Sittings · Compare

What changed

From · opinion parliamentary committee draft · 2025-02-18 EMPL-PA-765094 on a revamped long-term budget for the Union in a changing world

→

To · opinion parliamentary committee · 2025-04-02 CONT-AD-768034 on a revamped long-term budget for the Union in a changing world

+460 added · −35 removed · 9 modified paragraphs hide unchanged text

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on ~~Employment and Social~~Budgetary ~~Affairs~~Control submits the following to the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible:

Amendment 1

Motion for a resolution

~~Paragraph 18~~

Citation 19 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the discharge procedure and the findings of the European Court of Auditors in its annual reports on the implementation of the EU budget,

18. Recalls that social, economic and territorial cohesion is a cornerstone of European integration and is vital in binding the Union together and deepening the single market; underlines that a modernised cohesion policy must follow a decentralised, place-based, multilevel governance approach and be built around the shared management and partnership principle, fully involving local and regional authorities; underlines that cohesion policy must remain a long-term policy, based on the objectives set out in Articles 174 and 175 TFEU; expresses its concern that the Union’s cohesion policy, including as provided for by the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+), is often used as an emergency response tool;

~~Or. en~~

Amendment 2

Motion for a resolution

~~Paragraph 18 a (new)~~

Recital E

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18a. Highlights the vital role of EU programmes in the employment and social fields, in particular the European Social Fund+, the European Globalisation Fund, the Just Transition Fund, the Social Climate Fund and the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), in supporting the Union’s social and territorial cohesion and fostering economic resilience; warns that inflation impacts the real value of projects and may jeopardise their implementation;

E. whereas the Union budget, bolstered by NGEU, has been instrumental in alleviating the economic and social impact of the COVID-19 crisis and in responding to the effects of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; whereas the Union budget remains ill-equipped, in terms of size, structure and rules, to fully play its role in adjusting to evolving spending needs, addressing shocks and responding to crises and giving practical effect to the principle of solidarity;

~~Or. en~~

E. whereas the Union budget has been instrumental in alleviating the economic and social impact of the COVID-19 crisis and in responding to the effects of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; whereas the Union budget remains ill-equipped, in terms of structure and rules, to fully play its role in adjusting to evolving spending needs, addressing shocks and responding to crises and giving practical effect to the principle of solidarity;

Amendment 3

Motion for a resolution

~~Paragraph 19~~

Recital H a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19. Stresses that cohesion policy funding must tackle the key challenges the Union faces, such as demographic change and depopulation, and target the regions and people most in need; highlights, in particular, the importance of enhanced support to address the EU-wide housing crisis affecting millions of families and young people;

Ha. whereas the European Court of Auditors, in its 2023 report 1a, concluded that the error rate in EU spending has risen to 5.6 % of the overall budget and warned that increasing European debt is placing growing pressure on the EU budget;

19. Stresses that cohesion policy funding must tackle the key challenges the Union faces, such as demographic change and depopulation, and target the regions and people most in need; emphasises the lack of policy responses to the impact of demographic challenges with an ageing population due to declining fertility rates and extended life expectancies;

_________________

~~Or. en~~

1a European Court of Auditors, ‘2023 Annual reports’.

Amendment 4

Motion for a resolution

~~Paragraph 19 a (new)~~

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19a. Highlights, in particular, the importance of enhanced support to address the EU-wide housing crisis affecting millions of families and young people; welcomes the Commission’s plan to address the European housing crisis and the nomination of a Commissioner responsible for housing, including the use of EU financing for socially inclusive and sustainable housing systems;

3. Emphasises that the post-2027 MFF must also become simpler and more transparent and be protected against misuse, fraud and breaches of the principles of the rule of law and the Union’s values;

~~Or. en~~

3. Emphasises that the post-2027 MFF must also become simpler and more democratic, accessible and transparent, improving efficiency and accountability by simplifying and streamlining procedures, and be protected against corruption, misuse, fraud and conflicts of interest, and allowing for immediate action in case of breaches of the principles of the rule of law and the Union’s fundamental values; underlines the importance of protecting the Union’s financial interests; emphasises that simplification should not negatively affect transparency and should primarily benefit final beneficiaries and make application procedures more accessible;

Amendment 5

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 333 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

33a. Stresses the importance of universal access to public services in order to reduce regional development disparities and offer equal access to quality education, infrastructure and healthcare for all; calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider impacts on social, territorial and economic cohesion at all levels of public policy decisions;

3a. Stresses the importance of the EU anti-fraud architecture in the context of the post-2027 MFF and the crucial role to be played by EU institutions, offices and agencies (European Court of Auditors, Eurojust, Europol, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)); calls for sufficient funding of these bodies and encourages them to enhance their cooperation, particularly in terms of exchanging information on criminal/fraudulent activities in relation to EU funds and providing access to each other’s data; recalls the importance of coordination and enhanced cooperation with the judicial and police systems of the Member States in order to combat fraud, abuse and organised crime more effectively; insists that participation in the EPPO must be compulsory for Member States receiving EU funds under the post-2027 MFF, unless the Member State has a constitutional opt-out; calls for exploring synergies in, and the possible consolidation of, the Union’s anti-fraud architecture; highlights that the current anti-fraud architecture faces challenges such as fragmentation and the lack of an integrated governance framework, overlapping competencies, insufficient resources and unreliable data, which may lead to the underestimation of fraud against EU finances; calls, therefore, on the Commission to (i) create a common governance framework to coordinate all anti-fraud actors, (ii) implement a unified reporting system to consolidate available information, (iii) promote greater use of digital tools to improve data collection, exchange and analysis, and (iv) reinforce financial and human resources to ensure the effectiveness of anti-fraud institutions;

~~Or. en~~

Amendment 6

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 604

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4. Underlines that a simpler, more flexible MFF requires more robust parliamentary accountability;

60. Stresses that the next MFF must be designed so as to simplify the lives of beneficiaries, harmonise rules wherever possible and cut unnecessary red tape and must be implemented as close to people as possible; highlights the need to prioritise women, children, youth, older people, persons with disabilities, families, and persons in vulnerable situations, and to advocate targeted measures to combat youth unemployment, precarity and child poverty;

4. Underlines that a simpler, more flexible MFF requires more transparency and robust parliamentary scrutiny and accountability; recalls that EU citizens must be able to rely on those implementing the EU budget to inform them of how the funds have been spent and of the objectives achieved; recalls that transparency is essential to retain citizens’ trust, and that fraud and misuse of funds are extremely detrimental to maintaining that trust; calls on the Commission to put in place solid anti-fraud mechanisms in all funding instruments for the post-2027 MFF that ensure the protection of the EU budget; recommends advancing towards a publicly accessible database providing real-time information on EU budget allocations and spending outcomes;

