at a time of great economic uncertainty, thereby allowing governments to maintain investment levels and limit borrowing costs despite immense demands on national budgets; recalls that the EU response was comprehensive and timely, leading to extensive use of existing instruments and deploying additional financing instruments;

Amendment 33 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Emphasises that the implementation of the Facility should be carried out in line with the principle of sound financial management, which includes the effective prevention, detection and correction of fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest, as well as avoiding double funding; calls on the Commission, therefore, to be particularly strict with the Member States in complying with the protection of the financial interests of the Union as enshrined in Article 22 of the Regulation 2021/241;

Amendment 330 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 b (new)

33 b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that adequate control capacities are in place and that the Commission, OLAF, the Court of Auditors and where applicable the EPPO are granted full access by Member States to information to exert their rights according to the Financial Regulation and the RRF Regulation;

Amendment 331 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 b (new)

33 b. Calls on the Court of Auditors, OLAF, EPPO and national authorities to make full use of their prerogatives under the RRF Regulation and other relevant legislation and scrutinise thoroughly all RRF spending;

Amendment 332 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 c (new)

33 c. Calls on the Court of Auditors, OLAF and EPPO to make full use of their role under the RRF Regulation and scrutinise thoroughly all RRF spending, in order to prevent, detect, correct and investigate fraud, corruption, conflict of interests and where applicable to impose administrative penalties, as well as to avoid double funding;

Amendment 333 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 c (new)

33 c. Reiterates the importance of the Commission undertaking a continuous, including ex-post, monitoring of the RRF expenditure ensuring full transparency together with the Member States, and addressing any weaknesses in this regard;

Amendment 334 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 d (new)

33 d. Reminds that in the framework of the discharge procedure to the Commission, in accordance with Article 319 TFEU, the RRF shall be subject to reporting under the integrated financial and accountability reporting referred to in Article 247 of the Financial Regulation, and, in particular, separately in the Annual Management and Performance Report;

Amendment 335 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 d (new)

33 d. Reiterates the importance of the Commission undertaking a continuous, including ex-post, monitoring of the RRF expenditure; believes that full transparency is needed from the Member States, including as regards implementation and management data, in order to analyse the results of the RRF and identify possible weaknesses;

Amendment 336 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 e (new)

33 e. Reminds that in the framework of the discharge procedure to the Commission, in accordance with Article 319 TFEU, the Facility shall be subject to reporting under the integrated financial and accountability reporting referred to in Article 247 of the Financial Regulation, and, in particular, separately in the Annual Management and Performance Report.

Amendment 337 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 f (new)

33 f. Calls on all Member States to collect and record data on final recipients and beneficiaries of Union funding in an electronic standardised and interoperable format and to use the single data mining tool provided by the Commission; furthermore, reiterates the importance of digitalising all reporting, monitoring and audit;

Amendment 338 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5 a (new)

Lessons learned

Amendment 339 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Reaffirms Parliament’s role in scrutinising the implementation of the RRF, in particular through five plenary debates held in 2021, two adopted resolutions, four Recovery and Resilience Dialogues held with the Commission in 2021, 20 meetings of the dedicated working group on the scrutiny of the RRF, parliamentary questions, and the regular flow of information and ad hoc requests for information from the Commission; recalls that Article 25 of the RRF Regulation requests the Commission to transmit relevant documents and information simultaneously and on equal terms to the European Parliament and to the Council; notes that, despite the slow start of the proper process of a document flow, appropriate communication procedures were put in practice;

Amendment 34 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Markus FERBER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is an unprecedented one-off and limited in time instrument of solidarity and a cornerstone of the NextGenerationEU (NGEU) instrument, ~~ending in 2026,~~ as the main tool in the EU’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic to prepare the economies of the EU to face the new challenges; recalls that the EU response was comprehensive and timely, leading to extensive use of existing instruments and deploying additional financing instruments;

Amendment 34 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recalls that irregularities may lead to the reduction of financial contributions or the recovery of funds by the Commission; calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to the evaluation of the fulfilment of Country Specific Recommendations (CSRs) in the NRRPs in the disbursement phase of the Facility and to consider refraining from making payments if agreed or already completed milestones and targets related to challenges in the relevant CSRs are not adequately met; furthermore calls on the Commission to make full use of the provisions of the Regulation, allowing it to recover grants or ask for early repayment of loans in case of breach of the obligations of Member States under the financing agreements, including in relation to the implementation of CSRs;

Amendment 340 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Reaffirms Parliament’s role in scrutinising the implementation of the RRF, in particular through five plenary debates held in 2021, two adopted resolutions, four Recovery and Resilience Dialogues held with the Commission in 2021, 20 meetings of the dedicated working group on the scrutiny of the RRF, parliamentary questions, and the regular flow of information and ad hoc requests for information from the Commission; remains committed in ensuring that it will make full use of the entire range of possibilities offered by the Regulation to scrutinise RRF spending, including via local actions in the Member States.

Amendment 341 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Reaffirms Parliament’s role in scrutinising the implementation of the RRF, in particular through five plenary debates held in 2021, two adopted resolutions, four Recovery and Resilience Dialogues held with the Commission in 2021, 20 meetings of the dedicated working group on the scrutiny of the RRF, parliamentary questions, and the regular flow of information and ad hoc requests for information from the Commission; calls on the RRF Working Group to play a more meaningful role in the scrutiny of the implementation phase;

Amendment 342 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)

34 a. Deplores that many Member States have failed to involve regional, local and other stakeholders appropriately in the design of the RRPs; points out that many of the RRF projects will eventually be implemented on the local level; therefore an appropriate involvement of stakeholders on the ground is key; calls for Member States and the Commission to ensure a better involvement of those stakeholders in the further implementation of the RRF;

Amendment 343 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)

34 a. Highlights that the governance of the RRF lacks sufficient democratic control through the European Parliament and national parliaments, which has reduced budgetary priority setting to a technocratic exercise between the Commission and national governments in many Member States; highlights that democratic accountability could have strengthened the Commission’s ability to negotiate more ambitions national plans, in some cases;

Amendment 344 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)

34 a. Invites the Commission to follow an open, transparent and constructive approach during the recovery and resilience dialogues and to observe the provision of Article 26(1) as regards regular interactions with the Parliament; recalls that the inter-institutional cooperation established through the RRF should become a minimum standard in all funding programmes;

Amendment 345 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)

34 a. Invites the Commission to follow an open, transparent and constructive approach during the recovery and resilience dialogues and to observe the provision of Article 26(1)as regards regular interactions with the Parliament; calls to set up a schedule of the recovery and resilience dialogues for the rest of the year, instead of ad-hoc solutions.

Amendment 346 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)

34 a. Reminds that implementation of the RRF and of NRRPs' measures shall respect all relevant laws, including the principle of subsidiarity, respect to regional and local self-government and the right to good administration under EU Law;

Amendment 347 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)

34 a. Invites the Member States to follow the example of the European Parliament and establish national parliamentary committees to scrutinise the implementation of their NRRPs in an open, transparent and democratic way;

Amendment 348 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 b (new)

34 b. Regrets that in all Member States local and regional authorities, civil society organisations, social partners or other relevant stakeholders were not sufficiently involved, in the design and the implementation of the NRRPs and calls for their involvement in the implementation of the NRRPs to the maximum extent possible under the national legislation; recalls that local and regional authorities, civil society organisations, social partners and the other relevant stakeholders are at the forefront of NRRP local implementation and reminds the Commission and the Member States that proper involvement and coordination with local and regional authorities, civil society organisations, social partners, and other relevant stakeholders in the implementation of the plans is decisive for the success of the recovery in the Union; calls therefore for the establishment of a structured dialogue with civil society at an EU level to guarantee the promotion of the best practices and identify the need for action to address systemic issues; calls for regular interaction with relevant stakeholders throughout the implementation phase; urges Member States to fully engage local and regional authorities, as well as NGOs, wherever possible in implementing relevant milestones and target; stresses the role of NGOs in monitoring committees and similar structures;

Amendment 349 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 b (new)

Amendment 35 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

Amendment 35 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recalls that ~~irregularities may lead to the reduction of financial contributions or the recovery of funds by the Commission~~an unsatisfactory implementation of NRRPs or serious irregularities may lead to suspension and the termination of financial support agreements as well as the reduction and recovery of financial contributions by the Commission; calls on the Commission to describe in its future implementation reports whether such a case has occurred, the causes, and the remedial actions taken by the Commission or the concerned Member State;

Amendment 350 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 b (new)

34 b. Deplores that national parliaments, regions and municipalities have had a limited or even no involvement in designing national plans; recalls that regions and municipalities are at the forefront of RRP implementation and demands the Commission and the Member States to ensure proper and deep involvement of regions and municipalities, social partners, civil society, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders;

Amendment 351 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 b (new)

34 b. Is concerned about the insufficient clarity in many Member States on the NRRPs governance systems and the distribution of responsibilities for their implementation between the central, regional and local levels;

Amendment 352 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 c (new)

34 c. Reiterates that the RRF is not a political instrument, but an unprecedented instrument to support citizens and businesses, and calls on the Commission to ensure that Member States do not allocate funding based on political criteria; calls on the Commission to ensure that calls for proposals for RRF funding at national level are competitive and allow for a level playing field as regards the access for regions and municipalities; warns against “tailored- made” calls for proposals at national level whereby criteria are specifically designed for one competitor; calls on the Commission and other institutions involved in the control system to investigate such cases and take all required measures;

Amendment 353 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 c (new)

34 c. Reiterates its regret at the fact that many Member States have not or only inadequately involved local and regional authorities (LRAs) in the preparation process of NRRPs, and that the extent to which their input has been incorporated in most cases cannot be ascertained; calls on Member States to ensure the involvement of LRAs in the implementation of the RRF to the maximum extent possible under the national legislation and urges the Commission to present guidance to that end; recalls that LRAs are different to other stakeholders because they are at the forefront of implementing EU law;

Amendment 354 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 c (new)

34 c. Calls on Member States to ensure adequate management systems of RRF funds take into consideration the specific needs of the citizens at regional and local levels, while respecting the principles of non-discrimination and equal treatment; reminds that implementation of NRRPs’ measures shall respect all relevant laws;

Amendment 355 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 d (new)

34 d. Expects the review report on the implementation of the RRF prepared by the Commission to provide extensive data and analysis on the contributions of NRRPs to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights, including the gender impact of NRRPs and the effective contribution of the NRRPs to gender equality, as well as the support to the SMEs and the strategic autonomy;

Amendment 356 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 d (new)

34 d. Calls on Member States to ensure that management systems of RRF funds takes into consideration the specific needs of the regional and local level and to put in place management systems that allow for RRF expenditure related to local and regional objectives to be de-centralised;

Amendment 357 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER, François-Xavier BELLAMY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 e (new)

34 e. Reiterates the importance of allowing access to private sector to RRF expenditure, where applicable; recalls the importance of SMEs in the implementation of the RRF and warns against measures which would prevent SMEs from accessing RRF funding; invites the Commission to provide detailed analyses on the access of the private sector to RRF funding;

Amendment 358 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 e (new)

34 e. Encourages the Commission to explore ways to include local and regional governments, as well as civil society organisations in the monitoring of the RRF implementation;

Amendment 359 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus FERBER, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 f (new)

34 f. Reminds that according to the RRF regulation the Commission shall implement information and communication actions relating to the Facility, to actions taken pursuant to the Facility and to the results obtained; and that the Commission shall where appropriate inform the representation offices of the European Parliament of its actions and involve them in those actions;

Amendment 36 #

Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel FERNANDES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is an unprecedented instrument of solidarity and a cornerstone of the Next Generation EU (NGEU) instrument, ending in 2026, as the main tool in the EU’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic to prepare the economies of the EU to face the new challenges; helping European economies growth thanks to a more competitive economy and being the pillars of growth business, SMEs, private investment and, finally, the EU's strategic autonomy.

Amendment 36 #

Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Olivier CHASTEL, Gilles BOYER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recalls that serious irregularities such as fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest and double funding, may lead to the reduction of financial contributions or the recovery of funds by the Commission;

Amendment 360 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Welcomes the launch in December 2021 of the recovery and resilience scoreboard, which ~~will~~should allow every citizen to monitor the implementation of the RRF; notes that, in line with the Delegated Act on common indicators, Member States shall report on several indicators ; regrets that these indicators do not entail reporting on biodiversity and territorial cohesion, and lack a performance or impact oriented dimension; considers that the Scoreboard in its current form is not designed to track Member States' performance and display the progress in the implementation of the recovery and resilience plans;

Amendment 361 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Welcomes the launch in December 2021 of the recovery and resilience scoreboard, which will allow every citizen to monitor the implementation of the RRF; regrets, however, that the scoreboard does not reflect the extent to which Member States are effectively channelling funds to finance their projects and executing amounts;

Amendment 362 #

Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL, Nicola BEER, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Ondřej KOVAŘÍK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Welcomes the launch in December 2021 of the recovery and resilience scoreboard, which will allow every citizen to monitor the implementation of the RRF; invites the Commission to improve and enhance the capabilities of the scoreboard to ensure a high degree of visibility and accountability for the RRF;

Amendment 363 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Welcomes the launch in December 2021 of the recovery and resilience scoreboard, which will allow every citizen to monitor the implementation of the RRF; Calls for the Commission to launch its Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard in April 2022 as planned and ensure updates of the scoreboard twice a year in accordance with the RRF regulation; urges the Commission to enforce that Member States should provide the data necessary to report on the progress with regard to the six pillars of the RRF regulation and thereby enable every citizen to monitor the implementation of the RRF.

