2023/2129(DEC) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Recital A

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

A b. whereas this Parliament has repeatedly asked the Commission to promote and implement the use of gender mainstreaming, gender budgeting and gender impact assessments in all the Union policy areas and the European Court of Auditors (ECA) to incorporate a gender perspective into its reports on the implementation of the Union budget;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Recital A c (new)

A c. whereas gender equality in the Union has been particularly impacted by the consequences of the war in Ukraine, the cost of living crisis, which women are disproportionately affected by, and the backlashes against gender equality and women’s rights, especially around sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) in several Member States; whereas this further deepens inequalities and hampers gender equality;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that equal opportunities for men and women should be a given in all policy areas; however evidence based data should be the basis, rather than wolf- crying calls claiming women are more impacted by war, Covid, climate change, or that the best solution for women is more abortions; therefore savings can be made in the budgetary process by reducing these budgetary lines;deleted

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

Amendment 15 #

María Soraya RODRÍGUEZ RAMOS, Karen MELCHIOR, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that ~~equal opportunities for men and women should be a given~~a gender equality perspective should be integrated and ensured into all policy areas~~; however evidence based data should be the basis, rather than wolf- crying calls claiming women are mo~~ particularly in light of the multiple gendered impact~~ed by war, Covid, climate change, or that the best solution for women is more abortions; therefore savings can be made in the budgetary process by reducing~~s of various ongoing climate, energy and social crises with a focus on SRHR and the backlash against gender equality and women’s rights in the EU; reiterates therefore its call for the implementation of gender budgeting at all stages of these budgetary ~~line~~process;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that ~~equal opportunities for men and women should be a given~~a gender equality perspective should be integrated and ensured into all policy areas; however evidence based data should be the basis, rather than wolf- crying calls claiming women are more impacted by war, Covid, climate change, or that the best solution for women is more abortions; therefore savings can be made in the budgetary process by reduc, particularly in the light of the gendered aspects of ongoing crises such as wars, the climate crisis, inflation, and the backlash against women’s rights, especially sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) ing the~~se budgetary lines~~ Union and world-wide;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Stresses that women’s rights and a gender equality perspective should be integrated and ensured into all policy areas; reiterates therefore its call for the implementation of gender budgeting at all stages of the budgetary process; stresses the importance of gender budgeting in all recovery and alleviation measures to make use of EU programmes for mitigating gendered impacts of different crises;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Rejects the increase in the budget allocations for militarisation, specifically for arms, infrastructure, capacity and military mobility and for border surveillance and externalisation; takes the view that those funds should be used to promote economic and social cohesion and tackle the root causes of migration, such as poverty and violent conflicts;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. whereas the Parliament has repeatedly asked the Commission to promote and implement the use of gender mainstreaming, gender budgeting and gender impact assessments in all relevant Union policy areas;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas, gender equality and the elimination of inequalities are core values upon which the Union is founded, and the commitment to promote equality between men and women in all of its actions as enshrined in Article 8 TFEU; whereas the policies of attacking social and labour rights it promotes contradict that rhetoric and have, in fact, played a part in the deepening of socio-economic inequalities, particularly affecting women;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Stresses that a gender equality perspective should be integrated and ensured into all relevant policy areas, particularly in light of the multiple gendered impacts of various ongoing climate, energy and social crises; reiterates therefore its call for the implementation of gender budgeting throughout the budgetary process;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Highlights that a gender equality perspective should be integrated and ensured in the backlashes against gender equality and women’s rights, especially sexual and reproductive health and rights, in several Member States and worldwide; reiterates therefore its call for the implementation of gender budgeting throughout the budgetary process; stresses the importance of gender budgeting in all recovery and alleviation measures to make use of EU programmes for mitigating the gendered impacts of various crises;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

Amendment 24 #

María Soraya RODRÍGUEZ RAMOS, Karen MELCHIOR, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Raises concerns about the demonisation of groups supporting pregnant women; notes that this is contrary to Article 2 TEU and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, where the right to life is enshrined; is further concerned by disrespect of Member State competencNotes with concern that special report 10/2021, published by the ECA confirmed that the Union’s budget cycle does not yet adequately take gender equality into account since key elements, such as gender analysis, gender-related objectives, in the area of health; therefore calls for a removal of funding for organisations which promote abortion; calls on the Commission to explore the core mission of those to whom EU funds are granted and to withhold funding from actors using EU funds for the purposes of terminating human rights, particularly women’s rights and gender equalitydicators and accountability through reporting, are largely missing; and that the Commission has not yet fully implemented its commitment to include gender mainstreaming in the Union budget;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Raises concerns about the demonisation of groups supporting pregnant women; notes that this is contrary to Article 2 TEU and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, where the right to life is enshrined; is further concerned by disrespect of Member State competences in the area of health; therefore calls for a removal of funding for organisations which promote abortion; calls on the Commission to explore the core mission of those to whom EU funds are gNotes the Commission’s methodology for tracking gender aspects of expenditure as of 2023; recalls that only 2% of the Union’s budget was assessed as having a principle objective of improving gender equality; calls on the Commission to improve this score by mainstreaming gender from the start of programme design; reiterante~~d and to withhold funding from actors using EU funds for the purposes of terminating human rights, particularly women’s rights and gender equality~~s that further detail is needed so that the majority of spending (73%) currently assessed as 0* ‘potential to contribute to gender equality’ can be fully understood;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Repeats its concern at the interrelation between the attacks on the rule of law, democracy and human rights and the backlash on gender equality and women’s rights; calls on the Commission to continue its efforts to strengthen the rule of law in the Union, in particular those legal proposals aimed at protecting the EU budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law, breaches of human rights, including women’s rights and violations of the fundamental values of the European Union; calls on the Commission to explore the core mission of those to whom EU funds are granted and to withhold funding from actors who seek to use EU funds for the purposes of backsliding human rights, particularly women’s rights and gender equality, including SRHR and women’s rights to bodily integrity, autonomy and self-determination;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the Member States to safeguard sexual and reproductive health and rights, in particular by ensuring the availability of reproductive health programmes and services providing the types of care and medicines required for voluntary family planning and maternal and newborn health;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas, gender equality and the elimination of inequalities are core values upon which the Union is founded, and the commitment to promote gender equality ~~between men and women~~and gender mainstreaming in all of its actions as enshrined in Article 8 TFEU;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 31 #

María Soraya RODRÍGUEZ RAMOS, Karen MELCHIOR, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that gender mainstreaming is flawed, because it would force women into roles, employment and identities, which they may not want, rather than simply giving individuals and families the opportunity to decideRepeats its calls for the Commission to strengthen the rule of law and ensure that EU funds are not made available to any entity that is implicated in breaches of human rights, including women’s fundamental rights and SRHR;

Amendment 33 #

Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes that gender mainstreaming ~~is flawed,~~runs counter to womanhood because it ~~would~~ forces women into ~~roles, employment and identities, which they may not want, rather than simply giving individuals and families the opportunity to decide~~identify themselves artificially, according to ideological dictates that do not correspond to their real desires and needs;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Calls on the Commission to fully implement the European Court of Auditor’s recommendations, including in the mid-term review of the current multiannual financial framework and the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Welcomes the fact that gender equality and mainstreaming is one of the horizontal principles for Union funds in the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2021-2027 and in the Recovery and Resilience Facility;

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Calls on the Commission, in view of the end of this legislative term, to continue its work on gender equality and calls for a Commissioner on gender equality for the next term;

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Welcomes the Commission's work on a new classification to measure the gender impact of Union spending; calls on the Commission to ensure that this classification focuses on an accurate and comprehensive representation of the impact of programmes on gender equality;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 39 #

María Soraya RODRÍGUEZ RAMOS, Karen MELCHIOR, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas, gender equality ~~and the elimination of inequalities are core values up~~is a core value of the Union enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union; wh~~ich the Union is founded, and the commitment to promote equality between men and women in all of its actions as enshrined in Article 8 TFEU~~ereas Article 8 TFEU commits the Union to eliminate inequalities and to promote equality between men and women;

Amendment 40 #

María Soraya RODRÍGUEZ RAMOS, Karen MELCHIOR, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 41 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Notes the flawed methodology in calculating the Union’s gender pay gap of 12.7 %, as it fails to take into account a person’s choice to undertake work which is lower paid, or is part time in natureInsists that women and men should benefit equally from the Recovery and Resilience Facility, in particular in the light of the Union’s gender pay gap of 13%; recalls that the Commission introduced a gender assessment of the Member States’ Recovery and Resilience Plans only an ex-ante assessment, which revealed that some Member States had no measures tagged as focusing on gender equality;

Amendment 42 #

Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Notes the flawed methodology and random criterion used in calculating the Union’s gender pay gap of 12.7 %, as it fails to take into account a person’s choice to undertake work which is lower paid, or is part time in nature;

Amendment 43 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Welcomes the Commission's work on a new classification to measure the gender impact of Union spending; calls on the Commission to ensure that this classification focuses on an accurate and comprehensive representation of the impact of all existing programmes and funds; reiterates in this context that a comprehensive gender tracking methodology needs to include reporting on negative impacts on gender equality, as well as the importance of setting concrete expenditure targets;

Amendment 44 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses that in the last decade, with the onset of the economic and financial crisis, economic, social, labour and gender inequalities within and between Member States have become more acute; recalls the important role of the European Institute for Gender Equality in raising awareness of the extent and causes of gender inequality in the EU; calls, therefore, for its budget, staff and independence to be increased;

Amendment 45 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Calls on the Commission to deliver on the positive commitment made by President von der Leyen to promote gender equality in all policymaking and stresses that more needs to be done;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Points out that the key learning of the application of the pilot methodology was the limited possibility of assigning concrete scores due to a lack of required data; stresses therefore the importance of data collection requirements to enable a systematic and comprehensive collection of gender-disaggregated data in the context of all relevant EU policies; urges the Commission to treat this as a priority and make use of the opportunities to improve data collection requirements and indicators in new legislation and reviews, such as the recast of the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union;

Amendment 47 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Calls strongly for the establishment of precarity-based offers to be rejected; calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote collective agreements, wage appreciation, the promotion of open-ended contracts and the regulation of working hours; calls on the European Parliament and other EU institutions to combat precarity by promoting collective agreements and employment with rights and rejecting subcontracting, ensuring that a permanent position means a permanent employment contract and that there is equal pay for equal work;

Amendment 48 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Stresses the importance of using European Structural and Investment Funds such as the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) to promote gender equality, women’s employment, women's empowerement, entrepreneurship, leadership and management roles, as well as long-term care facilities;

Amendment 49 #

Margarita DE LA PISA CARRIÓN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4 c. Stresses the importance of strengthening the specifically dedicated Daphne initiative by increasing its resources, in particular measures that aim to combat all levels and all forms of gender-based violence against women and girls and domestic violence in line with Article7(6) of Regulation (EU) 2021/692 and to properly support victims;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Recital A

A. whereas~~, gender~~ equality between men and women and the elimination of inequalities are core values upon which the Union is founded, and the commitment to promote such equality ~~between men and women~~ in all of its actions as enshrined in Article 8 TFEU;

Amendment 50 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

~~5. Notes the importance of combatting violence and trafficking, as outlined in the Daphne initiative but calls for transparency over the results of the money inves~~deleted.

Amendment 51 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

~~5. Notes the importance of combatting violence and trafficking, as outlined in the Daphne initiative but calls for transparency over the results of the money inves~~deleted.

Amendment 52 #

María Soraya RODRÍGUEZ RAMOS, Karen MELCHIOR, Susana SOLÍS PÉREZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

~~5. Notes the importance of combatting violence and trafficking, as outlined in the Daphne initiative but calls for transparency over the results of the money inves~~deleted.

Amendment 53 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Notes the importance of combatting violence and trafficking, as outlined in the Daphne initiative but calls for transparency over the results of the money invested.~~Repeats its calls for a dedicated budget line for gender equality, in particular within the Daphne programme in the light of the crisis of gender-based violence facing the Union;

Amendment 54 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Regrets the lack of specific budget lines for measures dedicated to gender equality, especially within the Daphne programme, leading to a lack of transparency and accountabilit; stresses the importance of strengthening the specifically dedicated Daphne initiative by increasing its resources, in particular measures that aim to combat all levels and all forms of GBV against women and girls and domestic violence;

Amendment 55 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Is of the opinion, on the basis of the data currently available, that discharge can be granted on the General budget of the EU in respect of the implementation of its budget for the financial year 2022;

Amendment 56 #

Annika BRUNA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Notes the importance of combating Islamist ideologies and all of their networks in order to safeguard women's rights in Europe;

Amendment 57 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Notes that a study requested by FEMM committee1a shows that men are often favoured over women and marginalized groups when it comes to the design of subsidies and support under the Fit for 55 package, as well as in other policies, programmes and funding for the green transition; _________________ 1a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/STUD/2022/736899/IPOL_STU(20 22)736899_EN.pdf

Amendment 58 #

Annika BRUNA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Is concerned that the Commission is still subsidising and promoting associations with links to radical religious and political organisations that undermine women's fundamental rights, such as the Muslim Brotherhood;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas in a number of Member States with low birth rates, women and couples would like to have children but are in practice prevented from doing so, not by choice but as a consequence of the constant deterioration in their living and working conditions, a direct result of so- called austerity policies that have created unemployment, precarious employment relationships, disregard for and violation of maternity and paternity rights in the workplace, destroying public services and impeding access to childcare facilities;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas gender equality is one of the core values on which the European Union is founded and the Union is committed to promote gender mainstreaming in all of its actions as enshrined in Article 8 TFEU;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