~~Or. en~~

Amendment 7

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 626

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

62. Insists that a simpler budget must also be a more transparent budget, enabling better control of spending and reducing the risks of double funding; underlines that any reduction in programmes must be offset by a far more detailed breakdown of the budget by budget line, in contrast to some programme mergers in the current MFF, such as the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe (NDICI – Global Europe), which is an example not to follow; calls, therefore, for a sufficiently detailed breakdown by budget line to enable proper accountability and ensure that decision-making in the annual budgetary procedure is meaningful;

6. Is convinced that boosting competitiveness, decarbonising the economy and enhancing the Union’s innovation capacity are central priorities for the post-2027 MFF and are vital to ensure long-term, sustainable and inclusive growth and a more resilient economy and society;

62. Insists that a simpler budget must also be a more transparent budget, enabling better control of spending and reducing the risks of double funding; underlines that a reduction in the number and volume of programmes must be offset by a far more detailed breakdown of the budget by budget line, in contrast to some programme mergers in the current MFF, such as the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe (NDICI – Global Europe), which is an example not to follow; calls, therefore, for a sufficiently detailed breakdown by budget line to enable proper accountability, including better control by the co-legislators of the objectives and governance of the programmes, and ensure that decision-making in the annual budgetary procedure is meaningful;

6. Is convinced that boosting competitiveness and Europe’s security, decarbonising the economy and enhancing the Union’s innovation capacity are central priorities for the post-2027 MFF and are vital to ensure long-term, sustainable and inclusive growth and a more resilient economy and society;

~~Or. en~~

Amendment 8

Motion for a resolution

~~Paragraph 66 a (new)~~

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

66a. Believes that spending programmes should ensure a balanced approach between budgetary flexibility and parliamentary oversight, ensuring that any flexibility reserve remains tailored to the specific needs of each programme; underlines that, while flexibility in financial programmes is necessary to address unforeseen challenges, such mechanisms should not weaken Parliament’s and the Council’s codecision rights in each regulation relating to the internal functioning and resource allocation of relevant funds; insists that the decision-making process for mobilising flexibility reserves must ensure meaningful parliamentary scrutiny, with sectoral committees playing an integral role in the allocation of resources within their respective policy domains; stresses that the possible use of delegated acts or other EU instruments could be considered in order to strengthen the involvement of sectoral committees, such as the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, in decision-making during the implementation phase;

8. Points out that Draghi puts the annual investment gap with respect to innovation and infrastructure at EUR 750-800 billion per year between 2025 and 2030; underlines that, while the Union budget cannot cover that shortfall alone, it must play a vital role;

~~Or. en~~

Amendment 9

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 699

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

69. Considers that the post-2027 MFF should include only two special instruments - one dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters (the successor to the existing European Solidarity Reserve) and one for general-purpose crisis response (the successor to the Flexibility Instrument); insists that both special instruments should be adequately funded from the outset and able to carry over unspent amounts indefinitely over the MFF period; believes that all other special instruments can either be wound up or subsumed into the two special instruments or into existing programmes;

9. Stresses that the Union budget must be carefully coordinated with national spending and designed such that it can de-risk, mobilise and leverage private investment effectively, enabling start-ups and SMEs to access funds more readily; calls, therefore, for programmes such as InvestEU, which ensures additionality and follows a market-based, demand-driven approach, to be significantly reinforced in the next MFF; considers that budgetary guarantees are an effective use of resources and calls for them to be simplified;

69. Considers that the post-2027 MFF should include only two special instruments - one dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters or unexpected and significant job losses arising from major restructuring events (the successor to the existing European Solidarity Reserve and the European Globalisation Fund) and one for general-purpose crisis response (the successor to the Flexibility Instrument); insists that both special instruments should be adequately funded from the outset and able to carry over unspent amounts indefinitely over the MFF period; believes that all other special instruments can either be wound up or subsumed into the two special instruments or into existing programmes;

9. Calls for the next MFF to be equipped with robust safeguards to prevent corruption and ensure transparency; stresses that the Union budget must be carefully coordinated with national spending and designed such that it can de-risk, mobilise and leverage private investment effectively, enabling start-ups, scale-ups and SMEs to access funds more readily; calls, therefore, for programmes such as InvestEU, which ensures additionality and follows a market-based, demand-driven approach, to be significantly reinforced and aligned with the Union’s priorities and the scale of identified challenges in the next MFF and to be allowed to maintain a less risk-averse approach to truly stimulate innovation; considers that budgetary guarantees are an effective use of resources if coupled with effective anti-corruption measures and calls for them to be simplified;

~~Or. en~~

Amendment 10

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7010

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

70. Calls for the future Flexibility Instrument to be heavily front-loaded and subsequently to be fed through a number of additional sources of financing: unspent margins from previous years (as with the current Single Margin Instrument), the annual surplus from the previous year, a fines-based mechanism modelled on the existing Article 5 of the MFF Regulation, and decommitted appropriations;

10. Insists that, in the next MFF, more must be done to maximise the potential of the role of the European Investment Bank Group – together with other international and national financial institutions – in lending in strategic policy areas, such as climate and, latterly, dual-use defence projects;

10. Insists that, in the next MFF, more must be done to maximise the potential of the role of the European Investment Bank Group – together with other international and national financial institutions – in lending and advisory services in strategic policy areas, such as climate and, latterly, dual-use defence projects;

~~Or. en~~

Amendment 11

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7416

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

74. Underlines that the RRF can help to inform the delivery of Union spending under shared management; recalls, however, that the RRF was agreed in the very specific context of the COVID-19 pandemic and cannot, therefore, be replicated wholesale for future investment programmes;

16. Stresses that, in order to compete with other major global players, the European economy must also become more competitive and resilient on the supply side by investing more in the Union’s open strategic autonomy through enhanced industrial policy and a focus on strategic sectors and critical technologies to reduce dependence on third countries;

74. Underlines that the RRF can help to inform the delivery of Union spending under codecision; recalls, however, that the RRF was agreed in the very specific context of the COVID-19 pandemic and cannot, therefore, be replicated wholesale for future investment programmes;

16. Stresses that, in order to compete with other major global players, the European economy must also become more competitive and resilient on the supply side by investing more in the Union’s open strategic autonomy through enhanced, targeted and coordinated industrial policy and a focus on strategic sectors and critical technologies to reduce dependence on third countries;