Amendment 364 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35

35. Welcomes the launch in December 2021 of the recovery and resilience scoreboard, which will allow every citizen to monitor the implementation of the RRF; notes that, in line with the Delegated Act on common indicators, Member States shall report on several indicators, including for the implementation of the EPSR and SMEs supported;

Amendment 365 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)

35 a. Reminds that according to the RRF regulation the Commission shall implement information and communication actions relating to the Facility; encourages the Commission, through its representation offices in the Member States and in cooperation with the European Parliament Liaison Offices in the Member States, to launch events in the Member States that promote the scoreboard and present the different analyses conducted by the Commission, including on the 6 pillars; encourages the Commission to publish detailed analysis on the positive effects of the RRF by highlighting good practices in the implementation of the national NRRPs and recommendations for overcoming implementation obstacles and improving the effective use of the funds;

Amendment 366 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)

35 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to periodically assess and publish the level of effective disbursement of RFF funds; expects the review report on the implementation of the RRF prepared by the Commission to provide extensive data and analysis on the level of effective spending and absorption, the disbursement of funds to the various implementing bodies (such as LRAs) and the possible existence of bottlenecks in national public administrations that prevent the adequate implementation of NRRPs;

Amendment 367 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)

35 a. Deplores however that Member States were reluctant to provide more granular data to feed into the recovery and resilience scoreboard; notes that more granular data would have allowed citizens to better hold their governments to account;

Amendment 368 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 b (new)

35 b. Points out that national public administrations face a considerable challenge in absorbing all RRF funding in such a short space of time; urges the European Commission to actively support Member States that have experienced problems absorbing EU funds in addressing this issue, so that RRF funds are successfully disbursed across the Union;

Amendment 369 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 b (new)

35 b. Intends to make full use of the range of possibilities offered by the RRF Regulation to assess and promote the RRF, including through events including at local, regional and national level;

Amendment 37 #

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Nicola BEER, Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is an unprecedented and one-off instrument of solidarity and a cornerstone of the NextGenerationEU (NGEU) instrument, ending in 2026, as the main tool in the EU’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic to prepare the economies of the EU to face the new challenges;

Amendment 37 #

Alin MITUȚA, Olivier CHASTEL, Gilles BOYER, Ramona STRUGARIU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recalls that irregularities may lead to the reduction of financial contributions ~~or the~~, delays in disbursement of funds or recovery of funds by the Commission;

Amendment 370 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 c (new)

35 c. Welcomes the initiative of the European Ombudsman of preparing 'Good Practice Principles for governing transparency in the use of recovery funds';

Amendment 371 #

Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL, Nicola BEER, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Ondřej KOVAŘÍK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36

36. Notes that Member States’ NRRPs report on their communication strategies; deplores however that, without a clear standard, such communication campaigns are envisaged to be very different, thus limiting the visibility of the RRF and EU funding overall; Calls for the Commission and Member States to ensure that the mandatory single web spaces on NRRPs include: a) public procurement plans to improve transparency and enable companies across Member States to tender for projects and b) supplier list open for registration so that main suppliers will have a better overview of potential subsuppliers in other Member States;

Amendment 372 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36

36. Notes that Member States’ NRRPs report on their communication strategies; deplores however that, without a clear standard, such communication campaigns are envisaged to be very different, thus limiting the visibility of the RRF and EU funding overall; calls for further harmonisation of information available for citizens on national implementation and on national RRF-related communication strategies to foster transparency and accountability, thus reinforcing ownership of implementation; invites the Commission to recommend an harmonised approach and standard for displaying information on the implementation of the RRF at national/regional level, asking Member States to adhere to such standard or explain deviations;

Amendment 373 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)

36 a. Calls on the Commission to explore and present different scenarios on how to use the RRF experience to improve the EU economic governance framework; emphasises that, in order to ensure proper democratic legitimacy, such framework needs to overcome shortcomings in parliamentary accountability and lack of democratic oversight;

Amendment 374 #

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5 a (new)

Lessons learned from the RRF

Amendment 375 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 b (new)

36 b. Highlights that the revision of EU economic governance framework will be the opportunity to draw lessons from successes but also failures of the RFF; encourages the Commission to properly think about involvement of local and regional authorities and civil society organisations in any future economic coordination mechanism that will guide investments in EU Member States;

Amendment 376 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 b (new)

36 b. Highlights that, beyond the commitment period of the RRF, a modern and effective framework for EU common fiscal policy needs to be developed; emphasises that, to carry democratic legitimacy, such framework needs to overcome shortcomings in parliamentary accountability and the current lack of democratic oversight;

Amendment 377 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 c (new)

36 c. Concludes that the design and implementation of the RRF offer important lessons and can serve as an inspiration for identifying and addressing common structural challenges and investment needs; underlines the need to guarantee the integration of the European Semester with the RRF; calls in this respect for national reform and investment plans, addressing CSRs, MIPs and EU-wide priorities, to become a standard feature of the Semester; considers that such plans shall be designed on a multiannual cycle of economic policy coordination that would increase national ownership by anchoring reforms in milestones and targets rather than the precise means to achieve those;

Amendment 378 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 d (new)

36 d. Highlights the RRF’s success in protecting the fiscal space of Member States from the unexpected, substantial economic shock of the COVID-19 pandemic; suggests that similar mechanisms, financed through a NGEU- like structure under Article 122 and Article 175 TFEU, should be used to protect the stability of the Union in other exceptional circumstances with grave consequences; finds that the emergency represented by climate change constitutes exceptional circumstances requiring such mechanisms to address the climate emergency and energy crisis and to establish a fully renewable EU energy system by 2035; equally finds this is the case for the Russian aggression against Ukraine and the related sanctions, which have substantial negative economic effects on all Member States, while affecting some more than others, and increase the urgent need to a catalyse the energy transition with the aim of making Europe truly energy independent by 2030;

Amendment 379 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)

36 e. Underlines that the EU fiscal architecture remains incomplete as the EU lacks permanent meaningful budgetary instruments that would improve its ability to respond to macroeconomic shocks and thereby increase its resilience; calls for the establishment of a permanent fiscal capacity that would address common or country-specific shocks that are too large to be offset through the stabilising impact of monetary policy or the automatic stabilisers in national budgets, as well as to provide for the earmarking of government investments for a more efficient provision of European public goods;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is an unprecedented instrument ~~of solidarity~~ and a cornerstone of the NextGenerationEU (NGEU) instrument, ending in 2026, as the main tool in the EU’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic to prepare the economies of the EU to face the new challenges;

Amendment 38 #

Damian BOESELAGER, Luis GARICANO, Guy VERHOFSTADT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Recalls that irregularities ~~may~~should lead to the reduction of financial contributions or the recovery of funds by the Commission;

Amendment 380 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)

36 f. Considers an immediate and temporary ban of all fossil fuel imports from Russia a strategic and moral obligation and clear signal towards Putin's regime to stop the war in Ukraine; points out that such action carries significant costs, which will affect Member States to different degrees, depending on their fiscal space, energy dependence, and trade balance with Russia; holds that, even while the Next Generation EU funds have not yet been fully exhausted, the protection of the fiscal space of severely affected Member States requires a new EU Unity Fund, financed by raising grants and loans at the EU-level; suggests an allocation proportionally to the effects of the war, sanctions and energy supply disruptions on Member States’ economy with the aim of investing in energy efficiency and independence and of shielding people and businesses from severe socio-economic impacts;

Amendment 381 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Calls on the Commission to fully take into account Parliament’s views in the upcoming review report on the implementation of the RRF, which the Commission shall present to Parliament and the Council by 31 July 2022; calls on the Commission to also take into account the input of LRAs when drafting said report;

Amendment 382 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Calls on the Commission to fully take into account Parliament’s views in the upcoming review report on the implementation of the RRF, which the Commission shall present to Parliament and the Council by 31 July 2022; reaffirms that greater involvement of the European Parliament is necessary to improve the democratic accountability of RRF management and ultimately increase the momentum for European integration;

Amendment 383 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)

37 a. Reiterates the Commission’s estimation of the need for additional annual public investment in the three digit billion rang to address the challenges of digital transformation, green and just transition and social recovery; points out that additional means are required in order to tackle the consequences of the Russian invasion in Ukraine; therefore stresses, that an increased level of investment must be stabilised and upward convergence in the EU enhanced for many years to come;

Amendment 384 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)

37 a. Points out that LRAs have, in many cases, statutory powers and competences in policy areas that are key for the RRF; stresses that involving LRAs in the RRF is essential for the effectiveness of its implementation, as they play a key role in the design and implementation of many policies and investments; calls for a more active involvement of LRAs and a broader ownership of these authorities in the implementation of the NRRPs;

Amendment 385 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 b (new)

37 b. Calls on Member States to clearly define the role of LRAs in the implementation, further planning and evaluation of NRRPs in the agreements concluded with the European Commission on operational arrangements and the individual legal commitments on financial contributions, in accordance with their national constitutional provisions and distribution of powers; requests that Member States include in their reports on the implementation of the RRF a section on the involvement of LRAs;

Amendment 386 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 b (new)

37 b. Welcomes the Commission Communication on fiscal policy guidance for 2023 and its call to maintain a supportive fiscal stance to stand ready to react to the evolving economic situation; expects in this respect the general escape clause to remain activated as long as the underlying economic justifications persist;

Amendment 387 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 c (new)

37 c. Invites the Commission to take the principles of NGEU as a basis for a revamped common European fiscal architecture; considers NGEU to be a valuable and reliable blueprint for the European growth strategy for the next decade and calls for a common budgetary capacity dedicated to European strategic investment aligned with EU priorities with macroeconomic stabilisation function;

Amendment 388 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 d (new)

37 d. Notes the RRF investments in the green transition and digital transformation should contribute to increase EU strategic autonomy and independency, notably to reducing its dependency on imported fossil fuels and, in respect of the current circumstances, calls in particular for accelerating investment to ensure strategic autonomy and independency and reinforcing the EU’s security of supply;

Amendment 389 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 e (new)

37 e. Invites the Commission and the Member States to draw conclusions from the RRF exercise and improve the mechanisms driving the economic governance framework especially when it comes to establishing a more transparent and democratic coordination process, defining underlying political guidelines, cooperation between the European institutions as well as with the national governments and stakeholders and increased national ownership of policy design by providing positive incentives for productive investments and reforms, developing the national reform and investment programmes and implementing socially-balanced and sustainable structural reforms;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Highlights that the Russian military aggression against Ukraine and the justified sanctions against Russia and Belarus will affect the economic recovery of the Union; underlines that a possible partial or complete stop of Russian fossil fuel imports will further aggravate the economic outlook; notes that the degree of energy dependency on Russian fossil fuel imports varies across Member States;

Amendment 39 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Calls on the Commission to inform the budgetary authority about the use of FENIX, the IT system set up for Member States to report the relevant information on the implementation of the NRRPs, and particularly about the interoperability of this system with the ARACHNE data- mining tool;

Amendment 390 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the European Committee of the Regions and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

Amendment 4 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 b (new)

— having regard to the Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 20 October 2021 on the Annual Sustainable Growth Strategy 20215b, __________________ 5b ECO/556-EESC-2021.

Amendment 4 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas the Facility is a performance-based instrument, which means that the payments are conditional upon the fulfilment of milestones and targets underpinning the reforms and investments in the respective national recovery and resilience plans;

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Underlines that a determined, coordinated and solidarity-based European economic policy approach has been proven to be essential to foster EU economic integration, to limit the spreading of the crises and to mitigate its negative economic and social consequences;

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Stresses that~~Calls on the Commission~~, the European Anti-Fraud Office (~~ to ensure that adequate control capacities are in place and that the Commission, OLAF), the Court of Auditors and ~~the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) may~~where applicable the EPPO are granted full access by Member States to information to exer~~cise~~t their rights ~~laid down in Article 129(1) of the Financial Regulation with regard to the Facility; asks the Commission to provide information about the measures ensuring the early detection of the abuse of EU~~according to the Financial Regulation and the RRF Regulation; Calls on the Court of Auditors, OLAF and EPPO to make full use of their role under the RRF Regulation and scrutinise thoroughly all RRF spending, in order to prevent, detect, correct and investigate fraud, corruption, conflict of interests and where applicable to impose administrative penalties, as well as to avoid double fundsing;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Highlights that the RRF is a time- limited, one-time instrument specifically designed to deal with an unprecedented health and economic crisis and therefore cannot serve as a blueprint for the EU's economic governance;

Amendment 41 #

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Nicola BEER, Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that the Commission, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), the Court of Auditors and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) may exercise their rights laid down in Article 129(1) of the Financial Regulation with regard to the Facility~~; asks the Commission to provide information about the measures ensuring the early detection of the abuse of EU funds;~~ and in particular, should be able to use the information and monitoring system made available by the Commission within their competences and rights; asks the Commission to alert about any specific obstacle that NRRPs may contain to the full exercise of those rights; asks the Commission to provide information about the measures ensuring the early detection of the abuse of EU funds, as well as to report of the result of any relevant investigation or prosecution concluded on the use of funds at national or EU level, including where applicable the actions to recover the affected funds;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Recalls fiscal consolidation and a sound economic environment for future investments as the underlying reason behind establishing the RRF;

Amendment 42 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that the Commission, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), the Court of Auditors and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) may exercise their rights laid down in Article 129(1) of the Financial Regulation with regard to the Facility; asks the Commission to provide information about the measures ensuring the early detection of the abuse of EU funds; reiterates the important role of EPPO, OLAF, Europol, and Eurojust in supporting Member States and the Commission to protect the financial interests of the Union during the implementation of NGEU; highlights the NGEU Law Enforcement Forum as well as Operation Sentinel, which in a cooperative manner shall help to prevent and counter threats against the NGEU funds and map vulnerabilities in national allocation systems;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Highlights that the RRF played an instrumental role in preventing the fragmentation of the internal market and the further deepening of macroeconomic divergence, and in fostering social and territorial cohesion;

Amendment 43 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Stresses that the conflict in Ukraine and the severe sanctions against the Russian Federation will unavoidably result in extremely negative and asymmetric effects on the EU economy and Member States; is concerned about the entailing social consequences and even further increasing social inequality; expects that EU will react with the same determination, unity and speediness and in solidarity in this new severe crisis;

Amendment 44 #

Alin MITUȚA, Olivier CHASTEL, Gilles BOYER, Ramona STRUGARIU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Stresses that the Commission, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), the Court of Auditors and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) ~~may~~shall exercise their rights laid down in Article 129(1) of the Financial Regulation with regard to the Facility to ensure prevention, detection and investigation of fraud, conflicts of interest and corruption, and correction of irregularities; asks the Commission to provide information about the measures ensuring ~~the~~ early detection of the abuse of EU funds;

Amendment 45 #

Enikő GYŐRI, Tamás DEUTSCH, Andor DELI, Bogdan RZOŃCA, András GYÜRK, Zbigniew KUŹMIUK, Jadwiga WIŚNIEWSKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the fact that even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, it seems fair to conclude that, so far, the RRF has had positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP) and that its effective implementation will be key for the EU’s economic growth; recognises that the RRF has helped to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to the EU’s recovery and resilience; reminds in this regard that two countries, namely Poland and Hungary have excelled in terms of GDP growth in 2022; recognizes that Poland's GDP growth was 7,7%,while Hungary's economy grew by 7,1% in this period; highlights that this growth could be even higher, if the NRRP's of these two countries were not blocked because of political reasons;

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the fact that even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, it seems fair to conclude that, so far, the RRF has had positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP) and that its effective implementation will be key for the EU’s economic growth; recognises that the RRF has helped to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to the EU’s recovery and resilience; emphasises that the tried and tested design of the RRF could work as a blueprint for addressing new situations of crisis in Europe;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Notes with satisfaction from the Commission’s assessments of NRRPs that Member States’ plans adopted in 2021 have adequate control systems which ensures prevention of double funding, arrangements to correct serious irregularities and recovery of funds ~~are in general quite well developed~~; notes that the Commission also identified some deficiencies in 16 NRRPs and welcomes that the Member States concerned agreed to take additional remedial measures before requesting the first regular payment; asks the Commission to clearly indicate in its future implementation reports whether the agreed remedial measures were effectively implemented and any eventual impact of the identified deficiencies on the implementation of the relevant NRRP;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the fact that even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, it seems fair to conclude that, so far, the RRF has had positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP) and that its effective implementation will be key for the EU’s economic growth; recognises that the RRF has helped to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to the EU’s recovery and resilience; points out that the implementation of ambitious structural reforms plays a paramount role in achieving those objectives;

