On the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the Multiannual Financial Framework for the years 2028 to 2034

PR_Consent_InterimMod

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the Multiannual Financial Framework for the years 2028 to 2034

(COM(2025)0571 – C10-0000/2025 – 2025/0571R(APP))

– having regard to Articles 8, 285, 287, 311, 312, 323 and 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

– having regard to the Commission communication of 16 July 2025 entitled ‘A dynamic EU budget for the priorities of the future – The Multiannual Financial Framework 2028-2034’ (COM(2025)0570),

– having regard to the Commission proposal of 16 July 2025 for a Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2028 to 2034 (COM(2025)0571),

– having regard to the Commission proposal of 16 July 2025 for a Council decision on the system of own resources of the European Union and repealing Decision (EU, Euratom) 2020/2053 (COM(2025)0574),

– having regard to the Commission proposal of 16 July 2025 for an Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (COM(2025)572),

– having regard to its resolution of 7 May 2025 on a revamped long-term budget for the Union in a changing world,

– having regard to its resolution of 10 September 2025 on the role of cohesion policy investment in resolving the current housing crisis,

– having regard to its resolution of 21 January 2026 on the implementation of the common security and defence policy – annual report 2025,

– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union,

– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation),

– having regard to the report of 10 April 2024 by Enrico Letta entitled ‘Much More than a Market’ (the Letta report),

– having regard to the report of 9 September 2024 by Mario Draghi entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’ (the Draghi report),

– having regard to the report of 30 October 2024 by Sauli Niinistö entitled ‘Safer together – strengthening Europe’s civilian and military preparedness and readiness’ (the Niinistö report),

– having regard to the Commission communication of 18 February 2026 on the EU’s eastern regions bordering Russia, Belarus and Ukraine – Strong regions for a safe Europe COM(2026)0082,

– having regard to its resolutions on the outermost regions and overseas countries and territories, to the related policies that are in place and to the publications of the Commission related to the support specific to those regions, including in the area of agriculture,

– having regard to the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 on the European Green Deal (COM(2019)0640),

– having regard to the Commission communication of 12 November 2025 entitled ‘A Culture Compass for Europe’ (COM(2025)0785),

- having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 22 January 2026 on the multiannual financial framework 2028-2034,

- having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 22 January 2026 on the 2025 proposal for own resources,

– having regard to the resolution of the European Committee of the Regions of 15 October 2025 on the proposal for the multiannual financial framework 2028-2034,

– having regard to the opinion of the European Committee of the Regions of 4 March 2026 entitled ‘Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) post 2027, including own resources package’,

– having regard to the relevant reports of the European Court of Auditors related to the multiannual financial framework,

– having regard to the agreement adopted at the 15th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP 15) in Montreal on 19 December 2022 (Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework),

– having regard to the agreement adopted at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP 21) in Paris on 12 December 2015 (the Paris Agreement),

– having regard to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals,

– having regards to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,

– having regard to the meeting(s) between the Presidents under Article 324 TFEU,

– having regard to the letter from the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, to the President of Cyprus, Nikos Christodoulides, as the holder of the rotating presidency of the Council, and the President of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola, of 6 January 2026 on the common agricultural policy in the 2028-2034 multiannual financial framework,

– having regard to Rule 107(5) of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the interim report of the Committee on Budgets (A10-0105/2026),

A. whereas, pursuant to Article 311 TFEU, the Union must provide itself with the necessary means to attain its objectives and carry through its policies;

B. whereas the current MFF quickly proved its inadequacy in responding to a series of crises, inflation and new political challenges that were not and could not have been anticipated at the time of its adoption; whereas, for the purpose of securing the necessary funding, the MFF was pushed to its limits including an unprecedented recourse to the flexibility provisions and special instruments, after exhausting the available margins as well as several amendments to the MFF; whereas these tools are not meant to be used as substitutes for sound long-term budgetary planning; whereas this led to programmes such as cohesion policy being repeatedly used to respond to emergencies, thereby making it difficult to achieve their initial long-term objectives;

C. whereas the MFF mid-term revision agreed in 2024 proved to be imperative to address emerging priorities and challenges, and whereas the lack of resources continues to undermine the current MFF to this day;

D. whereas the establishment of the new MFF will be a critical moment for the Union, as it will provide for the possibility to endorse a common vision and decide on the future political priorities as well as the ability of the Union to deliver them; whereas the funding of new priorities and traditional priorities should be balanced in order to safeguard the common policies of the Union that underlie its political project; whereas the next MFF should respect the principle of subsidiarity;

E. whereas the global environment is marked by geopolitical tensions, economic volatility, energy security risks, climate-related disasters and evolving security threats, including the return of high intensity warfare in the EU’s neighbourhood, underscoring the need for an EU budget capable of adapting to both internal and external shocks, notably through investment in industry, the twin transition, connectivity and infrastructure, as well as civil preparedness and protection and investment in social policies;

F. whereas the next MFF must guarantee that the EU budget continues to be an investment tool and remains central in responding to our people’s needs and supporting European companies, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs);

G. whereas the EU’s long-standing policies covered under the national and regional partnership plans (NRPP) proposal are core policies of the European project and contribute to the resilience, cohesion, convergence and autonomy of the European Union while being central to its security and sovereignty in the current international context as well as to its economic, social and territorial stability and to its sustainability objectives;

H. whereas the Union faces a growing competitiveness gap in a changing geopolitical and economic reality, which undermines its long-term productivity, strategic autonomy, resilience and capacity to act; whereas the Union must significantly strengthen its investment capacity to compete globally;

I. whereas new technological realities should be adequately supported in the next MFF;

J. whereas in light of the drastic cuts to the USAID budget, the EU 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;

K. whereas the Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities; whereas breaches of those values undermine the cohesion of the Union, erode the rights of EU citizens and weaken mutual trust among Member States;

L. whereas Article 8 TFEU establishes the principle of gender mainstreaming;

M. whereas the Commission estimates the additional investment needed to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 at 1.5 % of gross domestic product per year compared to the decade 2011-2020 and the EU budget cannot cover this gap alone; whereas the climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution crisis creates severe health and economic costs; whereas it is essential for the EU to invest in programmes with climate and environment objectives;

N. whereas, pursuant to Article 191 TFEU, the EU policy on the environment must be based on the precautionary principle;

O. whereas pursuant to Article 349 TFEU, the Union must support the outermost regions; whereas the programme of options specifically relating to remoteness and insularity (POSEI) has proved to be important in this regard;

P. whereas it remains the right of Member States to determine their energy mix;

Q. whereas the Pact for the Mediterranean is a comprehensive EU framework intended to strengthen structured and lasting partnerships with the Southern Mediterranean partners;

R. whereas, pursuant to Protocol No 10 on Cyprus, the application of the EU acquis is suspended in those areas of the Republic of Cyprus in which the Government of the Republic of Cyprus does not exercise effective control; whereas this exceptional situation has, for decades, prevented lawful land owners from accessing, using, and enjoying their properties; whereas the right to property is protected under Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;

S. whereas payments linked to NextGenerationEU (NGEU) had a significant impact on the annual budgetary procedure under the current MFF due to the fact that borrowing costs were not intended to be covered over and above the ceilings as Parliament had proposed; whereas NGEU repayment will affect the next MFF, with both interest and principal repayment to cater for;

T. whereas on 16 July 2025, the Commission presented a set of proposals on the 2028-2034 MFF Regulation and the EU Own Resources Decision, followed by legislative proposals for the setting up of new EU programmes, funds and instruments;

1. Underlines that the next MFF must equip the Union with the necessary financial means to respond to a rapidly evolving geopolitical, economic and social environment, while delivering on both long-standing policies and emerging priorities; insists that the EU budget must remain an investment budget capable of supporting citizens, regions and businesses, in particular SMEs, while strengthening the Union’s resilience, competitiveness and social cohesion;

2. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), while the NGEU debt servicing – equivalent to an additional 0.11 % of EU GNI – should be excluded from the 1.27 % and accounted for over and above the ceilings; reiterates that the next MFF must be more ambitious in size, as the current level of financing does not match the Union’s political ambitions, and must be protected from inflationary shocks; stresses that this level constitutes the minimum necessary to enable the Union to deliver on its Treaty commitments, respond to citizens’ expectations, and address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the EU’s neighbourhood, evolving security threats, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

3. Strongly opposes any approach leading to the fragmentation of the single market or re-nationalisation of the EU budget and firmly rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Union; considers that the Commission’s approach of ‘one plan per Member State’ undermines the EU policies enshrined in the Treaties, creates unnecessary competition between beneficiaries, jeopardises the European dimension of spending, weakens multilevel governance, challenges the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, and reduces transparency;

4. Calls for an increased envelope for heading 1 to at least maintain funding at the level of the current MFF; calls, therefore, for strong, distinct and adequate funding for the common agricultural policy (CAP), the common fisheries policy, the cohesion policy, the European Social Fund and home affairs; insists, in this context, on fully allocating the non-ringfenced amounts under the NRPPs to these policies, thereby ensuring greater predictability for final beneficiaries; reiterates the need to maintain a horizontal implementation framework and rules for these policies, including rule of law conditionality, in order to ensure coherence and avoid fragmentation; calls for the establishment of regional chapters in accordance with Member States’ institutional frameworks, and for the full involvement of regional and local authorities in the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of programmes under heading 1, based on the principles of shared management, multilevel governance and partnership;

5. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of the policies included in heading 2, in line with Parliament’s long-standing calls, which represents a doubling compared to the current period and which will better equip the Union to respond to future challenges in an increasingly unpredictable global environment; recognises the need to reinforce the Union’s capacity to act in key strategic areas, including competitiveness, defence and security, research and innovation, the twin transition, infrastructure, health and crisis preparedness, education and culture;

6. Calls, therefore, for an adequate reinforcement of priority programmes under heading 2, including the European Competitiveness Fund (ECF), Horizon Europe, the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF), Erasmus+, AgoraEU, EU Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM+), with earmarking for EU4Health and LIFE-related actions under the ECF;

7. Welcomes the increase in resources for heading 3 as a signal of the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor; considers, however, that the proposed level remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges;

8. Calls, therefore, for an adequate reinforcement of heading 3 that allows the EU to support future enlargement, address rising needs related to development, humanitarian crises and peace-building, provide support to Ukraine and other partners, and uphold Union values, human rights and democracy worldwide while strengthening multilateralism; insists that humanitarian aid must continue to be ring-fenced, delivered through a coherent framework with an adequately resourced annual baseline; calls for a reinforcement of the envelope for overseas countries and territories, taking into consideration the recent threats to the territorial integrity of Greenland and the broader geopolitical context;

9. Underscores that the next MFF must focus on financing European public goods with discernible added value compared to national spending, such as cross-border projects; recalls that European citizens and businesses are demanding EU action; calls for targeted, strategic investment of EU funds to meet their needs in priority areas such as housing, energy and security;

10. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal for an enhanced Flexibility Instrument and calls for it to be supplemented by additional sources including unspent margins and reflows from financial instruments, without prejudice to sector-specific rules; calls for a dedicated solidarity reserve for natural disasters to be mobilised over and above the MFF ceilings as a last resort to finance the Union’s response to specific needs within the EU following damage caused by natural disasters;

11. Expresses serious concern that the Commission’s proposals shift key policy and budgetary decisions to Commission work programmes adopted without co-legislative involvement; insists that all substantive policy choices must be determined in the relevant basic acts, in full respect of Parliament’s prerogatives as co-legislator and budgetary authority; stresses that simplification must not come at the expense of transparency, democratic accountability or Parliament’s oversight role; is extremely concerned about the widespread use of financing not linked to costs for a substantial portion of programmes under the next MFF and warns that without adequate safeguards this approach entails substantial risks and weakens auditability;

12. Underlines that compliance with Union values and the rule of law is an essential prerequisite for access to EU funds; insists on the importance of a seamless and coherent EU values toolbox covering democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights across the entire EU budget; insists on a robust approach to ensure that legitimate final recipients are not penalised for rule of law breaches by their governments;

13. Strongly reiterates the crucial need for sustainable, predictable and resilient revenue for the EU budget pursuant to Article 310 TFEU that should match the expenditure side and the strategic priorities and identified financing needs of the EU; reaffirms Parliament’s strong commitment to the introduction of new own resources, not only for NGEU debt repayment but also to finance the Union’s enhanced policy ambitions; welcomes the Commission’s efforts to identify new own resources and to put forward certain calibrations to traditional own resources; supports the broader ‘basket approach’ proposed by the Commission and calls on the Council to unblock the stalemate observed since 2020 on a basket of new genuine own resources to reach a level of revenue of at least EUR 60 billion per year; underlines the importance of the Commission’s proposal for a novel type of crisis mechanism which could offer the Union the ability to respond swiftly to unexpected developments; underlines that Parliament will only approve a long-term budget, including the revenue side, that is fit for purpose for the Union in a changing world;

14. Considers that the positions set out in this interim report constitute Parliament’s mandate for the MFF negotiations and are to be taken into account by the Council in accordance with Article 312(5) TFEU in order to obtain Parliament’s consent; stands ready to work constructively and engage in meaningful negotiations with the Council to deliver a long-term budget that addresses the Union’s needs; calls for a swift agreement to be reached between the institutions by the end of 2026 to allow for a timely adoption of the MFF and to enable the implementation of spending programmes from 1 January 2028;

MFF related matters

15. Demands that the European Parliament be involved in all the stages of the MFF process, as required by the Treaties in Article 312(5) TFEU; considers that the Council must take due account of Parliament’s position set out here to secure Parliament’s consent in accordance with Article 312 TFEU;

Overall size

16. Recalls its position that, ‘in a fast changing world where people rightly expect more from the Union and where the Union is confronted with a growing number of crises and global challenges, the next MFF must be endowed with increased resources compared to the 2021-2027 period, moving away from the historically restrictive, self-imposed level of 1 % of EU GNI’; regrets that the Commission, instead of presenting a genuinely ambitious proposal, hides behind a headline figure of EUR 2 trillion in current prices, which in reality amounts to only EUR 1.763 trillion in 2025 constant prices, equal to 1.26 % of EU GNI, with 0.11 % being allocated to NGEU repayments; deplores that this results in a token increase for EU programmes of less than 0.01 percentage points of EU GNI, effectively freezing the budget in real terms; highlights that the phasing-out of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) will further substantially reduce the Union’s overall spending power; considers that this proposed level will neither enable the Union to deliver on its commitments enshrined in the Treaties nor respond to the significant geopolitical challenges ahead, including the climate and biodiversity crisis which is best dealt with at Union level, as well as the cost of living crisis;

17. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU GNI, excluding NGEU repayments; considers that NGEU debt servicing should be treated separately from appropriations for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture bringing the total amount to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to deliver on its commitments, respond to geopolitical challenges and achieve its strategic objectives;

18. Regrets that the NGEU repayment as presented by the Commission integrates annual instalments under the MFF ceilings from 2028 onwards; stresses that the repayment plan must ensure that NGEU debt servicing does not crowd out essential EU spending or compromise the Union’s ability to address future crises; therefore, recalls its long-standing position that appropriations linked to the repayment of NGEU should be accounted for over and above the ceilings;

19. Strongly supports the proposed technical adjustment method that accounts for actual inflation, which is essential to safeguard the EU budget’s purchasing power in periods of inflationary shocks; welcomes this mechanism, which is critical to protect EU programmes so that citizens do not suffer from inflation;

20. Calls, in this context, for the level of funding to be secured for EU programmes and policies, as set out in Annexes I and II to the present resolution; calls for the relevant commitment and payment ceilings to be adjusted accordingly;

Heading 1

21. Notes that heading 1 on ‘Europe’s social model and quality of life’ is allocated EUR 797.2 billion in 2025 prices, after excluding the amount provided for the repayment of NGEU, representing 45 % of the total 2028-2034 MFF; expresses deep concern that this is a decrease compared to the EUR 810.1 billion allocated in the 2021-2027 MFF, which amounted to 65 % of the total; considers this substantial cut unacceptable given the critical importance of maintaining the Union’s long-standing policies;

22. Regrets that the proposed NRPP Regulation (COM(2025)0558), which merges different policies into one plan per Member State, generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries, creates unnecessary competition for financial resources between beneficiaries and policies and politicises the distribution of EU funds, risking increased complexity and trade-offs between priorities; insists that the ‘one plan per Member State’ approach implicitly erodes the European dimension of the EU budget and the objectives of common EU policies, leads to excessive centralisation challenging the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, excludes regional and local authorities and relevant stakeholders from a meaningful role in shaping priorities, and undermines multilevel governance and the territorial dimension of spending; considers that the non-ringfenced amounts under the NRPPs should be fully allocated to offer predictability to final beneficiaries; warns, in addition, that the significant reduction in funding for heading 1 also threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding its democratic processes, the rule of law and social rights, and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers as well as the protection of the environment and biodiversity; reiterates the need to avoid fragmentation and maintain the horizontal implementing framework, including overarching rules and principles such as respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights, which should apply uniformly across the policies covered under the NRPP, while ensuring coherent and consistent implementation provisions;

23. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity and providing European public goods; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration, avoiding fragmentation or the re-nationalisation of key Union policies, promoting territorial, economic and social cohesion across all EU regions, including by addressing persistent structural constraints affecting peripheral, insular and outermost regions, and ensuring fair competition and equal opportunities for all territories across Member States, leaving no one and no region behind; considers, furthermore, that the EU budget should contribute to tackling the cost of living crisis and growing inequalities as well as to achieving the EU’s climate and biodiversity objectives, through investments in relevant key areas;

24. Rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation and a combination of policies which have different objectives, time horizons and delivery logics undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; is deeply concerned that a single instrument with multiple layers of objectives, safeguards and reporting requirements may increase complexity, weaken accountability and undermine effective implementation; warns that such an approach whereby Member States decides on the specific allocation of EU funds would fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration and upwards convergence;

25. Calls for separate, sufficient and clearly ringfenced funding for the CAP, the common fisheries policy, the cohesion policy and the European Social Fund to enhance long-term territorial resilience, social cohesion and trust in the European project as well as upwards convergence;

26. Deplores the proposed reduction in funding for the post-2027 CAP; calls for a dedicated and robust budget for the CAP in the next MFF to be ring-fenced with an amount of EUR 433.01 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 385.12 billion in 2025 constant prices) to ensure food security and sovereignty, competitiveness and a fair standard of living for farmers, and to enable them to transition to more sustainable practices, including sustainable land and water management; calls for a reinforced, accountable and more agile unity safety net under the horizontal framework of the NRPP; stresses the need to fully preserve the integrity of the internal market and ensure a level playing field between farmers in different Member States; calls for the continuation and reinforcement of measures that guarantee the viability of rural areas, also through LEADER and community-led local development; underlines that addressing climate, environmental, biodiversity loss and other challenges affecting rural areas, the agricultural sector and food security, contributes to the economic viability and competitiveness of the sector and of rural areas and to the long-term stability of agricultural production; emphasises the need to support tailored investments, including those fostering social inclusion that make agriculture more attractive to young people, women and new farmers;

27. Regrets the significant reduction in the budget as well as the diffusion of fisheries funding into several budgetary headings; calls for assurances that the ring-fenced allocation for fisheries and aquaculture in the MFF amounts to at least EUR 7.29 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 6.50 billion in 2025 constant prices), with a view to addressing the challenges of these sectors; underlines, furthermore, that the additional financing for the external dimension of fisheries under heading 3 should amount to EUR 1.69 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 1.50 billion in 2025 constant prices) including for sustainable fisheries partnership agreements and regional fisheries management organisations; reiterates that the common fisheries policy contributes to a stable income and long-term prospects for fishers, while protecting sustainable marine ecosystems, which underpin the sector’s competitiveness; calls for particular attention to be paid to the EU fishing fleet to improve safety and security, including by tackling illegal fishing and improving working conditions, energy efficiency and sustainability and allowing for the modernisation of the Union’s fleet and generational renewal; calls, furthermore, for the next MFF to ensure dedicated and visible financing, over and above the funding for fisheries, for Union ocean-related policies, including the Ocean Pact;

28. Recalls that cohesion policy is a legally enshrined Treaty-based priority of the Union; stresses that cohesion policy must continue to act as the Union’s main territorial investment instrument and as a pillar of the EU growth model, based on the effective involvement of regional and local authorities through their full participation in the preparation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of national plans and the tailoring of investments to their needs and implemented under a model based on the partnership principle, with the involvement of economic and civil society actors and multilevel governance with a total budget of EUR 306.93 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 274.34 billion in 2025 constant prices) for structural and investment funds;

29. Calls for cohesion policy to remain a distinct policy with a dedicated and robust budget ring-fenced in the next MFF with a total amount of EUR 248.37 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 222.00 billion in 2025 constant prices) for the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), EUR 46.99 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 42.00 billion in 2025 constant prices) for the Cohesion Fund and EUR 11.57 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 10.34 billion in 2025 constant prices) for Interreg; underlines that allocating this amount to cohesion policy is a necessary condition not only for ensuring the financing of long-term cohesion objectives and fostering convergence, but also for funding the new objectives and priorities within this policy;

30. Regrets that the shortcomings of the RRF, which were also identified by the European Court of Auditors, were not addressed by the Commission when proposing the NRPP Regulation and calls for a shared management approach in which local and regional authorities take responsibility for designing, programming, implementing and monitoring actions;

31. Calls for the establishment of regional chapters in accordance with the Member States’ institutional framework; calls for the full involvement of regional and local authorities in the design, monitoring and implementation of funds, based on shared management, multilevel governance and the partnership principle as they are currently understood; stresses the need for clearly defined resources, partnership rules and a strong territorial focus, with regions acting as managing authorities, including through direct negotiations with the Commission on the definition of milestones and targets and their implementation, as well as more direct access to EU funding for regional and local authorities;

32. Stresses the need for adequate support for the Union’s response to demographic challenges; calls for adequate resources to be ensured, within the relevant programmes, for measures contributing to the tackling of such challenges, in particular for regions and disadvantaged areas affected by regional disparities and an ageing population, in full respect of the Union’s competences and the principle of subsidiarity;

33. Recalls the unique challenges that island, cross-border and mountain regions in the EU face and calls for tailored solutions to address these needs; calls for the Commission and the Member States to ensure that their distinct geographic constraints and economic and environmental realities are duly taken into account in the design and implementation of the regional chapters;

34. Notes that the financial programming of the EU Facility, which allows for additional flexibility for the policies it covers and which falls entirely within the purview of the budgetary authority, will benefit from substantial financial resources allocated to it to face unforeseen crises;

35. Notes the introduction of Catalyst Europe in the Commission’s proposal, which could mobilise up to EUR 150 billion in affordable EU-backed loans to enable Member States to undertake strategic investments beyond their allocated national envelopes; believes that this mechanism represents an important step towards addressing the investment gaps in decarbonisation, digitalisation, and economic resilience; emphasises that Catalyst Europe would be accessible to all Member States, thereby contributing to economic and social cohesion, as well as European competitiveness;

36. Considers that, in order to ensure the full and effective application of Article 349 TFEU, specific funding for the outermost regions must be established within the 2028-2034 MFF; calls, therefore, for a POSEI with a separate sufficient financial allocation for specific measures, including for aquaculture and fisheries that play a key role in food security, employment and local development;

37. Emphasises that the 2028-2034 MFF should play a pivotal role in reducing inequality, poverty and social exclusion, by supporting the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights, its action plan and its headline targets; is deeply concerned that the availability and affordability of decent housing in Europe is decreasing at an alarming rate, in a context of declining overall investment in housing supply across many Member States, with public and private funding remaining below what is needed to meet demand; calls for a strategic, responsible and efficient deployment of investments in decent, sustainable and affordable housing, through the use of EU funds, including via measures under the ERDF, and the use of Catalyst Europe loans and targeted investments under the ECF, as well as InvestEU national compartments, enabling greater housing investment with a view to implementing the European Affordable Housing Plan;

38. Calls for the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) to remain a stand-alone and separate programme with a dedicated financial envelope of EUR 124.19 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 110.73 billion in 2025 constant prices) for promoting upwards social convergence, quality employment and equal opportunities; stresses that the ESF remains a key financing instrument for investing in education, employment and skills development, fostering equality and providing for people in vulnerable situations and those most in need in our societies, delivering on the targets of the EPSR action plan; deeply regrets the narrow social dimension of the proposed NRPP Regulation; calls for clarity and predictability to be guaranteed for final beneficiaries and the responsible managing authorities;

39. Underlines that the MFF must support the complete and swift implementation of the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum to ensure adequate reception conditions, fast and efficient asylum procedures, integration, and return and readmission procedures, in full compliance with international human rights law; insists that the next MFF must provide the necessary resources to adequately address the major challenges of the Union in the field of asylum, migration, integration, border management and internal security, and the effective protection of the EU’s external borders, including for border infrastructure, as well as physical, electronic and intelligence measures, when and where relevant; considers that the proposal put forward by the Commission does not adequately respond to these requirements and calls for an increase in the amounts for asylum and migration policies, border management and security to EUR 38.04 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 34.00 billion in 2025 constant prices); calls for the expansion of direct funding streams within the EU Facility for local and regional authorities, building upon the model of the current thematic facility of the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund;

40. Recognises that all of the EU’s eastern border regions face heightened economic, social and security challenges due to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and other geopolitical threats, including hybrid threats; stresses the need for comprehensive MFF support to strengthen their defence, preparedness, resilience and security, as well as their economic, social and territorial development; therefore calls for a comprehensive response across EU programmes and sustained EU level support, including financial assistance under the national plans;

Heading 2

41. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, innovation, strategic autonomy, strategic industrial sectors and infrastructures, water resilience, emerging technologies, biotech, the green and digital transition, critical raw materials, energy security, space, defence, transport and military mobility, creative industries, education, culture, democracy and fundamental rights, economic and social resilience, technological sovereignty and support for SMEs, startups and scale-ups; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas and stresses that it should be implemented in a manner that ensures strategic coherence and maximises EU added-value;

42. Underscores that the ECF needs to be a targeted funding instrument to fill a funding gap in the current MFF; underlines the key role of the ECF in strengthening the Union’s competitiveness, as the capacity of the Union’s companies to compete on global markets, strengthening its economic and industrial sovereignty, long-term productivity, strategic autonomy and resilience, including access to critical raw materials, and in achieving the twin transition; calls, in this regard, for a budget of EUR 264.35 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 234.00 billion in 2025 constant prices) for the ECF; insists that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; considers it important to ensure that the ECF, including LIFE actions, are implemented through transparent governance arrangements enabling tracking of overall spending, objectives and results and avoiding unnecessary fragmentation; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports and that a well-trained workforce is key to a future-proof European economy and, therefore, funding for reskilling and upskilling of workforce is needed, including in sectors faced with significant transformations;

43. Notes that the EU budget alone cannot fill the investment gap and, therefore, there is a need to maximise synergies between public and private investment, use de-risking, financial instruments and budget guarantees as powerful and effective tools to achieve EU objectives and policy goals, and simplify and harmonise the EU investment architecture; strongly insists that it is necessary to have an InvestEU instrument larger in size than the current programme and available from the outset and that the budget should provide more flexible and accessible InvestEU national compartments, especially for SMEs, and calls for the establishment of robust EU-level financial instruments and risk-sharing mechanisms under the ECF that can ensure a stable flow of investment and crowd in private capital;

44. Recalls the importance of supporting SMEs as they are the backbone of the European economy, have a strong territorial focus and are a main driver for growth across the Union; stresses the importance of an adequate investment level in SMEs; stresses that the EU budget should enable SMEs to access funding more swiftly and readily, close the innovation and investment gap with global competitors and contribute to sustainable growth, job creation and strategic autonomy;

45. Highlights that the green and digital transition is inextricably linked to Europe’s long-term prosperity, well-being, sustainability, growth and competitiveness; underlines that the ultimate success of the twin transition will depend heavily on ensuring that transition is just and inclusive for workers, regions and businesses, and that it contributes to social justice for all, with particular focus on the most vulnerable, in order to ensure that no one is left behind; insists therefore, that the 2028-2034 MFF must continue to support the twin transition; regrets that the proposal for the 2028-2034 MFF does not include a stand-alone instrument and calls for relevant funds under the next MFF to nevertheless support a just transition; highlights in addition the need for synergies and complementarity among cohesion policy funds and the ECF;

46. Stresses the need to step up Europe’s industrial and technological defence base; recalls that defence industrial policy must be open and foster competition, and that dual-use technologies, military mobility and critical infrastructures are pillars of the Union’s geopolitical projection and European deterrence; calls for clearly identifiable and adequately funded defence-related allocations; calls for any defence-relevant investments, including under the NRPP, to follow coherent eligibility criteria, including requirements related to clear European added value and coherent with the principles of European preference, interoperability, security of supply and industrial resilience;

47. Notes that the proposed budget for Horizon Europe still falls short of the needed Union contribution to achieve the 3 % research and development (R&D) spending target and calls for a budget for Horizon Europe of EUR 200 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 177.01 billion in 2025 constant prices); underlines that increased investments in EU research and innovation, including much greater private investments, reflect the Union’s existential need to close the innovation gap with our global competitors and thereby bring sustainable growth and competitiveness back to Europe, since this remains the bedrock of our prosperity and is crucial for maintaining our social model; recalls that EU R&D spending cannot substitute sustained national public investment in R&D; stresses that collaborative research, open competition, and scientific and technological excellence must remain at the heart of the framework programme, and welcomes the Commission’s decision to continue dedicated support for widening actions and for transition countries in order to enhance geographical balance; underlines that the framework programme, including its widening actions, should primarily aim to foster excellence in research and innovation across the whole Union and to fully unlock Europe’s talent potential;

