Progress: Procedure completed
Lead committee dossier:
Subjects
Events
The European Parliament decided, by 438 votes to 67 with 5 abstentions, to grant discharge to the Commission and the executive agencies in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022 and to approve the closure of the accounts of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022.
In its resolution, adopted by 417 votes to 172 with 22 abstentions, Parliament made the following observations:
Political priorities
Parliament recalled its strong commitment to the fundamental principles and values enshrined in the Treaty, including sound financial management and the combating of fraud and protecting the financial interests of the Union. It highlighted the importance of the Union budget for achieving the Union’s political priorities and highlighted the crucial role the Union budget played in 2022 in addressing the consequences of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine . It also recalled the importance of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) in facing the economic downturn following the COVID-19 pandemic, reminds that the RRF delivery model puts much, lighter requirements on the Commission, and reduces the control burden from the Commission towards the Member States.
Members called for the EU's financial rules to be rigorously applied to all programmes and beneficiaries, and for ex-post and mid-term evaluations of financial programmes set up in response to crises. Noting that the rule of law is deteriorating in some Member States, they stressed the crucial importance of the rule of law conditionality mechanism in protecting the EU budget. Parliament is concerned about the significant delay in the start of implementation for the 2021-2027 programming period due to the late adoption of a number of sectoral regulations governing different EU public policies, such as cohesion policy. It urged the Commission and the Member States to take all necessary measures to continue accelerating the implementation of public policies on the ground.
Budgetary and financial management
Parliament noted that in 2022, 98.5 % of the available commitment appropriations were used (EUR 179.4 billion out of EUR 182.2 billion). It expressed concern that the Court estimates the level of error for the 2022 expenditure to be 4.2 % (3 % in 2021 and 2.7 % in 2020). Members noted with concern that the total outstanding commitments, which represent future debts if not decommitted, reached an all-time high of EUR 450 billion in 2022, caused by both increased commitments related to NGEU (with all National Recovery and Resilience Plans adopted in 2022) and the slow start of the implementation of the 2021-2027 programming period. They noted with concern that Union debt increased from EUR 236.7 billion in 2021 to EUR 344.3 billion in 2022.
Members recalled that in 2022 consumer price inflation increased significantly, affecting the Union budget in several ways. They strongly support the Court recommendation to the Commission to assess the impact on the Union budget of increasing inflation in order to proactively apply mitigating measures.
Parliament called on the Commission to endorse the proposals made by the European Parliament in its resolutions on own resources , in order to ensure that sufficient resources are available to repay the investments made under NextGenerationEU.
Heading 1 of the MFF: Single market, Innovation and Digital
The budget for the programmes under this heading was EUR 25.2 billion (12.9 % of the Union budget). As of 31 December 2022, the final adopted budget commitments appropriations were EUR 21 845.08 million and 99.99 % of them were implemented.
Parliament called on the Commission to:
- include extra funds needed for Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe in the draft 2025 budget to improve on the current state where 7 out of 10 high-quality proposals still cannot be funded; (ii) continue to apply simplified rules and procedures; (iii) continue the funding to create an integrated, innovative and resilient Energy Union that promotes secure, sustainable, competitive and affordable energy for all, particularly SMEs and vulnerable and energy-poor consumers.
Heading 2 of the MFF: Cohesion, Resilience and Values
The budget for the programmes under this heading was EUR 79.1 billion (40.4 % of the Union budget). As of 31 December 2022, the final adopted budget commitments appropriations were EUR 67 805.19 million and 98.29 % of them were implemented. The 2014-2020 programmes account for over 1 million projects. So far, they have supported 2.4 million businesses, created 370 000 new jobs, increased the energy performance of more than 540 000 households, created 6 000 megawatts of new renewable energy sources and that 6.3 million households benefited from broadband. The absorption rate for cohesion policy funds under the programming period 2014-2020 reached 79.2 % at the end of 2022 (86 % at the end of 2023).
Members noted with concern that the overall level of error estimated by the Court increased to 6.4 %, which is significantly above the materiality threshold.
Parliament expressed strong concern about the recent case of alleged misuse of Union funds in contracts involving the purchase of face masks. It also pointed out that similar situations had arisen in a recently revealed case of alleged fraud involving ERDF funds in Portugal and in several cases of alleged misappropriation of REACT-EU funds for the purchase of medical equipment in the Czech Republic.
Members also regretted the Commission decision of 13.12.2023 considering that Hungary has fulfilled the horizontal enabling condition related to the judiciary independence, thus enabling the Hungarian authorities to submit reimbursement claims of up to EUR 10.2 billion without adequate control mechanisms or public procurement procedures in place to guarantee sound financial management and the protection of the Union budget.
Heading 3 of the MFF: Natural resources
The budget for programmes under this heading was EUR 58.3 billion (29.7% of the EU budget).
The Court estimates that the level of error was 2.2% (1.8% in 2021) and that most of the errors found concerned rural development operations. The majority of errors found by the Court were due to inaccurate information on area or animals (42%) and ineligible beneficiaries, activities, projects or expenditure.
Parliament called on the Commission not to reduce the pace and ambition needed to achieve the climate objectives set out in the Green Pact for Europe, and stressed the need to increase the investment needed to do so. It stressed that in 2022, the Union was far from achieving the level of performance required to meet the climate objectives set for 2030, 2040 and 2050.
Heading 4 of the MFF: Migration and border management
The budget for the programmes under this heading was EUR 3.4 billion (1.7% of the EU budget). At 31 December 2022, the final budget commitment appropriations adopted amounted to EUR 3 410.39 million and 99.54% of them were implemented. Parliament asked the Court to provide a clear estimate of the error rate for this heading.
Members pointed out that in 2022, appropriations under heading 4 of the MFF were decisive in dealing with the consequences of Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine.
Heading 5 of the MFF: Security and defence
The budget for the programmes under this heading was EUR 1.2 billion .
Parliament called on the Commission to: (i) develop a longer-term strategy for the European Defence Fund (EDF), building on the experience gained in the Preparatory Action on Defence Research (PADR); (ii) ensure that a sufficient budget and skilled human resources are made available to strengthen defence cooperation and investment and to implement the EDF.
Heading 6 of the MFF: Neighbourhood and the world
The budget for the programmes under this heading was EUR 14.5 billion (7.4 % of the Union budget). The final adopted budget payment appropriations amounted to EUR 13 156.10 million and 99.19 % of them were implemented.
Parliament noted that the Court’s audit results show that this is a high-risk area (34 out of 72 transactions audited, i.e. 47 %, were affected by errors) and invited the Court to provide a clear estimation of the error rate for this chapter.
An amendment adopted in plenary voiced concerns about “credible reports” that EU money “could have been partially misused” by Hamas and that UNWRA staff could have been involved in terrorist acts. Members urged the Commission to diversify the recipients of EU support to Palestinian civilians and to include the WHO, UNICEF and the Red Crescent. They also urge the Commission to guarantee independent controls of UNRWA.
Heading 7 of the MFF: Human resources
The budget for the programmes under this heading was EUR 11.6 billion (5.9% of the EU budget).
Parliament was pleased to note that the percentage of women in management positions has increased considerably since the beginning of the mandate: in July 2023, the share of women in management positions was 45.2% at senior management level (an increase of almost 9% since the beginning of the mandate) and 47.5% at middle management level (an increase of 6%).
In an amendment adopted in plenary, Members criticised the politicised process for appointing the EU SME Envoy, when it emerged from the recruitment assessments that the other two candidates, from under-represented Member States, had superior qualifications, and that the successful candidate was an outgoing member of President von der Leyen's own German political party. They called on the Commission to select a new candidate using a genuinely transparent and open process.
Documents
- Follow-up document: COM(2024)0267
- Follow-up document: EUR-Lex
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T9-0228/2024
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A9-0139/2024
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A9-0139/2024
- Supplementary non-legislative basic document: 06179/2024
- Supplementary non-legislative basic document: 06181/2024
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE758.988
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE758.989
- Committee opinion: PE754.665
- Committee opinion: PE753.716
- Committee opinion: PE755.040
- Committee opinion: PE752.906
- Committee opinion: PE755.024
- Committee opinion: PE756.272
- Committee opinion: PE754.838
- Committee opinion: PE756.204
- Committee opinion: PE753.718
- Committee draft report: PE753.552
- Specific opinion: PE756.075
- Court of Auditors: opinion, report: OJ C 000 04.10.2023, p. 0000
- Court of Auditors: opinion, report: N9-0060/2023
- Non-legislative basic document: COM(2023)0391
- Non-legislative basic document: EUR-Lex
- Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2023)0391
- Non-legislative basic document published: EUR-Lex
- Non-legislative basic document: COM(2023)0391 EUR-Lex
- Court of Auditors: opinion, report: OJ C 000 04.10.2023, p. 0000 N9-0060/2023
- Specific opinion: PE756.075
- Committee draft report: PE753.552
- Committee opinion: PE753.718
- Committee opinion: PE754.838
- Committee opinion: PE756.204
- Committee opinion: PE756.272
- Committee opinion: PE755.024
- Committee opinion: PE752.906
- Committee opinion: PE755.040
- Committee opinion: PE753.716
- Committee opinion: PE754.665
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE758.988
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE758.989
- Supplementary non-legislative basic document: 06179/2024
- Supplementary non-legislative basic document: 06181/2024
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A9-0139/2024
- Follow-up document: COM(2024)0267 EUR-Lex
Activities
- Martina DLABAJOVÁ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ivan ŠTEFANEC
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Rainer WIELAND
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Clare DALY
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Mick WALLACE
Plenary Speeches (1)
Votes
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – Proposal for a decision #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 5 – Am 19 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – § 9 – Am 24 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 11 – Am 25 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 14 – Am 9 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 15 – Am 21 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 15 – Am 22/1 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 15 – Am 22/2 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 18 – Am 3 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 18 – Am 4 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 18 – Am 26 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 109 – Am 29/1 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 109 – Am 29/2 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 20 – Am 37/1 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – § 191 – Am 30 #
PL | DE | IT | CZ | RO | BG | HU | SK | LT | AT | EE | BE | DK | SI | LV | LU | HR | SE | CY | EL | FI | NL | MT | PT | FR | IE | ES | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total |
47
|
86
|
61
|
20
|
20
|
13
|
16
|
14
|
10
|
18
|
7
|
21
|
12
|
6
|
7
|
6
|
5
|
21
|
3
|
14
|
13
|
25
|
4
|
18
|
65
|
12
|
50
|
|
PPE |
143
|
Poland PPEFor (12)Against (2) |
Germany PPEFor (26)Andreas SCHWAB, Axel VOSS, Christian DOLESCHAL, Christian EHLER, Christine SCHNEIDER, David MCALLISTER, Hildegard BENTELE, Jens GIESEKE, Karolin BRAUNSBERGER-REINHOLD, Lena DÜPONT, Manfred WEBER, Marion WALSMANN, Markus FERBER, Marlene MORTLER, Michael GAHLER, Monika HOHLMEIER, Niclas HERBST, Niels GEUKING, Norbert LINS, Peter JAHR, Peter LIESE, Rainer WIELAND, Ralf SEEKATZ, Sabine VERHEYEN, Stefan BERGER, Sven SIMON
Against (2) |
10
|
Czechia PPE |
Romania PPEFor (6) |
Bulgaria PPE |
4
|
4
|
Austria PPEFor (6)Against (1) |
1
|
4
|
1
|
4
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
Sweden PPE |
1
|
3
|
3
|
Netherlands PPEAbstain (1) |
1
|
Portugal PPE |
France PPEFor (6)Against (1) |
5
|
||
ECR |
59
|
Poland ECRFor (22)Adam BIELAN, Andżelika Anna MOŻDŻANOWSKA, Anna FOTYGA, Beata KEMPA, Beata MAZUREK, Beata SZYDŁO, Bogdan RZOŃCA, Dominik TARCZYŃSKI, Elżbieta RAFALSKA, Grzegorz TOBISZOWSKI, Izabela-Helena KLOC, Jacek SARYUSZ-WOLSKI, Joachim Stanisław BRUDZIŃSKI, Joanna KOPCIŃSKA, Karol KARSKI, Kosma ZŁOTOWSKI, Krzysztof JURGIEL, Patryk JAKI, Rafał ROMANOWSKI, Ryszard CZARNECKI, Tomasz Piotr PORĘBA, Witold Jan WASZCZYKOWSKI
Against (2) |
1
|
Italy ECR |
4
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
4
|
1
|
Spain ECRFor (1)Abstain (3) |
|||||||||||
ID |
49
|
Germany IDFor (7) |
Italy IDFor (19)Aldo PATRICIELLO, Alessandra BASSO, Angelo CIOCCA, Anna BONFRISCO, Annalisa TARDINO, Antonio Maria RINALDI, Danilo Oscar LANCINI, Elena LIZZI, Gianna GANCIA, Isabella TOVAGLIERI, Marco CAMPOMENOSI, Marco ZANNI, Maria Veronica ROSSI, Matteo ADINOLFI, Paola GHIDONI, Paolo BORCHIA, Rosanna CONTE, Susanna CECCARDI, Valentino GRANT
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Renew |
88
|
1
|
Germany RenewFor (6) |
3
|
Czechia Renew |
Romania Renew |
3
|
2
|
4
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
4
|
Denmark RenewAgainst (1) |
1
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
Netherlands RenewAgainst (1)Abstain (5) |
France RenewAgainst (16)Abstain (1) |
2
|
Spain RenewAgainst (2)Abstain (1) |
||||
NI |
37
|
2
|
Italy NIFor (1)Against (7) |
1
|
Hungary NIFor (9)Abstain (1) |
Slovakia NIAgainst (1)Abstain (3) |
1
|
1
|
Greece NIAbstain (2) |
1
|
Spain NIFor (1)Against (2) |
|||||||||||||||||
The Left |
29
|
Germany The LeftAgainst (5) |
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
France The LeftAgainst (3)Abstain (1) |
4
|
Spain The LeftAgainst (5) |
||||||||||||||
Verts/ALE |
65
|
1
|
Germany Verts/ALEAgainst (6) |
3
|
3
|
2
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
France Verts/ALEAgainst (11) |
1
|
3
|
||||||||||
S&D |
124
|
Poland S&DAgainst (6)Abstain (1) |
Germany S&DFor (3)Against (12) |
Italy S&DFor (1)Against (11) |
1
|
Romania S&DFor (2)Against (3)Abstain (3) |
3
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
Austria S&DAgainst (5) |
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
5
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
Netherlands S&DAgainst (6) |
3
|
Portugal S&DAgainst (9) |
France S&DAgainst (6) |
Spain S&DFor (1)Against (19)
Alicia HOMS GINEL,
Clara AGUILERA,
Cristina MAESTRE,
César LUENA,
Domènec RUIZ DEVESA,
Eider GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL,
Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO,
Iratxe GARCÍA PÉREZ,
Isabel GARCÍA MUÑOZ,
Javi LÓPEZ,
Javier MORENO SÁNCHEZ,
Jonás FERNÁNDEZ,
Juan Fernando LÓPEZ AGUILAR,
Laura BALLARÍN CEREZA,
Lina GÁLVEZ,
Marcos ROS SEMPERE,
Mónica Silvana GONZÁLEZ,
Nacho SÁNCHEZ AMOR,
Nicolás GONZÁLEZ CASARES
|
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 196 – Am 31/1 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 196 – Am 31/2 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 213 – Am 35 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – After § 275 – Am 32 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – § 280, after point i – Am 33 #
A9-0139/2024 – Isabel García Muñoz – Motion for a resolution (as a whole) #
Amendments | Dossier |
1006 |
2023/2129(DEC)
2023/11/09
FEMM
58 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
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 Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses that
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses that
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
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
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes that gender mainstreaming
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas, gender equality
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 42 #
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 #
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
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
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 #
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 #
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
76 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
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
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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.
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
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
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
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 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 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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 #
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
Amendment 34 #
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
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3.
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 #
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 #
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
Amendment 2 #
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
Amendment 4 #
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 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 #
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
Amendment 9 #
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
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 #
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;
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
Amendment 12 #
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;
Amendment 13 #
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 #
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 #
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 #
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
Amendment 2 #
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,
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 16 b (new) 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 #
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,
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 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
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
source: 757.141
2023/12/05
LIBE
36 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
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) 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
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Welcomes the actions by DG HOME to
Amendment 24 #
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, including extra support from the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, and extend its operational partnerships with third countries;
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 #
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
Amendment 32 #
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 #
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) 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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes that Member States stepped up implementation of their national programmes in 2022; is
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
source: 757.005
2023/12/06
CULT
80 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
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 1 #
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 #
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 10 #
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 #
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 11 #
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 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, which is helping to reinforce support to pupils, students, teachers and qualified staff fleeing from Ukraine;
Amendment 12 #
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, which is helping to reinforce support to pupils, students, teachers and qualified staff fleeing from Ukraine;
Amendment 13 #
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 and reaffirms the need for further increases of the budget;
Amendment 13 #
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 and reaffirms the need for further increases of the budget;
Amendment 14 #
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 14 #
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 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 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 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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 Amendment 19 #
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 19 #
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
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
Amendment 20 #
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 20 #
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 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 and expects a thorough investigation and follow-up;
Amendment 21 #
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 and expects a thorough investigation and follow-up;
Amendment 22 #
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 22 #
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 #
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 23 #
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 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 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 #
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 26 #
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 Amendment 37 #
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 37 #
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 #
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 38 #
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 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 #
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 4 #
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 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 #
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 5 #
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 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 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 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;
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
Amendment 13 #
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
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
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Draws attention to the increased risk of decommitments in the coming years and urges the Commission to
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 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
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
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
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Reminds that, without prejudice to the need to support the authorities
Amendment 9 #
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
134 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 #
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 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 #
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 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
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
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 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.
Amendment 13 #
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 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 13 #
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Underlines the need to speed up progress on achieving the NDICI-GE spending targets for human development
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Underlines the need to speed up progress on achieving the NDICI-GE spending targets for human development
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
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
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;
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 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;
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 #
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;
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 17 #
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;
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 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;
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 18 #
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;
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 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
Amendment 2 #
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 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
Amendment 2 #
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 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 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.
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.
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 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
Amendment 24 #
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 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
Amendment 24 #
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
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
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Highlights the importance of the Global Gateway
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 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Highlights the importance of the Global Gateway
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
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 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
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
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
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 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 #
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 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 #
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 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 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 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 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 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 #
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 35 #
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 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 #
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
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 #
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
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
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
Amendment 6 #
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 6 #
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 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 #
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 #
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 8 #
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 #
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;
Amendment 9 #
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;
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;
Amendment 9 #
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
12 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Is alarmed about the rising number of crises worldwide
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Is alarmed about the rising number of crises worldwide
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
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 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.
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Stresses the important role of the official development assistance (ODA);
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Stresses the important role of the official development assistance (ODA);
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
source: 758.143
2024/02/13
CONT
544 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Proposal for a decision 1 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 1 #
Proposal for a decision 1 Paragraph 1 1.