~~Or. en~~

Amendment 12

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Emphasises that food security is a vital component of strategic autonomy and that the next MFF must continue to support the Union’s farming and fisheries sectors, including small and young farmers and fishers, and help the sectors to better protect the climate and biodiversity; highlights the crucial role of the common agricultural policy in increasing productivity through technical progress, ensuring a fair standard of living for farmers and guaranteeing food security; calls for adequate funding for the common agricultural policy in the next MFF;

17. Emphasises that food security is a vital component of strategic autonomy and that the next MFF must continue to support the Union’s farming and fisheries sectors, including small and young farmers and fishers, and help the sectors to better protect the climate and biodiversity; notes the crucial role of the common agricultural policy in increasing productivity through technical progress, ensuring a fair standard of living for farmers and guaranteeing food security; calls for evenly distributed, transparent, traceable and targeted investments in the common agricultural policy in the next MFF;

Amendment 13

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18. Recalls that social, economic and territorial cohesion is a cornerstone of European integration and is vital in binding the Union together and deepening the single market, which still has untapped potential, according to the 2025 report on the single market and competitiveness; underlines that a modernised cohesion policy must follow a decentralised, place-based, multilevel governance approach and be built around the shared management and partnership principle, fully involving local and regional authorities as well as other relevant stakeholders; considers that their active participation will ensure effective oversight and contribute to strengthening safeguards against corruption and misuse of funds, thereby reinforcing transparency, accountability and the protection of the Union’s financial interests; recalls the importance of addressing the low absorption rate in the cohesion funds and calls for a more focused approach to the local and regional economic needs, including through the development of smart specialisation strategies for research and innovation;

Amendment 14

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22. Recalls that the Union is committed to achieving climate neutrality by 2050, which requires a decarbonisation of the economy through the deployment of clean technologies, improved energy and transport infrastructure and more energy-efficient housing; notes that the Commission estimates additional investment needs to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 at 1.5 % of GDP per year compared to the decade 2011-2020 and that, while the Union budget alone cannot cover the gap, it must remain a vital contributor;

22. Notes that the Union is committed to achieving climate neutrality by 2050, which requires a decarbonisation of the economy through the deployment of clean technologies, improved energy and transport infrastructure and more energy-efficient housing; notes that the Commission estimates additional investment needs to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 at 1.5 % of GDP per year compared to the decade 2011-2020; notes the value of performance indicators on achieving climate neutrality in order to monitor the implementation of the EU policies and investments;

Amendment 15

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 25

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

25. Recalls that security is the foundation for the Union’s prosperity and social model and that the next MFF must invest significantly more in safeguarding the Union against the myriad threats it faces;

25. Recalls that security is the foundation for the Union’s prosperity and social model and must be highly prioritised in the next MFF considering the myriad threats the EU faces, such as geopolitical conflicts, hybrid and cyber threats, and authoritarian regimes that undermine freedom, democracy and other fundamental European values;

Amendment 16

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 27

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

27. Points out that the Union has played a vital role in achieving lasting peace on its territory and must continue to do so by adjusting to the reality of war on its doorstep and the need to vastly boost defence capabilities and readiness, far beyond the current allocation;

27. Points out that the Union has played a vital role in achieving lasting peace on its territory and must continue to do so by adjusting promptly to the reality of war on its doorstep and the need to vastly boost defence capabilities and readiness, far beyond the current allocation;

Amendment 17

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 28

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

28. Notes that, according to the Commission President, the defence spending gap currently stands at EUR 500 billion for the next decade; underlines that the Union budget alone cannot fill the gap, but has an important role to play;

28 Notes that, according to the Commission President, the defence spending gap currently stands at EUR 500 billion for the next decade; notes that the Union budget alone cannot fill the gap, despite defence and security spending being an EU priority, also in terms of strategic autonomy; invites the Commission to look into enabling private investments and capital flows, and public-private partnerships to fill the spending gap and ensure high transparency, ethical and accountability standards;

Amendment 18

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30. Points to the importance of support in the budget for military mobility, which upgrades infrastructure for dual-use military and civilian purposes and thus contributes to the Union’s defence capabilities;

30. Reiterates the importance of coordinated support within the NATO framework in the budget for military mobility, which upgrades infrastructure for dual-use military and civilian purposes and thus contributes to the Union’s defence capabilities;

Amendment 19

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 33

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

33. Underlines that, with technological change, it has become easier for malicious and opportunistic foreign actors to spread disinformation, interfere in elections and mount cyberattacks against the Union’s interests; insists that the next MFF must invest in enhanced cybersecurity; points to the importance of digital and media literacy and critical thinking in this regard, and to the need for continued Union budget support for initiatives in these areas; stresses, furthermore, the need to invest in the education of the general public in order for them to be able to identify cyberthreats and navigate the environment of disinformation in today’s world;

Amendment 20

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 38

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

38. Underlines that the budget must uphold the Union’s role as the world’s leading provider of development aid and climate finance in line with the Union’s global obligations and commitments; insists that the budget must continue to support the Union in its efforts to defend the rules-based international order, democracy, multilateralism, human rights and fundamental values;

Amendment 21

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 43

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

43. Stresses that financial support must be conditional on the implementation of reforms and adherence to Union values; emphasises, in this regard, the need for a strong governance model that ensures parliamentary accountability, oversight and control;

43. Stresses that financial support must be conditional on the implementation of reforms and adherence to Union values, as well as on the implementation of effective measures to protect the financial interests of the Union; recalls the European Court of Auditors’ recommendations to define in advance clear strategic targets on the rule of law measures for each enlargement country and to request the introduction of detailed outputs and results for the pre-accession support, accompanied by a clear methodology to guide decisions on payments; calls on the Commission to introduce reinforced provisions giving the EU institutions greater capacity to check the use of EU funds in the financial agreements with candidate countries; emphasises, in this regard, the need for a strong governance model that ensures parliamentary accountability, oversight and control, and, in particular, a strong and functional anti-fraud structure;

Amendment 22

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 44

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

44. Underlines that pre-accession support to Ukraine has to be distinct from financial assistance for reconstruction and post-war recovery, where needs are far more substantial and require a concerted international effort, of which support through the Union budget should be an important part;

44. Underlines that pre-accession support to Ukraine has to be additional to financial assistance for reconstruction and post-war recovery, where needs are far more substantial and require a concerted international effort, of which support through the Union budget should be an important part;

Amendment 23

Motion for a resolution

Subheading 6

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Fundamental rights, Union values and the rule of law