48. Recalls the importance of the CEF in addressing the missing links in the European energy and transport sector and of its contribution to boosting economic growth, jobs, and competitiveness in the EU; notes that the clean energy transition, and cross-border structural investment to improve energy security and critical energy infrastructure in Europe are indispensable and constitute a prerequisite for ensuring a secure and affordable supply of energy across the Union; recalls the crucial importance and added value of EU investment in developing clean energy infrastructure and accelerating grid modernisation and cross-border interconnection, including for renewables; welcomes the highly necessary increase in CEF transport and military mobility; notes that funding for transport infrastructure, as well as decarbonisation and digitalisation solutions, is now dependent on close synchronisation between the CEF, ECF and NRPP; calls for a CEF allocation of EUR 91.29 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 81 billion in 2025 constant prices) in order to adequately support energy, transport and military mobility;

49. Stresses that the LIFE programme plays a central role in mainstreaming the EU’s environmental objectives and commitments; considers, therefore, that actions currently supported under the LIFE programme, such as targeted, long-term and high-quality support for nature conservation, biodiversity restoration, climate adaptation, pollution prevention and environmental governance should continue in a clear manner, with dedicated funding of EUR 3.39 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 3 billion in 2025 constant prices) under the ECF, so as to ensure predictability, stability and continuity of funding, including for local and regional authorities and so that the implementation on the ground remains effective and visible to beneficiaries and citizens; stresses, in addition, that the EU Facility should also implement LIFE-related actions to achieve the current level of financing of the LIFE programme;

50. Stresses that the health of European citizens remains a priority; highlights that a healthy population and a strong health sector are fundamental drivers of Europe’s competitiveness, economic resilience and well-being; underlines that sustained and predictable investment in health is essential to strengthen the resilience of health systems, support and retain a skilled health workforce, reduce inequalities in access to care across Member States and ensure the Union’s preparedness for future health crises; expresses strong concern about the dilution of the EU4Health programme, shifting most health policy, prevention, and health system-strengthening actions into the ECF; calls therefore for EUR 10.05 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 8.90 billion in 2025 constant prices) of funding to be earmarked under the ECF for specific EU4health priorities;

51. Reiterates that adequate resources should be devoted to fighting gender-based violence and to supporting sexual and reproductive health and services, women’s rights organisations, and EU initiatives and bodies promoting true equality among people, regardless of their gender, age, sexual orientation or race; points out, in this regard, the Commission’s communication following Parliament’s resolution of December 2025 on the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) ‘My Voice, My Choice’;

52. Takes note of the proposal to shift the crisis preparedness and health emergency response from the current EU4Health programme into the more general crisis response capabilities of the EU, complemented by new cross-sectoral crisis coordination functions and actions relating to civil-military cooperation, creating integrated and resilient European civil protection; underlines the EU’s role as a hub for coordinating and improving the Member States’ preparedness and capacities to respond immediately to large-scale, high-impact emergencies and reiterates its call to ensure adequate funding for preparedness and rapid crisis response, ensuring the UCPM+ remains the primary EU-level framework for general-purpose crisis response; calls for a budget for UCPM+ of EUR 12.42 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 11 billion in 2025 constant prices);

53. Reiterates that Erasmus+, as one of the flagship programmes of the Union, plays a central role in promoting European values, cross-border cooperation and youth engagement and recalls that, in the context of the Draghi and Letta reports, strengthening human capital, labour mobility and skills, including through university and apprenticeship exchanges, is identified as an essential component of Europe’s competitiveness and resilience; calls for an Erasmus+ budget of EUR 47.39 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 42 billion in 2025 constant prices);

54. Stresses that investment in democratic resilience and cultural vitality is an integral part of the Union’s strategic autonomy; welcomes, in this context, the proposal for the new AgoraEU programme, recognising its broadened scope and its unique European added value as the Union’s only programme dedicated to the cultural and creative sectors and media pluralism, as well as to supporting democratic participation and promoting European values; calls for a budget of EUR 10.72 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 9.5 billion in 2025 constant prices) for AgoraEU;

55. Calls for a budget of EUR 0.89 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 0.79 billion in 2025 constant prices) for the Justice Programme, including support for the digitalisation of judicial cooperation and access to justice, the roll-out of new cross-border instruments, and emerging initiatives to reduce cross-border legal fragmentation, in particular in light of emerging challenges, including online crime and hate speech;

Heading 3

56. Notes that heading 3 ‘Global Europe’ is allocated EUR 190 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing a significant increase from EUR 121.5 billion in the current period while maintaining its 10 % share of the total MFF; considers that this essential reinforcement of EUR 68.5 billion is absolutely crucial, as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor and reliable partner in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient to finance pre-accession support and external action given the scale of global challenges, including rising development needs and inequalities, humanitarian crises, an unprecedented number of crises, conflicts and overall fragilities, decarbonisation, global health and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; therefore considers it necessary to increase the budget allocation for the Global Europe instrument to EUR 225 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 198.63 billion in 2025 constant prices);

57. Regrets the lack of thematic targets covering critical areas which would allow the co-legislators to set strategic priorities; stresses the need to involve civil society partners as well as local and regional actors; stresses that this increased allocation is essential to secure the Union as a credible global actor; calls for the necessary funds to support enlargement and accession processes and to promote and uphold the Union’s values and interests worldwide, including through mutually beneficial partnerships; stresses that predictable and adequate funding supports stability, resilience and sustainable development and contributes to addressing the root causes of migration by fostering economic opportunities, quality education and vocational training, and job creation in partner countries, thereby strengthening long-term security; calls for provisions to be negotiated under the relevant legislative procedure to ensure that the implementation of EU funds under the Global Europe instrument does not ignore persistent human rights violations in partner countries, and recalls the principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence for humanitarian and development aid;

58. Warns that the merger of programmes could lead, once again, to weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement and reduced funding visibility for specific priorities, as occurred with Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) – Global Europe; calls for clear and meaningful accountability and reporting mechanisms within the Global Europe framework; insists that the pillars, as well as thematic programmes, countries and instruments within them, including pre-accession funds, maintain clear and separate budget lines to ensure transparency in allocations and that requests for transfers within pillars of a significant amount be subject to prior approval by Parliament; considers it essential to allow de-commitments under Global Europe to return to the budget line of origin; deems it necessary for the Commission to provide a clear breakdown between programmable and non-programmable funding and recalls that Global Europe must be mainly composed of geographic programme actions;

59. Recalls that humanitarian aid, with ring-fenced funding, safeguarded and implemented in line with Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/96 concerning humanitarian aid, remains Europe’s most visible and principled expression of solidarity and must continue to uphold the principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence; reiterates its position that the principled and needs-based nature of humanitarian aid requires that its predictable funding be delivered through a coherent framework with an adequately resourced annual baseline with a dedicated nomenclature, complemented by an adequate reserve to cater for emergency actions;

60. Emphasises the importance of guaranteed access to the reserve of the Global Europe cushion, which should be available in addition to, and outside of, the EUR 25 billion indicative allocation for reinforcements in the case of unexpected needs, which are growing due to factors such as climate change; calls for the EUR 25 billion for humanitarian aid over the 2028-2034 period to be regarded as a guaranteed minimum, and not as a ceiling, in view of the increasing number and duration of humanitarian crises;

61. Welcomes the fact that the mobilisation of the Global Europe cushion is to change compared to NDICI – Global Europe, as, under the next MFF and Financial Regulation rules, any mobilisation above 10 % of the annual allocation will have to be approved by Parliament and the Council; insists, however, on its previous calls that the Commission inform Parliament in due time before any mobilisation of the cushion and take into consideration its observations on the nature, objectives and financial amounts envisaged;

62. Underlines that a sufficiently resourced Global Europe instrument is essential for the consistency of the Union’s external action and for the EU to act as a reliable and long-term partner, on an equal footing with partner countries; reaffirms that allocations under Global Europe should align with the objective of EU development cooperation policy as stated in Article 208 TFEU, namely the reduction and, in the long term, the eradication of poverty, as well as with the European Consensus on Development and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development;

63. Calls for meaningful accountability and reporting mechanisms; is concerned by the widespread use of ‘financing not linked to costs’ in the implementation of the Europe pillar through performance-based plans and insists that these funds should be disbursed based on compliance with fundamentals of the enlargement process, including the rule of law;

64. Considers that enlargement represents an opportunity to strengthen the Union and that the next MFF is pivotal for preparing the Union and the candidate countries for their accession; welcomes the decision to grant Ukraine and the neighbouring Republic of Moldova candidate country status; insists on the need to deploy the necessary funds to support their accession processes and the accession processes of the Western Balkans countries; welcomes the commitment of Global Europe to provide robust financial support to candidate countries as a key instrument for anchoring them firmly to the EU and advancing their preparation for accession; calls for a dedicated allocation for each candidate country to be guaranteed with specific budget lines;

65. Reiterates its full support for Ukrainians in their fight for freedom and democracy and deplores the terrible suffering and impact resulting from Russia’s unprovoked and unjustifiable war of aggression; welcomes the fact that the proposal to implement the Ukraine Support Loan has been adopted as part of the Union’s support to Ukraine; underlines that debt service costs arising from the borrowing for the Ukraine Support Loan were not accounted for in the proposals for the next MFF; insists that these debt service costs be placed entirely over and above the ceilings of the next MFF and outside of the funding already planned under the Ukraine Reserve;

66. Notes with concern the decreased official development assistance (ODA) target from 93 % to 90 % in the Commission proposal; stresses that the Commission should not be able to change this target via delegated acts;

67. Stresses the need to secure sufficient funding for the common security and defence policy (CSDP) and the Rapid Deployment Capacity; underlines that civilian CSDP missions are strategic for the Union and support the Union’s security interests and external action objectives, as well as those of its partners; therefore, calls for an allocation of EUR 3.76 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 3.34 billion in 2025 constant prices) for the budget for the common foreign and security policy, which covers the CSDP;

68. Underlines that the overseas countries and territories represent unique and strategic assets that benefit the Union as a whole; believes that the allocation proposed by the Commission does not correspond to the challenges faced by overseas countries and territories and calls for an allocation of EUR 2.08 billion in current prices (equivalent to EUR 1.85 billion in 2025 constant prices), taking also into consideration the recent threats to the territorial integrity of Greenland, with which cooperation can significantly help the Union to advance its strategic autonomy;

69. Insists that EU funding for conflict prevention, peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction constitutes a direct investment in the Union’s long-term stability and security, particularly in its Eastern and Southern neighbourhoods; commends the role of the UN and its agencies in conflict zones and calls for the EU to strengthen its political and financial support for multilateralism; demands that the next MFF provide dedicated, adequate and predictable funding to the UN and its agencies, whose work is of fundamental importance to the civilian population, particularly in Gaza, the West Bank, Syria, Lebanon and the wider region; calls for the EU to play an active role in peacebuilding and in addressing the effects of the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza and supporting rebuilding efforts; calls for dedicated funding in this regard in the MFF; underlines that all EU funding must be in line with EU values and rules, in particular the Financial Regulation;

70. Calls for the continuation of resourcing for and meaningful engagement with civil society organisations (CSOs), especially local actors and women’s rights organisations, and for structured dialogue supported by dedicated funding streams tailored to the needs of CSOs and human right defenders; calls for external action funding to be implemented, while taking into account the fundamental role of local and regional governments thanks to effective, clear and consistent multilevel governance and partnerships;

71. Insists that the European Investment Bank (EIB) Group be recognised as the Union’s primary strategic financial partner within the Global Europe architecture to maximise the impact of heading 3 resources; calls for a strong investment partnership with the EIB to leverage the EU budget, mobilise private investment and enhance the budgetary guarantee and blending framework, ensuring the effective delivery of the instrument’s objectives, particularly relating to competitiveness, resilience and promoting private-sector access to funding in partner countries; acknowledges the complementary role of other implementing partners such as national promotional banks and institutions, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the Council of Europe Development Bank;

Human resources, decentralised agencies, and other administrative expenditure

72. Underlines the need for Union policies to be underpinned by a well-functioning administration; insists that, post-2027, sufficient financial and staff resources be allocated from the outset and throughout the MFF period so that Union institutions, bodies, decentralised agencies and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, notably when their mandate is extended, can ensure effective and efficient policy design and high-quality delivery and enforcement, provide technical assistance, continue to attract the best people from all Member States, thus ensuring geographical balance, and have leeway to adjust to changing circumstances; underlines the need for gender balance to be ensured within the administration at all levels;

73. Calls on the Commission to provide additional information on the funding and staff for EU decentralised agencies in the next MFF; considers that, for some agencies, the proposal of stable funding and staff will continue to undermine their ability to fulfil their mandates; reiterates Parliament’s long-standing position that new tasks should be financed through fresh appropriations, and that redeployments from programmes and other priorities must be exceptional; acknowledges the need to assess and avoid potential overlaps or duplications between agencies and identify opportunities for synergies and cooperation in order to ensure that resources are allocated efficiently;

74. Notes with concern that the Commission’s self-imposed stable staffing has proven counterproductive to meeting operational requirements; acknowledges that, for the 2028-2034 MFF, the Commission has requested additional posts, particularly regarding the cybersecurity requirements in terms of staff; insists that the staffing needs of all institutions and bodies have to be taken into account when establishing additional posts; highlights the particularly alarming situation whereby some EU agencies receive inadequate operational funding, severely limiting their capacity to fulfil their mandates, comply with the Regulation laying down measures for a high common level of cybersecurity at the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union and deliver on policy objectives and enforcement as well as their regulatory obligations; stresses that, in light of the increasing challenges to be addressed, the EU institutions and bodies need to offer an attractive work environment to secure high-level talent applications;

75. Stresses the importance of the European Schools system as a flagship model that sets high common educational standards across the Member States and offers an internationally recognised qualification that promotes academic excellence, learner mobility and a shared European identity; calls, therefore, for support and predictable funding to meet its currently not covered long-term structural costs and expanding responsibilities, and for its visibility, transparency and budgetary certainty to be ensured;

76. Assumes that the Commission proposal duly reflects actual needs across all institutions, bodies and agencies and, for that reason, does not propose a further increase; fully intends, however, to defend the Commission proposal and to secure the necessary funding for a strong, efficient and high-quality European public administration based on the principle of equality of the Union citizens, at the service of all Europeans;

Special instruments

77. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a Flexibility Instrument to be constituted not only of a fixed amount but also of additional funds from revenue relating to fines and decommitments; considers, in the light of its position of 7 May 2025, that the Flexibility Instrument should receive funds from additional sources, namely unspent margins from previous years, the annual surplus from the previous year and reflows from financial instruments, together with future margins as a last resort; considers also that it should be heavily frontloaded; calls for a simplification and rationalisation of procedures in the mobilisation of special instruments and, therefore, considers the existence of the Single Margin Instrument to be obsolete and calls for its features to be incorporated into the Flexibility Instrument; considers that external assigned revenue and amounts made available again under specific revenue and decommitment rules in programme-specific provisions could be exempted from this general rule;

78. Restates that there should be a second special instrument, the Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters, amounting to EUR 4 billion per year in 2025 constant prices to be mobilised over and above the MFF ceilings, dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters, which should complement the proposed cascade mechanism for crisis situations and should be governed by rules allowing for rapid disbursement and, where appropriate, pre-financing mechanisms in clear coordination with all relevant instruments, including UCPM+, thereby contributing to resilience and crisis preparedness; considers that both special instruments should be able to carry over unspent amounts throughout the MFF period, to guarantee flexibility;

79. Notes that the Commission proposes EUR 88 billion for the Ukraine Reserve within the MFF regulation to finance pre-accession assistance, recovery and reconstruction efforts; considers that this amount could provide substantial support; welcomes the placing of the Ukraine Reserve over and above the MFF ceilings to cater for Ukraine’s exceptional and unpredictable needs; observes, however, that should the conflict continue, this allocation would be insufficient to meet Ukraine’s needs; calls for an increase and frontloading of the Reserve, with a view to providing additional support to Ukraine; stresses that the financing structure for Ukraine should remain coherent, transparent and effective, fully supporting the country’s accession path while clearly distinguishing pre-accession assistance and reconstruction needs;

Specific provisions

80. Recalls that the current MFF has been underfunded, which required an MFF revision in 2024; notes that while there is increased flexibility in the 2028-2034 MFF proposal, the overall amounts in the Commission proposal are still not sufficient;

81. Regrets that the proposed MFF regulation does not include a mid-term review clause; insists that the MFF regulation must require the Commission to present a review of the functioning of the MFF, by July 2031 at the latest, taking full account of the economic situation at that time, as well as the latest macroeconomic and employment projections and relevant global developments; is also of the view that such a compulsory review should, as appropriate, be accompanied by a legislative proposal for the revision of this Regulation in accordance with the procedures set out in the TFEU; stresses that any such revision should not reduce pre-allocated national envelopes, as set out in the NRPP Regulation;

82. Recalls that European elections will take place in 2034; considers that the date of publication of the proposal for the following MFF Regulation, i.e. 1 July 2033, is significantly later than usual in the MFF life cycle; calls for the proposal for the post-2034 MFF to be published by July 2032 at the latest;

Governance

83. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF; acknowledges that flexibility is essential for responding to unforeseen challenges, but stresses that it cannot be used at the expense of accountability, predictability, transparency and policy coherence; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap and undermine public trust in the EU;

84. Regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries, including lowering the administrative burden associated with accessing the EU budget and making spending more efficient; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality or democratic accountability, nor be used as a pretext for undermining multilevel governance and partnership principles or constructive dialogue with key stakeholders and social partners, as taking their proper application into account will increase the effectiveness of EU spending and will be essential for the success of the MFF; echoes the Court of Auditors’ concern that the Commission’s approach will lead to simplification in relation to the Commission’s interactions with Member States, while increasing or shifting administrative burden to national, regional and beneficiary levels; underlines that simplification will require, where possible, the harmonisation of rules and reporting requirements between EU, national and regional levels; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests;

85. Believes that the current NRPP proposal could lead to the ‘renationalisation’ of some EU policies, due to a lack of a horizontal approach and the increased flexibility granted to the Member States in implementing the Union budget based on a national approach; calls for ensuring that the budget remains an investment budget, which maintains a focus on EU added value and ensures a strong horizontal approach;

86. Underlines that the widespread use of flexibility and performance-based instruments in the next MFF must be accompanied by strengthened multilevel governance; considers that the meaningful involvement of local and regional authorities, as well as social and economic partners, in the design, implementation and monitoring of Union-funded actions is essential to counterbalance Commission-centric implementation, reduce the democratic accountability gap and ensure that spending responds to real territorial needs; insists that adequate scrutiny by elected representatives at EU, national and regional levels, where relevant, should accompany such instruments and that Parliament’s budgetary and discharge role be preserved;

87. Recalls that the Court of Auditors found that the so-called performance-based model, built on the experience of the RRF, revealed weaknesses in its design, implementation and effectiveness; notes with concern that the MFF proposals include widespread use of financing not linked to costs (FNLC) for a substantial portion of the instruments under the next MFF; is extremely concerned about such a major shift towards a new model of implementation; draws attention to the fact that, without adequate safeguards to ensure sound financial management in the implementation of Union funding or clear steps to address the shortcomings identified in previous or existing performance-based instruments, this approach entails substantial risks and weakens auditability; underlines that a solution needs to be found to address the divergences between cost estimates connected to milestones and targets and the real costs of projects, as this misalignment risks undermining the implementation of agreed Union-wide political priorities; considers that any possible increase in efficiencies cannot come at the expense of the protection of the financial interests of the Union; underlines, in particular, that large-scale and complex projects should remain cost-based, as their scope, duration and multilevel financing require detailed financial reporting and verifiable expenditure data to ensure proper monitoring and accountability; calls for the continued and expanded use of simplified cost options, in particular for smaller or medium-scale investments, as effective and proportionate tools to reduce administrative burdens, increase accessibility for smaller beneficiaries, and maintain accountability and traceability in the use of Union funds;

88. Insists that data on incurred costs must remain available to the discharge authority in order to verify efficiency and ‘value for money’ in the Union budget; warns that, without cost transparency, parliamentary scrutiny risks becoming a formalistic exercise unable to safeguard the sound financial management of the budget; calls on the Commission to ensure systematic follow-up to the findings and recommendations of the Court of Auditors;

89. Insists on the need for greater coherence in the monitoring and implementation of EU spending programmes and in the mainstreaming of important EU objectives and commitments; underlines that the proposal for a Performance Regulation is a first step towards putting in place a horizontal expenditure tracking and performance monitoring framework for the budget that aims to reduce administrative burden; considers that this approach, if adequately implemented, may lead to strengthened democratic oversight; stresses that a comprehensive inclusion of horizontal principles in a single framework would allow for meaningful tracking and better reflect the Union’s political priorities; insists that the performance framework must prioritise impact indicators that measure actual outcomes for citizens; stresses that the proposed Performance Regulation must ensure that reporting indicators are mandatory where relevant and comparable across all Member States and management modes; warns that, without such comparability, the discharge authority will be unable to assess relative effectiveness or identify underperforming programmes; underlines that performance indicators must be explicitly derived from the objectives of each programme and should capture outputs, outcomes and impacts; emphasises that climate-related expenditure must be integrated into the MFF to accurately monitor and track funding and its impacts;

90. Stresses that the EU budget plays a vital role in supporting the EU’s fundamental values of democracy and pluralism, enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union; welcomes the recently published EU strategy for civil society, which recognises the important role of CSOs in providing advice, support and expertise in the development and implementation of EU legislation and policies; underlines, in this regard, the need to ensure long-term, predictable and sufficient funding for CSOs;

91. Recalls that, as required by the Financial Regulation, programmes and activities should, where feasible and appropriate and in accordance with the relevant sector-specific rules, be implemented to achieve their set objectives while respecting working and employment conditions under applicable national law, Union law, the conventions of the International Labour Organization, and collective agreements, taking into account the principle of gender equality and without doing significant harm to the environmental objectives of the Union;

92. Stresses that all funding must be in line with the Commission Guidance on funding for activities related to the development, implementation, monitoring and enforcement of Union legislation and policy; recalls, in this regard, the Commission’s statement of 1 April 2025 on the current LIFE programme;

Budgetary governance

93. Notes the overall structure of four MFF headings, as proposed by the Commission, down from seven headings in the current MFF; notes with concern that the Commission proposes to reduce the number of EU programmes from 60 to 19, introducing a lack of clarity between objectives and budgetary nomenclature, undermining transparency and accountability; stresses that Parliament’s position on the structure of these new MFF programmes will be determined during the co-decision procedure for the relevant sectoral legislative acts; insists that the proposed budget nomenclature and the amounts allocated to each budget line must reflect all the specific objectives of and within each programme, with a view to ensuring transparency, predictability and accountability and to providing the budgetary authority with the information necessary to establish the annual budget and oversee its implementation;

94. Deplores, in this regard, the fact that the budgetary nomenclature proposed in the sectoral legislation is woefully inadequate; underlines that the simplification of the budgetary structure must not come at the expense of transparency or the ability of the budgetary authority to exert efficient scrutiny and take informed decisions; insists that the nomenclature must remain sufficiently detailed to reflect programme objectives set out in the basic acts, preserve the visibility of EU actions in all policy objectives and priorities, and enable Parliament to fully exercise its scrutiny role; calls for a more granular nomenclature to allow for a meaningful annual budgetary procedure, draft amending budgets and discharge procedure; reiterates that the annual budgetary procedure is the core democratic mechanism for allocating funds within the MFF;

95. Notes that budgetary transfers under the Financial Regulation already provide flexibility during budget implementation; stresses that the Commission can currently transfer considerable amounts between policy areas without budgetary authority approval, limiting oversight; in the absence of a sufficiently detailed budget structure, calls for new rules setting both a maximum amount and percentage per budget line for transfers without approval; considers that transfers from other Union institutions below a certain threshold could be exempted from the objection procedure as a simplification measure;

96. Emphasises the need for robust governance ensuring parliamentary accountability, oversight and control, alongside an effective anti-fraud architecture; raises, furthermore, concerns as to how the Commission will obtain sufficient assurance at EU level on the legality and regularity of expenditure, recalling that such clear assurance is indispensable for Parliament to exercise its role as discharge authority; rejects any approach that limits Parliament to a consultative or information-only role in the mobilisation of any instrument or fund under the next MFF; stresses that budgetary flexibility must not circumvent the prerogatives of the budgetary authority and that all redeployments, reprogramming and mobilisation of cushions or other reserves must be subject to Parliament’s approval; considers that genuine flexibility requires both rapid response capacity and democratic legitimacy, which can only be achieved through Parliament’s full participation in decisions on the allocation and use of resources;

97. Expresses its concern about the lack of predictability in EU funding that might result from excessive flexibility mechanisms and recurrent redeployments; recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; underlines that while the current MFF has suffered from insufficient flexibility to adjust to evolving priorities, the next MFF must strike a better balance between investment predictability and adaptability; emphasises that certain policy areas require greater funding stability than others; firmly rejects recurrent redeployments as a means to finance Union priorities, as they undermine programme implementation and jeopardise the delivery of agreed policy objectives;

98. Notes the proposed increase in borrowing and lending under the next MFF; considers that the budgetary authority must carefully monitor the impact of this approach on the MFF headroom or other guarantees; demands that borrowing and lending operations respect the powers of the co-legislators and the budgetary authority;

99. Reiterates its call for a reinforced investment partnership with the EIB Group to leverage the EU budget, mobilise private investment and de-risk important policy areas such as climate, competitiveness, housing, social entrepreneurship, and innovation, defence and the external dimension; stresses that this and similar partnerships with other implementing partners leveraging the EU budget in all policy areas and de-risking investment where relevant, should maintain tailored instruments to facilitate access for SMEs, mid-caps and cross-border consortia, while ensuring robust governance, transparency and Union added value; reiterates the importance of adequate financing for technical assistance, jointly developed by the EIB and the Commission, for implementing authorities in order to help ensure timely implementation and the additionality of investments, in particular through building administrative capacity and developing investment pipelines, and calls for adequate funding to ensure the continued impact;

100. Reiterates its long-standing position that all EU-level spending should be brought within the purview of the budgetary authority, thereby ensuring democratic control, transparency and the protection of the Union’s financial interests;

Legislative governance

101. Emphasises that, in the interest of securing Parliament’s consent, every aspect of the MFF, especially budgetary elements, are to be considered as a package and subject to genuine negotiations; reiterates its objection to how current and previous MFF Regulations were adopted, with the European Council overstepping its role by predetermining multiple elements such as financial envelopes and policy-specific provisions, thereby violating Treaty provisions in both substance and intent; expresses serious concern that preliminary ‘negotiating boxes’ prepared by the Council presidency replicate this flawed methodology, incorporating issues that belong to the co-decision procedure when establishing new EU programme legislation;

102. Expresses serious concern about the broader programme design features and sectoral proposals that shift essential policy and budgetary decisions from the basic act to work programmes, significantly weakening Parliament’s legislative role; strongly objects to the transfer of legislative elements away from sectoral regulations, excluding Parliament from decisions that are currently taken under the ordinary legislative procedure and create legal uncertainty for beneficiaries;

103. Insists that all substantive policy choices such as programme objectives, spending priorities, financial allocations, funding rates, eligibility, selection and award criteria, conditions, definitions and calculation methods must be determined in the relevant basic acts, with full respect for Parliament’s prerogatives as co-legislator and budgetary authority and not in the work programme or similar empowerments; demands that policy choices, objectives and governance aspects be decided in the basic acts and that any supplementing and non-essential elements that are not included in the basic act be adopted exclusively through delegated acts, rejecting any use of implementing acts or other procedures that are not subject to Parliament’s consent; in this respect, requires that all multiannual and annual work programmes be adopted through delegated acts, in accordance with Article 290 TFEU, to ensure Parliament’s systematic involvement in policy decision-making and scrutiny; categorically rejects any attempt to relegate strategic policy decisions to comitology procedures or other arrangements; warns that Parliament will not accept any proposal that fails to guarantee its full legislative and oversight powers; stresses that reducing the level of detail in the basic acts results in shifting important policy choices to the implementation phase, therefore weakening democratic accountability and marginalising Parliament’s role in political decisions with significant policy and budgetary implications;

104. Stresses that the broad scope of objectives in the proposed sectoral regulations requires a revised assessment procedure for pilot projects and preparatory actions to safeguard Parliament’s already limited right of initiative; considers that clearer criteria and streamlined procedures are essential to ensure that Parliament can continue to launch innovative actions and test new policy approaches in headings 1, 2 and 3; insists that broadening the scope of programmes must not reduce Parliament’s capacity to propose pilot projects and preparatory actions in specific policy areas;

Respect for the rule of law and fundamental values

105. Underlines that compliance with Union values and fundamental rights is an essential prerequisite to access EU funds; highlights the need for continued links between respect for the rule of law and access to EU funds under the 2021-2027 MFF; believes that the protection of the Union’s financial interests is intrinsically linked to respect for the rule of law and Union values; stresses that the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation has been a key tool for protecting the Union’s financial interests against breaches of the rule of law, and that it should be applied whenever its legal conditions are met across the entire EU budget, including performance-based instruments as well as funding provided under Article 122 TFEU; calls on the Commission and the Council to apply the regulation strictly and consistently, and to take measures without undue delay wherever necessary;

106. Insists that, in the next MFF, a seamless and coherent Union values toolbox should cover democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights across all EU funds; is concerned about the overlaps with the conditionality mechanism introduced, in particular by the NRPPs, and calls for a unified, coherent and comprehensive framework across all EU funding programmes, in full coherence with the Conditionality Regulation, covering both enabling conditions that must be fulfilled in order to access EU funding, and measures to withhold funds when relevant conditions are no longer met; requests the Commission to consolidate all rule of law tools into a unified and comprehensive framework that provides clear, objective and transparent criteria for application and the way in which the Commission will ensure coordination among these tools;