Amendment 47 #

Antonio Maria RINALDI, Marco ZANNI, Anna BONFRISCO, Valentino GRANT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Notes with satisfaction from the Commission’s assessments of NRRPs that Member States’ prevention of double funding, arrangements to correct serious irregularities and recovery of funds are in general quite well developed; underlines that sufficient resources and capacities need to be directed towards the thorough scrutiny of the plans and the fulfilment of the milestones and targets by all institutions including identifying synergies to achieve the best possible outcome; warns against transforming this evaluation into a mere box-ticking exercise;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the fact that even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, it seems fair to conclude that, so far, the RRF has had and will have in the coming years limited positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP) and that its effective implementation will be key, but insufficient for the EU’s economic growth; recognises that the RRF has helped to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to the EU’s recovery and resilience; despite the fact that most of the contribution to investment comes from the expenditure provided from national budgets, as certified by the European Commission's autumn 2021forecasts;

Amendment 48 #

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

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Notes with satisfaction from the Commission’s assessments of NRRPs that Member States’ prevention of double funding, arrangements to correct serious irregularities and recovery of funds are in general quite well developed; insists on the necessity of a close cooperation between all EU institutions and bodies as well as with national authorities to ensure the efficient and proper use of funds;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the fact that, even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, ~~it seems fair to conclude that, so far, the RRF has had positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP)~~the RRF has had positive effects on Member States’ fiscal space and financing costs and that its effective implementation will be key for the EU’s economic growth; recognises that, while the main impact on GDP growth is expected to occur over the following years, the RRF has already helped to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to the EU’s recovery and resilience, including economic and social cohesion, jobs, productivity, competitiveness, research, development and innovation, and a well-functioning internal market with strong small and medium enterprises (SMEs);

Amendment 49 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Notes the guidance provided by the Commission to Member States to avoid double funding of the same costs by the Facility and other EU funds, as well as the support to identify suitable instruments at Union level to create synergies with the measures financed under the Facility;

Amendment 5 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Citation 23 a (new)

— having regard to the joint analysis of the European Committee of the Regions and the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR) on the involvement of municipalities, cities and regions in the preparation of the national Recovery and Resilience Plans,1a __________________ 1a https://cor.europa.eu/en/engage/Documen ts/Cohesion%20Alliance/Reports/The%20 involvement%20of%20municipalities,%20 cities%20and%20regions%20in%20the% 20preparation%20of%20the%20national %20Recovery%20and%20Resilience%20 Plans.%20Results%20of%20the%20CoR- CEMR%20targeted%20consultation/COR -2021-00131-00-00-TCD-TRA-EN.pdf

Amendment 5 #

Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel FERNANDES

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

A b. whereas the implementation of the Facility should be carried out in line with the principle of sound financial management and ensuring that the financial interests of the Union are effectively protected;

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the fact that even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, ~~it seems fair to conclude that, so far, the RRF has had positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP) and that its effective implementation will be key for the EU’s economic growth; recognises~~so far, the RRF has been an instrument that has created a lot of expectations to all stakeholders and institutions, deeper than what legislators had in mind and that its effective implementation will be key for the EU’s economic growth; it is contributing to readjusting national priorities and public knowledge of the effort carried out by the Union; we have confidence that on a medium term basis it can be recognized that the RRF has helped to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to the EU’s recovery and resilience;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission to encourage Member States to use ARACHNE and, in the meantime, to make sure that the alternative measures to risk- score the entities and individuals involved in implementation of the Facility are equivalent to ARACHNE; calls on the Commission to make sure that, in addition to the information on the beneficiaries of the programme, data on beneficial owners is also collected by the Member States; urges the Commission to establish an integrated,interoperable system building on, but not limited to existing tools, such as ARACHNE and EDES which contains information on all EU co-financed projects, beneficiaries and beneficial owners; stresses the need to harmonise the indicators in ARACHNE with the exclusion grounds of EDES to ensure that excluded economic operators are also visible in ARACHNE; calls for maximum interoperability between ARACHNE, EDES and other software to reduce the need to insert information items into various IT-systems multiple times and keep the administrative burden as low as possible; underlines that this integrated and interoperable system must enable to aggregate all individual amounts received by the same beneficiary or beneficial owner into one total sum;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the fact that even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, it seems fair to conclude that, so far, the RRF has had positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP) and that its effective implementation will be key for the EU’s economic growth; rRecognises that the RRF has helped to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to the EU’s recovery and resilience; notes, however, that there have been significant differences in the recovery path of core and periphery economies;

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the fact that even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, it seems fair to conclude that, so far, the RRF has had positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP) and that its effective implementation will be key for the EU’s economic growth; recognises that the RRF has helped to cushion EU economies and societi~~zen~~es from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to the EU’s recovery and resilience; stresses, however, that the recovery dynamics remain uneven, with significant divergences among Member States, and that uncertainty is still high;

Amendment 52 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Markus FERBER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. CReiterates that the use of a single data-mining and risk-scoring tool such as ARACHNE is essential to protect the EU budget by means of preventing conflict of interest, fraud, corruption and double funding; welcomes that several Member States aim to use ARACHNE in the implementation of the Facility; calls on the Commission to encourage all other Member States to use ARACHNE and, in the meantime, to make sure that the alternative measures to risk- score the entities and individuals involved in implementation of the Facility are equivalent to ARACHNE; calls on the Commission to make sure that, in addition to the information on the beneficiaries of the programme, data on beneficial owners is also collected by the Member States;

Amendment 53 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the fact that even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, it seems fair to conclude that~~, so far, the RRF has had positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP) and that its~~ the effective implementation of the RRF will be a key for ~~the EU’s economic growth~~positive impact on the EU GDP; recognises that ~~the RRF has~~ helped to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of ~~the~~ COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to ~~the EU’s~~EU recovery and ~~resilience~~growth, including economic cohesion, jobs, productivity,competitiveness, research, development and innovation, and a well- functioning internal market with strong small and medium enterprises (SMEs);

Amendment 53 #

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

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

Amendment 54 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the fact that even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, it seems fair to conclude that, so far, the RRF has had positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP) and that its effective implementation will be key for the EU’s economic growth; recognises that the RRF has helped to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to the EU’s recovery and resilience; including economic cohesion, jobs, productivity, competitiveness, research, development and innovation, and a well- functioning internal market with strong small and medium enterprises (SMEs);

Amendment 54 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Johan VAN OVERTVELDT, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Considers that he use of ARACHNE should be regulated mandatory as soon as possible; in the meantime calls on the Commission to encourage Member States to use ARACHNE and, ~~in the meantime,~~ to make sure that the alternative measures to risk- score the entities and individuals involved in implementation of the Facility are equivalent to ARACHNE; calls on the Commission to make sure that, in addition to the information on the beneficiaries of the programme, data on beneficial owners is also collected by the Member States;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the fact that even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, it seems fair to conclude that, so far, for the Member States whose NRRPs have been adopted, the RRF has had positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP) and that its effective implementation will be key for the EU’s economic growth; recognises that the RRF has helped to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to the EU’s recovery and resilience;

Amendment 55 #

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Nicola BEER, Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

Amendment 56 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Welcomes the fact that even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, ~~it seems fair to conclude that, so far, the RRF has had~~the RRF is likely to have a positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP) and that its effective implementation will ~~be key for~~contribute to the EU’s economic growth; recognises that the RRF has helped to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to the EU’s recovery and resilience;

Amendment 56 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. RWelcomes that most Member States have followed the Commission’s recommendations of designing specific websites where Facility-related information is displayed, but regrets the fact that there are major differences in the level and breadth of the available information made public on the ~~dedicated NRRP websites~~m; asks the Commission to include recommendations ~~in its~~and best practices in communication and visibility of the NGEU funding allowing for the monitoring of the progress of their implementation, in its future implementation reports with a particular focus on the harmonisation of the information available to citizens in order to foster transparency, public scrutiny and accountability;

Amendment 57 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Markus FERBER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esther DE LANGE, Markus PIEPER, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Is concerned that food prices and energy bills in Europe have risen as a result of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which will hurt low-income communities the most; calls on the Union’s leadership, building on the structure of the RRF, to propose a new “Energy Recovery Fund”, in order to compensate households and businesses worst hit by the surge in prices and accelerate our investment in renewable sources;

Amendment 57 #

Maria GRAPINI

10. Regrets the fact that there are major differences in the level and breadth of the available information made public on the dedicated NRRP websites; asks the Commission to include recommendations in its implementation report with a particular focus on the harmonisation of the information available to citizens ~~order to fos~~and measures to promoter transparency in order to foster public scrutiny and accountability;

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Believes that in order for the RRF to attain its objectives and support the EU to bounce back from the crisis, it is imperative that Member States implement thoroughly the agreed reforms and investments; reminds that the RRF is an incentive-based mechanism, whereby funding is disbursed upon completion of milestones and targets related to reforms;

Amendment 58 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Johan VAN OVERTVELDT, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. CRecalls that based on Article 22 of the Regulation 2021/241, Member States are primarily responsible for ensuring the protection of the financial interests of the Union; calls on the Commission to report on its assessment of the capacity of national audit systems (particularly audit capacity, beneficiary data storage and audit plan) to prevent, detect and correct corruption, fraud and conflicts of interest, and to ensure compliance with national and Union rules; stresses that, in the event of inadequacies in the national audit systems, the milestones or targets suggested by the Commission to address these inadequacies must be appropriately explained in the annual report on the implementation of the Facility;

Amendment 59 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Emphasizes that inflation can lead to a significant negative change with respect to the expected outcome of the RRF and more importantly to the expected results of the milestones and targets and estimated costs of the Member States’ NRRPs.

Amendment 59 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to report on its assessment of the capacity of national audit systems to prevent, detect and correct corruption, fraud and conflicts of interest, and to ensure compliance with national and Union rules; stresses that, in the event of inadequacies in the national audit systems, the milestones or targets suggested by the Commission to address these inadequacies must be appropriately explained in the annual report on the implementation of the Facility; notes that Spain, France, Greece and Italy, for which the Commission assessment of a first payment request is available, have milestones related to the national audit and control systems;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 24 a (new)

— having regard to the resolution on the rule of law and the consequences of the ECJ ruling (2022/2535),

Amendment 6 #

Roberts ZĪLE, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Johan VAN OVERTVELDT, Bogdan RZOŃCA

Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)

A c. whereas the Commission has published its report on the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility on 1st March 2022 as required under Article 31 of the Regulation 2021/241;

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Emphasizes that inflationary circumstances should be recognised by the Commission as justified and reasoned course of action for a Member State to amend its NRRP including the potential of downgrading the milestones and targets if it chooses so due to the inflationary circumstances.

Amendment 60 #

Antonio Maria RINALDI, Marco ZANNI, Anna BONFRISCO, Valentino GRANT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to report on its assessment of the capacity of national ~~audit~~internal control systems to prevent, detect and correct corruption, fraud and conflicts of interest, double funding and to ensure compliance with national and Union rules; stresses that, in the event of inadequacies in the national ~~audit~~internal control systems, the milestones or targets suggested by the Commission to address these inadequacies must be appropriately explained in the annual report on the implementation of the Facility;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Notes that, according to the Commission, the real GDP of the EU-27 could be around 1.5 % higher~~Calls on the Commission to recalculate the real GDP of the EU-27 in 2024, t~~han with~~aking into account ~~NGEU investments19 , when implemented effectively~~the increased energy prices and the Russo-Ukrainian War;; notes, furthermore, that the Commission forecasts that RRF grants will fund 24 % of total recovery support measures in 2022; __________________ 19 European Commission discussion paper 144, Quantifying Spillovers of Next Generation EU Investment, July 2021. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files /economy-finance/dp144_en.pdf

Amendment 61 #

Maria GRAPINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to report on its assessment of the capacity of national audit systems to prevent, detect and ~~remedy~~obviate corruption, fraud and conflicts of interest, and to ensure compliance with national and Union rules; stresses that, in the event of inadequacies in the national audit systems, the milestones or targets suggested by the Commission to address these inadequacies must be appropriately explained in the annual report on the implementation of the Facility;

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that, according to the Commission, the real GDP of the EU-27 could be around 1.5 % higher in 2024 than without NGEU investments19 , when implemented effectively; notes, furthermore, that the Commission forecasts that RRF grants will fund 24 % of total recovery support measures in 2022; regrets he fact that the Facility’s final amount was significantly lower than initially proposed, which undermined its macroeconomic impact in the EU; __________________ 19 European Commission discussion paper 144, Quantifying Spillovers of Next Generation EU Investment, July 2021. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/ economy-finance/dp144_en.pdf

Amendment 62 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Reiterates its concern that the Commission only audits the achievement of milestones and targets before paying out RRF funds while leaving it to the Member States to ensure that public procurement or state aid rules have been complied with; notes that the Commission will carry out system audits to ensure that the Member States have put in place strong controls for the protection of the Union’s financial interests against conflicts of interest or serious irregularities; is, however, of the opinion that the Commission as Guardian of the Treaties should not only rely on Member States’ audits on compliance with applicable rules to ensure an equal playing field for investments under the RRF; calls therefore on the Commission to extend its audit activities beyond system audits to include checks on public procurement and state aid rules following its risk-based approach particularly in Member States where severe or systemic weaknesses have repeatedly been detected; recalls in this regard the severe loopholes in the national legislation in certain Member States regarding efficient controls and prevention of conflicts of interests, such as Romania, Bulgaria, Czechia, Slovakia, Malta and Cyprus as well as Greece and Italy;

Amendment 63 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that, according to the Commission, the real GDP of the EU-27 could be around 1.5 % higher in 2024 than without NGEU investments19 , when implemented effectively; notes, furthermore, that the Commission forecasts that RRF grants will fund 24 % of total recovery support measures in 2022; highlights that Russia’s aggression in Ukraine will have economic and social consequences over the continent, particularly in Eastern Europe, that might influence the forecasts; __________________ 19 European Commission discussion paper 144, Quantifying Spillovers of Next Generation EU Investment, July 2021. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/ economy-finance/dp144_en.pdf

Amendment 63 #

Alin MITUȚA, Olivier CHASTEL, Gilles BOYER, Michal WIEZIK

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13

13. Notes that the absorption of grants under the Facility is projected to be front- loaded with 42 % of the total amount of allocated grants to euro area Member States to be spent by the end of 2022; notes that most grants are geared towards funding private and public investments; ~~recalls that such investments are relatively more prone to errors;~~ calls on the Commission to be vigilant, especially for payment requests from Member States where systematic failures in the management and control systems exist;

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Recalls that Member States have taken sizeable fiscal measures in response to the pandemic and in support of the recovery (5.2% of GDP in 2021 and 2.8% of GDP in 2022), a significant share of which is financed via the RRF; Notes that, according to the Commission, the real GDP of the EU-27 could be around 1.5 % higher in 2024 than without NGEU investments19 , when implemented effectively; notes, furthermore, that the Commission forecasts that RRF grants will fund 24 % of total recovery support measures in 2022; __________________ 19 European Commission discussion paper 144, Quantifying Spillovers of Next Generation EU Investment, July 2021. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/ economy-finance/dp144_en.pdf