Fundamental rights, the rule of law and other Union values

Amendment 24

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 46

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

46. Emphasises the importance of the Union budget in promoting and protecting democracy and the Union’s values, fostering the Union’s common cultural heritage and European integration, enhancing citizen engagement and youth participation and promoting fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the rule of law; points to the importance of independence of justice, the sound functioning of national institutions, support for civil society and de-oligarchisation;

46. Emphasises the importance of the Union budget in promoting and protecting democracy and the Union’s values, as enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, fostering the Union’s common cultural heritage and European integration, enhancing citizen engagement and youth participation and promoting fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the rule of law, while ensuring the protection of the Union’s financial interests through anti-corruption measures and transparent financial management; points to the importance of independence of the judiciary, including prosecution, the sound functioning of European, national and subnational institutions, including free, independent and pluralistic media and a pluralistic and thriving civil society, and de-oligarchisation; stresses the need for robust anti-corruption measures to be a central pillar of the post-2027 MFF; urges the full involvement of Parliament in the process, including its right to access relevant documentation to ensure transparency and accountability throughout the procedure;

Amendment 25

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 48

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

48. Highlights the importance of strong links between respect for the rule of law and access to EU funds under the current MFF; believes that the protection of the Union’s financial interests depends on respect for the rule of law at national level; welcomes, in particular, the positive impact of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation in protecting the Union’s financial interests in cases of systemic and persistent breaches of the rule of law; calls on the Commission and the Council to apply the regulation strictly, consistently and without undue delay wherever necessary; emphasises that decisions to suspend or reduce Union funding over breaches of the rule of law must be based on objective criteria and not be guided by other considerations, nor be the outcome of negotiations;

48. Considers compliance with the rule of law and other Union values as fundamental to the protection of the EU’s financial interests and therefore a prerequisite to access EU funds; highlights the importance of strong links between respect for the rule of law and access to EU funds under the current MFF; believes that the protection of the Union’s financial interests depends on respect for the rule of law at national level; welcomes, in particular, the positive impact of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation in protecting the Union’s financial interests in cases of systemic and persistent breaches of the rule of law; calls on the Commission and the Council to apply the regulation strictly, consistently and without undue delay wherever necessary; emphasises that decisions to suspend or reduce Union funding over breaches of the rule of law must be based on objective, non-discriminatory criteria, thus ensuring that the mechanism is not used as a political tool and is not subject to blackmailing tactics of governments seeking to influence Union decisions; calls for an improved procedural framework that guarantees objectivity, transparency, consistency and the protection of final beneficiaries; urges the full involvement of Parliament in the process, including its right to access relevant documentation to ensure transparency and accountability throughout the procedure; recognises the emergence of new types of rule of law violations by national governments and calls on the Commission to address these evolving challenges, to include an assessment of the status of compliance with single market rules in the evaluation of the rule of law in each Member State and to trigger the conditionality mechanism if structural and persistent breaches occur at the national level that negatively impact the protection of the Union’s financial interests; considers that ex ante conditionalities and the permanent monitoring of their fulfilment play a central role in the protection of the EU’s financial interests;

Amendment 26

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 49

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

49. Points to the need for a strong link between the rule of law and the Union budget post-2027 and welcomes the Commission’s intention to bolster links between the recommendations in the annual rule of law report and access to funds through the budget; calls on the Commission to outline, in the annual rule of law report from 2025 onwards, the extent to which identified weaknesses in rule of law regimes potentially pose a risk to the Union budget; welcomes, furthermore, the link between respect for Union values and the implementation of the budget and calls on the Commission to actively monitor Member States’ compliance with this principle;

49. Points to the need for a stronger link between the rule of law as well as other Union values and the Union budget post-2027 and welcomes the Commission’s intention to bolster links between the recommendations in the annual rule of law report and access to funds through the budget; calls on the Commission to outline, in the annual rule of law report from 2025 onwards, the extent to which identified weaknesses in rule of law regimes potentially pose a risk to the Union budget; welcomes, furthermore, the link between respect for Union values and the implementation of the budget and calls on the Commission to actively monitor Member States’ compliance with this principle and to take swift action in the event of non-compliance;

Amendment 27

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 50

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

50. Calls for the consolidation of a robust rule of law toolbox, building on the current conditionality provisions under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and the horizontal enabling conditions in the Common Provisions Regulation; underlines the need for far greater transparency and consistency with regard to the application of tools to protect the rule of law and for Parliament’s role to be strengthened in the application and scrutiny of such measures; insists, furthermore, on the need for consistency across instruments when assessing breaches of the rule of law in Member States;

50. Calls for the consolidation of a robust toolbox covering the rule of law and other Union values, building on the current conditionality provisions under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and the horizontal enabling conditions in the Common Provisions Regulation1a and the relevant provisions of the Financial Regulation and insists that the toolbox should cover the entire EU budget and ensure no backsliding across any instruments; underlines the need for far greater transparency and consistency with regard to the application of tools to protect the rule of law and for Parliament’s role to be strengthened in the scrutiny of such measures; insists, furthermore, on the need for consistency across instruments when assessing breaches of the rule of law in Member States;

______________

1a Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy, OJ L 231, 30.6.2021, p. 159, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1060/oj.

Amendment 28

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 51

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

51. Recalls that the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation provides that final recipients should not be deprived of the benefits of EU funds in the event of sanctions being applied to their government; believes that, to date, this provision has not been effective and stresses the importance of applying a smart conditionality approach so that beneficiaries are not penalised because of their government’s actions; calls on the Commission to explore additional ways of ensuring that local and regional authorities, civil society and other beneficiaries can continue to benefit from Union funding in cases of breaches of the rule of law by national governments without weakening the application of the regulation;

51. Recalls that the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation provides that final recipients should not be deprived of the benefits of EU funds in the event of the mechanism being applied to their government; strongly believes that, to date, this provision has been insufficiently enforced and stresses the importance of applying the conditionality mechanism so that beneficiaries are safeguarded from being penalised due to the actions of their government; insists that the Commission propose specific measures to ensure that local and regional authorities, civil society and other beneficiaries can continue to benefit from Union funding in cases of breaches of the rule of law by national governments without weakening the application of the regulation;

Amendment 29

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 51 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

51a. Acknowledges the crucial role of horizontal enabling conditions in the Common Provisions Regulation in ensuring the systematic application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights; underlines the need to strengthen monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to enhance the practical enforcement of these conditions, ensuring enhanced transparency and stakeholder participation in the monitoring committee;

Amendment 30

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 55

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

55. Welcomes the development of a methodology to track gender-based spending and considers that the lessons learnt should be applied in the next MFF; stresses, in the same vein, the need for a significant improvement in climate and biodiversity mainstreaming methodologies;

deleted

Amendment 31

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 56 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