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;
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;
Amendment 100 #
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 100 #
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 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 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 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 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 a (new) 34 a. Notes that during 2022 consumer price inflation increased significantly, affecting the EU budget in several ways, by reducing the relative size of the EU budget and reducing the efficiency of the EU finds not able to achieve the objectives to the same extent as initially planned; considers that high inflation affects the proportion of revenue from different sources, with a net reduction of teh share of the GNI-based own resources; strongly supports the Court recommendation on the Commission to assess the impact on the EU budget of increasing inflation in order to proactively apply mitigating measures;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 a (new) 34 a. Notes that during 2022 consumer price inflation increased significantly, affecting the EU budget in several ways, by reducing the relative size of the EU budget and reducing the efficiency of the EU finds not able to achieve the objectives to the same extent as initially planned; considers that high inflation affects the proportion of revenue from different sources, with a net reduction of teh share of the GNI-based own resources; strongly supports the Court recommendation on the Commission to assess the impact on the EU budget of increasing inflation in order to proactively apply mitigating measures;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 a (new) 34 a. Welcomes the online based transparency platforms developed and maintained by the Commission which provide data on the implementation of the EU spending programmes and allow to search through the recipients of EU funding and projects, such as the Financial Transparency System, giving information about the EU funding under direct and indirect management, the RRF Scoreboard, the Cohesion Open Data Platform and Kohesio platform;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 a (new) 34 a. Welcomes the online based transparency platforms developed and maintained by the Commission which provide data on the implementation of the EU spending programmes and allow to search through the recipients of EU funding and projects, such as the Financial Transparency System, giving information about the EU funding under direct and indirect management, the RRF Scoreboard, the Cohesion Open Data Platform and Kohesio platform;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new) 35 a. 34a. Calls on the Court of Auditors to: (i) differentiate the types of errors and to make more transparent the rate of errors caused by severe misuse, fraud or other criminal activities and the errors caused by administrative oversight or inaccurate application of rules; (ii) to assess more intensively also the quality, the European added value, the sustainability, the performance and the practicability of the implemented projects;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new) 35 a. 34a. Calls on the Court of Auditors to: (i) differentiate the types of errors and to make more transparent the rate of errors caused by severe misuse, fraud or other criminal activities and the errors caused by administrative oversight or inaccurate application of rules; (ii) to assess more intensively also the quality, the European added value, the sustainability, the performance and the practicability of the implemented projects;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point i (i)
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point i (i)
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point i a (new) (i a) clearly separate the role of Chief Risk Officer and of Deputy Director- General of DG BUDG in terms of NGEU risk management otherwise it may affect the effectiveness of their oversight of risk (ECA Special report 16/2023: NGEU debt management at the Commission: An encouraging start, but further alignment with best practice needed);
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point i a (new) (i a) clearly separate the role of Chief Risk Officer and of Deputy Director- General of DG BUDG in terms of NGEU risk management otherwise it may affect the effectiveness of their oversight of risk (ECA Special report 16/2023: NGEU debt management at the Commission: An encouraging start, but further alignment with best practice needed);
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point i a (new) (i a) undergo an ex-post evaluation of the reliability of their own estimation of the risk at closure for the financial year for which the programs were closed and presents the results of such an evaluation to the Discharge authority;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point i a (new) (i a) undergo an ex-post evaluation of the reliability of their own estimation of the risk at closure for the financial year for which the programs were closed and presents the results of such an evaluation to the Discharge authority;
Amendment 11 #
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; notes in this regard the continuing relevance of investments 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 and economic impact within the EU;
Amendment 11 #
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; notes in this regard the continuing relevance of investments 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 and economic impact within the EU;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point i b (new) (i b) formulate clear debt management objectives and report on performance in their implementation (ECA Special report 16/2023: NGEU debt management at the Commission: An encouraging start, but further alignment with best practice needed);
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point i b (new) (i b) formulate clear debt management objectives and report on performance in their implementation (ECA Special report 16/2023: NGEU debt management at the Commission: An encouraging start, but further alignment with best practice needed);
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point ii (ii) continue to simplify rules and procedures without compromising the quality of the controls; and continue to digitalize audit procedures;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point ii (ii) continue to simplify rules and procedures without compromising the quality of the controls; and continue to digitalize audit procedures;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point iii (iii) step up efforts to improve transparency in the use of funds, including as regards information on final beneficiaries and contracts with third parties and to be more proactive in publishing as much information as possible about tendering processes compared to its current practices;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point iii (iii) step up efforts to improve transparency in the use of funds, including as regards information on final beneficiaries and contracts with third parties and to be more proactive in publishing as much information as possible about tendering processes compared to its current practices;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point iii (iii) step up efforts to improve transparency in the use of funds, including as regards information on
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point iii (iii) step up efforts to improve transparency in the use of funds, including as regards information on
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point iv (iv) continue to support the administrative capacity of Member States’ authorities; identify ways to help member states accelerate the use of EU funds, notably in shared management funds under the Common Provisions Regulation;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point iv (iv) continue to support the administrative capacity of Member States’ authorities; identify ways to help member states accelerate the use of EU funds, notably in shared management funds under the Common Provisions Regulation;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point iv (iv) continue to support the administrative capacity of Member States’ authorities; also in view of accelerating the use of EU finds, and reducing the level of outstanding commitments;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point iv (iv) continue to support the administrative capacity of Member States’ authorities; also in view of accelerating the use of EU finds, and reducing the level of outstanding commitments;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point v (v) report as part of its disclosure on contingent liabilities and what the annual exposure of the Union budget is, arising from budgetary guarantees and from financial assistance to third countries, making public its estimate of total annual exposure;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point v (v) report as part of its disclosure on contingent liabilities and what the annual exposure of the Union budget is, arising from budgetary guarantees and from financial assistance to third countries, making public its estimate of total annual exposure;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point v a (new) (v a) provide sufficient measures to protect the EU budget from the different risks identified in particular the RAL, the increasing debt, the increased budget exposure including to Ukraine, the increasing inflation etc;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point v a (new) (v a) provide sufficient measures to protect the EU budget from the different risks identified in particular the RAL, the increasing debt, the increased budget exposure including to Ukraine, the increasing inflation etc;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point v a (new) (v a) urges the Commission to set up ex ante mechanisms clearly identifying NGOs operating on Union territory and abroad that have acknowledged ties to religious fundamentalist or terrorist networks and push forward an agenda that is undermining the security of the EU citizens;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point v a (new) (v a) urges the Commission to set up ex ante mechanisms clearly identifying NGOs operating on Union territory and abroad that have acknowledged ties to religious fundamentalist or terrorist networks and push forward an agenda that is undermining the security of the EU citizens;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point v b (new) (v b) finally end the exemption of NGOs from Union anti-money laundering rules as non-obliged entities and to extend the definition of politically exposed persons to former politicians who take up management positions in NGOs receiving Union funding;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point v b (new) (v b) finally end the exemption of NGOs from Union anti-money laundering rules as non-obliged entities and to extend the definition of politically exposed persons to former politicians who take up management positions in NGOs receiving Union funding;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Stresses the fact that in 2022 the EU has fallen much short of the level of efficiency needed to achieve the climate- related goals set for 2030, 2040 and 2050; urges the Commission not to water down the paste and ambition needed to lower the CO2 emissions and keep the global warming below 1,5% degrees above the pre-industrial times;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Stresses the fact that in 2022 the EU has fallen much short of the level of efficiency needed to achieve the climate- related goals set for 2030, 2040 and 2050; urges the Commission not to water down the paste and ambition needed to lower the CO2 emissions and keep the global warming below 1,5% degrees above the pre-industrial times;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point vi (vi) continue monitoring the possible risk of corruption and fraud across all funds, using feedback from investigations by the EPPO and OLAF; and encourage the systematic use of Archane and EDES databases systems;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point vi (vi) continue monitoring the possible risk of corruption and fraud across all funds, using feedback from investigations by the EPPO and OLAF; and encourage the systematic use of Archane and EDES databases systems;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point vi a (new) (vi a) ensure the protection of the Union budget by making general and systematic use of digital and automated systems for reporting, monitoring and audit and urgently establish a compulsory integrated and interoperable system building on, but not limited to, existing tools and databases in the context of the concluded revision of the Financial Regulation; modify and improve the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard as well as the respective Commission RRF website to ensure that the implementation, the performance and fulfilment of indicators are regularly updated, accurate and, clearly structured and transparent; outcome of the audit are transparent; ensure that all Member States use the systems and central registers to report on beneficial owners and final beneficiaries;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point vi a (new) (vi a) ensure the protection of the Union budget by making general and systematic use of digital and automated systems for reporting, monitoring and audit and urgently establish a compulsory integrated and interoperable system building on, but not limited to, existing tools and databases in the context of the concluded revision of the Financial Regulation; modify and improve the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard as well as the respective Commission RRF website to ensure that the implementation, the performance and fulfilment of indicators are regularly updated, accurate and, clearly structured and transparent; outcome of the audit are transparent; ensure that all Member States use the systems and central registers to report on beneficial owners and final beneficiaries;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point vi a (new) (vi a) assess the impact on the EU budget of high inflation continuing over several years and identify tools to mitigate resulting key risks;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 – point vi a (new) (vi a) assess the impact on the EU budget of high inflation continuing over several years and identify tools to mitigate resulting key risks;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39. Considers the overview of special reports, which spans the largest part of chapter three of the Court’s Annual report, gives a good overview of reports presented by the Court that relate to 2022 strategic areas
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39. Considers the overview of special reports, which spans the largest part of chapter three of the Court’s Annual report, gives a good overview of reports presented by the Court that relate to 2022 strategic areas
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. Notes the Court’s review 06/2023 on the Commission’s 2022 AMPR for the Union budget and its conclusion that Volume I of the 2022 AMPR followed the Commission’s corporate management board strategic guidance when it presented the facts and achievements concerning budgetary management for 2022, and notes that there was scope to improve the quality of performance data; notes the Commission’s replies to written questions on an IAS audit
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. Notes the Court’s review 06/2023 on the Commission’s 2022 AMPR for the Union budget and its conclusion that Volume I of the 2022 AMPR followed the Commission’s corporate management board strategic guidance when it presented the facts and achievements concerning budgetary management for 2022, and notes that there was scope to improve the quality of performance data; notes the Commission’s replies to written questions on an IAS audit
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 a (new) 42 a. Recalls the findings of the Court’s Special Report 09/2022 “Climate Spending in the 2014-2020 EU budget”; notes in addition the Court’s Special Report 26/2023 on the Performance monitoring framework in the RRF; concludes that the Court identified in both special reports issues with the method the Commission presents performance information, both in the MFF and the RRF; notes in particular that disclosure about shortcomings in the performance monitoring methodologies show weaknessesin particular because of mixing estimates with actual numbers of achieved results and realised projects or blending budgeted amounts with actually paid amounts; considers that performance data presented by the Commission should not include estimations but only figures of realised actions; remains worried about the Court’s finding that limited improvements are expected in the 2021- 2027 climate reporting; regrets that the Commission has not yet addressed weaknesses in the reported figures of their new methodology;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 a (new) 42 a. Recalls the findings of the Court’s Special Report 09/2022 “Climate Spending in the 2014-2020 EU budget”; notes in addition the Court’s Special Report 26/2023 on the Performance monitoring framework in the RRF; concludes that the Court identified in both special reports issues with the method the Commission presents performance information, both in the MFF and the RRF; notes in particular that disclosure about shortcomings in the performance monitoring methodologies show weaknessesin particular because of mixing estimates with actual numbers of achieved results and realised projects or blending budgeted amounts with actually paid amounts; considers that performance data presented by the Commission should not include estimations but only figures of realised actions; remains worried about the Court’s finding that limited improvements are expected in the 2021- 2027 climate reporting; regrets that the Commission has not yet addressed weaknesses in the reported figures of their new methodology;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new) 44 a. Notes that the EU budget needs to respond to multiple challenges with additional financial programmes, such as the NGEU recovery instrument; notes that for 2022, the revenue from traditional own resources remained relatively stable, while budgetary guarantees for borrowing and lending operations were a substantial part of revenue; recalls in that regard Parliament’s resolution of 10 May 2023 on own resources: a new start for EU finances, a new start for Europe;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 44 a (new) 44 a. Notes that the EU budget needs to respond to multiple challenges with additional financial programmes, such as the NGEU recovery instrument; notes that for 2022, the revenue from traditional own resources remained relatively stable, while budgetary guarantees for borrowing and lending operations were a substantial part of revenue; recalls in that regard Parliament’s resolution of 10 May 2023 on own resources: a new start for EU finances, a new start for Europe;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 46. Notes from the Annual Report on the Protection of the Union financial interests (PIF Report) that in 2022, the number of fraudulent irregularities relating to TOR (454) fell by 6
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 46 46. Notes from the Annual Report on the Protection of the Union financial interests (PIF Report) that in 2022, the number of fraudulent irregularities relating to TOR (454) fell by 6
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 47 a (new) 47 a. Calls the Commision to conduct a deep analysis of all amounts recovered on the basis of EPPO notfications and to inform the discharge authority about the results; recalls that Commission plays the primary role in the follow up and recovery of damages to the EU budget, following EPPO notifications. Regrets that EPPO until now is not aware of the mechanisms set up by the Commission to that effect; notes that the issue of EPPO notifications has been raised in the Annual Meetings on the implementation of the Commission; welcomes the EPPO Working Arrangement and the set up of a working group to ensure that EPPO notifications will enable the Commission to maximize recovery to the EU budget;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 47 a (new) 47 a. Calls the Commision to conduct a deep analysis of all amounts recovered on the basis of EPPO notfications and to inform the discharge authority about the results; recalls that Commission plays the primary role in the follow up and recovery of damages to the EU budget, following EPPO notifications. Regrets that EPPO until now is not aware of the mechanisms set up by the Commission to that effect; notes that the issue of EPPO notifications has been raised in the Annual Meetings on the implementation of the Commission; welcomes the EPPO Working Arrangement and the set up of a working group to ensure that EPPO notifications will enable the Commission to maximize recovery to the EU budget;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 48 48. Welcomes the developments that have resulted in lifting both the quantified and unquantified reservation in the area of textiles and shoes imported from China; notes with satisfaction that the United Kingdom has now paid the total amount due (final payment of EUR 1,57 billion in January 2023) including interest (EUR 1,4 billion in February 2023); notes that
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 48 48. Welcomes the developments that have resulted in lifting both the quantified and unquantified reservation in the area of textiles and shoes imported from China; notes with satisfaction that the United Kingdom has now paid the total amount due (final payment of EUR 1,57 billion in January 2023) including interest (EUR 1,4 billion in February 2023); notes that
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that the sound and timely implementation of the budget contributes to addressing more efficiently and effectively the needs and challenges in different policy areas; warns that the implementation of the budget under time pressure may lead to an increase in errors and irregularities; recalls the role of the Commission as guardian of the treaty to protect the European financial interests;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that the sound and timely implementation of the budget contributes to addressing more efficiently and effectively the needs and challenges in different policy areas; warns that the implementation of the budget under time pressure may lead to an increase in errors and irregularities; recalls the role of the Commission as guardian of the treaty to protect the European financial interests;
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 – point i Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 – point i Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 – point i (i) take over the suggestions of the European Parliament in its resolutions on own resources in order to ensure sufficient resources to repay the investments made under NGEU;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 – point i (i) take over the suggestions of the European Parliament in its resolutions on own resources in order to ensure sufficient resources to repay the investments made under NGEU;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 – point iv a (new) (iv a) provide detailed explanations to the Budget authority on reasons why the Commision only partially implemented 13 % of the Court’s recommendations from 2019 and has not implemented further 10 % of their recommendations;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 49 – point iv a (new) (iv a) provide detailed explanations to the Budget authority on reasons why the Commision only partially implemented 13 % of the Court’s recommendations from 2019 and has not implemented further 10 % of their recommendations;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 54 54. Notes that the Court estimates that the level of error in spending on ‘Single Market, Innovation and Digital’ in 2022 was material at 2,7 % ; notes with satisfaction that this is a considerable decrease compared to 4,4 % in 2021; takes note of the Court’s observation that the research and innovation expenditure is most affected by error, particularly in the area of personnel costs;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 54 54. Notes that the Court estimates that the level of error in spending on ‘Single Market, Innovation and Digital’ in 2022 was material at 2,7 % ; notes with satisfaction that this is a considerable decrease compared to 4,4 % in 2021; takes note of the Court’s observation that the research and innovation expenditure is most affected by error, particularly in the area of personnel costs;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 55 55. Notes that quantifiable errors relating to ineligible costs represent 98 % of the Court’s estimated level of error of 2,7 % in 2022; notes with concern, in particular, that the rules for declaring personnel costs under Horizon 2020 remain complex and that their calculation remains a significant source of error (67 % of the estimated error level in 2022); notes that the Commission has developed and promotes the use of the ‘Personnel Costs Wizard’ to help beneficiaries to declare their personnel costs correctly;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 55 55. Notes that quantifiable errors relating to ineligible costs represent 98 % of the Court’s estimated level of error of 2,7 % in 2022; notes with concern, in particular, that the rules for declaring personnel costs under Horizon 2020 remain complex and that their calculation remains a significant source of error (67 % of the estimated error level in 2022); notes that the Commission has developed and promotes the use of the ‘Personnel Costs Wizard’ to help beneficiaries to declare their personnel costs correctly;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 57. Notes the remarks made by the Director-General for Research and Innovation in his discharge hearing that the Commission intends to increase the disbursement of Horizon Europe funds through lump sums from 2 % in 2022 to 50 % in 2027; notes, in that context, the Court’s specific review of the Commission’s procedures and guidance on lump-sum funded grants in research; notes the Commission’s statement that the level of scrutiny in terms of economy, efficiency and effectiveness is higher in the evaluation of lump-sum proposals; emphasises the need to check the actual implementation of projects using lump sums;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 57 57. Notes the remarks made by the Director-General for Research and Innovation in his discharge hearing that the Commission intends to increase the disbursement of Horizon Europe funds through lump sums from 2 % in 2022 to 50 % in 2027; notes, in that context, the Court’s specific review of the Commission’s procedures and guidance on lump-sum funded grants in research; notes the Commission’s statement that the level of scrutiny in terms of economy, efficiency and effectiveness is higher in the evaluation of lump-sum proposals; emphasises the need to check the actual implementation of projects using lump sums;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 58 58. Stresses the crucial role of the private sector in addressing the innovation gap in the Union and improving Union competitiveness and growth; believes, in particular, that it is imperative to keep promoting and facilitating as much as possible the participation of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Union R&I funding programmes; notes the Court’s conclusion that SMEs and newcomers are more prone to errors than other beneficiaries, since they lack the experience and resources to administer the funds, and welcomes the efforts made by the Commission to specifically support them, for example through information campaigns, contacts with the system of National Contact Points and the dedicated helpdesk of the Research Enquiry Service; considers that the simplification of rules and procedures are the most important driver for increased participation of SMEs;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 58 58. Stresses the crucial role of the private sector in addressing the innovation gap in the Union and improving Union competitiveness and growth; believes, in particular, that it is imperative to keep promoting and facilitating as much as possible the participation of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Union R&I funding programmes; notes the Court’s conclusion that SMEs and newcomers are more prone to errors than other beneficiaries, since they lack the experience and resources to administer the funds, and welcomes the efforts made by the Commission to specifically support them, for example through information campaigns, contacts with the system of National Contact Points and the dedicated helpdesk of the Research Enquiry Service; considers that the simplification of rules and procedures are the most important driver for increased participation of SMEs;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 58 a (new) 58 a. Stresses the importance to have transparent and clear rules applied to the selection procedure and to the public procurement procedures in all executive agencies; regrets the rise of complaints of reaserchers for non transparency notably for the Research Excutive Agency; recalls that under the 2021-2027 EU long-term budget, the REA manages several EU programmes and support services; calls for Commission to conduct an assessment of all procedures and an ex-post evaluation of the added value of all their executive agencies in accordance with Art 3 .1 of the Council Regulation (EC No 58/2003 of 19 December 2002 laying down the statute for executive agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community programmes (Official Journal L 011 , 16/01/2003 P. 0001 – 0008));
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 58 a (new) 58 a. Stresses the importance to have transparent and clear rules applied to the selection procedure and to the public procurement procedures in all executive agencies; regrets the rise of complaints of reaserchers for non transparency notably for the Research Excutive Agency; recalls that under the 2021-2027 EU long-term budget, the REA manages several EU programmes and support services; calls for Commission to conduct an assessment of all procedures and an ex-post evaluation of the added value of all their executive agencies in accordance with Art 3 .1 of the Council Regulation (EC No 58/2003 of 19 December 2002 laying down the statute for executive agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community programmes (Official Journal L 011 , 16/01/2003 P. 0001 – 0008));
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 59 59. Notes that the R&I Family Fraud Risk Assessment was updated in 2022 as work preceding the 2023 update of the Common Anti-Fraud Strategy; notes the drafting and adoption in 2022 of the ‘Guidance on Horizon Europe ex-ante anti- fraud checks’, which is part of the Horizon Europe ex-ante control strategy; notes that the main forum of the R&I Family on anti- fraud matters is the committee for Fraud and Irregularities in Research (FAIR Committee)
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 59 59. Notes that the R&I Family Fraud Risk Assessment was updated in 2022 as work preceding the 2023 update of the Common Anti-Fraud Strategy; notes the drafting and adoption in 2022 of the ‘Guidance on Horizon Europe ex-ante anti- fraud checks’, which is part of the Horizon Europe ex-ante control strategy; notes that the main forum of the R&I Family on anti- fraud matters is the committee for Fraud and Irregularities in Research (FAIR Committee)
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 61 61. Welcomes the role of the ERC in supporting top researchers in Europe, which is underlined by numerous awards, including 14 Nobel Prizes, 6 Fields Medals and 11 Wolf Prizes; welcomes the 2 300 patent applications and 400 spin-off companies generated thanks to ERC projects; stresses the independence and autonomy of the ERC when fulfilling its role to support excellent research in the Union; recalls that the ERC requires a unique set-up to host ERCEA staff, the ERC Scientific Council and the experts responsible for the panel evaluations and that this configuration is indispensable for its work; is astonished by the Commission's plan to move several executive agencies and the ERCEA into new buildings without proper consultation and their agreement, while disregarding their actual office needs and thus endangering business continuity; highlights that even some Commission services were not adequately informed about these plans; stresses that the ERCEA has the right to sign lease contracts on its own and without the Commission's approval to maintain its extraordinary business model; underlines that the Commission must plan and collaborate with the ERCEA in good time to find suitable office spaces that fulfil their requirements and do not endanger their activities;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 61 61. Welcomes the role of the ERC in supporting top researchers in Europe, which is underlined by numerous awards, including 14 Nobel Prizes, 6 Fields Medals and 11 Wolf Prizes; welcomes the 2 300 patent applications and 400 spin-off companies generated thanks to ERC projects; stresses the independence and autonomy of the ERC when fulfilling its role to support excellent research in the Union; recalls that the ERC requires a unique set-up to host ERCEA staff, the ERC Scientific Council and the experts responsible for the panel evaluations and that this configuration is indispensable for its work; is astonished by the Commission's plan to move several executive agencies and the ERCEA into new buildings without proper consultation and their agreement, while disregarding their actual office needs and thus endangering business continuity; highlights that even some Commission services were not adequately informed about these plans; stresses that the ERCEA has the right to sign lease contracts on its own and without the Commission's approval to maintain its extraordinary business model; underlines that the Commission must plan and collaborate with the ERCEA in good time to find suitable office spaces that fulfil their requirements and do not endanger their activities;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that the sound and timely implementation of the budget contributes to addressing more efficiently and effectively the needs and challenges in different policy areas; warns that the simultaneous implementation of
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that the sound and timely implementation of the budget contributes to addressing more efficiently and effectively the needs and challenges in different policy areas; warns that the simultaneous implementation of
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 65. Notes that, in total, CEF Energy 1 and 2 (2014-202
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 65. Notes that, in total, CEF Energy 1 and 2 (2014-202
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 a (new) 65 a. Notes that Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine and weaponisation of energy upended energy markets in 2022, triggering price volatility and energy insecurity across the world EU’s energy system; highlights the Commission’s response to the crisis developing the REPowerEU Plan aiming to reduce dependence on Russian fossil fuels and phase out Russian energy imports before 2030; notes that REPowerEU Plan mobilises close to EUR 300 billion, approximately EUR 72 billion in grants and EUR 225 billion in loans; notes that REPowerEU Plan has additionally provided a legal basis for both Member States and the Commission to modify national RRPs and to check whether M&Ts are well defined to clarify them where necessary;
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 a (new) 65 a. Notes that Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine and weaponisation of energy upended energy markets in 2022, triggering price volatility and energy insecurity across the world EU’s energy system; highlights the Commission’s response to the crisis developing the REPowerEU Plan aiming to reduce dependence on Russian fossil fuels and phase out Russian energy imports before 2030; notes that REPowerEU Plan mobilises close to EUR 300 billion, approximately EUR 72 billion in grants and EUR 225 billion in loans; notes that REPowerEU Plan has additionally provided a legal basis for both Member States and the Commission to modify national RRPs and to check whether M&Ts are well defined to clarify them where necessary;
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 – point -i (new) (-i) include extra funds needed for Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe in the draft 2025 budget to improve on the current state where 7 out of 10 high- quality proposals still cannot be funded;
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 – point -i (new) (-i) include extra funds needed for Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe in the draft 2025 budget to improve on the current state where 7 out of 10 high- quality proposals still cannot be funded;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 – point i a (new) (i a) continue to simplify rules and procedures in line with the new financial regulation, to support training sessions and practical information for applicants in member states, in particular for SMEs, spin-offs, start-ups, regional NGOs or local action groups;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 – point i a (new) (i a) continue to simplify rules and procedures in line with the new financial regulation, to support training sessions and practical information for applicants in member states, in particular for SMEs, spin-offs, start-ups, regional NGOs or local action groups;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 – point v a (new) (v a) increase awareness, coherence, and sustainability of the support to SME internationalisation;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 – point v a (new) (v a) increase awareness, coherence, and sustainability of the support to SME internationalisation;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 – point v b (new) (v b) check the actual implementation of projects using lump sums;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 – point v b (new) (v b) check the actual implementation of projects using lump sums;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 – point v c (new) (v c) report to the discharge authority: a. how many cases of suspected fraud have been referred by the competent Commission departments to the EDES panel, for what exclusion grounds, and how many of these cases have resulted in 1. an early detection decision, 2. an exclusion decision of the panel; b. for how long entities have been excluded from participation in EU funds; c. if any of the excluded entities has received EU funds after the exclusion decision had ended;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 – point v c (new) (v c) report to the discharge authority: a. how many cases of suspected fraud have been referred by the competent Commission departments to the EDES panel, for what exclusion grounds, and how many of these cases have resulted in 1. an early detection decision, 2. an exclusion decision of the panel; b. for how long entities have been excluded from participation in EU funds; c. if any of the excluded entities has received EU funds after the exclusion decision had ended;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 69 69. Takes note that the absorption rate for cohesion policy funds under the programming period 2014-2020 reached 79,2 % at the end of 2022 (86 % at the end of 2023, including newly added Recovery assistance for cohesion and the territories of Europe (REACT-EU) in 2021-2022), having a similar level at the same point in time as in the period 2007-2013; is concerned that this level of absoption was only achieved through a temporary 100% EU co-financing rate waiving any requirement for national co-financing of projects that have been a long-established principle of EU finances; notes that the 2014-2020 programmes account for over 1 million projects and that so far, they have supported 2,4 million businesses, created 370 000 new jobs, increased the energy performance of more than 540 000 households, created 6 000 megawatts of new renewable energy sources and that 6,3 million households benefited from broadband; notes that absorption in 2022 improved for a large part because of CRII, CRII+, CARE, and FAST-CARE for the purpose of crisis response, diminishing projects to support the structural cohesion objectives of creating convergence and cohesion in the EU;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 69 69. Takes note that the absorption rate for cohesion policy funds under the programming period 2014-2020 reached 79,2 % at the end of 2022 (86 % at the end of 2023, including newly added Recovery assistance for cohesion and the territories of Europe (REACT-EU) in 2021-2022), having a similar level at the same point in time as in the period 2007-2013; is concerned that this level of absoption was only achieved through a temporary 100% EU co-financing rate waiving any requirement for national co-financing of projects that have been a long-established principle of EU finances; notes that the 2014-2020 programmes account for over 1 million projects and that so far, they have supported 2,4 million businesses, created 370 000 new jobs, increased the energy performance of more than 540 000 households, created 6 000 megawatts of new renewable energy sources and that 6,3 million households benefited from broadband; notes that absorption in 2022 improved for a large part because of CRII, CRII+, CARE, and FAST-CARE for the purpose of crisis response, diminishing projects to support the structural cohesion objectives of creating convergence and cohesion in the EU;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 69 69. Takes note that the absorption rate for cohesion policy funds under the programming period 2014-2020 reached 79,2 % at the end of 2022 (86 % at the end of 2023, including newly added Recovery assistance for cohesion and the territories of Europe (REACT-EU) in 2021-2022), having a similar level at the same point in time as in the period 2007-2013; reminds that REACT-EU showed an absorption rate of only 45.5% at the end of August 2023; notes that the 2014-2020 programmes account for over 1 million projects and that so far, they have supported 2,4 million businesses, created 370 000 new jobs, increased the energy performance of more than 540 000 households, created 6 000 megawatts of new renewable energy sources and that 6,3 million households benefited from
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 69 69. Takes note that the absorption rate for cohesion policy funds under the programming period 2014-2020 reached 79,2 % at the end of 2022 (86 % at the end of 2023, including newly added Recovery assistance for cohesion and the territories of Europe (REACT-EU) in 2021-2022), having a similar level at the same point in time as in the period 2007-2013; reminds that REACT-EU showed an absorption rate of only 45.5% at the end of August 2023; notes that the 2014-2020 programmes account for over 1 million projects and that so far, they have supported 2,4 million businesses, created 370 000 new jobs, increased the energy performance of more than 540 000 households, created 6 000 megawatts of new renewable energy sources and that 6,3 million households benefited from
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 71. Notes that the Court has examined a sample of 260 transactions covering the full range of spending under MFF Heading 2; notes with concern that the Court’s estimated overall level of error in ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ in 2022
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 71. Notes that the Court has examined a sample of 260 transactions covering the full range of spending under MFF Heading 2; notes with concern that the Court’s estimated overall level of error in ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ in 2022
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that the sound and timely implementation of the budget contributes to addressing more efficiently and effectively the needs and challenges in different policy areas;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that the sound and timely implementation of the budget contributes to addressing more efficiently and effectively the needs and challenges in different policy areas;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 71. Notes that the Court has examined a sample of 260 transactions covering the full range of spending under MFF Heading 2; notes with great concern that the Court’s estimated overall level of error in ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ in 2022
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 71. Notes that the Court has examined a sample of 260 transactions covering the full range of spending under MFF Heading 2; notes with great concern that the Court’s estimated overall level of error in ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ in 2022
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 a (new) 71 a. Is worried by the Courts persistent comments on the shortcoming identified in the way audit and managing authorities work (notably weaknesses in the ex post checks by the audit authorities and in controls by the managing authorities that do not always effectively prevent or detect irregularities in expenditure declared by beneficiaries) and the over-reliance of the Commission on the quality of programme authorities’ work; related to inherent limitations in the Commission’s desk reviews;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 71 a (new) 71 a. Is worried by the Courts persistent comments on the shortcoming identified in the way audit and managing authorities work (notably weaknesses in the ex post checks by the audit authorities and in controls by the managing authorities that do not always effectively prevent or detect irregularities in expenditure declared by beneficiaries) and the over-reliance of the Commission on the quality of programme authorities’ work; related to inherent limitations in the Commission’s desk reviews;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 72 72.
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 72 72.
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 73 73. Notes the Court’s explanations that its error rate refers to the share of expenditure declared, for which it considers that the conditions for payment set out in Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 (‘the Financial Regulation’)5 , the CPR and in Directive (EU) 2017/1371 on the protection of the Union’s financial interests (‘PIF Directive’)6 have not been fully met, leading to a direct and measurable financial impact on the payment amount authorised at the time from the Union budget; takes note of the Court’s clarification that the error rate should not be interpreted as being equivalent to the potential amount of financial corrections the Commission can impose in accordance with the applicable rules;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 73 73. Notes the Court’s explanations that its error rate refers to the share of expenditure declared, for which it considers that the conditions for payment set out in Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 (‘the Financial Regulation’)5 , the CPR and in Directive (EU) 2017/1371 on the protection of the Union’s financial interests (‘PIF Directive’)6 have not been fully met, leading to a direct and measurable financial impact on the payment amount authorised at the time from the Union budget; takes note of the Court’s clarification that the error rate should not be interpreted as being equivalent to the potential amount of financial corrections the Commission can impose in accordance with the applicable rules;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 74 74. Notes that
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 74 74. Notes that
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 74 74. Notes that in the annual activity reports, the Commission reports
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 74 74. Notes that in the annual activity reports, the Commission reports
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 75 Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 75 Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 76. Notes with concern that the Court identified an increase in the specific types of errors, such as ineligible costs and projects and infringements of internal market rules, including public procurement and state aid rules, which are the same categories of irregularities identified by the Commission and the audit authorities based on their common typology; notes that 3 % of the Court’s estimated 6,4 % error rate in Heading 2 is related to 100 % co-financed priorities under the Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative (CRII+) which allowed for more flexible spending; reiterates that more flexibility should never lead to compromising quality and controls; asks for a review from the Commission of the current situation in order to avoid similar situations in the future; notes that the Commission has not found audit evidence of a significant impact overall of the new types of measures and flexibilities introduced on the programme error rates and takes note
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 76. Notes with concern that the Court identified an increase in the specific types of errors, such as ineligible costs and projects and infringements of internal market rules, including public procurement and state aid rules, which are the same categories of irregularities identified by the Commission and the audit authorities based on their common typology; notes that 3 % of the Court’s estimated 6,4 % error rate in Heading 2 is related to 100 % co-financed priorities under the Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative (CRII+) which allowed for more flexible spending; reiterates that more flexibility should never lead to compromising quality and controls; asks for a review from the Commission of the current situation in order to avoid similar situations in the future; notes that the Commission has not found audit evidence of a significant impact overall of the new types of measures and flexibilities introduced on the programme error rates and takes note
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 76. Notes that the Court identified an increase in the specific types of errors, such as ineligible costs and projects and infringements of internal market rules, including public procurement and state aid rules
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 76. Notes that the Court identified an increase in the specific types of errors, such as ineligible costs and projects and infringements of internal market rules, including public procurement and state aid rules
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 a (new) 76 a. Notes that the Court identified cases of projects for which ineligible expenditure was accepted, as well as their contribution to the overall estimated level of error; stresses the importance of remedying the systemic root causes and the need for audit authorities to effectively assess the eligibility criteria;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 a (new) 76 a. Notes that the Court identified cases of projects for which ineligible expenditure was accepted, as well as their contribution to the overall estimated level of error; stresses the importance of remedying the systemic root causes and the need for audit authorities to effectively assess the eligibility criteria;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF)'s contribution to support Member States in recovering from the economic and social consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and creating a resilient Union that can shoulder the challenges of the future; notes the contribution of the RRF and RePowerEU in addressing the energy-related challenges caused by the Russia’s war of agression against Ukraine; calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement the associated actions swiftly in accordance with the agreed milestones and targets; regrets that milestones have not been better defined and more strictly monitored by the Commission;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF)'s contribution to support Member States in recovering from the economic and social consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and creating a resilient Union that can shoulder the challenges of the future; notes the contribution of the RRF and RePowerEU in addressing the energy-related challenges caused by the Russia’s war of agression against Ukraine; calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement the associated actions swiftly in accordance with the agreed milestones and targets; regrets that milestones have not been better defined and more strictly monitored by the Commission;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 b (new) 76 b. Notes that the Commission considers that self-declarations are a useful tool to gain assurance when finding alternative supporting evidence would be difficult or administratively too costly for the beneficiaries; supports the Court’s recommendation to improve checks by audit authorities of self- declarations issued by beneficiaries of the funds in order to ensure their validity and reliability;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 76 b (new) 76 b. Notes that the Commission considers that self-declarations are a useful tool to gain assurance when finding alternative supporting evidence would be difficult or administratively too costly for the beneficiaries; supports the Court’s recommendation to improve checks by audit authorities of self- declarations issued by beneficiaries of the funds in order to ensure their validity and reliability;
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 77 77. Takes note that for ERDF and CF, the Commission implemented financial corrections and withdrawals amounting to EUR 11 billion over the programming period, including EUR 2,4 billion for the accounting year 2021-2022; notes further that the Commission continues the implementation of its targeted ‘action plan on public procurement and State aid’ in cooperation with Member States; acknowledges that national authorities are primarily responsible for making the financial corrections decided by the Commission but believes that additional checks shall be implemented in order to confirm that all corrections have been implemented correctly;
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 77 77. Takes note that for ERDF and CF, the Commission implemented financial corrections and withdrawals amounting to EUR 11 billion over the programming period, including EUR 2,4 billion for the accounting year 2021-2022; notes further that the Commission continues the implementation of its targeted ‘action plan on public procurement and State aid’ in cooperation with Member States; acknowledges that national authorities are primarily responsible for making the financial corrections decided by the Commission but believes that additional checks shall be implemented in order to confirm that all corrections have been implemented correctly;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 77 77. Takes note that for ERDF and CF, the Commission implemented financial corrections and withdrawals amounting to EUR 11 billion over the programming period, including EUR 2,4 billion for the accounting year 2021-2022; notes that these financial corrections so far have not resulted in any loss of funding for member states as the Commission has not yet implemented any net financial correction in the 2014-2020 period; notes further that the Commission plans to continue
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 77 77. Takes note that for ERDF and CF, the Commission implemented financial corrections and withdrawals amounting to EUR 11 billion over the programming period, including EUR 2,4 billion for the accounting year 2021-2022; notes that these financial corrections so far have not resulted in any loss of funding for member states as the Commission has not yet implemented any net financial correction in the 2014-2020 period; notes further that the Commission plans to continue
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 79 79. Notes that
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 79 79. Notes that
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 79 79. Notes that complementarity characterises the relation between the cohesion policy funds and the other Union funding instruments; recalls that the cohesion policy funds and the RRF are different in terms of general objectives, timeline, management mode and financing, but highlights that complementarity between them is possible and expected, provided the same costs are not covered twice and points to the Commission to do its utmost to mitigate these risks;
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 79 79. Notes that complementarity characterises the relation between the cohesion policy funds and the other Union funding instruments; recalls that the cohesion policy funds and the RRF are different in terms of general objectives, timeline, management mode and financing, but highlights that complementarity between them is possible and expected, provided the same costs are not covered twice and points to the Commission to do its utmost to mitigate these risks;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 80 80. Notes that the Commission is
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 80 80. Notes that the Commission is
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 80 80.
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 80 80.
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 81 81. Welcomes that neither the Court nor the Commission identify any cases where the obligatory national co-funding of a cohesion project was paid for by RRF funds in the 2022 RRF disbursements; urges the Commission to continue to monitor the situation and prevent such financing to happen;
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 81 81. Welcomes that neither the Court nor the Commission identify any cases where the obligatory national co-funding of a cohesion project was paid for by RRF funds in the 2022 RRF disbursements; urges the Commission to continue to monitor the situation and prevent such financing to happen;
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 81 81. Welcomes that for the moment neither the Court nor the Commission identify any cases where the obligatory national co-funding of a cohesion project was paid for by RRF funds in the 2022 RRF disbursements;
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 81 81. Welcomes that for the moment neither the Court nor the Commission identify any cases where the obligatory national co-funding of a cohesion project was paid for by RRF funds in the 2022 RRF disbursements;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 82. Notes that the Co
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 82. Notes that the Co
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF)'s contribution to support Member States in recovering from the economic and social consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and creating a resilient Union that can shoulder the challenges of the future; notes the contribution of the RRF and RePowerEU in addressing the energy-related challenges caused by the Russia’s war of agression against Ukraine; calls on the Commission
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF)'s contribution to support Member States in recovering from the economic and social consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and creating a resilient Union that can shoulder the challenges of the future; notes the contribution of the RRF and RePowerEU in addressing the energy-related challenges caused by the Russia’s war of agression against Ukraine; calls on the Commission
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 82. Notes that the Court considers that the Commission’s desk reviews and compliance audits have inherent limitations in confirming the validity of the residual total error rates reported by audit authorities;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 82. Notes that the Court considers that the Commission’s desk reviews and compliance audits have inherent limitations in confirming the validity of the residual total error rates reported by audit authorities;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 82.
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 82.
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 82. Notes that the Court considers that the Commission’s desk reviews
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 82 82. Notes that the Court considers that the Commission’s desk reviews
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 83 83.
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 83 83.
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 83 83. Notes with concern the Court’s finding that the proportion of assurance packages with residual error rates of above 2 % reached a peak of 61 % of the expenditure in the Court’s sample in 2022 compared to 39 % in the previous year, reflecting the persistent shortcomings in the work of the audit authorities; stresses with concern that the Court’s audit results over the last six years demonstrate that the controls currently in place do not yet sufficiently offset the high inherent risk of error in cohesion, and that managing authorities do not always effectively prevent or detect irregularities in expenditure declared by beneficiaries; notes with concern that the errors found by the Court represent significant weaknesses in the audit authorities’ work on verifying the eligibility of expenditures and projects, and the compliance with internal market rules; notes that a part of the residual error rates recalculated by the Court above 2 % in the audited assurance packages are attributable to the aforementioned divergences;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 83 83. Notes with concern the Court’s finding that the proportion of assurance packages with residual error rates of above 2 % reached a peak of 61 % of the expenditure in the Court’s sample in 2022 compared to 39 % in the previous year, reflecting the persistent shortcomings in the work of the audit authorities; stresses with concern that the Court’s audit results over the last six years demonstrate that the controls currently in place do not yet sufficiently offset the high inherent risk of error in cohesion, and that managing authorities do not always effectively prevent or detect irregularities in expenditure declared by beneficiaries; notes with concern that the errors found by the Court represent significant weaknesses in the audit authorities’ work on verifying the eligibility of expenditures and projects, and the compliance with internal market rules; notes that a part of the residual error rates recalculated by the Court above 2 % in the audited assurance packages are attributable to the aforementioned divergences;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Is concerned about the persistent shortcomings observed by the Court in the national audits, which can be due to inadequate scope, unclear documentation of audits and sample filtering performed by national audit authorities, as well as resource issues, including inadequate funding and a lack of a skilled workforce within national audit authorities; notes that the Co
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Is concerned about the persistent shortcomings observed by the Court in the national audits, which can be due to inadequate scope, unclear documentation of audits and sample filtering performed by national audit authorities, as well as resource issues, including inadequate funding and a lack of a skilled workforce within national audit authorities; notes that the Co
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Is concerned about the persistent shortcomings observed by the Court in the national audits, which can be due to inadequate scope, unclear documentation of audits and sample filtering performed by national audit authorities, as well as resource issues, including inadequate funding and a lack of a skilled workforce within national audit authorities; recalls the recommendations in the INI report 2022/2020 on possibilities to increase the reliability of audits and controls by national authorities in shared management; notes that the Commission considers the work of the majority of the audit authorities to be reliable and that only 7 out of 81 audit authorities need serious improvements;
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Is concerned about the persistent shortcomings observed by the Court in the national audits, which can be due to inadequate scope, unclear documentation of audits and sample filtering performed by national audit authorities, as well as resource issues, including inadequate funding and a lack of a skilled workforce within national audit authorities; recalls the recommendations in the INI report 2022/2020 on possibilities to increase the reliability of audits and controls by national authorities in shared management; notes that the Commission considers the work of the majority of the audit authorities to be reliable and that only 7 out of 81 audit authorities need serious improvements;
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Is concerned about the persistent shortcomings observed by the Court in the national audits, which can be due to inadequate scope, unclear documentation of audits and sample filtering performed by national audit authorities, as well as resource issues, including inadequate funding and a lack of a skilled workforce within national audit authorities; notes that the Commission considers the work of the majority of the audit authorities to be reliable and that only
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Is concerned about the persistent shortcomings observed by the Court in the national audits, which can be due to inadequate scope, unclear documentation of audits and sample filtering performed by national audit authorities, as well as resource issues, including inadequate funding and a lack of a skilled workforce within national audit authorities; notes that the Commission considers the work of the majority of the audit authorities to be reliable and that only
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Is greatly concerned about the persistent shortcomings observed by the Court in the national audits, which can be due to inadequate scope, unclear documentation of audits and sample filtering performed by national audit authorities, as well as resource issues, including inadequate funding and a lack of a skilled workforce within national audit authorities; notes that the Commission, on the other hand, considers the work of the majority of the audit authorities to be reliable and that only 7 out of 81 audit authorities need serious improvements;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 84 84. Is greatly concerned about the persistent shortcomings observed by the Court in the national audits, which can be due to inadequate scope, unclear documentation of audits and sample filtering performed by national audit authorities, as well as resource issues, including inadequate funding and a lack of a skilled workforce within national audit authorities; notes that the Commission, on the other hand, considers the work of the majority of the audit authorities to be reliable and that only 7 out of 81 audit authorities need serious improvements;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 85 85. Notes the Court’s finding that, as a way to simplify expenditure, beneficiaries of cohesion policy funding used SCOs for 77 transactions, or 30% of its sample, applying either flat rates, standard sales of unit costs or a combination of both; stresses that SCOs are one of the most important measures to reduce administrative costs and burdens for the beneficiaries and thus, to facilitate the access of small beneficiaries to the funding and focus more on the achievement of the objectives while reducing the error rate; highlights that the Court considers that SCO’s are not always adequately implemented and shares the Court’s audit conclusion that SCOs should not result in an excessive financial benefit for a member state; on the other side SCO should in practice lead to real reductions of bureaucratic burden and not to an exhaustive ex-ante and ex-post control; notes that slight variations of prices in SCO estimates compared to the prices identified during ex-post controls should be acceptable;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 85 85. Notes the Court’s finding that, as a way to simplify expenditure, beneficiaries of cohesion policy funding used SCOs for 77 transactions, or 30% of its sample, applying either flat rates, standard sales of unit costs or a combination of both; stresses that SCOs are one of the most important measures to reduce administrative costs and burdens for the beneficiaries and thus, to facilitate the access of small beneficiaries to the funding and focus more on the achievement of the objectives while reducing the error rate; highlights that the Court considers that SCO’s are not always adequately implemented and shares the Court’s audit conclusion that SCOs should not result in an excessive financial benefit for a member state; on the other side SCO should in practice lead to real reductions of bureaucratic burden and not to an exhaustive ex-ante and ex-post control; notes that slight variations of prices in SCO estimates compared to the prices identified during ex-post controls should be acceptable;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF)'s contribution to support Member States in recovering from the economic and social consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and creating a resilient Union that can shoulder the challenges of the future; notes the contribution of the RRF and RePowerEU in addressing the energy-related challenges caused by
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF)'s contribution to support Member States in recovering from the economic and social consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic and creating a resilient Union that can shoulder the challenges of the future; notes the contribution of the RRF and RePowerEU in addressing the energy-related challenges caused by
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 86 86. Notes that, for 2021-2027 programmes, the Commission has encouraged the use by programme authorities of the simplification measures foreseen under the CPR, in particular, the use of SCOs and financing not linked to costs (FNLC) schemes to tackle eligibility issues, ease management verifications and control the burden on beneficiaries; notes that, as a result of this effort, for the ERDF and the CF for example, 120 SCO schemes at programme level were adopted so far in 11 Member States and for Interreg programmes (EUR 5,7 billion of total contribution) as well as 4 FNLC schemes in 4 Member States (for EUR 1,2 billion of total contribution); underlines that urgently further simplification and flexibility is needed; calls on the Commission to find the right balance between necessary flexibility for slight price variations and on the other sider inappropriate intentional cost and price overestimations;
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 86 86. Notes that, for 2021-2027 programmes, the Commission has encouraged the use by programme authorities of the simplification measures foreseen under the CPR, in particular, the use of SCOs and financing not linked to costs (FNLC) schemes to tackle eligibility issues, ease management verifications and control the burden on beneficiaries; notes that, as a result of this effort, for the ERDF and the CF for example, 120 SCO schemes at programme level were adopted so far in 11 Member States and for Interreg programmes (EUR 5,7 billion of total contribution) as well as 4 FNLC schemes in 4 Member States (for EUR 1,2 billion of total contribution); underlines that urgently further simplification and flexibility is needed; calls on the Commission to find the right balance between necessary flexibility for slight price variations and on the other sider inappropriate intentional cost and price overestimations;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 86 a (new) 86 a. Is worried by the Court’s finding regarding an ERDF programme in Slovakia aimed at renovating a public building’s interior space, despite the fact that under that program only energy- efficiency measures were eligible; notes the Court’s observation that this project should not have passed the evaluation phase, as in the application the threshold of at least 25 % of the expenditure for the project linked to energy efficiency was not met; notes similar cases identified by the Court that lack a Commission response;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 88 88. Notes from the Annual Report on the Protection of the EU Financial Interests for the year 2022 (PIF Report)
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 88 a (new) 88 a. Stresses that the Court, OLAF and the EPPO should have access to a single integrated IT system for data-mining and risk-scoring provided by the Commission, in a proportionate manner, within the exercise of their respective competences, as is envisaged in the recast of the Financial Regulation;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point i (i) proactively engage in constructive dialogue with the Court to overcome the growing number of situations where Commission’s official response to the Court’s findings is to ‘agree to disagree’ and continue its cooperation with the Court in order to look for possible comparability of the results of their estimated error rates, as well as to align the interpretation of legal texts;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point i (i) continue its cooperation with the Court in order
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point i a (new) (i a) continue its close work with the audit authorities in order to strengthen their capacity to prevent and correct recurring errors, to better document their audit work and therefore to contribute to the assurance process;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point i a (new) (i a) improve and strengthen Member States' management and control system to ensure member states declare only eligible expenditure to the Commission;
Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point i b (new) (i b) ensure that audit authorities have appropriate methods in place to check self-declarations by means of identifying good practices and issuing a guidance to Member States;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point i c (new) (i c) carry out specific targeted checks as part of the closure audits to ensure that Member States have applied the necessary financial corrections for errors detected;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Highlights the crucial role the Union budget played in 2022 in addressing the fall-out of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine to secure food supply chains, address energy-related challenges, support Member States in welcoming refugees, and provide assistance to Ukraine in caring for its citizens; notes that this has put pressure on the budget and that all available flexibility measures have been used; notes in that regard the proposals made by the Commission in the Multi- annual Financial Framework (MFF) review to re-orient funds and to raise fresh funds, and calls on the Council to swiftly move forward with the adoption of the proposals; stresses the importance to clarify how to repay EU debt;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Highlights the crucial role the Union budget played in 2022 in addressing the fall-out of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine to secure food supply chains, address energy-related challenges, support Member States in welcoming refugees, and provide assistance to Ukraine in caring for its citizens; notes that this has put pressure on the budget and that all available flexibility measures have been used; notes in that regard the proposals made by the Commission in the Multi- annual Financial Framework (MFF) review to re-orient funds and to raise fresh funds, and calls on the Council to swiftly move forward with the adoption of the proposals; stresses the importance to clarify how to repay EU debt;
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point i d (new) (i d) grant the Court, OLAF and the EPPO access to a single integrated IT system for data-mining and risk-scoring provided by the Commission, in the terms agreed in the recast of the Financial Regulation;
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point ii (ii) pay particular attention in its audits to the risks linked to the flexibilities introduced with the CRII/CRII+ amendments; launch an immediate review of spending under these programmes to identify and correct systemic issues which have led to an abrupt increase of the error rate;
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point iii (iii) continue its support to Member States and at the same time prepare an action plan on how to best avoid the administrational over-burden towards the end of the MFF that will come on top of the planned RRF eligibility period, given the completion of the 2014-
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point iv (iv) continue the implementation of its
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point iv a (new) (iv a) deliver on its promise to provide both the Discharge authority as well as the general public with the list of EU funds’ biggest final beneficiaries, where such a list considers the final beneficiary to be the natural person or an entity that, as the last in the chain of recipients, receives the EU funds;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point v (v) further enhance simplification in the implementation of cohesion programmes
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point vi (vi) work, in order to achieve a successful uptake of SCOs, in parallel with all stakeholders, on methodological and assurance harmonisation so that there is sufficient predictability for the beneficiaries on how those options are expected to be implemented; and ensure that audits do not lead to further bureaucratisation of implementation and an unnecessary audit burden on beneficiaries; ensure SCO are not implemented in a way that Member States gain excessive financial benefit, while guaranteeing an appropriate flexibility in the cost and price estimations;
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point vii (vii) work together with Member States' audit authorities to ensure that the specific risk of double funding, especially with the RRF financing, is
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point viii (viii) establish a comprehensive mechanism for the use of cohesion funds in the event of exceptional or unforeseen circumstances using guiding provisions on its scope, funding availability, governance, audit and control, and application; underlines that such use for exceptional circumstances should be restricted to specific and well defined situations, limited in time and scope and with an increased degree of controls to mitigate risks;
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point viii a (new) (viii a) calls on the Commission to re- assess its decision to “unfreeze” 10.2 billion EUR of cohesion funds to Hungary, particularly in light of the national measures taken since its adoption, and to refrain from disbursing any funds until all of the relevant legislation has been fully implemented and the adopted measures have proven their effectiveness in practice;
Amendment 2 #
Proposal for a decision 1 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 2 #
Proposal for a decision 1 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Highlights the crucial role the Union budget played in 2022 in addressing the fall-out of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine to secure food supply chains, address energy-related challenges, support Member States in welcoming Ukrainian refugees, and provide assistance to Ukraine in caring for its citizens; notes that this has put pressure on the budget and that all available flexibility measures have been used; notes in that regard the proposals made by the Commission in the Multi-
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Highlights the crucial role the Union budget played in 2022 in addressing the fall-out of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine to secure food supply chains, address energy-related challenges, support Member States in welcoming Ukrainian refugees, and provide assistance to Ukraine in caring for its citizens; notes that this has put pressure on the budget and that all available flexibility measures have been used; notes in that regard the proposals made by the Commission in the Multi-
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point viii b (new) (viii b) make the use of IT tools such as EDES and ARACHNE mandatory and systematic for all Union funds including shared management and ensure better use of new technology in order to increase controls and protect the Union budget against fraud and misuse of funds in the context of the concluded revision of the Financial Regulation;
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point viii d (new) (viii d) report on the early preventive system audits (EPSA) performed at the beginning of the programming period, in order to confirm the effectiveness of the control systems in the Member States, including the system in place to prevent irregularities;
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point viii f (new) (viii f) report to the discharge authority how the use of flexibility measures in Cohesion policy, that have improved absorption, has affected the structural cohesion objectives of convergence and cohesion;
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 89 – point viii g (new) (viii g) match the Court’s findings concerning Member States’ declarations with the information coming from the Commission’s risk at payment and risk at closure exercise on managing authorities to identify error hotspots that need to be addressed with urgency;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 90 90. Notes that the budget for the programmes under MFF heading 3 ‘Natural resources’ was EUR 58,
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 91 91. Notes that 2022 was the second and last year of the transitional period during which funds from the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) 2021-2027 budget allocation and an additional EUR 8 billion of externally assigned revenue from the NextGenerationEU funds for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development Fund (EAFRD) could be
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 94 94. Notes that the Court has examined a sample of 218 transactions covering the full range of spending under this MFF heading; notes that the Court also examined the regularity information given in the annual activity reports of the Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development (DG AGRI) and the Directorate-General for Climate Action (DG CLIMA), as well as selected systems in 17 Member States and the United Kingdom; notes that the Court estimates the level of error for ‘Natural Resources’ to be 2,2 % (1,8 % in 202
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 96 96. Notes that the majority of errors found by the Court were related to the provision of inaccurate information on areas or animals (42 %) and ineligible beneficiary, activity, and project, expenditure; notes with concern, as in 202
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 97 97.
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 98 Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Reminds of the importance of a strict application of the financial rules of the EU in all programmes and on all beneficiaries, in order to avoid all forms of fraud, conflict of interests, corruption, double funding and money laundering; in this framework reminds of the key role played by the whole EU anti-fraud architecture and expresses some concerns about the refusal of some member states to cooperate with one of its elements, notably the EPPO;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Reminds of the importance of a strict application of the financial rules of the EU in all programmes and on all beneficiaries, in order to avoid all forms of fraud, conflict of interests, corruption, double funding and money laundering; in this framework reminds of the key role played by the whole EU anti-fraud architecture and expresses some concerns about the refusal of some member states to cooperate with one of its elements, notably the EPPO;
Amendment 210 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 98 98. Notes the example of an incorrect declaration of agricultural activity presented by the Court in its annual report, quoted in several media as the “lemon trees’ case”, where a farmer declared to cultivate permanent crop, where in reality the plot was not cultivated for several years; notes the financial impact of this error was EUR 8 349,06 as reported by the Commission, along with the corrective actions taken by the responsible national authorities, including the recovery of the claimed amount; commends the thorough audit work of the Court and the Commission and the swift follow-up by the paying agency concerned; stresses though that this case should not be understood as an rare and individual coincidence but rather as a risk of systematic way allowing for fraudulent way to receiving the EU funds and should thus not be underestimated;
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 99 99. Notes that SCOs are applied across the CAP, including in rural development where eligibility conditions are more complex and the risk of error is higher, and that there is still potential to simplify measures that are not based on area or animal declarations, where Member States can decide whether to reimburse actual costs or pay according to predefined outputs; notes that the Commission reports almost 92 % of Rural Development Programmes make use of SCOs; calls on the Commission to disclose the amount disbursed through SCOs;
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 101 101.
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 101 101. Welcomes the increased interest in and use of the integrated IT tool for data mining ARACHNE by the Member States, with 13 Member States using the tool for at least some measures, and five Member States participating in a general introduction workshop on ARACHNE; notes the obstacles reported by Member States and the continued efforts of the Commission to improve ARACHNE; regrets the selective adoption of ARACHNE by Member States;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 102 102. Notes that, in 2022, the Commission reported an implementation rate of 99,69 %, for commitments under the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF), a marked improvement from the 15,98 % implementation rate of
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 104 – point ii Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 104 – point iii a (new) (iii a) continue to promote the use of ARACHNE to increase both the number of Member States using the system, and to increase the extent of use to include all programmes in the context of the concluded revision of the Financial Regulation;
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 104 – point v (v) promote, provide incentives and support the Member States’ paying agencies in using IT tools like
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 104 – point v a (new) (v a) make better use and encourage the use of AI and data from new technologies such as the Union owned Copernicus Sentinel satellites to monitor and control the correct use of CAP funds;
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 105 105. Notes that the budget for the programmes under MFF heading 4 ‘Migration and Border Management’ was EUR 3,4 billion (1,7 % of the Union budget) distributed as follows: 43,9 % for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF), 23,1 % for the Integrated Border Management Fund (IBMF) and 33 % for three decentralised agencies: European Boarder Coast Agency (FRONTEX), European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA) and European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (EU- LISA); notes that, as of 31 December 2022, the final budget commitment appropriations adopted amounted to EUR 3 410,39 million and 99,54 % of them had been implemented (EUR 3 394,69 million); notes further that the final adopted budget payment appropriations amounted to EUR 3 372,54 million and 97,61 % of them have been implemented (EUR 3 292,03 million);
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Condemns the lack of transparency from the Commission and pharmaceutical companies in the development, purchase and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Condemns the lack of transparency from the Commission and pharmaceutical companies in the development, purchase and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines;
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 108 108. Notes that the Court examined a sample of 23 transactions that is not representative enough of the spending under MFF headings 4 and 5 and, therefore, cannot provide an estimate of the error rate;
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 108 108. Notes that the Court examined a sample of 23 transactions that is not representative enough of the spending under MFF headings 4 and 5 and, therefore, cannot provide an estimate of the error rate;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 109 109. Welcomes the progress identified by the Court in its review of the work done by six Member States’ audit authorities in preparation for the 2021-2027 AMIF, the Border Management and Visa Instrument (BMVI) and ISF annual accounts; notes the Court’s observation that, at the time of its visits (between September 2022 and February 2023), the six Member States’ audit strategies had not yet been adopted, which is a prerequisite for submitting an ‘assurance package’; notes that, at the time of the Court’s visit, the IT systems to store information and documentation needed for audits of the six Member States’ managing authorities were either under development or yet to be developed;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 112 112. Notes that more than 16 million people from Ukraine and Moldova have been recorded as having entered the Union since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, and over 4 million persons fleeing the war obtained protection in the Union; notes that the Commission provided financial support to the International Organisation for Migration to support the process, as part of a EUR 15 million project facilitating transfers from Moldova of vulnerable pe
Amendment 224 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 113 – subparagraph 1 (new) calls for an end to the funding of NGOs undertaking search and rescue operations, which contribute to illegal immigration towards European countries and facilitate people-smuggling; stresses the importance of providing adequate funding to build physical barriers along the European Union’s external borders in order to prevent migrants from entering illegally; furthermore, asks the Commission to actively help Member States relocate the entire asylum procedure and to give them the means to do so;
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 113 a (new) 113 a. Highlights that 331 553 illegal border crossings into the EU were registered in 2022, confirming the raise of 66% comparing to the year of 2021;
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 114 Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 114 114. Welcomes that the participation of SMEs in the EDF (European Defence Fund) (in particular the cross-
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 115 Amendment 229 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 116 Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Condemns the Commission’s failure to provide responses with regard to the Covid Vaccines Agreement between the European Commission and Pfizer. Is concerned that, unlike in the case of other contract negotiations, the EU executive has refused to provide records of the discussions with Pfizer, in the form of minutes, the names of experts consulted, the terms agreed or other evidence.
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Condemns the Commission’s failure to provide responses with regard to the Covid Vaccines Agreement between the European Commission and Pfizer. Is concerned that, unlike in the case of other contract negotiations, the EU executive has refused to provide records of the discussions with Pfizer, in the form of minutes, the names of experts consulted, the terms agreed or other evidence.
Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 – point -i (new) (-i) develop a longer-term strategy for the EDF building on the experience with PADR and the Court’s recommendations;
Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 117 – point i a (new) (i a) focus its controls on expenditure found by the Court to be highly affected by eligibility and procurement issues in 2022 and asks the Court to expand a sample of audited transactions to be able to provide an estimate of the error rate;
Amendment 232 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 118 – subparagraph 1 (new) stresses that any development aid granted to third countries is strictly conditional upon the effective implementation of return and readmission agreements;
Amendment 233 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 119 119. Notes that the Court examined a sample of 72 transactions which is not representative enough of the spending under this MFF heading and, therefore, cannot provide an estimate of the error rate; notes that the Court’s audit results show that this is a high-risk area (34 out of 72 transactions audited, i.e. 47 %, were affected by errors); notes that the Court found 25 errors that had a financial impact on the Union budget, relating to ineligible costs, absence of supporting documents, public procurement and expenditure not incurred, areas that could point to risks of reliable functioning of the national authorities’ control mechanism or even the administrative or political willingness to properly execute the EU financial rules;
Amendment 234 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 119 119. Notes that the Court examined a sample of 72 transactions which is not representative enough of the spending under this MFF heading and, therefore, cannot provide an estimate of the error rate;
Amendment 235 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 122 122.
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 123 123. Notes with concern that the AARs of DG NEAR and the Directorate-General for International Partnerships (DG INTPA) reported difficulties in the implementation of the new operational information system OPSYS, which was at times unstable, failing to meet expectations, and requiring frequent intervention from DG DIGIT support teams, leading to it being identified as a critical risk in DG NEAR’s risk assessment exercise; notes the actions implemented by the Commission’s services to improve the situation and its opinion that these difficulties did not result in unreliable data or incomplete management information;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 124 a (new) 124 a. Recognises the importance of NGOs in ensuring that the EU, as the largest donor of development aid in the world, continues to contribute to promoting stability and peace, overcoming poverty and advancing sustainable development; commends in particular the activity of NGOs in areas of conflict in ensuring that humanitarian aid reaches the civilian population in a rapid and effective manner; takes note of the control and audit, transparency and accountability requirements applicable to all EU funding and different stakeholders, but considers that there is always room for improvement, particularly by making the most of digitalisation;
Amendment 238 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 125 125. Welcomes the implementation by the Commission of several mechanisms to mitigate risks and safeguard the proper use of Union funds spent in unstable or conflict zones;
Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 125 125. Welcomes the implementation by the Commission of several mechanisms to mitigate risks and safeguard the proper use of Union funds spent in unstable or conflict zones; notes that the Commission systematically assesses corruption risks in partner countries and uses an array of tools to mitigate them, at the same time applies conditions and performance indicators to promote fiscal transparency and accountability through its budget support; reminds that legal provisions leave broad scope for interpretation and therefore the Commission has considerable flexibility in deciding whether these general conditions have been met; highlights that the ECA's regularity audit cannot cover what happens beyond the moment the Commission pays budget support to the recipient country, since these funds then merge with that country’s own budget resources; welcomes the fact that, according to World Bank data, countries benefiting from Union budget support have improved in the control of corruption over time;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 b (new) 5 b. Notes with concern that, to date, the Commission has not make available, not only to the public, but not even to the Members of the European Parliament, the non-redacted versions of the contracts signed with the producers of the COVID- 19 vaccine;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 b (new) 5 b. Notes with concern that, to date, the Commission has not make available, not only to the public, but not even to the Members of the European Parliament, the non-redacted versions of the contracts signed with the producers of the COVID- 19 vaccine;
Amendment 240 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 126 126. Notes with concern that the Court, in its Special Report 14/2023 “Programming the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe” found that, although the Commission and the EEAS had merged funding into a single instrument, the NDICI-Global Europe Instrument, which covers more than 70 % of the Union funding allocated for external action in the 2021-2027 financing period, they followed two different fund allocation methodologies for Neighbourhood and non-Neighbourhood countries, and that the multiannual indicative programmes did not ensure that the selected sectors of intervention were those in which Union funding could achieve a
Amendment 241 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 127.
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 127.
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 127. Notes that, following the despicable terrorist attacks carried out by Hamas against Israel on 7 October 2023, the Commission announced on 9 October 2023 its decision to review the Union’s assistance for Palestine;
Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 127. Notes that, following the despicable terrorist attacks carried out by Hamas against Israel on 7 October 2023, the Commission announced on 9 October 2023 its decision to review the Union’s assistance for Palestine; welcomes that the review, finalised on 21 November 2023, has shown that the Commission
Amendment 245 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 a (new) 127 a. Recalls the EU strategy to promote and ensure quality education for children across the world, especially when specific EU financial support is provided; condemns the problematic and hateful contents encouraging violence, spreading antisemitism and inciting to hatred in Palestinian school textbooks drafted by EU funded civil servants as well as in supplementary educational materials developed by UNRWA staff and taught in its schools; reaffirms in the context of the despicable terrorist attacks carried out by Hamas on 7 October 2023, that education to hatred have direct and dramatic consequences on the security of Israelis as well as on the perspectives of a better future for young Palestinians; therefore requests the Commission to closely scrutinise that no funds are allocated or linked directly or indirectly to the use of such educational materials and that the Palestinian Authority (PA) modifies the full curriculum expeditiously as repeatedly requested in the discharge decisions in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial years 2016, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021; stresses that financial support from the Union to the Palestinian Authority in the area of education shall be provided on the condition of a national Palestinian curriculum, with reference textbooks and educational material, that is free from anti-Semitic contents and incitement to violence and complies with quality education ; calls in that regard the Commission and Member States to provide expertise, share knowledge, guidance and technical support to empower Palestinian teachers, trainers and experts towards the implementation of education that fully complies with UNESCO standards;
Amendment 246 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 a (new) 127 a. Deplores the incitement to violence, eulogizing of terrorists, anti- Semitism and hate speech taught in Palestinian textbooks and additional teaching materials developed by UNRWA, taught in Palestinian schools which helped enable the dreadful terrorist attacks carried out by Hamas on Oct 7th. Stresses with great concern that the perpetrators of the Hamas attack on Israel included UNRWA employees and graduates of Palestinian schools, which utilize, teach and implement textbooks and teaching materials that are drafted by civil servants whose salaries are paid for by the EU; Stresses and reiterates the EP’s position that textbooks drafted by Union funds, must be made conditional on full compliance with UNESCO standards of peace and tolerance; as already was decided upon by the EP in its 2023 recommendation on relations with the Palestinian Authority, and as repeatedly requested in its latest adopted resolutions on Prospects for the Two-State Solution, and in its discharge procedures adopted in 2023, 2022, 2021, and 2020;
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 a (new) 127 a. Is concerned by the serious allegations made by Israel that 12 employees of UNRWA might have participated in the despicable terrorist attacks in October 2023; notes that the Agency immediately terminated their contracts and welcomes the launch of an UN investigation; notes that the allegations involve 12 out of 13 000 local staff members of UNRWA in Gaza alone, who are themselves victims of the ongoing humanitarian tragedy while playing a critical role in distributing food, water, and medicine; notes that UNRWA has developed a specific framework to ensure the neutrality and independence of its operations in line with the UN standards, which includes vetting and due diligence measures, and shares the list of all its staff with the host countries, including Israel, on an annual basis;
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 b (new) 127 b. Highlights that UNRWA is the backbone of the UN humanitarian response in Gaza and is the primary organization providing life-saving assistance to over 2.2 million people; is worried that UNRWA’s defunding would not only threaten the humanitarian response in Gaza, but would also jeopardize the regional stability as the Agency provides essential services such as education and healthcare to some 5,9 million Palestinian refugees in the West Bank, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon; recalls that the Union is one of the largest donors of humanitarian and development aid to Palestinians in Gaza and welcomes the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs confirmation that EU funding to UNRWA has not been suspended, and supports his stance that “defunding UNRWA would be both disproportionate and dangerous”;
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 d (new) 127 d. Recalls that the findings of the study commissioned by the Commission to Georg Eckert Institut on the Palestinian Textbooks revealed a complex picture where the textbooks (i) adhere to UNESCO standards and adopt criteria that are prominent in international education discourse, including a strong focus on human rights, (ii) express a narrative of resistance within the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and (iii) display an antagonism towards Israel; notes that the Union does not fund the Palestinian Textbooks and that neither are they the responsibility of UNRWA, which works to delivers quality education with an emphasis on fostering a human rights culture, even in challenging times;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 c (new) 5 c. Notes that the EPPO has confirmed that there is an ongoing investigation into the acquisition of COVID-19 vaccines in the Union7a; _________________ 7a https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/ongo ing-eppo-investigation-acquisition-covid- 19-vaccines-eu
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 c (new) 5 c. Notes that the EPPO has confirmed that there is an ongoing investigation into the acquisition of COVID-19 vaccines in the Union7a; _________________ 7a https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/news/ongo ing-eppo-investigation-acquisition-covid- 19-vaccines-eu
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 a (new) 127 a. Unequivocally denounces the antisemitic hate speech and incitement to violence in Palestinian school textbooks used by UNRWA and the Palestinian Authority which have 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; Strongly condemning the use of such materials, which contribute to an environment of intolerance and extremism, and noting with deep concern that these materials may have played a role in facilitating the Hamas terror attack on Israel on October 7th, 2023, in which several perpetrators were reportedly UNRWA employees and graduates of Palestinian schools; stresses that financial support from the Union to the Palestinian Authority and UNRWA in the area of education shall be provided on the condition of removing all antisemitic references and examples that incite hatred and violence from the Palestinian curriculum with full adherence to UNESCO standards of peace and tolerance in education, as already was decided upon by the EP in its 2023 recommendation on relations with the Palestinian Authority, and 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, 2020 and 2021; as well as in its latest adopted resolution on Prospects for the Two-State Solution;
Amendment 251 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 b (new) 127 b. Highlights that according to the answers of commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement for the 2021 Discharge Report the ongoing development portfolio for the Palestinians, under the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) Regulation, is EUR 681 million between 2021 and 2023, for the Palestinian Authority, UNRWA and development projects in the West Bank and Gaza; Notes that about one third of the funding benefitted projects in Gaza and two third in the West Bank; Underlines that the EU provided EUR 271 million to UNRWA for the provision of social services to the Palestinian refugees and in addition, the EU provided support to the Palestinian Authority’s recurrent expenditures, mainly the salaries and pensions of civil servants, the social allowances paid through the cash transfer programme and part of the costs of referrals to the East Jerusalem Hospitals through the PEGASE mechanism; Notes with concern that there is no real control over these fundings;
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 c (new) 127 c. Underlines that the ECA AR 2022 highlights an example of ineligible expenditure included in the cost claim concerning a project in Palestine on the sustainable use of natural resources to support Palestine’s transition to a green economy with an incentive component that was intended to support SMEs in the form of grants for ‘green’ projects in the areas of energy efficiency, renewable energy and pollution abatement; Underlines that 190.500 Euros had been approved of and paid to a development agency, with the task to monitor the implementation of the project by the final beneficiary, but the project was not realized11a; _________________ 11a /https://www.eca.europa.eu/ECAPublicati ons/AR-2022/AR-2022_EN.pdf
Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 a (new) 127 a. Expresses deep concern over the recent announcement by some countries of suspension of funding to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA); calls for increased and sustained funding in recognition of the agency's crucial role in the humanitarian response in Gaza, and to ensure the uninterrupted delivery of vital services to a vulnerable population in the Middle East;
Amendment 254 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 c (new) 127 c. Is concerned about the destruction and confiscation of Union-funded projects in the West Bank and notes that in 2022, 101 structures funded by the EU or EU Member States were demolished or seized by Israel with a value at EUR 337 019, representing the third highest financial injury since 2016; recalls that representatives of EU institutions, concerned Member States and other donors have requested on several occasions the return or compensation for EU-funded assets demolished, dismantled or confiscated; recalls the position of the Council expressing its commitment to ensure that all agreements between Israel and the Union must unequivocally and explicitly indicate the inapplicability to the territories occupied by Israel since 1967, as well as to continue the effective implementation of existing Union law and bilateral arrangements applicable to settlement products;
Amendment 255 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 128 a (new) 128 a. Notes the Reform Growth Plan for the Western Balkans which was proposed by the Commission to further support convergence efforts in the region; stresses the need for a more clarity on the use of different financial instruments toward the region, primarily among IPA III, Economic and Investment Plan, and the Reform Growth Plan; urges the Commission to provide the sub-national level to have more direct access to EU funds;
Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 128 a (new) 128 a. Welcomes that the Ukraine Facility lays out provisions to ensure effective controls; recalls that on 7 April 2022, the Parliament called for the confiscation of Russian assets owned by Russian individuals and entities, frozen as a result of EU restrictive measures, in order to finance Ukraine’s reconstruction;
Amendment 257 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 128 b (new) 128 b. Welcomes the Global Gateway strategy as a concerted EU response to global challenges bringing together public and private investment; notes that 2022 was the first full year of the implementation of the Global Gateway strategy; stresses the need for more transparency, accountability and regular assessments of the Global Gateway implementation as well as for enhanced Parliament’s involvement in respect of its democratic scrutiny role;
Amendment 258 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 130 – point ii (ii) continue ensuring that all contracts involving Union funding fully respect applicable Union legislation, including accountability, transparency and protection of Union funds; make the participation of entities, individuals or groups affiliated with terrorist organisations categorically incompatible with any Union funding; and ensure that strict monitoring and control mechanisms make sure that all individuals involved in Union funded actions exclusively pursue the objectives and activities approved for Union funding, where necessary, request the restitution, or compensation for EU-funded assets that have been demolished, dismantled or confiscated;
Amendment 259 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 130 – point ii (ii) continue ensuring that all contracts involving Union funding fully respect applicable UE values, Union legislation, including accountability, transparency and protection of Union funds; make the participation of entities, NGOs,individuals or groups affiliated with terrorist organisations or promoting hate speech and discrimination categorically incompatible with any Union funding; and ensure that strict monitoring and ex ante and ex post control mechanisms make sure that all individuals involved in Union funded actions exclusively pursue the EU objectives and activities approved for Union funding;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 d (new) 5 d. Notes that, based on an inquiry, the European Ombudsman concluded that the Commission's refusal of public access to text messages exchanged between the Commission President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company on the purchase of a COVID 19 vaccine (case 1316/2021/MIG) constituted “maladministration”8a; _________________ 8a https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/de cision/en/158295
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 d (new) 5 d. Notes that, based on an inquiry, the European Ombudsman concluded that the Commission's refusal of public access to text messages exchanged between the Commission President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company on the purchase of a COVID 19 vaccine (case 1316/2021/MIG) constituted “maladministration”8a; _________________ 8a https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/de cision/en/158295
Amendment 260 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 130 – point ii a (new) (ii a) to intensify its communication with international organizations in order to provide the ECA with complete, unlimited and timely access to documents necessary to carry out its task in accordance with the TFEU, and not just in read-only format;
Amendment 261 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 130 – point iii (iii) put in place adequate ex ante and ex post control measures in unstable or conflict zones to ensure the proper control of spending of Union funds and ways to recover the EU funds;
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 130 – point iii a (new) (iii a) ensures the proper, timely and thorough audit, including with the inclusion of the EPPO and European Court of Auditors, of all funds provided under the Ukraine Facility and the upcoming Western Balkans facility;
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 130 – point iii a (new) (iii a) closely scrutinise and monitor that the Palestinian Authority (PA) modifies the full curriculum expeditiously;
Amendment 264 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 131 a (new) 131a. Repeats its call for a reduction in the salaries paid to European Commissioners, which constitute an absurd political privilege at a time when EU citizens are being asked to make sacrifices in the name of budgetary constraint;
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 136 a (new) 136 a. Notes the adoption and implementation of an action plan to increase attractiveness of careers in Luxembourg; takes note of the Commission’s considerations against introducing a correction coefficient for Luxembourg at this stage in its report assessing the evolution of purchasing power of remuneration and pensions of Union officials (COM(2022) 180 final); recalls its reiterated requests to the Commission to find ways to mitigate the growing problem of the purchase power disparity suffered by the staff members posted to Luxembourg, which is mainly due to the cost of living;
Amendment 266 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 137 a (new) 137 a. Recalls the Court’s conclusion in its Special report 13/2019 that “any unethical behaviour by staff and Members of EU institutions and bodies is unacceptable and, even if it is only alleged, attracts high levels of public interest and reduces trust in the EU”; regrets the two cases of potential conflicts of interests involving high-ranked officials in DG MOVE for missions and DG NEAR for ownership reported by the press in 2022; takes note that the Commission implements effective internal control system in matters of ethics management according to the Court in its 2019 report and the European Ombudsman in its decision on the revolving doors inquiry; points out that unethical behaviour also has a budgetary cost for the institution concerned and reiterates its position and expectations of the EU's Ethics Body;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 138. Notes that the new central corporate financial system of the Commission, SUMMA, was planned to go into production by the end of 2023 and had progressed in line with the objective of going live at the beginning of 2024;
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 138 a (new) 138 a. Notes the adoption on 5 April 2022 of the ‘Communication on greening the Commission’, which aims to achieve climate neutrality by 2030, including an action plan to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions; notes the Commission intends to achieve these objectives by acquiring more energy efficient and greener buildings, shifting to dynamic collaborative workspaces and reducing the number of offices, and reiterates its warning that staff wellbeing and satisfaction should be taken into account in all future decisions in this regard;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 a (new) 139a. Condemns the property transaction, of a value of EUR 1 billion, to rent office space in the Brussels Nord district. Views this as yet another case of waste by the EU and calls for termination of the negotiations between the Commission and the Belgian Government.
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Expresses its disappointment at the Commission’s continuing lack of transparency with regard to the agreements it has concluded with the pharmaceutical companies that produce COVID-19 vaccines, as well as at the communications via text message between the President of the Commission and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Expresses its disappointment at the Commission’s continuing lack of transparency with regard to the agreements it has concluded with the pharmaceutical companies that produce COVID-19 vaccines, as well as at the communications via text message between the President of the Commission and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company;
Amendment 270 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 a (new) 139 a. Recalls that the European Parliament resolution of 13 July 2023 on public access to documents – annual report for the years 2019-2021 3a noted with great concern that, in 2021, following a request for public access to text messages between the Commission’s President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company regarding the Commission’s purchase of COVID-19 vaccines, the Commission refused to acknowledge that such text messages fall within the definition of a ‘document’ under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001; recalls that registering a document is a consequence of the existence of a document and not a prerequisite for its existence; takes note of the Ombudsman’s finding of maladministration by the Commission in this case 4a; is concerned about the fact that the Commission has failed to follow up on the Ombudsman’s recommendation following her inquiry to conduct another search for relevant text messages; expresses deep concern about the growing distance between citizens and the EU institutions, which this situation has caused; _________________ 3a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/doc ument/TA-9-2023-0295_EN.html 4a https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/cas e/en/59777
Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 b (new) 139 b. Recalls that the European Parliament resolution of 13 July 2023 on public access to documents – annual report for the years 2019-2021 2a underlined that the Commission has been deleting documents, including minutes from closed meetings, reports and internal documents; expresses its concern about the fact that this practice has led to the disappearance of important correspondence relevant to policy decisions and spending of public money; _________________ 2a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/doc ument/TA-9-2023-0295_EN.html
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 139 c (new) 139 c. Recalls that the European Parliament resolution of 13 July 2023 on public access to documents – annual report for the years 2019-202115a underlined that the Commission’s internal policy is, in effect, not to register text messages, as it argues that text messages are ‘short-lived documents’ in nature and ‘are not meant to contain important information relating to policies, activities and decisions of the Commission’; points out, however, that in practice, text messages are being used for this purpose; _________________ 15a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/doc ument/TA-9-2023-0295_EN.html
Amendment 273 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 140 140. Notes with satisfaction that the Court, in its Annual Report on the accounts for the European Schools for the 2022 financial year, found no material errors in the final consolidated annual accounts of the European Schools for 2022; welcomes further improvements highlighted by the Court in the quality of the final individual and consolidated accounts compared to previous years;
Amendment 274 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 144 – point iv a (new) (iv a) address without further delay and in an efficient way the challenges faced by staff members who are assigned to and reside in Luxembourg;
Amendment 275 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 145 – introductory part 145. Furthermore, calls on the Commission
Amendment 276 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 145 – point iii Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 145 – point iii a (new) (iii a) perform an in-depth review under an independent chairperson of the governance and management structures across the System of European Schools and involve the Directorate General for Education, Youth, Sports and Culture of the Commission;
Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 146 146. Recalls that the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 abruptly changed the economic and social outlook of the Union and led to a unified effort to launch the recovery package for Europe, consisting of the 2021-2027 MFF and NGEU, of which the cornerstone is the RRF; recalls that the objective of the RRF is to provide Member States with financial support to mitigate the serious economic and social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and make European economies and societies more sustainable, resilient, inclusive and better prepared for the challenges and opportunities of the green and digital transitions; recalls that the RRF is an innovative
Amendment 279 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 147 a (new) 147a. 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 the Member States, to ensure better transparency of the use of EU taxpayers’ money;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recalls the importance of carrying out
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recalls the importance of carrying out
Amendment 280 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 148 148. Notes that the REPowerEU Plan was launched in May 2022 to help the Union to reduce its dependency on Russian fossil fuels by saving energy, producing clean energy and diversifying its energy supplies
Amendment 281 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 149 149. Recalls that, under NGEU, the Commission can raise up to EUR 806,9 billion between mid-2021 and 2026 through the issuance of EU-bonds; notes that in June 2022, the Commission announced a funding plan for the period June to end-December 2022 and raised an additional EUR 50 billion in long-term funding for NGEU, complemented by short-term EU-bills issuances, bringing the total outstanding amount of NGEU bonds to EUR 171 billion, of which EUR 36,5 were raised by issuing green bonds; notes that this debt consists of borrowed amounts with different maturities, ranging from 1 year to more than 25 years; remarks that this means that even though repayment of NGEU debt will only start after 2030; notes with concern borrowed amounts need to be repaid and borrowing activities remain needed not only to raise new funds, but also to replace existing debt;
Amendment 282 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 149 a (new) 149 a. Welcomes the Commission’s estimate that the full implementation of quantifiable milestones and targets up until the end of 2026 funded by NGEU Green Bonds, corresponding to 57% of the NGEU Green Bond eligible expenditure, can reduce GHG emissions by 44 million tonnes of CO2 per annum– equivalent to 1.2% of aggregate 2022 EU GHG emissions - and insists on proper implementation; stresses furthermore the importance that reforms and investments under the Recovery and Resilience Plans meet the climate targets of the regulation and fully respect the “do no significant harm” principle;
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 150 150. Notes that, in 2020, an amount of EUR 14,9 billion was planned in the MFF 2021-2027 to cover the interest payments for NGEU non-repayable support; is concerned about the impact of the higher interest rates on the purchasing power of the Union budget, with the interest rates on 10-year EU-Bonds increasing from 0,09 % in 2021 to 3,2 % in 2023; expresses concern about the large amount of money that the Commission is borrowing in order to pay for the Recovery and Resilience Facility, is concerned in particular about the strong rise in the interest rates ; regrets that the Commission did not borrow important parts of the money designated for the RRF directly after the agreement between Parliament and Council was concluded, and at a time when interest rates were much lower; notes the Commission’s statement that the Union will meet its obligations towards bondholders in all circumstances and its proposal for a technical modification to the MFF to optimise the budgetary treatment of NGEU borrowing costs; requests that the Commission provide more information to the European Parliament on how repayment will be made and from which institutions funds are being borrowed; emphasizes that this debt burdens the EU budget;
Amendment 284 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 151.
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 151. Welcomes that the RRF expenditure in 2022 is legal and regular in all material aspects, except for the effects of the quantitative findings in 11 payments and the material error in 6 payments estimated by the Court, which are the basis for its qualified opinion concerning the RRF expenditure; notes that the nature of the RRF spending model relies on the
Amendment 286 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 a (new) 151 a. Reminds that RRF funds, according to the RRF regulation (EU) 2021/241, article 5, paragraph 1, shall not be used to finance recurring budgetary expenditure; is particularly concerned about the Court’s observation regarding one target which represents a substitution of recurring national budgetary expenditure; calls for adequate measures to be taken, including through a strict enforcement of the option of partial payments;
Amendment 287 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 b (new) 151 b. Further expects that actions are taken by the Commission to address concrete instances of reversal or milestones and targets in the RRP of some member states and takes note with concern about the reported cases of such reversals; urges the Commission to strictly apply the provisions of the Regulation and the adopted guidelines;
Amendment 288 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 151 c (new) 151 c. Is concerned about the Court’s observation of persisting weaknesses in the set-up and functioning of member state control systems and urges the Commission and national authorities to address them swiftly; recalls that such weaknesses put at risk the sound financial management of RRF funding; reminds the Commission and Member States that according to the RRF Regulation, the non-fulfilment of milestones or targets related to a Member State’s audit and control system that were necessary for complying with Article 22 of the RRF Regulation may lead to the suspension of the full instalment and all future instalments; calls on an adequate and equal application of this provision for all member states;
Amendment 289 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 152 152. Notes that the Court audited 244 out of 274 milestones and all 37 targets included in 2022 payment requests for grants;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recalls the utmost importance of carrying out an ex-post evaluation of financial programmes created to respond to a crisis concerning their effectiveness, economic impact and performance, efficiency, relevance, coherence and Union added value;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recalls the utmost importance of carrying out an ex-post evaluation of financial programmes created to respond to a crisis concerning their effectiveness, economic impact and performance, efficiency, relevance, coherence and Union added value;
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 152 a (new) 152 a. Recalls the Court’s observations in Special Reports 21/2022 and 7/2023 that milestones and targets measure outputs rather than results; urges the Commission to ensure that the future design of instruments based on financing linked to costs shall also measure results and not only outputs; stresses that the mere completion of projects financed by the RRF funds do not guarantee a positive economic and social impact as well as quality and sustainability;
Amendment 291 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 152 a (new) 152 a. Notes that the Court has identified what it considers to be cases of continuation of a pre-existing project started before the eligibility period and targets that were a substitution of recurring national budgetary expenditure, although this conclusion does not agree with the Court’s own consideration that recurring actions refers to types of expenditure like staff and operating costs of government entities;
Amendment 292 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 152 b (new) 152 b. Recalls the Court’s observation in Special Report 21/2022 and its Annual Report for 2021 that milestones and targets often lack clarity and are not well defined and that the Court makes the same observation in its annual report 2022; calls on the Commission to draw on lessons learned when designing future performance based instruments;
Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 152 c (new) 152 c. Is worried by the Court’s findings in SR 26/2023 that milestones and targets vary in ambition between Member States and considers this is yet another example where the Commission does not treat member states equally; notes that the Commission confirmed the differences and will try to enhance equal treatment during the implementation phase; considers that Member States by default should be treated equally and regrets this has not been the case when negotiating the RRPs; insists that equal treatment should be ensured when evaluating the completion of milestones and targets;
Amendment 294 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 153 153. Notes that the Court considers that a case of double funding occurred in 2022, even though the measure in question does not have any costs attached to it under the RRF; notes the Commission’s observation that, according to the RRF Regulation, ‘double funding’ is explicitly linked to costs and thus, there can be no 'double funding' if the Member State has not submitted any cost estimate as part of its national plan; notes that the Commission underlines that reforms are essential criteria for the Commission's positive assessment of RRPs
Amendment 295 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 153 153. Notes with concern that the Court
Amendment 296 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 154. Notes that the Court also identified several cases of weak design in M&Ts and problems with the reliability of information that Member States included in their management declarations,
Amendment 297 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 154. Notes with concern that the Court also identified several cases of weak design in M&Ts and problems with the reliability of information that Member States included in their management declarations, although the effects of those findings are considered material but not pervasive by the Court; notes that the Commission agrees to review M&Ts provided there is a legal justification to change the elements of a Council Implementing Decision, namely that a Member State submits an amended plan and a legal basis justifies the changes;
Amendment 298 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 154 a (new) 154 a. Is worried that in its audit work the Court also identified weaknesses in Member States' reporting and control systems, leading the Commission to set up additional conditions for payments (control milestones); notes limitations in the Commission preliminary assessments and ex posts audits and problems with the reliability of the information provided in the management declarations by Member States, casting doubts on the possibility to relay on them when assessing milestones and targets before making payments;
Amendment 299 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 155 155.
Amendment 3 #
Proposal for a decision 2 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 3 #
Proposal for a decision 2 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recalls the importance of carrying out an ex-post evaluation of financial programmes created to respond to a crisis concerning the
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recalls the importance of carrying out an ex-post evaluation of financial programmes created to respond to a crisis concerning the
Amendment 300 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 156 156.
Amendment 301 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 156 156. Welcomes the systematic and comprehensive audit work of the Court regarding the RRF, with emphasis on the protection of the Union’s financial interests, which
Amendment 302 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 156 a (new) 156 a. Appreciates the Special Report 26/2023: ‘the Recovery and Resilience Facility’s performance promoting framework-measuring implementation progress but not sufficient to capture performance’ in highlighting some of the drawbacks of using a performance-based framework, in particular when trying to quantify results; requests the Commission applies lessons learnt from the Court’s observations in this special report when designing future performance-based frameworks;
Amendment 303 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 156 a (new) 156 a. Stresses the fact that the RRF was established as the common EU’s instrument to mitigate the serious economic and social impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and make European economies and societies more sustainable, resilient, inclusive and better prepared for the challenges and opportunities of the green and digital transitions and its financial means thus can not be understood as Member States’ own budget resources; emphasizes the crucial role of the Court and the Commission in their proactive ex-ante and ex-post controls in making sure the funds are spend effectively with satisfactory fulfillment of M&Ts;
Amendment 304 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 157 157.
Amendment 305 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 158. Welcomes that, based on the Court’s recommendations and the experience gained, the Commission presented its methodologies on (i) assessing the satisfactory fulfilment of M&Ts, (ii) calculating the suspended amounts in case of non-fulfilment of a milestone or target, and (iii) dealing with potential situations where M&Ts initially assessed as satisfactorily fulfilled by the Commission were subsequently reversed by the Member State; welcomes that the Commission accepts the recommendation to carry out a revision of its ex-post audit procedures to verify the potential reversal of targets after the payment, although is particularly concerned that the methodology does not provide legal clarity in case a milestone or target is reversed after the implementation period of the RRF once all payments have been made;
Amendment 306 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 158.
Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 e (new) 158 e. Expresses concern that there is no provision that addresses the reversal of milestones and targets after the last date for payments from the RRF, 31 December 2026 or after the last payment in an RRP in general, particularly because some of the most important milestones and targets included in RRPs are to be fulfilled in the last part of the RRF lifetime; expresses concern that the Commission is dependent on the Member States to identify any of the mentioned reversals; recommends that the Commission communicate more actively with Member States to proactively identify any reversals of targets and milestones; calls on the Commission to present a methodology that addresses both omissions;
Amendment 308 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 a (new) 158 a. Emphasises the need for the Commission to pay more attention to reversal of milestones, in particular in the area of rule of law; highlights the recent case of a potential reversal of two milestones concerning the rule of law in Slovakia (15.5 “Fighting corruption and strengthening the integrity and independence of the judiciary” and milestone 16.1 “ Reform on making the fight against corruption and anti-money laundering more effective”, Annex of the Council Implementing Decision); observes that rule of law milestones and targets are particularly vulnerable to arbitrary governmental decisions; notes that 12 national recovery and resilience plans contain rule of law or anti- corruption reforms in their milestones and targets; urges the Commission to actively follow and collect information on the reversal of rule of law milestones and targets and to actively discuss financial consequences as laid out in the RRF regulation;
Amendment 309 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 b (new) 158 b. Notes that the framework for assessing milestones and targets lacks explanations, i.a. the reasons why the verification mechanism and monitoring steps as described in the operational arrangement should not be considered for the assessment;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recalls the importance of carrying out an ex-post evaluation of financial programmes created to respond to a crisis concerning their compliance, effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, coherence and Union added value;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recalls the importance of carrying out an ex-post evaluation of financial programmes created to respond to a crisis concerning their compliance, effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, coherence and Union added value;
Amendment 310 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 c (new) 158 c. Underlines that the definitions of “satisfactory fulfilment” of the relevant milestones and target are defined through terms, which lack a clear definition and contain subjective elements such as “minimal deviation from a formal requirement”, “limited and proportional delays” and “minimal deviation from a substance requirement”; asks that further clarifications are given in this regard and calls for a clear and comprehensive approach when assessing deviations;
Amendment 311 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 158 d (new) 158 d. Notes that the methodology for the determination of payment suspension does not provide an explanation for the values chosen as coefficients and also contains subjective elements, such as the upward or downward adjustments of the corrected unit value and terms that lack clear definitions, such as investments of “major importance” or reforms of “particular importance”; asks that further clarifications are given;
Amendment 312 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 159 159. Notes that the Commission verified the adequacy of the control systems of Member States as a precondition for the positive assessment of the RRPs and, in some cases,
Amendment 313 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 159 159. Notes that the Commission verified the adequacy of the control systems of Member States as a precondition for the positive assessment of the RRPs and, in some cases, specific M&Ts on audit and control were added in the RRPs to ensure the full adequacy of the systems to protect the financial interests of the Union; notes that the satisfactory fulfilment of audit and control M&Ts was, in turn, a precondition for the first payments and welcomes that the Court did not raise any issues related to their satisfactory fulfilment assessed during 2022; notes that
Amendment 314 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 159 a (new) 159 a. Recalls that the Council adopted the Hungarian recovery and resilience plan based on the Commission’s positive evaluation; notes that compared to the original plan, a whole new component of measures was added containing 38 measures with 11 milestones and targets, regrets that pre-financing under the RRF is not subject to a procedure under the conditionality mechanism;
Amendment 315 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 160 a (new) 160 a. Recalls that on 15 December 2022, the Council adopted Implementing Decision on the approval of the assessment of the RRP for Hungary; recalls that 27 ‘super milestones’ were added to the national RRP with remedial and audit and control measures; notes that on 7 December 2023, the Council adopted Implementing Decision approving Hungary’s amended RRP, including a REPowerEU chapter, which allows Hungary to receive EUR 0,9 billion in pre-financing of the REPowerEU funds;
Amendment 316 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 159 b (new) 159 b. Notes the efforts of the Commission to raise funds on the financial markets to provide the financial means for the RRF; notes that interest rates have risen sharply in 2022 and that Commission AAA borrowing costs are higher than Member States with a lower rating, is concerned by the resulting debts, the rising interest rates and the resulting uncertain capacity to repay the loans; notes however that we have 90 billion Euros less debt than initially forecasted;
Amendment 317 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 161. Notes that the Commission reports that the achievement of M&Ts is broadly on track, after the first year of the RRF's functioning was more focused on the necessary reforms to build the framework for subsequent investment projects to have a higher impact; notes that the Commission reports delays compared to the indicative calendar of payments, due to the process of revising the RRPs in the context of the REPowerEU Plan and implementation challenges Member States are facing, such as administrative capacity issues, investment bottlenecks, and consequences of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, including the energy crisis, unexpected price shocks, shortages of certain materials and high inflation; calls on the Commission to remain vigilant, in particular towards the end of the RRF lifecycle, in order to ensure that Member States protect the financial interests of the EU and that EU taxpayers’ money is adequately spent; points out that, in particular, the countering of fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest (defined as ‘serious irregularities’) and double funding should receive appropriate resources and attention; notes that the Commission is supporting all Member States in accelerating the implementation and revision of their plans, including through the Technical Support Instrument; is concerned that according to the Commission’s RRF 2023 implementation report, 8 Member States have not yet submitted any payment request to the Commission;
Amendment 318 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 161. Notes that the Commission reports that the achievement of M&Ts is broadly on track, after the first year of the RRF's functioning was more focused on the necessary reforms to build the framework for subsequent investment projects to have a higher impact; notes with concern that the Commission reports delays compared to the indicative calendar of payments, due to the process of revising the RRPs in the context of the REPowerEU Plan and implementation challenges Member States are facing, such as administrative capacity issues, investment bottlenecks, and consequences of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, including the energy crisis, unexpected price shocks, shortages of certain materials and high inflation;
Amendment 319 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 161. Notes that the Commission reports that the achievement of M&Ts is broadly on track, after the first year of the RRF's functioning was more focused on the necessary reforms to build the framework for subsequent investment projects to have a higher impact; notes that the Commission reports delays compared to the indicative calendar of payments, due to the process of revising the RRPs in the context of the REPowerEU Plan and implementation challenges Member States are facing, such as administrative capacity issues, investment bottlenecks, and consequences of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, including the energy crisis, unexpected price shocks, shortages of certain materials and high inflation; notes that the Commission is supporting all Member States in accelerating the implementation and revision of their plans, including through the Technical Support Instrument; is concerned that according to the Commission’s RRF
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Recalls the importance of the RRF in facing the economic downturn following the COVID-19 pandemic, reminds that the RRF delivery model puts much, lighter requirements on the Commission, and reduces the control burden from the Commission towards the Member States; is concerned that the Court in its assessment of the RRF identified shortcomings in the Commission preliminary assessment and ex posts audits and considers that weaknesses remain in the member states’ reporting and control systems; is worried that such weaknesses have led to the establishment of ‘control milestones’ indicating that the relevant member state systems were not fully functional when the plans started to be implemented, thus posing a risk to the regularity of RRF expenditure and the protection of the EU’s financial interests;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Recalls the importance of the RRF in facing the economic downturn following the COVID-19 pandemic, reminds that the RRF delivery model puts much, lighter requirements on the Commission, and reduces the control burden from the Commission towards the Member States; is concerned that the Court in its assessment of the RRF identified shortcomings in the Commission preliminary assessment and ex posts audits and considers that weaknesses remain in the member states’ reporting and control systems; is worried that such weaknesses have led to the establishment of ‘control milestones’ indicating that the relevant member state systems were not fully functional when the plans started to be implemented, thus posing a risk to the regularity of RRF expenditure and the protection of the EU’s financial interests;
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 a (new) 161 a. Emphasises that one of the drivers of the creation of the Resilience and Recovery Facility was a lack of resilience and preparedness that became apparent during the Corona Pandemic to have severe weaknesses; the crisis response capacity of healthcare systems across EU member states is clearly mentioned inarticles 6, 10, 15, 16 and 28 of Regulation 2021/241 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility; highlights that according to Article 3, Scope, of the RRF Regulation 2021/241, health is one of the six pillars of the RRF; regrets that overall only a few milestones and targets cover health aspects or the strengthening of the health systems in member countries; notes that some country national recovery plans do not even have a health-related milestone or target or have ones that are only vaguely related to health and do not contribute to strengthening the health or hospital system; urges the Commission to strengthen milestones and targets related to preparedness and resilience in the health sector where possible when revising national recovery and resilience plans with member states; notes that eight indicators in the RRF Regulation Annex VI cover health, including those covering e-health services, health infrastructure, health equipment, health mobile assets, digitalisation in health care, effectiveness and resilience of healthcare systems and several others; asks the Commission to report to the CONT Committee in autumn;
Amendment 321 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 a (new) 161 a. Recalls that the COVID-19 pandemic has revealed structural weaknesses in health systems across the EU and welcomes that health resilience is among the six pillars of the RRF decided by the co-legislators that make possible reforms and investments to strengthen their capacity, quality and resilience; notes that 531 M&Ts and 223 measures, as well as 48 % of the estimated contribution to this pillar is related to healthcare, including reforms to improve access to healthcare, developing e-health services and incentives for R&D investments by pharmaceutical companies; notes that an estimate 45 million people can use or be served by new or modernised health care facilities thanks to the RRF;
Amendment 322 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 a (new) 161 a. Notes that the Commission is supporting all Member States in accelerating the implementation and revision of their plans, including through the Technical Support Instrument; is concerned that according to the Commission’s RRF 2023 implementation report, 8 Member States have not yet submitted any payment request to the Commission;