Amendment 64 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Draft opinion
Paragraph 13

13. Notes that the absorption of grants under the Facility is projected to be front- loaded with 42 % of the total amount of allocated grants to euro area Member States to be spent by the end of 2022; notes that most grants are geared towards funding private and public investments; recalls that such investments are relatively more prone to errors; calls on the Commission to be vigilant, especially for payment requests from Member States where systematic failures in the ~~management and~~national internal control systems exist;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Highlights the positive impact of the NGEU instrument estimated by the Commission1a,the ECB1band the IMF1c,notably with an increase of GDP growth of up to 1.5 percentage point higher then without NGEU investment, a positive persistent effect for the following years, the positive macroeconomic spill over effects and the potential of well- targeted reforms and investment to reduce energy intensity and emissions and reduce social inequalities; __________________ 1a https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files /economy-finance/dp144_en.pdf; https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files /economy-finance/ip169_en.pdf; 1b https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/economic- bulletin/articles/2022/html/ecb.ebart20220 1_02~318271f6cb.en.html; https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpops /ecb.op255~9391447a99.en.pdf 1c file:///C:/Users/sreither/Downloads/1EUR EA2022001.pdf

Amendment 65 #

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Ramona STRUGARIU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14

14. ~~Calls on the Commission to make approval of the NRRPs conditional on the observance of the rule of law~~ Stresses that democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights, and in particular the implementation of CJEU rulings, are not negotiable; demands the ~~prevention and detection of, and the fight against, fraud, conflicts of interest and corruption; stresses that all measures set out in the NRRPs must~~refore that the Commission as Guardian of the Treaties ensure that these are fully complied with, and make the approval of the NRRPs and the disbursement of funds conditional on the full complyiance with the Union’'s values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and the prevention and detection of, and the fight against, fraud, conflicts of interest and corruption;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Notes that many Member States are in a difficult fiscal position, which is partially due to the effects of the pandemic and partially due to policy mistakes and a lack of fiscal discipline prior to the pandemic; points out that the RRF grants will continue to provide substantial fiscal support to growth and can thus enable highly-indebted Member States to pursue structural reforms and medium-term fiscal consolidation; calls on Member States to make the best use of this opportunity;

Amendment 66 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14

14. CEmphasises that in case of a serious breach of the Rule of law, the Conditionality Mechanism can be triggered regarding the NGEU stimulus package, and thus the Facility; calls on the Commission to make approval of the NRRPs conditional on the observance of the rRule of law and the prevention and detection of, and the fight against, fraud, conflicts of interest and corruption; stresses that all measures set out in the NRRPs must comply with the Union’s values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Points out that a successful and transparent implementation of the RRF would contribute to long term competitive, strategically autonomous, sustainable, inclusive and resilient economies and societies and will help to foster economic, social and territorial cohesion and catalyse the green and digital transitions;

Amendment 67 #

Siegfried MUREŞAN, José Manuel FERNANDES, Markus FERBER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esther DE LANGE, Luděk NIEDERMAYER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14

14. Calls on the Commission to make approval of the NRRPs conditional on the observance of the rule of law and the prevention and detection of, and the fight against, fraud, conflicts of interest and corruption; therefore calls on the Commission to implement the Conditionality Regulation approved by the European Court of Justice without any further delay; stresses that all measures set out in the NRRPs must comply with the Union’s values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union;

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Points out that a successful implementation of the RRF would lay down the foundations for long term competitive, strategically autonomous, sustainable, inclusive and resilient economies and societies;

Amendment 68 #

Michal WIEZIK, Alin MITUȚA, Olivier CHASTEL, Gilles BOYER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14

14. Calls on the Commission to make approval of the NRRPs conditional on the observance of the rule of law and the prevention and detection of, and the fight against, fraud, conflicts of interest ~~and~~, corruption and double funding; stresses that all measures set out in the NRRPs must comply with the Union’s values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union;

Amendment 69 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

Amendment 69 #

Maria GRAPINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14

14. cCalls on it to make approval of NRRPs conditional on observance of the rule of law and the prevention and detection of and fight against, fraud, conflicts of interest and corruption without affecting the final beneficiaries; stresses that all the measures set out in the NRRPs must comply with the Union EU's values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union;

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 24 b (new)

— having regard to the Commission Communication RepowerEU: joint European Action for more affordable, secure and sustainable energy,

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Recalls that the specific objective of the Facility is to provide financial support with a view to achieving the milestones and targets of reforms and investments set out in recovery and resilience plans aiming to cope with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and laying the foundations for sustainable recovery;

Amendment 70 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Reiterates the importance of the successful implementation by the Member States of national recovery and resilience plans (NRRPs) in order to ensure a long- term impact on the EU economy and society; recalls that the RRF is a performance-based mechanism, whereby funding is disbursed upon completion of milestones and targets related to measures; urges the Commission to use all lessons learned from the creation and implementation of the RRF to shape the new EU economic governance framework;

Amendment 70 #

Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel FERNANDES

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Reminds the Commission that the Facility is subject to the Rule of Law conditionality regime and calls on refraining from approving NRRPs in case of concerns regarding the observance of rule of law and the sound financial management of EU funds, prevention, detection and fight against fraud, conflict of interests and corruption; furthermore, recalls that the observance of rule of law and the sound financial management of EU funds are to be evaluated continuously throughout the lifecycle of the Facility and that the Commission shall refrain to disburse funding and, where applicable, recover funds, in case such conditions are no longer fulfilled;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Reiterates the importance of the successful implementation by the Member States of national recovery and resilience plans (NRRPs) in order to ensure a long- term impact on the EU economy and society; recalls that the RRF is a performance-based mechanism, that should respond to growth objectives not just procedure milestones whereby funding is disbursed upon completion of milestones and targets related to measures; Recalls that for its success it is crucial the participation of local, regional and national institutions that are those responsible for developing those policies, as stated in Articles 18 and 28 of the RRF Regulation

Amendment 71 #

Lara WOLTERS, Isabel GARCÍA MUÑOZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14 a. Expresses its concern that one Member State has not yet submitted its national recovery plan; is also concerned about reports1a that the requirement of broad and transparent consultation with local authorities and relevant stakeholders in drafting the recovery plan has not been met; _________________ 1a https://www.ftm.nl/artikelen/oude- kabinet-knutselde-met-private-partijen- toch-aan-nationaal-plan-eu-herstelfonds

Amendment 72 #

Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Moritz KÖRNER, Nicola BEER, Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

Amendment 72 #

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

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15

15. Reiterates its concerns expressed in its resolution of 10 June 2021 on the views of Parliament on the ongoing assessment by the Commission and the Council of the national recovery and resilience plans1 that many Member States have not, or have only inadequately, involved regional and local authorities in the drafting process of the NRRPs; recalls that regional and local authorities and civil society organisations are at the forefront of NRRP local implementation and asks the Commission and the Member States to ensure proper involvement of social partners, civil society, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders in the implementation of the NRRPs, as well as an effective coordination between the relevant levels of government; _________________ 1 OJ C 67, 8.2.2022, p. 90.

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Reiterates the importance of the successful implementation by the Member States of national recovery and resilience plans (NRRPs), in particular the reform component, in order to ensure a long- term impact on the EU economy and society; recalls that the RRF is a performance- based mechanism, whereby funding is disbursed only upon completion of milestones and targets ~~related to measures~~;

Amendment 73 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15 a. Highlights that social partners, local, and regional authorities are key stakeholders to achieve the sustainable recovery from the pandemic and thus, they should be appropriately consulted and involved in the implementation of the reforms and investments within the Facility; asks the Commission to further develop its assessment of the consultation of the relevant stakeholders in its future implementation reports, with an identification of best practises that can be implemented for other Member States such as governance systems that involve central and regional governments competent for a given area;

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Reiterates the importance of the successful and timely implementation by the Member States of national recovery and resilience plans (NRRPs) in order to ~~ensure a~~maximise the long- term impact on the EU economy and society; recalls that the RRF is a performance-based mechanism, whereby funding is disbursed upon completion of milestones and targets related to measures;

Amendment 74 #

Costas MAVRIDES, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Margarida MARQUES

Draft opinion
Paragraph 16

16. Reaffirms Parliament’s role in scrutinising the implementation of the Facility, also through the annual discharge procedure.; Reminds that in the framework of the discharge procedure to the Commission, in accordance with Article 319 TFEU, the Facility shall be subject to reporting under the integrated financial and accountability reporting referred to in Article 247 of the Financial Regulation, and, in particular, separately in the Annual Management and Performance Report;

Amendment 75 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Points out that the successful rollout of the RRF will help to make EU economies and societies more sustainable, inclusive, resilient and better prepared for the just, green and digital transition; is convinced that enhancing the sustainable transition and putting the well-being of people first is a prerequisite for a resilient, more egalitarian and future-proof economy; is convinced that a successful implementation of the NRRPs will contribute to reduce cross-country divergences fostering convergence;

Amendment 75 #

Markus PIEPER, Angelika WINZIG

Draft opinion
Paragraph 16

16. Reaffirms Parliament’s role in scrutinising the implementation of the Facility, also through the annual discharge procedure.; notes that the involvement of the European Parliament and Council is crucial to ensure the democratic oversight; signals that the discharge can be postponed if the cooperation with both Institutions is hampered and transparent access to the documents is denied or delayed by the Commission;

Amendment 76 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Notes that the approval of the RRF has led to the abandonment of previous Commission’s proposals for a Euro Area common budget (such as the Budgetary Instrument for Convergence and Competitiveness, BICC); notes, however, that the RRF is only a temporary instrument and should not be seen as a substitute for permanent instruments; calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal for permanent budgetary instruments at Euro Area level in order to promote sustainable growth and convergence;

Amendment 76 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 16

16. Reaffirms Parliament’s role in scrutinising the implementation of the Facility, which lays the foundation of its democratic accountability, also through the annual discharge procedure.;

Amendment 77 #

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Underlines that the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to increase strategic autonomy of the Union in key supply chains and critical infrastructures and services; stresses that this need has been reinforced by the Ukraine war and the sanctions, in particular in the area of energy dependency on fossil fuel imports from Russia; notes that according to the Commission, the RRF is expected to give a major boost to the implementation of the EU Industrial strategy;

Amendment 78 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Is concerned about the low level of effective disbursement or take-up of RRF funds in some Member States; warns that the RRF will only mitigate the social and economic impact of the crisis if funds are effectively absorbed and spent, so that they reach the real economy; calls on Member States to take the appropriate decisions on organisational structure and resources and to implement legal reforms if necessary in orden to ensure the timely expenditure of RRF funds;

Amendment 79 #

Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN, Dragoş PÎSLARU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Points out that the creation of the RRF provides lessons for the future of the EU economic architecture and governance and that its successful implementation could lead either to its extension or lay down the foundations for creating similar instruments and mechanisms at EU level to tackle crises and promote the EU objectives;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A (new)

A. whereas the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is the main building block of the Next Generation EU (NGEU) stimulus package;

Amendment 8 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)

-1 a. Underlines that the Commission assess the Member States’ disbursement requests upon achievement of agreed milestones and targets while respecting the national ownership of the NRRPs and the choice of the Member States of the relevant types of financing and the methods of implementation; reiterates, besides, the Parliament’s role of supervision of the work of the Commission with regard to the Facility implementation in the frame of the 'recovery and resilience dialogue';

Amendment 80 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Underlines that the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to increase strategic autonomy of the Union in key supply chains and critical infrastructures and services; notes that according to the Commission, the RRF is expected to give a major boost to the implementation of the EU Industrial strategy;

Amendment 81 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments, ~~particularly growth-enhancing ones under the RRF, sh~~should also generate EU added value; notes that according to the Commission the EU-wide GDP effects are aroulnd ~~also generate EU added value~~one third larger when explicitly accounting for the spillover effects from individual country measures; emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments under the RRF should also contribute to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights; calls upon the Commission to assess whether national plans have led to unnecessary duplication of investments in national plans of adjacent countries and to assist Member States in avoiding unnecessary overlap;

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments, particularly growth-enhancing ones under the RRF, should also generate EU added value; emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments under the RRF should also contribute to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights; calls for the introduction of new indicators in the European Semester cycle to properly monitor social progress and upwards convergence in the EU;

Amendment 83 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments, particularly growth-enhancing ones under the RRF, should also generate EU added value and foster the development of domestic industries while also promoting convergence between Member States; emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments under the RRF should also contribute to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights and the EU Green Deal;

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments, particularly growth-enhancing ones under the RRF, should also generate EU added value; ~~emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments under the RRF should also contribute to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights;~~

Amendment 85 #

Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS, José Manuel FERNANDES

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments, particularly growth-enhancing ones under the RRF, should also generate EU added value; emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments under the RRF should also contribute to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights and to the promotion of gender equality and equal opportunities for all and the mainstreaming of these objectives;

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments, particularly growth-enhancing ones under the RRF, should also generate EU added value taking into account the European Semester and Country Specific Recommendations, as well as the acquis communitaire, being as it is essential the coherent legislative and political development ; emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments under the RRF should also contribute to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights;

Amendment 87 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments, particularly growth-enhancing ones under the RRF, should also generate EU added value; notes that according to the Commission the EU-wide GDP effects are around one third larger when explicitly accounting for the spillover effects from individual country measures; emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments under the RRF should also contribute to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights;

Amendment 88 #

Linea SØGAARD-LIDELL, Nicola BEER, Caroline NAGTEGAAL, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Moritz KÖRNER, Ondřej KOVAŘÍK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments, particularly growth-enhancing ones under the RRF, should also generate EU added value; improve EU competitiveness ; emphasises that the packages of reforms and investments under the RRF should also contribute to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights;

Amendment 89 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Deplores the fact that women20 , children21 , young people, the elderly and vulnerable groups have been the most impacted by the COVID-19 crisis; recalls the need to ensure that the EU leaves no one behind, and that it tackles gender- specific socio-economic impacts on its path to recovery; __________________ 20 European Parliament, Directorate- General for Internal Policies, Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, COVID-19 and its economic impact on women and women’s poverty – Insights from 5 European Countries, May 2021. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/STUD/2021/693183/IPOL_STU(20 21)693183_EN.pdf 21 Eurochild, Growing up in lockdown: Europe’s children in the age of COVID- 19, 17 November 2020. https://www.eurochild.org/resource/growi ng-up-in-lockdown-europes-children-in- the-age-of-covid-19/deleted

Amendment 9 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Luis GARICANO, Martin HOJSÍK, Olivier CHASTEL, Valérie HAYER, Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Nicola BEER, Moritz KÖRNER, Fabienne KELLER, Gilles BOYER

Motion for a resolution
Recital A (new)