56a. Acknowledges the importance of a clear monitoring framework for horizontal, cross-cutting EU objectives and ensuring that funding instruments are designed to achieve such EU objectives; notes the Commission’s efforts to enhance the tracking of and reporting on such horizontal priorities, but calls for stronger safeguards and clearer milestones for the completion of these measures; calls for a closer link between disbursements and the achievement of objectives in future funding instruments, along with proactive steps to mitigate the risks of non-completion;

Amendment 32

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 56 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

56b. Calls on the Commission to establish a framework for monitoring and evaluating horizontal EU priorities; stresses the importance of robust performance monitoring and evaluation frameworks to track the contribution of investments to meeting horizontal targets; calls on the Commission to strengthen its commitment to Better Regulation principles to ensure that future funding instruments deliver measurable results;

Amendment 33

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 57

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

57. Insists that, post-2027, sufficient financial and staff resources be allocated from the outset so that Union institutions, bodies and decentralised agencies can ensure effective and efficient policy design, delivery and enforcement, continue to attract the best people from all Member States, thus ensuring geographical balance, and have leeway to adjust to changing circumstances;

57. Recalls that an effective European public administration is a public good; insists that, post-2027, sufficient financial and staff resources be allocated from the outset so that Union institutions, bodies and decentralised agencies can ensure effective and efficient policy design, delivery and enforcement as well as the protection of the financial interests of the Union, continue to attract the best people from all Member States, thus ensuring geographical balance, and have leeway to adjust to changing circumstances;

Amendment 34

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 59

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

59. Stresses that up-front investment in interoperable IT infrastructure and data mining can also generate longer-term cost savings and hugely enhance policy delivery and tracking of spending;

59. Emphasises that, if properly managed, digitalisation can make public administration more efficient, reliable and secure, while also contributing to the protection of the EU’s financial interests; stresses that the increased focus on performance requires a more robust monitoring framework and effective use of IT tools such as EDES and ARACHNE to enhance transparency, data-driven oversight and governance under the post-2027 MFF; stresses the importance of up-front investment in interoperable IT infrastructure and data mining as a prerequisite for implementing the key components of the protection of the Union’s financial interests in the next MFF and highlights that they can also generate longer-term cost savings and hugely enhance policy delivery and tracking of spending; calls on the Commission to enhance interoperability between digital tools for the supervision and audits of EU funds, and to provide support and tools to upgrade the digital skills of public administration staff, both EU and national, involved in the management of EU funds;

Amendment 35

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 59 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

59a. Emphasises that the cybersecurity preparedness of the EU institutions and bodies is insufficient given the growing threats, making them vulnerable to increasingly sophisticated cyberattacks; highlights the lack of a common legal framework, insufficient resources and training, unequal cybersecurity investments, and gaps in cooperation and information sharing on security incidents; recalls the importance of recital 14 and Article 6(7) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2023/28411a and calls on the Commission to continue making adequate investments in cybersecurity to meet the longer-term indicative target of at least 10 % of total IT spending; calls on the Commission to (i) introduce binding cybersecurity rules for all EU institutions and bodies, (ii) increase resources for CERT-EU and ENISA, (iii) enhance interinstitutional cooperation, (iv) prioritise support for less cyber-mature entities, and (v) ensure mandatory cybersecurity training for staff and decision-makers; further stresses the need to improve incident reporting and coordination to strengthen the EU’s overall cyber resilience;

______________

1a Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2023/2841 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2023 laying down measures for a high common level of cybersecurity at the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union, OJ L, 2023/2841, 18.12.2023, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2841/oj.

Amendment 36

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 60

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

60. Stresses that the next MFF must be designed so as to simplify the procedures for final beneficiaries, develop digitalisation, harmonise rules wherever possible and cut unnecessary red tape and must be implemented as close to people as possible; is of the opinion that cutting red tape and effective budgetary control can go hand in hand; insists, therefore, that the financial oversight of Union funds should be conducted through more synchronised and digitalised reporting mechanisms, with a view to strengthening financial supervision, enabling advanced data analytics, identifying risk indicators, and facilitating comparative assessments among Member States;

Amendment 37

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 61

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

61. Calls for genuine simplification where there are overlapping objectives, diverging eligibility criteria and different rules governing aspects that should be uniform across programmes; considers that an assessment of which spending programmes should be included in the next MFF must be based on the above aspects, on the need to focus spending on clearly identified policy objectives and on the policy intervention logic of each programme; points out that transparency must be ensured and improved through a centralised, real-time, publicly accessible database of all recipients of EU funds, including final beneficiaries of cohesion and agricultural funding, in order to prevent fraud and misuse;

Amendment 38

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 61 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

61a. Expresses serious concern over the conclusion of the European Court of Auditors, in its 2023 report1a, that the error rate in EU spending has risen to 5.6 % of the overall budget; underlines the European Court of Auditors’ warning that increasing European debt is placing growing pressure on the EU budget; urges the Commission to thoroughly consider the findings of the European Court of Auditors and fully implement the recommendations from both its annual and special reports to enhance the efficiency, transparency and accountability of EU budgetary spending;

_________________

1a European Court of Auditors, ‘2023 Annual reports’.

Amendment 39

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 61 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

61a. Believes that, alongside strong control mechanisms, the next MFF should have a specific focus on a further simplification of the procedures for applicants and/or beneficiaries, in particular smaller beneficiaries; is of the opinion that the Commission’s deregulation priorities should also be felt by applicants for EU funding; reiterates that such simplification should not be to the detriment of sufficient controls, sound financial management and transparency;

Amendment 40

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 62

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

62. Insists that a simpler budget must also be a more transparent budget, enabling better control of spending and reducing the risks of double funding, misuse and fraud, without undermining the necessary complementarity between EU funds; underlines that any reduction in programmes must be offset by a far more detailed breakdown of the budget by budget line, in contrast to some programme mergers in the current MFF, such as the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe (NDICI – Global Europe), which is an example not to follow; calls, therefore, for a sufficiently detailed breakdown by budget line to enable proper accountability and ensure that decision-making in the annual budgetary procedure is meaningful;

Amendment 41

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 62 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

62b. Emphasises, in particular, the risk of double funding, which increases with the introduction of instruments based on financing not linked to costs (FNLC) and is higher when different EU funding programmes with different delivery models, rules and governance and accountability frameworks are used to finance similar measures and actions during the same time frame; calls on the Commission to align rules, governance and accountability frameworks; stresses the ex ante need to prevent double funding through a clear demarcation of which kinds of actions can be funded by which instruments; re-emphasises, in this regard, the increased need for the detection of double funding through a single, integrated, interoperable information and monitoring system, as envisaged in the Financial Regulation;