A a. whereas the European Parliament has repeatedly asked the Commission to promote and implement the use of gender mainstreaming, gender budgeting and gender impact assessments in all Union policy areas;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas it is vital to ensure that women have the right to work with rights and the right to motherhood without being penalised for it, as women continue to be the worst affected and suffer the most discrimination; whereas examples of this discrimination include pressure from employers on women attending job interviews at which they are asked whether they have children and how old they are, with the aim of influencing women’s decisions and opting for childless workers who are ‘more available’, along with growing economic and work-related pressures on female employees not to take maternity leave;

source: 755.969

2023/11/21 TRAN 38 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the findings of the European Court of Auditors (‘the Court’) that the consolidated accounts of the EU for 2022 present fairly, in all material respects, the EU’s financial position; regrets that the level of error for budget expenditure increased from 3 % to 4.2 %; notes that~~, in line with the Court’s assessment, the errors are both material and pervasive~~ this level of error stems mainly from the heading ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’; notes that, in line with the Court’s assessment, the errors are both material and pervasive; notes that, according to the ECA, the higher error rates correlate with more complicated rules;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights the decrease, compared to 2021, in funding for calls for proposals under the CEF Transport 2022 funding instrument on projects targeting new, upgraded and improved European transport infrastructure; takes notice that the CEF Transport 2022 calls that were launched during the 3rd quarter of 2022 opened additional funding possibilities with an extra EUR 6 bln. of EU co-funding; recognizes the achievement that in 2022, the CEF reached its full implementation phase;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Commends the legislative work of DG MOVE to contribute to the climate goals of the Union, such as Fuel EU Maritime, AFIR or Refuel Aviation; regrets however that the proposals of the Greening Transport Package, such as the Weights and Dimensions or the Combined Transport, are delayed;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Commends the dedicated calls within CEF Transport 2022 launched to support the projects aiming at improving transport infrastructure along the Solidarity Lanes and at Border Crossing Points (BCPs) between the EU and Ukraine and Moldova; stresses that continued help and support to Ukraine is of uttermost importance;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Stresses that it is crucial that mobility and transport are available, interconnected, efficient and affordable for all as mobility is a right of European citizens and that all EU transport policies are designed in accordance with this essential principle; stresses that nobody can be left behind, that rural and remote regions need to be better connected, furthermore, transport and mobility have to be accessible for persons with reduced mobility and persons with disabilities;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Welcomes the start of implementation of the New Urban Mobility Framework in 2022 to improve urban mobility; however, notes with concern that this Framework does not recognise that all modes of transport have their role to play and every citizen have the right to choose the mode of transport according to their preferences and needs;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4 c. Calls on the Commission to ensure that there is additional advisory support to the national authorities of the Member States in order to navigate simultaneous funding due to absorbing funds from several instruments at the same time, namely closing the remaining ESIF programmes from the 2014-2020 MFF, while the implementation of the 2021- 2027 shared-management funds under the CPR has also begun, albeit with a delay; notes at the same time that most of the Member States have reached the implementation phase of NGEU financing; notes that, alongside all this, they need to pursue measures introduced in connection with Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, such as CARE and FAST-CARE, causing the Member States on losing funding;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)

4 d. Regrets that the late adoption of the legislation for the shared management funds from the 2021-2027 MFF and the parallel implementation of several instruments resulted in pressure on administrative resources leading to delays in approval of all partnership agreements with the Member States and of most of the programmes;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Calls for the preparation of the revision of the regulatory framework for: (a) rail, to remove the existing regulatory obstacles so that it can be a competitive alternative, with a particular emphasis on provisions on capacity management that are necessary to better suit the needs of freight services and to regulate technical and operational standards that are currently national; (b) both combined transport, enlarging its scope to intermodal transport, and road-only transport; notes that these revisions should aim to reduce the diverging implementation by the Member States, include provisions on the digitalisation of information flows, and reinforce the incentives for intermodal transport;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Stresses the importance of finalizing the core TEN-T network by 2030; calls on the Commission to provide the Member States with clear guidelines on how to perform the market study and how to draw up a terminal development plan, with particular regard to cross- border aspects and along the Core Network Corridors; stresses the importance of setting up a target implementation date within 12 months after entry into force of the new TEN-T regulation;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Takes notice of~~Welcomes the adoption by the Commission of an amended proposal for the revised TEN-T Regulation in June 2022, which aims to strengthen the links with Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova, by extending four European Transport Corridors to these neighbouring countries; in this regard also welcomes the signature of the three grant agreements under the Connecting Europe Facility for Transport worth almost EUR 45 mln. to improve transport connections between Moldova and Romania along the TEN-T network, as the projects will modernise transport infrastructure at the road border crossing points Ungheni, Albița Leușeni, and Reni- Giurgiulești-Galați; notes that these investments will strengthen the EU- Ukraine Solidarity Lanes – the routes used since Russia's blockade of Ukraine's Black Sea ports to transport Ukraine's and Moldova's exports and imports;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that the implementation of the 2022 budget was still partly impacted by the late adoption of the MFF Regulation ~~and heavily affected by Russia’s invasion of~~, high inflation rate, higher interest payments of NGEU related to overall higher interest rates due to high inflation, and heavily affected by illegal, unjustified Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the need to provide complex humanitarian and financial support;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Takes notice of the adoption by the Commission of an amended proposal, in line with its ‘Solidarity Lanes’, for the revised TEN-T Regulation in June 2022, which aims to strengthen the links with Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova, by extending four European Transport Corridors to these neighbouring countries;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Commends that on 11 November 2022, the European Commission, Czechia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, the Republic of Moldova, Ukraine, the European Investment Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the World Bank Group published a Joint Declaration announcing the pooling of EUR 1 bln. for the Solidarity Lanes to enhance the capacity of these transport corridors;

Amendment 22 #

Kateřina KONEČNÁ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Welcome~~Deeply regrets action taken by the Commission in December 2022 to speed up the financing of 35 military mobility projects along the TEN-T; notes that accelerated evaluation of the CEF 2021 Military Mobility call triggered the faster award of almost EUR 1 bln. of CEF funds to key dual use infrastructural components;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Welcomes the Action Plan on Military Mobility 2.0, building on the success of the first action plan of 2018; highlights that the 2022 action plan broadens the scope of Military Mobility by addressing the threats and challenges stemming from the new security environment; points out that the identification of the gaps and bottlenecks in the physical transport infrastructure in the Member States, which might hamper short notice and large-scale deployments of military forces, will be assessed in 2023;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Welcomes the Action Plan on Military Mobility 2.0 presented by the Commission, that addresses the emerging threats and challenges within the evolving security landscape, thereby expanding the scope of Military Mobility;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Highlights that at the heart of military mobility is the need to upgrade the dual use transport infrastructure along the military mobility network – comprising multi-modal transport routes connected by logistical hubs – so that it is capable of handling potentially heavy and large-scale military transports at short notice; points out that the EU Member States largely use the same transport infrastructure for both civilian and military movements and transportation; notes therefore that strengthening of the dual-use transport infrastructure across the trans-European transport (TEN-T) involves the development of multi-modal transport corridors and transport nodes; considers that, as a result, development of the dual-use transport infrastructure through co-funding from the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) funding instrument continues to be an essential pillar of this Action Plan; points out that, in accordance with the Strategic Compass, the EU will continue strengthening the dual-use transport infrastructure across the trans-European transport network in order to promote rapid and seamless movement of military personnel, material and equipment for operational deployments and exercises, working in close cooperation with NATO and other partners;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7 c. Welcomes that the Commission accelerated the evaluation for the CEF 2021 Military Mobility call and anticipated by several months the 2022 Military Mobility funding opportunities; notes that this triggered the faster award of almost EUR 1 bln. of CEF funds to the key dual use infrastructural components, covering all transport modes and helping the deployment of the dual use infrastructure, for instance, improving technical parameters for railway bridges and tunnels, upgrading the airport infrastructure for civilian-military traffic, and adapting technical specifications for port infrastructures;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)

7 d. Welcomes the Commission’s engagement to redeploy funding envisaged for the short-term defence instrument; takes notice of the funding from the European Defence Fund and the proposal to enhance the Union’s strategic transport infrastructures to make them fit for military mobility; further calls on the Commission to ensure a clear commitment as well as to find and present solutions to sufficiently increase the military mobility budget line beyond the Flexibility Instrument, in order to strengthen European security and to include military mobility infrastructure within the TEN-T;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)

7 e. Points out that continued and increasing public investment in providing large scale infrastructure, especially the TEN-T network, is key to providing interconnectivity, boosting of economic growth and benefitting fully from the opportunities of the Single Market;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 f (new)

7 f. Highlights that connectivity is crucial for cohesion and even more so for the Member States at the periphery of the Single Market; therefore, believes that it is crucial for the EU to play a leading role in fostering a global level playing field in the aviation and maritime sectors;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Notes that the final budget for commitment appropriations of EUR 182.2 bln. was above the MFF ceiling of EUR 179.8 bln.: this was made possible by the use of special instruments, such as the Flexibility Instrument, the Brexit Adjustment Reserve, the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund and the Solidarity and Emergency Aid Reserve, for amounts over and above the ceilings of the 7-year financial framework (maximum EUR 21.1 bln. in 2018 prices for the 7-year MFF);

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 g (new)

7 g. Calls for cross-border and multi- country projects and to simplify, accelerate and harmonise digitalisation and the regulatory process for infrastructure projects, especially for cross-border interconnections and bottlenecks;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 h (new)

7 h. Welcomes the Commission’s willingness to explore the benefits and possibilities of such new transport modes, as Hyperloop;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 i (new)

7 i. Underlines that funding of the TEN-T network revision shall well reflect and further focus on the extension of connection towards the Eastern Neighbourhood; in this regard insists on not delaying the acception of Bulgaria and Romania to the Schengen Area any longer to ensure seamless transport connection to the East;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Recalls the Court’s Special Report 27/2021 “EU Support to tourism – Need for a fresh strategic orientation and a better funding approach”; recalls the Court’s recommendation to the Commission to set out a consolidated new strategy for the EU tourism ecosystem in cooperation with the Member States in order to develop an effective tourism agenda for 2030 and to apply selection procedures for ERDF- funded tourism investments to support this new strategic orientation; reiterates the Parliament’s request for the creation of a new budgetary line for tourism to support this sector, severely hit by the COVID-19 and now suffering from energy crisis, inflation and facing significant challenges connected to impacts of green and digital transitions in the transport and tourism sector; calls on the Commission to develop a new strategy for the tourism sector and a roadmap for smart and sustainable tourism backed up by budgetary means taking also into account that majority of the tourism industry consists of SMEs;

Amendment 34 #

José Ramón BAUZÁ DÍAZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Welcomes the Special report 13/2022 “Free movement in the EU during the COVID-19 pandemic - Limited scrutiny of internal border controls, and uncoordinated actions by Member States”1a; urges both the Commission and the Member States to diligently implement the recommendations delineated therein, including closer scrutiny of border controls, the establishment of streamlined procedures for data collection on restrictions, and the provision of more actionable guidance on implementation; further recalls the role of the ECDC in enhancing the oversight of the implementation of its guidance; _________________ 1a https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADoc uments/SR22_13/SR_free-movement- phase-I_EN.pdf

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Calls for examples of relevant investments dedicated to the tourism sector related to the diversification of the tourism offer, extension of the tourism season, and development of high value added tourism products or targeting specific groups, innovative services and digitalisation;

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Notes that all citizens of Romania and Bulgaria are discriminated against because they face delays, excessive bureaucratic burden and additional costs when travelling for the purposes of tourism, work, studying or doing business abroad, compared to their counterparts from the Schengen countries; emphasises that the veto on the accession of Romania and Bulgaria to the Schengen area can lead to the anti-European sentiment in these countries and, in turn, to a decline in confidence in the EU project and its institutions; stresses that identity checks raise trade costs for goods by approximately 0.4 % to 0.9 % of the value of trade at every Schengen border, while even higher costs apply to trade in services; stresses that trade costs for the entire Schengen area amount to EUR 6.5- 13 bln. per year; underlines that the accession of Romania and Bulgaria to the Schengen area is essential, as an enlarged Schengen area without internal border controls will make the EU stronger; highlights that the current situation goes against one of the main European principles of free movement; urges in this regard the Commission to analyse all possible procedures to defend the right to free movement of Romanian and Bulgarian citizens;

Amendment 38 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Acknowledges that 2022 was the inaugural year of the implementation of the New EU Urban Mobility Framework, an integral component of the Efficient and Green Mobility package; notes that DG MOVE has taken proactive measures, including the establishment of a reformed Commission expert group on urban mobility, and prepared the Commission’s Recommendation on National Support Programmes for Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning; welcomes the fact that throughout 2022, a series of meticulously organized communication events were executed with the express purpose of advancing awareness on and understanding of Urban Mobility initiatives;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Highlights that, within the RRF, some milestones and targets lacked clarity or did not cover all key implementation stages of the measure; calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve the utilisation of the RRF funding and implementation of the national plans as well as the control in order to ensure the best usage and value added of those funds, especially in the transport and tourism sector;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2 c. Welcomes that Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia obtained the observer status in the Regional Steering Committee of the Transport Community Treaty (TCT) in November 2022;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)

2 d. Welcomes the substantive contribution of DG MOVE to the subsequent packages of the sanctions against Russia and Belarus: in aviation, they covered both flights with Russian owned, operated or controlled aircraft in the EU airspace and the export of aviation goods to or support to the use of such goods by Russia, in order to undermine Russia’s international connectivity and cripple Russia’s aviation industry;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)

2 e. Salutes the initiative of the European Air Traffic Management Voluntary Solidarity Fund for Ukraine and Moldova under the responsibility of Eurocontrol, aiming to sustain staff/training costs and any other costs to ensure operational readiness when air traffic recovers; furthermore, welcomes another Eurocontrol solidarity mechanism to assist the front-line states struggling with the effects of a sharp drop in air traffic; points out that the Eurocontrol Member States decided to establish two specific funds: one in the form of a donation to Ukraine and Moldova of EUR 46.5 mln. and one in the form of a loan of EUR 46.1 mln. to Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)

2 f. Commends the Commission’s legislative proposals in the field of transport to help Ukraine during the unjustified illegal war of Russian aggression such as the proposal for a Regulation regarding Ukrainian driving licences including the driving licence for professional drivers;

Amendment 9 #

Alicia HOMS GINEL, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Milan BRGLEZ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Klára DOBREV, Ilan DE BASSO, Agnes JONGERIUS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Highligh~~Regrets the decrease, compared to 2021, in funding for calls for proposals under the CEF Transport 2022 funding instrument on projects targeting new, upgraded and improved European transport infrastructure; takes notice that the CEF Transport 2022 calls that were launched during the 3rd quarter of 2022 opened additional funding possibilities with an extra EUR 6 bln. of EU co-funding; stresses that a sufficiently high CEF Transport budget line is key to ensuring implementation of the TEN-T network, including the enlargement in the Eastern region to provide connection to the Eastern partners such as Ukraine, greening of European transport, increased military mobility and offsetting the unprecedently high inflation rates;

source: 754.994

2023/11/22 EMPL 12 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Citation 2 a (new)