A. whereas Russia’s aggression in Ukraine on February 24 2022 has led the European Union to impose unprecedented economic sanctions; whereas the conflict generated by Russia has led a high number of Ukrainian citizens to leave Ukraine and to travel and settle in the EU; whereas the military invasion will generate economic and social consequences on the European continent, in particular on Eastern Europe countries;

Amendment 9 #

Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA, Francisco José MILLÁN MON, José Manuel GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL, Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that by mid-February 2022, all Member States but one had submitted national recovery and resilience plans ~~(NRRPs)~~, requesting in total EUR 337.5 billion in grants and EUR 166 billion in loans; welcomes that the Commission has approved 22 NRRPs, followed by the adoption of the respective 22 Council Implementing Decisions, and has agreed the operational arrangements with 8 Member States, which set the framework for monitoring the plans’ implementation;

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Deplores the ~~fact that women20 , children21 , young people, the elderl~~consequences that European citizens have suffered and continue to be most impacted by the COVID-19 crisis; emphasizes the role that primary aind ~~vulnerable groups have been the most impacted by the COVID-19 crisi~~ustry has had in keeping the economy alive and the effort carried out by SME’S as to maintain the productive network in the amidst of epidemiological and regulatory uncertainty, and many times without the alleviation of Member States administration’s; recalls the need to ensure that the EU leaves no one behind, and that it tackles ~~gender- specific~~ socio-economic impacts on its path to recovery; __________________ 20 European Parliament, Directorate- General for Internal Policies, Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, COVID-19 and its economic impact on women and women’s poverty – Insights from 5 European Countries, May 2021. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/et udes/STUD/2021/693183/IPOL_STU(202 1)693183_EN.pdf 21 Eurochild, Growing up in lockdown: Europe’s children in the age of COVID-19, 17 November 2020. https://www.eurochild.org/resource/growin g-up-in-lockdown-europes-children-in-the- age-of-covid-19/

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Deplores the fact that women20 , children21 , young people, the elderly and vulnerable groups have been the most impacted by the COVID-19 crisis; recalls the need to ensure that the EU leaves no one behind, and that it tackles gender- specific socio-economic impacts on its path to recovery; underlines that the twin transitions in Europe will create winners and losers; calls for a well-thought strategy on the part of the EU to support those who stand to lose more from the change; __________________ 20 European Parliament, Directorate- General for Internal Policies, Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, COVID-19 and its economic impact on women and women’s poverty – Insights from 5 European Countries, May 2021. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/et udes/STUD/2021/693183/IPOL_STU(202 1)693183_EN.pdf 21 Eurochild, Growing up in lockdown: Europe’s children in the age of COVID-19, 17 November 2020. https://www.eurochild.org/resource/growin g-up-in-lockdown-europes-children-in-the- age-of-covid-19/

Amendment 92 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Deplores the fact that women20 , children21 , young people, the elderly and vulnerable groups have been the most impacted by the COVID-19 crisis; recalls the need to ensure that the EU leaves no one behind, and that it tackles gender- specific socio-economic impacts on its path to recovery; stresses that support from the RRF should be implemented through inclusive measures, accessible to all, especially the most vulnerable groups; __________________ 20 European Parliament, Directorate- General for Internal Policies, Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, COVID-19 and its economic impact on women and women’s poverty – Insights from 5 European Countries, May 2021. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/et udes/STUD/2021/693183/IPOL_STU(202 1)693183_EN.pdf 21 Eurochild, Growing up in lockdown: Europe’s children in the age of COVID-19, 17 November 2020. https://www.eurochild.org/resource/growin g-up-in-lockdown-europes-children-in-the- age-of-covid-19/

Amendment 93 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Deplores the fact that women20 , children21 , young people, the elderly and vulnerable groups have been the most impacted by the COVID-19 crisis; ~~recalls the need to ensure that the EU leaves no one behind, and that it tackles~~deplores the failure of the majority of RRPs to address the gender- specific socio- economic impact~~s on its path to recovery~~ of the crisis; stresses that the so far limited interventions to improve the accessibility and the quality of child-care facilities are welcome, but fall short of what is needed; __________________ 20 European Parliament, Directorate- General for Internal Policies, Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, COVID-19 and its economic impact on women and women’s poverty – Insights from 5 European Countries, May 2021. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/et udes/STUD/2021/693183/IPOL_STU(202 1)693183_EN.pdf 21 Eurochild, Growing up in lockdown: Europe’s children in the age of COVID-19, 17 November 2020. https://www.eurochild.org/resource/growin g-up-in-lockdown-europes-children-in-the- age-of-covid-19/

Amendment 94 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Deplores the fact~~Notes that women20 , children21 , young people, the elderly and vulnerable groups have been the most impacted by the COVID-19 crisis; recalls the need to ensure that the EU leaves no one behind, and that it tackles gender- specific socio- economic impacts on its path to recovery; keeping in mind that these are not root targets for financing from RRF; __________________ 20 European Parliament, Directorate- General for Internal Policies, Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, COVID-19 and its economic impact on women and women’s poverty – Insights from 5 European Countries, May 2021. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/et udes/STUD/2021/693183/IPOL_STU(202 1)693183_EN.pdf 21 Eurochild, Growing up in lockdown: Europe’s children in the age of COVID-19, 17 November 2020. https://www.eurochild.org/resource/growin g-up-in-lockdown-europes-children-in-the- age-of-covid-19/

Amendment 95 #

Alexis GEORGOULIS, Rasmus ANDRESEN, Niklas NIENASS, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Irena JOVEVA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Andrey SLABAKOV, Giorgos GEORGIOU, Hannes HEIDE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Deplores the fact that women20 , children21 , young people, the elderly and vulnerable groups have been the most impacted by the COVID-19 crisis; recalls the need to ensure that the EU ~~leaves no one behind, and that it~~ tackles gender- specific socio-economic impacts on its path to recovery; __________________ 20 European Parliament, Directorate- General for Internal Policies, Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, COVID-19 and its economic impact on women and women’s poverty – Insights from 5 European Countries, May 2021. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/et udes/STUD/2021/693183/IPOL_STU(202 1)693183_EN.pdf 21 Eurochild, Growing up in lockdown: Europe’s children in the age of COVID-19, 17 November 2020. https://www.eurochild.org/resource/growin g-up-in-lockdown-europes-children-in-the- age-of-covid-19/

Amendment 96 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Underlines the importance of culture for our identity, democracy, society and economy; is concerned that the European cultural and creative sectors, which account for between 4 and 7 % of the EU’s GDP and for about 8.7 million jobs in the EU, were among those hit first and the hardest by the pandemic and will be the last to recover;

Amendment 97 #

Alexis GEORGOULIS, Rasmus ANDRESEN, Niklas NIENASS, Tomasz FRANKOWSKI, Irena JOVEVA, Massimiliano SMERIGLIO, Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO, Andrey SLABAKOV, Hannes HEIDE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Notes the Commission’s approach to incorporate interventions that are not strictly cultural, such as tourism on cultural heritage sites and energy efficiency of cultural buildings, in the calculations of the overall RRF spending on culture; considers that in order to have accurate statistical information and thus a good representation on the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard website, a swift, detailed and transparent assessment of the data available to clearly indicate the amounts destined to culture;

Amendment 98 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL, Siegfried MUREŞAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates the importance of the six pillars in providing the Member States with a structure to propose and implement reforms and investments that tackle the green and digital transitions, the economy, productivity and competitiveness, social and territorial cohesion, health and institutional resilience, and measures for children and young people; notes that the current debate on energy sovereignty should lead Member States to prioritize the energy transition, so as to significantly reduce (and eventually eliminate) the fossil fuel dependency and promote socially and environmentally sustainable growth;

Amendment 99 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates the importance of the six pillars in providing the Member States with a structure to propose and implement reforms and investments that tackle the green and digital transitions, the economy, productivity and competitiveness, social and territorial cohesion, health and institutional resilience, and measures for children and young people; highlights that all Member States are required by the RRF Regulation to include in their national recovery and resilience plans measures that address all pillars; deplores that not all Member States chose to respect the pillar structure of the Regulation which would have allowed an easier monitoring;

source: 729.897

2022/03/25 EMPL 144 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Citation 1 a (new)

— having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU)2021/2106 of 28 September 2021 on supplementing Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility by setting out the common indicators and the detailed elements of the recovery and resilience scoreboard2a, _________________ 2a OJ L 429, 1.12.2021, p. 83.

Amendment 10 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas youth have significant decrease in personal income and a higher risk of poverty and social exclusion, as well as a considerable risk for the future labour market involvement; whereas immediate action is needed to secure and improve the future and well-being of young people; whereas the youth unemployment rate in the EU, while showing initial signs of recovery by mid- 2021, still stood at 17.4% in Q2-2021, nearly triple the unemployment rate of the population aged 25-741a; _________________ 1a https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files /economy- finance/2022_european_semester_propos al_for_a_joint_employment_report_0.pdf

Amendment 100 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Jordi CAÑAS, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. CNotes that, according to the Commission estimates provided to the European Parliament working group on the Recovery and Resilience Facility, EUR 188 bln have been allocated for measures related to the social and territorial cohesion in the 22 approved plans; regrets that social investment measures were rather restricted towards social infrastructure and did not allow the development of proper care services and temporary relief measures; calls on the Commission and the Member States to support legislative and policy initiatives aimed at reducing inequalities and promoting decent working conditions for all, with a particular focus on telework, the right to disconnect, mental well-being at work, occupational health and safety, ensuring quality jobs for essential workers, and strengthening the role of the social partners and collective bargaining; calls in this regard for the swift adoption of the directives on improving working conditions in platform work and on adequate minimum wages in the European Union;

Amendment 101 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to support legislative and policy initiatives aimed at reducing inequalities and promoting decent working conditions for all, with a particular focus on the use of artificial intelligence, and especially of algorithms, in the management of working conditions, of telework, the right to disconnect, mental well-being at work, occupational health and safety, ensuring quality jobs for essential workers, and strengthening the role of the social partners and collective bargaining; calls in this regard for the swift adoption of the directives on improving working conditions in platform work and on adequate minimum wages in the European Union;

Amendment 102 #

Sara SKYTTEDAL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States, while respecting the principle of subsidiarity, to support legislative and policy initiatives aimed at reducing inequalities and promoting decent working conditions for all, with a particular focus on telework, the right to disconnect, mental well-being at work, occupational health and safety, ensuring quality jobs for essential workers, and strengthening the role of the social partners and collective bargaining; ~~calls in this regard for the swift adoption of the directives on improving working conditions in platform work and on adequate minimum wages in the European Union;~~

Amendment 103 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the ~~Commission and the~~ Member States to support ~~legislative and policy initiatives aimed at reducing inequalities and~~initiatives aimed at promoting decent working conditions for all, with a particular focus on telework, ~~the right to disconnect~~work-life balance, mental well-being at work, occupational health and safety, ensuring quality jobs for essential workers, and strengthening the role of the social partners and collective bargaining; calls in this regard for the swift adoption of the ~~directiv~~measures on improving working conditions in platform work and on adequate minimum wages in the European Union;

Amendment 104 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to support legislative and policy initiatives aimed at reducing inequalities and promoting decent working conditions for all, ~~with a particular focus on~~including with regard to telework, the right to disconnect, mental well-being at work, occupational health and safety, ensuring quality jobs for essential workers, and strengthening the role of the social partners and collective bargaining; calls in this regard for the swift adoption of the directives on improving working conditions in platform work and on adequate minimum wages in the European Unionstable employment relationships and regulated working hours, to promote decent wages and pensions and their progressive increase, and strengthening the role of unions and collective bargaining;

Amendment 105 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to support legislative and policy initiatives aimed at reducing inequalities and promoting decent working conditions for all, with a particular focus on telework, the right to disconnect, mental well-being at work, occupational health and safety, ensuring quality jobs for essential workers, and strengthening the role of the social partners and collective bargaining; calls in this regard for the swift adoption of the directives on improving working conditions in platform work pay transparency and enforcement mechanisms and on adequate minimum wages in the European Union;

Amendment 106 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to support legislative and policy initiatives aimed at reducing inequalities and ~~promot~~ensuring decent working conditions for all, with a particular focus on telework, the right to disconnect, mental well-being at work, occupational health and safety, ensuring quality jobs for essential workers, and strengthening the role of the social partners and collective bargaining; calls in this regard for the swift adoption of the directives on improving working conditions in platform work ~~and~~, on adequate minimum wages in the European Union, and pay transparency;

Amendment 107 #

Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Beata SZYDŁO, Anna ZALEWSKA, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to support legislative and policy initiatives aimed at reducing inequalities and promoting decent working conditions for all, with a particular focus on telework, the right to disconnect, mental well-being at work, occupational health and safety, ensuring quality and safe jobs for essential workers, and strengthening the role of the social partners and collective bargaining; calls in this regard for the swift adoption of the directives on improving working conditions in platform work and on adequate minimum wages in the European Union;

Amendment 108 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the ~~Commission and the~~ Member States to ~~support~~take legislative and policy initiatives aimed at reducing inequalities and promoting decent working conditions for all, with a particular focus on telework, the right to disconnect, mental well-being at work, occupational health and safety, ensuring quality jobs for essential workers, and strengthening the role of the social partners and collective bargaining; calls ion th~~is regard for the swift adoption~~e Commission and the Member States to cooperate constructively ofn the directives on improving working conditions in platform work and on adequate minimum wages in the European Union;

Amendment 109 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Radan KANEV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to support legislative and policy initiatives aimed at reducing inequalities and promoting decent working conditions for all, with a particular focus on telework, the right to disconnect, mental well-being at work, occupational health and safety, ensuring quality jobs for essential workers, and ~~strengthen~~promoting the role of the social partners and collective bargaining; calls in this regard for the swift adoption of the directives on improving working conditions in platform work and on adequate minimum wages in the European Union;

Amendment 11 #

Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Beata SZYDŁO, Anna ZALEWSKA, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas the EU's socio-economic situation in recent years has been determined by the impact of the COVID- 19 pandemic, mainly due to changes in social behaviour and administrative constraints, taken with a view to protecting the population and maintaining the capacity of the health system;

Amendment 110 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Notes that, according to the Commission estimates provided to the European Parliament working group on the Recovery and Resilience Facility, the total expenditure on healthcare-related measures is estimated at EUR 37 billion; welcomes the opportunity for investment in health and long-term care systems which are essential in the demographic change; regrets that Member States did not include measures to make mental health care accessible and affordable for all age groups, especially in early ages, and to address health inequalities through the provision of adequate support to vulnerable groups; recalls those living alone, those with lower socio-economic status, and those who were unemployed1a had higher rates of mental distress, while that the mental health of young people has worsened significantly or almost doubling in several Member States compared to the pre-crisis level; highlights that mental health should represent an integral part of the EU’s socio-economic recovery from the pandemic and an occupational health priority, in particular in educational and workplace environments; _________________ 1a OECD Tackling the mental health impact of the COVID-19 crisis: An integrated, whole-of-society response https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy- responses/tackling-the-mental-health- impact-of-the-covid-19-crisis-an- integrated-whole-of-society-response- 0ccafa0b/