Amendment 42

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 62 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

62c. Regrets the Commission’s rejection of recommendations to clarify the definition of double funding under FNLC models and to strengthen control requirements; considers that both the cost and performance dimensions must be addressed to effectively mitigate risks; urges the Commission to formalise minimum control requirements and ensure their consistent application at the beneficiary level to safeguard EU funds and enhance oversight across Member States;

Amendment 43

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 62 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

62d. Acknowledges the importance of coordination among funding programmes and instruments on account of the complexities introduced by the RRF and FNLC models; calls on the Commission to address these challenges proactively in the post-2027 MFF by establishing robust data-sharing mechanisms and aligning reporting across funding instruments to strengthen oversight and accountability;

Amendment 44

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 62 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

62e. Calls on the Commission to reform audit mechanisms with a view to strengthening the role of the European Court of Auditors in the implementation of MFF programmes and in its interaction with national audit offices, with a focus on timing, lessons learnt and subsidiarity;

Amendment 45

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 62 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

62f. Calls on the Commission to increase the transparency, and citizens’ awareness, of the MFF by gathering and setting up a real-time, publicly accessible digital dashboard detailing fund allocation, project purposes, outcomes and final beneficiaries;

Amendment 46

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 62 g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

62g. Notes that the Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT) is looking into the existence of grant agreements containing detailed lobbying activities, funded by the MFF LIFE programme; notes that the Commission adopted guidance on funding activities related to the development, implementation, monitoring and enforcement of Union legislation and policy clarifying that funding is in line with the EU acquis, while stating that this could entail a reputational risk for the Union; calls on the Commission to ensure full transparency on the final recipients of EU funds across different policy areas as well as to review all other MFF programmes to make sure they comply with the measures that have been taken by the Commission;

Amendment 47

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 63

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

63. Reiterates its long-standing position that all EU-level spending should be brought within the purview of the budgetary authority; calls, therefore, for the full budgetisation of (partially) off-budget instruments such as the Social Climate Fund, the Innovation Fund and the Modernisation Fund, or their successors, in order to ensure Parliament’s oversight and the Court of Auditors’ audit rights; reiterates the call for public audit mandates for all financing instruments supporting EU policies, including those outside the EU legal framework;

Amendment 48

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 63 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

63a. Insists on the introduction of automatic corrective measures in the next MFF, particularly in cases where serious deficiencies in national control mechanisms are identified; calls on the Commission to adopt a stringent approach in such cases, immediately suspending funding where structural and persistent deficiencies threaten the proper financial implementation of the EU budget, thereby safeguarding the Union’s financial interests; emphasises the deterrent effect of such a system and points, in that regard, to net-financial corrections that protect the EU’s financial interests, and result in a direct loss for the Member State concerned; calls for sufficient internal guidance on flat-rate corrections for deficiencies in Member States’ control systems, including in performance-based instruments; urges the Commission to strengthen its focus on using flat-rate corrections for systemic irregularities to better safeguard the Union’s financial interests; stresses the importance of addressing weaknesses in recovery mechanisms to ensure irregularities are properly identified and managed; highlights the need to include robust recovery provisions and safeguards in future funding instruments to mitigate the risks of incomplete measures, double funding or unlawful actions;

Amendment 49

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 63 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

63b. Calls on the Commission to provide detailed, transparent and publicly accessible information on established irregular expenditure and the corrective measures taken; emphasises that sufficient and transparent reporting is essential for effective oversight and accountability; highlights the critical need to align disbursements with the completion of milestones and objectives under instruments such as the RRF; emphasises the need for enhanced mechanisms to give assurance on the absence of double funding, especially in simplified financing models such as FNLC, by expanding audit coverage to include both cost and performance dimensions;

Amendment 50

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 63 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

63d. Deplores the release of EU funds to a Member State involved in a procedure under the rule of law conditionality mechanism despite significant deficiencies in its judicial independence and anti-corruption frameworks; urges the Commission to ensure that EU funds effectively reach the population; calls on the Commission to systematically suspend EU funds through all instruments at its disposal in cases of severe and persistent breaches of the rule of law, corruption, misuse of EU funds, or structural and persistent deficiencies that endanger the sound financial implementation of the EU budget;

Amendment 51

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 64

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

64. Points out that, traditionally, the MFF has not been conceived with a crisis response or flexibility logic, but rather has been designed primarily to ensure medium-term investment predictability; underlines that, in a rapidly changing political, economic and social context, such an approach is no longer tenable; insists on sufficient in-built crisis response capacity in the next MFF;

64. Points out that, traditionally, the MFF has not been conceived with a crisis response or flexibility logic, but rather has been designed primarily to ensure medium-term investment predictability; recalls that, as a result, the EU’s financial landscape has become fragmented, with instruments featuring varying sources of funding and governance arrangements; underlines that, in a rapidly changing political, economic and social context, such an approach is no longer tenable; insists on sufficient in-built crisis response capacity in the next MFF; emphasises that, while responding to crises is crucial, it must be done in full adherence to transparency requirements, and that instruments introduced under urgent circumstances should integrate into their design the respective assessment criteria for which funds are disbursed; calls for a sufficient prior assessment of all financial instruments (re-)introduced in the post-2027 MFF, with a focus on their design, necessity and alignment with EU objectives; calls for full parliamentary scrutiny over off-budget instruments and special funds, ensuring that all EU expenditure is subject to democratic oversight and that no financial instruments bypass parliamentary control;

Amendment 52

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 67

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

67. Underlines that the MFF must have sufficient margins under each heading to ensure that new instruments or spending objectives agreed over the programming period can be accommodated without eroding funding for other policy objectives or eating into crisis response capacity;

deleted

Amendment 53

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 67 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

67a. Notes that different programmes and projects could have varying timelines for implementation; warns against excessively burdensome administrative obligations associated with changing such programmes or projects; underlines the need for flexibility of funding destinations to ensure that funding can be reallocated if it is not spent on an envisaged project (‘use or lose’);

Amendment 54

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 69 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

69a. Highlights that the EU’s crisis response mechanisms have revealed gaps in monitoring, accountability and long-term planning; urges the Commission to enhance transparency and performance tracking, ensuring harmonised indicators and real-time oversight; stresses the need for stronger parliamentary scrutiny over crisis funds and clearer conditionalities to align emergency measures with the EU’s strategic long-term objectives;

Amendment 55

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 71 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

71a. Calls, in this regard, for the length of the MFF budget to be shortened from 7 to 5 years to increase flexibility and accountability and to be more synchronised with the mandate of the EU institutions;