Amendment 323 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 b (new) 161 b. Stresses the importance of proactive supporting role of the Commission to the Member States towards the ending of the RRF instrument period to best avoid the delays and under- implementation problem, so evidently observed towards the end of MFF period; calls for speedy implementation of recovery and resilience plans, including an evaluation by the Commission regarding the implementation process, barriers and results; is concerned that under-implementation, unless swiftly mitigated, will result in a payment crisis, i.e. a mismatch of payment needs and available space under the MFF payment ceiling in 2026 and 2027;
Amendment 324 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 b (new) 161 b. Notes that very little emphasis is placed on resilience or added-value in contributing to resilience when milestones and targets are emphasized; urges the Commission to create a ‘contribution to resilience’ indicator for the RRF scoreboard and to tabulate impact in the areas of resilience; further urges the Commission to consider contribution to resilience when considering new milestones and targets that are introduced into revised national recovery and resilience plans; encourages the Court to look more closely at RRF impact of resilience in all the pillars in a future study;
Amendment 325 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 c (new) 161 c. Emphasises that when reviewing revised national recovery plans, the Commission should still diligently apply the ‘Assessment guidelines for the Facility’ as outlined in Annex V of the Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility, which includes the Commission to assess and rate national recovery and resilience plans under the criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and coherence (article 19(3)), as well as coverage of the six pillars, namely a) green transition, b) digital transformation, c) smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, d) social and territorial cohesion, e) health and economic, social and institutional resilience, f) policies for the next generation (Article 3); asserts that this is an important process to avoid revised national recovery plans that are much weaker than the original plans or that no longer fulfil the criteria;
Amendment 326 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 c (new) 161 c. Is of the opinion that both the Member States and the Commission missed the opportunity to better tailor and align the investments and reforms to the EU policy goals, in particular pertaining to the just and green transition, especially in terms of choosing most impactful investments; regrets in that regard the approval of certain activities financed through the RRF fund included in the green and digital spending components of the Plan do not in reality contribute to more sustainable and green economic transition;
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 d (new) 161 d. Notes that the RRF should create synergies and measures implemented should lead to structural reforms that have added-value; is concerned that some countries have repackaged old national reforms into the national RRPs;
Amendment 328 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 e (new) 161 e. Emphasises that there should be better co-governance approach in all Member States where local and regional authorities, civil society organisations, social partners, academia or other relevant stakeholders are adequately involved in the design and the implementation of the national RRPs; calls for their involvement based on clear, fair, transparent and non-politicised principles, in the implementation of the national RRPs to the maximum extent possible under the national legislative framework;
Amendment 329 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 161 f (new) 161 f. Calls on the Commission to ensure that Member States apply a zero-tolerance approach to corruption and fraud, including embezzlement without any exception;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Underlines the risk of conflicts of interest when all actors involved in the implementation of the EU budget at any level, might be compromised for reasons beyond economic interest, particularly family, emotional life, political or national affinity; notes the highly fragmented legal framework across Member States and regions concerning the conflict of interest and welcomes the Commission guidance to promote a uniform interpretation and application; supports the Court’s observation in its Special report 6/2023 that “data mining, by comparing information from different sources, has the potential to help detect possible conflicts of interest”;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Underlines the risk of conflicts of interest when all actors involved in the implementation of the EU budget at any level, might be compromised for reasons beyond economic interest, particularly family, emotional life, political or national affinity; notes the highly fragmented legal framework across Member States and regions concerning the conflict of interest and welcomes the Commission guidance to promote a uniform interpretation and application; supports the Court’s observation in its Special report 6/2023 that “data mining, by comparing information from different sources, has the potential to help detect possible conflicts of interest”;
Amendment 330 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 166 a (new) 166 a. Notes that the Court found that concerning reporting on the common indicators, quality and underlying methodologies are not checked by national audit authorities in any visited member state; is astonished that in a member state the indicated planting of trees did not exist when ECA made an on- the-spot check; notes that the Commission does not require supporting evidence or explanations on the reported data, except in cases where estimates are reported; notes that the Court concludes that this poses a risk to data reliability and comparability across member states; concludes that data reliability in the absence of audits might affect the performance information reported on common indicators to a larger extent than information based on milestones and targets; considers this, given the issues identified in the milestones and targets by the Court, a worrying situation and calls on the Commission to improve its assurance on the reporting on common indicators; notes the differing practices among auditing authorities regarding the timing of the checks on the fulfilment of targets and reforms; believes that such checks should be better harmonised and should include a compulsory check on the reliability and accuracy of the data on milestones and targets before those milestones and targets are included in a payment request; points out the risks of an approach that uses mostly ex-post checks and calls on Member States to avoid such practices;
Amendment 331 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 166 b (new) 166 b. Encourages more true cross border projects be implemented using RRF funds; is critical of the fact that some projects receiving RRF funds are listed by some countries as cross-border as soon as they reduce energy consumption or increase energy efficiency; considers that though reducing energy consumption may achieve some RRF climate goals (including 17 indicators in Annex VI for the Methodology for Climate Tracking in the Regulation establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility), these projects should nevertheless not be considered cross- border if they do not include an actual cross-border geographical element;
Amendment 332 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 166 c (new) 166 c. Notes that countries may be overwhelmed administratively with the transfer of large RRF funds and cohesion funds at the same time, points out that the sheer size of funds transferred can place a large administrative burden on member states, thus delaying implementation and potentially threatening transparency; is concerned by the fact that according to the EIB one member state appeared on a short notice with the wish to create a new EIB program for 20 billion within a short period of time because of problems of disbursement via the own administration; encourages Commission to actively communicate with member states about administrative capacities in handling the funds before making the transfer and to so thorough checks on the quality and necessity of projects; notes that the budgetary control committee was informed of many instances where member states felt overwhelmed administratively in this regard;
Amendment 333 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 166 d (new) 166 d. Notes potential concerns about absorption of funds with high quality projects as pointed out in discussions in the budgetary control committee during presentations of the ECA Special Report to the budgetary control committee and as discussed in the RRF working group of the European Parliament; encourages the Commission to think of possible next steps and concrete measures and solutions to help member states to implement the projects in the foreseen timeline;
Amendment 334 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 166 e (new) 166 e. Notes the risk of double funding between Cohesion and RRF Funds as pointed out in ECA Review 01/2023; encourages the Commission actively cross-check between databases to ensure double funding does not occur; encourages the Commission to proactively work together with member states in this regard;
Amendment 335 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 166 f (new) 166 f. Expresses concerns regarding the Recovery and Resilience Fund: i. calls on the Commission to accurately list “final recipients” according to Article 22 2d) of Regulation (EU) 2021/241; ii. is concerned about an assurance and accountibility gap due partially to the time lapse between Milestones fulfilment and Project implementation; iii. calls on the Commission to act swiftly when reversals of milestones occur: to request the reinstallment of the fulfilment of the milestone, in case of refusal by the member state to partially block remaining funds in line with the methodology and to recover the corresponding funds; iv. criticises that in contradiction to the main goals of the facility the definition of “resilience” is insufficient to ameliorate the preparadeness of future crisis situations; v. is concerned that there is an absence of compliance audits by the Commission on RRF funded investment projects, despite the multiple warnings of ECA stating that many national management, payment and audit authorities are not fully functioning and therefore have potentially unreliable audits; vi. is concerned about the limited number of cross-border projects under the RRF, notes that many purely national projects are listed as cross-border projects as soon as they have energy saving or energy reducing elements; criticises the overestimation of the published number of cross-border projects as misleading; urges the Commission to change the methodology of categorisation of cross- border projects; urges that only projects with an real geographical cross-border component to be considered a cross- border project;
Amendment 336 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 166 a (new) 166 a. Notes that the RRF Scoreboard provides real-time information on the disbursements and progress made by Member States, as well as additional data, indicators and thematic analysis and welcomes the launch of the EU-wide interactive map showing RRF projects by geographical location and providing information on the state of play; notes that the RRF Scoreboard also links to the national websites and commends those Member States that have set up specific websites where all information and documentation relevant to their national RRPs are published;
Amendment 337 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 a (new) 167 a. Expresses concern about the Court’s finding in SR 07/2023 that reporting of fraud involving RRF funds lacks a standardised approach with strong coordination and cooperation between member states; asks the Commission to encourage Member states to align the reporting on fraud in a digital standardised way and to make use of the Irregularity Management System; calls on the Commission to report at an aggregated level on the cased of suspected fraud, corruption, and conflict of interests detected in its own audits, and by the Member States as reported in the management declarations; calls on the Commission to evaluate the information received, to consider its quality and to offer guidance to Member States if necessary; welcomes that the Commission has already adapted the Irregularity Management System so that the system can be used for the RRF by the competent national authorities for recording detected irregularities; notes the legal basis for using the IMS is in the Regulation (EU) 2021/241;
Amendment 338 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 b (new) 167 b. Notes with concern, that EPPO’s responsibility in investigating crimes involving RRF funds is being put into question in 9 cases in a member state; notes that the European Court of Justice was asked via a preliminary question to give an opinion in one of these cases;
Amendment 339 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 c (new) 167 c. Furthermore notes that cases involving RRF funds fall squarely into the Material Competence of the EPPO according to Chapter IV Competence and exercise of the competence of the EPPO, Section 1, Competence of the EPPO, Article 22, 1. “the EPPO shall be competent in respect of the criminal offences affecting the financial interest of the Union that are provided for in Directive (EU) 2017/1371, as implemented by national law, irrespective of whether the same criminal conduct could be classified as another type of offence under national law”, and in addition Article 23, Territorial and personal competence of the EPPO, “the EPPO shall be competent for the offences referred to Article 22 where such offences: a) were committed in whole or in part within the territory of one or several member states”; encourages the Commission to convey this member states;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Emphasises the role of the European anti-fraud office (OLAF), the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO), the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) and the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) in the fight against corruption; calls for the capacities of the EPPO and OLAF, as well as cooperation between them, to be strengthened further; reiterates the need to step up the efforts in the fight against fraud both at Union and Member State level, in close cooperation with the EPPO and OLAF; appreciates the efforts and stresses the role of the EPPO in the investigation and prosecution of fraud and other criminal offences affecting the financial interests of the Union; highlights the importance of the EPPO’s full independence and impartiality for the effective exercise of its functions; recalls the importance of providing the EPPO and OLAF with sufficient financial and human resources calls for common anti- corruption rules applicable to all staff of Union bodies;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Emphasises the role of the European anti-fraud office (OLAF), the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO), the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) and the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) in the fight against corruption; calls for the capacities of the EPPO and OLAF, as well as cooperation between them, to be strengthened further; reiterates the need to step up the efforts in the fight against fraud both at Union and Member State level, in close cooperation with the EPPO and OLAF; appreciates the efforts and stresses the role of the EPPO in the investigation and prosecution of fraud and other criminal offences affecting the financial interests of the Union; highlights the importance of the EPPO’s full independence and impartiality for the effective exercise of its functions; recalls the importance of providing the EPPO and OLAF with sufficient financial and human resources calls for common anti- corruption rules applicable to all staff of Union bodies;
Amendment 340 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 d (new) 167 d. Implores the Commission to communicate more actively with Member States regarding fraud prevention;
Amendment 341 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 e (new) 167 e. Encourages the Commission, EPPO and other relevant entities to cooperate intensively to identify fraud cases or crimes against the financial interest of the EU, to report possible patterns of fraud and other financial crimes; encourages the relevant entities on European and national level to strengthen cooperation and coordination in these cases to better protect taxpayers money; asks Member States to strengthen their capacities to uncover crimes in this area and to support a structured cooperation with the relevant European entities;
Amendment 342 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 f (new) 167 f. Emphasises that the protection of the financial interests of the European Union is a top priority and that preventing fraudulent use of RRF Funds is part of this priority; asserts that more precise implementation and performance monitoring will help reduce or prevent fraud at an early stage; calls on the Commission to act accordingly;
Amendment 343 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 g (new) 167 g. Emphasises that in particular rule of law and anti-corruption milestones and targets are at risk of being overturned as these milestones and targets are essential in hindering corrupt individuals, organisations. governments or criminal systems; urges the Commission to follow the fulfillment of rule of law and anti- corruption milestones and targets closely and to more actively report on reversals or possible reversals of milestones in this area;
Amendment 344 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 167 h (new) 167 h. Is concerned that the information presented on the RRF Scoreboard concerning progress under the six pillars is misleading as for example the contribution of each measure is counted twice as pointed out in the ECA Special Report 26/2023; calls on the Commission to disclose for the current presented figures the limitations detected by the Court immediately, and to remedy the shortcomings; notes further as regards the RRF Scoreboard that the Court concluded in its Special Report 26/2023 that presented performance lacks transparency as regards inclusion of estimates and that aggregated information is not comparable; notes that transparency about limitations is of the utmost importance as lack of transparency calls into question what other limitations have not been disclosed and therefore affects the (perceived) reliability of all presented information; calls on the Commission to proactively present the assumptions and limitations of the presented data on the scoreboard;
Amendment 345 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 168. Notes that, following an explicit demand of the Parliament, the amended RRF Regulation requires Member States to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding under the RRF; notes that all Member States but one have published the required list on the RRF Scoreboard and observes a large variety of the size of the payments both across the Member States and within each country, which is explained by the heterogeneous nature of RRPs; regrets the delays in the publication by Member States of the lists; expresses concern over the interpretation of the Commission of the concept of “final recipient” under the RRF; is furthermore concerned that the final recipients listed are often only at the ministry level and that the descriptions are extremely vague, for example where 573 million Euros were paid to the Slovakian Ministry of the Environment simply for ‘adaptation of regions to climate changes’, or where 19 million Euros were paid to the Interior Ministry of Bulgaria for construction of a relay network, with similar examples available in almost all final recipients lists in a total of more than 50 cases; calls on the Member States to publish the data collected to comply with Article 22(2)(d) of the original RRF Regulation on all final recipients and their beneficial owners, and eventual contractors and subcontractors; is concerned that otherwise it will be problematic to measure the impact and guarantee visibility of the RRF funds to the citizens when not even the Parliament and the Commission know where the money was spent;
Amendment 346 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 168. Notes that, following an explicit demand of the Parliament, the amended RRF Regulation requires Member States to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding under the RRF; notes that all Member States but one have published the required list on the RRF Scoreboard and observes a large variety of the size of the payments both across the Member States and within each country, which is explained by the heterogeneous nature of RRPs; reiterates its demand that the list of final recipients provides the factual natural person or an entity that is the last in a chain of money transfers;
Amendment 347 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 168. Notes that, following an explicit demand of the Parliament, the amended RRF Regulation requires Member States to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding under the RRF; notes that all Member States
Amendment 348 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 168 a (new) 168 a. Expresses concern about the high number of RRF cases reported to EPPO after the first year of implementation, namely 15 active cases in EPPO related to RRF as reported in the EPPO Annual Report 2022; calls on the Commission to act in situations where several cases with certain patterns and indicators are occurring and to cooperate with OLAF and EPPO to inform about patterns of fraud, corruption and money laundering related to RRF; calls on the Commission to draw consequences for member states with too many cases of fraud including changes of the administrative procedures or, if necessary, freezing payments;
Amendment 349 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 169 a (new) 169 a. Is concerned about reports from the Court regarding difficulties in accessing RRF data to perform its duties; urges the Commission to ensure full access to the Court to the relevant databases of member states and EU; urges the Commission to guarantee that data in the FENIX database are updated in a timely manner for the purposes of audit and control; underlines that data should be accurate and transmitted in a standardised format;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Emphasises the role and the importance of a strengthened cooperation of the European anti-fraud office (OLAF), the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO), the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) and the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) in the fight against corruption; calls for the capacities of the EPPO and OLAF,
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Emphasises the role and the importance of a strengthened cooperation of the European anti-fraud office (OLAF), the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO), the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) and the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) in the fight against corruption; calls for the capacities of the EPPO and OLAF,
Amendment 350 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 169 b (new) 169 b. Recommends when implementing performance-based instruments in the future, that milestones and targets are clearly defined and linked in a timely manner to avoid accountability gaps and that the measuring of outputs and results is possible; recommends for performance based instruments to create a clear and precise verification mechanism from the beginning; notes that this is crucial in the context of transparency and accountability to the EU taxpayer;
Amendment 351 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 169 c (new) 169 c. Is concerned about transparency and accountability towards the public; urges that the Commission communicates with Member States about appropriate labelling of projects including reference that a project received Recovery and Resilience Funds; regrets following ECA report 2022 that even at the Commission level there is no clear oversight what specific projects RRF funds are supporting; underlines that the European taxpayer has the right to see what projects EU funds are supporting, where the projects are occurring, and what their added value is; calls on the Commission to increase visibility to insist on clear labelling of projects whether in the form of plaques for physical buildings or renovations, notifications on websites, announcements at conferences or trainings, labelled on printed documents;
Amendment 352 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 – point i a (new) (i a) Halt payments for countries where milestones and targets have been reversed, if the Member State refuses to undo the reversal; apply the verification mechanism when analysing the fulfilment of milestones and targets as listed in the operational arrangements as these verification mechanisms provide more details about specific milestones and targets and thus their application would contribute to the accuracy of measurements; urges that for future performance-based instruments, the purpose of the verification mechanism be more clearly outlined, and that the mechanism are actually applied when measuring performance, particularly in view that with the RRF, verification mechanisms mentioned in the operational arrangements were very precise, but that in practice the Commission did not apply these when measuring performance;
Amendment 353 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 – point i a (new) (i a) urgently follow up on the Ombudsman’s recommendation following her inquiry on the Commission's refusal of public access to text messages exchanged between the Commission President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company on the purchase of a COVID-19 vaccine and to conduct a full search without delay;
Amendment 354 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 – point i a (new) (i a) continue to undertake Member States’ system audits in order to obtain reasonable assurance on the compliance with EU and national rules, particularly public procurement, and work closely with the Court to find ways to remove its concerns about the assurance gap;
Amendment 355 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 – point i a (new) (i a) work in close cooperation with the discharge authority as co legislator to reform the RRF regulation by providing a methodology to monitor potential reversals of milestones or targets 2 years after the end of the implementation;
Amendment 356 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 – point i b (new) (i b) ensure the systematic registration and archiving of non-private correspondence related to key political decisions and spending;
Amendment 357 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 – point i c (new) (i c) bring its internal guidelines on document registration in line with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and to register text messages related to its policies, activities and decisions particularly those involving the expenditure of public funds;
Amendment 358 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 – point i d (new) (i d) immediately publish the non- redacted versions of the Purhase Agreements for the COVID-19 vaccines;
Amendment 359 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 – point ii (ii) keep improving the clarity of the measures and the related M&Ts, as well as ensure that they fully respect the horizontal principles of the Regulation, when the Member State submits a revision of the national plan;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Emphasises the role of the European anti-fraud office (OLAF), the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO), the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) and the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) in the fight against corruption; calls for the capacities of the EPPO and OLAF, as well as cooperation between them, to be strengthened further; calls for their remits to be better defined, and for common anti- corruption rules applicable to all staff of Union bodies;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Emphasises the role of the European anti-fraud office (OLAF), the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO), the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) and the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) in the fight against corruption; calls for the capacities of the EPPO and OLAF, as well as cooperation between them, to be strengthened further; calls for their remits to be better defined, and for common anti- corruption rules applicable to all staff of Union bodies;
Amendment 360 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 – point ii c (new) (ii c) improve the ex-post monitoring of continued fulfilment of milestones and targets; urges the Commission to actively follow potential reversal of milestones and targets, particularly in the area of rule of law, and to actively discuss financial consequences of reversals;
Amendment 361 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 – point iii a (new) (iii a) improve the transparency and presentation of the RRF Scoreboard by eliminating any possibility of misinterpretation of figures and double counting; consistently apply the definition of final recipients as listed in 22 2 d of the RRF regulation; perform regular checks of the adequacy of the control and monitoring systems of Member States; ensure a comparable level of precision in the evaluation of milestones and targets; ensure equal treatment to Member States when evaluating the fulfilment of milestones and targets; further encourage Member States to develop cross-border projects with real cross-border geographical components when revision country plans; reject any financing of recurring national budgetary expenditure using RRF funds if there are no exceptional reasons and suspend any payments immediately if Member States are found in breach of this provision; further support Member States to increase their administrative capacity to handle the parallel administrative systems of RRF and cohesion fund implementation, and help them reduce unnecessary administrative burdens, simplify tenders and provide for more targeted information, thus facilitating the access of SMEs and self-employed to funding;
Amendment 362 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 – point iii a (new) (iii a) pay special attention and on-going dialogue with the Member States so that reforms and investments under the Recovery and Resilience Plans meet the climate targets of the regulation and fully respect the “do no significant harm” principle;
Amendment 363 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 – point v i (new) (v i) ensure full and unrestricted access to the Court in the performance of its duties, to RRF related data, explicitly the FENIX data base; ensure full and unrestricted access to OLAF and EPPO in the exercise of their duties to RRF related data in cooperation with the member states urges the Commission to communicate actively with member states on EPPOs responsibility for criminal cases in the area of RRF funds since corruption or fraud using RRF funds constitutes a crime against the financial interests of the European Union; urges member states responsible justice entities to cooperate intensively with EPPO and OLAF in this regard and to provide all necessary information; urges that for future performance-based instruments, the Commission look not just into Member State’s audit and control arrangements and the theoretical set-up on paper, but also into the actual functioning of the audit and control arrangements in practice with the goal of better protecting the financial interest of the Union and ensuring compliance with all EU and national rules; encourages the Commission to measure contribution to resilience more accurately and to depict this on the RRF scoreboard; address the tension between cohesion and the RRF, in particular concerning the involvement of local, regional, economic and social partners and civil society organisations, that makes it easier to absorb RFF funding in comparison to cohesion funding, emphasises that the Commission should stress that Member States should avoid ‘cherry picking’, but rather should select funds according to what is most fitting and efficient for the program or project in question; stresses that Commission should keep a particular close eye on potential double funding with cohesion and RRF funds, as noted in ECA Review 01/2023; requests that the Commission put more emphasis on the involvement of local and regional needs by requesting the member states to work more actively with local regions in a co-governance approach. urges the Commission to keep the goal of resilience and recovery in mind, in particular with regards to strengthening the preparedness and resilience of health and pharmaceutical sector as well as in the sector of goods that are critical in the different situations of possibly occurring crisis;
Amendment 364 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 171 a (new) 171 a. be more proactive in publishing documents and statistics regarding how they handle document access requests, as such information would help with assessing the institutions’ proactive approach to document access; calls that an application for access to a document must be handled promptly;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes the measures undertaken by the Commission in 2022
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes the measures undertaken by the Commission in 2022
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 4 #
Proposal for a decision 3 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 4 #
Proposal for a decision 3 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8 a. Strongly regrets the Commission’s decision to consider that Hungary has fulfilled the horizontal enabling condition related to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, as regards judiciary independence, thus enabling the Hungarian authorities to submit reimbursement claims of up to EUR 10.2 billion without adequate control mechanisms or public procurement procedures in place to guarantee sound financial management and the protection of the EU budget; believes that this decision politically contradicts the decision to prolong the measures adopted under the Conditionality Regulation and expresses its disappointment that Parliament was not adequately informed during the process; underlines that the Commission is tasked with independently and objectively assessing Hungary’s compliance with applicable legislation, without compromising on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights; believes that even after the recent reforms, Hungary does not meet the standard of judicial independence set out in the Charter, as indicated by experts in Hungary and internationally, as the measures adopted do not ensure sufficient safeguards against political influence and can be either circumvented or inadequately applied; is concerned, in particular, about the persistence of obstacles to preliminary references, problems with the allocation of cases in the Kúria, and the deficient system for the nomination of President of the Kúria;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8 a. Strongly regrets the Commission’s decision to consider that Hungary has fulfilled the horizontal enabling condition related to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, as regards judiciary independence, thus enabling the Hungarian authorities to submit reimbursement claims of up to EUR 10.2 billion without adequate control mechanisms or public procurement procedures in place to guarantee sound financial management and the protection of the EU budget; believes that this decision politically contradicts the decision to prolong the measures adopted under the Conditionality Regulation and expresses its disappointment that Parliament was not adequately informed during the process; underlines that the Commission is tasked with independently and objectively assessing Hungary’s compliance with applicable legislation, without compromising on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights; believes that even after the recent reforms, Hungary does not meet the standard of judicial independence set out in the Charter, as indicated by experts in Hungary and internationally, as the measures adopted do not ensure sufficient safeguards against political influence and can be either circumvented or inadequately applied; is concerned, in particular, about the persistence of obstacles to preliminary references, problems with the allocation of cases in the Kúria, and the deficient system for the nomination of President of the Kúria;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8 a. Recalls that on 15 December 2022, the Council adopted Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2506 on measures for the protection of the Union budget against breaches of the principles of the rule of law in Hungary, including the suspension of 55 % of budgetary commitments under three operational cohesion policy programmes; notes that the Commission has been monitoring the implementation of the remedial measures proposed by Hungary in the framework of the ‘Conditionality Regulation’; notes that in December 2023, the Commission reassessed on its own motion the situation in Hungary and concluded that the Union’s budget remains at the same level of risk as there are still commitments that were neither correctly nor timely fulfilled;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8 a. Recalls that on 15 December 2022, the Council adopted Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2506 on measures for the protection of the Union budget against breaches of the principles of the rule of law in Hungary, including the suspension of 55 % of budgetary commitments under three operational cohesion policy programmes; notes that the Commission has been monitoring the implementation of the remedial measures proposed by Hungary in the framework of the ‘Conditionality Regulation’; notes that in December 2023, the Commission reassessed on its own motion the situation in Hungary and concluded that the Union’s budget remains at the same level of risk as there are still commitments that were neither correctly nor timely fulfilled;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 b (new) 8 b. Notes that in 2022 the Council based on a Commission proposal agreed on measures for the protection of the Union budget against breaches of the principles of the rule of law in Hungary; welcomes the temporarily suspension of 55% of commitments for certain cohesion policy programmes for the period 2021- 2027; stresses that the decision was based on the Commission’s concerns regarding severe issues related to the public procurement system in Hungary; stresses the importance that Union needs to protect its financial interests as well during pre-financing;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 b (new) 8 b. Notes that in 2022 the Council based on a Commission proposal agreed on measures for the protection of the Union budget against breaches of the principles of the rule of law in Hungary; welcomes the temporarily suspension of 55% of commitments for certain cohesion policy programmes for the period 2021- 2027; stresses that the decision was based on the Commission’s concerns regarding severe issues related to the public procurement system in Hungary; stresses the importance that Union needs to protect its financial interests as well during pre-financing;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 b (new) 8 b. Notes that in December 2022, the Commission concluded that Hungary was not fulfilling the horizontal enabling conditions under the CPR on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) with regard to judicial independence and the provisions of several laws posing serious risks to LGBTIQ+ rights, academic freedom and the right to asylum; is concerned about the Commission decision in December 2023 considering that the horizontal enabling condition of the Charter had been fulfilled in relation to judicial independence, thus enabling the Hungary authorities to submit reimbursement claims of up to EUR 10,2 billion; believes that this decision politically contradicts the decision to prolong the measures adopted under the Conditionality Regulation and reiterates the need of treating as a single, integral package all the measures required for the release of EU funding under the Conditionality Regulation, the CPRs and the RRF Regulation; expresses its disappointment that Parliament was not adequately informed during the process;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 b (new) 8 b. Notes that in December 2022, the Commission concluded that Hungary was not fulfilling the horizontal enabling conditions under the CPR on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) with regard to judicial independence and the provisions of several laws posing serious risks to LGBTIQ+ rights, academic freedom and the right to asylum; is concerned about the Commission decision in December 2023 considering that the horizontal enabling condition of the Charter had been fulfilled in relation to judicial independence, thus enabling the Hungary authorities to submit reimbursement claims of up to EUR 10,2 billion; believes that this decision politically contradicts the decision to prolong the measures adopted under the Conditionality Regulation and reiterates the need of treating as a single, integral package all the measures required for the release of EU funding under the Conditionality Regulation, the CPRs and the RRF Regulation; expresses its disappointment that Parliament was not adequately informed during the process;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Welcomes the agreement reached in the negotiations on the revised Union financial rules in December 2023; welcomes, in particular, the enhancements related to tracking Union funds through digital tools and interoperability that will bolster the protection of the Union Financial Interests, the targeted extension of the Early Detection and Exclusion System (EDES) to shared management post MFF 2027, the reference to the Rule of Law conditionality mechanism and Union values
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Welcomes the agreement reached in the negotiations on the revised Union financial rules in December 2023; welcomes, in particular, the enhancements related to tracking Union funds through digital tools and interoperability that will bolster the protection of the Union Financial Interests, the targeted extension of the Early Detection and Exclusion System (EDES) to shared management post MFF 2027, the reference to the Rule of Law conditionality mechanism and Union values
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Reminds the Commission that all legislative proposals that have a significant economic, social and environmental impact have to be accompanied by solid and thorough impact assessments, including their impact on
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Reminds the Commission that all legislative proposals that have a significant economic, social and environmental impact have to be accompanied by solid and thorough impact assessments, including their impact on
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Reminds the Commission that all legislative proposals that have a significant economic, social and environmental impact have to be accompanied by solid and thorough impact assessments
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Reminds the Commission that all legislative proposals that have a significant economic, social and environmental impact have to be accompanied by solid and thorough impact assessments
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. Recalls that spending areas subject to more complex rules and eligibility criteria are at higher risk of errors and create an excessive administrative burden for recipients of support, specially newcomers; reiterates the need to implement simplification in EU spending programmes to the extent possible, striking a balance with robust checks and controls; stresses that the digitisation of the management, reporting and auditing of EU funds is essential to improve access for potential recipients in an equitable way and to make the management of funds more efficient and transparent for the citizens as a whole;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. Recalls that spending areas subject to more complex rules and eligibility criteria are at higher risk of errors and create an excessive administrative burden for recipients of support, specially newcomers; reiterates the need to implement simplification in EU spending programmes to the extent possible, striking a balance with robust checks and controls; stresses that the digitisation of the management, reporting and auditing of EU funds is essential to improve access for potential recipients in an equitable way and to make the management of funds more efficient and transparent for the citizens as a whole;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Is concerned that the late adoption of several sectoral regulations governing different Union policies, such as the Cohesion policy, resulted in a significant delay in the implementation of the 2021- 2027 programming period; urges the Commission and the Member States once more to take all the necessary measures to continue to speed up the implementation of the policies on the ground, while keeping a high focus on compliance with the rules, quality of projects, achievement of results and protection of the financial interests of the Union; highlights in this context the importance of avoiding decommitments which in turn would decrease the impact of the Union budget; highlights in this context the risk that outstanding commitments bear on the Union budget, possibly generating significant decommitments which in turn would decrease the impact of the Union budget; demands that the Commission indicates to the discharge authority the measures it intends to take to avoid this situation;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Is concerned that the late adoption of several sectoral regulations governing different Union policies, such as the Cohesion policy, resulted in a significant delay in the implementation of the 2021- 2027 programming period; urges the Commission and the Member States once more to take all the necessary measures to continue to speed up the implementation of the policies on the ground, while keeping a high focus on compliance with the rules, quality of projects, achievement of results and protection of the financial interests of the Union; highlights in this context the importance of avoiding decommitments which in turn would decrease the impact of the Union budget; highlights in this context the risk that outstanding commitments bear on the Union budget, possibly generating significant decommitments which in turn would decrease the impact of the Union budget; demands that the Commission indicates to the discharge authority the measures it intends to take to avoid this situation;
Amendment 5 #
Proposal for a decision 4 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 5 #
Proposal for a decision 4 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Is concerned that the late adoption of several sectoral regulations governing different Union policies, such as the Cohesion policy, resulted in a significant delay in the implementation of the 2021- 2027 programming period; urges the Commission and the Member States once moreto take all the necessary measures to continue to speed up the implementation of the policies on the ground with a better geographical balance, while keeping a high focus on compliance with the rules, achievement of results and protection of the financial interests of the Union; highlights in this context the importance of avoiding decommitments which in turn would decrease the impact of the Union budget;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Is concerned that the late adoption of several sectoral regulations governing different Union policies, such as the Cohesion policy, resulted in a significant delay in the implementation of the 2021- 2027 programming period; urges the Commission and the Member States once moreto take all the necessary measures to continue to speed up the implementation of the policies on the ground with a better geographical balance, while keeping a high focus on compliance with the rules, achievement of results and protection of the financial interests of the Union; highlights in this context the importance of avoiding decommitments which in turn would decrease the impact of the Union budget;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Regrets that again the Court issued an adverse opinion on the legality and regularity of expenditure, and found that the control mechanisms of the Commission and Member States are simply not reliable enough; underlines the importance of reinforcing the control mechanisms of the Commission and Member States which are considered by the Court as not reliable therefore compromising the reliability of the AMPR; remind that the Commission should follow up in details on all Parliament’s observations, including all the political priorities;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Regrets that again the Court issued an adverse opinion on the legality and regularity of expenditure, and found that the control mechanisms of the Commission and Member States are simply not reliable enough; underlines the importance of reinforcing the control mechanisms of the Commission and Member States which are considered by the Court as not reliable therefore compromising the reliability of the AMPR; remind that the Commission should follow up in details on all Parliament’s observations, including all the political priorities;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Calls on the Commission to take initiatives such as technical assistance to increase the absorption rate in the Member States on a permanent basis; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the progress of implementation in Member States, in particular in the cases of under-implementation and low absorption rates and to deliver a country- analysis to the discharge authority, identifying the recurrent problems, as well as the measures taken to optimise the situation;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Calls on the Commission to take initiatives such as technical assistance to increase the absorption rate in the Member States on a permanent basis; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the progress of implementation in Member States, in particular in the cases of under-implementation and low absorption rates and to deliver a country- analysis to the discharge authority, identifying the recurrent problems, as well as the measures taken to optimise the situation;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Stresses the importance of EU cohesion policy for economic and territorial convergence and development in the regions of the Union, as well as for supporting the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights; highlights the synergies of the cohesion funds in coordination with other EU programmes, particularly the RRF, to maximise the impact and efficiency of public spending;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Stresses the importance of EU cohesion policy for economic and territorial convergence and development in the regions of the Union, as well as for supporting the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights; highlights the synergies of the cohesion funds in coordination with other EU programmes, particularly the RRF, to maximise the impact and efficiency of public spending;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Calls on the Commission to implement the recommendations of the European Parliament in its resolution of 17 January 2024 on the transparency and accountability of non-governmental organisations funded from the EU budget (2023/2122 (INI));
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Calls on the Commission to implement the recommendations of the European Parliament in its resolution of 17 January 2024 on the transparency and accountability of non-governmental organisations funded from the EU budget (2023/2122 (INI));
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11 b. Urges the Commission to stop all contracts, payments and grant agreements with NGO’s, networks and other partners that include interest related lobbying or influencing of the legislative processes on behalf of Commission DGs, Agencies and other entities; stresses that these actions violate the code of good conduct; asks the Commission to identify all contracts, agreements and partnerships of this kind and to involve the EDES Panel in cases of severe misconduct; asks the Commission to report to the CONT committee in autumn 2024;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11 b. Urges the Commission to stop all contracts, payments and grant agreements with NGO’s, networks and other partners that include interest related lobbying or influencing of the legislative processes on behalf of Commission DGs, Agencies and other entities; stresses that these actions violate the code of good conduct; asks the Commission to identify all contracts, agreements and partnerships of this kind and to involve the EDES Panel in cases of severe misconduct; asks the Commission to report to the CONT committee in autumn 2024;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11 b. Welcomes the vital role played by NGOs in representing civil society and in promoting and defending the values enshrined in the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) while implementing programmes and projects financed by the EU budget in full respect of the EU financial rules and the protection of the EU’s financial interests;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11 b. Welcomes the vital role played by NGOs in representing civil society and in promoting and defending the values enshrined in the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) while implementing programmes and projects financed by the EU budget in full respect of the EU financial rules and the protection of the EU’s financial interests;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Recalls that the Discharge on the General Budget of the EU and the European Commission for 2021 underlines the deep concern regarding the funding of projects carried out by or involving NGOs with links to radical religious and political organisations 5c; _________________ 5c https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/doc ument/TA-9-2023-0137_EN.html
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Recalls that the Discharge on the General Budget of the EU and the European Commission for 2021 underlines the deep concern regarding the funding of projects carried out by or involving NGOs with links to radical religious and political organisations 5c; _________________ 5c https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/doc ument/TA-9-2023-0137_EN.html
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. In this respect, expresses regret at the Commission’s lack of transparency as regards the organisations – in particular non-governmental organisations – to which it gives funds to the tune of several billion per year, without any conditions in place or any ex-ante or ex-post checks being carried out on the entities concerned, on their status or on their links with terrorist organisations;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. In this respect, expresses regret at the Commission’s lack of transparency as regards the organisations – in particular non-governmental organisations – to which it gives funds to the tune of several billion per year, without any conditions in place or any ex-ante or ex-post checks being carried out on the entities concerned, on their status or on their links with terrorist organisations;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 c (new) 11c. Deplores the tardy, crude and incomplete nature of the information that the Commission provides on the financial transparency system;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 c (new) 11c. Deplores the tardy, crude and incomplete nature of the information that the Commission provides on the financial transparency system;
Amendment 6 #
Proposal for a decision 5 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 6 #
Proposal for a decision 5 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11b. Points out that the Qatargate scandal exposed civil society organisations as catalysts for corruption; regrets the fact that NGOs and civil society organisations are still exempt from most anti-money-laundering transparency and reporting obligations; emphasises that European Court of Auditors Special report No 35/2018 warns that NGOs are prone to be used for money laundering purposes; calls, therefore, for a definition of NGOs to be established at EU level and for NGOs to be brought within the scope of EU action to combat money laundering;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11b. Points out that the Qatargate scandal exposed civil society organisations as catalysts for corruption; regrets the fact that NGOs and civil society organisations are still exempt from most anti-money-laundering transparency and reporting obligations; emphasises that European Court of Auditors Special report No 35/2018 warns that NGOs are prone to be used for money laundering purposes; calls, therefore, for a definition of NGOs to be established at EU level and for NGOs to be brought within the scope of EU action to combat money laundering;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 c (new) 11 c. Is extremely concerned about reports that EU taxpayers’ money and funds of other donors distributed to UNRWA were misused by Hamas, instead of benefitting the Palestinian civilian population; is shocked about reports from the Israeli authorities on UNRWA employees being involved in acts of terror; is deeply concerned that the Commission did not act after multiple warnings by Parliament in 2022 about EU funds being misused for terrorist purposes; urges the Commission to insist on controls and audits of UNRWA conducted by ECA, the Internal Audit Service, EU appointed independent external experts, and experienced international partners such as Global Affairs Canada; asks the Commission to use other trusted partners such as the WHO, UNICEF or the Egyptian Red Crescent in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), Gaza, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan for delivering funds and help to Palestinian civilians and refugees; asks the Commission to keep Parliament informed about new developments and efforts undertaken to provide direct support to Palestinian civilians and refugees and to prevent terrorist from diverting funds;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 c (new) 11 c. Is extremely concerned about reports that EU taxpayers’ money and funds of other donors distributed to UNRWA were misused by Hamas, instead of benefitting the Palestinian civilian population; is shocked about reports from the Israeli authorities on UNRWA employees being involved in acts of terror; is deeply concerned that the Commission did not act after multiple warnings by Parliament in 2022 about EU funds being misused for terrorist purposes; urges the Commission to insist on controls and audits of UNRWA conducted by ECA, the Internal Audit Service, EU appointed independent external experts, and experienced international partners such as Global Affairs Canada; asks the Commission to use other trusted partners such as the WHO, UNICEF or the Egyptian Red Crescent in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), Gaza, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan for delivering funds and help to Palestinian civilians and refugees; asks the Commission to keep Parliament informed about new developments and efforts undertaken to provide direct support to Palestinian civilians and refugees and to prevent terrorist from diverting funds;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Notes that after the end of the transition period following the UK’s withdrawal process, the Commission estimated that, at the balance sheet date, the Union accounts showed a net receivable due from the UK of EUR 23,9 billion (2021: 41,8 billion), of which it is estimated that EUR 9,1 billion will be paid in the 12 months following the reporting date; considers that any amount in excess of the estimated EUR 9,1 billion should be used to reduce the borrowing- and lending activities of the Commission;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Notes that after the end of the transition period following the UK’s withdrawal process, the Commission estimated that, at the balance sheet date, the Union accounts showed a net receivable due from the UK of EUR 23,9 billion (2021: 41,8 billion), of which it is estimated that EUR 9,1 billion will be paid in the 12 months following the reporting date; considers that any amount in excess of the estimated EUR 9,1 billion should be used to reduce the borrowing- and lending activities of the Commission;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18.
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18.
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18.
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18.
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18.
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18.
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19.
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19.
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19.
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19.
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that the Court estimates the level of error for the 2022 expenditure to be 4,2 % (3 % in 2021), which is above the materiality threshold; notes the Commission’s confidence that the risk at payment is estimated at 1.9 % for 2022 (similar to 2020, 2021 and 2022), is representative of the level of error at the time of payment; notes that the Commission’s estimate of error is chronically below the ECA range, meaning that the Commission almost intentionally lowers the error rate in its annuals reports; notes that the Commission’s estimation of the risk at closure, after ex-post controls and corrections have been applied, is 0.9 %; notes the divergence between the Court’s overall error rate and the Commission’s risk at payment, which is observed for the overall Union budget expenditure in 2022, although not in all expenditure areas;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that the Court estimates the level of error for the 2022 expenditure to be 4,2 % (3 % in 2021), which is above the materiality threshold; notes the Commission’s confidence that the risk at payment is estimated at 1.9 % for 2022 (similar to 2020, 2021 and 2022), is representative of the level of error at the time of payment; notes that the Commission’s estimate of error is chronically below the ECA range, meaning that the Commission almost intentionally lowers the error rate in its annuals reports; notes that the Commission’s estimation of the risk at closure, after ex-post controls and corrections have been applied, is 0.9 %; notes the divergence between the Court’s overall error rate and the Commission’s risk at payment, which is observed for the overall Union budget expenditure in 2022, although not in all expenditure areas;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that the Court estimates the level of error for the 2022 expenditure to be 4,2 % (3 % in 2021), which is above the materiality threshold; notes the Commission’s
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that the Court estimates the level of error for the 2022 expenditure to be 4,2 % (3 % in 2021), which is above the materiality threshold; notes the Commission’s
Amendment 7 #
Proposal for a decision 6 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 7 #
Proposal for a decision 6 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that the Court estimates the level of error for the 2022 expenditure to be 4,2 % (3 % in 2021), which is above the materiality threshold; notes the Commission’s confidence that the risk at payment is estimated at 1.9 % for 2022 (similar to 2020, 2021 and 2022), is representative of the level of error at the time of payment; notes that the Commission’s estimation of the risk at closure, after ex-post controls and corrections have been applied, is 0.9 %;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that the Court estimates the level of error for the 2022 expenditure to be 4,2 % (3 % in 2021), which is above the materiality threshold; notes the Commission’s confidence that the risk at payment is estimated at 1.9 % for 2022 (similar to 2020, 2021 and 2022), is representative of the level of error at the time of payment; notes that the Commission’s estimation of the risk at closure, after ex-post controls and corrections have been applied, is 0.9 %;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19.
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19.
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19 a. Reiterates the concerns about the Court observation that the Commission’s risk assessment is likely to underestimate the level of risk in several areas, revealing again weaknesses in the Commission’s ex-post audits in Heading 1 'Single market, innovation and digital', underestimation of errors in Heading 2 'Cohesion, resilience and values', and underestimations of risk and a high number of errors in Heading 6 'Neighbourhood and the world', among other issues; is also worried by recurrent weaknesses identified by the court on Member Stets’ ex post checks in heading 2, limiting the reliance that can be placed on their work , father questioning the existence of an effective managing control system which is indispensable to ensure the compliance but also the performance of operations;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19 a. Reiterates the concerns about the Court observation that the Commission’s risk assessment is likely to underestimate the level of risk in several areas, revealing again weaknesses in the Commission’s ex-post audits in Heading 1 'Single market, innovation and digital', underestimation of errors in Heading 2 'Cohesion, resilience and values', and underestimations of risk and a high number of errors in Heading 6 'Neighbourhood and the world', among other issues; is also worried by recurrent weaknesses identified by the court on Member Stets’ ex post checks in heading 2, limiting the reliance that can be placed on their work , father questioning the existence of an effective managing control system which is indispensable to ensure the compliance but also the performance of operations;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19 a. Expresses its support for the audit approach and methodology of the Court; notes with concern the divergences between the error rates and risk at payment as calculated by the Court and the Commission; highlights that these differences do not occur in all expenditure areas; remarks the fact that the Commission’s estimates for risk at payment are consistently in the lower range or below the statistical estimations of the Court and is concerned that this represents a systematic underestimation of the existing error level by the Commission; welcomes the sample based approach and methodology of the Court as important indicator for the existing risks;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19 a. Expresses its support for the audit approach and methodology of the Court; notes with concern the divergences between the error rates and risk at payment as calculated by the Court and the Commission; highlights that these differences do not occur in all expenditure areas; remarks the fact that the Commission’s estimates for risk at payment are consistently in the lower range or below the statistical estimations of the Court and is concerned that this represents a systematic underestimation of the existing error level by the Commission; welcomes the sample based approach and methodology of the Court as important indicator for the existing risks;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Underlines that the general estimate of the level of error in the Union budget, as presented in the Court’s Statement of Assurance, is an estimate of the money that should not have been paid out because it was not used in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations, and not a measure of fraud or of inefficiency or waste; regrets that the general estimate of the level of error in the Union budget gives each year a bad opinion to citizens on the managemùent of EU funds even more before European elections;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Underlines that the general estimate of the level of error in the Union budget, as presented in the Court’s Statement of Assurance, is an estimate of the money that should not have been paid out because it was not used in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations, and not a measure of fraud or of inefficiency or waste; regrets that the general estimate of the level of error in the Union budget gives each year a bad opinion to citizens on the managemùent of EU funds even more before European elections;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Underlines that the general estimate of the level of error in the Union budget, as presented in the Court’s Statement of Assurance, is an estimate of the money that should not have been paid out because it was not used in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations, and not a measure of fraud
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Underlines that the general estimate of the level of error in the Union budget, as presented in the Court’s Statement of Assurance, is an estimate of the money that should not have been paid out because it was not used in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations, and not a measure of fraud
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Underlines that the general estimate of the level of error in the Union budget, as presented in the Court’s Statement of Assurance, is an estimate of the money that should not have been paid out because it was not used in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations, and not a
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Underlines that the general estimate of the level of error in the Union budget, as presented in the Court’s Statement of Assurance, is an estimate of the money that should not have been paid out because it was not used in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations, and not a
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Recalls that the audit approach and methodology of the Court are based on international audit standards that require the testing of a random, representative sample of transactions that result in an estimate of the error rate; recalls that the Court differentiates between low-risk expenditure, i.e. entitlement-based payments under simplified rules, and high- risk expenditure, i.e. reimbursement-based payments subject to complex rules; notes that for the 2022 expenditure, the Court has selected 66 % of its audit population from the high-risk expenditure (63,2 % in 2021), amounting to EUR 110,1 billion, and 34 % from the low-risk expenditure, amounting to EUR 56,7 billion; notes that the Court’s estimated error rate for 2022 (4,2 %) is mainly driven by ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ (2,5 % of the overall error rate), ‘Natural resources and environment (0,8 %), ‘Neighbourhood and the world’ (0,4 %), and ‘Single market, innovation and digital’ (0,3 %), all of them considered high-risk expenditure areas by the Court;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Recalls that the audit approach and methodology of the Court are based on international audit standards that require the testing of a random, representative sample of transactions that result in an estimate of the error rate; recalls that the Court differentiates between low-risk expenditure, i.e. entitlement-based payments under simplified rules, and high- risk expenditure, i.e. reimbursement-based payments subject to complex rules; notes that for the 2022 expenditure, the Court has selected 66 % of its audit population from the high-risk expenditure (63,2 % in 2021), amounting to EUR 110,1 billion, and 34 % from the low-risk expenditure, amounting to EUR 56,7 billion; notes that the Court’s estimated error rate for 2022 (4,2 %) is mainly driven by ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ (2,5 % of the overall error rate), ‘Natural resources and environment (0,8 %), ‘Neighbourhood and the world’ (0,4 %), and ‘Single market, innovation and digital’ (0,3 %), all of them considered high-risk expenditure areas by the Court;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Recalls that the audit approach and methodology of the Court are based on international audit standards that require the testing of a random, representative sample of transactions that result in an estimate of the error rate; recalls that the Court differentiates between low-risk expenditure, i.e. entitlement-based payments under simplified rules, and high- risk expenditure, i.e. reimbursement-based payments subject to complex rules; notes that for the 2022 expenditure, the Court has selected 66 % of its audit population from the high-risk expenditure (63,2 % in 2021), amounting to EUR 110,1 billion, and 34 % from the low-risk expenditure, amounting to EUR 56,7 billion; notes that the Court’s estimated error rate for 2022 (4,2 %) is mainly driven by ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ (2,5 % of the overall error rate), ‘Natural resources and environment (0,8 %), ‘Neighbourhood and the world’ (0,4 %), and ‘Single market, innovation and digital’ (0,3 %),
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Recalls that the audit approach and methodology of the Court are based on international audit standards that require the testing of a random, representative sample of transactions that result in an estimate of the error rate; recalls that the Court differentiates between low-risk expenditure, i.e. entitlement-based payments under simplified rules, and high- risk expenditure, i.e. reimbursement-based payments subject to complex rules; notes that for the 2022 expenditure, the Court has selected 66 % of its audit population from the high-risk expenditure (63,2 % in 2021), amounting to EUR 110,1 billion, and 34 % from the low-risk expenditure, amounting to EUR 56,7 billion; notes that the Court’s estimated error rate for 2022 (4,2 %) is mainly driven by ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ (2,5 % of the overall error rate), ‘Natural resources and environment (0,8 %), ‘Neighbourhood and the world’ (0,4 %), and ‘Single market, innovation and digital’ (0,3 %),
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21 a. Notes with concern however, that the Commission in its Annual Management and Performance Report categorises the expenditure into higher, medium and lower risk segments; emphasises that the use of different risk categories by the Court and the Commission hinders the possibility to make a comparative analysis between from errors and administrative errors of the discharge authority in making a comparative analysis of the respective reports; notes that the Court’s use of the risk categories is in large part used to determine the sample size to ultimately support its opinion on the legality and regularity of expenditure, whereas the commission’s use of risk categories serves to identify areas where additional managerial attention is needed to correct errors;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21 a. Notes with concern however, that the Commission in its Annual Management and Performance Report categorises the expenditure into higher, medium and lower risk segments; emphasises that the use of different risk categories by the Court and the Commission hinders the possibility to make a comparative analysis between from errors and administrative errors of the discharge authority in making a comparative analysis of the respective reports; notes that the Court’s use of the risk categories is in large part used to determine the sample size to ultimately support its opinion on the legality and regularity of expenditure, whereas the commission’s use of risk categories serves to identify areas where additional managerial attention is needed to correct errors;
Amendment 8 #
Proposal for a decision 7 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 8 #
Proposal for a decision 7 Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Recalls that the Court’s audit
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Recalls that the Court’s audit
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Recalls that the Court’s audit
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Recalls that the Court’s audit
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Recalls that Union spending programmes are multiannual by design and their related control systems and management cycles also cover multiple years;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Recalls that Union spending programmes are multiannual by design and their related control systems and management cycles also cover multiple years;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Recalls that Union spending programmes are multiannual by design and their related control systems and management cycles also cover multiple years; recalls that the Commission’s estimates of the risk at closure have a multiannual perspective that takes account of corrections and recoveries over several years;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Recalls that Union spending programmes are multiannual by design and their related control systems and management cycles also cover multiple years; recalls that the Commission’s estimates of the risk at closure have a multiannual perspective that takes account of corrections and recoveries over several years;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Considers that both approaches serve different purposes and have their benefits, disadvantages, strengths, and weaknesses, and should be used to complement each other
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Considers that both approaches serve different purposes and have their benefits, disadvantages, strengths, and weaknesses, and should be used to complement each other
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Considers that both approaches serve different purposes and have their benefits, disadvantages, strengths, and weaknesses, and should be used to complement each other while understanding the differences and particularities, such as the different concepts of error and the risk categorisation used by each institution;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Considers that both approaches serve different purposes and have their benefits, disadvantages, strengths, and weaknesses, and should be used to complement each other while understanding the differences and particularities, such as the different concepts of error and the risk categorisation used by each institution;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Considers that both approaches serve different purposes and have their benefits, disadvantages, strengths, and weaknesses, and should be used to complement each other while understanding the differences and particularities, such as the different concepts of error and the risk categorisation used by each institution;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Considers that both approaches serve different purposes and have their benefits, disadvantages, strengths, and weaknesses, and should be used to complement each other while understanding the differences and particularities, such as the different concepts of error and the risk categorisation used by each institution;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24 a. Notes with concern that substantial issues were detected in reimbursement-based expenditure, which accounts for 66 % of the Court’s audit population, in which the estimated level of error is 6 %; takes note that the effects of the errors found by the Court are estimated as both material and pervasive to the year's accepted expenditure;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24 a. Notes with concern that substantial issues were detected in reimbursement-based expenditure, which accounts for 66 % of the Court’s audit population, in which the estimated level of error is 6 %; takes note that the effects of the errors found by the Court are estimated as both material and pervasive to the year's accepted expenditure;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24 a. Reiterates its support for the audit approach and methodology of the Court; invites again the Commission to rethink its methodology and cooperate with the Court with a view to increasing harmonisation and to providing for more comparable figures;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24 a. Reiterates its support for the audit approach and methodology of the Court; invites again the Commission to rethink its methodology and cooperate with the Court with a view to increasing harmonisation and to providing for more comparable figures;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 a (new) – having regard to the Discharge from 2021 on the EU General Budget - Commission and Executive Agencies 1a; _________________ 1a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/doc ument/TA-9-2023-0137_EN.html
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 a (new) – having regard to the Discharge from 2021 on the EU General Budget - Commission and Executive Agencies 1a; _________________ 1a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/doc ument/TA-9-2023-0137_EN.html
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Notes that, on several issues, the Court’s and Commission’s findings are aligned, most notably concerning the main sources of irregularities in ‘Cohesion’, and the higher risks for market measures and rural development in ‘Natural resources and environment’;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Notes that, on several issues, the Court’s and Commission’s findings are aligned, most notably concerning the main sources of irregularities in ‘Cohesion’, and the higher risks for market measures and rural development in ‘Natural resources and environment’;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Notes that, on several issues, the Court’s and Commission’s findings are aligned, most notably concerning the main sources of irregularities in ‘Cohesion’, and the higher risks for market measures and rural development in ‘Natural resources and environment’; notes that specifically in ‘Cohesion’ some cases of eligibility errors identified and quantified by the Court
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Notes that, on several issues, the Court’s and Commission’s findings are aligned, most notably concerning the main sources of irregularities in ‘Cohesion’, and the higher risks for market measures and rural development in ‘Natural resources and environment’; notes that specifically in ‘Cohesion’ some cases of eligibility errors identified and quantified by the Court
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Notes that the Court, in the exercise of its mandate, does not investigate fraud but does take account of the risk of fraud; notes that the Court forwards to the EPPO suspicions of criminal offences falling in its competences and to OLAF suspicions of fraud, corruption or other illegal activity affecting the Union’s financial interests identified while performing its audits; notes that, in 2022, the Court reported 14 cases of suspected fraud to OLAF, and in parallel reported 6 of these cases to the EPPO, resulting so far in
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Notes that the Court, in the exercise of its mandate, does not investigate fraud but does take account of the risk of fraud; notes that the Court forwards to the EPPO suspicions of criminal offences falling in its competences and to OLAF suspicions of fraud, corruption or other illegal activity affecting the Union’s financial interests identified while performing its audits; notes that, in 2022, the Court reported 14 cases of suspected fraud to OLAF, and in parallel reported 6 of these cases to the EPPO, resulting so far in
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28.
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28.
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 a (new) 28 a. Notes with concern that at the end of 2021, total outstanding commitments which are accumulated commitments made but not yet paid (RAL), reached a record high of EUR 341,6 billion; highlights that outstanding commitments are likely to exceed EUR 460 billion in 2023 but then will fall with the fulfilment of milestones and targets ; notes that commitments under MFF are still increasing and will continue to rise in the coming years due to the slow start of the programming period with payments following even later; Highlights that the time available for implementing shared- management funds under the 2021-2027 MFF is shorter than under previous MFFs because of the n+2 rule; is aware of the challenges in relation to managing and controlling all the funds under MFF and NGEU due to their pure volume and the different managing, programming, implementing and controlling mechanisms resulting in a very complex system; notes with concern the significant differences in absorption rates by Member States, and the fact that some Member States still have more than 20 % of their committed amounts to absorb in 2023 following the n+3 rule;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 a (new) 28 a. Notes with concern that at the end of 2021, total outstanding commitments which are accumulated commitments made but not yet paid (RAL), reached a record high of EUR 341,6 billion; highlights that outstanding commitments are likely to exceed EUR 460 billion in 2023 but then will fall with the fulfilment of milestones and targets ; notes that commitments under MFF are still increasing and will continue to rise in the coming years due to the slow start of the programming period with payments following even later; Highlights that the time available for implementing shared- management funds under the 2021-2027 MFF is shorter than under previous MFFs because of the n+2 rule; is aware of the challenges in relation to managing and controlling all the funds under MFF and NGEU due to their pure volume and the different managing, programming, implementing and controlling mechanisms resulting in a very complex system; notes with concern the significant differences in absorption rates by Member States, and the fact that some Member States still have more than 20 % of their committed amounts to absorb in 2023 following the n+3 rule;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Notes with concern that the total outstanding commitments reached an all- time high of EUR 450 billion in 2022, caused by both increased commitments related to NGEU (with all National Recovery and Resilience Plans adopted in 2022) and the slow start of the implementation of the 2021-2027 programming period; notes that the Commission expects this amount to further increase in 2023, and foresees a decrease from 2024 to 2027 when committed amounts for both NGEU and the 2021- 2027 programming period should be paid out; recalls that the Commission and Member States are currently behind schedule for payments established with each Member State in the implementing decision approving their NRP, despite the number of payments requests received at the end of 2023; notes that approximately EUR 90 billion of unused loans will not be absorpt by Member States;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Notes with concern that the total outstanding commitments reached an all- time high of EUR 450 billion in 2022, caused by both increased commitments related to NGEU (with all National Recovery and Resilience Plans adopted in 2022) and the slow start of the implementation of the 2021-2027 programming period; notes that the Commission expects this amount to further increase in 2023, and foresees a decrease from 2024 to 2027 when committed amounts for both NGEU and the 2021- 2027 programming period should be paid out; recalls that the Commission and Member States are currently behind schedule for payments established with each Member State in the implementing decision approving their NRP, despite the number of payments requests received at the end of 2023; notes that approximately EUR 90 billion of unused loans will not be absorpt by Member States;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Notes that the total outstanding commitments reached an all-time high of EUR 450 billion in 2022, caused by both increased commitments related to NGEU (with all National Recovery and Resilience Plans adopted in 2022) and the start of the implementation of the 2021-2027 programming period; notes that the Commission expects this amount to further increase in 2023, and foresees a decrease from 2024 to 2027 when committed amounts for both NGEU and the 2021- 2027 programming period should be paid out; regrets the lack of initiatives taken by the Commission, in conjunction with the Member States, to increase the absorption capacity of the programs and thus bring about a sharp and lasting reduction in outstanding commitments;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Notes that the total outstanding commitments reached an all-time high of EUR 450 billion in 2022, caused by both increased commitments related to NGEU (with all National Recovery and Resilience Plans adopted in 2022) and the start of the implementation of the 2021-2027 programming period; notes that the Commission expects this amount to further increase in 2023, and foresees a decrease from 2024 to 2027 when committed amounts for both NGEU and the 2021- 2027 programming period should be paid out; regrets the lack of initiatives taken by the Commission, in conjunction with the Member States, to increase the absorption capacity of the programs and thus bring about a sharp and lasting reduction in outstanding commitments;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Notes with concern that the total outstanding commitments, which represent future debts if not decommitted, reached an all-time high of EUR 450 billion in 2022, caused by both increased commitments related to NGEU (with all National Recovery and Resilience Plans adopted in 2022) and the start of the implementation of the 2021-2027 programming period; notes that the Commission expects this amount to further increase in 2023, and foresees a decrease from 2024 to 2027 when committed amounts for both NGEU and the 2021- 2027 programming period should be paid out;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Notes with concern that the total outstanding commitments, which represent future debts if not decommitted, reached an all-time high of EUR 450 billion in 2022, caused by both increased commitments related to NGEU (with all National Recovery and Resilience Plans adopted in 2022) and the start of the implementation of the 2021-2027 programming period; notes that the Commission expects this amount to further increase in 2023, and foresees a decrease from 2024 to 2027 when committed amounts for both NGEU and the 2021- 2027 programming period should be paid out;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 a (new) 29 a. Underlines that the Commission projections for the reduction of the outstanding commitments is based on the fundamental assumption, namely that Member States effectively makes more efforts to accelerate the absorption of the 2021-2027 shared management funds and that automatic technical adjustments of payments ceiling are sufficient to cover the payments needs; is worried that these 2 assumptions may not be fulfilled hence creating a very dangerous situation for the EU budget;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 a (new) 29 a. Underlines that the Commission projections for the reduction of the outstanding commitments is based on the fundamental assumption, namely that Member States effectively makes more efforts to accelerate the absorption of the 2021-2027 shared management funds and that automatic technical adjustments of payments ceiling are sufficient to cover the payments needs; is worried that these 2 assumptions may not be fulfilled hence creating a very dangerous situation for the EU budget;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31. Notes with concern that Union debt increased from EUR 236,7 billion in 2021 to EUR 344,3 billion in 2022; notes that of the entire debt, only the share of NGEU non-
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31. Notes with concern that Union debt increased from EUR 236,7 billion in 2021 to EUR 344,3 billion in 2022; notes that of the entire debt, only the share of NGEU non-
source: 758.988
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
events/7 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Procedure completed, awaiting publication in Official JournalNew
Procedure completed |
docs/18 |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/5 |
|
docs/18 |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/5 |
|
docs/18 |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/5 |
|
events/5 |
|
events/5 |
|
events/5 |
|
docs/18 |
|
docs/18 |
|
docs/18 |
|
docs/18 |
|
docs/18 |
|
docs/18 |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/5/summary |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/5/summary |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/5/summary |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/5/summary |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/5/summary |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/5/summary |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/5/summary |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/5/summary |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/5/summary |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/4 |
|
events/5 |
|
forecasts |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament's voteNew
Procedure completed, awaiting publication in Official Journal |
docs/18 |
|
events/4 |
|
events/5 |
|
forecasts |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament's voteNew
Procedure completed, awaiting publication in Official Journal |
events/4 |
|
forecasts |
|
events/4 |
|
forecasts |
|
events/4 |
|
forecasts |
|
docs/16/docs/0/title |
Old
06179/2024New
06181/2024 |
docs/17 |
|
events/3 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's vote |
docs/17 |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/3 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's vote |
docs/17 |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/3 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's vote |
docs/17 |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/3 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's vote |
docs/17 |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/3 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's vote |
docs/17 |
|
docs/18 |
|
events/3 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's vote |
docs/17 |
|
events/3 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's vote |
docs/17 |
|
docs/17 |
|
docs/15 |
|
docs/16 |
|
docs/15 |
|
events/2 |
|
forecasts |
|
docs/13 |
|
docs/14 |
|
docs/10 |
|
docs/12 |
|
docs/12/date |
Old
2024-02-06T00:00:00New
2024-02-12T00:00:00 |
docs/3 |
|
docs/12 |
|
docs/12/date |
Old
2024-01-11T00:00:00New
2024-02-08T00:00:00 |
docs/9 |
|
docs/10 |
|
docs/11 |
|
docs/11/date |
Old
2024-01-25T00:00:00New
2024-02-06T00:00:00 |
docs/12 |
|
docs/12/date |
Old
2024-01-25T00:00:00New
2024-02-07T00:00:00 |
docs/4 |
|
docs/12 |
|
docs/12/date |
Old
2024-01-12T00:00:00New
2024-02-05T00:00:00 |
committees/13/opinion |
False
|
docs/7 |
|
docs/12 |
|
docs/12/date |
Old
2024-01-23T00:00:00New
2024-01-31T00:00:00 |
docs/9 |
|
docs/11 |
|
docs/12 |
|
committees/18 |
|
committees/18 |
|
docs/8 |
|
docs/9 |
|
docs/6 |
|
docs/7 |
|
docs/3 |
|
docs/4 |
|
docs/5 |
|
docs/2 |
|
committees/16/rapporteur |
|
committees/12/rapporteur |
|
commission |
|
committees/8/opinion |
False
|
docs/1 |
|
docs/1 |
|
committees/1 |
Old
New
|
committees/2 |
Old
New
|
committees/3 |
Old
New
|
committees/4 |
Old
New
|
committees/5 |
Old
New
|
committees/6 |
Old
New
|
committees/7 |
Old
New
|
committees/8 |
|
committees/8 |
Old
New
|
committees/9 |
Old
New
|
committees/10 |
Old
New
|
committees/11 |
Old
New
|
committees/12 |
Old
New
|
committees/13 |
Old
New
|
committees/14 |
Old
New
|
committees/15 |
Old
New
|
committees/16 |
Old
New
|
committees/17 |
|
committees/18 |
Old
New
|
committees/1 |
Old
New
|
committees/2 |
Old
New
|
committees/3 |
Old
New
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4/rapporteur |
|
committees/5 |
Old
New
|
committees/6 |
Old
New
|
committees/7 |
Old
New
|
committees/8 |
Old
New
|
committees/9 |
Old
New
|
committees/10 |
Old
New
|
committees/11 |
Old
New
|
committees/12 |
Old
New
|
committees/13 |
Old
New
|
committees/14 |
Old
New
|
committees/15 |
|
committees/15 |
Old
New
|
committees/16 |
Old
New
|
committees/1 |
Old
New
|
committees/2 |
Old
New
|
committees/3 |
Old
New
|
committees/4 |
Old
New
|
committees/5 |
Old
New
|
committees/6 |
Old
New
|
committees/7 |
Old
New
|
committees/8 |
Old
New
|
committees/9 |
Old
New
|
committees/10 |
Old
New
|
committees/11 |
Old
New
|
committees/12 |
Old
New
|
committees/13 |
Old
New
|
committees/14 |
Old
New
|
committees/15 |
Old
New
|
committees/16 |
Old
New
|
committees/17/rapporteur |
|
docs/1 |
|
committees/16/opinion |
False
|
committees/18/opinion |
False
|
committees/2/rapporteur |
|
committees/3/rapporteur |
|
committees/4/rapporteur |
|
committees/5/rapporteur |
|
committees/13/opinion |
False
|
committees/1 |
Old
New
|
committees/2 |
Old
New
|
committees/3 |
Old
New
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
Old
New
|
committees/5 |
|
committees/5 |
Old
New
|
committees/6 |
Old
New
|
committees/7 |
Old
New
|
committees/8 |
Old
New
|
committees/9 |
Old
New
|
committees/10 |
Old
New
|
committees/11 |
Old
New
|
committees/12 |
|
committees/12/opinion |
False
|
committees/13 |
Old
New
|
committees/14 |
Old
New
|
committees/15 |
|
committees/15/opinion |
False
|
committees/16 |
Old
New
|
committees/17 |
Old
New
|
committees/18 |
Old
New
|
events/1 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
committees/8/rapporteur |
|
committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
committees/1 |
Old
New
|
committees/2 |
Old
New
|
committees/3 |
Old
New
|
committees/4 |
Old
New
|
committees/5 |
Old
New
|
committees/6 |
Old
New
|
committees/7 |
Old
New
|
committees/8 |
Old
New
|
committees/9 |
Old
New
|
committees/10 |
Old
New
|
committees/11 |
Old
New
|
committees/12 |
Old
New
|
committees/13 |
Old
New
|
committees/14 |
Old
New
|
committees/15 |
Old
New
|
committees/16 |
Old
New
|
committees/17 |
Old
New
|
committees/18 |
Old
New
|
committees/1 |
Old
New
|
committees/2 |
Old
New
|
committees/3 |
Old
New
|
committees/4 |
Old
New
|
committees/5 |
Old
New
|
committees/6 |
Old
New
|
committees/7 |
Old
New
|
committees/8 |
Old
New
|
committees/9 |
Old
New
|
committees/10 |
|
committees/10 |
Old
New
|
committees/11 |
Old
New
|
committees/12 |
|
committees/12/opinion |
False
|
committees/13 |
Old
New
|
committees/14 |
Old
New
|
committees/15 |
Old
New
|
committees/16 |
Old
New
|
committees/17 |
Old
New
|
committees/18 |
Old
New
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
Old
New
|
committees/2 |
Old
New
|
committees/3 |
Old
New
|
committees/4 |
Old
New
|
committees/5 |
Old
New
|
committees/6 |
Old
New
|
committees/7 |
Old
New
|
committees/8 |
Old
New
|
committees/9 |
Old
New
|
committees/10 |
Old
New
|
committees/11 |
Old
New
|
committees/12 |
Old
New
|
committees/13 |
Old
New
|
committees/14 |
Old
New
|
committees/15 |
Old
New
|
committees/16 |
Old
New
|
committees/17 |
Old
New
|
committees/18 |
Old
New
|