Amendment 111 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Notes that many NRRPs include explanations on how the plan addresses gender-related concerns; observes that some NRRPs contain measures focusing on the participation of women in the labour market and the reduction of the gender pay gap; notes however that these measures fall short of what would have been needed to ensure agender-equal recovery; regrets that current available data show that jobs are largely created in male-dominated sectors without accompanying measures to increase the presence of women in those sectors;

Amendment 112 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Notes that the country-specific recommendations remain focused one- sidedly on narrow concepts of competitiveness an economic growth instead of on the sustainable development of prosperity and wellbeing, and points out that there is a need for strong parliamentary oversight of the Commission and governments during the process, in order to hinder restrictive,one- sided reform targets;

Amendment 113 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Takes the view that companies that fail to meet the highest social and labour standards – particularly those whose organisational model is based on precarious employment relationships or which close down and dismiss workers for no apparent reason – should be barred from accessing public funds, including EU funds;

Amendment 114 #

Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Beata SZYDŁO, Anna ZALEWSKA, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the Commission to bring forward a proposal, structured along the lines of the Recovery and Resilience Facility, to counter the adverse effects, especially on vulnerable households and businesses, of energy price increases and of the need to establish the Union's strategic energy autonomy;

Amendment 115 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Emphasizes that extraordinary inflation should be recognised by the Commission as a justified reason for a Member State to amend its NRRP including the potential of downgrading the milestones and targets;

Amendment 116 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to bolster the social component of the RRF with a view to favouring SMEs and families, both of which are basic pillars of European society;

Amendment 117 #

Ádám KÓSA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Insists on making the evaluation process transparent and calls on the Commission to adopt the national plans submitted by the Member States as a matter of urgency;

Amendment 118 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Calls for the public debt taken on by the Member States under the RRP not to be counted for the purposes of macroeconomic governance and for the part of the public debt issued by the Member States, for the entire period in which they are tackling the consequences of the pandemic, held by the ECB and appearing on their balance sheets and on the balance sheets of the National Central Banks (Eurosystem), to be cancelled in order to give the Member States room for manoeuvre to address public investment needs properly;

Amendment 119 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Urges the Commission to verify the proper consultation of the social partners while Member States drafted the Nationalrecovery and resilience plans (NRRPs), where social partners were heard according to national rules and practices; urges the Commission to verify the proper implementation of the social objectives of the country-specific recommendations in the NRRPs, as to mitigate the employment impact of the crisis as well as the social protection of workers, with in particular non-standard workers;

Amendment 12 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

A b. whereas, according to the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard, Member States have put forward 228 measures with a focus on supporting children and youth; whereas 74% of the measures focus on general, vocational and higher education and training capacity, as well as accessibility, affordability, quality and inclusiveness, including digitisation and infrastructure, the performance of education and increasing capacity in higher education; whereas 14% of the measures that Member States included are dealing with early childhood education and care, early school leaving and child poverty; whereas 12% of the measures focus on tackling youth unemployment through job creation, hiring, job transition incentives and support for self-employment;

Amendment 120 #

Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Beata SZYDŁO, Anna ZALEWSKA, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Calls on the Commission to reassess the potential amount of RRF loan support that would not be requested by the Member States due to limited interest for the loan component, thereby calls on the Commission to exercise more flexible framework for the provision of support of the Facility to Member States particularly in respect to the fallout of the Russian aggression on Ukraine, namely related to social aspects such as aid for children, housing, infrastructure etc.;

Amendment 121 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Calls on the Commission to use the social component of the RRF to promote entrepreneurship and talent, focusing especially on young persons, as a means of developing the single market;

Amendment 122 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3 c. Reminds the Commission that the rule of law conditionality mechanism is an essential component of the RRF; calls on the Commission to refrain from approving the NRRPs of Member States as long as concerns regarding the observance of the rule of law and the prevention and detection of and fight against fraud, conflicts of interest and corruption persist in those countries, and to ensure that all the measures set out in their plans comply with EU values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union;

Amendment 123 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)

3 d. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to tax energy companies' windfall gains and sending direct income support to low-income households as the war in Ukraine disrupts the energy market and adds to spiralling inflation;

Amendment 124 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Welcom~~Notes the creation and publication of the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard.; criticizes the lack of initiative of the Commission to come forward with complementary social indicators tracking notably the implementation of the 20 principles of the EPSR through the NRRPs; recalls that the European Parliament has asked the Commission to cover the following areas in the Action Plan and in the Social Scoreboard: decent work, social justice and equal opportunities, robust social welfare systems and fair mobility; notes that the delegated act on social expenditure and on the resilience scoreboard will not be sufficient to track and to report on the gender dimension and impacts of the RRF; calls on the Commission to come forward with complementary gender indicators tracking notably the gender impacts of the NRRPs; is convinced that public social and green investments should be excluded from deficit and debt calculation;

Amendment 125 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the ~~creation and publication of the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard.~~ steps taken by the Commission in order to ensure full transparency in implementing of the RRF, such as making the Operational Arrangements concluded with the Member States available of the dedicated RRF website as well as launching Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard, that contains data on the plans submitted by Member States, approved by the Commission and endorsed by the Council; Reiterates the importance of the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard in providing a clear framework for the additionality impact, as well as ensuring a qualitative analysis of the reforms and investments proposed; urges the Member States to provide detailed information to the Commission in order to ensure an effective reporting of the impact of the RRF;

Amendment 126 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the creation and publication of the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard., and should be further developed; asks the European Commission to ensure the "territorial dimension" and to ensure the role of local and regional authorities is properly reflected in the biannual scoreboard, without leading to excessive administrative burden for the relevant authorities;

Amendment 127 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Welcomes the creation and publication of the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard. as a performance-reporting tool to monitor the implementation of the RRF generally as well as Member States’ individual recovery and resilience plans and enhance transparency for the general public;

Amendment 128 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Jordi CAÑAS, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Welcom~~Notes the creation and publication of the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard.;

Amendment 129 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Deplores that national parliaments, regions and local authorities, as well as civil society organisations, including youth organisations have had a limited involvement in designing national plans; recalls that regions and local authorities and civil society organisations are at the forefront of RRP local implementation and asks the Commission and the Member States to ensure proper and deep involvement of social partners, civil society, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders in the implementation of the plans, as well as effective coordination between the relevant levels of government;

Amendment 13 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the RRF created an unprecedented structure adapted to addressing the complex effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on economy, society and institutions as well as to make sure that the transitions of climate-neutrality, digitalisation and demographic change, are socially fair and just; whereas it should be ensured that it tackles gender- specific socio-economic impacts on its path to recovery; whereas evaluation of the implementation of the RRF is needed to implement lessons learned and to update the current structures put in place;

Amendment 130 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Underlines that the Facility aims at contributing to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights, introducing better policies for the next generation; considers that for the delegated acts on recovery and resilience scoreboard and on social expenditure to comply and be in line with the aims of the Regulation, clear methodologies are crucial for displaying the progress on the implementation of the recovery and resilience plans regarding the above mentioned aspects;

Amendment 131 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Notes positively that several Member States provide data at regional level and invites the other Member States to provide data at regional level; calls for the Commission to update the monitoring of the implementation of the six pillars and to ensure granular data is made available in the RRF scoreboard and that the European Parliament is regularly updated to continue and enhance its role in scrutinising the implementation of the RRF;

Amendment 132 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Welcomes the share of RRF social expenditure under the four social categories of employment and skills (20.4%), education and childcare (33%), health and long-term care (32%) and social policies (14.6%)for the RRPs endorsed thus far; calls on Member States to ensure ambitious social objectives in their investments and reforms;

Amendment 133 #

Carmen AVRAM, Manuel PIZARRO, Elisabetta GUALMINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Recommends prioritising projects that strengthen the resilience of Member States and their capacity to meet the needs arising from the refugee crisis;

Amendment 134 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Considers that the RRF should become a permanent framework to ensure that it is available again in crises of similar severity,and can be accessed more quickly; stresses however that the weaknesses of the RRF should be corrected in the new instrument including more ambitious social goals, firmly establishing the sustainable development of prosperity and wellbeing as well; notes that with the establishment of the new instrument that the Commission and Council should learn from the conclusions to improve the mechanisms driving the economic governance framework especially when it comes to establishing a more transparent and democratic coordination process, defining underlying political guidelines, cooperation between the European institutions as well as with the national governments and stakeholders and increased national ownership of policy design by providing positive incentives for productive investments and reforms, developing the national reform and investment programmes and implementing socially-balanced and sustainable structural reforms;

Amendment 135 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Regrets these delegated acts do not provide a robust and comprehensive methodology to track and to report on the social dimension and impacts of the RRF that would live up to the objectives of the Regulation; underlines that the social expenditure methodology must follow the structure of the European Pillar of Social Rights and analyse the contribution to each one of the 20 principles; stresses that common indicators must include indicators reflecting all the social areas included in the RRF that allow an assessment of the performance of the Facility; calls on the Commission to come forward with complementary social indicators tracking notably the implementation of the 20 principles of the EPSR through the NRRPs;

Amendment 136 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Observes Member States have put forward 320 measures with a focus on supporting children and youth and 115 measures with a focus on gender equality for the RRPs endorsed thus far; notes that while most Member States integrated a gender equality dimension in their RRPs, the extent to which such measures are covered varies greatly and could be improved for a number of Member States9a; stresses the importance of mainstreaming gender equality and equal opportunities for all throughout the implementation of RRPs; further stresses that investment in robust care infrastructure in particular is crucial to tackling the gender employment gap; _________________ 9a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/IDAN/2021/689470/IPOL_IDA(20 21)689470_EN.pdf

Amendment 137 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Alin MITUȚA, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Reiterates the importance of a successful implementation by the Member States in order to ensure a long-term impact on the EU economy and society; urges the Commission to use all lessons learned from the creation and implementation of the RRF in shaping the new EU economic governance framework;

Amendment 138 #

Carmen AVRAM, Manuel PIZARRO, Elisabetta GUALMINI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to speed up the implementation of energy resilience projects and to identify sustainable solutions to mitigate the impact of rising energy prices on the population;

Amendment 139 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4 c. Insists once again on the essential role played by EU stakeholders in the preparation, implementation and monitoring of the RRPs; regrets that the RRF Regulation does not contain a formal assessment criterion when it comes to the involvement of local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders and how the input of the stakeholders is reflected; deplores once more the fact that many Member States have not or only inadequately involved regional and local authorities in the drafting process of the NRRPs;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the RRF ~~created an unprecedented structure adapted to addressing the complex effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on economy, society and institution~~aims to mitigate the economic and social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and make European economies and societies more sustainable, resilient and better prepared for the green and digital transitions through reforms and investments; whereas it created an unprecedented structure under the NextGenerationEUrecovery instrument making available EUR 385.8 billion in loans and EUR 338 billion in grants;

Amendment 140 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4 c. Recalls that EUR 220 billion in loans is still available under the RRF; highlights the opportunity that new loans under the Facility could provide to Member States in addressing the current Ukrainian refugee crisis and encourages Member States to make use of the potential funding available to support refugees' needs in particular their educational, care, social and labour market integration in advance of the request deadline for loan support in mid- 2023;

Amendment 141 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)

4 d. Concludes that the design and implementation of the RRF offer important lessons and can serve as an inspiration for reforming the European Semester; calls on the European Commission to integrate effectively the social dimension into the Semester process;

Amendment 142 #

4 d. Recalls that respect for the rule of law is an essential precondition for compliance with the principles of sound financial management and that RRF funds are subject to Regulation 2020/2092;

Amendment 143 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 e (new)

4 e. Recalls the need to ensure complementarity and coordination of RRF funding with other EU funds in particular ESF+;

Amendment 144 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 f (new)

4 f. Recalls Member States should consult local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders in the preparation and, where available, implementation of RRPs in accordance with their national legal frameworks; stresses the importance of active engagement with such stakeholders by Member States during the implementation phase;

Amendment 15 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the ~~RRF created an unprecedented structure adapt~~establishment of the RRF set limits to its use, whether owing to an insufficient figure or to the frontloading of funds or because it is being mobilised in the form of loans, causing further indebtedness, or because of the associated conditionalities, which prevent it from being an effective support for the response needed to address~~ing~~ the complex effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on economy, society and institutions;

Amendment 16 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the RRF created an unprecedented structure adapted to addressing the complex effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on economy, society ~~and~~ institutions and is positively contributing to the EU’s recovery and resilience, including economic growth, cohesion, jobs, productivity, competitiveness, research, development and innovation, and a well-functioning internal market with robust small and medium enterprises SMEs;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the RRF created an unprecedented structure adapted to addressing the complex effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on economy, society and institutions; whereas the RRF will drive Member States' reforms and investments in line with the EU’s priorities as set out in the six pillars;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas the RRF created an unprecedented structure adapted to addressing the complex effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on economy, people, society and institutions;

Amendment 19 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas the Recovery and Resilience Facility has proven to have great potential to raise funds on the market at rates advantageous to the Member States; whereas it has also proved sufficient to meet the major challenges of a resilient and sustainable recovery, and will therefore be equally indispensable when seeking to achieve the EU’s ambitious goals relating to the environment and energy autonomy;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Citation 1 a (new)

— having regard to the recovery and resilience scoreboard,

Amendment 20 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

Ba. Whereas the RRF means that the Member States take on debt, and whereas, for the Member States to agree to incur such debt, the objectives pursued by it must be duly adapted to the social circumstances of the various Member States;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

B a. whereas the release of funds under the RRF is contingent on the satisfactory fulfilment of relevant milestones and targets of reforms and investments by Member States as set out in their recovery and resilience plans (RRPs);

Amendment 22 #

Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Beata SZYDŁO, Anna ZALEWSKA, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

B a. whereas one of the major challenges for the European Union is that of negative demographic trends; whereas the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated this phenomenon;

Amendment 23 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas, because of the COVID- 19 pandemic, some young people may have missed out on training or professional experience opportunities;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas social and territorial cohesion is one of the six pillars of the RRF~~; whereas creating and~~, specifically the implementation of the twenty principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights; whereas contributing to the upward economic and social convergence, restoring and promoting sustainable growth and the integration of the economies of the Union, fostering high- quality sustainable employment creation, growth, ensuring equality of and access to opportunities and social protection, protecting vulnerable groups and improving the living standards of all is one of the objectives included in the RRF Regulation;

Amendment 25 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas social and territorial cohesion is one of the six pillars of the RRF; whereas creating and fostering high- quality employment creation is one of the objectives included in the RRF Regulation; whereas this should be achieved through a comprehensive package of reforms and investments in order to promote social impact investments, as well as stable employments contracts, decent wages, collective bargaining and social protection coverage;

Amendment 26 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas social and territorial cohesion is one of the six pillars of the RRF; whereas ~~creating~~mitigating the social and economic impact of the crisis, contributing to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights and fostering high- quality employment creation, which is particularly important for women and the most disadvantaged groups, is one of the objectives included in the RRF Regulation;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas social and territorial cohesion ~~is one~~and policies for the next generation are two of the six pillars of the RRF; whereas creating and fostering high- quality employment ~~creation is one of~~mitigating the social and economic impact of the COVID crisis, in particular on women, and contributing to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights are among the objectives included in the RRF Regulation;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas social and territorial cohesion is one of the six pillars of the RRF; whereas creating and fostering the competitiveness of our companies and high- quality employment creation is one of the objectives included in the RRF Regulation;

Amendment 29 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Recital C

C. whereas social and territorial cohesion is one of the six pillars of the RRF; whereas creating and fostering high- quality employment creation ~~is on~~and inclusive growth are some of the objectives included in the RRF Regulation;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Citation 1 b (new)

— having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU)2021/2105 of 28 September 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility by defining a methodology for reporting social expenditure3a, _________________ 3a OJ L 429, 1.12.2021, p. 79.

Amendment 30 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas policies for the next generation, children and youth, including education and skills, is one of the six pillars of the RRF; whereas the constant development of digital skills, as well as the development of skills with economic potential, such as green or entrepreneurial skills, is key for a healthy inclusive and future-oriented European labour market and should create access for every European to quality and paid employment; whereas the same applies to vocational education, trade skills and life skills; whereas in 2022 and 2023 3.4 million jobs are expected to be created1a,making it will be essential to ensure young people take part of these new employment opportunities; whereas an increasing number of young adults are now relying on the parental home to protect them from poverty, but 29 % of households with three generations are at risk of poverty and 13 % are severely deprived2a; whereas 40% of employers cannot find people with the right skills to fill their vacancies3a; whereas the EU needs to overcome all forms of skills mismatch in order to make effective use of its human capital4a; whereas access to proper digital infrastructure and training on digital skills should be available to all in order to avoid widening the gap between people on digital literacy and ensure equal opportunities for all in the education system and in the labour market; _________________ 1a European Commission Autumn 2021 Economic Outlook, p.2. 2a Source: Recital N – EP Resolution on Strong Social Europe for Just Transitions) 3a Source : https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId =1146⟨Id=en 4a Source: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/BRIE/2016/573893/EPRS_BRI%2 82016%29573893_EN.pdf

Amendment 31 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas implementing lessons learnt from the pandemic, including in the labour market and labour force, can contribute to strengthening recovery and resilience; whereas the shift to teleworking should be used also to the benefit of those workers whose Member State of the employer is different from the Member State of their family residence and current social security rules do not allow them to telework from the different Member States than the Member State of the employer; whereas revision of these rules would attract more workers to the labour market as it would provide desired flexibility and thus create new work opportunities and increase employment;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas Article 16 of the regulation requires the European Commission to present a review report on the implementation of the Facility to the European Parliament and the Council by 31 July 2022; whereas this report should assess the extent to which the implementation of the recovery and resilience plans is in line with the six pillars and contributes to the general objective of the Regulation;

Amendment 33 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

Ca. Whereas the proper use of the RRF for social objectives requires efficient monitoring of the funds, to ensure that they are used with the level of diligence required for public funds, and whereas mere ex-post monitoring, at which point it is no longer possible to remedy possible misuse, is not sufficient;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas the consequences of the Russian invasion in Ukraine are placing a heavy burden on households due to the increase in prices of basic needs, including energy and food, and services; whereas integrating refugees in this economic context will require the mobilisation of public and social services;

Amendment 35 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas a large number of reforms and investments aim to improve territorial infrastructure and services provided at local level; whereas these measures can also boost the local economy, national competitiveness and institutional resilience;

Amendment 36 #

Carmen AVRAM, Manuel PIZARRO, Elisabetta GUALMINI

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. Having regard to the armed conflict in Ukraine and the refugee crisis faced by the Member States, in particular those on the external border with Ukraine;

Amendment 37 #

Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Beata SZYDŁO, Anna ZALEWSKA, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas the national recovery plans of four Member States have still not been approved by the European Commission;

Amendment 38 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)

C a. whereas the consultation and involvement of the EU stakeholders strongly varies between countries and regions;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)

C b. whereas poverty as well as in-work poverty are on the raise again in the EU; whereas according to OECD, a fiscal response targeting support for the more vulnerable of 0.5% of GDP could substantially mitigate the economic impact of this current crisis without substantially adding to inflation; whereas the increased need for funding to strengthen the economy will not place budgetary constraints on the Member States, if combined with a fair redistribution of wealth on property and an effective progressive tax policy that ends tax fraud and tax evasion; whereas, under current market conditions, the profits of electricity companies could increase by €200 billion, and so a tax increase on these profits in these circumstances could help reduce the electricity bills of consumers and the mostvulnerable groups; whereas Member States should keep investing in a sustainable transition in order to maintain the recovery from the pandemic;

Amendment 4 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Citation 1 c (new)

— having regard to the recovery and resilience scoreboard4a, _________________ 4a https://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/rec overy-and-resilience-scoreboard/

Amendment 40 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)

C b. whereas the methodology for reporting on social expenditure in Member States’ recovery and resilience plans should ensure all reforms and investments with a primary social dimension are associated to one of nine social policy areas under the four broader social categories set out in the delegated act; whereas additionally all measures of a social nature that include a focus on children and the youth, or on gender equality, should be flagged in order to ensure specific reporting on expenditure under the RRF on these areas;

Amendment 41 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)

C b. whereas the importance of local and regional involvement in implementing the national recovery and resilience plans (NRRPs); whereas local and regional authorities are responsible for one third of all public expenditure and more than half of public investment in the EU1a, a large portion of which is in policy areas that are key for the RRF; _________________ 1a OECD, Key data on Local and Regional Governments in the European Union (brochure), 2018. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/regional/EU-Local- government-key-data.pdf

Amendment 42 #

Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Beata SZYDŁO, Anna ZALEWSKA, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)

Cb. Whereas the responsibility for monitoring RRF social allocations lies primarily with the European Commission, which is the manager of the funds originating from and intended for the Member States;

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)

C b. whereas the digital skills indicator in the EU is only 56%; whereas, according to the EU digital objectives, the digital skills indicator should increase to 80% by 20301a; _________________ 1a Digital Economy and Society Index 2021, p. 15

Amendment 44 #

Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Beata SZYDŁO, Anna ZALEWSKA, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Recital C c (new)

C c. whereas the inflation can lead to a significant negative change in the expected outcome of the RRF and more importantly to the expected results of the milestones, targets and estimated costs of the Member States’ NRRPs;

Amendment 45 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Alin MITUȚA, Sylvie BRUNET, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the COVID-19 crisis has already left many young people jobless or in precarious employment; calls on the Commission and Member Sstates to fight against youth unemployment and to ensure that young people, especially those not in employment, education or training (NEETs), receive adequate, paid and quality first working experience; condemns the practice of unpaid internships as a form of exploitation of young workers, and a violation of their rights, and calls on the Commission and the Member States, in collaboration with Parliament, and respecting the principle of subsidiarity, to propose a common legal framework to ensure fair remuneration for traineeships and apprenticeships in order to avoid exploitative practices;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the COVID-19 crisis has already left many people jobless or in precarious employment and interrupted vocational education, traineeships or apprenticeships of many young people; calls on the Commission and Member States to fight against youth unemployment and to ensure that young people, especially those not in employment, education or training (NEETs), receive adequate, paid and quality first working experience; Calls furthermore on the Commission and Member States to promote up-skilling and re-skilling of workers who lost their jobs during the pandemic so they are able to adapt to the changes in the labour market particularly its digitalisation;

Amendment 47 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the COVID-19 ~~crisis~~pandemic has already left ~~many people~~thousands of workers jobless or in precarious employment~~; calls on the Commission and Member States to fight against youth unemployment and to ensure that young people, especially thos~~ and that many have seen their wages cut, their hours deregulated and their rights undermined; points out that COVID-19 is often used as an excuse to further exploit workers; calls on the Commission and Member States to fight for the promotion of full employment and work with rights, and against unemployment, including for young people, and against the risk of poverty and social exclusion and to ensure that young people not in employment, education or training (NEETs), receive adequate, properly paid and quality first working experience;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the COVID-19 crisis has already left many people jobless or in precarious employment; ~~calls on the Commission and Member States to fight against youth unemployment and to ensure that young people,~~stresses that the Russian invasion in Ukraine and the sanctions against the Russian Federation will produce negative and asymmetric effects on the EU economy, Member States and especially thouse ~~not~~ holds in regards to the on-going e~~mployment, education or training (NEETs), receive adequate, paid and quality first working experience~~nergy crisis; is concerned about its social consequences and the further increasing social inequality; expects that the EU will react with the same determination, unity and speediness and in solidarity in this new severe crisis;

Amendment 49 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN, Radan KANEV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the COVID-19 crisis has already left many people ~~jobless or in precarious employment~~unemployed and young people are particularly affected by the COVID-19 crisis in terms of employment, education, training and mental well-being; calls on the Commission and Member States to fight against youth unemployment and to ensure that young people, especially those not in employment, education or training (NEETs), receive adequate, ~~pai~~remunerated and quality first working experience;

Amendment 5 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Citation 1 d (new)

— having regard to the European Commission’s Recoveryand Resilience Facility Annual Report of 01 March 20225a, _________________ 5a COM(2022) 75 final

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Highlights that the COVID-19 crisis has already left many people jobless or in precarious employment; c~~Calls on the Commission and Member States to fight against youth unemployment and to ensure that young people, especially those not in employment, education or training (NEETs), receive adequate, paid and quality first working experience;

Amendment 51 #

Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Beata SZYDŁO, Anna ZALEWSKA, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the COVID-19 crisis has already left many people jobless or in precarious employment; calls on the Commission and Member States to fight against youth unemployment and to ensure that young people, especially those not in employment, education or training (NEETs), have access to training and receive adequate, paid and quality first working experience;

Amendment 52 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Calls on the Commission to immediately approve the recovery plans for Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary and Sweden; recalls that further delay in deciding on the mobilisation of funds under this instrument means that, in the end, these funds may not be used at all for post-pandemic recovery assistance; points out that in the context of a new challenge for the EU and the world, namely the war in Ukraine, funds should reach the Member States as soon as possible;

Amendment 53 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Highlights that the COVID-19 pandemic shifted most of the everyday and work activities to online environment; Calls therefore on the support to the activities promoting acquisition of digitals skills and digital tools for all with the special focus on vulnerable and socially disadvantaged groups;

Amendment 54 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the need to incorporate specific targets, linked to social investment, with a particular focus on women and young people, along with the climate and digital targets, in such a way as to ensure an appropriate allocation of funding to meet the objectives set;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Welcomes the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) as an ambitious and timely tool to enable the EU to emerge stronger from the COVID-19 crisis. Supports the European Commission's view that most Member States have satisfactory drawing up the (NRRPs) in a short space of time;

Amendment 56 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Highlights that the COVID-19 crisis have the most impacted women, children, young people, the elderly and vulnerable groups and that it has left many people jobless or in precarious employment; insist on the importance for the EU to leave no one behind;

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. In this regard welcomes the early disbursement of EUR 56.6 billion in pre- financing by the Commission to 21 Member States in order to ensure the frontloading of financial support to address the crisis andit’s consequent impacts;

Amendment 58 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Reiterates that the COVID-19 pandemic proved that many activities and jobs are possible to conduct distantly with the use of digital tools which could help people from distant or rural areas to find better opportunities in the labour market and thus prevent brain drain from these areas to bigger cities or abroad; Calls therefore on the Commission and the Member States to support quality digital infrastructure in distant and rural regions in order to attract young people and combat brain drain;

Amendment 59 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Emphasizes that in several Member States the NRRPs are only part of broader national recovery plans, and points to the need for more exchange of best practices between Member States and a comprehensive approach at European level, in order to overcome the crisis and make the EU economy more robust, resilient and competitive for the future;

Amendment 6 #

Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Beata SZYDŁO, Anna ZALEWSKA, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic is placing a heavy burden on people in the EU, particularly those from more vulnerable groups, such as women, single parents, people with disabilities, children, young people ~~and the elderly,~~, the elderly and big families as well as it is placing a heavy burden on the frontline workers and their families in their everyday lives, working lives and livelihoods2 3 ; _________________ 2 Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung, Belastungen von Kindern, Jugendlichen und Eltern in der Corona-Pandemie, 2021. 3 European Commission, Joint Employment Report 2021.

Amendment 60 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Stresses the need to adapt labour market policy instruments to support those groups that are particularly disadvantaged on the labour market, such as young people, women, people with disabilities, people with low qualifications, people remaining in the agricultural sector due to a lack of alternative forms of employment, and the older people;

Amendment 61 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. SCalls on the Commission and Member States to fight against youth unemployment and to ensure that young people, especially those not in employment, education or training(NEETs), receive adequate, paid and quality first working experience; stresses that Member States must adopt reforms and include investments in the next generation, children and youth in line with the objectives of the Child Guarantee and reinforced Youth Guarantee; recalls that there is RRF funding expressly available for the development of education, training and skills, particularly digital skills; stresses, further, the importance of the mutual recognition of skills, qualifications and competences in fostering labour mobility; calls on the Commission for a ban of unpaid traineeships and to present a legal framework for fairly remunerated traineeships, internships and apprenticeships; calls on the Commission to present a proposal that offers an allowance scheme for obtaining qualifications to every adult in need that wants to enrol in vocational training or tertiary education, and which covers educational costs and essential needs of the person and his/her dependants;

Amendment 62 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Alin MITUȚA, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Stresses that Member States must adopt reforms and include~~Highlights that, according to the Commission estimates provided to the European Parliament working group on the Recovery and Resilience Facility, Member States included in their plans measures dedicated to children and youth worth EUR 49.21 billion, representing approximately 11,5% of the total budget of the 22 recovery and resilience plans currently approved; stresses that Member States must include reforms and investments in the next generation, children and the youth in line with the objectives of the Child Guarantee and reinforced Youth Guarantee; recalls that there is RRF funding expressly available for the development of education, training and skills, particularly digital skills; stresses, further, the importance of the mutual recognition of skills, qualifications and competences in fostering labour mobility in order to access financing under the RRF and ensure complementarity between RRF, ESF+ and EU programmes; calls on the Commission to closely monitor Member States' investment in this area via the Semester cycle and the national reform programmes in line with the RRF, while involving social partners in the monitoring and evaluation of the national recovery and resilience plans;

Amendment 63 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that Member States must adopt reforms and include investments in the next generation, children and youth with the special focus on children and young people from vulnerable and disadvantaged environment in line with the objectives of the Child Guarantee and reinforced Youth Guarantee; recalls that there is RRF funding expressly available for the development of education, training and skills, particularly digital skills and recalls that it shall also support development of cross-cutting skills such as critical thinking, entrepreneurship, creativity, team work or media literacy; stresses, further, the importance of the mutual recognition of skills, qualifications a~~nd competences~~s well as formal recognition of skills and competences gained during informal care, informal learning or volunteering in fostering labour mobility;