Amendment 56

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 71 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

71a. Considers that, given the significant changes and simplifications envisaged, there is an increased need to adjust the Financial Regulation to an entirely new way of working in the post-2027 MFF, in parallel with the adoption of the MFF regulation; expects the Commission to ensure that the next MFF, including the spending programmes, remains aligned with the Financial Regulation (recast); highlights, in that context, the requirement laid down in the recast of the Financial Regulation for the Commission and the Member States, in the implementation of the EU budget, to ensure compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights and to respect the values on which the Union is founded, enshrined in Article 2 TFEU;

Amendment 57

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 72 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

72a. Calls on the Commission to focus more closely on results and outcomes in the post-2027 MFF, alongside outputs and costs, and to place greater emphasis on cross-border EU added value; warns against embedding political objectives in a performance-based system, justifying the need to focus on results and outcomes;

Amendment 58

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 72 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

72b. Considers that any shift to a more performance-based approach needs to be based on a clear and reliable performance framework where EU expenditure is clearly attributed to the objectives being pursued therewith, both ex ante on the basis of estimates, and ex post on the basis of actual expenditure, and that this should be clearly disclosed in the Commission’s progress and performance reports; considers that this should be reflected in the legal bases for the post-2027 MFF to allow the Commission to collect this information from the Member States;

Amendment 59

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 75

75. Points out that any application of an RRF-style delivery model in the next MFF would have to correct the RRF’s fundamental flaws, by involving regional and local authorities from design to delivery through a place-based and multilevel governance approach, ensuring the cross-border dimension of investment projects, focusing on results and impact rather than outputs, guaranteeing full transparency in relation to final recipients of Union spending and safeguarding Parliament’s role as legislator, budgetary and discharge authority and in holding the executive to account;

75. Points out that any application of an RRF-style delivery model in the next MFF would have to correct the RRF’s fundamental flaws, ~~respecting~~by ~~the~~allowing ~~ordinary~~for ~~legislative~~a ~~procedure,~~more ~~namely~~flexible ~~institutional~~programming ~~codecision,~~framework ~~for~~guaranteeing ~~each~~robust ~~regulation,~~public byprocurement and grant procedures, implementing the partnership principle, involving regional and local authorities and other relevant stakeholders from design to delivery through a place-based and multilevel governance approach, ensuring the cross-border dimension of investment ~~projects,~~projects and cross-border projects per se, focusing on results and impact rather than ~~outputs,~~outcomes, ensuring the availability of data relevant for performance measurement and a single audit trail, guaranteeing full transparency in relation to final recipients of Union spending and safeguarding Parliament’s role as legislator, budgetary and discharge authority and in holding the executive to account; recalls the importance of a clear definition of the milestones and objectives;

~~Or. en~~

Amendment 60

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 75 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

75a. Considers that transparency is key to ensuring that EU funds achieve their objectives and reach their intended final beneficiaries and/or recipients; emphasises the need to identify and report on the real final beneficiaries of all EU funds to maintain public trust and enable Parliament to effectively fulfil its discharge authority role; reiterates the concern about the Commission and the Member States’ interpretation of what a ‘final recipient’ of RRF funding represents, which is not in line with the agreement of the REPowerEU negotiations, and maintains that ministries, public authorities and other contracting authorities cannot be listed as final recipients of RRF funding; expresses further concern about the findings of the Court of Auditors concerning the risk of irregular and double funding and financing of recurring budgetary expenditure, which are not in line with the RRF legal basis; stresses that a robust mechanism to prevent double funding and ensure accountability must be centrally integrated into and be applicable to all funding instruments, especially under the RRF and the FNLC delivery model;

Amendment 61

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 75 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

75b. Reiterates its position that the involvement of regional and local authorities, as well as other relevant stakeholders, is key in the design and implementation of any national approach to the next MFF;

Amendment 62

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 75 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

75a. Notes the Commission’s intention to increase the focus on a performance-based implementation of the EU budget, which requires careful choice and definition of indicators clearly linked to the funding objectives, based on thorough ex ante impact assessments, monitoring and ex post evaluations; is of the opinion that any shift to a performance-based approach based on the RRF requires the issues identified in its implementation acknowledged by the Commission to be addressed, and that it otherwise cannot be used as a blueprint; notes that these issues include limited accountability and limited insight at EU level into compliance with (EU) rules and regulations in the implementation of EU funds, limited transparency with regard to final recipients, limited EU added value on account of, in particular, the limited number of cross-border projects, and the limited involvement of subnational entities, in particular local and regional authorities, in the design and implementation of the instrument; calls for a continued and increased focus on performance, which, at the same time, should not come at the expense of controls and sound financial management; stresses the need for more centralised, integrated and interoperable IT solutions to automate reporting and guarantee the reliability and accuracy of data without creating additional administrative burdens; underscores the importance of monitoring the regularity of expenditure under the new MFF as well in order to combat misuse and fraud; is therefore of the opinion that, even if there is a shift to a more results- and impact-focused system, there must be a check on expenditure regularity; underlines that ensuring the full protection of the Union’s financial interests under performance-based budgeting will require careful balancing of auditing and control requirements with the administrative burden imposed on Member States and beneficiaries; points out that implementing the single audit approach and having one single contact point at the Commission for Member States and the European Court of Auditors, such as FENIX, would enable the administrative burden to be reduced while consolidating and coordinating audit responsibilities;

Amendment 63

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 75 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

75c. Underlines the need for tailor-made approaches for Member States; considers it of the utmost importance that the Commission maintain a strong horizontal approach to prevent the ‘nationalisation’ of Union policies, resulting in 27 national approaches that together do not form a Union approach and where Member States are treated differently on similar issues; notes that the experience so far with national recovery and resilience plans has not been positive, as it has not always been possible to quantify each Member State’s contribution to EU objectives due to a lack or incomparability of available data, and larger Member States with more budgetary resources have been treated differently from smaller ones with tighter budgets; considers that Parliament should be involved in defining such national approaches;

Amendment 64

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 75 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

75d. Notes that, in the case of existing performance-based instruments implemented under direct management, there is no obligation for Member States to report cases of suspected fraud in the Irregularity Management System (IMS), as is the case for funds implemented under shared management; calls on the Commission to mitigate this information gap for future performance-based instruments, either by requiring the use of the IMS or by defining new reporting obligations that would give EU-level anti-fraud organisations access to such information from Member States;

Amendment 65

Motion for a resolution

Subheading 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A long-term budget that demonstrates performance

Amendment 66

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 75 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