– having regard to the European Commission’s Annual management and performance report for the EU budget 2022;

Amendment 10 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Jozef MIHÁL, Max ORVILLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Stresses that the Commission should substantially reduce the level of outstanding commitments; Notes that in the light of high outstanding commitments which await payment from future EU budgets, the Commission should identify ways to help member states accelerate the use of EU funds, in particular of shared management funds under the Common Provisions Regulation, while respecting sound financial management;

Amendment 11 #

Marc BOTENGA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Calls on the Commission to favour taking catering and other staff in-house in order to promote good working conditions and avoid layoffs;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Commission to follow up and take necessary action with regards to all errors found by the Court and to ~~reques~~implement additional financial corrections, where deemed necessary;

Amendment 2 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Jozef MIHÁL, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Max ORVILLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is worried by the fact that by the end of 2022, total outstanding commitments reached a record level of over €450 billion; takes note, however, that the increase is mainly a result of an increased commitment of funds during the second year of NGEU implementation, as well as the start of 2021- 2027 shared management fund implementation, and that , according to the Commission, after a further increase to some €460 billion in 2023, the outstanding commitments should decrease during 2024 to 2027 to €314 billion;

Amendment 3 #

1. Is worried by the fact that by the end of 2022, total outstanding commitments reached a record level of over €450 billion; takes note, however, that, according to the Commission, after a further increase to some €460 billion in 2023, the outstanding commitments should decrease ~~during~~from 2024 tountil 2027 to €314 billion;

Amendment 4 #

Marc BOTENGA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Expresses satisfaction that the biggest part of the Union budget spending in 2022 went to the Heading 2 “Cohesion, resilience and values” (EUR 79.1 billion, or 40.4 %); emphasizes that the ESF is supposed to counter the worst excesses of unequal development and boost local development; furthermore, regional actors must be involved more closely;

Amendment 5 #

Alicia HOMS GINEL, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Milan BRGLEZ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Klára DOBREV, Ilan DE BASSO, Agnes JONGERIUS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. 2a. Recalls that transparency and accountability in the implementation of the EU Budget is key; stresses in this context the need for further efforts, both from the Commission and Member States, to ensure better transparency of the use of EU taxpayers’ money; insists that the publication of final recipients of EU funding should be a horizontal provision for all categories of EU funding; regrets the interpretation of the Commission of what “final recipients” are in the case of the Recovery and Resilience Facility;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Recalls that spending under the subheading “Economic, social and territorial cohesion” (Subheading 2a) focuses on reducing development disparities between the different Member States and regions of the EU; stresses the importance of EU cohesion policy in supporting the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights and achieving its targets and assisting Member States and regions to harness new opportunities and address challenges, such as globalisation, unemployment, poverty and social exclusion, industrial change, digitalisation and supporting up and re- skilling and lifelong learning;

Amendment 7 #

Alicia HOMS GINEL, Estrella DURÁ FERRANDIS, Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ, Milan BRGLEZ, Lina GÁLVEZ MUÑOZ, Klára DOBREV, Ilan DE BASSO, Agnes JONGERIUS

4. Is greatly worried that the overall level of error, estimated by the European Court of Auditors, was material at 4.2 %, compared to 3.0 % in 2021; and is particularly worried that the level of error is mainly driven by ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’, which was the biggest contributor to this rate (2.5 %); recognises that the majority of spending in this area is deemed high-risk expenditure as mainly reimbursement-based and often subject to complex rules; notes that the most common errors under the Cohesion heading were ineligible projects and infringements of internal market rules, in particular non- compliance with public procurement and state aid rules; calls for urgent action to decrease the error rate in the future, especially for the new funding period, and calls on the Commission to assist the agencies to improve their internal procedures in order to ensure compliance with applicable public procurement and state aid rules;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Is greatly worried that the overall level of error was material at 4.2 %, compared to 3.0 % in 2021, largely above the 2 % materiality threshold; and is particularly worried that the level of error is mainly driven by ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’, which was the biggest contributor to this rate (2.5 %); recognises that the majority of spending in this area is deemed high-risk expenditure as mainly reimbursement-based and often subject to complex rules; notes that the most common errors under the Cohesion heading were ineligible projects and infringements of internal market rules, in particular non- compliance with public procurement and state aid rules; calls for urgent action to decrease the error rate in the future, especially for the new funding period, and calls on the Commission to assist the agencies to improve their internal procedures in order to ensure compliance with applicable public procurement and state aid rules;

Amendment 9 #

Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Jozef MIHÁL, Dragoş PÎSLARU, Max ORVILLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Is greatly worried that the overall level of error was material at 4.2 %, thus is higher compared to 3.0 % in 2021; and is particularly worried that the level of error is mainly driven by ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’, which was the biggest contributor to this rate (2.5 %); recognises that the majority of spending in this area is deemed high-risk expenditure as mainly reimbursement-based and often subject to complex rules; notes that the most common errors under the Cohesion heading were ineligible projects and infringements of internal market rules, in particular non- compliance with public procurement and state aid rules; calls for urgent action to decrease the error rate in the future, especially for the new funding period, and calls on the Commission to assist the agencies to improve their internal procedures in order to ensure compliance with applicable public procurement and state aid rules;

source: 756.286

2023/12/04 ENVI 24 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Is satisfied with the work carried out by the five decentralised agencies which are under its remit, which carry out technical, scientific or managerial tasks that help the Union institutions elaborate and implement policies in the area of environment, climate action, public health and food safety, as well as with the way in which those agencies' budgets are implemented; stresses that, given the scale of current and upcoming challenges, sufficient funding and sufficient directly related staffing must be guaranteed for the agencies and the Commission Directorates- General ('DG') working in the areas of environment, climate action, public health and food safety;

Amendment 10 #

Alexandr VONDRA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Notes that, according to Volume I of the AMPR Volume 1, the total figure dedicated to climate is €119.4 billion from the EU budget and NextGenerationEU reported by the Commission includes €17.6 billion from the common agricultural policy (CAP). Regrets the Court's finding, in its Special Report 16/20212 , that EU agricultural funding destined for climate action has not contributed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions; shares the Court's view that the new Common Agricultural Policy should have a greater focus on reducing agricultural emissions, and be more accountable and transparent about its contribution to climate mitigation; ~~_________________~~ Is concerned that, because the Commission used the same methodology to track climate related expenditure for the CAP in 2022 as for 2021, the ECA report 06/20231a, the Commission’s 2022 annual management and performance report for the EU budget, considers the Commission’s calculation of the contributions of the CAP to climate expenditure are overstated. Acknowledges that updated tracking methodology for the new CAP will apply from 2023 and urges the Commission avoid any derogation allowing Member States to derogate from CAP greening measures and produce crops for food and feed on fallow lands that are part of Ecological Focus Areas (EFA) while still receiving the greening payments. Notes that such derogations in 2022 caused a decline in measures that add nutrients to the soil, contribute to the build-up of humus or provide habitats for pollinating insects and calls for an impact assessment on the decision to derogate from environmental measures. _________________ 1a https://www.eca.europa.eu/ECAPublicatio ns/RV-2023-06/RV-2023-06_EN.pdf 2 Common Agricultural Policy and climate – Half of EU climate spending but farm emissions are not decreasing, 21 June 2021.

Amendment 12 #

Alexandr VONDRA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 10

10. Regrets the Court's finding, in its Special Report 16/20212 , that EU agricultural funding destined for climate action has not contributed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions; shares the Court's view that the new Common Agricultural Policy should have a greater focus on reducing agricultural emissions, and be more accountable and transparent about its contribution to climate mitigation; _________________ 2 Common Agricultural Policy and climate – Half of EU climate spending but farm emissions are not decreasing, 21 June 2021.

Amendment 13 #

Tiemo WÖLKEN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Strongly regrets the Commission's decision to renew the approval of the active substance glyphosate in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council and amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011; notes that the Commission failed to properly consider the toxicity of co-formulants as provided by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and confirmed by the Blaise ruling (C-616/17); is concerned that the Commission failed to properly assess the effect of glyphosate on biodiversity, including aquatic life and bees; recalls that the European Food and Safety Authority (EFSA) identified several data gaps on information which is mandatory to assess, including on the consumer dietary risk assessment in relation to toxic residues on food, and the genotoxicity of impurities produced in the glyphosate production process; recalls that EFSA acknowledges that the current pesticide approval procedures are insufficient to assess the risk of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson’s disease; believes that the Commission should have protected the European citizens and the environment on the basis of this scientific information, using the obligation and the legal possibilities that Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 gives to ensure a high level of protection of health and the environment.

Amendment 14 #

Cristian TERHEŞ, Emmanouil FRAGKOS, Robert ROOS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Takes note that several legislative proposals included in the work programme of DG SANTE for 2022 were unduly delayed. Acknowledges the disparity in the frequency of DG SANTE meetings with industry representatives compared to those with patient or consumer organizations, civil society, and NGO representatives. Advocates for ensuring equal, transparent, and balanced access for all stakeholders to facilitate meaningful contributions to policy discussions.

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12 a. Stresses the fact that the European Commission has focused all of the efforts and funding on the non-transparent procurement of COVID-19 vaccines while ignoring the medical opinions, studies and products that offered alternative medical reatments to COVID-19;

Amendment 16 #

Cristian TERHEŞ, Emmanouil FRAGKOS, Robert ROOS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12 b. Criticises the Commission for granting conditional market authorisation to vaccines for COVID-19, without existing at that time sufficient reliable scientific data proving without any doubts that the benefits of the vaccines far outweighed their potential risks that could put the citizens' lives at risk; Takes note that the way the conditional marketing authorisation was granted for the COVID-19 vaccines caused distrust and vaccine hesitancy regarding any vaccines; Reaffirms that, according to the definition, in order for a medical product to be labelled as vaccine it must produce immunity against a disease so the vaccinated person will not get infected nor transmit the disease; notes that the anti COVID-19 injections, despite being labelled as vaccines, had not met the criteria of a vaccine, since it was proven that people injected with these medical products got infected as well as transmitted the disease and even die;

Amendment 17 #

Cristian TERHEŞ, Emmanouil FRAGKOS, Robert ROOS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15

15. Notes that HERA, following its establishment as an internal Commission service on 1 October 2021, increased its operations throughout 2022 and that its mission is to support the Commission’s priorities for public health, preparedness and crisis management in the sectors of health, research and innovation and industry; Notes with concern the overlap of responsibilities and duplication of efforts between mandates of DG HERA with DG SANTE and the ECDC; calls on the Commission to ensure the added value of HERA as an integral part of the Commission and to prevent duplication of work and resources;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15 a. Notes with concern the creation of HERA, a body intended to expand EU influence over decision making in the area of health policy; Stresses that citizens of Member States never consented to the EU having powers over health policy;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 16

16. Notes that in 2022, HERA ~~managed expenditures of~~had payments of EUR 438 million and increased its staff from 30 to 80 members; Notes that HERA’s financial management is fully delegated to other entities. Notes that: a) DG INTPA paid EUR 430 million on behalf of HERA under the Emergency Support Instrument through a cross- subdelegation, and that b)100% of HERA EU4Health 2022 budget was implemented by the Health and Digital Executive Agency (HaDEA) for a total amount of EUR 275 million in commitment appropriation. c) HERA co-delegated EUR 580.5 million in commitment appropriations to DG ECHO under the Union Civil Protection Mechanism for the development of stockpiles of medical countermeasures to respond to large-scale Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear (CBRN) emergencies. d) Projects for approximately EUR ~~438~~125 million ~~and increased its staff from 30 to 80 members;~~ , contributing to HERA objectives were earmarked for HERA by DG RTD under the Horizon Europe 2022 programme. Remarks that HERA has entrusted partner DGs with the implementation of internal control processes to ensure the adequate management of the risks related to the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions they are responsible for, taking into account the multiannual character of programmes and the nature of the payments concerned. Notes that the partner DGs bear the responsibility for the delegated appropriations and report on them in their own AAR

Amendment 2 #

Tiemo WÖLKEN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Is satisfied with the work carried out by the five decentralised agencies which are under its remit, which carry out technical, scientific or managerial tasks that help the Union institutions elaborate and implement policies in the area of environment, climate action, public health and food safety, as well as with the way in which those agencies' budgets are implemented; stresses that, given the scale of current and upcoming challenges, sufficient and continuous funding must be guaranteed for the agencies and the Commission Directorates-General ('DG') working in the areas of environment, climate action, public health and food safety;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 16 b (new)

16 b. Regrets that the Commission’s decision on financing HERA heavily relied on the EU4Health Programme, cutting its budget by more than half with an EU4Health contribution of 2,795 billion EUR to HERA between 2021 and 2027); notes with concern that such reduction affected EU4Health’s capability of ambitious financing of other activities as foreseen by the Regulation (EU) 2021/522, including putting at risks actions under Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan and the necessary support for creation of the European Health Data Space; deplores that by assigning such significant amounts to HERA, the Commission breached the agreed funding ceilings for minimum and maximum spending set in the EU4Health Regulation;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 16 b (new)

16 b. Notes with strong concern the close collaboration of Commission officials and industry within the activities of HERA; calls for strong transparency and conflict of interest rules to be put in place to ensure public trust in and commercial independence of HERA. Is concerned that by the end of 2022, HERA did not developed and implemented a Procedure for reporting exceptions and non-compliance events, and an Anti- Fraud Strategy.

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 16 c (new)

16 c. Highlights that the Commission's “lessons learned” report on the COVID- 19 pandemic did not examine the performance of the vaccine procurement process, beyond its overall outcome. Urges the Commission to apply a high degree of transparency to all current and future contracts under the joint procurement and related purchase agreements in the field of health; insists that its relevant DGs should put in place a solid and transparent EU public procurement framework, when funds from the EU budget are fully or partially involved, that would allow for comprehensive scrutiny by the Parliament, especially concerning major health crisis-related spending areas; in line with the overriding public interest stated in Regulation 1049/2001 and the need for ensure public trust; calls on the Commission to make fully available all concluded vaccine and therapeutics (advanced) purchase agreements for COVID-19;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 17

17. Is of the opinion, on the basis of the data available and the implementation report, that discharge can be granted to the Commission, despite certain caveats described above in respect of expenditure in the areas of environmental and climate policy, public health and food safety for the financial year 2022, provided that sufficient guarantees are given that the shortfalls described will be remedied in the coming period.