Amendment 64 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that Member States must adopt reforms and include investments in access and opportunity for the next generation, children and youth related to education, health, nutrition, jobs and housing in line with the objectives of the Child Guarantee and reinforced Youth Guarantee; recalls that there is RRF funding expressly available for the development of education, training and skills, particularly digital skills and calls on the Member States to ensure such investment in human capital, in particular through up- and re-skilling and requalification of the workforce as well as for reintegration of the unemployed; stresses, further, the importance of the mutual recognition of skills, qualifications and competences in fostering labour mobility;

Amendment 65 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. SIs concerned that many NRRPs do not properly reflect the ambitions set by the European Child Guarantee and that they reflect only partially those of the reinforced Youth Guarantee; stresses that Member States must adopt reforms and include investments in the next generation, children and youth in line with the objectives of the Child Guarantee and reinforced Youth Guarantee; recalls that there is RRF funding expressly available for the development of education, training and skills, particularly digital skills; stresses, further, the importance of the mutual recognition of skills, qualifications and competences in fostering labour mobility;

Amendment 66 #

Antonius MANDERS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that Member States must adopt reforms and include investments in the next generation, children and youth in line with the objectives of the Child Guarantee and reinforced Youth Guarantee; recalls that there is RRF funding expressly available for the development of education, training and skills, particularly digital skills; stresses that these investments should also be available to the elderly in the spirit of lifelong learning and promotion of social inclusiveness; stresses, further, the importance of the mutual recognition of skills, qualifications and competences in fostering labour mobility;

Amendment 67 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that Member States must adopt reforms and include investments in the next generation, children and youth in line with the objectives of the Child Guarantee and reinforced Youth Guarantee; recalls that there is RRF funding expressly available for the development of education, training and skills, particularly digital skills; stresses, further, the importance of the mutual recognition of skills, qualifications and competences in fostering labour mobility, especially in border regions;

Amendment 68 #

Sara SKYTTEDAL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that Member States must adopt reforms ~~and~~focused on promoting economic growth and strengthening competitiveness as well as include investments in the next generation, children and youth in line with the objectives of the Child Guarantee and reinforced Youth Guarantee; recalls that there is RRF funding expressly available for the development of education, training and skills, particularly digital skills; stresses, further, the importance of the mutual recognition of skills, qualifications and competences in fostering labour mobility;

Amendment 69 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that Member States must adopt reforms and include investments in the next generation, children and youth in line with the ~~objectives~~circumstances and specific objectives of each child and young person, making use of the Child Guarantee and reinforced Youth Guarantee; recalls that there is RRF funding expressly available for the development of education, training and skills, particularly digital skills; stresses, further, the importance of the mutual recognition of skills, qualifications and competences in fostering labour mobility;

Amendment 7 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic is placing a heavy burden on ~~people in the EU~~workers and people, particularly those from more vulnerable groups, such as precarious workers, women, people with disabilities, children, young people and the elderly, in ~~their everyday lives, working lives and~~every dimension of their lives and with regard to their livelihoods23; _________________ 2 Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung, Belastungen von Kindern, Jugendlichen und Eltern in der Corona-Pandemie, 2021. 3 European Commission, Joint Employment Report 2021.

Amendment 70 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Notes that the social milestones and targets that have been set out are insufficient and need to be improved by the Commission for reporting on progress and for the purpose of monitoring and evaluating the facility, and should define a methodology for reporting social expenditure, including on children and young people, under the facility; points out the particular importance of indicators related to the implementation of the EPRS principles, quality employment, upward social convergence, equality of and access to opportunities and social protection, education and skills, and investment in access and opportunities for children and young people related to education, health, nutrition, jobs and housing, in line with the objectives of the Child Guarantee and Youth Guarantee; calls on the Commission to work with the European Parliament, social partners and civil society, in the context of the recovery and resilience dialogue, to review these indicators, as committed by the Member States at the social summit in Porto in May 2021 to implement the EPSR action plan in the RRF implementation, in accordance with those established by the European Parliament resolution on a strong social Europe for just transitions, in order to properly assess the investments in and reforms of the NRRPs, as well as the proposed measures to ensure progress towards these goals;

Amendment 71 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Stresses the need to address skills gaps and skills obsolescence in the EU in order to address labour market shortages which are holding back productivity and economic growth; stresses the need to transform and modernise education and training in light of the digital and green transitions enhancing the acquisition of digital skills and education particularly and promoting VET and lifelong learning; recalls the RRF funding expressly available for the development of education, training and skills, particularly digital skills; further stresses the importance of the mutual recognition of skills, qualifications and competences in fostering labour mobility and addressing labour market; demands and welcomes in this regard the Commission proposals for Council Recommendations on individual learning accounts and micro-credentials and urges the Council to adopt and implement the proposals without delay;

Amendment 72 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Recalls that the social consequences of the pandemic have been manifold and have unevenly burdened lower income and vulnerable groups while at the same time reinforcing the need for public services; observes that the social expenditure in the NRRPs focuses on employment incentives for specific disadvantaged groups, reforms of employment protection legislation and labour contract regulation; regrets that only some NRRPs contain measures for the development of proper care services and temporary support measures; calls for increased public expenditure to ensure the provision of accessible highquality public services;

Amendment 73 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Urges the Commission and the Member States to push for equality at all life stages, including the beginning and the end of life; calls, therefore, for the establishment of a programme to support Member States that plan to establish or bolster a public, universal and free network of high-quality care and education for children (including under threes) and persons with a disability, a public, universal and free care for the elderly, and for people with long-term care needs;

Amendment 74 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Welcomes that reforms and investments proposed by many Member States exceed the requirement of at least 20% of total allocation in each RRP to support digital objectives amounting to EUR 117 billion or 26%; stresses in particular the importance of investments in digital skills development for workers and citizens, digitalisation of businesses including SMEs and improving connectivity infrastructure particularly for rural areas to reduce the digital divide;

Amendment 75 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Stresses Member States should focus on reforms and investments to support job creation, and the transition to new sectors and occupations, to boost competitiveness and improve the performance, functioning and resilience of the labour markets. Special attention should be given to horizontal upskilling programmes in digital skills, green skills and especially financial literacy;

Amendment 76 #

Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Beata SZYDŁO, Anna ZALEWSKA, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls for the RRF to have more flexible social objectives that are not limited to environmental sustainability and digitalisation, so as not to restrict the efficient allocation of resources where they are needed, and instead to put an end to the ideological promotion of funds that actually originate from the Member States;

Amendment 77 #

Radan KANEV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Stress that the Recovery and Resilience Facility will play a crucial role in the future development of the European economic and social policies, severely challenged also by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, including the acceleration towards energy independence;

Amendment 78 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Stresses the need for Member States to take action in the area of increasing adult participation in education and other forms of lifelong acquisition of skills and qualifications and to match vocational training with labour market needs;

Amendment 79 #

Agnes JONGERIUS, Manuel PIZARRO, Brando BENIFEI, Carmen AVRAM, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Marc ANGEL, Elisabetta GUALMINI, Alicia HOMS GINEL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that the amount earmarked for the RRF is nowhere near enough to compensate for the impact of the pandemic, and is even further from enough to relaunch and modernise the Member States' economies;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic is placing a heavy burden on people in the EU, particularly those from more vulnerable groups, such as women, people with disabilities, children, young people and ~~the elderly~~older people, in their everyday lives, working lives and livelihoods2 3 ; _________________ 2 Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung, Belastungen von Kindern, Jugendlichen und Eltern in der Corona-Pandemie, 2021. 3 European Commission, Joint Employment Report 2021.

Amendment 80 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Highlights that access to quality and inclusive education, training and life- long learning for all, is essential for ensuring that the workforce has the skills required to deliver on the green transition. Fair transition aspects should thus be integrated in the development and implementation of national skills strategies, in line with the European Skills Agenda and the EU’s new updated Industrial Strategy1b. Skills partnerships under the Pact for Skills will also be an important lever. Up-to-date labour market and skills intelligence and foresight, including at regional and local, sectoral and occupational levels allows for the identification and forecasting of relevant occupation-specific and transversal skills needs, also as a basis for adapting curricula to meet the skills needs for the green transition; VET should equip young people and adults, with the skills needed to master the green transition1c. _________________ 1b Communication from the Commission ‘Updating the 2020 New Industrial Strategy: Building a stronger Single Market for Europe’s recovery’, COM(2021) 350 final. 1c Council Recommendation of 24 November 2020 on vocational education and training (VET) for sustainable competitiveness, social fairness and resilience (OJ C 417, 2.12.2020, p. 1).

Amendment 81 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Welcomes that measures supporting social and territorial cohesion amount to EUR 193 billion of estimated expenditure including EUR 17.4 billion for adult learning, employment support and modernisation of labour market institutions, EUR 45.6 billion for accessibility, affordability, quality and inclusiveness, including digitalisation and infrastructure of education and early childhood education and care and EUR 37 billion for healthcare resilience, sustainability, adequacy, availability, accessibility, affordability and quality, including digitalisation and infrastructure; calls on Member States to continue investing in social expenditure under pillar 4 of the regulation to, inter alia, support job creation and entrepreneurship, life-long learning and VET, labour market and social inclusion of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, improved child and long-term care and resilient social protection systems;

Amendment 82 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Deplores the fact that the RRF ties the economic recovery and investment policies to constraints arising from macroeconomic governance, the European Semester and its instruments (country-specific recommendations, national reform plans and sanctions by means of suspension of payments in the event of non-compliance with deficit and debt criteria);

Amendment 83 #

Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Beata SZYDŁO, Anna ZALEWSKA, Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Recalls the detrimental effects of the COVID-19 crisis on people’s mental health; is concerned that many Member States did not include sufficient measures to make mental health care accessible and highlights that mental health should represent an integral part of the EU’s socio-economic recovery from the pandemic and anoccupational health priority;

Amendment 84 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Stresses that in order to maximise the benefits of the digital economy and promote productivity in the long term it is needed to continuously improve the level of digital literacy in the society as well as to increase the coverage of fixed networks with very high speed;

Amendment 85 #

Dragoş PÎSLARU, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Alin MITUȚA, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR, Ilana CICUREL, Monica SEMEDO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Welcomes the fact that the Commission has already received first payment requests under the RRF; urges the Commission to ensure a fast deployment of payments and to closely monitor the implementation of reforms and investments;

Amendment 86 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2 c. Welcomes that over a third of measures and around two thirds of the expenditure linked to the effectiveness of public administration and to business and public service continuity relate to the digital transformation1d; Highlights that the measures to enhance civil service diminish regulatory and administrative burdens, improve public procurement procedures and contribute to the effectiveness of the public administration; _________________ 1d Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility.

Amendment 87 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Michal ŠIMEČKA, Ilana CICUREL, Stéphane BIJOUX, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Marie-Pierre VEDRENNE, Sylvie BRUNET, Jordi CAÑAS, Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI, Véronique TRILLET-LENOIR

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2b. Rejects the Commission's intervention in the setting of the content of the Member States' Recovery and Resilience Plans, which has led to pressure being exerted to change the draft versions of some RRPs, either by abandoning planned investments or by including some 'reforms';

Amendment 88 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2 c. Notes measures related to the next generation pillar account for EUR 49 billion, representing approximately 11% of estimated expenditure covering early childhood education and care, general primary and secondary school education, initial vocational education and training, and higher education and youth employment support and youth job creation;

Amendment 89 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)

2d. Stresses that, as it offers the EU budget as a guarantee for debt issuance on the markets, the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is actually, by its very nature, an advance payment to Member States, made towards future payments; rejects the fact that the RRF funds now transferred to the Member States will, from 2028 onwards, be deducted from future transfers under cohesion policy and its instruments;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic is placing a heavy burden on all people in the EU, particularly ~~those from more~~on women and on vulnerable groups, such as ~~women, people~~persons with disabilities, children, young people and the elderly, in their everyday lives, working lives and livelihoods2 3 ; _________________ 2 Bundesinstitut für Bevölkerungsforschung, Belastungen von Kindern, Jugendlichen und Eltern in der Corona-Pandemie, 2021. 3 European Commission, Joint Employment Report 2021.

Amendment 90 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

2 d. Emphasizes that 10 NRRPs contain measures to improve the training development and work conditions of civil servants by facilitating flexible working arrangements, implementing a better pay system in the public service and the modernisation of recruitment processes and notably the effectiveness of the judicial systems are found in 13 NRRPs;

Amendment 91 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)

2 e. Calls for clear coordination between the NRRPs and the ESIF programmes, as this is mandatory in accordance with Article 17 of the RRF Regulation; therefore calls on the Commission to draw attention to this in the agreements concluded with the Member States on the NRRPs. The synergies between the NRRPs and the ESIF programmes should also be part of the Commission's annual reports on the implementation of the RRF and of the scrutiny by the European Parliament;

Amendment 92 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)

2f. Stresses the importance of access to sport, leisure and culture to the physical and mental health of every generation of society; calls strongly, in this regard, for the RRF to support the creation, bolstering and renewal of public infrastructure and initiatives that promote sport, leisure and culture for all generations, along with the right to play;

Amendment 93 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)

2 f. Calls for coordination with the other programmes funded by NextGenEU (e.g. REACT-EU) and for the alignment between the seven existing and new programmes funded by NextGenEU concerning ambitions for a green and digital transition and effective implementation by local and regional authorities of the recovery programmes;

Amendment 94 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 g (new)

2g. Stresses the need to use the RRF to enforce the fundamental right to housing; calls on the Commission and the Member States to support public investment in public and quality housing with a view to effectively addressing the growing problems of a shortage of affordable housing, poor housing conditions and housing exclusion;

Amendment 95 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 g (new)

2 g. Invites the European Commission to actively support local and regional authorities that have experienced problems while absorbing EU funds in the past, in addressing these problems, so that the NRRP scan be successfully implemented across the European Union;

Amendment 96 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 h (new)

2 h. Calls on the Member States to focus on a more decentralized approach in order to tackle possible territorial differences, both in terms of challenges and opportunities. Believes that, in this way, NRRPs could be more efficient; Points out that regions that were already lagging behind in their development before the outbreak of the pandemic are at risk of an even greater development gap, in employment, educational attainment, business support, digitalisation, mobility or other key policy areas;

Amendment 97 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 h (new)

2h. Takes the view that the RRF must be used to combat physical accessibility barriers, but not only those for persons with a disability;

Amendment 98 #

Gheorghe FALCĂ, Eugen TOMAC, Miriam LEXMANN, Radan KANEV, Stelios KYMPOUROPOULOS, Jarosław DUDA, Krzysztof HETMAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 i (new)

2 i. Emphasizes that apprenticeships and remunerated traineeships, including strong training components, in particular for young people, contribute to labour market transitions, notably towards activities contributing to climate and environmental objectives, and sectors facing particular skills shortages. Increasing adult participation in lifelong learning should be promoted to meet upskilling and reskilling needs, inter alia by empowering individuals to seek training that is tailored to their needs and via short, quality-assured courses on skills for the green transition;

Amendment 99 #