75e. Notes the Commission’s wish to put the post-2027 MFF on a stronger performance-based footing; notes the experience in the current and previous MFFs with performance frameworks that had to define, measure and report on performance; recalls the reports of the Court of Auditors that looked into performance frameworks from a compliance or performance perspective and repeatedly found similar shortcomings, regardless of the policy area; recalls that this concerned the poor definition of performance indicators and/ or objectives, a lack of available performance data to measure achievements on indicators or objectives, the poor quality of performance data and a lack of comparability between providers (e.g. Member States); calls on the Commission to address these issues in a performance monitoring and evaluation framework for the post-2027 MFF that is linked to the political priorities of the Commission, while bearing in mind the potential costs and administrative burdens on Member States, stakeholders and project promoters;

Amendment 67

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 75 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

75f. Understands that defining and agreeing on indicators and/or objectives between the Commission and the Member States constitutes a process of negotiation and may therefore result in politicised compromises; is concerned that this may result in differences in treatment among Member States, notably between larger and smaller Member States; stresses, however, the importance of clear and measurable ex ante definitions, since the outcome of the entire implementation process relies on it; stresses therefore the ex ante need to define clear and measurable indicators and/or objectives; notes that indicators and objectives can be defined at various levels, including as input, output, results and impacts, and that measuring the actual contribution from Union activities varies per level, with inputs and outputs having a relatively strong link, while results and outcomes are more difficult to attribute to Union policies; stresses the need for the post-2027 MFF to have in place methodologies for identifying the link between the activities deployed under Union policies and the results and impacts observed; stresses the need to align definitions across Union policy areas, and therefore the need for an effective performance monitoring and evaluation framework;

Amendment 68

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 75 g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

75g. Regards identifying and defining performance data, once indicators and objectives have been established, as a more technical undertaking requiring major improvements in the post-2027 MFF; stresses that performance data, both existing and new, should be accurate and consistent to avoid an unnecessary administrative burden and to ensure data comparability between Member States; calls on the Commission to make full use of the data and knowledge available in Eurostat and the Joint Research Centre; calls on the Commission to identify baselines for indicators and objectives before the start of the post-2027 MFF;

Amendment 69

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 75 h (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

75h. Notes that for performance-based instruments, where payments are based on the achievement of indicators/ objectives defined ex ante, the verification of the actual achievement of these objectives is of the utmost importance; considers that agreed verification mechanisms can provide clarity on the actions and deliverables that are necessary to determine whether an objective has been achieved and a linked payment can be made; recalls the need to properly consult with all relevant Commission services when verifying the achievements made, and to document the process;

Amendment 70

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 78

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

78. Underlines that, to date, the Union budget has been required only to repay interest related to NGEU and that, from 2028 onwards, the budget will also have to repay the capital; underscores that the total costs for NGEU capital and interest repayments are projected to be around EUR 20-30 billion a year from 2028;

78. Expresses its concern that outstanding debt from borrowing amounted to EUR 458.5 billion at the end of 2023, representing 2.7 % of total EU GDP; underlines that, to date, the Union budget has been required only to repay interest related to NGEU, but that, from 2028 onwards, the budget will also have to repay the capital; underscores that the total costs for NGEU capital and interest repayments are projected to be around EUR 20-30 billion a year from 2028; notes that higher indebtedness makes the Union budget more vulnerable to interest rate increases; stresses therefore that new borrowing should be avoided as far as possible;

Amendment 71

Motion for a resolution

Subheading 13

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A long-term budget that is properly resourced and sustainably financed

A long-term budget that is properly resourced, sustainably financed and effectively protected

Amendment 72

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 82

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

82. Underlines that, as described above, the budgetary needs post-2027 will be significantly higher than the amounts allocated to the 2021-2027 MFF; insists, therefore, that the Union will only be able to tackle the significant challenges it faces and deliver on its policy objectives if the next MFF is endowed with the resources necessary to meet the increasing budgetary needs;

Amendment 73

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 84

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

84. Reiterates the need for sustainable and resilient revenue for the Union budget; points to the legally binding roadmap towards the introduction of new own resourcesin the IIA, in which Parliament, the Council and the Commission undertook to introduce sufficient new own resources to at least cover the repayment of NGEU debt;

84. Is concerned by the fact that the Union’s debt continues to rise, with a large share of this increase attributed to the NGEU temporary recovery instrument; is concerned that the increased debt and the associated higher interest costs will have long-term consequences on the EU’s fiscal stability, potentially leading to greater financial strain and a reduced capacity to respond to future challenges or invest in key strategic areas; encourages the Commission to explore options to reduce the overall debt burden;

Amendment 74

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 86

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

86. Calls on the Commission to design a modernised budget with a renewed spending focus, driven by the need for fairness, greater simplification, a reduced administrative burden and more transparency, including on the revenue side; underlines that existing rebates and corrections automatically expire at the end of the current MFF;

86. Calls on the Commission to design a modernised budget with a renewed spending focus, driven by the need for fairness, greater simplification and digitalisation, a reduced administrative burden, anti-fraud protection and more transparency, including on the revenue side; points out that simplification cannot be achieved at the expense of control and reporting activities and should go hand in hand with efficient systems for detecting and reporting fraud; underlines that existing rebates and corrections automatically expire at the end of the current MFF;

Amendment 75

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 88

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

88. Emphasises Parliament’s commitment to play its role fully throughout the process; believes that the design of the MFF should be bottom-up and based on the extensive involvement of all relevant stakeholders and local and regional authorities; underlines, furthermore, the need for a strategic dialogue among the three institutions in the run-up to the MFF proposals; stresses that all EU institutions involved in the negotiations of the MFF must ensure high transparency and accountability standards;

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The rapporteur for the opinion declares under ~~her~~his exclusive responsibility that ~~she~~he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Date adopted

18.3.2025

Result of final vote

–:

Members present for the final vote

Georgios Aftias, Arno Bausemer, Gilles Boyer, Olivier Chastel, Caterina Chinnici, Tamás Deutsch, Dick Erixon, Daniel Freund, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Niclas Herbst, Monika Hohlmeier, Virginie Joron, Kinga Kollár, Giuseppe Lupo, Marit Maij, Claudiu Manda, Csaba Molnár, Fidias Panayiotou, Jacek Protas, Julien Sanchez, Jonas Sjöstedt, Carla Tavares, Tomáš Zdechovský

Substitutes present for the final vote

Maria Grapini, Erik Marquardt, Bert-Jan Ruissen, Annamária Vicsek

Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

Andrzej Halicki, Valentina Palmisano, Georgiana Teodorescu

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols: