What changed

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on ForeignCivil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgetary Control, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its motion for a resolution:

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;

1. Notes that the Court of Auditors (the ‘Court’) audited spending areas comprising various policies related to migration and border management (heading 4) and security and defence (heading 5);

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

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; reiterates the call from the Parliament to carry out the audit in a way that would allow calculating the estimated level of error;

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

3. Notes with concern that 11 out of the 23 transactions examined by the Court contained quantifiable errors which had a financial impact on the amounts charged to the Union budget; highlights that such cases may have negative reputational impact;

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;

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

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;

5. Welcomes the prompt actions by DG HOME following the Russian aggression, especially the timely drafting of a decision on the activation of the Temporary Protection Directive for the first time, the setting up of a Solidarity Platform ‘Ukraine’;

6. Welcomes the actions by DG HOME to support Member States in improving the return process particularly by linking the EU visa policy to cooperation on readmission; welcomes the operational partnerships to fight migrant smuggling with Morocco, Niger, and the Western Balkans; is concerned of particularly low levels of returns of irregular migrants across the EU and associated security risks; calls on the Commission to continue working towards strategy for more effective returns and extend its operational partnerships with third countries;

7. Acknowledges the continuing support of DG JUST to the Commission’s policy on upholding the rule of law in the Union, especially and the yearly edition of the Justice Scoreboard and the third Annual Rule of Law Report, which contained recommendations to the Member States for the first time;