Amendment 24 #

Nathalie COLIN-OESTERLÉ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Recalls the Commission’s commitment to carry out a thorough review of the implementation of HERA’s operations by 2025 and to consider changing its structure and governance, including in order to transform it into a genuine agency with an autonomous budget.

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Is satisfied with the work carried out by the five decentralised agencies which are under its remit, which carry out technical, scientific or managerial tasks that help the Union institutions elaborate and implement policies in the area of environment, climate action, public health and food safety, as well as with the way in which those agencies' budgets are implemented; stresses that, given the scale of current and upcoming challenges, ~~sufficient fund~~adequate funding and staffing must be guaranteed for the agencies and the Commission Directorates-General ('DG') working in the areas of environment, climate action, public health and food safety;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Highlights that the Commission is responsible for making sure that all EU countries properly apply EU law and thus calls on the Commission to ensure that there is sufficient staff capacity in DG Environment and other environmentally relevant services such as DG Sante and DG Clima, and of the environmental team within the Commission’s Legal Service to ensure the full enforcement of environmental legislation.

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that in 2022, DG Climate Action managed EUR 33,80 million under the title “Climate action” of the Union budget whilst EUR 2 897,4 million was available for the innovation fund; notes also that the DG had 310 members of staff at the end of the year; considers that this number should grow, in view of the increasing volume of tasks related, inter alia, to the Union's path towards climate neutrality by 2050;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Notes the changes made to the 7. Commission’s climate-tracking methodology in 2022 in response to the concerns expressed about the Court's finding in Special Report 09/20221 , stating that the reported spending was not always relevant to climate action, that the amount reported as having been spent for that purpose had been overstated by at least EUR 72 billion, meaning that only around 13% of the 2014-2020 budget was spent on climate related purposes; Urges the Commission to distinguish between climate mitigation and climate adaptation in the tracking methodology by breaking monitoring and reporting category into climate adaptation and climate mitigation _________________ 1 Climate spending in the 2014-2020 EU budget – Not as high as reported, 30 May 2022.

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Notes the changes made to the Commission’s climate-tracking methodology in 2022 in response to the concerns expressed about the Court's finding in Special Report 09/20221, stating that the reported spending was not always relevant to climate action, that the amount reported as having been spent for that purpose had been overstated by at least EUR 72 billion, meaning that only around 13% of the 2014-2020 budget was spent on climate related purposes; is of the opinion that this fact serves as a warning; _________________ 1 Climate spending in the 2014-2020 EU budget – Not as high as reported, 30 May 2022.

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Underlines the importance of proper scrutiny of climate and biodiversity expenditure in the EU budget, and holds the Commission accountable for the implementation of a robust and reliable methodology, in line with the commitments undertaken in the MFF agreement and paragraph 16d of the IIA of 16 December 2020; Calls on the Commission to avoid misleading approximation of the spending contribution to climate and biodiversity objectives, lack of explicit targets, as well as only partial coverage of potential negative or unclear climate and biodiversity impacts; Acknowledges that there are the interventions with common benefits but underlines the need to avoid double counting.

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Calls on the Commission to provide Parliament with an annual report setting out in detail the contribution of each budget item to the climate mainstreaming and the biodiversity targets, in order to facilitate their monitoring; calls further on the Commission to report whether any budget item fails to respect the "do no significant harm" criterion as referred to in the Taxonomy Regulation; Deplores the disastrous signal to investors and the rest of the world given by the EU through the complementary Delegated Act (CDA) adopted in 2022 that recognises fossil gas and nuclear energy as sustainable investments and considers that this will delay the achievements of climate neutrality and will redirect investment from clean renewable energy sources.

source: 757.141

2023/12/05 LIBE 36 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Note~~Expresses concerns that the Court of Auditors (the ‘Court’) audited on spending areas comprising various policies related to migration and border management (heading 4) and security and defence (heading 5) incidicated that these are a high-risk area, with a focus on expenditure on personel costs, equipment, procurement and the type of beneficiary;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Notes with concern that the Commission funds organizations with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist groups whose goals are not alligned with EU values; highlights that projects with honourable purposes, such as the fight against islamophobia, get millions in EU funding that the facto serve to finance other campaigns, for example for the promotion of the use of veil;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Recalls that in 2022, the Ombudsman has urged the Commission to treat access to document requests concerning EU recovery funds with greater consistency and to better explain its reasoning if it decides not release the asked-for information; 5a _________________ 5a https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/ne ws-document/en/163567

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Recalls that in 2022, the Ombudsman opened an inquiry in the European Commission’s refusal to give public access to documents related to its proposal for a Regulation on the European Health Data Space; 9k _________________ 9k https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/cas e/en/62762

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)

4 c. Deplores the problematic and hateful material in Palestinian school textbooks and study cards which has still not been removed; underlines that education and pupils’ access to peaceful and unbiased textbooks is essential, especially in the context of the rising implication of teenagers in terrorist attacks; stresses that financial support from the Union for the Palestinian Authority in the area of education shall be provided on the condition that textbook content is aligned with UNESCO standards, as decided upon by Union education ministers in Paris on 17 March 2015, that all anti-Semitic references are deleted, and examples that incite hatred and violence are removed, as repeatedly requested in the resolutions accompanying the discharge decisions in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial years 2016, 2018, 2019 and 2020; therefore requests the Commission to closely scrutinise that the Palestinian Authority (PA) modifies the full curriculum expeditiously;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 d (new)

4 d. Notes that the European Commission did not assess the risk that Hamas proxies and associated individuals operating in the EU present to the safety and security of EU citizens and that the continuation of funding under these circumstances puts EU citizens in danger;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 e (new)

4 e. Notes that the European Commission did not use its full prerogatives, as guardian of the treaties, to make sure Romania and Bulgaria are accepted into Schengen, despite the fact that both countries are meeting since 2011 all the conditions to be fully members of the Schengen area;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 f (new)

4 f. Regrets the recurrent practice of the Commission in providing an often only very limited amount of information on the implementation of EU legislation to Parliament; calls for the Commission to respect the principle of sincere cooperation and proactively publish this information; expresses regret at the Commission’s refusal to publish statistics indicating the effectiveness of EU policies, which hinders any public scrutiny of policies with a significant impact on fundamental rights; calls on the Commission to be more proactive in publishing such statistics in order to prove that policies are necessary and proportionate to achieving their objective; calls on the Commission to be transparent as regards contracts with third parties; calls on the Commission to be more proactive in publishing as much information as possible about the tender processes compared to its current practices;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 g (new)

4 g. Deeply regrets the fact that the Commission and Council insist on in camera meetings without proper justification; considers that requests for in camera meetings should be properly evaluated; calls for clear criteria and rules governing requests for in camera sessions in the EU institutions;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 h (new)

4 h. Reiterates the calls made in previous resolutions by the Parliament on public access to documents; regrets the fact that there has been no proper follow- up from the Commission to several proposals made by Parliament;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 i (new)

4 i. Recalls the request made in several resolutions by the Parlaiment, including on Public access to documents for years 2016-20185a, and urges the Commission to ensure public access to all advance purchase agreements, in their full form, between the EU and private companies in the field of health, in particular when ordering vaccines; _________________ 5a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/doc ument/TA-9-2021-0043_EN.pdf

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Expresses deep concerns that the European Ombudsman has found the Commission liable for maladministration following her inquiry into the time it takes for the Commission to handle access to documents in April 2022 following complaints on delays and a lack of communication with requesters; regrets that the inquiry revealed that “systematic and significant delays” occur when handling requests to review initial decisions refusing access, with over 81% of decisions being delayed in 2021; echoes the European Ombudsman’s call to conduct a fundamental rethink over how to tackle these delays and adhere to the timelines set out by the legislature; refuses to grant discharge until these recomendations are met;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. W~~elcomes the prompt actions by DG HOME following the Russian aggression, especially the timely drafting of a decision on the activation of the Temporary Protection Directive for the first ti~~hilst welcoming the activation of the Temporary Protection Directive and granting of funds to protect refugees fleeing from Ukraine, deplores that EU funding to response to the Russian- Ukraine war has exposed a widely discriminatory migration policy against asylum seekers from Middle Eastern and African countries; notes that in 2022, the amount of EU funds released in three years to help Member States receiving Syrian refugees (€5.7bn) was one third of what was mobilised in year to host Ukrainian refugees (€17.4bn); notes that a considerable part of EU budget funding to respond to the Syrian refugees was channelled into reinforcement of border security; reminds that this reveals a discriminatory double standard at the core of the EU’s migration policy whereby Ukrainians can enter unconditionally with protection under the Temporary Protection Directive (TPD), whilst refugees from Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, ~~the setting up of a Solidarity Platform ‘Ukraine’;~~ amongst many others are met with increased policing and deterrence at the borders; calls for the Commision to apply the activation of TPD in all similar cases and in line with the principle of non- discrimination;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Welcomes the actions by DG HOME to support Member States in improving the return process particularly by linking the EU visa policy to cooperation on readmission; welcomes the operational partnerships to fight migrant smuggling with Morocco, Niger, and the Western Balkans; is concerned of particularly low levels of returns of irregular migrants across the EU and associated security risks; calls on the Commission to continue working towards strategy for more effective returns and extend its opIs appalled by the Commissions inhumane migration policy based on deterrence, externalisation and militarization through its partnership deals with Morocco, Niger, Tunisia, Libya and Egypt; reiterates that this is a dangerous model of migration management which has resulted in the systematic “pullbacks” of refugees to brutal detention conditions and human rights violations at the hands of the EU- funded Libyan Coast Guard; highlights that the expansion of externalisation of EU’s migration policy to third countries with dubious records on human rights undermines the EU’s responsabilities under international refugee law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights; calls instead for a fair and equitable EU asylum policy, with broad safeguards to protect the right to international p~~artnerships with third countries~~rotection under humanitarian law and human rights of those arriving to the EU;

Amendment 23 #

Nils UŠAKOVS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Welcomes the actions by DG HOME to ~~support Member States in improving the return process particularly by~~create partnerships against human trafficking networks to support Member States in carrying out relocations and other transfer mechanisms and in improving quick and efficient asylum and return procedures, like those linking the EU visa policy to cooperation on readmission; welcomes the operational partnerships to fight migrant smuggling with Morocco, Niger, and the Western Balkans; is concerned of particularly low levels of returns of irregular migrants across the EU ~~and associated security risks~~; calls on the Commission to continue working towards strategy for more effective returns and extend its operational partnerships with third countries; and to promoting integration policies for legally residing non-EU nationals;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Regrets the trend of ‘informalisation’ in the external dimension of migration, notably in the conclusion of nonbinding agreements with third countries related to migration outside of the procedure under Article 218 TFEU, of which the EU-Tunisia MoU is the latest example; points to the human rights related risks of these agreements and lack of judicial and Parliamentary scrutiny and reiterates its position from 2019 that informal agreements between the EU and third countries do not provide a predictable policy or any stable and coherent statutory framework provisions on irregular migration;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Calls on the Commission to put forward proposals to use EU funds to better support Member States in the protection of the external borders, inter alia by financing border infrastructure;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Notes with concern that human trafficking and human smuggling remains a lucrative business for mafias, and that despite some efforts and millions in EU funding the number of detections of irregular border crossings at the external borders keeps rising; calls on the Commission to put forward proposals to make funding to third countries conditional on cooperation on the management of migration flows and the fight against human traffickers and migrant smugglers;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Urges the Commission to increase transparency and accountabililty of the programming and implementation of Home Affairs funds in third countries, notably by generating a publicly available overview of all migration related spending in third countries, and urges for ex ante human rights impact assesments for migration related spending in third countries, and to share these assesments with the Parliament;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)

6 c. Is concerned about the lack of involvement of the Parliament in the Operational Coordination Mechanism for the External Dimension of Migration (MOCADEM); recalls Article 9 of the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission, guaranteeing the basic principle of equal treatment for Parliament and the Council with regards to documents; urges the Commission on this basis to provide the Parliament will all relevant documentation of MOCADEM and ensure EP inclusion in any future meetings or activities of MOCADEM;

Amendment 3 #

Annika BRUNA, Jean-Paul GARRAUD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that for the audited spending areas related to migration and border management, security and defence policies, the Court examined a sample of 23 transactions, under MFF headings 4 and 5; notes the Court’s explanation that the audit scope was not designed to be representative for these headings but nevertheless contributed to their statement of assurance; reiterates the call from the Parliament to carry out the audit in a way that would allow calculating the estimated level of error;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Acknowledges the continuing support of DG JUST to the Commission’s policy on upholding the rule of law in the Union, especially and the yearly edition of the Justice Scoreboard and the third Annual Rule of Law Report, which contained recommendations to the Member States for the first time; encourages the Commission to closely monitor the effective follow up of reccommendations provided to the Member States concerned, and to take action in case adequate measures to address existing concerns are not adopted at the national level;

Amendment 32 #

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Ramona STRUGARIU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Strongly regrets the Commission’s lack of enforcement measures and legislative follow-up to Parliament’s recommendation, including on recommendation of 15 June 2023 to the Council and the Commission following the investigation of alleged contraventions and maladministration in the application of Union law in relation to the use of Pegasus and equivalent surveillance spyware; calls on the Commission to respect the principle of sincere cooperation between Union institutions, and to comply with the obligations set out in the Framework Agreement and the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Notes with concern the European Ombudsman's Special Report concerning the time the Commission takes to deal with requests for public access to documents, which outlined that in 85% of the cases the Commission does not deal with confirmatory applications within the legal time limits; calls on the Commission to urgently address this matter and comply with Regulation 1049/2001 on public access to documents, a key precondition for transparency and public trust in the Commission;

Amendment 34 #

Sophia IN 'T VELD, Ramona STRUGARIU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Calls on the Commission to provide more transparency and accountability of the external funding which it uses for asylum and migration policies in third countries, in particular NDICI funding, such as in countries like Tunisia and Libya; calls on the Commission to always carry out a comprehensive human rights impact assessment before such funding is decided upon and disbursed, and to systematically publish such human rights impact assessments;

Amendment 35 #

7 b. Is strongly concerned about the revelations on conflicts of interests involving high level Commission’s officials and the use of X advertising campaign related to the Child Sexual Abuse regulation; calls on the Commission to publish all documents requested by the Parliament and make full transparency on this case;

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)

7 c. Is strongly concerned by the special report published by the European Ombudsman and submitted to the Parliament concerning the time the Commission takes to deal with requests for public access to documents; expresses deepest concerns regarding the Ombudsman’s finding that the systemic and significant delays in the Commission’s processing of requests for public access to documents amount to maladministration; shares the Ombudsman’s conclusion that the Commission needs, as a matter of priority, to correct this situation;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Notes with concern that the Special Report of the Court for 2022 on the EU COVID-19 vaccine procurement states that the Commission refused to offer the Court the requested information (on the preliminary negotiations, scientific experts consulted and advice received, timing of the talks, records of the discussions, and details of the agreed terms and conditions) in relation to the biggest COVID-19 vaccine contract signed by the Commission during the COVID-19 Pandemic and that this contract was negotiated by the President of the Commission without the involvement of the joint negotiation team; 1a _________________ 1a https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADoc uments/SR22_19/SR_EU_COVID_vaccin e_procurement_EN.pdf

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Notes with concern that the European Ombudsman opened a case on 16 September 2021 on the separate matter of the European Commission’s refusal to grant public access to text messages exchanged between the Commission President and the CEO of Pfizer at the time of the preliminary negotiations; recalls that the Ombudsman's report of 26 January 2022 finds that the way the Commission dealt with this request constituted maladministration;2a _________________ 2a https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/rec ommendation/en/151678

Amendment 6 #

3 c. Notes with concern that the Special Report of the Court for 2022 on the EU COVID-19 vaccine procurement shows that, according to the Commission, the joint negotiation team was under pressure from the pharmaceutical industry to release companies from their liability for COVID-19 vaccines;3a _________________ 3a https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADoc uments/SR22_19/SR_EU_COVID_vaccin e_procurement_EN.pdf, p.28

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)

3 d. Emphasises that the Court noted that even though the steering board considered it important to have a diversified portfolio of vaccines based on different technologies the Commission decided to rely mostly on Pfizer/BioNTech mRNA technology-based vaccines up to the end of 2023; 4a _________________ 4a https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADoc uments/SR22_19/SR_EU_COVID_vaccin e_procurement_EN.pdf p.32

Amendment 8 #

Annika BRUNA, Jean-Paul GARRAUD

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Notes that Member States stepped up implementation of their national programmes in 2022; is ~~concerned that significant amounts remain undisbursed for bo~~highly alarmed by reports on how EU funding from the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) ~~(26 %) and~~, the Internal Security Fund (ISF) (33 %), meanwhile acknowledges that funding for 2014-2020 has to be spent by June 2024; urges the Commission to step up its efforts towards assisting Member States in the effective implementation of their respective national programmesand the Border Management and VISA Instrument (BMVI) have been linked to the violation of fundamental rights of migrants in Hungary, Croatia and Bulgaria; notes that this includes funding to border guards and to construct policing infrastructure and equipment on the borders whereby pushbacks and illegal detentions of migrants have occurred; calls on the EU to immediately suspend financing through these funds and for an independent inquiry to take place; condemns also the denial of reception to asylum-seekers by many Member States while Member States have been underspending AMIF funding;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Notes that Member States stepped up implementation of their national programmes in 2022; is concerned that significant amounts remain undisbursed ~~for both Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) (26 %) and~~, notably for the Internal Security Fund (ISF) (33 %), meanwhile acknowledges that funding for 2014-2020 has to be spent by June 2024; urges the Commission to step up its efforts towards assisting Member States in the effective implementation of their respective national programmes;

source: 757.005

2023/12/06 CULT 40 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Irena JOVEVA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission’s and the European Education and Culture Executive Agency’s (EACEA) efforts to adapt Erasmus+, the European Solidarity Corps and Creative Europe to a changing reality, for instance by reviewing upwards individual support rates for grants to safeguard their inclusive character, extending application deadlines and project duration, and a voluntary refocusing of activities on Ukraine, and expects more efforts to further reinforce inclusion measures and support to facilitate the participation of vulnerable groups;

Amendment 10 #

Andrea BOCSKOR, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates its concern about the strongly backloaded budget profile of Erasmus+; welcomes the extra EUR 35 million awarded to Erasmus+ in 2022 due to the Parliament’s insistence; calls for the creation of options based on fair, lawful and transparent procedures, agreed with the European Commission, to ensure that all students, teachers and researchers, including the Hungarians, can benefit from the Erasmus+ programme and contribute to the broader goals of European educational and research cooperation; calls on the Commission to remove any financial and administrative barriers, in order to achieve a truly inclusive programme;

Amendment 11 #

Irena JOVEVA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates its concern about the strongly backloaded budget profile of Erasmus+; welcomes the extra EUR 35 million awarded to Erasmus+ in 2022 due to the Parliament’s insistence; stresses the need to better use the potential of existing synergies between programmes and actions, better communicate on those synergies and calls on the Commission to further investigate future innovative funding solutions;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

Amendment 14 #

Andrea BOCSKOR, Milan ZVER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Highlights that an accelerated rate for the implementation of cultural and educational programmes is strongly connected to the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF); asks the Commission to assess and actively support the recommendations made by the Parliament related to a minimum 10% allocation for education, 2% for the cultural sector and 20% for digital transformation within the RRF plans; recalls that the digital transformation needs to focus on education and lifelong learning and calls upon the Commission to provide an enhanced assessment of the RRF plans related to this topic;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Expresses its profound regret that students, teachers and researchers of model-changing universities in Hungary have been placed in a difficult situation as a result of the decision taken by the Council at the end of last year, which has put at risk their participation in the 2024 programmes; believes that nobody should be discriminated from any programme due to political attitude;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Acknowledges the effects that some novelties, notably the extension of the accreditation scheme to the Erasmus+ programme’s main sectors, have had in terms of simplifying the application process and easing the accessibility of funding for mobility activities;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Highlights that the Erasmus+ programme framework of inclusion measures adopted in 2021 seems to bear fruit, with 23% more projects having gender equality as their main or an important and deliberate objective in 2022 than in 2021;

Amendment 18 #

Christian EHLER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 19 #

Petra KAMMEREVERT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Requests the European Court of Auditors to carry out an audit on the possible misuse of EU funds through Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps by networks of associations that present false projects; considers that, in particular, proposals should be put forward to bolster confidence in newly established accreditation mechanisms by sustainably ensuring that once accredited, applicants continue to fully respect European values after such recognition, without diminishing the simplification of the application process achieved through the accreditation mechanism;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission’s and the European Education and Culture Executive Agency’s (EACEA) efforts to adapt Erasmus+, the European Solidarity Corps and Creative Europe to ~~a changing reality, for instance by reviewing upwards individual support rates for grants to safeguard their inclusive character, extending application deadlines and project dur~~the current challenges related to the energy crisis, high inflation, and ~~a voluntary refocusing of activities o~~the ongoing war in Ukraine;

Amendment 20 #

Irena JOVEVA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Requests the European Court of Auditors to carry out an audit on the possible misuse of EU funds through Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps by networks of associations that present false projects, with the aim of verifying recent reports on this matter by some national agencies and measuring the scale and importance of such cases of fraud, and their treatment by competent authorities in the Member States;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 22 #

Petra KAMMEREVERT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Urges the Commission to drastically simplify the application for funding under Erasmus+ and to make it less time-consuming in order to counteract the increasing professionalisation in the process of applying for funding, so as to ensure that small and voluntary organisations and applicants can also successfully participate in the programme without significant additional effort;

Amendment 23 #

Irena JOVEVA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Welcomes the fact that, thanks to a EUR 3 million reinforcement of the 2022 European Year of Youth at the Parliament’s insistence, a number of actions under the Year could be strengthened, such as solidarity projects, volunteering and networking activities; underlines that the successful results of the Year should now be sustainably implemented to ensure its lasting legacy;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes the continued frontloading of the Creative Europe budget in 2022 for mitigating the persisting impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the cultural and creative sectors; deplores, however, that the programme as a whole remains underfinanced in relation to the objectives to be achieved, notably given its high subscription rate;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Notes the continued frontloading of the Creative Europe budget in 2022 for mitigating the persisting impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the cultural and creative sectors; notes that, thanks to this frontloading, a higher number of European cultural cooperation projects could be selected in 2022 than ever before;

Amendment 26 #

Irena JOVEVA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Welcomes the fact that almost all proposals submitted in the Media Strand are requested to provide a strategy to improve the industry’s greening measures, with projects in some actions having to initiate the process of obtaining a sustainability certification; urges the Commission, building on these promising results and the recommendations of a 2022 study on greening Creative Europe, to push ahead more strongly, including through more funding for training on greening and sustainability in the audiovisual sector;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Welcomes in particular the recent setting-up of ‘cascade funding’ as a means to better reach all beneficiaries of Creative Europe projects, especially individuals and small and medium-sized organisations; invites the Commission to further develop such schemes in all programmes of relevance to the sector;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Reiterates its call to urgently address the outstanding issues related to personal data protection for beneficiaries of and participants in Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps, in particular as regards third country personal data transfers; urges DG EAC to roll out the new ‘transfer tool’ immediately following authorisation from the European Data Protection Supervisor to ensure appropriate safeguards for such transfers in the future;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Expresses concern over the greening priorities laid down in the Creative Europe programme, particularly as a cross-cutting issue for all funding projects; highlights the fact that focusing on reducing the impact of projects on the environment risks having a negative impact on the variety and quality of projects; points out that greening criteria in projects disproportionately affect lower incomе communities;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Notes that, despite a challenging context created by long-lasting effects of the pandemic, the impact of rising inflation and energy prices on beneficiaries and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the Erasmus+ programme could in 2022 fully resume its long-standing mission to support transnational learning mobility, with the number of mobilities supported comparable to pre-pandemic years;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Welcomes DG EAC’s roll-out of a new project management tool for National Agencies, which includes a new risk and potential exclusions feature; encourages DG EAC and DG CNECT to implement their Anti-Fraud Strategies fully, including by offering mandatory fraud awareness raising and data protection training for staff, in particular newcomers, and entrusted bodies and organising a fraud awareness survey;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Calls on Member States to accelerate spending under Erasmus+, the European Solidarity Corps and Creative Europe to reach out to and involve young people, artists and professionals with fewer opportunities; requests the Commission to contribute to this aim by continuing close cooperation with Member States;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Notes with concern the persisting challenges in 2022 with the e-Grant tools for beneficiaries of calls managed by the EACEA; strongly urges the Commission and EACEA to address these IT issues once and for all to avoid repercussions on target achievement, reduce errors within the process and enhance simplification;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Stresses that accessibility of small beneficiaries, including authorities from smaller communities, NGOs and SMEs, but also vulnerable groups and people with disabilities, should be increased through a better adapted financing methodology and an efficient and accessible IT infrastructure;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Encourages the EACEA to swiftly implement the recommendations of its internal audit service to improve the quality of transactions, such as the use of checklists, the modification of financial circuits and the harmonisation of processes;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Notes the positive development in the EACEA’s staffing situation, with a significant increase of staff by the end of 2022;

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

~~9. Welcomes the EACEA’s efforts to implement EMAS and encourages it to increase its efforts by further implementing a sustainability plan and publishing the agency’s sustainability report.~~deleted

Amendment 37 #

Petra KAMMEREVERT

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Calls on the Commission and Parliament to fundamentally revise the pre-assessment procedure for pilot projects and preparatory actions so as to continue to enforce the necessary budgetary discipline while significantly limiting the Commission's influence on the will of the budgetary legislator expressed in the proposals;

Amendment 38 #

Irena JOVEVA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Emphasises the need for a stronger coordination between the different actors implementing education, youth and culture actions and the different programmes, and calls upon the Commission to develop clusters and networks of beneficiaries working on similar projects in order to Europeanize their results and activities;

Amendment 39 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9 a. Deplores that too many pilot projects and preparatory actions receive low grades by the Commission and that, as a consequence, there is a very limited use of their potential in advancing innovative policies;

Amendment 4 #

Irena JOVEVA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Stresses that more efforts are needed to adapt the new programmes to present and future opportunities and challenges; regrets that there is no adequate budgetary support for the ethical use of artificial intelligence and robotics in the education and cultural sectors; regrets that citizenship education did not receive enough budgetary space;

Amendment 40 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9 b. Encourages DG Connect to continue implementing media literacy strategies, such as the 2022 European Media Literacy Week, and underlines the need to continue the fight against disinformation in all relevant Commission initiatives;

Amendment 5 #

Irena JOVEVA, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Laurence FARRENG, Ilana CICUREL

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Notes with regret that the procedures to apply for EU funding under those programmes are often still too burdensome and create obstacles for potential beneficiaries, especially small and micro organisations in the cultural and creative sectors and industries, whose administrative capacities are limited;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that 2022 saw the launch or further roll-out of important initiatives such as the European Education Area, the MediaInvest blending facility, the new mobility scheme Culture Moves Europe and the 2022 European Year of Youth; regrets the limitations included in the Culture Moves Europe scheme excluding air travel for journeys below 600 km and forcing participants to make lengthier, more expensive trips; notes that the top- up provided to offset such costs represents lost mobility opportunities for more potential participants;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Appreciates that the Commission and the EACEA managed to achieve nearly full budget execution for Erasmus+ and full budget execution for the European Solidarity Corps in 2022, making it even necessary to redeploy credits from other programmes to cover payment needs; notes the challenges to the payment implementation of Creative Europe in 2022, with some EUR 50 million having been deferred to 2023 as a result of operational issues and delays in the granting processes; recognises DG Education, Youth, Sport and Culture’s (DG EAC) and the EACEA’s efforts to limit the impact of these delays and return to a normalised pace in 2023;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Stresses that the MFF revision should bring additional ambitious financial resources for the youth, cultural and educational programmes; regrets the proposal made within the Council related to cuts to Erasmus+ and Creative Europe and recalls the position of the Parliament as a budgetary authority supporting these two key programmes;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2 b. Notes that DG EAC’s and the EACEA’s overall risk at payment continued to be relatively low and their overall error rate remained below the 2 % materiality threshold in 2022;

source: 757.174

2023/12/08 REGI 30 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Notes that according to the European Court of Auditors (ECA) Annual report for the financial year 2022, the estimated level of error in spending on ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ is 6.4% and that for the subheading ‘Economic, social and territorial cohesion, the estimated level of error is 6.6%; underlines that in the 260 transactions the ECA audited, audit authorities reported 58 quantifiable errors and most notably concerned ineligible costs (31) and irregularities in public procurement procedures (21);

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Calls on the Commission to develop measures to simplify administrative procedures with a view to ensuring that cohesion policy funds are spent responsibly and appropriately;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Points out on importance of legality and regularity of cohesion spending; stresses further the importance of effective control by Member State audit and managing authorities; welcomes the adoption of national anti-fraud strategies by 24 Member States in total, as that should increase the protection of the EU´s financial interests;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights ~~the~~a significant role of the E~~PPO in protecting the EU budget~~uropean Anti-Fraud Office and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in relation to protecting the EU budget; expresses hope that more Member States will join the EPPO soon; reminds that, in her appearance before the Committee on Regional Development on 25 May 2023, the European Public Prosecutor noted that the management and control system for EU expenditure currently in place is not designed to detect fraud and that audits or administrative investigations rarely detect financial crime; stresses the need to provide the EPPO with the necessary means to carry out its duties; is of the opinion that a strengthened EPPO would make it possible for the legislator to further simplify the regulatory framework for cohesion;

Amendment 13 #

Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights the role of the EPPO in protecting the EU budget; reminds that, in her appearance before the Committee on Regional Development on 25 May 2023, the European Public Prosecutor noted that the management and control system for EU expenditure currently in place is not designed to detect fraud and that audits or administrative investigations rarely detect financial crime; stresses the need to provide the EPPO with the necessary means to carry out its duties; is of the opinion that a strengthened EPPO would make it possible for the legislator to further simplify the regulatory framework for cohesion in order to improve the application of the funds;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights the role of the EPPO in protecting the EU budget; reminds that, in her appearance before the Committee on Regional Development on 25 May 2023, the European Public Prosecutor noted that the management and control system for EU expenditure currently in place is not designed to detect fraud and that audits or administrative investigations rarely detect financial crime, which has often a cross- border dimension; stresses the need to provide the EPPO with the necessary means to carry out its duties; is of the opinion that a strengthened EPPO would make it possible for the legislator to further simplify the regulatory framework for cohesion;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 – point 1 (new)

(1) Calls for more effort at EU level and in the Member States to tackle fraud;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Reminds that according to the 21- 27 Common Provisions Regulation, member state authorities should report all cases of suspected or established fraud related to EU-funded projects that they identify, and that they should report these cases even if they detect them before declaring expenditure to the Commission;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Stresses the need to address the main issues of the funds allocation system; therefore, urges the European Commission to take concrete measures, such as the development of a one-stop- shop that consolidates the information relative to all available funds including updated and detailed information on beneficiaries.

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Welcomes the Commission statement on the recently released ex ante module in Arachne, which allows Member States to use the tool preventively at project selection and award phase, in addition to ex post verifications to control implementation of projects; calls, however, on the Commission to advance the date for deployment of the single integrated IT tool for data mining and risk-scoring from 2028 to 2025, the first year when a significant amount of 2021- 2027 expenditure is expected to be declared;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Notes that the Commission’s error estimates are above the materiality threshold but are significantly lower than the Court’s~~1 ; draws attention to the different methodologies applied by the two institutions; is worried about~~[1], at 1,9 % as compared to 6.4 %; points out that, although both institutions apply different methodologies, the growing discrepancy between their assessments provided by the Court of Auditors and the Commission, especially in the area of cohesion; _________________ 1 European Court of Auditors, Annual report on the implementation of the EU budget for the 2022 financial year., especially in the area of cohesion, raises great concerns;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Expresses concerns about the Commission’s reported plans to disburse the suspended 6.3 billion EUR from the RRF to Hungary in exchange for its endorsement of the aid for Ukraine; points out, that the suspended funds should not be released to Hungary until the remedial measures adopted by the Hungarian government have proven effective in practice;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Recalls the crucial role that managing authorities and audit authorities play in the management and control of funds and spending; underlines that the effective control of management authorities is essential to ensure the compliance of operations and programmes as well as their good performance; furthermore, stresses the need for audit authorities to be functionally independent from management authorities as they are responsible for verifying expenditure declared by managing authorities;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Draws attention to the increased risk of decommitments in the coming years and urges the Commission to continue its cooperation with the Member States and the regions to ~~both~~ speed up and ease ~~the~~complete and correct good closure of the 2014-2020 programming period, allowing for these authorities to draw lessons for the implementation of the ongoing one;

Amendment 22 #

Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Draws attention to the increased risk of decommitments in the coming years and urges the Commission to ~~continue its~~strengthen the cooperation with the Member States and the regions to both speed up and ease the good closure of the 2014-2020 programming period;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Welcomes the financial flexibility available in the use of cohesion funds and believes that post-2027 cohesion policy must provide the flexibility needed in the use of funds to enable the Member States to steer resources in an appropriate and reliable manner;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Underlines the ECA’s recommendation to strengthen measures that have been designed to address recurring errors, particularly in relation to ineligible costs and projects; notes that this would support managing authorities in reducing continued occurrence of these errors and lead to better performance in spending;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

~~6. Is concerned that the prioritisation of the RRF in the Member States is causing delays in the implementation of funds under the CPR 2021-2027.~~deleted

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Is concerned that the prioritisation of the RRF in the Member States is causing delays in the implementation of funds under the CPR 2021-2027.; draws attention to the cases of weak design that the ECA has found in relation to the measures and underlying milestones or targets in the Recovery plans; highlights that these latter should clearly define all milestones and targets and stresses that all the problems regarding the reliability of information that member states included in their management declarations should be properly addressed;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Is concerned that the prioritisation of the RRF in the Member States is causing delays in the implementation of funds under the CPR 2021-2027.; stresses the need for further simplification of rules, greater use of simplified cost options and improved effectiveness of ex ante and ex- post checks;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 (new)

Calls on the Member States to accelerate the investment of cohesion resources in support of creation of jobs, economic growth, business competitiveness as well as inclusion of socially vulnerable groups; to this end, requests the Commission to continue its cooperation with the Member States to contribute to responsible, appropriate and effective spending of funds as well as to, in particular, ensure the involvement of all relevant stakeholders at all levels of government and local government;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Highlights the findings of the Court’s special report 09/2022 on climate- spending information for 2014-2020, which state that the Commission had overestimated such spending by at least €72 billion, mostly due to overestimation of the contribution of agricultural funding, but also of infrastructure and cohesion funding; welcomes the fact that the Commission accepted1b the three recommendations of the Court's special report on: the climate relevance of agricultural funding; the need for enhancing climate reporting; the link of the EU budget to climate and energy objectives. _________________ 1b Commission replies to main ECA observations (Results of the ECA performance audits, p.388)

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Stresses, in this regard, the inherent risks posed by these simultaneous activities for all bodies responsible for managing and controlling these funds and concurs with the Court of Auditors that an additional advisory support from the Commission to national authorities would be needed in this particular context;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6 b. Stresses the importance of cohesion policy in promoting gender equality, as highlighted by the European Parliament's own-initiative report on the gender dimension in cohesion policy and by the “European Court of Auditors’ Special Report 10/2021: Gender mainstreaming in the EU budget: time to turn words into action”; points out the Court’s assessment that the EU’s budget cycle did not take gender equality adequately into account and the Commission had not yet lived up to its commitment to gender mainstreaming in the EU budget; welcomes, on the other hand, that, in line with these recommendations, in the "2023 report on gender equality in the EU"1c, the European Commission confirmed the establishment of a methodology to track all EU spending programmes’ contributions to gender equality under the 2021-2027 multiannual framework and that this methodology was piloted in the 2023 draft budget and found that 11 spending programmes contribute to gender equality and 29 programmes have the potential to do so if adequately gender mainstreamed (for a total of 99% of budgetary spending). _________________ 1c "European Commission's 2023 report on gender equality in the EU", p.53

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Underlines that Cohesion policy played a frontline role to address the last health and war-related emergencies and was instrumental in dealing with the multi-faceted challenges thereto entailed; reminds, however, that the rationale of this policy is to ensure a long-term planning of measures that should strengthen economic, social, and territorial cohesion between European regions and that an appropriate budget line should be created in the next programming period to meet unforeseen events, also in order not to divert resources from the established objectives and identified territories;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1 c. Takes note of the Commission’s statement1a which mentions that particular attention is being paid to the implementation of the Just Transition Fund (JTF) due to the timeframe to spend NextGenerationEU (NGEU) resources by the end of 2026, but underlines the quite insufficient progress in its implementation and absorption rate; _________________ 1a Commission replies to main ECA observations (Budgetary and financial management in 2022, p. 382)

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Reminds that, without prejudice to the need to support the authorities and beneficiaries to better comply with spending rules and minimise errors, the most pressing issues to be addressed in the area of cohesion policy are, on the one hand, the overly complex rules and procedures and the disproportionate administrative burden they entail and, on the other hand, the effective targeting of the funds; highlights that both the Commission and the Court of Auditors identified the following categories as the main sources of irregularities: ineligible expenditure, public procurement, audit trail and State aid.

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Reminds that, without prejudice to the need to support the authorities and beneficiaries to better comply with spending rules and minimise errors, the most pressing issues to be addressed in the area of cohesion policy are~~, on the one hand,~~: the overly complex rules and procedures and the disproportionate administrative burden they entail a, the effective targeting of the funds, onand the ~~other hand, the effective targeting of the fund~~constant diversion, as a rule and not as an exception for exceptional situations, of funds initially allocated to cohesion policies towards other policy areas;

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Reminds that, without prejudice to the need to support the authorities ~~and~~, including in particular local and regional authorities, as well as beneficiaries to better comply with spending rules and minimise errors, the most pressing issues to be addressed in the area of cohesion policy are, on the one hand, the overly complex rules and procedures and the disproportionate administrative burden they entail and, on the other hand, the effective targeting of the funds;

Amendment 9 #

Hannes HEIDE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Reminds that, without prejudice to the need to support the authorities and beneficiaries to better comply with spending rules and minimise errors, the most pressing issues to be addressed in the area of cohesion policy are, on the one hand, the overly complex rules and procedures, with the need of more flexible processes, and the disproportionate administrative burden they entail and, on the other hand, the effective targeting of the funds;

source: 757.292

2023/12/18 AFET 67 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Calls attention to the fact that the current year of audit is the one during which Russia launched its war of aggression against Ukraine, the worldwide effects of which have dramatically increased pressure on many EU partners and the need for humanitarian assistance ; expresses satisfaction that the flexibility of the Neighbourhood, Development, and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe of the Neighbourhood, Development, and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe (NDICI-GE) allowed the Union to quickly adapt to the extraordinary set of circumstances; urges, however, the Commission and the EEAS to take further measures to ensure that the cushion of the Instrument in the future is used more as intended, since its excessive early use has resulted in its being depleted very quickly and used beyond its core purpose of responding to emerging challenges and priorities; recalls Parliament’s standing position that new priorities should be financed with additional resources;

Amendment 1 #

Ilan DE BASSO, Carlos ZORRINHO, Udo BULLMANN, Karsten LUCKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is alarmed about the rising number of crises worldwide and the highest-ever humanitarian funding gap; is worried that Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) - Global Europe (GE) is stretched to its limits and is not sufficient to address existing needs; calls on the Member States to ensure that the cushion is mobilised only for purposes within its intended scope;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Takes note of the European Court of Auditors’ Special Report regarding the programming which concluded that it was comprehensively designed, addressing a broad range of partner country needs and EU priorities; highlights the identified deficiencies in the methodologies used for allocating funding to countries and in the setup of the monitoring framework; recommends therefore that the Commission and the EEAS improve the methodology for allocating funding and the assessment of the impact of EU support, focus the scope of the programming process, simplify and consistently use the indicators in the multiannual indicative programmes; suggests, in the framework of the mid term evaluation of the Instrument that the nomenclature be revised introducing a higher level of detail for transparency, predictability, accountability, scrutiny, and to enhance the budgetary authority’s capacity to make choices reflecting political priorities; regrets the two different approaches applied by the Commission and EEAS within the Instrument for the allocation of funding to Neighbourhood and non-Neighbourhood countries and asks that they be standardised, comparable and transparent in order to facilitate the audit trail;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Welcomes the Global Gateway strategy as a concerted EU response to global challenges; is of the opinion that in times of new geostrategic challenges, EU foreign policy and development cooperation actors must coordinate better in order to increase the EU’s presence and visibility worldwide;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Emphasises the significance of meeting all spending and program-related targets outlined in the NDICI-GE instrument and calls for comprehensive information to be provided on the progress achieved; expresses regret over the significant shortfalls in reaching the Instrument's 30% climate target, in contributing to the 10% biodiversity target in the MFF for 2026 and 2027, and in ensuring that the EU's global financial commitments under the UN framework are fulfilled, in particular as regards the contribution to the Loss and Damage Fund; highlights the increasing pressure climate change puts on food production and access, particularly in vulnerable regions, impacting food security and nutrition; reminds that biodiversity is key in combating climate change, and its loss undermines progress on approximately 80% of the assessed targets for the SDGs; calls on the Commission for a detailed plan outlining how it intends to meet spending and gender targets by the end of the MFF;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that 2022 was the first full year of the implementation of the Global Gateway strategy; underlines that actions bringing together public and private investment must ~~always be guided by development objectives; calls for more transparency and Parliament’s involvement in strategic choices involving Union funds~~be limited in areas where they can add value to the local economy and be consistent with the SDGs, the Paris Agreement and national development objectives; calls for more transparency, regular assessments of the Global Gateway implementation and Parliament’s involvement, beyond a simple observer role, in strategic choices involving Union funds in respect of the scrutiny role of the European Parliament of the NDICI-Global Europe, which is the main source of financing of the Global Gateway; calls on the Commission to set a clear and transparent accountability mechanism of implementation of the strategy and to demonstrate clear rationale for the use of development finance for the projects branded under the Global Gateway strategy; insists that Global Gateway should not only align with the EU ~~interest~~priorities but also with the needs of partner countries and contribute to the achievement of the SDGs;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Reiterates its call on the Commission to implement the recommendations of the European Court of Auditors Special Report 01/2022 in order to ensure an effective impact of EU financial assistance in support for the rule of law in the Western Balkans, in particular by developing guidelines on the application of the provisions on modulation and conditionality under the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) III;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that 2022 was the first full year of the implementation of the Global Gateway strategy; underlines that actions bringing together public and private investment must always be guided by development objectives and meet the specific needs of the countries concerned, in particular as regards infrastructure and energy; calls for more transparency and Parliament’s involvement in strategic choices involving Union funds; insists that Global Gateway should not only align with the EU interests but also with the needs of partner countries, for example in terms of energy and infrastructure, and contribute to the achievement of the SDGs;

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Notes~~ Encourages further mobilisation of the European Peace Facility in response to Russia’s military aggression against Ukraine, which ~~marks~~sends a clear signal of a paradigm shift for EU foreign and security policy; notes the Special Report of the European Court of Auditors which recommends sequencing of existing EU defence planning and cooperation tools to assess how to further develop planning for EU defence funding;

Amendment 13 #

Ilan DE BASSO, Carlos ZORRINHO, Udo BULLMANN, Karsten LUCKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes that 2022 was the first full year of the implementation of the Global Gateway strategy; underlines that actions bringing together public and private investment must always be guided by development objectives; calls for more transparency and Parliament’s involvement in strategic choices involving Union funds; insists that Global Gateway should not only align with the EU interests but also with Agenda 2030, the Paris Agreement, the needs of partner countries and contribute to the achievement of the SDGs;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Welcomes the Commission’s revised Code of Practice on Disinformation, adopted in 2022; calls for the established Task Force which meets on a regular basis to monitor and adapt the commitments in view of technological, societal, market and legislative developments; stresses the need for the EU to increase the visibility of its actions through a better, more strategic communication of its external actions towards its own citizens and beyond;

Amendment 14 #

Waldemar TOMASZEWSKI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines the need to speed up progress on achieving the NDICI-GE spending targets for human development~~, gender and climate objectives; is worried, in particular, about the Commission’ capacity to ensure reach~~ and migration control objectives; considers that aid should be suspended in the event of a degradation in democracy, human rights or the rule of law ing th~~e Instrument’s climate target and calls for concrete actions outlining how the climate target is going to be met~~ird countries, as well as in the event of a lack of cooperation in the fight against illegal migration and in the event of a serious conflict with shared values, such as supporting a war of aggression;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Commends the Commission’s adoption of the EUR 25 million assistance program “EU4Belarus: Supporting societal resilience and human capital development” which further strengthens the resilience and capacity of the Belarusian people to promote democratic changes in Belarus at the time of political crisis;

Amendment 15 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines the need to speed up progress on achieving the NDICI-GE spending targets for human development, gender, biodiversity and climate objectives; is worried, in particular, about the Commission’ capacity to ensure reaching the Instrument’s climate target ~~and~~of 30% and the biodiversity target of 10% for 2026 and 2027; recalls that the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services will undermine progress in approximately 80 % of the SDGs targets and that climate change will increasingly put pressure on food production and access, especially in vulnerable regions, undermining nutrition and food security; calls for concrete actions outlining how the climate and biodiversity target iss are going to be met; recalls the commitment set out to ensure a strong gender perspective and mainstreaming implementing the EU Gender Action Plan III;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines that the Union budget must continue to provide support to build peace and stability in the Middle East region, to combat hate and fundamentalism and to promote human rights; ~~awaits~~takes positive note, in that light, of the results of the review of the Commission ~~is conducting on the use of Union funds~~, which concluded that no EU funds went directly or indirectly to Hamas; urges the Commission to therefore swiftly disburse the EU funds to Palestine without additional conditionality, notably to Palestinian civil society, which plays a pivotal role in promoting human rights and secular values, as well as the fights against radicalisation; condemns the obstruction of the disbursement of funds under the Annual Action Plan for Palestine by Commissioner Varhelyi, despite institutional approval of the package in November 2022; regrets the Commission’s recent proposal to allocate EUR 18 million of NDICI-GE funding to an implementing act related to the Abraham Accords, reminds the Commission that this is not in line with the development purposes of NDICI-GE;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines the need to speed up progress on achieving the NDICI-GE spending targets for human development, gender and climate objectives, but also on migration, in particular in the fight against irregular migration; is worried, in particular, about the Commission’s capacity to ensure reaching the Instrument’s climate target and calls for concrete actions outlining how the climate target is going to be met;

Amendment 17 #

David LEGA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines that the Union budget must continue to provide support to build peace and stability in the Middle East region, to combat hate and fundamentalism and to promote human rights; ~~await~~notes the ~~review~~conclusion of the Commission ~~is conducting on the use of Union~~’s internal review regarding the Union funds to Palestinians and calls for an objective, third party, independent audit of these EU funds;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Takes note of the enhanced provisions of the Samoa Agreement on migration and stresses that EU development cooperation must be conditional on the beneficiary country’s cooperation on migration, in particular as regards returns and readmissions;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3 b. Urges the Commission to stick to the 10% indicative migration target of NDICI and to refrain from further increasing migration related spending compared to the reported 14% in November 2022; regrets the modus operandi of the Commission in its management of external migration budget lines, notably the absence of fundamental rights impact assessments prior to migration projects in third countries, absence of publicly available overviews of budgets and projects and the Commission´s systematic refusal by to provide the European Parliament with budgetary migration related spending overviews per country and MOCADEM related documentation, despite several formal requests and commitments under the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission; urges the Commission to significantly improve these practices with immediate effect, notably by performing an independent external evaluation of migration related spending under NDICI, with a focus on EU legal obligations related to human rights and development spending;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines that the Union budget must continue to provide support to build peace and stability in the Middle East region, to combat hate and fundamentalism and to promote human rights; awaits the review the Commission is conducting on the use of Union funds; underlines the interlinkages between stability and sustainable development, particularly in fragile countries and regions;

Amendment 19 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Reminds the Commission’s commitment to dedicate at least 10% of the EU’s development portfolio to support access to quality education; welcomes the progress reached so far and calls on the Commission to continue the implementation of this commitment; further calls on the Commission to involve local actors, including faith-based organisations, with relevant experiences in providing quality education into the implementation of the EU financing for education in developing countries;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Calls attention to the fact that the current year of audit is the one during which Russia launched its war of aggression against Ukraine, the worldwide effects of which have dramatically increased pressure on many EU partners and increased the need for investments in sustainable development and humanitarian assistance ; expresses satisfaction that the flexibility of the Neighbourhood, Development, and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe of the Neighbourhood, Development, and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe (NDICI-GE) allowed the Union to quickly adapt to the extraordinary set of circumstances; urges, however, the Commission and the EEAS to take further measures to ensure that the cushion of the Instrument in the future is used more as intended, since its excessive early use has resulted in its being depleted very quickly and used beyond its core purpose of responding to emerging challenges and priorities;

Amendment 2 #

Waldemar TOMASZEWSKI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is alarmed about the rising number of crises worldwide and the highest-ever humanitarian funding gap, exacerbated by Russia’s unjustified and unprovoked aggression in Ukraine, the growing political and economic influence of China in Africa and Russian interference on that continent, as well as new factors driving mass migration and leading to asylum-seeking, such as the Taliban takeover in Afghanistan and coups in the Sahel region, which have exacerbated instability across Africa and Asia; is worried that Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) - Global Europe (GE) is stretched to its limits and is not sufficient to address existing needs;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Underlines that the EU´s budget should be managed in compliance with the Treaties and EU acquis, including provisions related to fundamental rights compliance, transparency and accountability towards the European Parliament and EU citizens; regrets, against that backdrop, the modus operandi of the Commission in its management of the external migration budget lines, notably the absence of fundamental rights impact assessments prior to migration projects in third countries, absence of publicly available overviews of budgets and projects and the Commission´s systematic refusal to provide Parliament with budgetary migration related spending overviews per country and MOCADEM related documentation, despite several formal requests and commitments under the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission: urges the Commission to significantly improve these practices with immediate effect, notably by performing ex ante human rights impact assessments before projects, creating a public overview of all migration related projects in third countries and systematically putting Parliament on equal footing with the Council in terms of the level of information provided;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Notes that in 2022 EUR 501 million were mobilised from the cushion of the NDICI-GE instrument as part of the bilateral assistance for Ukraine; urges the Commission in its future actions to preserve the initial purpose of cushion funds, which is to respond to unforeseen crises; welcomes, in this regard, the proposal to create a new instrument, the Ukraine Facility, to provide predictable financial support for Ukraine over the 2024-2027 period;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Notes the Commission's published review on 21 November 2023 of EU financial assistance for Palestine, which concluded that the Commission controls and existing safeguards in place work well and found no evidence that money has been diverted for unintended purposes;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Questions the large-scale tapping of the cushion within the NDICI-GE; deplores the Commission’s failure to always notify Parliament before the cushion is mobilised, undermining Parliament’s right of scrutiny and impeding the Commission from fully taking into consideration its observations on the nature, objectives and financial amounts envisaged;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Stresses the importance of education and the critical need to denounce and eradicate all manifestations of hate speech and violent actions on both sides; underscores that the suspension of funding should not occur arbitrarily or without transparent and independent evidence of misuse; commends the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) for its indispensable humanitarian endeavors in Gaza and its pivotal role in delivering quality education, with a specific emphasis on fostering a human rights culture, even in challenging times;

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Appreciat~~Stresses the role of local NGOs and partners in service delivery and support to local communities; underlines the importance of enhancing their capacity to manage and implement actions financed by the EU and invites the Commission to facilitate adequate training towards this aim; is concerned about the continued difficulties faced by small local NGOs to access Union funding; encourages the Commission to improve these funding procedures and to systematically prioritise local NGOs in order to provide better capacity-building on the ground;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Urges the Commission to enhance the Rule of Law conditionality based approach of IPA III funding, in order for the instrument to serve its’ purpose of effectively preparing accession countries to fulfil the conditions of becoming EU Member States, considers a particular emphasis on the Rule of Law and democracy related conditions to be of importance in this regard;

Amendment 23 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Appreciates the role of local NGOs and partners in service delivery; underlines the importance of enhancing their capacity to manage and implement actions financed by the EU and invites the Commission to facilitate adequate training towards this aim; is concerned about the continued difficulties faced by small local NGOs to access Union funding, but stresses that access to Union funding for small local NGOs must not entail an easing of transparency requirements;

Amendment 24 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Highlights the importance of the Global Gateway initiative which can significantly contribute to initiatives on connectivity, green and digital cooperation and that it needs to be focused and clearly structured in order ~~for the resources to be used in the best way possible~~to deliver transformational impact in partner countries while promoting universal values and using resources in the best way possible; strongly supports leveraging the EU budget and private sector involvement for contributing to Agenda 2030;

Amendment 24 #

Ilan DE BASSO, Carlos ZORRINHO, Udo BULLMANN, Karsten LUCKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Appreciates the role of local NGOs and partners in service delivery; underlines the importance of enhancing their capacity to manage and implement actions financed by the EU and invites the Commission to facilitate adequate training towards this aim; is concerned about the continued difficulties faced by small local NGOs to access Union funding; highlights the efficacy of local ownership in project implementation as concerns prioritisation, allocation of resources and building local know-how;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Highlights the importance of the Global Gateway initiative which can significantly contribute to initiatives on connectivity, green and digital cooperation and that it needs to be focused and clearly structured in order for the resources to be used in the best way possible; calls on the Commission to set a clear and transparent accountability mechanism for implementation of the strategy and to demonstrate clear rationale for the use of development finance for the projects branded under the Global Gateway strategy and its equal benefits to recipient countries’ public and private sectors;

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Appreciates the role of local ~~NGOs and partne~~organisations, including faith-based actors in service delivery; underlines the importance of enhancing their capacity to manage and implement actions financed by the EU and invites the Commission to facilitate adequate training towards this aim; is concerned about the continued difficulties faced by small local NGOs as well as faith-based organisations to access Union funding;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Highlights the importance of the Global Gateway ~~initiative~~strategy which can significantly contribute to initiatives on connectivity, green and digital cooperation and that it needs to be focused and clearly structured in order for the resources to be used in the best way possible;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses that NGOs receiving Union funding must adhere to the Union’s values, for example in the area of gender equality, and is concerned about possible direct or indirect funding or support by the Union for organisations advocating a strict form of Islam or which disseminate such thinking, for example in education;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Recognises the multiple roles that Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) play; recalls the EU’s commitment to support CSOs in all external instruments and programmes and in all areas of cooperation, including through a flexible and tailor-made approach to funding in order to reach all types of CSOs; calls on the Commission to involve CSOs more systematically in the Global Gateway and Team Europe Initiatives;

Amendment 27 #

Thierry MARIANI, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Stresses the important role of~~Recalls the obligation under the NDICI Regulation for 93% of the Instrument funding to be compliant with the official development assistance (ODA); c~~alls for a cautious approach to blending and public-private partnership~~riteria as established by the OECD; recalls that blending and public-private partnerships cannot guarantee universal access to, or replace public investments in fields, such as education ~~or health~~, social protection or health, that provide crucial long-term prospects for the graduation from poverty;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that further enlargement of the European Union would entail enormous costs for the Union, the Member States and taxpayers in the event of the accession of some or all of the countries currently engaged in the accession process; stresses that such an enlargement would run counter to the interests of European citizens;

Amendment 28 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses the important role of the official development assistance (ODA), but also the persistent challenges in improving its effectiveness; calls for a cautious approach to blending and public- private partnerships in fields, such as education or health, while emphasising the potential of such blending for diversifying sources of development funding;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Regrets the fact that the CFSP budget for civilian CSDP missions has only marginally increased from the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 to the MFF 2021-2027 (from a starting point of approximately EUR 350 million per year), while at the same time the number and tasks of the missions have increased, the security environment has become more challenging, the cost of operations has increased, inflation has risen and the number of contracted personnel has increased, therefore limiting the potential for expanding the current missions’ mandates or possibly establishing new missions in response to urgent security needs; calls for a substantive increase of funding for the CFSP budget, while at the same time ensuring the efficient use of the funds allocated to the CSDP civilian missions, in order to make sure that they effectively respond to crisis situations and unforeseen events, and to actively identify where complementary projects and programmes could be funded from other relevant EU budgets, ensuring sound financial management and the careful prioritisation of existing resources;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls for increased mobilisation of sources of development funding other than ODA alone, such as partnerships with the private sector and direct transfers (remittances), and stresses that the circle of state donors of ODA should also be widened;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Calls attention to the fact that the current year of audit is the one during which Russia launched its full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine, the worldwide effects of which have dramatically increased pressure on many EU partners and the need for humanitarian assistance ; expresses satisfaction that the flexibility of the Neighbourhood, Development, and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe of the Neighbourhood, Development, and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe (NDICI-GE) allowed the Union to quickly adapt to the extraordinary set of circumstances; urges, however, the Commission and the EEAS to take further measures to ensure that the cushion of the Instrument in the future is used more as intended, since its excessive early use has resulted in its being depleted very quickly and used beyond its core purpose of responding to emerging challenges and priorities;

Amendment 3 #

Thierry MARIANI, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Susanna CECCARDI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is alarmed about the rising number of crises worldwide and the highest-ever humanitarian funding gap; is worried that Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) - Global Europe (GE) is stretched to its limits and is not sufficient to address existing needs; further notes with concern that the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine worsened the global food crisis, triggered an energy, cost of living and debt crisis worldwide and created economic uncertainty;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Recalls that accession countries benefit from very significant financial investments from the EU; calls for a definitive end to all pre-accession funding for Türkiye;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Calls for ex ante assessments to determine the possible implications and risks of EU programs with regard to human rights, especially in projects dealing with tourism and biodiversity protection, as well as in refugee and diaspora-focused programs;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5 c. Calls also for the structure of the CFSP budget to be changed and for the generation of one budget line per civilian CSDP mission, in order to allow for better scrutiny and increased transparency;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Recalls the Parliament’s power of scrutiny and the need for transparency in the implementation of the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) - Global Europe; underlines that the Commission is responsible for identifying, formulating, implementing, monitoring and evaluating EU assistance; recalls that the European External Action Service (EEAS) is tasked with ensuring the continuity and coherence of EU external policies with the integrated approach that includes the NDICI-Global Europe; stresses that the Parliament is responsible for democratic oversight and scrutiny as a co-legislator under the co- decision procedure; is of the opinion that this approach enables further cooperation between the EU institutions, the Member States and the European Investment Bank (EIB) to continuously increase the EU’s collective effectiveness and visibility;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Stresses, however, the importance of public-private partnerships in education, including for the purposes of vocational training, particularly in Africa, in order to enhance the labour market integration and employability of young people;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Asks the Commission to guarantee that EU funding programs are not linked to cases of transnational repression, affecting refugees, asylum seekers, and naturalized citizens in the EU;

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5 c. Calls on the Commission and Member States for a suspension or modulation of EU funding programs that (in)directly contribute to human rights violations, with particular regard to the rights of IPLCs, including their right to self-determination, land, free assembly, and free, prior and informed consent;

Amendment 35 #

Ilan DE BASSO, Carlos ZORRINHO, Udo BULLMANN, Karsten LUCKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Welcomes the finding of the ECA report on the EU budget for 2022 that DG ECHO implemented ECA recommendation and established a procedure ensuring that partner organisations base their allocation of shared costs on expenditure actually incurred; urges the Commission to act upon ECA recommendations that have not been implemented.

Amendment 36 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Welcomes the European Court of Auditors (ECA) Special Report 14/2023 entitled ‘Programming the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe: Comprehensive programmes with deficiencies in the methods for allocating funds and impact monitoring’; expects the Commission to act on the recommendations made by the ECA especially as regards more predictable and transparent programming as well as clearer methodology for assessing the impact of EU’s support and reiterates in this regard the recommendations made it its resolution of 12 December 2023 on the implementation of the NDICI-GE; encourages the ECA to prepare special reports relating to development cooperation expenditure and to regularly cover development cooperation aspects in its special reports on horizontal issues in accordance with the Policy Coherence for Development principle set in article 208 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU.

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Reiterates commitment to the goals of the NDICI-GE instrument namely eradicating poverty, combating climate change, addressing food insecurity and promoting sustainable human development; recalls that the EU and Member States' commitment to increase Official Development Assistance (ODA) to 0.7% of the gross national income by 2030, allocating at least 20% under the Instrument to social inclusion and human development, including inequalities, gender equality, education and women’s empowerment;

Amendment 4 #

Thierry MARIANI, Jean-Lin LACAPELLE, Susanna CECCARDI

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is alarmed about the rising number of crises worldwide and the highest-ever humanitarian funding gap; is worried that Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) - Global Europe (GE) is stretched to its limits and ~~is not sufficient to address existing~~that the amounts currently deployed do not effectively meet established needs;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Considers that EU aid to third countries under the NDICI should be conditional on those third countries controlling their migration flows and on readmission agreements;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is alarmed about the rising number of crises worldwide ~~and~~, the highest-ever humanitarian funding gap and increasing inequalities between and within countries; is worried that Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) - Global Europe (GE) is stretched to its limits and is not sufficient to address existing needs;

Amendment 6 #

Katalin CSEH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Recalls that the rule of law, the EU’s fundamental values and the respect for human rights in recipient countries are embedded in the basic acts of IPA III and of NDICI-GE; calls on the Commission to modify assistance should threats to democracy, the rule of law, human rights of fundamental freedoms so require;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Notes that the European Union and its 27 EU Member States together remain the world’s biggest provider of external assistance, accounting for approximately 43 % of the total official development assistance (ODA) provided by all OECD ODA donors to developing countries;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Stresses the need for the EFSD+ to support investments for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); highlights the importance of a holistic approach to human security; calls accordingly for full implementation of the EU Gender Action Plan III, operationalising the EU Global Health Strategy and Youth Action Plan in external action; emphasises the need to enhance the EU's efforts in promoting and protecting human rights, welcoming the mid-term review of the EU Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy; strongly supports the Council conclusions of May 4, 2023, on corruption as an obstacle to development;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the need to improve the effectiveness of EU development aid and humanitarian aid;

Amendment 8 #

Katalin CSEH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Calls on the Commission to send clear signals to those candidate countries in which a backlash against rule of law standards - including limitations on the freedom of expression, the freedom of press, women’s and minority rights, the harassment of NGOs and human rights defenders - is jeopardising or delaying their accession to the EU; invites the Commission to examine the efficiency of the funds spent on the improvement of the state of the Rule of Law in the accession countries and report back to the AFET and CONT committees;

Amendment 8 #

Ilan DE BASSO, Carlos ZORRINHO, Udo BULLMANN, Karsten LUCKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Recognises the work of the Commission in applying controls to make sure that transactions are made in a legitimate manner and that activities are implemented in accordance with the priorities set by the legislator; calls on the Commission to further improve controls in order to decrease the amount of transactional errors and to fully implement the recommendations of the Court of Auditors;

Amendment 9 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Takes note of the European Court of Auditors’ Special Report regarding the programming comprehensively designed, addressing a broad range of partner country needs and EU priorities; highlights the identified deficiencies in the methodologies used for allocating funding to countries and in the setup of the monitoring framework; recommends therefore that the Commission and the EEAS improve the methodology for allocating funding and the assessment of the impact of EU support, focus the scope of the programming process, simplify and consistently use the indicators in the multiannual indicative programmes; suggests, in the framework of the mid term evaluation of the Instrument that the nomenclature be revised introducing a higher level of detail for transparency, predictability, accountability, scrutiny, and to enhance the budgetary authority’s capacity to make choices reflecting political priorities; regrets the two different approaches applied by the Commission and EEAS within the Instrument for the allocation of funding to Neighbourhood and non- Neighbourhood countries and asks that they be standardised, comparable and transparent in order to facilitate the audit trail;

Amendment 9 #

Ilan DE BASSO, Carlos ZORRINHO, Udo BULLMANN, Karsten LUCKE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1 b. Highlights the fact that the legitimacy and effectiveness of EU development cooperation hinges on the correct implementation of activities and their proper funding; calls on the Commission to redouble efforts to find eligible projects and to ensure a sufficient amount of payments under the current expenditure ceiling;

source: 757.850

2024/01/18 DEVE 6 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Is alarmed about the rising number of crises worldwide ~~and~~, the highest-ever humanitarian funding gap and increasing inequalities between and within countries exacerbated by Russia’s unjustified and unprovoked aggression in Ukraine which worsened the global food crisis, triggered an energy, cost of living and debt crisis worldwide and created economic uncertainty, is also concerned about the growing political and economic influence of China in Africa and Russian interference on that continent; is worried that Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument ~~(NDICI)~~ - Global Europe (NDICI-GE) is stretched to its limits and is not sufficient to address existing needs; calls on the Member States to ensure that the cushion is mobilised only for purposes within its intended scope;

Amendment 2 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. NWelcomes the Global Gateway strategy as a concerted EU response to global challenges; notes that 2022 was the first full year of the implementation of the Global Gateway strategy; underlines that actions bringing together public and private investment must ~~always be guided by development objectives; calls for more transparency and Parliament’s involvement in strategic choices involving Union funds~~be focused on areas where they can add value to the local economy and be consistent with development objectives and national strategies of partner countries, as well as with the Agenda 2030, the SDGs and the Paris Agreement; calls for more transparency, accountability and regular assessments of the Global Gateway implementation as well as for Parliament’s involvement, beyond a simple observer role, in strategic choices involving Union funds in respect of the scrutiny role of the European Parliament of the NDICI- Global Europe, which is the main source of financing of the Global Gateway; calls on the Commission to ensure that projects branded under the Global Gateway strategy contribute to the development objectives laid down in the NDICI-Global Europe Regulation; insists that Global Gateway should not only align with the EU ~~interest~~priorities but also with the needs of partner countries and contribute to the achievement of the SDGs;

Amendment 3 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Is concerned about the depletion of the cushion within the NDICI-GE; insists that the Commission always notifies Parliament before the cushion is mobilised, respecting Parliament’s right of scrutiny and that the Commission fully takes into consideration Parliament's observations on the nature, objectives and financial amounts envisaged; stresses that the Parliament is responsible for democratic oversight and scrutiny of the NDICI-GE instrument as a co-legislator under the co-decision procedure; urges the Commission in its future actions to preserve the initial purpose of cushion funds, which is to respond to unforeseen crises; notes that in 2022 EUR 501 million were mobilised from the cushion of the NDICI-GE instrument as part of the bilateral assistance for Ukraine; welcomes, in this regard, the proposal to create a new instrument, the Ukraine Facility, to provide predictable financial support for Ukraine over the 2024-2027 period;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Appreciat~~Stresses the role of local NGOs and partners in service delivery and support to local communities; underlines the importance of enhancing their capacity to manage and implement actions financed by the EU and invites the Commission to facilitate adequate training towards this aim; is concerned about the continued difficulties faced by small local ~~NGO~~organisations to access Union funding; encourages the Commission to improve these funding procedures and to systematically prioritise local organisations in order to provide better capacity-building on the ground; highlights the efficacy of local ownership in project implementation in terms of prioritisation, allocation of resources and building local know-how;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses the important role of the official development assistance (ODA); ~~calls for a cautious approach to blending and public-private partnership~~notes that the European Union and its 27 EU Member States together remain the world’s biggest provider of external assistance, accounting for approximately 43% of the total ODA provided by all OECD ODA donors to developing countries in 2021; recalls the obligation under the NDICI Regulation for 93% of the Instrument funding to be compliant with the official development assistance (ODA) criteria; stresses that blending and public-private partnerships alone cannot guarantee universal access to, or replace public investments in fields, such as education ~~or health~~, social protection or health care, that provide crucial long-term prospects for the graduation from poverty and, therefore, advocates for a cautious approach in using them;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. WHighlights the fact that the legitimacy and effectiveness of EU development cooperation hinges on the correct implementation of activities and their proper funding; recognises the work of the Commission in applying controls to make sure that transactions are made in a legitimate manner and that activities are implemented in accordance with the priorities set by the legislator; calls on the Commission to further improve controls in order to decrease the amount of transactional errors, to act upon ECA recommendations that have not been implemented and to redouble efforts to find eligible projects and to ensure a sufficient amount of payments under the current expenditure ceiling; welcomes the finding of the ECA report on the EU budget for 2022 that DG ECHO implemented ECA recommendation and established a procedure ensuring that partner organisations base their allocation of shared costs on expenditure actually incurred.

source: 758.143

2024/02/13 CONT 364 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Viola VON CRAMON-TAUBADEL

Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Grants the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022 /~~ Postpones its decision on granting the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022;

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights the importance of the Union budget for achieving the Union’s political priorities, as well as its role in assisting Member States in unforeseen circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic, international conflicts or crisis and their consequences; ~~not~~stresses in this regard the ~~continu~~urgent need for increasing relevance of investments aimed towards achieving goals set in the EU GreenDeal and support from the Union budget for reducing disparities between Member States and regions, for promoting economic growth and employment, for combating poverty and social exclusion, and thus for improving the daily life of Union citizens;

Amendment 100 #

Joachim KUHS, Matteo ADINOLFI, Dominique BILDE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31 a. Reminds that once the NGEU borrowing will be entirely accomplished, the size of the EU debt stock of all borrowing programmes will be no less than 1.7 trillion EUR with €750 billion for NGEU, €100 billion for SURE, €50 billion outstanding from before and from new MFA arrangements, EFSF, EIB, ESM and adding inflation;

Amendment 101 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)

33 a. Supports the Court recommendation for the Commission to act more proactively to ensure the tools available to mitigate the exposure risks have sufficient capacity;

Amendment 102 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 b (new)

33 b. Notes that in 2022 the Commission has changed the disclosure of contingent liability in its consolidated accounts, making the comparison of year by year extremely complex and long; invites the Commission to report more clearly on its annual account, in order to facilitate conclusions and analysis also in view of the discharge procedure;

Amendment 103 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Notes that the exposure of the Union budget to Ukraine increased in 2022 to EUR 15,6 billion, with related provisions; notes with concern that for the MFA+ support to Ukraine with a value of EUR 18,0 billion, agreed at the end of 2022 and disbursed throughout 2023, no provisions were required in the CPF to cover the risks of default, posing a serious risk to the EU budget as expressed in the Opinion 07/2022; draws attention that possible losses related to MFA+ will have to be covered by future Union budgets or by the budgetary ‘headroom’ between the MFF ceiling and the own resources ceiling; invites the Commission to provide additional measures to protect the EU budget from future losses related to the MFA+;

Amendment 104 #