107. Demands that Union funds be withheld where essential requirements are not fulfilled and that frozen funds only be released to the Member States concerned once they have fully implemented meaningful reforms and verifiably demonstrated compliance with the rule of law in practice and in coherence with the findings of the rule of law reports; stresses that decisions to suspend or reduce Union funding over breaches of the rule of law must be based on objective criteria, applied consistently, and must not be guided by other considerations or be the outcome of negotiations;

108. Acknowledges that the Commission proposes, in the context of the NRPPs, the possibility to make funding that is decommitted because of a lack of remedial measures in response to an identified breach of the rule of law under the Conditionality Regulation available again to programmes in direct or indirect management; demands clarification as to how such decommitted amounts could be channelled to other programmes and calls for the prohibition of reshuffling of frozen funds; insists that the decision to use de-committed funds is a prerogative of the budgetary authority in the framework of the annual budgetary procedure and should not be left to the discretion of the Commission;

109. Stresses that a robust approach is needed to ensure that legitimate final recipients and beneficiaries are not penalised because EU funds for their government have been suspended as a result of rule of law breaches; stresses that this principle lies at the core of a smarter conditionality approach;

IIA-related matters

110. Emphasises that a steering mechanism will not compensate for any loss of Parliament’s legislative or budgetary powers; underlines that the annual budget should reflect policy priorities and plans agreed by the co-legislators; insists that getting budgetary governance right and preserving the prerogatives of the budgetary authority are essential prerequisites to making the annual budgetary procedure more meaningful and that any steering mechanism can only function if the basic foundations are in place;

111. Rejects any arrangement that would constrain the freedom of the budgetary authority to make autonomous decisions on budget priorities and allocations; firmly opposes any mechanism that would enable the Commission to predetermine budgetary choices through technical assessments; categorically rejects any possibility for the European Council to influence the annual budgetary procedure through European Council Conclusions, as this would constitute a clear breach of Treaty provisions and undermine the institutional balance established for budgetary decision-making; recalls that the Financial Regulation already provides for the possibility to lift budgetary reserves; calls for systematic coordination by the Commission with the budgetary authority before making any voluntary commitments on the use of in-built flexibility, and for any mobilisation to be approved by decision of the budgetary authority;

112. Notes with concern that the Commission proposes to increase the deviation from indicative amounts in sectoral legislation from the current 15 % to 20 % in the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA); underlines that this proposed increase, combined with the merging of programmes and substantially larger budgets per programme, would create significant potential for modifications without the involvement of co-legislators; expresses serious reservations about the cumulative effect of these changes on democratic oversight and the balance of institutional powers; considers that such an expansion of executive flexibility undermines the prerogatives of the budgetary authority; calls, therefore, for the maximum deviation from indicative amounts to be limited to 5 % over the entire duration of the programmes, without prejudice to the application of the relevant provisions of the MFF Regulation and the IIA, ensuring that any substantial budgetary reallocations remain subject to proper democratic scrutiny and co-legislative decision-making; insists that this reduced threshold would maintain necessary operational flexibility while preserving Parliament’s essential role in budgetary oversight;

113. Highlights the importance of maintaining the interinstitutional regular dialogue on own resources and calls for a higher frequency of meetings;

114. Proposes to include a dedicated annex on cooperation concerning the conditionality regime; believes, in this context, that a regular dialogue between the three institutions on the current state of play concerning the protection of the EU budget, with regard to the rule of law, would be an effective way of improving coordination of the rule of law toolbox;

Own resources

115. Reaffirms Parliament’s strong commitment to the introduction of new own resources to ensure a sustainable and predictable long-term financing of the EU budget; reiterates the need for sustainable and resilient revenue for the Union budget that should match the expenditure side, thus ensuring budgetary stability, efficiency and fiscal discipline and thereby enabling the Union to address its needs and priorities;

116. Reiterates its long-standing call for the introduction of new genuine own resources, not only for NGEU debt repayment but also to finance the Union’s enhanced policy ambitions; expresses its continued conviction that the introduction of new genuine own resources to finance the Union’s budget is indispensable; recalls that, without new resources, the financial burden will inevitably fall on Member States through increased GNI-based contributions; considers, therefore, that the introduction of genuine new revenue streams of at least EUR 60 billion per year is an essential condition for an ambitious MFF 2028-2034;

117. Is highly concerned by the complete absence of progress on the reform of the system of own resources in the Council since 2020; underlines that genuine new own resources are the necessary answer, in times of budgetary constraints, to finance long-standing and new Union policies and much-needed investments in the EU;

118. Reaffirms its long-standing criticism that conceiving and negotiating the budget based on the principle of ‘juste retour’ will inevitably result in reduced EU added value, as it diminishes the rationale for investing together in common and European public goods; acknowledges, at the same time, the merits of the GNI-based own resource, in view of its reliable balancing function; calls on the Council and the Member States to refrain from prolonging any lump-sum reductions, and to create an equitable overall budgetary balance for all by focussing on the synergies and EU-added value in a spirit of solidarity and allowing for more transparency;

119. Recalls that the own resources decision requires unanimity in the Council, consultation with Parliament, and national ratification by all Member States; stresses that any basket of new own resources must be perceived as fair to avoid situations where the implementation of such revenue streams disproportionately penalises certain Member States;

120. Considers that, in the face of unprecedented challenges requiring substantial increases in investment across multiple policy areas in the next MFF period, the revenue base of the EU budget must be broadened, strengthened, diversified and modernised in a duly justified manner; insists that, to this end, the existing own resources should be adjusted and upgraded, and new own resources should be introduced without further delay; considers, in addition, that revenue other than own resources should be an essential ingredient to the mix of income sources, and well-defined borrowing and lending operations whose ensuing contingent liabilities are safely covered by the headroom under the own resources ceilings should remain an actionable fall-back option, at least in times of unforeseen crises;

121. Recalls the legal obligation and political responsibility for the timely repayment of the NGEU debt; reiterates its position that the repayment of the NGEU debt should continue to be managed in a prudent and flexible manner, including, where possible, through refinancing operations, in order to minimise pressure on the MFF and its programmes for 2028-2034;

122. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to identify new own resources and to put forward certain calibrations to traditional own resources, such as customs duties, with a view to strengthening the Union’s financial autonomy and reducing reliance on national contributions, thereby securing the future financing of the Union’s budget; supports the broader basket approach proposed by the Commission as this represents a realistic pathway to securing the necessary support in the Council; takes note of the various types of own resources proposed; strongly underlines, however, that any basket of new own resources must be adopted at the same time as the next multiannual financial framework and must generate a stable and sufficient flow of revenues of at least roughly EUR 60 billion per year, as this level is essential to ensure steady repayment of borrowing undertaken under NGEU, meet the Union’s commitments and finance joint investment in European public goods; calls on the Council to swiftly reach agreement on new own resources in order to provide long-term budgetary certainty;

123. Demands that, should the Council eliminate certain elements of the basket, it should replace the ensuing gap by increased call-rates for other sources or by replacing them with another source; emphasises that the new sources should not harm the competitiveness of small and medium-sized enterprises or EU competitiveness as a whole; considers that the revenue potential of, inter alia, a digital services levy aimed at major digital platforms, an online gambling and betting services levy, the extension of Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, and a levy based on a uniform call rate on capital gains from crypto assets should all be explored as possible solutions should other proposed own resources not gain support among Member States, in order to ensure tax fairness and a revenue level that is commensurate with needs;

124. Considers that joint borrowing presents a viable option that offers the Union the ability to respond swiftly to unexpected developments and facilitates the timely financing of EU policies with clear EU added value; emphasises that such an option should be fully in line with the EU’s strategic priorities for European public goods, or facilitate investment in cross-border or pan-European projects that boost the EU’s growth potential;

125. Underlines the importance of the Commission’s proposal for a novel type of crisis mechanism based on extraordinary borrowing backed by additional headroom under the own resources ceiling and anchored in the EU budget’s consistently excellent credit rating; notes that this instrument is time-bound, subject to pre-defined criteria and limited in purpose, scope and size, delimited by the extra available dedicated headroom compartment; notes, furthermore, that the instrument will enable the Union to mobilise up to EUR 395 billion in loans to Member States when severe crises, severe hardship or serious threats thereof occur during the 2028-2034 period; expresses satisfaction that the proposed mechanism would not be based on Article 122 TFEU, which sidelines Parliament as in previous instances, but on a Council regulation under Article 311(4) TFEU, which requires the consent of Parliament, thus ensuring institutional balance and procedural accountability;

126. Considers that this mechanism can be a further tool at EU level to respond swiftly and effectively to increasing needs, as repeatedly advocated by Mario Draghi, as well as to unpredictable developments; calls on the Commission and the Member States to use the experience gained from NGEU to finance and implement future strategic EU investments;

127. States that it will only approve a long-term budget, including appropriate and sustainable revenue, that is fit for purpose for the Union in a changing world;

Amendments to the MFF regulation

128. Asks the Commission to take into account the following modifications:

The proposal for a Council regulation should be modified as follows:

Modification 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(13) Non-thematic special instruments are necessary to provide flexibility in favour of any MFF heading according to needs, and to facilitate the budgetary procedure. The Single Margin Instrument should enable shifting margins available below the ceilings for commitment and payment appropriations, respectively, between financial years and, for commitment appropriations, between MFF headings, without exceeding the total amounts of the MFF ceilings for commitment and payment appropriations for the entire period of the MFF. In line with sound financial management and prudent budgeting, the mobilisation of amounts of margins from the current and future financial years should be a last resort.

deleted

Modification 2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 13 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(13a) Given the uncertainty surrounding the future evolution of interest rates and in order to avoid undue pressures on Union programmes, it is appropriate to establish a thematic special instrument, the EU Recovery Instrument (EURI), to cover the repayment of the principal and the funding costs relating to NextGenerationEU. The necessary commitment appropriations and corresponding payment appropriations in the Union budget should be made available over and above the ceilings of the MFF.

Modification 3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(14) The Flexibility Instrument should be available to allow the financing of specific unforeseen expenditure for a given financial year. The Flexibility Instrument should be constituted of a fixed amount, as well as of amounts equivalent to revenue collected pursuant to the implementation of Union policies, such as fines, other penalties, sanctions and any accrued interest or other income generated by them imposed by Union institutions, and amounts equivalent to decommitments of appropriations, other than external assigned revenue, with the exclusion of amounts made available again in accordance with specific rules on making appropriations corresponding to decommitments available again.

(14) The Flexibility Instrument should be available to allow the financing of specific unforeseen expenditure for a given financial year. The Flexibility Instrument should be constituted of a fixed amount, as well as of amounts equivalent to revenue collected pursuant to the implementation of Union policies, such as fines, other penalties, sanctions and any accrued interest or other income generated by them imposed by Union institutions, amounts equivalent to decommitments of appropriations, other than external assigned revenue, with the exclusion of amounts made available again in accordance with specific rules on making appropriations corresponding to decommitments available again, margins left available from previous years, the annual surplus as well as reflows from financial instruments without prejudice to programme-specific provisions. Where necessary and as a last resort, it should be possible, in the annual budget procedure, to increase the amount of the Flexibility Instrument by an amount that would be fully offset against the margin of commitment or payment appropriations in one or more MFF headings for the financial year in question or future financial years.

Modification 4

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 1 – Article 2 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

2. Where it is necessary to use the resources from the special instruments provided for in Articles 6 and 8, commitment and corresponding payment appropriations shall be entered in the budget over and above the relevant MFF ceilings.

2. Where it is necessary to use the resources from the special instruments provided for in Articles 5a, 6, 8 and 8a, commitment and corresponding payment appropriations shall be entered in the budget over and above the relevant MFF ceilings.

Where it is necessary to use the resources from the Single Margin Instrument as laid down in Article 7, commitment and corresponding payment appropriations shall be entered in the budget over and above the relevant MFF ceilings for a given year.

Modification 5

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 2 – Article 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

Article 3a

Global margin for payments

1. Every year, starting in 2029, as part of the technical adjustment referred to in Article 4, the Commission shall adjust the payment ceiling for the years 2029 to 2034 upwards by an amount equivalent to the difference between the executed payments and the MFF payment ceiling of year n-1.

2. Any adjustment made pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be fully offset by a corresponding reduction of the payment ceiling for year n-1.

Modification 6

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 2 – Article 4 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(c) a calculation of the Global Margin for Commitments as referred to in Article 7(1), point (a);

deleted

Modification 7

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 2 – Article 4 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(d) a calculation of the adjustment of the ceiling for payment appropriations under the Global Margin for Payments as referred to in Article 7(1), point (b);

(d) a calculation of the adjustment of the ceiling for payment appropriations under the Global Margin for Payments as referred to in Article 3a;

Modification 8

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 2 – Article 4 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(e) a calculation of the maximum amount for the Contingency Margin referred to in Article 7(1), point (c);

deleted

Modification 9

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 2 – Article 4 – paragraph 1- point f

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(f) a calculation of the amounts to be made available to the Flexibility Instrument under Article 8(2), first subparagraph, points (a) and (b).

(f) a calculation of the amounts to be made available to the Flexibility Instrument under Article 8(2).

Modification 10

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 5a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

Article 5a

the EURI Instrument

1. The EURI Instrument shall be mobilised to finance the repayment of the principal and the funding costs due in respect of the funds borrowed on the capital markets in accordance with Article 5(2) of Decision (EU, Euratom) 2020/2053.

2. The EURI Instrument shall be mobilised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the budgetary procedure provided for in Article 314 TFEU.

Modification 11

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 6 – Paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

1. The Ukraine Reserve may be mobilised for the sole purpose of financing expenditure for Ukraine under [Regulation (EU) XXXX/XX] [Global Europe].

1. The Ukraine Reserve may be mobilised for the sole purpose of financing:

(a) expenditure for Ukraine under [Regulation (EU) XXXX/XX] [Global Europe] as well as expenditure for interest rate subsidies and borrowing costs subsidies pursuant to Articles 23 and 34 of Regulation (EU) 2024/792 [Ukraine Facility], Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2463 [MFA+], Article 6 of Decision (EU) 2022/1628 [MFA II] and Article 5(2) of Decision (EU) 2022/1201 [MFA I];

(b) expenditure pursuant to Article 22 of Regulation (EU) 2026/467 [Ukraine Support Loan Regulation].

2. The Ukraine Reserve shall not exceed an amount of EUR 88.9 billion in 2025 prices for the period 2028 to 2034. The annual amount mobilised under the Ukraine Reserve in a given year shall not exceed EUR 13.5 billion in 2025 prices. The unused portion of the annual amount in a given year may be used in the following years, until 2034.

2. The Ukraine Reserve shall comprise an amount not exceeding EUR 88.9 billion in 2025 prices for the period 2028 to 2034, solely for expenditure referred to in the first subparagraph, point (a). The annual amount mobilised in a given year shall not exceed EUR 13.5 billion in 2025 prices. The unused portion of the annual amount in a given year may be used in the following years, until 2034.

3. In addition, the Ukraine Reserve shall also comprise an amount of EUR 26.2 billion in 2025 prices for the period 2028 to 2034, solely for expenditure referred to in the first subparagraph, point (b). Should the remaining availabilities in a given year be insufficient to cover for the borrowing costs subsidy requested by Ukraine under Article 22 of Regulation (EU) 2026/467 [Ukraine Support Loan Regulation], additional contributions from participating Member States under the same Regulation (EU) 2026/467 [Ukraine Support Loan Regulation] shall be assigned in the form of external assigned revenue.

3. The Ukraine Reserve may be mobilised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the budgetary procedure provided for in Article 314 TFEU.

4. The Ukraine Reserve may be mobilised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the budgetary procedure provided for in Article 314 TFEU.

Modification 12

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

Article 7

Single Margin Instrument

1. The Single Margin Instrument shall comprise:

(a) as of 2029, amounts corresponding to margins left available below the MFF ceilings for commitment appropriations of year n-1, to be made available over and above the MFF ceilings for commitment appropriations for the years 2029 to 2034 (the ‘Global Margin for Commitments’);

(b) as of 2029, amounts equivalent to the difference between the executed payments and the MFF payment ceiling of year n-1 to adjust upwards the payment ceiling for the years 2029 to 2034 (the ‘Global Margin for Payments’);

(c) as a last resort instrument, additional amounts which may be made available over and above the MFF ceilings in a given year for commitment or payment appropriations, or both, as the case may be, provided that they are fully offset against the margins in one or more MFF headings for the current or future financial years as regards commitment appropriations and are fully offset against the margins under the payment ceiling for future financial years as regards payment appropriations (the ‘Contingency Margin’).

2. The Global Margin for Commitments may be mobilised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the budgetary procedure provided for in Article 314 TFEU.

3. The upward adjustments under the Global Margin for Payments shall be carried out by the Commission, starting in 2029, as part of the technical adjustment referred to in Article 4.

Any upward adjustment under the Global Margin for Payments shall be fully offset by a corresponding reduction of the payment ceiling for year n-1.

4. The Contingency Margin may be mobilised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the budgetary procedure provided for in Article 314 TFEU as a last resort instrument to react to unforeseen circumstances.

Amounts may only be mobilised under the Contingency Margin if the amounts available pursuant to paragraph 1, points (a) and (b), as applicable, are insufficient.

The Contingency Margin shall not exceed, in any given year, 0,04 % of the gross national income of the Union, as calculated in the annual technical adjustment referred to in Article 4.

The amounts offset shall not be further mobilised in the context of the MFF.

5. Recourse to the Single Margin Instrument in any given year shall be consistent with the own resources ceilings set out in the Own Resources Decision.

deleted

Modification 13

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 8 – Paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(b) an amount equivalent to decommitments of appropriations, other than external assigned revenue, made in the year n-2, with the exclusion of the amounts of decommitments made available again in accordance with specific rules on making appropriations available as referred to in Article 15 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 and Regulation [(EU) XXXX/XX] [National and Regional Partnership Fund].

(b) an amount equivalent to decommitments of appropriations, other than external assigned revenue, made in the year n-2, with the exclusion of the amounts of decommitments made available again in accordance with specific rules on making appropriations available as referred to in Article 15 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, Regulation [(EU) XXXX/XX] [National and Regional Partnership Fund], and Regulation [(EU) XXXX/XX] [Global Europe].

Modification 14

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point ba (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(ba) an amount corresponding to margins left available below the MFF ceilings for commitment appropriations of previous financial years;

Modification 15

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point bb (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(bb) where there is a surplus in year n-1, an amount equivalent to that surplus, excluding revenue as referred to in point (a).

Modification 16

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

Where necessary and as a last resort, the European Parliament and the Council may increase the amount referred to in the first subparagraph by an amount that shall not exceed in a given year 0,04 % of the gross national income of the Union, as calculated in the technical adjustment referred to in Article 4, and that shall be fully offset against the margin of commitment or payment appropriations, or both, in one or more MFF headings for the current or future financial years. Amounts that are offset in that way shall not be further mobilised in the context of the MFF and shall be consistent with the own resources ceiling.

Modification 17

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

The Commission shall calculate each year, as part of technical adjustments referred to in Article 4, the amounts available on the basis of the first subparagraph, points (a) and (b) of this paragraph.

The Commission shall calculate each year, as part of technical adjustments referred to in Article 4, the amounts available on the basis of the first and second subparagraphs of this paragraph.

Modification 18

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

Article 8a

Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters

1. The Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters may be used as a last resort to finance responses to specific needs within the Union for emergency responses and support operations following direct damage caused as a direct consequence of a natural disaster.

2. The Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters shall not exceed a maximum annual amount of EUR 4 billion (in 2025 prices). Any portion of the annual amount not used in year n may be used in the following years until 2034.

On 1 October of each year, at least one quarter of the annual amount of the Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters shall remain available in order to cover needs arising until the end of that year.

In exceptional cases and if the remaining financial resources available are not sufficient to cover the amounts considered necessary in the year of occurrence of an event as referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission may propose that the difference be financed through the annual amount referred to in paragraph 2 available in the following year, up to a maximum amount of EUR 1 billion (in 2025 prices).

3. The appropriations for the Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters shall be entered in the general budget of the Union as a provision.

Modification 19

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 4 – Article 9 – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

Revision of the MFF to ensure compliance with the own resources ceiling

Mid-term review of the MFF

Modification 20

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 4 – Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

1a. By 31 July 2031 at the latest, the Commission shall present a review of the functioning of the MFF. This compulsory review shall, as appropriate, be accompanied by a legislative proposal for the revision of this Regulation. Pre-allocated national envelopes according to the Regulation XXXX/2027 [NRPPs] shall not be reduced through such a revision.

Modification 21

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 5 – Article 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

By 1 July 2033, the Commission shall present a proposal for a new multiannual financial framework.

By 1 July 2032, the Commission shall present a proposal for a new multiannual financial framework

Amendments to the IIA

129. Stresses that, as a result of the negotiation and adoption of a new MFF Regulation, the proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management should be modified as follows:

Modification 22

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Title

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

INTERINSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT

between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management

INTERINSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT

between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management

Modification 23

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Recital 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

1. The purpose of this Agreement, adopted in accordance with Article 295 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), is to implement budgetary discipline and improve the functioning of the annual budgetary procedure and cooperation between the institutions on budgetary matters as well as to ensure sound financial management.

1. The purpose of this Agreement, adopted in accordance with Article 295 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), is to improve the functioning of the annual budgetary procedure and cooperation between the institutions on budgetary matters as well as to ensure sound financial management.

Modification 24

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 1

Section A – point 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

7. In line with Article 312(5) TFEU, the Institutions shall take any measure necessary to facilitate the adoption of a new MFF or a revision thereof, in accordance with the special legislative procedure referred to in Article 312(2) TFEU. Such measures will include regular meetings and exchange of information between the European Parliament and the Council and, on the initiative of the Commission, meetings of the Presidents of the Institutions as set out in Article 324 TFEU in order to promote consultation and the reconciliation of the positions of the Institutions. Where a proposal for a new MFF or for a substantial revision has been presented, the Institutions will seek to determine specific arrangements for cooperation and dialogue between them throughout the procedure leading to its adoption.

7. In line with Article 312(5) TFEU, the Institutions shall take any measure necessary to facilitate the adoption of a new MFF or a revision thereof, in accordance with the special legislative procedure referred to in Article 312(2) TFEU. Such measures shall include:

(a) regular meetings and exchange of information between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission at political and technical level throughout the entire process, including the presence of the European Parliament’s representatives at formal and informal meetings of the General Affairs Council at which the MFF is discussed;

(b) on the initiative of the Commission, including when requested by the European Parliament or the Council, meetings of the Presidents of the Institutions as set out in Article 324 TFEU in order to promote consultation and the reconciliation of the positions of the Institutions;

(c) transmission by the Commission of timely data and information, including at the request of the European Parliament or the Council, and the organisation of technical briefings for both institutions;

(d) trilateral negotiations.

Where a proposal for a new MFF or for a substantial revision has been presented, the Institutions shall seek to determine specific arrangements for cooperation and dialogue between them throughout the procedure leading to its adoption on the basis of a calendar proposed by Commission, including in particular the measures laid down in the first subparagraph.

Where there are delays to the calendar referred to in the second subparagraph that give rise to a risk of no Council regulation determining a new financial framework being adopted by the end of the previous financial framework, the Commission shall present a contingency plan to the European Parliament and the Council.

Modification 25

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 1

Section B – point 9

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

Single Margin Instrument

9. The mobilisation of all or part of the amounts referred to in Article 7(1), point (c) of the MFF Regulation (‘Contingency Margin’) shall be proposed by the Commission after it has ascertained that the necessary commitment or payment appropriations, as the case may be, cannot be financed otherwise. Such a proposal may be made in relation to a draft budget or draft amending budget.

The Contingency Margin may be mobilised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the budgetary procedure set out in Article 314 TFEU.

deleted

Modification 26

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 1

Section B – point 9 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters

9a. Where the Commission considers that the conditions for mobilising the Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters are met, it shall submit a proposal to the European Parliament and to the Council for a transfer from that Reserve to the corresponding budget lines in accordance with the Financial Regulation.

The decision to mobilise amounts under Article 8a (1) of the MFF Regulation shall be taken jointly by the European Parliament and by the Council on a proposal from the Commission.

Before making any proposal for a transfer from the Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters for assistance, the Commission shall examine the scope for reallocating appropriations.

Modification 27

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 2

Section A – point 10 – subparagraphs 2 and 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

The European Parliament and the Council, and the Commission when it draws up the draft budget, undertake not to depart by more than 20 % from that amount for the entire duration of the programme or instrument concerned, unless duly justified new circumstances arise, including in relation to the Union’s policy priorities, with account being taken of the results obtained from implementing the programmes and instruments.

This point does not apply to appropriations pre-allocated per Member State under Regulation [(EU) XXXX/XX] [National and Regional Partnership Fund].

The European Parliament and the Council, and the Commission when it draws up the draft budget, undertake not to depart by more than 5 % from that amount for the entire duration of the programme or instrument concerned, unless duly justified new circumstances arise, including in relation to the Union’s policy priorities, with account being taken of the results obtained from implementing the programmes and instruments. Any increase resulting from such variation shall remain beneath the existing ceiling for the heading concerned, without prejudice to the use of instruments referred to in the MFF Regulation and in this Agreement.

This point shall not apply to appropriations pre-allocated per Member State under Regulation [(EU) XXXX/XX] [National and Regional Partnership Fund].

Modification 28

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 2

Section A – point 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

11. In order to provide precise and reliable forecasts of the budgetary implications of basic acts within the meaning of Article 2(4) of the Financial Regulation and of pending legislative proposals, the Commission shall attach to the draft budget a complete indicative financial programming for headings 2 and 3 of the MFF. That programming, structured by heading, policy area and budget line, should identify:

(a) the basic acts, with a distinction being drawn between multiannual programmes, legal acts establishing or entrusting tasks to decentralised agencies, and annual actions:

(1) for multiannual programmes the Commission should indicate the procedure under which they were adopted, the duration of the programmes, the total indicative financial envelope and the share allocated to administrative expenditure;

(2) for legal acts establishing or entrusting new tasks to decentralised agencies, the Commission should indicate the legal basis under which they were adopted and provide multiannual estimates;

(3) for annual actions (relating to pilot projects, preparatory actions) and actions financed under the prerogatives of the Commission, the Commission should provide multiannual estimates;

(b) pending legislative proposals from the Commission with the latest update on their potential budgetary impact including, when necessary, the related need for reprogramming in case of adoption.

The indicative financial programming shall show transparently unallocated reserves and ‘cushions’ within multiannual programmes.

The Commission should consider ways of cross-referencing the financial programming with its legislative programming to provide more precise and reliable forecasts. For each legislative proposal, the Commission should indicate whether it is included in the programming communicated at the time of the presentation of the draft budget or after the final adoption of the budget. The Commission should inform the European Parliament and the Council in particular of:

(a) all new legislative acts adopted and all pending proposals presented but not included in programming communicated at the time of the draft budget or after the final adoption of the budget (with the corresponding amounts);

(b) legislation foreseen in the Commission’s annual legislative work programme, with an indication of whether the actions are likely to have a financial impact.

Whenever necessary, the Commission should indicate the reprogramming entailed by new legislative proposals.

The indicative financial programming shall be updated after the adoption of the budget to incorporate the results of the budgetary procedure and any other relevant decision.

11. In order to provide precise and reliable forecasts of the budgetary implications of basic acts within the meaning of Article 2(4) of the Financial Regulation and of pending legislative proposals, the Commission shall attach to the draft budget a complete indicative financial programming for the EU Facility established in the [NRPP Regulation] and for all the programmes in headings 2 and 3 of the MFF. That programming, structured by heading, policy area and budget line, shall identify:

(a) the basic acts, with a distinction being drawn between multiannual programmes, legal acts establishing or entrusting tasks to decentralised agencies, and annual actions:

(1) for multiannual programmes the Commission shall indicate the procedure under which they were adopted, the duration of the programmes, the total indicative financial envelope and the share allocated to administrative expenditure;

(2) for legal acts establishing or entrusting new tasks to decentralised agencies, the Commission shall indicate the legal basis under which they were adopted and provide multiannual estimates;

(3) for annual actions (relating to pilot projects, preparatory actions) and actions financed under the prerogatives of the Commission, the Commission shall provide multiannual estimates;

(b) pending legislative proposals from the Commission with the latest update on their potential budgetary impact including, when necessary, the related need for reprogramming in case of adoption.

The Commission shall also attach to the draft budget an indicative financial programming by main objectives of the funds under shared management under heading 1. The indicative financial programming shall show transparently unallocated reserves and ‘cushions’ within multiannual programmes.

The Commission shall cross-reference the financial programming with its legislative programming to provide more precise and reliable forecasts. For each legislative proposal, the Commission shall indicate whether it is included in the programming communicated at the time of the presentation of the draft budget or after the final adoption of the budget. The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council in particular of:

(a) all new legislative acts adopted and all pending proposals presented but not included in programming communicated at the time of the draft budget or after the final adoption of the budget (with the corresponding amounts);

(b) legislation foreseen in the Commission’s annual legislative work programme, with an indication of whether the actions are likely to have a financial impact.

Whenever necessary, the Commission shall indicate the reprogramming entailed by new legislative proposals.

The indicative financial programming shall be updated after the adoption of the budget to incorporate the results of the budgetary procedure and any other relevant decision. It shall provide a detailed overview for the entire programming period, a detailed explanation of the changes made in comparison with the financial programming of the previous year and any departure from the prime reference amount referred to in point 10.

Modification 29

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 2

Section A – point 11b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

Own Resources Dialogue

11b. The three Institutions will maintain the interinstitutional regular dialogue on Own Resources, meeting at least once per Council Presidency and at a higher frequency at the request of one institution.

Modification 30

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 2

Section A – point 11c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

Pledges

11c. Before announcing financial pledges in support of third countries, the Commission shall inform and take into account the views expressed by the budgetary authority on these matters; for any such case, the Commission shall provide detailed and comprehensive information, including on the source of financing for financial commitments, whether existing resources are being redirected or new resources are to be mobilised, including when involving loans, or any use of flexibilities, cushions or otherwise unallocated amounts.

Modification 31

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 2

Section B – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

B. DECENTRALISED AGENCIES AND EUROPEAN SCHOOLS

B. FINANCIAL STATEMENT

Modification 32

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 2

Section B – point 12 – subparagraphs 1 to 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

12. Before presenting a proposal for the creation of a new decentralised agency, and after having considered the assignment of the envisaged tasks to an existing institution, agency or body, the Commission should produce a sound, complete and objective impact assessment, taking into account, inter alia, the critical mass of staff and competencies needed, cost-benefit aspects, coherence, subsidiarity and proportionality, the impact on Union activities, and the budgetary implications for the expenditure heading concerned. On the basis of that information and without prejudice to the legislative procedures governing the setting up of the decentralised agency, the European Parliament and the Council commit themselves, in the framework of budgetary cooperation, to arrive at a timely agreement on the financing of the proposed decentralised agency.

The following procedural steps shall be applied:

— firstly, the Commission shall systematically present any proposal for setting up a new decentralised agency to the first budgetary trilogue following the adoption of its proposal, and shall present the financial statement accompanying the legislative proposal for the creation of the decentralised agency and shall illustrate the consequences thereof for the remaining period of the financial programming;

— secondly, during the legislative process, the Commission shall assist the legislator in assessing the financial consequences of the amendments proposed; those financial consequences should be considered during the relevant steps of the applicable legislative procedure;

— thirdly, before the conclusion of the legislative process, the Commission shall present an updated financial statement taking into account potential amendments by the legislator; that final financial statement shall be discussed before a final agreement is reached and be formally endorsed by the legislator; it shall also be placed on the agenda of a subsequent budgetary trilogue (in urgent cases, in simplified form), in view of reaching an agreement on the financing;

— fourthly, the agreement reached, taking into account the Commission’s budgetary assessment with regard to the content of the legislative process, shall be confirmed in a joint declaration; that joint declaration shall be subject to approval by the European Parliament and by the Council, each in accordance with its own rules of procedure.

The same procedure should be applied to any amendment to a legal act concerning a decentralised agency which would have an impact on the resources of the agency in question.

12. Before presenting a proposal for the creation of a new decentralised agency, and, where appropriate, after having considered the assignment of any envisaged tasks to an existing institution, agency or body, the Commission shall produce a sound, complete and objective impact assessment, taking into account, inter alia, the critical mass of staff and competencies needed, cost-benefit aspects, coherence, subsidiarity and proportionality, the impact on national and Union activities, and the budgetary implications for the expenditure heading concerned. On the basis of that information and without prejudice to the legislative procedures concerned, the European Parliament and the Council commit themselves, in the framework of budgetary cooperation, to arrive at a timely agreement.

The following procedural steps shall be applied:

— firstly, the Commission shall systematically present any proposal for setting up a new decentralised agency, to the first budgetary trilogue following the adoption of its proposal, and shall present the financial statement accompanying the legislative proposal and shall illustrate the consequences thereof for the remaining period of the financial programming;

— secondly, during the legislative process, the Commission shall assist the legislator in assessing the financial consequences of the amendments proposed; those financial consequences shall be considered during the relevant legislative trilogues;

— thirdly, before the conclusion of the legislative process, the Commission shall present an updated financial statement taking into account potential amendments by the legislator; the legislator shall discuss that updated financial statement before a final agreement is reached and shall formally endorse the final financial statement; that final financial statement shall also be placed on the agenda of a subsequent budgetary trilogue (in urgent cases, in simplified form), in view of reaching an agreement on the financing;

— fourthly, the agreement reached, taking into account the Commission’s budgetary assessment with regard to the content of the legislative process, shall be confirmed in a joint declaration; that joint declaration shall be subject to approval by the European Parliament and by the Council, each in accordance with its own rules of procedure.

The Commission shall provide a consolidated annual overview of all the changes made to programmes and agencies compared to the MFF baseline together with the draft budget.

The same procedure shall be applied to any amendment to a legal act concerning a decentralised agency which would have an impact on the resources of the agency in question.

Modification 33

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 3

Section B – point 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

13. Relevant provisions from the Common Approach annexed to the Joint Statement of the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on decentralised agencies signed on 19 July 2012 should be duly taken into account in the budgetary procedure.

13. Relevant provisions from the Common Approach annexed to the Joint Statement of the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on decentralised agencies signed on 19 July 2012 shall be duly taken into account in the budgetary procedure.

Modification 34

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 3

Section B – point 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

14. When the creation of a new European school is envisaged by the Board of Governors of the European Schools, a similar procedure is to be applied, mutatis mutandis, for its budgetary implications on the Union budget.

14. The Commission shall notify the European Parliament and the Council when the creation or extension of a new European school is first envisaged by the Board of Governors of the European Schools, by means of a report containing preliminary information on the proposed creation or extension of the school, including the budgetary implications thereof. As soon as the Board of Governors decides on the creation or extension of a school, the Commission shall present the European Parliament and the Council with a second report containing up-to-date information on the budgetary implications of the decision.

Modification 35

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 2

Section B – point 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

15. Where the Commission submits a proposal for the adoption of an act of the Council under Article 122 TFEU with potential appreciable implications for the Union budget, the following arrangements for a procedure of budgetary scrutiny between the European Parliament and the Council with the active assistance of the Commission may apply.

15. Where the Commission submits a proposal for the adoption of an act of the Council under Article 122 TFEU with potential appreciable implications for the Union budget, the following arrangements for a procedure of budgetary scrutiny between the European Parliament and the Council with the active assistance of the Commission shall apply.

Modification 36

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 2

Section B – point 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

16. The Commission will accompany any proposal for an act of the Council under Article 122 TFEU by an assessment of the budgetary implications of the proposed legal act and will indicate whether the act in question may, in its view, have appreciable implications for the Union budget. On that basis, the European Parliament and the Council may request that the procedure be initiated.

The procedure will take place in a Joint Committee consisting of representatives of the European Parliament and of the Council at the appropriate level. The Commission will participate in the work of the Joint Committee.

Without prejudice to the powers of the Council under Article 122 TFEU, the European Parliament and the Council will engage in a constructive dialogue with a view to seeking a joint understanding of the budgetary implications of the envisaged legal act having due regard to the urgency of the matter.

The procedure should take place during a period not exceeding two months, unless the act in question must be adopted before a specific date or, if the urgency of the matter so requires, within a shorter time limit fixed by the Council.

16. The Commission shall accompany any proposal for an act of the Council under Article 122 TFEU by an assessment of the budgetary implications of the proposed legal act and shall indicate whether the act in question may, in its view, have appreciable implications for the Union budget. On that basis, the European Parliament and the Council may request that the procedure be initiated.

The procedure shall take place in a Joint Committee consisting of representatives of the European Parliament and of the Council at the appropriate level. The Commission shall participate in the work of the Joint Committee.

Without prejudice to the powers of the Council under Article 122 TFEU, the European Parliament and the Council shall engage in a constructive dialogue with a view to seeking a joint written understanding of the budgetary implications of the envisaged legal act having due regard to the urgency of the matter.

The procedure shall take place during a period not exceeding two months from the date on which it is initiated. Where it is necessary for the act in question to be adopted before the end of that two-month period or where the urgency of the matter so requires, the European Parliament and the Council may shorten that period by common agreement.

Modification 37

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 3

Section A – title

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

A. BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION, PAYMENTS AND RESTE À LIQUIDER (RAL)

A. BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION, PAYMENTS, RESTE À LIQUIDER (RAL) AND CONTINGENT LIABILITIES

Modification 38

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 3

Section A – point 19

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

19. Given the need to ensure an orderly progression of the total appropriations for payments in relation to the appropriations for commitments so as to avoid any abnormal shift of outstanding commitments (RAL), the Institutions agree to monitor closely the payment forecasts and the level of the RAL so as to mitigate the risk of hampering the implementation of Union programmes because of a lack of payment appropriations at the end of the MFF.

In the course of the budgetary procedure, the Institutions shall meet regularly with a view to jointly assessing the state of play and the outlook for budgetary implementation in the current and future financial years. That assessment shall take the form of dedicated interinstitutional meetings at the appropriate level, before which the Commission shall provide, as appropriate, a detailed state of play on payment implementation, on payment claims received and revised forecasts, including long-term forecasts, where applicable, as well as relevant information on contingent liabilities.

19. In order to ensure that the Union is able to fulfil its financial obligations stemming from existing and future commitments in accordance with Article 323 TFEU and with a view to ensuring an orderly progression of the total appropriations for payments in relation to the appropriations for commitments so as to avoid any abnormal shift of outstanding commitments (RAL), the Institutions agree to monitor closely borrowing and lending operations and contingent liabilities and, so as to mitigate the risk of hampering the implementation of Union programmes because of a lack of payment appropriations at the end of the MFF, the payment forecasts and the level of the RAL.

In the course of the budgetary procedure, the Institutions shall meet regularly with a view to jointly assessing the state of play and the outlook for borrowing and lending and contingent liabilities and budgetary implementation in the current and future financial years. That assessment shall take the form of dedicated interinstitutional meetings at the appropriate level, before which the Commission shall provide, a detailed state of play on payment implementation, on transfers, on payment claims received and revised forecasts, including long-term forecasts, where applicable, as well as full information on contingent liabilities and the corresponding budgetary cover, including long-term forecasts, methodologies, and updates on borrowing and lending.

Modification 39

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 3

Section B – point 20 – subparagraphs 2 to 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

The Commission undertakes to keep the European Parliament regularly informed about the preparation, conduct and completion of the negotiations on fisheries agreements, including their budgetary implications.

In the course of the legislative procedure relating to fisheries agreements, the Institutions undertake to make every effort to ensure that all procedures are carried out as quickly as possible.

Amounts provided for in the budget for new fisheries agreements or for the renewal of fisheries agreements which are expected to enter into force or to be applied provisionally by 1 January of the financial year concerned shall be included in the main operational budget line.

Amounts provided for in the budget for new fisheries agreements or for the renewal of fisheries agreements which enter into force or are applied provisionally after 1 January of the related financial year shall be put in reserve.

The Commission undertakes to keep the European Parliament regularly informed about the preparation, conduct and completion of the negotiations on fisheries agreements, including their budgetary implications.

In the course of the legislative procedure relating to fisheries agreements, the Institutions undertake to make every effort to ensure that all procedures are carried out as quickly as possible, while fully respecting each institution's internal rules.

The Commission shall strive to complete negotiations on new fisheries agreements or on the renewal of fisheries agreements in a timely manner in order to avoid the provisional application of the protocols while the European Parliament has not yet given its consent to the conclusion of the agreements or protocols.

Amounts provided for in the budget for new fisheries agreements or for the renewal of fisheries agreements which are expected to enter into force by 1 January of the financial year concerned shall be included in the main operational budget line.

Amounts provided for in the budget for new fisheries agreements or for the renewal of fisheries agreements which enter into force after 1 January of the related financial year shall be put in reserve.

Modification 40

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 3

Section C – point 22

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

22. The total amount of CFSP operating expenditure shall be entered entirely in one budget chapter, entitled CFSP. That amount shall cover the real predictable needs, assessed in the framework of the establishment of the draft budget, on the basis of forecasts drawn up annually by the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (the ‘High Representative’). A reasonable margin shall be allowed for to cover unforeseen actions. No funds may be entered in a reserve.

22. The total amount of CFSP operating expenditure shall be entered entirely in one budget chapter, entitled CFSP. That amount shall cover the real predictable needs, assessed in the framework of the establishment of the draft budget, on the basis of forecasts drawn up annually by the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (the ‘High Representative’). A reasonable margin shall be allowed for to cover unforeseen actions.

Modification 41

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 3

Section C – point 24 subparagraphs 1 and 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

24. Each year, the High Representative shall consult the European Parliament on a forward-looking document, which shall be transmitted by 15 June of the year in question, setting out the main aspects and basic choices of the CFSP, including the financial implications for the general budget of the Union, an evaluation of the measures launched in the year n-1 and an assessment of the coordination and complementarity of CFSP with the Union’s other external financial instruments. Furthermore, the High Representative shall keep the European Parliament regularly informed by holding joint consultation meetings at least three times a year, in the framework of the regular political dialogue on the CFSP, to be agreed at the latest on 30 November each year. Participation in those meetings shall be determined by the European Parliament and the Council respectively, bearing in mind the objective, and the nature of the information exchanged in those meetings.

The Commission shall be invited to participate in those meetings.

24. Each year, the High Representative shall consult the European Parliament on a forward-looking document, which shall be transmitted by 15 June of the year in question, setting out the main aspects and basic choices of the CFSP, including the financial implications for the general budget of the Union, an evaluation of the measures launched in the year n-1 and an assessment of the coordination and complementarity of CFSP with the Union’s other external financial instruments. Furthermore, the High Representative shall keep the European Parliament regularly informed in the framework of the regular financial and political dialogue on the CFSP, as laid down in point 24a.

Modification 42

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 3

Section C – point 24 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

24a. The regular financial and political dialogue on the CFSP shall concern all Union activities to which the implementation of the CFSP chapter gives rise, and in particular those entailing expenditure or financial liabilities for the Union budget. It shall take place at least five times a year, to be agreed at the latest until 30 November of the year n-1. In the context of this dialogue, the High Representative shall consult the European Parliament in accordance with Article 36 TEU as described in points 22, 23 and 24 of this Agreement and shall ensure that its views are duly taken into consideration. The dialogue may involve European Union Special Representatives or, where appropriate, Commissioners. It shall take place in accordance with security rules applicable to the exchange of information.

Modification 43

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part IV (new)

INTERINSTITUTIONAL COOPERATION ON THE RULE OF LAW CONDITIONALITY

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

INTERINSTITUTIONAL COOPERATION ON THE RULE OF LAW CONDITIONALITY

Part A. Cooperation

25 (new). The Commission shall provide Parliament and Council with systematic, timely, structured, and secure access to information in the context of the implementation of Regulation (EU) 2020/2092 and of other rules related to the Charter of fundamental rights and rule of law conditionality including:

a. the written notification sent to the Member States;

b. any request for additional information;

c. the correspondence between Commission services and the Member States;

d. observations and reports provided by the Member States;

e. all internal documents containing legal analyses, assessments or other relevant documents of the Commission - including relevant information received by the Commission from final recipients - leading to the adoption of measures, the extension, the modification or the lifting of the measures or the non-initiation of the applicable procedures.

26. (new) A secure communication channel shall be agreed upon to safeguard confidentiality, whenever necessary.

Part B. Consultation and Dialogue

27. (new) The Commission shall provide information to the European Parliament and the Council before the Commission presents any proposal for the adoption, extension, modification or the lifting of measures, and take into account the views expressed in this context.

28. The Commission shall hold quarterly structured dialogues with the relevant European Parliament committees to guarantee real-time information flow and reinforce democratic oversight.

29. The Institutions shall convene regular high-level meetings to improve coordination regarding the rule of law toolbox.

Part C. Transparency and Annual Reporting

30. The Commission shall transmit to the European Parliament and the Council a consolidated annual inventory of all conditionality-related decisions across budget headings in the context of the annual budgetary procedure.

Modification 44

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Annex

Part A – point 1 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

1a. In order to ensure that the European Parliament and the Council are able to exercise their budgetary prerogatives in an effective manner, budgetary positions, transfers or other notifications entailing the activation of deadlines shall be submitted taking due account of any recess periods, the dates of which those institutions have informed each other in due time through their respective services.

Modification 45

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Annex

Part B – point 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

2. In due time before the adoption of the draft budget by the Commission, a budgetary trilogue shall be convened to discuss the funding priorities for the budget of the coming financial year. The discussions will take into account the Union’s policy priorities identified by the Institutions in relevant documents and will aim to inform the budgetary procedure and explore how the priorities can best be reflected in the next budget.

2. In due time before the adoption of the draft budget by the Commission, a budgetary trilogue shall be convened to discuss the possible funding priorities for the budget of the coming financial year. The discussions shall take into account the Union’s policy priorities identified by the European Parliament and the Council, as the budgetary authority, in any relevant documents and shall aim to inform the budgetary procedure and explore how the priorities can best be reflected in the next budget.

Modification 46

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Annex

Part D – point 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

13. A budgetary trilogue could be convened before the votes in plenary of the European Parliament.

13. A budgetary trilogue may be convened before the votes in plenary of the European Parliament.

Modification 47

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Annex

Part E – point 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

15. If the Council cannot agree on all the amendments adopted by the European Parliament, it should confirm its position by letter sent before the first meeting foreseen during the conciliation period. In such case, the Conciliation Committee shall proceed in accordance with the conditions laid down in the following points of this Annex.

15. If the Council cannot agree on all the amendments adopted by the European Parliament, it shall confirm its position by letter sent before the first meeting foreseen during the conciliation period. In such case, the Conciliation Committee shall proceed in accordance with the conditions laid down in the following points of this Annex.

°

° °

130. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

Annex I: European Parliament’s position on figures (current prices and 2025 constant prices) excluding NGEU debt service cost

EUR million - current prices using 2% deflator

COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

Total

2028-2034

1. Economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, maritime , prosperity and security

155.131

152.647

149.516

146.740

143.070

129.536

120.725

997.366

2. Competitiveness, prosperity and security

74.825

90.966

93.066

97.694

99.148

101.491

102.507

659.697

3. Global Europe

27.300

27.936

28.438

34.023

39.758

40.516

41.288

239.259

4. Administration

14.945

15.584

16.281

16.870

17.466

18.062

18.669

117.877

TOTAL COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS

272.201

287.134

287.301

295.327

299.442

289.605

283.189

2.014.198

TOTAL PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS

271.032

305.040

300.920

296.118

279.007

275.902

267.875

1.995.894

EUR million - 2025 prices

COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

Total

2028-2034

1. Economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, maritime, prosperity and security

146.152

140.992

135.392

130.273

124.525

110.534

100.996

888.864

2. Competitiveness, prosperity and security

70.508

84.037

84.291

86.747

86.312

86.619

85.771

584.288

3. Global Europe

25.727

25.810

25.758

30.214

34.615

34.583

34.551

211.260

4. Administration

14.083

14.397

14.746

14.980

15.205

15.415

15.621

104.449

TOTAL COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS

256.472

265.237

260.189

262.215

260.657

247.151

236.939

1.788.861

TOTAL PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS

255.399

281.809

272.552

262.944

242.892

235.479

224.145

1.775.220

Annex II: European Parliament’s position on the breakdown per programme

EUR billion - Commitment appropriations (current prices)

MFF proposal

EP position (1,27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Multiannual Financial Framework

1816,89

2014,20

197,30

Heading 1: Europe's Social model and quality of life, excluding NGEU

894,22

997,37

103,15

European Fund for economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, fisheries and maritime, prosperity and security

865,08

972,86

107,79

CAP

293,70

433,01

139,31

of which

Income support

293,70

320,30

26,60

Rural areas

0,00

106,41

106,41

Unity safety net*

6,30

6,30

0,00

POSEI (to be put under CAP)

0,00

7,33

7,33

Fisheries

2,00

7,29

5,29

European Fund for Regional Development, including for European Territorial Cooperation (Interreg) and the Cohesion Fund

228,06

306,93

78,87

of which

ERDF

183,15

248,37

65,23

CF

34,65

46,99

12,34

Interreg

10,26

11,57

1,30

European Social Fund

0,00

124,19

124,19

Migration - Asylum, migration and integration**

11,98

13,31

1,34

Migration - Border management and common policy on visas**

15,40

17,12

1,72

Migration - Internal security**

6,84

7,61

0,76

EU Facility***

65,63

56,08

-9,56

Non-ringfenced in NRPP

235,17

0,00

-235,17

Support to the Turkish-Cypriot Community

0,44

0,49

0,05

Decentralised agencies

22,89

22,89

0,00

Margins

5,82

1,13

-4,69

* The amount of EUR 6,3 billion corresponding to the Unity Safety Net is accounted for under the CAP

** Total for the HOME Affairs funds: EUR 38,04 billion

*** without accounting for the Unity Safety Net

EUR billion - Commitment appropriations (current prices)

MFF proposal

EP position (1,27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

589,59

659,70

70,10

European Competitiveness Fund

234,30

264,35

30,05

of which

LIFE actions

0,00

3,39

3,39

EU4Health actions

0,00

10,05

10,05

Horizon Europe

175,00

200,00

25,00

EURATOM/ITER

9,79

9,79

0,00

INSC-D (Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation - Decommissioning)

0,97

0,97

0,00

Ignalina Programme

0,68

0,68

0,00

CEF (Transport, Energy, Military Mobility)

81,43

91,29

9,86

Single Market and Customs Programme

6,24

6,87

0,63

Pericles (protection of the Euro)

0,01

0,01

0,00

Erasmus+

40,83

47,39

6,56

AgoraEU

8,58

10,72

2,14

UCPM+ (EU Civil Protection Mechanism and health preparedness)

10,68

12,42

1,74

Justice

0,80

0,89

0,09

Decentralised agencies

9,80

9,80

0,00

Other actions, prerogatives

2,49

2,49

0,00

Margins

8,01

2,03

-5,98

Heading 3: Global Europe

215,20

239,26

24,06

Global Europe

200,31

225,00

24,69

Common Foreign and Security Policy

3,37

3,76

0,39

Overseas countries and territories, including Greenland

1,00

2,08

1,09

Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAS) And Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOS)

1,33

1,69

0,36

Other actions, prerogatives

1,12

1,12

0,00

Margins

8,07

5,59

-2,48

Heading 4: Administration

117,88

117,88

0,00

EUR billion - Commitment appropriations (2025 constant prices)

MFF proposal

EP position (1,27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Multiannual Financial Framework

1613,75

1788,86

175,11

Heading 1: Europe's Social model and quality of life, excluding NGEU

797,08

888,86

91,78

European Fund for economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, fisheries and maritime, prosperity and security

771,29

867,19

95,90

CAP

261,01

385,12

124,11

of which

Income support

261,01

284,65

23,64

Rural areas

0,00

94,88

94,88

Unity safety net*

5,60

5,60

0,00

POSEI (to be put under CAP)

0,00

6,50

6,50

Fisheries

1,77

6,50

4,73

European Fund for Regional Development, including for European Territorial Cooperation (Interreg) and the Cohesion Fund

203,72

274,34

70,62

of which

ERDF

163,71

222,00

58,29

CF

30,97

42,00

11,03

Interreg

9,04

10,34

1,30

European Social Fund

0,00

110,73

110,73

Migration - Asylum, migration and integration**

10,70

11,90

1,20

Migration - Border management and common policy on visas**

13,76

15,30

1,54

Migration - Internal security**

6,12

6,80

0,68

EU Facility***

58,40

50,00

-8,40

Non-ringfenced in NRPP

210,20

0,00

-210,20

Support to the Turkish-Cypriot Community

0,39

0,43

0,04

Decentralised agencies

20,24

20,24

0,00

Margins

5,16

1,00

-4,16

* The amount of EUR 5,6 billion corresponding to the Unity Safety Net is accounted for under the CAP

** Total for the HOME Affairs funds: EUR 34,0 billion

*** without accounting for the Unity Safety Net

EUR billion - Commitment appropriations (2025 constant prices)

MFF proposal

EP position (1,27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

522,21

584,29

62,08

European Competitiveness Fund

207,40

234,00

26,60

of which

LIFE actions

0,00

3,00

3,00

EU4Health actions

0,00

8,90

8,90

Horizon Europe

154,88

177,01

22,13

EURATOM/ITER

8,71

8,71

0,00

INSC-D (Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation - Decommissioning)

0,85

0,85

0,00

Ignalina Programme

0,60

0,60

0,00

CEF (Transport, Energy, Military Mobility)

72,25

81,00

8,75

Single Market and Customs Programme

5,54

6,10

0,56

Pericles (protection of the Euro)

0,01

0,01

0,00

Erasmus+

36,19

42,00

5,81

AgoraEU

7,61

9,50

1,89

UCPM+ (EU Civil Protection Mechanism and health preparedness)

9,46

11,00

1,54

Justice

0,71

0,79

0,08

Decentralised agencies

8,69

8,69

0,00

Other actions, prerogatives

2,23

2,23

0,00

Margins

7,09

1,80

-5,29

Heading 3: Global Europe

190,02

211,26

21,24

Global Europe

176,83

198,63

21,80

Common Foreign and Security Policy

2,99

3,34

0,35

Overseas countries and territories, including Greenland

0,89

1,85

0,96

Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAS) And Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOS)

1,18

1,50

0,32

Other actions, prerogatives

1,01

1,01

0,00

Margins

7,13

4,94

-2,19

Heading 4: Administration

104,45

104,45

0,00

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Article 312 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) stipulates that a Council regulation, adopted unanimously by the Council after obtaining the consent of the Parliament, shall lay down a multiannual financial framework for a period of at least five years.

The European Commission put forward a Proposal for a Council Regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2028 to 2034 on 16 July 2025, which was supplemented by a set of proposals in July and September 2025.

This motion for a resolution identifies issues and puts forward solutions for the modification and the implementation of the proposed act. It constitutes Parliament’s mandate for negotiations on the next multiannual financial framework, to be taken into account by the Council in view of securing the consent of Parliament, in line with Article 312(5) TFEU.

ANNEX: DECLARATIONS OF INPUT

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteurs declare that they included in their report input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that they received, in the preparation of the report, prior to the adoption thereof in committee, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

1. Interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register

European Committee of Regions

European Economic and Social Committee

European Investment Bank

Eurojust, the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation

2. Representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies

None

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteurs.

Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteurs declare that they have submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament's Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

MINORITY POSITION

The draft report is an improvement on the MFF proposal presented by the Commission; however, it fails to challenge key policy choices and fundamental guidelines.

Among other aspects, the following are to be welcomed: the – albeit insufficient – increase in the overall budget; the autonomy given to and earmarking of funds within the NRRPs and the increase in their allocations (particularly for the ESF) and the distribution of unallocated amounts; the maintenance of the POSEI programme and stronger Horizon Europe and Erasmus+ programmes.

However, funding for cohesion, agriculture and fisheries has been cut significantly: from 65 % in the current 2021-2027 framework to less than 50 % in the 2028-2034 framework. The proposal also maintains the EU’s militarisation and arms escalation, along with the allocation of financial resources to economic groups and multinationals under the guise of competitiveness. What is more, the concentration of power within the Commission remains, as does its discretionary authority, and its increased control over funds allocated to each Member State. This includes the principle of payment by results and its ties to the European Semester, along with the associated constraints and conditions.

26.2.2026

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

for the Committee on Budgets

on the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the Multiannual Financial Framework for the years 2028 to 2034

(COM(2025)0571 – C100000/2025 – 2025/0571R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Dan Barna

PA_Consent_Interim

OPINION

The Committee on Foreign Affairs submits the following to the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, the following:

Amendment 1

Motion for a resolution

Citation 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the development effectiveness principles defined at the 2011 Busan High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, which build on the aid effectiveness principles in the OECD’s 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and its 2008 Accra Agenda for action,

Amendment 2

Motion for a resolution

Citation 6 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) Recommendation on the Terms and Conditions of Aid, OECD/LEGAL/5006,

Amendment 3

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

B. whereas the current MFF quickly proved its inadequacy in responding to a series of crises and new political challenges that were not anticipated at the time of its adoption; whereas, for the purpose of securing the necessary funding, the MFF was pushed to its limits including an unprecedented recourse to the flexibility provisions and special instruments, after exhausting the available margins;

B. whereas the current MFF quickly proved its inadequacy in responding to a series of crises and new political challenges that were not anticipated at the time of its adoption; whereas, for the purpose of securing the necessary funding, the MFF was pushed to its limits, including through an unprecedented recourse to flexibility provisions and special instruments, after exhausting the available margins; whereas such measures must remain exceptional and cannot replace sound budgetary planning;

Amendment 4

Motion for a resolution

Recital E a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ea. whereas the new MFF’s revised structure lacks a dedicated programme and specific budgetary earmarking for human rights, democracy, good governance and the rule of law, raising concerns about underfunding, lack of predictability and the erosion of thematic priorities;

Amendment 5

Motion for a resolution

Recital E b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Eb. whereas the evaluation of the Union’s external financing instruments confirms the central role of civil society organisations as key partners in the implementation of NDICI – Global Europe, particularly in fragile contexts, where they effectively reach local communities and foster their engagement in development;

Amendment 6

Motion for a resolution

Recital E c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ec. whereas the evaluation of the Union’s external financing instruments also confirms the importance of multiannual programming in identifying shared priorities and providing a strategic cooperation framework over the medium term, thereby ensuring a degree of predictability for partner countries;

Amendment 7

Motion for a resolution

Recital E d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ed. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has resulted in broader geopolitical instability, especially in the Baltic region and on the EU’s eastern borders, that has forced the EU to reassess its strategic approach, necessitating a renewed focus on European competitiveness and defence; whereas the 2028-2034 MFF should reflect these priorities in order to safeguard the EU’s security and prosperity;

Amendment 8

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; notes, however, that the proposed 1.27 % of GNI already poses significant limitations on the Union’s ability to adequately address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises; underlines that responding to new geopolitical, security and economic challenges requires clear prioritisation;

Amendment 9

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2a. Stresses that, given the profound and lasting impact of ongoing global crises, including armed conflicts, systemic instability, and the increasing use of economic and hybrid coercion, the MFF 2028–2034 must move beyond a traditional budgetary approach and serve as a genuinely geopolitical instrument, fully aligned with the Member States’ and EU’s external action priorities and capable of defending stability, resilience, and the EU’s strategic interests in its wider neighbourhood;

Amendment 10

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5. Welcomes the reinforcement of the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) – Global Europe as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including the United States’ retreat from its role as a global guarantor of peace and security, enlargement and development needs, humanitarian crises, and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; opposes the weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement, as well as the reduced funding visibility for specific priorities inherent in the design of Global Europe as proposed by the Commission;

5. Welcomes the reinforcement of the Global Europe instrument as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor and its contribution to eradicating poverty and promoting sustainable development, prosperity, peace and stability in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including enlargement and development needs, humanitarian crises, the need to support Ukraine, Moldova, Western Balkan candidate countries and other partners and the United States’ retreat from multilateralism and the transatlantic partnership; demands an increased level of funding sufficient to ambitiously implement core EU external action obligations, in particular the promotion of human rights and democracy worldwide, including support to civil society organisations and human rights defenders, the deployment of electoral observation missions, crisis prevention, post-conflict reconstruction and responses to humanitarian crises; calls for an operational conditionality framework with enforceable human rights and robust democracy clauses to be introduced in the new Global Europe instrument for funding partner non-EU countries, including suspension clauses in cases of persistent violations of human rights; notes the increased flexibility of the proposed Global Europe instrument and calls for it to be rebalanced with meaningful accountability and reporting mechanisms which are currently absent from the proposal; opposes the weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement, as well as the reduced funding visibility for specific priorities inherent in the design of Global Europe as proposed by the Commission; underlines the importance of ensuring consistency between the Global Europe instrument and other external action instruments in order to avoid fragmentation, duplication and the increasing use of off-budget or exceptional tools; stresses the importance of clear priorities, accountability and effective delivery of external action spending;

Amendment 11

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

7. Recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; underscores that the allocation of funds to specific policy objectives is to be decided jointly by Parliament and the Council; deplores the fact that the indicative nomenclature proposed in the programme legislation is woefully insufficient; reiterates its call for the post-2027 MFF to include two special instruments – one dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters and one for general-purpose crisis response;

7. Recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes in response to exceptional and unforeseen circumstances, while stressing that such flexibility must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; underscores that the allocation of funds to specific policy objectives is to be decided jointly by Parliament and the Council; deplores the fact that the indicative nomenclature proposed in the programme legislation is woefully insufficient; reiterates its call for the post-2027 MFF to include two special instruments – one dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters and one for general-purpose crisis response;

Amendment 12

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

12. Demands that the European Parliament be involved in all the stages of the MFF process, as required by Article 312(5) TFEU; considers that the Council must take due account of Parliament’s position set out here to secure Parliament’s consent in accordance with Article 312 TFEU;

12. Demands that the European Parliament be involved in all the stages of the MFF process and specific targets across different programmes which increases their predictability, as required by Article 312(5) TFEU; considers that the Council must take due account of Parliament’s position set out here to secure Parliament’s consent in accordance with Article 312 TFEU;

Amendment 13

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

13. Recalls its position that, ‘in a fast changing world where people rightly expect more from the Union and where the Union is confronted with a growing number of crises, the next MFF must be endowed with increased resources compared to the 2021-2027 period, moving away from the historically restrictive, self-imposed level of 1 % of GNI’; regrets that the Commission, instead of presenting a genuinely ambitious proposal, hides behind a headline figure of EUR 2 trillion in current prices, which in reality amounts to only EUR 1.763 trillion in 2025 constant prices, equal to 1.26 % of EU GNI, with 0.11 % being allocated to NGEU repayments; deplores that this results in a token increase for EU programmes of less than 0.01 percentage points of GNI, effectively freezing the budget in real terms; highlights that the phasing-out of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) will further substantially reduce the Union’s overall spending power; considers that this proposed level will not enable the Union to deliver on its commitments or respond to the significant geopolitical challenges ahead;

13. Recalls its position that, ‘in a fast changing world where people rightly expect more from the Union and where the Union is confronted with a growing number of crises, the next MFF must be endowed with increased resources compared to the 2021-2027 period, moving away from the historically restrictive, self-imposed level of 1 % of GNI’; regrets that the Commission, instead of presenting a genuinely ambitious proposal, hides behind a headline figure of EUR 2 trillion in current prices, which in reality amounts to only EUR 1.763 trillion in 2025 constant prices, equal to 1.26 % of EU GNI, with 0.11 % being allocated to NGEU repayments; deplores that this results in a token increase for EU programmes of less than 0.01 percentage points of GNI, effectively freezing the budget in real terms; highlights that the phasing-out of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) will further substantially reduce the Union’s overall spending power; considers that this proposed level will not enable the Union to deliver on its commitments or respond to the significant geopolitical challenges ahead; underlines that, in a changing geopolitical and economic environment, the Union’s capacity to act depends on the focus, quality and effectiveness of expenditure;

Amendment 14

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

14. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU GNI, excluding NGEU repayments; considers that NGEU debt servicing should be treated separately from appropriations for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture bringing the total amount to 1.38 % of GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to deliver on its commitments, respond to geopolitical challenges and achieve its strategic objectives;

14. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU GNI, excluding NGEU repayments; considers that NGEU debt servicing should be treated separately from appropriations for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture bringing the total amount to 1.38 % of GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to deliver on its commitments, respond to geopolitical challenges and achieve its strategic objectives; recalls that the repayment of NextGenerationEU constitutes a binding obligation for the EU and must be ensured in a manner consistent with budgetary discipline;

Amendment 15

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19. Rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration;

19. Rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration and create distortions of competition and unequal conditions for economic actors across the EU;

Amendment 16

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; stresses that the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 should be implemented in a manner that ensures strategic consistency and maximises European added value, including by strengthening the EU’s defence readiness, military mobility, energy independence and the resilience of critical and dual-use infrastructure, in particular in light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and its implications for the EU’s security environment and border regions; underlines the importance of enhanced cooperation between public authorities, industry and academia in defence-related and dual-use research and innovation, so as to reinforce the EU’s strategic autonomy, preparedness and capacity to respond to current and future security challenges, while maintaining transparency, clear priorities and effective parliamentary oversight; recalls that competitiveness should support sustainable economic growth and productivity as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

Amendment 17

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21. Notes that Heading 3 ‘Global Europe’ is allocated EUR 190 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing a significant increase from EUR 121.5 billion in the current period while maintaining its 10 % share of the total MFF; considers that this reinforcement of EUR 68.5 billion is positive, as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including development needs, humanitarian crises and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; calls for the necessary funds to support enlargement and accession processes; warns that the merger of programmes could lead, once again, to weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement and reduced funding visibility for specific priorities, as occurred with NDICI-Global Europe; insists that the pillars maintain clear and separate budget lines to ensure transparency in allocations; recalls its position that the needs-based nature of humanitarian aid requires ring-fenced funding delivered through a stand-alone spending programme and dedicated nomenclature and underlines that effective humanitarian aid provision is contingent on predictability through a sufficient annual baseline allocation;

21. Notes that Heading 3 ‘Global Europe’ is allocated EUR 190 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing a significant increase from EUR 121.5 billion in the current period while maintaining its 10 % share of the total MFF; considers that this reinforcement of EUR 68.5 billion is positive, as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including the rising number of conflicts and increasing overall fragility, development needs, humanitarian crises and the need to support Ukraine, including in relation to Ukraine’s efforts in the Russian war of aggression and in relation to its accession, Western Balkans, Moldova, and rising geopolitical and geo-economic competition; calls for the necessary funds to support enlargement and accession processes and to promote and uphold the Union’s values and interests worldwide, including through mutually beneficial partnerships; warns that the merger of programmes must not lead, once again, to weakened parliamentary oversight specifically regarding the adoption of action plans and the mobilisation of the ‘emerging challenges and priorities cushion’; insists that the pillars remain clear and that detailed separate budget lines are created to ensure transparency and give the budgetary authority the flexibility to adjust spending priorities, if needed;

Amendment 18

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21a. Strongly supports the overall size of the MFF proposed by Parliament, set at 1.27 % of EU GNI and demands that Global Europe maintains, at a minimum, its 10 % share of the total MFF, in order to adequately finance all the policies it is to serve, in particular enlargement, support for Ukraine, development cooperation and international partnerships, humanitarian aid while addressing the increasing scale of global challenges; stresses that this increased allocation is essential to secure the EU’s role as a credible global actor; recalls that the specific allocations within Global Europe and its pillars are to be negotiated as part of the Global Europe Regulation1a, reflecting the overall amount of the MFF and the total amount of Global Europe within Heading 3;

_______________

1a Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Global Europe (COM(2025)0551).

Amendment 19

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21b. Demands that the share of non-programmable funding within the ‘Global Pillar’ be set at 25 % of the total allocation under the future regulation and that this funding be explicitly dedicated to clearly defined actions including humanitarian assistance, crisis response, peacebuilding, resilience, EU Election Observation Missions (EU EOMs) and foreign-policy needs;

Amendment 20

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21c. Rejects the proposed budgetary nomenclature for Global Europe, which aggregates vast resources into broad geographical pillars; considers that this structure prevents the budgetary authority from tracking expenditure on key priorities such as human rights, civil society support and climate action; calls for a more granular nomenclature that includes specific budget lines within each geographical pillar; requests a more detailed nomenclature on enlargement; reminds that the main approach for actions financed under Global Europe should be through geographic programmable actions in order to reinforce predictability; recalls that non-programmable actions should be complementary to programmable actions; insists that funds under the Global Pillar be explicitly non-transferable to other geographical pillars, in order to preserve funding for global initiatives, crisis response and conflict prevention; insists furthermore that significant transfers between pillars be subject to parliamentary consent; stresses the imperative of predictable funding; demands that transfers between geographical pillars under Global Europe be possible only if evidence demonstrates that SDG-related needs have objectively increased in one geographical pillar and decrease in another; stresses that, alongside predictability for investment, spending programmes should retain a substantial in-built flexibility reserve, to be decided by the budgetary authority; stresses that any Global Europe carry-over or surplus must be reintegrated into the committed budget, as redirecting it to flexible or ‘unprogrammable’ envelopes risks undermining ring-fenced areas and parliamentary oversight; acknowledges that flexibility is essential to respond to unforeseen challenges, but must be anchored in a framework ensuring accountability, predictability, transparency; expresses its opposition to allowing the Commission to change the official development assistance (ODA) target of 90 % by means of a delegated act, as this weakens the binding nature of this target and does not enable Parliament to exercise proper oversight; recalls that the ODA spending target is key for the EU’s international commitments to poverty reduction and eradication and to the principle of policy coherence for development; notes that Global Europe aims to support the development of a European Economic Foreign Policy through enhanced alignment with internal Union priorities, including economic and energy security, trade and competitiveness, the expansion and diversification of sustainable economic exchanges and value chains with partner countries, food security and connectivity;

Amendment 21

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21d. Calls on the Commission and the EEAS to ensure that activities moved from thematic to geographic programming retain the full scope previously covered under NDICI – Global Europe;

Amendment 22

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21e. Reiterates that enlargement is a core geopolitical priority for the Union and a strategic investment in Europe’s long-term security, stability and prosperity, particularly in the context of heightened geopolitical competition and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; welcomes the commitment of Global Europe to provide robust financial and policy-based support to candidate countries and potential candidate countries as a key instrument for anchoring them firmly to the EU and advancing their preparation for accession; regrets that the merging of the pre-accession instrument into a single Global Europe framework risks weakening clarity and diluting targeted action on enlargement, as well as Parliament’s ability to exercise oversight; considers that support for civil society in enlargement countries should remain independent of government reform progress; is concerned by the financing structure for Ukraine, which lacks a clear distinction between pre-accession and reconstruction needs; warns that the new delivery model under the Europe Pillar, which mandates the establishment of complex structures aligned with internal Union fund management, risks imposing an excessive administrative burden on candidate countries; emphasises that, in order to ensure the predictability, credibility and fairness of the accession process, calls for explicit and transparent allocations, including earmarked pre-accession funding, within the Europe pillar; stresses that consolidation under one single instrument must not result in a de facto reduction of financial resources allocated to pre-accession assistance; underscores that, on the basis of the Commission’s estimates and recent progress reports, several candidate countries are likely to accede to the Union during the next MFF period; therefore urges that dedicated budgetary provisions for the prospective new Member States be fully integrated into the EU’s next multiannual budget; underlines that the Europe Pillar, designed to prepare candidate countries for Union membership, must operate under the strictest standards of value compliance; calls for the application of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation1a to all funds allocated under the Europe Pillar, ensuring that breaches of the rule of law principles in candidate countries lead to the immediate suspension of payments, independent of the broader foreign policy discretionary mechanisms; emphasises that funds allocated for pre-accession assistance must be subject to the same standards, rules and conditionality for all candidate countries;

_______________________

1a Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/2092/oj).

Amendment 23

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21f. Recalls that the neutrality, independence, impartiality and needs-based nature of humanitarian aid require ring-fenced funding delivered through a stand-alone spending programme and a dedicated nomenclature, and that effective humanitarian aid depends on predictability through a sufficient annual baseline allocation; calls for Global Europe to retain a Humanitarian-Development-Peace (HDP) nexus approach as a core principle of EU external action, with renewed attention to fragility, maintaining conflict-sensitivity across all external programmes, and recommitting to conflict prevention and peacebuilding; urges Global Europe to sustain the EU’s engagement in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States (FCAS) through a differentiated approach aimed at peacebuilding, conflict prevention and human development including demining, disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration, post-conflict actions, societal peacebuilding and transitional justice, and for the implementation of the Women, Peace and Security Agenda; underlines that public funding and grants remain central instruments of Global Europe external action in low-income and fragile contexts;

Amendment 24

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21g. Insists that EU funding for conflict prevention, peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction constitutes a direct investment in the Union’s long-term stability and security, particularly in its neighbourhood; commends the role of the UN and its agencies in conflict zones and calls for the EU to strengthen its political and financial support to multilateralism; demands that the next MFF provides dedicated, adequate and predictable funding to the UN and its agencies, including to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), whose work in Gaza, the West Bank and the region is fundamental to the civilian population; demands that the EU plays an active role in the reconstruction of Gaza and calls, in this regard, for the creation within the MFF of an EU Facility for the reconstruction of Gaza;

Amendment 25

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 h (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21h. Calls for the continuation of resourcing for and meaningful engagement with civil society organisations (CSOs), especially local actors and women’s rights organisations, and for structured dialogue supported by dedicated funding streams tailored to the needs of CSOs as well as for Human Rights Defenders (HRDs); recalls the need to strengthen programmes aimed at supporting civil society, human rights defenders, journalists and investigative media in third countries, as these actors are essential to protecting the civic space, ensuring democratic transparency and resisting authoritarian drift; demands that support to CSOs and HRDs in third countries remain independent of reform progress or possible democratic backsliding, and that such support be shielded from potential changes to country action plans in cases of democracy, human rights or rule of law deficiencies; insists that the new MFF provide sustainable, accessible and flexible funding enabling rapid responses to threats against fundamental freedoms and support for local initiatives; urges the establishment of a dedicated, well-resourced, and ring-fenced budget line within the Global Europe instrument for human rights, the rule of law, and democracy;

Amendment 26

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 i (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21i. Notes that the European Investment Bank (EIB) Group acts as the Union’s principal strategic financial partner within the Global Europe framework, maximising the impact of resources under Heading 3; acknowledges the complementary role of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) in supporting private sector development and of the Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB) in the field of social infrastructure; underlines the strategic relevance of the Western Balkans Investment Framework (WBIF) as a key vehicle for leveraging EU funds in the region, and recalls the essential role of the European Parliament in ensuring democratic oversight of investments supported through WBIF; insists that the European Investment Bank (EIB) Group be formally anchored as the EU’s primary strategic financial partner within the Global Europe architecture to maximise the impact of Heading 3 resources; calls for a reinforced investment partnership with the EIB to leverage the EU budget, mobilise private investment and enhance the budgetary guarantee and blending framework, ensuring effective delivery of the instrument’s objectives;

Amendment 27

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 j (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21j. Underlines that local and regional governments (LRGs) are fundamental actors in achieving the objectives of Global Europe and in advancing sustainable development, given that approximately 65 % of the Sustainable Development Goals’ (SDGs) targets require significant local action; insists that effective, clear and consistent mechanisms for multilevel governance and partnership be established in the future Global Europe regulation, explicitly recognising LRGs as development actors and key policymakers, particularly within the Europe Pillar and the ‘Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf Pillar’, where LRG involvement mechanisms remain vague or completely absent; calls for the systematic involvement of LRGs and their associations in the drafting process of the future multiannual indicative programmes and action plans under Global Europe, ensuring they have timely access to information and are duly consulted to guarantee that funding strategies are aligned with local needs and contexts; calls, furthermore, for the creation of a dedicated funding stream or envelope for decentralised cooperation and technical assistance, tailored to the administrative and technical capacity constraints faced by LRGs, thereby facilitating their operational role in the implementation of the Global Gateway strategy and the accession process;

Amendment 28

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22. Underlines the need for Union policies to be underpinned by a well-functioning administration; insists that, post-2027, sufficient financial and staff resources be allocated from the outset and throughout the MFF period so that Union institutions, bodies, decentralised agencies and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office can ensure effective and efficient policy design and high-quality delivery and enforcement, provide technical assistance, continue to attract the best people from all Member States, thus ensuring geographical balance, and have leeway to adjust to changing circumstances;

22. Underlines the need for Union policies to be underpinned by a well-functioning administration; insists that, post-2027, sufficient financial and staff resources be allocated from the outset and throughout the MFF period so that Union institutions, bodies, decentralised agencies and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office can ensure effective and efficient policy design and high-quality delivery and enforcement, provide technical assistance, continue to attract the best people from all Member States, thus ensuring to fulfil their mandates effectively, geographical balance, and have leeway to adjust to changing circumstances; stresses that sufficient administrative and human resources are also required to ensure effective programming, monitoring and accountability of EU external action spending;

Amendment 29

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23. Notes with concern that the Commission’s self-imposed stable staffing has proven inadequate to meet operational requirements; acknowledges that, for the 2028-2034 MFF, the Commission has requested additional posts; insists that the staffing needs of all institutions and bodies have to be taken into account when establishing additional posts; highlights the particularly alarming situation whereby some EU agencies receive inadequate operational funding, severely limiting their capacity to fulfil their mandates and deliver on policy objectives;

23. Notes with concern that the Commission’s self-imposed stable staffing has proven inadequate to meet operational requirements; acknowledges that, for the 2028-2034 MFF, the Commission has requested additional posts; insists that the staffing needs of all institutions and bodies have to be taken into account when establishing additional posts; highlights the particularly alarming situation whereby some EU agencies receive inadequate operational funding, severely limiting their capacity to fulfil their mandates and deliver on policy objectives; underlines, in this context, that the European External Action Service (EEAS), given its global mandate, worldwide delegation network and specific security responsibilities, faces structural constraints that differ from those of EU institutions and bodies primarily based within the EU; stresses that the structurally underfunded EEAS must be provided with adequate and predictable administrative and operational resources, including staffing and security-related expenditure, commensurate with its expanding responsibilities under EU external action; cautions against the application of rigid, across-the-board administrative reduction approaches to the EEAS in the next MFF; expresses concern at any proposal that would weaken the EU’s external presence through reductions in delegations or staff; calls therefore for a targeted and differentiated approach ensuring that the EEAS can effectively perform its autonomous mandate, maintain a secure and functional global network, and deliver on the EU’s foreign policy objectives;

Amendment 30

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a Flexibility Instrument to be constituted not only of a fixed amount but also of additional funds from revenue relating to fines and decommitments; considers, in the light of its position of 7 May 2025, that the Flexibility Instrument should receive funds from additional sources, namely unspent margins from previous years, the annual surplus from the previous year and reflows from financial instruments, together with current and future margins as a last resort; considers also that it should be heavily frontloaded; considers that external assigned revenue and amounts made available again under specific revenue and decommitment rules in programme-specific provisions could be exempted from this general rule;

24. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a Flexibility Instrument to be constituted not only of a fixed amount but also of additional funds from revenue relating to fines and decommitments; considers, in the light of its position of 7 May 2025, that the Flexibility Instrument should receive funds from additional sources, namely unspent margins from previous years, the annual surplus from the previous year and reflows from financial instruments, together with current and future margins as a last resort; considers also that it should be heavily frontloaded; considers that external assigned revenue and amounts made available again under specific revenue and decommitment rules in programme-specific provisions could be exempted from this general rule; considers it essential that de-commitments under Global Europe return to the budget line of origin in order to provide the necessary flexibility required for external action; underlines that the simplification of the budgetary structure must not come at the expense of transparency or the ability of the budgetary authority to exert efficient scrutiny and to take informed decisions; underlines the need for full transparency and robust parliamentary scrutiny; requests a more detailed nomenclature on enlargement with at least one budget line per country; reminds that the main approach for actions financed under Global Europe should be through geographic programmable actions and therefore the proportion of geographic programmable funding should reflect this principle in order to reinforce predictability while the applicable proportions should be defined in the Global Europe Regulation; recalls that non-programmable actions should be complementary to programmable actions, while humanitarian aid is to retain its neutrality, impartiality, independence and needs-based nature;

_____________

Amendment 31

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 25

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

25. Restates also its view that there should be a second special instrument, the Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters, dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters; considers that both special instruments should be able to carry over unspent amounts throughout the MFF period, to guarantee flexibility;

25. Restates also its view that there should be a second special instrument, the Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters, dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters; considers that both special instruments should be able to carry over unspent amounts throughout the MFF period, to guarantee flexibility; stresses that the use of such an instrument must remain strictly needs-based, transparent and time-limited;

Amendment 32

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26. Notes that the Commission proposes EUR 88 billion for the Ukraine Reserve within the MFF regulation to finance pre-accession assistance, recovery and reconstruction efforts; considers that this amount could provide substantial support; observes, however, that should the conflict continue, this allocation would be insufficient to meet Ukraine’s needs; calls for an increase and frontloading of the Reserve, with a view to providing additional support to Ukraine;

26. Notes that the Commission proposed EUR 88 billion for the Ukraine Reserve within the MFF regulation to finance pre-accession assistance, recovery and reconstruction efforts; considers that this amount could provide substantial support; observes, however, that should the conflict continue, this allocation would be insufficient to meet Ukraine’s needs; calls for an increase and frontloading of the Reserve, with a view to providing additional support to Ukraine; welcomes the placing of the Ukraine Reserve over and above the MFF ceiling to cater for Ukraine’s exceptional and unpredictable needs while ensuring that support for Ukraine will not be to the detriment of other partner countries and regions; stresses that joint borrowing backed by additional headroom in the own resources in the EU budget is a time-bound and limited instrument, and that an additional reparations loan, in the form of a legally and financially sound mechanism, would constitute a more coherent, just and sustainable approach to the support for Ukraine, while also reducing the Union’s financial exposure; welcomes the decision by the European Council to meet a substantial part of Ukraine’s budgetary needs through 2026 and 2027 through the joint borrowing of EUR 90 billion in the form of permanent structured cooperation; recalls however that Council Regulation (EU) 2025/2600 of 12 December 20251a enacts the indefinite immobilisation of Russian sovereign assets and thus, in addition, allows for the establishment of a legally and financially sound mechanism in the form of a Reparations Loan using frozen Russian assets, hence providing longer-term visibility to Ukraine and ensuring it eventually receives war reparations from Russia as provided for by international law, or an equivalent amount;

_________________

1a Council Regulation (EU) 2025/2600 of 12 December 2025 on emergency measures addressing the serious economic difficulties caused by Russia’s actions in the context of the war of aggression against Ukraine (OJ L, 2025/2600, 13.12.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2025/2600/oj).

Amendment 33

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 34

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

34. Deplores, in this regard, the fact that the budgetary nomenclature proposed in the sectoral legislation is woefully inadequate; calls on the Commission to take note of the detailed nomenclature for the four headings accompanying this report to be used as a basis for further discussions, without pre-empting the outcome of the respective ordinary legislative procedures;

34. Deplores, in this regard, the fact that the budgetary nomenclature proposed in the sectoral legislation is woefully inadequate; calls on the Commission to take note of the detailed nomenclature for the four headings accompanying this report to be used as a basis for further discussions, without pre-empting the outcome of the respective ordinary legislative procedures; stresses that, in the case of Global Europe, the budgetary nomenclature should sufficiently reflect the specific objectives of the different policies constituting the instrument; calls for a more detailed nomenclature that includes specific budget lines for thematic programmes and instruments within each geographical pillar;

Amendment 34

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 35

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

35. Notes that budgetary transfers under the Financial Regulation3 already provide flexibility during budget implementation; stresses that the Commission can currently transfer considerable amounts between policy areas without budgetary authority approval, limiting oversight; in the absence of a sufficiently detailed budget structure, calls for new rules setting both a maximum amount and percentage per budget line for transfers without approval; considers that transfers from other Union institutions below a certain threshold could be exempted from the objection procedure as a simplification measure;

35. Notes that budgetary transfers under the Financial Regulation3 already provide flexibility during budget implementation; stresses that the Commission can currently transfer considerable amounts between policy areas without budgetary authority approval; requests that significant transfers within Global Europe pillars be subject to Parliamentary consent as these pillars aggregate large amounts; in the absence of a sufficiently detailed budget structure, calls for new rules setting both a maximum amount and percentage per budget line for transfers without approval; considers that transfers from other Union institutions below a certain threshold could be exempted from the objection procedure as a simplification measure;

__________________

__________________

3 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2018/1046/oj).

3 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2018/1046/oj).

Amendment 35

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 36

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

36. Emphasises the need for robust governance ensuring parliamentary accountability, oversight and control, alongside an effective anti-fraud architecture; rejects any approach that limits Parliament to a consultative or information-only role in the mobilisation of any instrument or fund under the next MFF; stresses that budgetary flexibility must not circumvent the prerogatives of the budgetary authority and that all redeployments, reprogramming and mobilisation of cushions or other reserves must be subject to Parliament’s approval; considers that genuine flexibility requires both rapid response capacity and democratic legitimacy, which can only be achieved through Parliament’s full participation in decisions on the allocation and use of resources;

36. Emphasises the need for robust governance ensuring parliamentary accountability, oversight and control, alongside an effective anti-fraud architecture; rejects any approach that limits Parliament to a consultative or information-only role in the mobilisation of any instrument or fund under the next MFF; calls for more clarity as to the financial assistance to be provided to partner countries in the form of policy-based loans under the Global Europe instrument, and insists on the need to respect the institutional balance and budgetary authorities’ prerogatives in decision-making and the governance of similar financing mechanisms; stresses that budgetary flexibility must not circumvent the prerogatives of the budgetary authority and that all redeployments, reprogramming and mobilisation of cushions or other reserves must be subject to Parliament’s approval; considers that genuine flexibility requires both rapid response capacity and democratic legitimacy, which can only be achieved through Parliament’s full participation in decisions on the allocation and use of resources; welcomes the fact that the Global Europe Cushion mobilisation is to change compared to NDICI – Global Europe, whereby under the next MFF mobilisation of the cushion will have to follow Financial Regulation rules and any mobilisation above 10 % of the annual allocation will have to be approved by Parliament and the Council; insists, however, on its previous calls that the Commission is to inform the co-legislators meaningfully and in due time before any mobilisation of the cushion and take into consideration their observations on the nature, objectives and financial amounts envisaged;

Amendment 36

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 37

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

37. Expresses its concern about the lack of predictability in EU funding that might result from excessive flexibility mechanisms and recurrent redeployments; recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; underlines that while the current MFF has suffered from insufficient flexibility to adjust to evolving priorities, the next MFF must strike a better balance between investment predictability and adaptability; emphasises that certain policy areas require greater funding stability than others; firmly rejects recurrent redeployments as a means to finance Union priorities, as they undermine programme implementation and jeopardise the delivery of agreed policy objectives;

37. Expresses its concern about the lack of predictability in EU funding that might result from excessive flexibility mechanisms and recurrent redeployments; recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; underlines that while the current MFF has faced challenges in responding to evolving priorities, the next MFF must strike a better balance between investment predictability and adaptability; emphasises that certain policy areas require greater funding stability than others; firmly rejects recurrent redeployments as a means to finance Union priorities, as they undermine programme implementation and jeopardise the delivery of agreed policy objectives;

Amendment 37

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 38

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

38. Notes the proposed increase in borrowing and lending under the next MFF; considers that the budgetary authority must carefully monitor the impact of this approach on the MFF headroom or other guarantees; demands that borrowing and lending operations respect the powers of the co-legislators and the budgetary authority;

38. Notes the proposed increase in borrowing and lending under the next MFF; considers that the budgetary authority must carefully monitor the impact of this approach on the MFF headroom or other guarantees; demands that borrowing and lending operations fully respect the powers of the co-legislators and the budgetary authority;

Amendment 38

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 42

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

42. Insists that all substantive policy choices such as programme objectives, spending priorities, financial allocations, eligibility, selection and award criteria, conditions, definitions and calculation methods must be determined in the relevant legislation, with full respect for Parliament’s prerogatives as co-legislator and budgetary authority and not in the work programme; demands that any elements entailing policy choices that are not included in the basic act be adopted exclusively through delegated acts, rejecting any use of implementing acts or other procedures that would bypass parliamentary scrutiny; in this respect, requires that all multiannual and annual work programmes be adopted through delegated acts to ensure Parliament’s systematic involvement in policy decision-making; categorically rejects any attempt to relegate strategic decisions to comitology procedures or other arrangements; warns that Parliament will not accept any proposal that fails to guarantee its full legislative and oversight powers;

42. Insists that all substantive policy choices such as programme objectives, spending priorities, financial allocations, eligibility, selection and award criteria, conditions, definitions and calculation methods must be determined in the relevant legislation, with full respect for Parliament’s prerogatives as co-legislator and budgetary authority and not in the work programme; specifically rejects the proposal to establish the implementing rules for pre-accession assistance under the Europe Pillar of Global Europe through implementing acts, given that these rules define the design, content and management of support that is essential for future membership; demands that any elements entailing policy choices, including the adoption of multiannual indicative programmes and the mobilisation of the emerging challenges and priorities cushion, be adopted exclusively through delegated acts to ensure Parliament’s systematic involvement in policy decision-making; categorically rejects any attempt to relegate strategic decisions to comitology procedures or other arrangements; warns that Parliament will not accept any proposal that fails to guarantee its full legislative and oversight powers;

Amendment 39

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 48

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

48. Emphasises that a steering mechanism will not compensate for any loss of Parliament’s legislative or budgetary powers; insists that getting budgetary governance right and preserving the prerogatives of the budgetary authority are essential prerequisites to making the annual budgetary procedure more meaningful and that any steering mechanism can only function if the basic foundations are in place;

48. Emphasises that a steering mechanism will not compensate for any loss of Parliament’s legislative or budgetary powers; insists that getting budgetary governance right and preserving the prerogatives of the budgetary authority are essential prerequisites to making the annual budgetary procedure more meaningful and that any steering mechanism can only function if the basic foundations are in place; requests that the Commission present the key policy priorities of EU external action to Parliament in a way that meaningfully informs the envisaged steering mechanism and strategic debate on priorities to be funded under the annual budget; the Commission must take into account Parliament’s recommendations, including possible reviews and shifts in priorities for the budgets under the Global Europe pillars;

Modification 40

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(11) Support to Ukraine under Regulation (EU)[XXX] [Global Europe] should be flexible, so as to provide the adequate form and level of support. Support should be provided in particular in the form of loans, non-repayable support and provisioning for budgetary guarantees. For the part of the support to Ukraine under that Regulation provided in the form of loans, it should be possible to mobilise the necessary appropriations in the budget over and above the ceilings of the MFF for financial assistance to Ukraine available until the end of 2034. For the part of the support to Ukraine under Global Europe provided in the form of non-repayable support and provisioning of budgetary guarantees, the appropriations should be provided through a thematic special instrument, the ‘Ukraine Reserve’. The commitment appropriations and corresponding payment appropriations should be mobilised annually in the framework of the budgetary procedure set out in Article 314 TFEU, over and above the ceilings for commitment and payment appropriations of the MFF.

(11) Support to Ukraine under Regulation (EU)[XXX] [Global Europe] should be flexible, so as to provide the adequate form and level of support. Support should be provided in particular in the form of loans, non-repayable support and provisioning for budgetary guarantees. For the part of the support to Ukraine under that Regulation provided in the form of loans, it should be possible to mobilise the necessary appropriations in the budget over and above the ceilings of the MFF for financial assistance to Ukraine available until the end of 2034. For the part of the support to Ukraine under Global Europe provided in the form of non-repayable support and provisioning of budgetary guarantees, the appropriations should be provided through a thematic special instrument, the ‘Ukraine Reserve’. To ensure the consistency of the enlargement process, the mobilisation of the Ukraine Reserve should clearly distinguish between resources dedicated to recovery and reconstruction and those dedicated to pre-accession assistance, ensuring that the latter are programmed and implemented in alignment with the methodology applied to other candidate countries under the Europe Pillar. The commitment appropriations and corresponding payment appropriations should be mobilised annually in the framework of the budgetary procedure set out in Article 314 TFEU, over and above the ceilings for commitment and payment appropriations of the MFF.

Modification 41

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 14

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(14) The Flexibility Instrument should be available to allow the financing of specific unforeseen expenditure for a given financial year. The Flexibility Instrument should be constituted of a fixed amount, as well as of amounts equivalent to revenue collected pursuant to the implementation of Union policies, such as fines, other penalties, sanctions and any accrued interest or other income generated by them imposed by Union institutions, and amounts equivalent to decommitments of appropriations, other than external assigned revenue, with the exclusion of amounts made available again in accordance with specific rules on making appropriations corresponding to decommitments available again.

(14) The Flexibility Instrument should be available to allow the financing of specific unforeseen expenditure for a given financial year. The Flexibility Instrument should be constituted of a fixed amount, as well as of amounts equivalent to revenue collected pursuant to the implementation of Union policies, such as fines, other penalties, sanctions and any accrued interest or other income generated by them imposed by Union institutions, excluding amounts equivalent to decommitments of appropriations, other than external assigned revenue, which are to remain within the budget lines from which they were decommitted, to be reused by the budgetary authority in accordance with the relevant sectoral rules.

Modification 42

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(15) Enlargement of the Union is a strategic investment in peace, security, stability and prosperity in Europe and allows the Union to be better positioned to address global challenges. It is necessary to provide for a revision of the MFF in the event of accession of new Member Sates to the Union.

(15) Enlargement of the Union is a strategic investment in peace, security, stability and prosperity in Europe and allows the Union to be better positioned to address global challenges. To ensure the predictability and credibility of the accession process, the financial framework should guarantee a dedicated allocation for candidate countries and potential candidate countries, clearly distinguishing these funds from those allocated to other partners in the region. It is necessary to provide for a revision of the MFF in the event of accession of new Member Sates to the Union.

Modification 43

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 1 – Article 2 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

3. Where it is necessary to mobilise a guarantee for financial assistance to Member States authorised in accordance with Article 223(1) of the Financial Regulation, the necessary amount shall be mobilised over and above the MFF ceilings.

3. Where it is necessary to mobilise a guarantee for financial assistance to Member States authorised in accordance with Article 223(1) of the Financial Regulation, the necessary amount shall be mobilised over and above the MFF ceilings. The Commission shall provide the European Parliament and the Council with a detailed annual report on the sustainability of the contingent liabilities arising from such mobilisation and shall consult the budgetary authority prior to the authorisation of new guarantees.

Modification 44

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 6 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

1. The Ukraine Reserve may be mobilised for the sole purpose of financing expenditure for Ukraine under [Regulation (EU) XXXX/XX] [Global Europe].

1. The Ukraine Reserve may be mobilised for the sole purpose of financing expenditure for Ukraine under [Regulation (EU) XXXX/XX] [Global Europe]. The mobilisation decision shall clearly distinguish between amounts allocated for pre-accession assistance, which shall support the alignment with the Union acquis, and amounts allocated for reconstruction and recovery.

Modification 45

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 6 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

3a. Support provided under the Ukraine Reserve shall be subject to the strict application of the measures linked to the general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget as referred to in Article 5. The release of funds shall be conditional upon the effective respect for the rule of law and the financial interests of the Union.

Modification 46

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(b) an amount equivalent to decommitments of appropriations, other than external assigned revenue, made in the year n-2, with the exclusion of the amounts of decommitments made available again in accordance with specific rules on making appropriations available as referred to in Article 15 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 and Regulation [(EU) XXXX/XX] [National and Regional Partnership Fund].

(b) an amount equivalent to decommitments of appropriations, other than external assigned revenue, made in the year n-2, with the exclusion of the amounts of decommitments made available again in accordance with specific rules on making appropriations available as referred to in Article 15 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, Regulation [(EU) XXXX/XX] [National and Regional Partnership Fund], and Regulation [(EU) XXXX/XX] [Global Europe].

Modification 47

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part II – Section A – point 11 – subpoint -a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

-(a) for Heading 3, a specific breakdown of the Europe Pillar, distinguishing between allocations for candidate countries and potential candidate countries and allocations for other partners in the Eastern Neighbourhood;

Amendment 48

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 02 – Article 01

Annex III

Modification

Enlargement – Preparation for accession

Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (candidate countries and potential candidate countries)

Amendment 49

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 02 – Article 02

Annex III

Modification

Eastern Neighbourhood – Programmes

Eastern Neighbourhood (Non-candidate partners)

Amendment 50

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 02 – Article 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Europe – human rights, democracy and rule of law

Amendment 51

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 03 – Article 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf – human rights, democracy and rule of law

Amendment 52

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 04 – Article 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Sub-Saharan Africa – human rights, democracy and rule of law

Amendment 53

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 05 – Article 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Asia and the Pacific – human rights, democracy and rule of law

Amendment 54

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 06 – Article 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Americas and the Caribbean – human rights, democracy and rule of law

Amendment 55

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 07 – Article 01 – item 01 (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Preparation for accession – Albania

Amendment 56

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 07 – Article 01 – item 02 (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Preparation for accession – Bosnia and Herzegovina

Amendment 57

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 07 – Article 01 – item 03 (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Preparation for accession – Georgia

Amendment 58

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 07 – Article 01 – item 04 (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Preparation for accession – Kosovo

Amendment 59

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 07 – Article 01 – item 05 (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Preparation for accession – North Macedonia

Amendment 60

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 07 – Article 01 – item 06 (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Preparation for accession – Moldova

Amendment 61

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 07 – Article 01 – item 07 (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Preparation for accession – Montenegro

Amendment 62

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 07 – Article 01 – item 08 (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Preparation for accession – Serbia

Amendment 63

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 07 – Article 01 – item 09 (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Preparation for accession – Ukraine

Amendment 64

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 07 – Article 01 – item 10 (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Preparation for accession - Türkiye

Amendment 65

Annex III

Heading 3: Global Europe – Title 07 – Chapter 07 – Article 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Global – human rights, democracy and rule of law

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for opinion declares that he included in his opinion input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that he received, in the preparation of the opinion, prior to the adoption thereof in committee, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

1. Interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register

PLATFORMA - Local and Regional International Action

European Peacebuilding Liaison Office (EPLO)

2. Representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur for opinion.

Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur for opinion declares that he has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Interim report on the proposal for the multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034

References

2025/0571R(APP)

Committee(s) responsible

Date announced in plenary

BUDG

13.11.2025

Opinion by

Date announced in plenary

AFET

13.11.2025

Rapporteur for the opinion

Date appointed

Dan Barna

4.12.2025

Discussed in committee

15.1.2026

Date adopted

25.2.2026

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

47

12

5

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols:

24.2.2026

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND DEFENCE

for the Committee on Budgets

on the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the Multiannual Financial Framework for the years 2028 to 2034

(COM(2025)0571 – C100000/2025 – 2025/0571R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: MarieAgnes StrackZimmermann

PA_Consent_Interim

OPINION

The Committee on Security and Defence submits the following to the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible:

Amendment 1

Motion for a resolution

Citation 4 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 17 December 2025 on European Defence Readiness 2030: assessment of needs1a,

_________________

1a Texts adopted, P10_TA(2025)0336.

Amendment 2

Motion for a resolution

Recital B a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ba. whereas there is an urgent need to increase European defence-related investments, complementing and stimulating the increase in defence spending by the Member States to enhance Europe’s resilience and security, by supporting the development and deployment of dual-use technologies and capabilities that strengthen the protection of critical infrastructure against hybrid threats, cyberattacks and other risks to societal and economic stability;

Amendment 3

Motion for a resolution

Recital B b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Bb. whereas EU citizens rightly expect more from the EU and its budget, including the capacity to respond quickly and effectively to evolving threats and to provide the necessary support to bolster defence capabilities, especially in times of crisis; whereas the next multiannual financial framework (MFF) should support a comprehensive security approach and appropriately fund measures that strengthen defence readiness and resilience;

Amendment 4

Motion for a resolution

Recital E a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ea. whereas European security should be pursued through a realistic, pragmatic and integrated approach, ensuring coherence between internal and external action, the eastern and southern flanks, and civil and military instruments, while avoiding fragmented and uncoordinated interventions; whereas the EU’s eastern border regions endure a constant security, economic and social strain resulting from Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, hybrid threats and military pressure, including attacks on energy networks, transport corridors, communication systems, subsea cables and airspace, while the southern flank also faces persistent security-related challenges; whereas these realities should be explicitly reflected across all relevant headings of the 2028-2034 MFF;

Amendment 5

Motion for a resolution

Recital E b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Eb. whereas unmanned aerial systems, including low-cost and mass-produced drones, have become a primary tool of modern warfare and hybrid aggression, posing a direct threat to civilian populations, critical infrastructure and military assets across the Union;

Amendment 6

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in an EU candidate country, threatening the territorial integrity of the Union itself, as well as hybrid and cyber attacks, threats to critical infrastructure and democratic institutions, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

Amendment 7

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2a. Recognises the economic, social and security challenges facing the EU’s eastern border regions resulting from their proximity to aggressors that pose a persistent direct military and/or hybrid threat, and the direct and indirect consequences of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; emphasises the importance of the relevant MFF programmes, in particular those under Heading 1 and Heading 2, in offering comprehensive financial support to the EU’s eastern border regions, with the aim of enhancing their defence, preparedness, resilience and security capabilities, including the East Shield and Baltic Defence Line;

Amendment 8

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Opposes the merging of different policies in one plan per Member State, which generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns that the significant reduction in funding in Heading 1 threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

3. Opposes the merging of different policies in one plan per Member State, including defence-related components, which generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns that the significant reduction in funding in Heading 1 threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights and ensuring food security, a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers, and the security and defence of its citizens;

Amendment 9

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4a. Stresses that European defence, preparedness and resilience constitute European public goods and must be financed accordingly at Union level, including through a clear roadmap, ensuring that such spending fully complies with EU values and international law, and remains subject to robust transparency requirements, anti-fraud safeguards and full parliamentary scrutiny;

Amendment 10

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5. Welcomes the reinforcement of the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) – Global Europe as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including the United States’ retreat from its role as a global guarantor of peace and security, enlargement and development needs, humanitarian crises, and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; opposes the weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement, as well as the reduced funding visibility for specific priorities inherent in the design of Global Europe as proposed by the Commission;

5. Welcomes the reinforcement of the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) – Global Europe as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including enlargement and development needs, humanitarian crises, and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; notes, furthermore, the United States’ increasingly more transactional approach to foreign policy, including a reduced commitment to multilateralism, which amounts to a step back from its role regarding global peace and security; opposes the weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement, as well as the reduced funding visibility for specific priorities inherent in the design of Global Europe as proposed by the Commission;

Amendment 11

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5a. Considers that, in the current geopolitical context – primarily Russia’s unjustified and unprovoked war against Ukraine, hybrid warfare against EU Member States and the United States’ alleged plan to set 2027 as the deadline for Europe to assume responsibility for the majority of its own conventional defence – it is crucial to consider defence as a structural priority for the next MFF; recalls that the Draghi report has made it very clear that unprecedented and massive financing and investment are required to attain EU defence readiness and make the EU strategically autonomous; calls, therefore, for these needs to be addressed in the next MFF;

Amendment 12

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6. Recalls its position that ‘simplification cannot mean more leeway for the Commission without the necessary checks and balances and must therefore be achieved with full respect for the institutional balance provided for in the Treaties’; opposes, therefore, the proposed approach that sacrifices transparency and controls under the guise of efficiency, compromising programme quality and democratic accountability, and undermining Parliament’s role as the budgetary and discharge authority; underlines Parliament’s commitment to securing the necessary transparency mechanisms to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests, which is vital to safeguard public trust in the EU;

6. Recalls its position that ‘simplification cannot mean more leeway for the Commission without the necessary checks and balances and must therefore be achieved with full respect for the institutional balance provided for in the Treaties’; opposes, therefore, the proposed approach that sacrifices transparency and controls under the guise of efficiency, compromising programme quality and democratic accountability, and undermining Parliament’s role as the budgetary and discharge authority; underlines Parliament’s political scrutiny powers and its commitment to securing the necessary transparency mechanisms to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests, which is vital to safeguard public trust in the EU;

Amendment 13

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

7. Recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; underscores that the allocation of funds to specific policy objectives is to be decided jointly by Parliament and the Council; deplores the fact that the indicative nomenclature proposed in the programme legislation is woefully insufficient; reiterates its call for the post-2027 MFF to include two special instruments – one dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters and one for general-purpose crisis response;

7. Recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; underscores that the allocation of funds to specific policy objectives is to be decided jointly by Parliament and the Council; deplores the fact that the indicative nomenclature proposed in the programme legislation is woefully insufficient; calls for the budget nomenclature to allow for clear identification, traceability and parliamentary scrutiny of defence-related investment across all relevant instruments, including the European Competitiveness Fund, Horizon Europe, the Connecting Europe Facility and defence-related components of the national and regional partnership plans (NRPPs) and the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and the common security and defence policy (CSDP); stresses that this requires sufficiently granular budget lines and robust reporting mechanisms; reiterates its call for the post-2027 MFF to include two special instruments – one dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters and one for general-purpose crisis response, including crises related to security and defence industrial supply disruptions, large-scale cyber incidents and major civil protection emergencies;

Amendment 14

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17a. Recalls that EU funds address structural vulnerabilities and contribute to the Union’s security, defence and preparedness through mutually reinforcing investments, including by strengthening territorial cohesion, protecting critical infrastructure and reducing regional disparities in crisis response capacities, thereby underpinning the Union’s strategic autonomy;

Amendment 15

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity and providing European public goods; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration, ensuring fair competition and equal opportunities across all Member States;

18. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity and providing European public goods; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration, ensuring fair competition and equal opportunities across all Member States, and contributing to supporting defence capabilities and ensuring security across all regions;

Amendment 16

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19a. Expresses concern about the lack of coordination among Member States and the lack of clear eligibility criteria for the investments in supporting the Union’s defence capabilities and security across all regions, given that industrial superiority is the key determinant of military success on the battlefield; demands that any defence-related investments, including under the NRPPs, follow coherent eligibility criteria and control principles aligned with those included in the defence-specific investment instruments, such as the European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP) and the European Defence Fund in the current MFF, including requirements related to clear EU added value, interoperability, security of supply and industrial resilience;

Amendment 17

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence readiness, military mobility, including counter-mobility, technological sovereignty, economic resilience, and the fight against hybrid threats and foreign interference; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas, and recalls the immediate threats on the EU’s eastern flank and the need to provide concrete support to Member States, which must be addressed as a matter of priority; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; strongly insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth and EU strategic autonomy, independence and defence readiness, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

Amendment 18

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20a. Believes that in the rapidly changing security environment, there is an urgent need to strengthen EU defence readiness and close critical capability gaps by significantly scaling up defence industry production and EU capability development, including by leveraging space capabilities for the Union’s security and defence readiness needs; stresses that the EU’s Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) requires stronger and sustained support under the next MFF, underpinned by long-term planning and predictable investment frameworks; underlines that such a dedicated envelope is necessary to support joint procurement, industrial production ramp-up, innovation and interoperability in order to close critical capability gaps, thereby contributing to the Union’s security, resilience and long-term competitiveness; recalls that a ‘buy European’ approach – involving the EDTIB, European Economic Area and European Free Trade Association countries, Ukraine and security and defence partners –provides predictable order volumes, drives private investment in research and development on defence, supports the ramping up of industrial production and enables the EDTIB to deliver innovative defence capabilities at scale and in a timely manner, provided that it is based on quality, interoperability and security of supply; welcomes the proposal for the continuation and scaling up of EU programmes aimed at increasing defence cooperation, in particular EDIP; encourages the continuation and scaling-up of the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) programme;

Amendment 19

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20b. Regrets that the Commission did not provide a sufficiently detailed breakdown of this envelope in its proposal; regrets, furthermore, that the proposed structure does not sufficiently ensure visibility for defence-related expenditure; calls for clearly identifiable and adequately funded defence-related budget lines dedicated to defence industrial investment; recalls that a detailed budgetary breakdown is necessary to enable the budgetary authority to take meaningful and informed decisions; believes that the European Competitiveness Fund should include a clearly identifiable, dedicated and adequately funded budget for defence-related investment; stresses, therefore, that, within the proposed European Competitiveness Fund, the chapter and the corresponding budgetary line ‘Resilience, Defence Industry and Space’ should be split into (i) Resilience, (ii) Defence Industry and (iii) Space; underlines that such a separation would ensure transparency, predictability and legal certainty by preventing transfers between structurally different policy objectives, help to guarantee adequate and stable funding levels for each priority area, and strengthen Parliament’s ability to exercise effective budgetary scrutiny, oversight and democratic accountability for EU expenditure;

Amendment 20

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20c. Stresses that the creation of a dedicated budget line for the European defence industry, with the objective of enabling, developing and prioritising multiannual programmes, is paramount to supporting sustained investment across the EDTIB; underlines the importance of such multiannual programming for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and start-ups; underlines that this is indispensable for scaling up production capacity, strengthening supply chains, fostering skills development and incentivising cross-border cooperation and joint procurement among Member States; considers that the larger share of the indicative envelope for that policy window should be clearly dedicated to defence industry actions (including industrial scale-up, resilient security of supply, research and innovation, and increased cooperation on capability development, procurement and maintenance, which are critical in ensuring the increased availability of EU-made defence products), in line with the need for sustained and predictable investment;

Amendment 21

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20d. Reiterates its previous calls on the Commission to explore all possible options to support Member States’ defence investments and to maximise the synergies in existing mechanisms to support the Union’s defence readiness; stresses that the reinforced resources under Heading 2 should ensure that EU budget funds are only spent on defence when it is in the European collective interest, notably through joint procurement, increased interoperability and the development of common European capabilities; calls for the creation of European preference criteria and safeguards, such as those developed under current EU defence instruments, covering, where relevant, eligibility, ownership and control requirements, security of supply and protection of sensitive information, which should be applied consistently to defence-related funding under the European Competitiveness Fund and to any defence-related investments supported through the NRPPs; stresses that such criteria must be reflected in the sectoral basic acts to ensure legal certainty and democratic accountability;

Amendment 22

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20e. Notes that the Union’s rapidly growing security and defence needs are driving the mobilisation of very significant amounts of public and private financing at speed, which requires political and budgetary oversight and high accountability standards; calls on the Commission and the Member States to mitigate any risk of capture of EU defence-related funding through the transfer of strategic defence assets to actors closely linked to governments with authoritarian tendencies; stresses that such risks are particularly acute where persistent rule of law concerns exist, and that corruption, conflicts of interest or captured procurement not only endanger the EU budget, but also undermine the Union’s real defence capacity, erode its credibility and may ultimately compromise its strategic autonomy;

Amendment 23

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20f. Stresses that military mobility must remain a priority; highlights the importance of maintaining the Connecting Europe Facility as the main source of robust military mobility funding and welcomes the proposal to increase its budget; notes, however, that the proposed increase falls far short of the estimated EUR 100 billion needed to fulfil the Commission’s objectives and establish efficient military mobility, including a ‘military Schengen’, which is crucial for Europe’s defence and for strengthening the Union’s security, resilience and interoperability with NATO; stresses the importance of sustained, adequate and predictable investment in strategic and dual-use transport infrastructure along military mobility corridors, thereby having a positive effect on territorial cohesion, balanced regional development and the effective functioning of the single market; stresses that military mobility investments must prioritise dual-use projects that also strengthen civilian resilience, in particular climate-resilient transport corridors; underlines the urgent need to strengthen connectivity between Ukraine, Moldova and EU Member States;

Amendment 24

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20g. Stresses that, in the context of the 2028-2034 MFF, adequate and predictable EU-level investment is essential to support the attainment of qualitative military edge for Member States’ armed forces, especially concerning unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and counter-UAS capabilities; stresses the need to support EU-level investment priorities that favour the stockpiling of critical drone components and raw materials rather than complete systems, ensure access to such component stockpiles for SMEs and partners such as Ukraine, and integrate these efforts into a broader strategy to reduce strategic dependencies in supply chains; underlines the added value of supporting regional drone manufacturing and technological hubs across the Union, and linking them, where relevant, to dual-use logistics nodes connected to the Trans-European Transport Network, thereby strengthening mobility, resilience and deterrence against hybrid threats; stresses, finally, the need for sustained investment in the European UAS workforce, skills and manufacturing base, to align standards and interoperability needs in coordination with NATO, thereby fostering innovation, competition and long-term industrial resilience across the Union;

Amendment 25

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 h (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20h. Underlines the importance of strengthening civil preparedness as a core component of the Union’s resilience in the face of security crises, hybrid threats and natural or human-caused disasters, as recalled in the Niinistö report; stresses the need to enhance coordination between civilian and military actors and calls for a dedicated budget for staging regular joint training exercises and simulations at EU level; stresses the importance of directing EU funding towards the protection and resilience of critical infrastructure, through a coordinated civil-military approach; calls for dedicated support to enhance security, connectivity and economic vitality in all regions, particularly those most exposed to the consequences of Russia’s war of aggression;

Amendment 26

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21. Notes that Heading 3 ‘Global Europe’ is allocated EUR 190 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing a significant increase from EUR 121.5 billion in the current period while maintaining its 10 % share of the total MFF; considers that this reinforcement of EUR 68.5 billion is positive, as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including development needs, humanitarian crises and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; calls for the necessary funds to support enlargement and accession processes; warns that the merger of programmes could lead, once again, to weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement and reduced funding visibility for specific priorities, as occurred with NDICI-Global Europe; insists that the pillars maintain clear and separate budget lines to ensure transparency in allocations; recalls its position that the needs-based nature of humanitarian aid requires ring-fenced funding delivered through a stand-alone spending programme and dedicated nomenclature and underlines that effective humanitarian aid provision is contingent on predictability through a sufficient annual baseline allocation;

21. Notes that Heading 3 ‘Global Europe’ is allocated EUR 190 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing a significant increase from EUR 121.5 billion in the current period while maintaining its 10 % share of the total MFF; considers that this reinforcement of EUR 68.5 billion is positive, as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the Union’s role in external crisis management and security and the scale of global challenges including development needs, humanitarian crises and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; calls for the necessary funds to support enlargement and accession processes; warns that the merger of programmes must not weaken parliamentary oversight, transparency or funding visibility for specific priorities, including CSDP-related action, as experienced under NDICI-Global Europe; insists that the pillars maintain clear and separate budget lines to ensure transparency in allocations; recalls its position that the needs-based nature of humanitarian aid requires ring-fenced funding delivered through a stand-alone spending programme and dedicated nomenclature and underlines that effective humanitarian aid provision is contingent on predictability through a sufficient annual baseline allocation; stresses that funding under Heading 3 should contribute more systematically to strengthening security, resilience and both the civil protection and defence-related capacities of candidate and potential candidate countries, as an integral part of the Union’s broader security and stability framework;

Amendment 27

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21a. Underlines that civilian CSDP missions are strategic for the Union; notes that although these missions are often limited in size, they are deployed in strategically important environments and ensure a sustained EU presence on the ground; stresses that such a presence helps contribute to situational awareness, stability and resilience, and supports the Union’s security interests and external action objectives as well as those of our partners; calls, therefore, for an adequate increase in the allocation for the CFSP/CSDP budget, through targeted adjustments to external action funding, and for the budget nomenclature to maintain clearly identifiable CSDP mission lines, in order to strengthen Parliament’s scrutiny role and improve the Union’s ability to deploy, sustain and, where needed, scale up these missions;

Amendment 28

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21b. Reiterates its call to promote the establishment of a system for the flow of intelligence from Member States to the European External Action Service (EEAS) on foreign and security issues occurring outside the Union; calls, in this regard, for strengthening the EU Intelligence and Situation Centre (INTCEN), the EEAS Crisis Response Centre and the Satellite Centre (SatCen) by enhancing their staff, financial resources and capabilities; calls for improved security protocols for the services working on intelligence and/or with sensitive information;

Amendment 29

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26. Notes that the Commission proposes EUR 88 billion for the Ukraine Reserve within the MFF regulation to finance pre-accession assistance, recovery and reconstruction efforts; considers that this amount could provide substantial support; observes, however, that should the conflict continue, this allocation would be insufficient to meet Ukraine’s needs; calls for an increase and frontloading of the Reserve, with a view to providing additional support to Ukraine;

26. Notes that the Commission proposes EUR 88 billion for the Ukraine Reserve within the MFF regulation to finance pre-accession assistance, recovery and reconstruction efforts; considers that this amount could provide substantial support; observes, however, that should the conflict continue, this allocation would be insufficient to meet Ukraine’s needs; calls for an increase and frontloading of the Reserve, with a view to providing additional support to Ukraine; notes, with concern, the absence of a dedicated budget to support Ukraine’s military capability needs, should the war continue beyond 2027 when the EUR 60 billion designated under the Support Loan for Ukraine comes to an end; stresses that this support should be predictable, frontloaded and commensurate with needs in order to sustain Ukraine’s resilience, recovery and reconstruction, and to avoid repeated ad-hoc emergency negotiations; insists that any mobilisation, redeployment or reinforcement of Ukraine-related funding remain subject to parliamentary scrutiny and be implemented through clearly identifiable budget lines;

Amendment 30

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to include in their plans for the operationalisation of Article 42(7) TEU an emergency mechanism that would enable the MFF to support the transition of European industry to wartime production capacity in case of an armed attack by a state;

Amendment 31

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries; acknowledges the need for flexibility but firmly rejects any approach that sacrifices transparency under the guise of efficiency; regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality, or democratic accountability; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap and undermine public trust in the EU;

30. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries; acknowledges the need for flexibility but firmly rejects any approach that sacrifices transparency under the guise of efficiency; regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality, or democratic accountability; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap and undermine public trust in the EU; stresses the importance of timely, transparent and accessible information on the mobilisation and use of special instruments, in order to ensure effective parliamentary scrutiny and public accountability;

Amendment 32

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 33

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

33. Notes the overall structure of four MFF headings, as proposed by the Commission, down from seven headings in the current MFF; notes with concern that the Commission proposes to reduce the number of EU programmes from 60 to 19, introducing a lack of clarity regarding objectives and budgetary nomenclature; stresses that Parliament’s position on the structure of these new MFF programmes will be determined during the co-decision procedure for the relevant sectoral legislative acts; insists that the proposed budget nomenclature must reflect the specific objectives of each programme, with a view to ensuring transparency and accountability and providing the budgetary authority with the information necessary to establish the annual budget and oversee its implementation;

33. Notes the overall structure of four MFF headings, as proposed by the Commission, down from seven headings in the current MFF; notes with concern that the Commission proposes to reduce the number of EU programmes from 60 to 19, introducing a lack of clarity regarding objectives and budgetary nomenclature; considers that, in strategic areas such as defence, budget lines must be sufficiently differentiated to prevent the blending of defence industrial objectives with non-defence objectives within a single budget line, thereby ensuring transparency, predictability and democratic accountability; stresses that Parliament’s position on the structure of these new MFF programmes will be determined during the co-decision procedure for the relevant sectoral legislative acts; insists that the proposed budget nomenclature must reflect the specific objectives of each programme, with a view to ensuring transparency and accountability and providing the budgetary authority with the information necessary to establish the annual budget and oversee its implementation;

Amendment 33

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 37 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

37a. Highlights that defence industrial readiness and capability-related supply chains require a high degree of funding stability and long-term visibility; insists, therefore, that the basic act and budget nomenclature ensure predictable minimum allocations for defence industrial objectives, and that any reprogramming is duly justified, transparent and subject to strengthened scrutiny; calls on the Commission to commit to prior notification and enhanced justification for any transfer affecting clearly identified defence-related budget lines;

Amendment 34

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 39

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

39. Reiterates its call for a reinforced investment partnership with the EIB Group to leverage the EU budget, mobilise private investment and de-risk important policy areas such as climate, competitiveness, and innovation, defence and the external dimension;

39. Reiterates its call for a reinforced investment partnership with the EIB Group to leverage the EU budget, mobilise private investment and de-risk important policy areas for the EU’s strategic autonomy such as climate, competitiveness, and innovation, defence and the external dimension; insists that any defence-related support under this partnership comply with eligibility criteria and safeguards equivalent to those applied under current EU defence instruments;

Modification 35

Proposal for a regulation

Annex III 04 02 04 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

04 02 04 (a) Resilience

04 02 04 (b) Defence Industry

04 02 04 (c) Space

Modification 36

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 3 – Section C – point 22

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

22. The total amount of CFSP operating expenditure shall be entered entirely in one budget chapter, entitled CFSP. That amount shall cover the real predictable needs, assessed in the framework of the establishment of the draft budget, on the basis of forecasts drawn up annually by the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (the ‘High Representative’). A reasonable margin shall be allowed for to cover unforeseen actions. No funds may be entered in a reserve.

22. The total amount of CFSP operating expenditure, with the common security and defence policy as an integral part, shall be entered entirely in one budget chapter, entitled CFSP. That amount shall cover the real predictable needs, assessed in the framework of the establishment of the draft budget, on the basis of forecasts drawn up annually by the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (the ‘High Representative’). A reasonable margin shall be allowed for to cover unforeseen actions. No funds may be entered in a reserve.

Modification 37

Proposal for Interinstitutional Agreement

Part 3 – Section C – point 24

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

24. Each year, the High Representative shall consult the European Parliament on a forward-looking document, which shall be transmitted by 15 June of the year in question, setting out the main aspects and basic choices of the CFSP, including the financial implications for the general budget of the Union, an evaluation of the measures launched in the year n-1 and an assessment of the coordination and complementarity of CFSP with the Union’s other external financial instruments. Furthermore, the High Representative shall keep the European Parliament regularly informed by holding joint consultation meetings in the framework of the regular political dialogue on the CFSP and to be agreed at the latest on 30 November each year. Participation in those meetings shall be determined by the European Parliament and the Council respectively, bearing in mind the objective, and the nature of the information exchanged in those meetings.

24. Each year, the High Representative shall consult the European Parliament on a forward-looking document, which shall be transmitted by 15 June of the year in question, setting out the main aspects and basic choices of the CFSP, including the financial implications for the general budget of the Union, an evaluation of the measures launched in the year n-1 and an assessment of the coordination and complementarity of CFSP with the Union’s other external financial instruments. Furthermore, the High Representative shall keep the European Parliament regularly informed by holding joint consultation meetings in the framework of the regular political dialogue on the CFSP, to be agreed at the latest on 30 November of each year. Participation in those meetings shall be determined by the European Parliament and the Council respectively, bearing in mind the objective, and the nature of the information exchanged in those meetings.

The Commission shall be invited to participate in those meetings.

The Commission shall be invited to participate in those meetings.

If the Council adopts a decision in the field of the CFSP entailing expenditure, the High Representative shall immediately, and in any event no later than 30 days thereafter, send the European Parliament an estimate of the costs envisaged (a ‘financial statement’).. and payment schedule in particular those costs regarding time-frame, staff employed, use of premises and other infrastructure, transport facilities, training requirements and security arrangements.

If the Council adopts a decision in the field of the CFSP entailing expenditure, the High Representative shall immediately, and in any event no later than 30 days thereafter, send the European Parliament an estimate of the costs envisaged (a ‘financial statement’).. and payment schedule in particular those costs regarding time-frame, staff employed, use of premises and other infrastructure, transport facilities, training requirements and security arrangements.

Once a quarter, the Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council about the implementation of CFSP actions and the financial forecasts for the remainder of the financial year.

Once a quarter, the Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council about the implementation of CFSP actions and the financial forecasts for the remainder of the financial year.

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

The Chair in her capacity as rapporteur for opinion declares under her exclusive responsibility that she did not include in her opinion input from interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Interim report on the proposal for the multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034

References

2025/0571R(APP)

Committee(s) responsible

Date announced in plenary

BUDG

13.11.2025

Opinion by

Date announced in plenary

SEDE

13.11.2025

Rapporteur for the opinion

Date appointed

Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann

5.11.2025

Date adopted

24.2.2026

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

28

7

2

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols:

25.2.2026

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON DEVELOPMENT

for the Committee on Budgets

on the interim report on the proposal for the multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034

(COM(2025)0571 – C100000/2025 – 2025/0571R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Niels Geuking

PA_Consent_Interim

OPINION

The Committee on Development submits the following to the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible:

Amendment 1

Motion for a resolution

Citation 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the development effectiveness principles defined at the Busan high-level forum, which build on the aid effectiveness principles in the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (2005) and the Accra Agenda for Action (2008),

Amendment 2

Motion for a resolution

Citation 6 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the Recommendation on Terms and Conditions of Aid adopted on 28 February 1978 by the Development Assistance Committee of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development,

Amendment 3

Motion for a resolution

Recital E a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ea. whereas the changing geopolitical landscape, including developments related to Russia and China, competing development interests and reduced funding from traditional donors such as the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and some EU Member States, reinforce the need for the EU to seize the geostrategic potential of acting as a reliable global partner, including through development cooperation and humanitarian assistance, to promote inclusive growth in partner countries and make progress in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs); whereas this requires EU foreign, security and development actors to better coordinate their actions;

Amendment 4

Motion for a resolution

Recital E b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Eb. whereas sufficient flexibility is required to enable an effective response to unforeseen crises but this must not come at the expense of democratic scrutiny and control, predictability, transparency or the integrity of official development assistance (ODA); whereas clear limits and the full involvement of Parliament, as budgetary co-legislator, are required for any significant reallocations within the MFF, in particular in the area of external financing;

Amendment 5

Motion for a resolution

Recital E c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ec. whereas the EU has set the target of collectively providing ODA equivalent to 0.7 % of its gross national income (GNI); whereas the EU and its Members States combined are the largest providers of ODA globally, accounting for 42 % of global ODA in 2022 and 2023; whereas they provided around 38.7 % of global humanitarian assistance in 2025; whereas the EU’s role as credible global partner in development requires the allocation of funding to align with prior set objectives; whereas the European Court of Auditors, in its Opinion 03/2024 on the Commission’s evaluation of the External Action Guarantee, found insufficient evidence that current spending under the European Fund for Sustainable Development Plus (EFSD+) contributes to the objectives of the NDICI-GE Regulation1a, in particular the eradication of poverty, and noted inadequate substantiation of the amount of private funds mobilised;

______________

1a Regulation (EU) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 June 2021 establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe, amending and repealing Decision No 466/2014/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EU) 2017/1601 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 480/2009 (OJ L 209, 14.6.2021, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/947/oj)

Amendment 6

Motion for a resolution

Recital E d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ed. whereas the MFF revision and the lack of resources have resulted in cuts of EUR 348 million to the financial envelope for Sub-Saharan Africa, despite the fact that Article 6(2)(a) of the NDICI-GE Regulation stipulates a minimum financial envelope for Sub-Saharan Africa, which is currently not being attained;

Amendment 7

Motion for a resolution

Recital E e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ee. whereas the new MFF’s revised structure lacks a dedicated programme and a specific, earmarked budget for human rights, democracy, good governance and the rule of law, raising concerns of underfunding, lack of predictability, and erosion of thematic priorities;

Amendment 8

Motion for a resolution

Recital E f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ef. whereas the evaluation of the EU’s external financing instruments confirms the central role of civil society within the NDICI-GE and recognises civil society organisations as key partners in fragile contexts, as they are effective in reaching local communities and fostering their engagement in development;

Amendment 9

Motion for a resolution

Recital E g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Eg. whereas the evaluation of the EU’s external financing instruments also confirms the important role of programming in identifying shared priorities and setting a strategic cooperation framework over the medium term, thus giving partner countries some predictability;

Amendment 10

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises, which add to global fragility;

Amendment 11

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5. Welcomes the reinforcement of the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) – Global Europe as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including the United States’ retreat from its role as a global guarantor of peace and security, enlargement and development needs, humanitarian crises, and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; opposes the weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement, as well as the reduced funding visibility for specific priorities inherent in the design of Global Europe as proposed by the Commission;

5. Welcomes the reinforcement of the Global Europe instrument as a necessary step towards more credible and strategic EU external action and as a demonstration of the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment and to eradicating extreme poverty and tackling increasing inequality; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including the United States’ retreat from its role as a global guarantor of peace and security, enlargement and development needs, worsening humanitarian crises, and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; stresses that, in this context, the proposed level of funding must be considered a minimum baseline and should not be subjected to further cuts or internal redeployments; calls for Global Europe to maintain a share of at least 10 % of the total MFF, which is essential to secure the Union’s role as a credible global actor; strongly supports the overall size of the MFF as proposed by Parliament and set at 1.27 % of EU GNI;

Amendment 12

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5a. Notes the increased flexibility of the proposed Global Europe instrument and calls for it to be rebalanced through meaningful accountability and reporting mechanisms, which should be further defined in the sectoral proposal; opposes the weakened parliamentary oversight that is inherent in the design of Global Europe as proposed by the Commission; underlines the need to increase transparency in the EU’s external action and the visibility of funding for specific priorities and to implement institutional safeguards and set specific spending targets and minimum commitments for key strategic investments, to guarantee that flexibility does not come at the expense of long-term strategic alignment;

Amendment 13

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5b. Underlines that the suspension of USAID funding and global aid cuts by several Member States will have long-term implications for the world’s development agenda and the achievement of the SDGs; notes with concern the decreased ODA target from 93 % in the current instrument to 90 % in the proposed regulation; stresses that the integrity of ODA must be preserved and opposes the possibility of amending it by delegated act; calls for urgent action to address the current shortcomings of the Member States in upholding international agreements and the EU’s collective commitments to provide 0.7 % of GNI as ODA and 0.2 % as ODA to least developed countries (LDCs) by 2030;

Amendment 14

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5c. Calls for Global Europe to be anchored in the European Consensus on Development and the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and reiterates the EU’s political commitment to policy coherence for development;

Amendment 15

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity and providing European public goods; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration, ensuring fair competition and equal opportunities across all Member States;

18. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity and providing European public goods; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration, ensuring fair competition and equal opportunities across all Member States; calls for Parliament to have a role in the approval and monitoring of all EU programmes;

Amendment 16

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21. Notes that Heading 3 ‘Global Europe’ is allocated EUR 190 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing a significant increase from EUR 121.5 billion in the current period while maintaining its 10 % share of the total MFF; considers that this reinforcement of EUR 68.5 billion is positive, as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including development needs, humanitarian crises and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; calls for the necessary funds to support enlargement and accession processes; warns that the merger of programmes could lead, once again, to weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement and reduced funding visibility for specific priorities, as occurred with NDICI-Global Europe; insists that the pillars maintain clear and separate budget lines to ensure transparency in allocations; recalls its position that the needs-based nature of humanitarian aid requires ring-fenced funding delivered through a stand-alone spending programme and dedicated nomenclature and underlines that effective humanitarian aid provision is contingent on predictability through a sufficient annual baseline allocation;

21. Notes that Heading 3 ‘Global Europe’ is allocated EUR 190 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing an increase from EUR 121.5 billion in the current period while maintaining its 10 % share of the total MFF; considers that this reinforcement of EUR 68.5 billion is positive, as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor and reliable partner in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges, including rising development needs and inequalities, humanitarian crises, an unprecedented number of conflicts and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; calls for the necessary funds to support enlargement and accession processes; warns that the merger of programmes could lead, once again, to weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement and reduced funding visibility for specific priorities, as occurred with NDICI-Global Europe; insists that the pillars maintain detailed and separate budget lines to ensure transparency in allocations;

Amendment 17

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21a. Underlines that a sufficiently resourced Global Europe instrument is essential for the consistency of the Union’s external action and for the EU to act as a reliable and long-term partner, on an equal footing with partner countries; reaffirms that allocations under Global Europe must align with the primary objective of EU development cooperation policy as encompassed by Article 208 TFEU, namely the reduction and, in the long term, the eradication of poverty, as well as with the European Consensus on Development and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development;

Amendment 18

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21b. Underlines that global investment is indispensable for addressing today’s interconnected crises, as it strengthens health security, tackles climate challenges and promotes peace, while delivering tangible returns for EU citizens and partner countries; stresses that predictable and adequate funding supports stability, resilience and sustainable development and contributes to addressing the root causes of migration by fostering economic opportunities, high-quality education and vocational training, and job creation in partner countries, thereby strengthening long-term security; calls for the reinstatement of minimum spending targets and thematic programmes for human development, human rights, good governance, civil society, democracy, the rule of law, gender equality, climate and biodiversity, and for LDCs; underlines that EU development cooperation must complement public education systems in partner countries; reiterates that women-led organisations are often best placed to respond to humanitarian crises; calls on the international community to support funding for women’s rights organisations;

Amendment 19

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21c. Warns that nominal increases in the MFF risk concealing real-term reductions due to inflation, which affect EU external action in particular; stresses that safeguarding the real value of Heading 3 is essential for the Union’s ability to meet its global commitments;

Amendment 20

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21d. Welcomes the introduction of a dedicated reserve within Global Europe, recognising the growing number and complexity of external crises and the need for the EU to respond to them more rapidly and effectively, while preserving parliamentary oversight and the predictability of long-term external action;

Amendment 21

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21e. Recalls that humanitarian aid, with ring-fenced funding, safeguarded and implemented in line with Council Regulation 1257/96 on humanitarian aid1a, remains the EU’s most visible and principled expression of solidarity and must continue to uphold the principles of humanity, impartiality, neutrality and independence; reiterates its position that the principled and needs-based nature of humanitarian aid requires its predictable funding to be delivered through a coherent framework with an adequately resourced annual baseline with dedicated nomenclature, complemented by an adequate reserve to cater for emergency actions; emphasises the importance of guaranteed access to the reserve of the Global Europe cushion, which should be available in addition to, and outside of, the EUR 25 billion indicative allocation for reinforcements for unexpected needs, which are growing owing to factors such as climate change; calls for the indicative figure of EUR 25 billion for humanitarian aid for the 2028-2034 period to be regarded as a guaranteed minimum and not a ceiling, in view of the increasing number and duration of humanitarian crises; calls for the implementation of the humanitarian-development-peace nexus to reduce humanitarian needs and for Global Europe to continue supporting initiatives that contribute to security, stability, resilience and peace;

______________

1a Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/96 of 20 June 1996 concerning humanitarian aid (OJ L 163, 2.7.1996, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/1996/1257/oj).

Amendment 22

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21f. Stresses the need to continue to adopt a differentiated, context-specific approach that reflects the specific needs, vulnerabilities and development priorities of low- and middle-income countries and fragile states; underscores the risk that reliance on private financing to tackle global development challenges may be misaligned with the development needs of those countries; recalls that, while grants remain an important instrument of EU development cooperation for reaching local communities effectively, in particular in low- and middle-income countries and in fragile contexts, grants alone are not sufficient to mobilise resources on the scale required; underlines the need to strengthen private investment, financial instruments and budgetary guarantees, including guarantees supporting businesses, in order to promote sustainable growth, job creation and resilience in partner countries; stresses that the heightened emphasis on efficiency and flexibility must be accompanied by enhanced transparency and accountability in the financing of the EU’s external actions, as well as institutional safeguards to ensure alignment with the primary objective of EU development cooperation policy as encompassed by Article 208 TFEU; stresses that limited EU budgetary resources and funds such as the European Competitiveness Fund should be used in a targeted manner to enable risk-sharing and to leverage private investment for initiatives like Global Gateway, with a view to fostering long-term self-sufficiency and thereby preserving Global Europe’s resources for sustainable development and for its primary purpose of ODA; reaffirms that efforts to mobilise private funds do not release the EU from its international commitments on development spending; insists that Parliament and the Council should receive timely information on the allocations to programmes and projects, and any reallocations under Global Europe, as well as funds leveraged through guarantees and blending, and that this information should also be made publicly accessible online;

Amendment 23

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21g. Calls for institutional safeguards in line with lessons learned from the current NDICI-GE instrument, including binding ceilings on blended finance, guarantees and loans, as well as continued commitment to the 85 % target for gender equality, the 35 % target for climate and the environment, and the EU collective target to contribute 0.2 % of GNI to LDCs as ODA;

Amendment 24

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22. Underlines the need for Union policies to be underpinned by a well-functioning administration; insists that, post-2027, sufficient financial and staff resources be allocated from the outset and throughout the MFF period so that Union institutions, bodies, decentralised agencies and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office can ensure effective and efficient policy design and high-quality delivery and enforcement, provide technical assistance, continue to attract the best people from all Member States, thus ensuring geographical balance, and have leeway to adjust to changing circumstances;

22. Underlines the need for Union policies to be underpinned by a well-functioning and efficient administration; insists that, post-2027, sufficient financial and staff resources be allocated from the outset and throughout the MFF period so that Union institutions, bodies, decentralised agencies and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office can ensure effective and efficient policy design and high-quality delivery and enforcement, provide technical assistance, continue to attract the best people from all Member States, thus ensuring geographical balance, and have leeway to adjust to changing circumstances;

Amendment 25

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22a. Expresses deep concern that the proposed Global Europe Regulation eliminates dedicated monitoring, reporting and evaluation provisions, replacing the mid-term review with a minimal implementation report, which risks seriously undermining the transparency, accountability and effective oversight of EU external action;

Amendment 26

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22b. Stresses the importance of strengthening results-oriented monitoring and evaluation and appropriate, performance-based indicators across external action instruments, including blended finance, guarantees and loans; considers that commitments should be proportionate to the EU’s capacity to monitor implementation and assess impact, in order to ensure the effective use of resources, transparency and public trust; stresses that adequate administrative and human resources, including in EU Delegations, are required to ensure effective programming, monitoring and accountability of EU external action spending, and meaningful engagement with partner countries and civil society organisations;

Amendment 27

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 24 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

24a. Considers it essential to allow decommitments under Global Europe to be reused within the same budget line, fully respecting Parliament’s budgetary prerogatives, and subject to the highest standard of transparency and oversight, as this provides the necessary flexibility to respond to non-implementation and rapidly changing conditions in fragile and volatile partner countries and allows long-term partnerships with partner countries and mutual trust to be safeguarded, in line with development effectiveness principles;

Amendment 28

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26. Notes that the Commission proposes EUR 88 billion for the Ukraine Reserve within the MFF regulation to finance pre-accession assistance, recovery and reconstruction efforts; considers that this amount could provide substantial support; observes, however, that should the conflict continue, this allocation would be insufficient to meet Ukraine’s needs; calls for an increase and frontloading of the Reserve, with a view to providing additional support to Ukraine;

26. Takes note of the proposed EUR 88 billion for the Ukraine Reserve within the MFF regulation to finance pre-accession assistance, recovery and reconstruction efforts under Heading 3; notes with concern that the EU’s support for Ukraine within the external policy instrument creates an imbalance and does not ensure proper scrutiny and transparency of EU funding; requests that any further spending linked to existing or future instruments and actions in support of Ukraine be placed over and above the MFF ceilings; stresses that funding for Ukraine should remain clearly identifiable and ring-fenced, with robust oversight, without undermining funding for development and humanitarian assistance in other partner countries and regions;

Amendment 29

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries; acknowledges the need for flexibility but firmly rejects any approach that sacrifices transparency under the guise of efficiency; regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality, or democratic accountability; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap and undermine public trust in the EU;

30. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries; acknowledges the need for flexibility but firmly rejects any approach that sacrifices transparency under the guise of efficiency; regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality, or democratic accountability; insists that the application of flexibility, while necessary, must be subject to clear decision-making procedures, full transparency standards and strong parliamentary scrutiny and oversight; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap and undermine public trust in the EU;

Amendment 30

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 34

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

34. Deplores, in this regard, the fact that the budgetary nomenclature proposed in the sectoral legislation is woefully inadequate; calls on the Commission to take note of the detailed nomenclature for the four headings accompanying this report to be used as a basis for further discussions, without pre-empting the outcome of the respective ordinary legislative procedures;

34. Deplores, in this regard, the fact that the budgetary nomenclature proposed in the sectoral legislation is woefully inadequate; calls on the Commission to take note of the detailed nomenclature for the four headings accompanying this report to be used as a basis for further discussions, without pre-empting the outcome of the respective ordinary legislative procedures; underlines that any simplification of the budgetary structure must not come at the expense of transparency or the ability of the budgetary authority to take informed decisions;

Amendment 31

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 34 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

34a. Stresses that, in the case of Global Europe, the budgetary nomenclature should sufficiently reflect the specific objectives and internal logic of the different policies constituting the instrument; asks the Commission, therefore, to provide a specified breakdown of programmable and non-programmable funding across the Global Europe pillars, in order to allow Parliament and the Council to assess, ex ante, the scope, balance and flexibility of the instrument’s framework and to ensure an appropriate balance between predictability and flexibility; recalls that the main approach for actions financed under Global Europe should be through geographic programmable actions; requests more detailed nomenclature on enlargement with, as a minimum, one budget line per country;

Amendment 32

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 35

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

35. Notes that budgetary transfers under the Financial Regulation3 already provide flexibility during budget implementation; stresses that the Commission can currently transfer considerable amounts between policy areas without budgetary authority approval, limiting oversight; in the absence of a sufficiently detailed budget structure, calls for new rules setting both a maximum amount and percentage per budget line for transfers without approval; considers that transfers from other Union institutions below a certain threshold could be exempted from the objection procedure as a simplification measure;

35. Notes that budgetary transfers under the Financial Regulation3 already provide flexibility during budget implementation; stresses that the Commission can currently transfer considerable amounts between policy areas without budgetary authority approval, limiting oversight; in the absence of a sufficiently detailed budget structure, calls for new rules setting both a maximum amount and percentage per budget line for transfers without approval; calls for transparency and the full involvement of Parliament in any significant reallocations within Heading 3; requests that significant transfers within Global Europe pillars be subject to parliamentary consent, as these pillars aggregate large amounts; considers that transfers from other Union institutions below a certain threshold could be exempted from the objection procedure as a simplification measure;

_________________

_________________

3 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2018/1046/oj).

3 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2018/1046/oj).

Amendment 33

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 36

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

36. Emphasises the need for robust governance ensuring parliamentary accountability, oversight and control, alongside an effective anti-fraud architecture; rejects any approach that limits Parliament to a consultative or information-only role in the mobilisation of any instrument or fund under the next MFF; stresses that budgetary flexibility must not circumvent the prerogatives of the budgetary authority and that all redeployments, reprogramming and mobilisation of cushions or other reserves must be subject to Parliament’s approval; considers that genuine flexibility requires both rapid response capacity and democratic legitimacy, which can only be achieved through Parliament’s full participation in decisions on the allocation and use of resources;

36. Emphasises the need for robust governance ensuring parliamentary accountability, oversight and control, alongside an effective anti-fraud architecture; rejects any approach that limits Parliament to a consultative or information-only role in the mobilisation of any instrument or fund under the next MFF; calls for more clarity on the financial assistance to be provided to partner countries in the form of policy-based loans under the Global Europe instrument; insists on the need to respect the institutional balance and the budgetary authorities’ prerogatives in the decision-making regarding similar financing mechanisms and in their governance; stresses that budgetary flexibility must not circumvent the prerogatives of the budgetary authority and that all redeployments, reprogramming and mobilisation of cushions or other reserves must be subject to Parliament’s approval; considers that genuine flexibility requires both rapid response capacity and democratic legitimacy, which can only be achieved through Parliament’s full participation in decisions on the allocation and use of resources;

Amendment 34

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 36 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

36a. Welcomes the proposed change in the mobilisation of the Global Europe cushion compared to NDICI-GE, whereby, under the Global Europe Regulation and the Financial Regulation, any mobilisation above 10 % of the annual allocation will have to be approved by Parliament and the Council; reiterates, however, its previous calls on the Commission to inform Parliament well in advance of any mobilisation of the cushion and to take into consideration Parliament’s observations on the nature, objectives and financial amounts of the planned mobilisation;

Amendment 35

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 48

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

48. Emphasises that a steering mechanism will not compensate for any loss of Parliament’s legislative or budgetary powers; insists that getting budgetary governance right and preserving the prerogatives of the budgetary authority are essential prerequisites to making the annual budgetary procedure more meaningful and that any steering mechanism can only function if the basic foundations are in place;

48. Emphasises that a steering mechanism will not compensate for any loss of Parliament’s legislative or budgetary powers; insists that getting budgetary governance right and preserving the prerogatives of the budgetary authority are essential prerequisites to making the annual budgetary procedure more meaningful and that any steering mechanism can only function if the basic foundations are in place; requests that the Commission present the key policy priorities of EU external action to Parliament in a way that meaningfully informs the planned steering mechanism and the strategic debate on the priorities for funding under the annual budget; requests that the Commission take into account Parliament’s recommendations, including on possible reviews of and shifts in priorities for the budgets under Global Europe pillars;

Amendment 36

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 48 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

48a. Recalls that the specific allocations within Global Europe and its pillars are to be negotiated as part of the Global Europe Regulation, reflecting the overall amount for the MFF and the total amount for Global Europe within Heading 3;

Amendment 37

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 3 - line 07 02 10a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

07 02 10a Europe –Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law

Justification

This amendment establishes a dedicated budget line for programmes promoting human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

Amendment 38

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 3 - line 07 03 10a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

07 03 10a Middle East – Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law

Justification

This amendment establishes a dedicated budget line for programmes promoting human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

Amendment 39

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 3 - line 07 04 10a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

07 04 10a Sub-Saharan Africa –Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law

Justification

This amendment establishes a dedicated budget line for programmes promoting human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

Amendment 40

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 3 - line 07 05 10a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

07 05 10a Asia and the Pacific –Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law

Justification

This amendment establishes a dedicated budget line for programmes promoting human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

Amendment 41

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 3 - line 07 06 10a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

07 06 10a Americas and the Caribbean – Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law

Justification

This amendment establishes a dedicated budget line for programmes promoting human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

Amendment 42

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 3 - line 07 07 10a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

07 07 10a Global – Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law

Justification

This amendment establishes a dedicated budget line for programmes promoting human rights, democracy and the rule of law.

Modification 43

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 3 – Article 8 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

(b) an amount equivalent to decommitments of appropriations, other than external assigned revenue, made in the year n-2, with the exclusion of the amounts of decommitments made available again in accordance with specific rules on making appropriations available as referred to in Article 15 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 and Regulation [(EU) XXXX/XX] [National and Regional Partnership Fund].

(b) an amount equivalent to decommitments of appropriations, other than external assigned revenue, made in the year n-2, with the exclusion of the amounts of decommitments made available again in accordance with specific rules on making appropriations available as referred to in Article 15 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509, Regulation [(EU) XXXX/XX] [National and Regional Partnership Fund] and Regulation [(EU) XXXX/XX] [Global Europe].

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for opinion declares that he included in his opinion input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that he received, in the preparation of the opinion, prior to the adoption thereof in committee, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Interim report on the proposal for the multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034

References

2025/0571R(APP)

Committee(s) responsible

Date announced in plenary

BUDG

13.11.2025

Opinion by

Date announced in plenary

DEVE

13.11.2025

Rapporteur for the opinion

Date appointed

Niels Geuking

18.12.2025

Discussed in committee

28.1.2026

Date adopted

24.2.2026

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

16

0

3

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols:

10.3.2026

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETARY CONTROL

for the Committee on Budgets

on the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2028 to 2034

(COM(2025)0571 – C10-0000/2025 – 2025/0571R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Jacek Protas

PA_Consent_Interim

OPINION

The Committee on Budgetary Control submits the following to the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible:

Amendment 1

Motion for a resolution

Citation 7 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the discharge procedure set out in Article 319 TFEU and the recurrent findings of the European Court of Auditors (ECA) in its annual reports on the implementation of the EU budget,

Amendment 2

Motion for a resolution

Recital A a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Aa. whereas an ambitious Union budget requires not only adequate financial resources but also robust governance, transparency and accountability mechanisms; whereas the credibility of the Union budget and citizens’ trust in European spending depend on the effective protection of the Union’s financial interests and on the Parliament’s ability to exercise full budgetary and discharge scrutiny; whereas simplification and flexibility in budget implementation must be accompanied by strong safeguards to ensure sound financial management in accordance with the Treaties and the Financial Regulation;

Amendment 3

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

B. whereas the current MFF quickly proved its inadequacy in responding to a series of crises and new political challenges that were not anticipated at the time of its adoption; whereas, for the purpose of securing the necessary funding, the MFF was pushed to its limits including an unprecedented recourse to the flexibility provisions and special instruments, after exhausting the available margins;

B. whereas the current MFF quickly proved its inadequacy in responding to a series of crises and new political challenges that were not anticipated at the time of its adoption; whereas, for the purpose of securing the necessary funding, the MFF was pushed to its limits including an unprecedented recourse to the flexibility provisions and special instruments, after exhausting the available margins, has been insufficient in supporting the competitiveness of the EU and its Member States, resulting in a marked slowdown in economic growth, and a contraction of the labour market;

Amendment 4

Motion for a resolution

Recital C

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

C. whereas the MFF mid-term revision agreed in 2024 proved to be imperative due to the lack of resources that continue to undermine the current MFF to this day;

C. whereas the MFF mid-term revision agreed in 2024 proved to be imperative due to the lack of resources that continue to undermine the current MFF to this day; and whereas it has not achieved entirely its intended objectives, as evidenced by economic growth trends and the ongoing crisis in competitiveness, as well as by the findings of successive discharge decisions, reports of the European Court of Auditors, and the Draghi report;

Amendment 5

Motion for a resolution

Recital D a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Da. whereas the experience gained from the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility and other performance-based instruments has highlighted their risks; whereas these lessons must be fully taken into account when designing the architecture of the post-2027 MFF in order to avoid replicating structural weaknesses and to ensure effective democratic oversight;

Amendment 6

Motion for a resolution

Recital D b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Db. whereas the expanding range of political priorities in the Union is making it even more imperative to exercise a responsible use of available financial resources and a reinforced vigilance with regard to sound financial management;

Amendment 7

Motion for a resolution

Recital E a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ea. whereas it is imperative that EU spending be subject to justified audits and controls to minimise the risk of error, misuse of funds and fraud, thus maintaining trust in the EU and its institutions;

Amendment 8

Motion for a resolution

Recital E b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Eb. whereas, according to the Annual Report 2024 of the European Court of Auditors, outstanding amounts borrowed by the EU could exceed EUR 900 billion by 2027, which is almost ten times the level from 2020 before the introduction of the NGEU recovery package; whereas rising borrowing costs pose a risk to future budgets and reduce the fiscal space for new priorities;

Amendment 9

Motion for a resolution

Recital E c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ec. whereas the Treaties give to the European Parliament the roles of legislator, budgetary authority and discharge authority; whereas no flexibility mechanism, delivery model or implementation arrangement under the next MFF should undermine Parliament’s ability to exercise these prerogatives; whereas democratic accountability and effective budgetary control are essential elements of the Union’s institutional balance;

Amendment 10

Motion for a resolution

Recital E d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ed. Reiterates the need for sectoral programs to be implemented and closely monitored in full compliance with the principles enshrined in the TEU and TFEU, with strengthened mechanisms to ensure their efficiency and effectiveness, considering the specific circumstances of Member States, as well as the urgent need to address development disparities within the EU;

Amendment 11

Motion for a resolution

Recital E e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ee. whereas the Draghi report has highlighted a growing economic gap between the EU and its main competitors; whereas EU spending programmes must produce clear benefits for citizens and businesses;

Amendment 12

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap, the worsening climate and biodiversity crises, technological dependence, innovation challenges, food security, and territorial disparities which continue to persist;

Amendment 13

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2. Underscores that the next MFF must focus on financing European public goods with discernible added value compared to national spending; rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration;

2. Underscores that the next MFF must focus on financing European public goods with discernible added value compared to national spending; in this context, considers it a priority to promote research and innovation, support the development of new technologies, enhance the competitiveness of small, medium-sized, and large enterprises, support training and youth, and safeguard health and territorial protection; at the same time emphasizes the need to address territorial and income disparities, as well as demographic trends; calls for improved implementation of these policies and for measuring the actual achievement of objectives rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration;

Amendment 14

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3a. Points out that persistent disparities within the EU undermine its integrity; reiterates that cohesion policy must remain a pillar of the Union in order to reduce territorial disparities and promote harmonious regional development; calls for urgent action to reduce development disparities, as well as for the improvement of tools to monitor their effectiveness;

Amendment 15

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6. Recalls its position that ‘simplification cannot mean more leeway for the Commission without the necessary checks and balances and must therefore be achieved with full respect for the institutional balance provided for in the Treaties’; opposes, therefore, the proposed approach that sacrifices transparency and controls under the guise of efficiency, compromising programme quality and democratic accountability, and undermining Parliament’s role as the budgetary and discharge authority; underlines Parliament’s commitment to securing the necessary transparency mechanisms to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests, which is vital to safeguard public trust in the EU;

6. Recalls its position that ‘simplification cannot mean more leeway for the Commission without the necessary checks and balances and must therefore be achieved with full respect for the institutional balance provided for in the Treaties’; opposes, therefore, the proposed approach, especially the generalised use of financing not linked to costs (FNLC), which fundamentally alters the control, audit and accountability framework of Union spending; thus sacrificing transparency and controls under the guise of efficiency, compromising programme quality and democratic accountability, and undermining Parliament’s role as the budgetary and discharge authority; stresses that any flexibility mechanisms under the next MFF must be accompanied by robust safeguards, including full audits trails and effective parliamentary scrutiny to ensure sound financial management; underlines Parliament’s commitment to securing the necessary transparency mechanisms to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests, which is vital to safeguard public trust in the EU; stresses that any simplification measure must preserve Parliament’s full capacity to exercise democratic scrutiny and discharge authority, and must not result in reduced transparency, weakened audit trails, accountability and control or a shift of institutional balance in favour of executive discretion;

Amendment 16

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6a. Emphasises that, while responding to crises is crucial, it must be done with full adherence to transparency requirements; stresses that performance-based instruments must respect the principles of legality, regularity, economy, efficiency and effectiveness, as foreseen by the EU Financial Regulation; stresses furthermore that any new spending instrument or delivery model introduced under the post 2027 MFF, in particular performance-based instruments and models based on financing not linked to costs, must be subject to a comprehensive ex ante assessment of control, audit and anti-fraud risks, and must include clearly defined accountability, verification and correction mechanisms before any funds are disbursed;

Amendment 17

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8. Underlines that compliance with Union values and fundamental rights is an essential prerequisite to access EU funds and believes that the protection of the Union’s financial interests depends on respect for the rule of law at national level; calls for any duplication or overlaps between existing and future legislation to be avoided, in particular for the proposal on the NRPPs where such overlaps are observed, and to ensure a unified, coherent and comprehensive framework across all EU funding programmes, under the umbrella of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation2 ;

8. Underlines that compliance with Union values and fundamental rights is an essential prerequisite to access EU funds and believes that the protection of the Union’s financial interests depends on respect for the rule of law at national level; reminds that rule of law deficiencies amplify risk for the EU financial interests since their protection relies on independent judiciary, autonomous anti-fraud bodies, media freedom and functioning procurement controls; deplores the overlaps with the conditionality mechanism introduced by the Commission’s proposal for NRPPs and calls for a unified, coherent and comprehensive framework across all EU funding programmes under the umbrella of the Conditionality Regulation1a;

_________________

_________________

1a Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/2092/oj).

2 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/2092/oj).

Amendment 18

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8a. Expresses its serious concern that, according to the Commission’s proposal, no institution, Member State or national authority will be expected to verify the underlying costs of measures under the NRPPs; warns that this approach will, among other things, severely hamper the ability to detect double funding or payments that exceed the actual costs of projects and hinder the Commission from determining or measuring the financial consequences of rule of law breaches; warns, furthermore, that this approach would undermine the democratic scrutiny role bestowed by the Treaties on Parliament, as one arm of the EU’s budgetary authority and as its discharge authority, as well as the important role of the ECA; considers that the cost-effectiveness, traceability and transparency of financial flows, from the payments to the final recipients, including subcontractors, must be guaranteed through an interoperable IT system, since this is the only way of establishing and quantifying the budgetary impact of rule of law breaches; stresses that the Commission must improve the accuracy and precision of the information shared with Parliament; stresses the need for a single audit trail;

Amendment 19

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Regrets that the proposed NRPP Regulation (COM(2025)0558), which merges different policies into one plan per Member State, generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns, in addition, that the significant reduction in funding for Heading 1 also threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights, and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

17. Regrets that the proposed NRPP Regulation (COM(2025)0558), which merges different policies into one plan per Member State, generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns, in addition, that the significant reduction in funding for Heading 1 also threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights, and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers; stresses, in this regard, the need to preserve as well as improve the specific characteristics of long-standing EU policies, in particular the CAP and cohesion policy, and to strenghten the tools for monitoring their delivery and effectiveness; insists that the Parliament should have a role in the monitoring of all the EU programmes including those under the NRPP regulation; calls for the architecture in particular in Heading 1 to be designed in a way that the Parliament can exercise democratic scrutiny to its full authority for each Member State;

Amendment 20

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20a. Stresses that shared management in the next MFF must involve regional and local authorities and stakeholders in a manner that enables their participation in cohesion policy design, management and monitoring, on the basis of the understanding hitherto applied to shared management, multilevel governance and the partnership principle, in order to ensure, that measures are more targeted, effective, and responsive to the needs of the territories as well as to ensure the added value for the EU of cross-border projects; considers that any shift to using performance-based delivery models requires capacity-building at EU level and in the Member States, as the monitoring, control and audit needs of performance-based delivery models differ from those of instruments based on the reimbursement of eligible costs and stresses that such capacity-building must extend to national audit authorities and managing bodies, whose readiness is a precondition for sound financial management under performance-based delivery models;

Amendment 21

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20b. Considers it of the utmost importance that the Commission maintain a strong horizontal approach to prevent the ‘nationalisation’ of EU policies, resulting in 27 national approaches that together do not form an EU approach and where Member States are treated differently on similar issues; considers that Parliament should be involved in defining such national approaches in order to ensure equal treatment and effective parliamentary oversight of national implementation choices;

Amendment 22

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20c. Calls on the Commission to promote simplified procedures, digitize processes, provide technical assistance, and enhance instruments for efficiency and effectiveness;

Amendment 23

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20d. Reiterates, in the context of the Union’s budgetary control and democratic scrutiny, the need for the sectoral programmes under the new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) to be implemented in full compliance with the principles enshrined in the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), so as to ensure sound financial management, legal certainty;

Amendment 24

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21a. Calls for stronger provisions giving the EU institutions greater capacity to check the use of EU funds stemming from financial agreements with third countries; emphasises, in this regard, the need for a robust governance model that ensures parliamentary accountability, oversight and control, and, in particular, a strong and functional anti-fraud structure;

Amendment 25

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21b. Underlines that any financing under Heading 3 must fully adhere to the values and principles of the Union ; calls on the Commission to immediately strengthen due diligence, monitoring, and risk-mitigation mechanisms, suspend or recover funds from compromised organisations, and exclude them from future funding; stresses that rigorous safeguards are essential to protect the credibility of EU external action and uphold the Union’s commitments globally; stresses that strategic partnerships with third countries and regional organisations should be based on shared goals and values, as well as mutual, verifiable commitments; underlines that the credibility of such partnerships depends on a clear link between the results achieved and the level of support provided, using measurable indicators that allow for monitoring their attainment; calls for Heading 3 to include increased scrutiny of the spending of controlled funds in order to ensure that budgetary resources do not flow to beneficiaries, whose activities support the inflow of irregular migrants into the European Union;

Amendment 26

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22. Underlines the need for Union policies to be underpinned by a well-functioning administration; insists that, post-2027, sufficient financial and staff resources be allocated from the outset and throughout the MFF period so that Union institutions, bodies, decentralised agencies and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office can ensure effective and efficient policy design and high-quality delivery and enforcement, provide technical assistance, continue to attract the best people from all Member States, thus ensuring geographical balance, and have leeway to adjust to changing circumstances;

22. Recalls that an effective European public administration is a public good; underlines the need for Union policies to be underpinned by a well-functioning administration that is capable of ensuring effective and efficient policy design, delivery and enforcement and of protecting the EU’s financial interests; insists that, post-2027, sufficient financial and staff resources be allocated from the outset and throughout the MFF period so that Union institutions, bodies, decentralised agencies and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office can ensure effective and efficient policy design and high-quality delivery and enforcement, provide technical assistance, continue to attract the best people from all Member States, thus ensuring geographical balance, and have leeway to adjust to changing circumstances; stresses, however, that all institutions must actively pursue the consolidation of administrative activities; insists that efficiency gains from digitalisation must lead to demonstrable savings in the administrative budget;

Amendment 27

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30a. Warns that the growing use of performance-based instruments without a corresponding strengthening of parliamentary scrutiny, risks shifting institutional balances in favour of executive discretion and away from democratic accountability; insists that any governance model for performance-based instruments must involve Parliament and the Council on equal terms; rejects any proposal that might upset the institutional balance and undermine Parliament’s budgetary and discharge role;

Amendment 28

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30 b. Expresses serious concerns over proposals that would limit the role of the European Parliament in the adoption of NRPPs, while Monitoring Committees would be empowered to approve amendments to the Plan, the selection of operations, the evaluation roadmap, the communication strategy, and territorial development strategies; is highly concerned about the lack of democratic legitimacy, whereby other stakeholders are favoured by the Commission over elected representatives; stresses that sidelining parliamentary oversight would open the door to politicised spending decisions, undermine sound financial management and dilute budgetary scrutiny and accountability for Union funds;

Amendment 29

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30c. Highlights the central role of public authorities in monitoring processes; underlines that stakeholders and interest representatives may provide input and expertise while emphasising that the ultimate responsibility for decision-making, accountability and control must remain in the hands of duly constituted state bodies, fully respecting citizens’ rights and democratic structures; warns that the multitude of Monitoring Committees creates unnecessary bureaucracy and diverts resources from implementation; considers that the list under Article 6(1)(c) in the NRPP Regulation is unclear, and calls for a precise, transparent and legally sound definition of the entities concerned; calls on the Commission, where there are credible indications that plans are being corrupted or captured, to make use of effective instruments to safeguard their proper implementation, including targeted technical assistance and, where necessary, reinforced monitoring arrangements or the long-term deployment of independent experts;

Amendment 30

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 31

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

31. Notes with concern that the MFF proposals include widespread use of financing not linked to costs for a substantial portion of the instruments under the next MFF; draws attention to the fact that without adequate safeguards to ensure sound financial management in the implementation of Union funding or clear steps to address the shortcomings identified in previous or existing performance-based instruments, this approach entails substantial risks; considers that any possible increase in efficiencies cannot come at the expense of the protection of the financial interests of the Union; calls for appropriate oversight and accountability mechanisms to be established in all relevant legal acts;

31. Considers the Commission’s proposal to make FNLC the default financing mechanism in the next MFF to be unjustified and irresponsible, as it entails serious risks of increases in overcompensation, irregularities, double funding and fraud, thereby reducing the EU’s ability to ensure value for money, transparency and traceability of EU funds; is concerned about making such a major shift towards a new model of budget implementation without adequately addressing the shortcomings identified in previous or existing performance-based instruments and without comprehensively evaluating the Recovery and Resilience Facility; calls for the reintroduction of adequate safeguards to ensure sound financial management in the implementation of Union funding across all legislative acts under the 2028-2034 MFF package; underlines, in particular, the need to ensure that complete audit trails are maintained; insists that large-scale and complex projects should remain cost-based, as their scope, duration and multilevel financing require detailed financial reporting and verifiable expenditure data to ensure proper monitoring and accountability; accepts the continued and expanded use of lump sums and simplified cost options, in particular for smaller or medium-scale investments, as effective and proportionate tools to reduce administrative burdens and increase accessibility for smaller beneficiaries; notes that, at a time when the outstanding EU borrowing is increasing, any financing model that weakens cost verification undermines fiscal sustainability and the capacity to service the EU’s growing debt obligations;

Amendment 31

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 31 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

31a. Insists that any use of the FNLC model must require a correlation between the payment applications and the fulfilment of milestones and targets, on the one hand, and the implementation of concrete projects, on the other hand; stresses that without such a correlation, the traceability of EU funding is compromised; stresses that EU funding should be granted only for measures directly linked to concrete, verifiable projects that demonstrate tangible progress, deliver measurable results, contribute to EU policy objectives and can be effectively monitored and audited;

Amendment 32

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 31 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

31b. Insists that any assessments of the fulfilment of milestones and targets must be performed by the Commission and not Member States and must follow a transparent and standardised methodology, with documented scoring and substantiated justification for any deviations above the legal threshold; calls for all assessment files to be made available to Parliament and the ECA; calls for unambiguous compliance criteria to determine when any performance-based instruments fulfil planned outputs or results, with uniform definitions across Member States;

Amendment 33

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 31 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

31c. Underlines that the generalised use of FNLC requires the ECA and national audit authorities to significantly adapt their activities and move towards a different auditing approach; warns that making such a shift without ensuring the readiness of audit authorities will pose significant challenges and could create a structural gap in the audit trail, with serious consequences for both the sound financial management of the EU budget and the discharge procedure; calls on the Commission to reform audit mechanisms with a view to strengthening the ECA’s role in the implementation of MFF programmes and in the ECA’s interaction with national audit offices, with a focus on timing, lessons learnt and subsidiarity;

Amendment 34

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 31 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

31d. Insists that, irrespective of the financing model applied, but in particular for performance-based instruments, the real costs incurred during implementation should be regularly compared with the estimated costs, and audits should be triggered automatically when significant discrepancies are detected;

Amendment 35

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 31 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

31e. Expresses its concern that in the Commission’s proposals, performance-based instruments using FNLC focus more on system audits than on controls on actual expenditure incurred, and regrets the fact that according to the NRPP proposal, no institution, Member State or national authority will be expected to verify the underlying costs of measures under the NRPPs; warns that this approach will undermine the EU’s ability to assess the value for money of EU projects, lead to a serious accountability gap and increase the risk of irregularities, fraud and double funding; recalls that for many years now, the ECA has consistently demonstrated that audit packages delivered by national audit authorities have an unacceptably high error rate; warns, furthermore, that system audits may not reveal underlying issues that can spill over and seriously undermine the sound financial management of the EU budget and the protection of the EU’s financial interests; demands that the Commission put in place robust safeguards to ensure consistent, independent and high-quality audit work across all Member States, including by providing detailed methodological guidance, offering sustained technical assistance wherever audit authorities show persistent weaknesses, ensuring increased interoperability between digital tools for the supervision and audit of EU funds, and delivering dedicated training on performance audit standards; insists that reliance on national authorities and external auditors must be conditional on their compliance with these safeguards to prevent variability in control quality and independence; calls on the Commission to publish, for each spending programme under the 2028–2034 MFF, clear and user-friendly performance and spending summaries, including overviews and interactive dashboards with machine-readable datasets, allowing taxpayers to see the value generated; insists that such summaries integrate both financial and performance information in line with OECD best practice on performance reporting;

Amendment 36

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 31 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

31f. Calls for the establishment of a single, integrated and interoperable information and monitoring system, including a single data-mining and risk-scoring tool, as part of the 2028-2034 MFF package; demands that the use of such a new interoperable system should be a precondition for accessing EU funding in the next MFF; demands, at the same time, greater transparency in the implementation of performance-based instruments, including the timely publication of all Commission assessments, national reporting data, audit summaries and recovery actions in a format that is accessible, comparable and verifiable, thus ensuring that Parliament, the ECA and citizens can scrutinise the use of EU funds; reiterates that it is necessary to enhance transparency by expanding the RRF scoreboard model to all performance-based instruments in order to improve the timeliness and comparability of national reporting and ensure public access, traceability and accountability; calls on the Commission to ensure, for all funding programmes, including performance-based instruments, that data on the real, final recipients, including contractors and subcontractors, is available in real time to audit and discharge authorities, as well as to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF);

Amendment 37

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 32

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

32. Acknowledges the proposal for a Performance Regulation as a first step in putting in place a horizontal expenditure tracking and performance monitoring framework for the budget; considers that this approach can lead to greater coherence in the monitoring and implementation of EU spending programmes and in the mainstreaming of important EU objectives; stresses that the inclusion of horizontal principles in a single framework must enable more effective tracking methodologies and parliamentary scrutiny without creating additional burdens;

32. Acknowledges the proposal for a Performance Regulation as a first step in putting in place a horizontal expenditure tracking and performance monitoring framework for the budget; considers that this approach, if implemented properly, can lead to greater coherence in the monitoring and implementation of EU spending programmes and in the mainstreaming of important EU objectives; stresses that the inclusion of horizontal principles in a single framework must enable more effective tracking methodologies and parliamentary scrutiny without creating additional burdens; insists that the performance framework must prioritise impact indicators which measure actual outcomes for citizens; underlines that performance indicators must be explicitly derived from the objectives of each programme and capture outputs, outcomes and, above all, impacts; stresses that all performance frameworks shall include cost-benefit analysis and transparent budgeting;

Amendment 38

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 32 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

32a. Stresses that the proposed Performance Regulation must ensure that reporting indicators are mandatory, uniform and comparable across all Member States; warns that without such comparability, the discharge authority will be unable to assess relative effectiveness or identify underperforming programmes; questions several aspects of the proposal, such as the limited choice of horizontal principles, the overlaps with the Financial Regulation, the absence of impact indicators, the overlaps between the output and result indicators, and the flexibility offered to Member States in choosing reporting indicators, which will make it impossible to compare performance across the EU or EU added value; regrets the fact that progress will be monitored on the basis of the implementation of commitment appropriations rather than payment appropriations, which will not provide a realistic overview of the performance of EU programmes; calls for a mandatory ‘review mechanism’ whereby funding streams that consistently fail to meet their impact targets are automatically reviewed;

Amendment 39

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 32 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

32b. Invites the European Court of Auditors to consolidate its findings into a comparative performance analysis and to develop a methodology for a ‘performance compass’ of Union programmes under the 2028–2034 MFF;

Amendment 40

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 36

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

36. Emphasises the need for robust governance ensuring parliamentary accountability, oversight and control, alongside an effective anti-fraud architecture; rejects any approach that limits Parliament to a consultative or information-only role in the mobilisation of any instrument or fund under the next MFF; stresses that budgetary flexibility must not circumvent the prerogatives of the budgetary authority and that all redeployments, reprogramming and mobilisation of cushions or other reserves must be subject to Parliament’s approval; considers that genuine flexibility requires both rapid response capacity and democratic legitimacy, which can only be achieved through Parliament’s full participation in decisions on the allocation and use of resources;

36. Emphasises the need for robust and coherent governance of the Union Budget ensuring full parliamentary accountability, effective oversight and meaningful control throughout the entire budgetary cycle ,, alongside a strong and operational anti-fraud architecture; stresses that such governance must be supported by concrete and verifiable measures; calls therefore for full transparency on final beneficiaries of EU funds, including contractors and sub-contractors; stresses that Member States cannot be considered final beneficiaries of Union funding; demands real time access to beneficiary-level data for Parliament, the European Court of Auditors, OLAF and the EPPO ; reiterates Parliament’s long-standing call for a single, integrated and interoperable information and monitoring system for EU spending, including data mining and risk-scoring tools; insists that the use of such a system must be a precondition for accessing Union funds under the next MFF; demands that all Commission and national databases used for the management and monitoring of EU funds be directly accessible to the European Court of Auditors, without prior aggregation or modification, in order to safeguard the independence and effectiveness of audits; calls for the systematic and reinforced use of the Early Detection and Exclusion System (EDES) under the next MFF; stresses that economic operators involved in fraud, corruption, serious irregularities or grave breaches of contractual obligations must be effectively excluded from Union funding across all programmes and delivery models, including performance-based instruments; regrets the fragmented use of exclusion mechanisms and the lack of interoperability between EDES and national systems; stresses that effective exclusion mechanisms are essential to prevent the repeated misuse of Union funds and to ensure a credible EU anti-fraud framework ; stresses that no flexibility mechanism, reprogramming decision or performance-based disbursement under the next MFF may limit Parliament’s ability to exercise its discharge powers; insists that full access to information is a prerequisite for democratic accountability; rejects therefore any approach that limits Parliament to a consultative or information-only role in the mobilisation of any instrument or fund under the next MFF; stresses that budgetary flexibility must not circumvent the prerogatives of the budgetary authority and that all redeployments, reprogramming and mobilisation of cushions or other reserves must be subject to Parliament’s approval; considers that genuine flexibility requires both rapid response capacity and democratic legitimacy, which can only be achieved through Parliament’s full participation in decisions on the allocation and use of resources;

Amendment 41

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 36 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

36a. 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 (the ECA, Eurojust, Europol, the EPPO and 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 one another with access to their 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 all Member States receiving EU funds under the post-2027 MFF, unless a Member State has a Treaty-based opt-out;

Amendment 42

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 36 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

36b. Calls for the exploring of the synergies in, and the possible consolidation of, the EU’s anti-fraud architecture; highlights the fact 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 on the Commission, therefore, to (i) create a common governance framework to coordinate all anti-fraud actors, (ii) implement a unified reporting system to consolidate the 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;

Amendment 43

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 36 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

36c. Underlines the central role of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in investigating and prosecuting criminal offences affecting the Union’s financial interests; stresses that, in the context of the next MFF and the increased use of performance-based instruments and financing not linked to costs, the effectiveness of the EPPO will be essential to ensure credible deterrence, effective prosecution and the recovery of misused Union funds; emphasises that the EPPO is a fully independent judicial body and that enhanced cooperation with OLAF, the European Court of Auditors, Europol and Eurojust should be based on structured dialogue and practical coordination, while fully respecting their distinct mandates; stresses the need to ensure timely and effective access for the EPPO to relevant information and data, including data on final beneficiaries, contractors and subcontractors, also under performance-based delivery models; calls for adequate and stable financial and human resources to be allocated to the EPPO throughout the duration of the next MFF, recalls in this regard, that the EPPO is a Union body established under Article 86 TFEU with a specific prosecutorial mandate; calls therefore for its budget to be presented separately from decentralised agencies and to be at least doubled relative to the Commission indications for the 2028-2034 period, in order to match its expanding workload and responsibilities; recalls that participation in the EPPO constitutes a key element of the Union’s anti fraud framework;

Amendment 44

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 36 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

36d. Notes with serious concern that the European Court of Auditors continues to identify persistent weaknesses in the control and implementation of EU expenditure; recalls that, according to the Court’s Annual Report 2024, 68.9 % of audited expenditure in spending areas more exposed to the risk of error was affected by material error, corresponding to approximately EUR 116 billion in payments, resulting in an adverse opinion for the sixth consecutive year; notes furthermore that, taking into account the results across all MFF headings, the estimated level of error in these higher-risk areas remains significant; warns that persistent errors undermine public trust in the Union budget and divert resources away from genuine European priorities; calls therefore for strengthened safeguards, controls and performance requirements to be embedded in the implementation of the Multiannual Financial Framework 2028–2034, in order to better protect the Union’s financial interests and ensure sound financial management;

Amendment 45

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 36 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

36e. Recalls that, at the end of 2024, the EPPO was handling 311 active cases related to NextGenerationEU, all but four of which concerned the RRF, representing approximately 17 % of all active expenditure fraud investigations; further notes an increase of 51 % in NGEU-related caseload in 2024 when compared to 2023; warns therefore that the generalised use of FNLC proposed risks to exacerbate the possibility of future fraud cases;

Amendment 46

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 36 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

36f. Emphasises the need for robust, coherent and effective EU anti-fraud architecture in which EPPO will have to play reinforced role that will require significant additional resources; considers it imperative that EPPO funding is significantly increased in the next MFF;

Amendment 47

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 38

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

38. Notes the proposed increase in borrowing and lending under the next MFF; considers that the budgetary authority must carefully monitor the impact of this approach on the MFF headroom or other guarantees; demands that borrowing and lending operations respect the powers of the co-legislators and the budgetary authority;

38. Notes the proposed increase in borrowing and lending under the next MFF; considers that the budgetary authority must carefully monitor the impact of this approach on the MFF headroom or other guarantees; demands that borrowing and lending operations respect the powers of the co-legislators and the budgetary authority; highlights that borrowing and lending operations conducted through the EIB Group and EU guarantees can create contingent liabilities that do not appear in national debt statistics; stresses the importance of transparency regarding the Union’s overall financial exposure; calls on the Commission publish, together with each annual budget, a consolidated overview of all contingent liabilities arising from EU-level borrowing, lending and guarantee operations, including those implemented by the EIB, to enable the budgetary and discharge authorities to assess the full financial picture;

Amendment 48

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 39 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

39a. Stresses, that any reinforced partnership must be accompanied by strengthened accountability and audit arrangements commensurate with the EIB’s mandate; recalls the findings of European Court of Auditors Special Report 07/2025; believes that EIB financing should not crowd out private capital or serve as a substitute for national budgets; stresses, that any reinforced partnership with the EIB must be accompanied by strengthened accountability and audit arrangements commensurate with the EIB’s mandate; calls on the EIB to actively involve national Supreme Audit Institutions to ensure accountability for operations not currently covered by the ECA; reiterates that a Treaty change is necessary to grant the ECA full and unrestricted access to all EIB operations to align democratic accountability with the EIB's evolving financial exposure;

Amendment 49

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 44 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

44a. Stresses that decisions to suspend or reduce Union funding in response to breaches of the rule of law must be based on clear and objective and legally sound criteria, applied consistently and transparently, and must not be guided by political considerations or the outcome of negotiations; underlines that rule of law deficiencies affecting the independence and functioning of the judiciary, public procurement systems, audit and control bodies, anti-corruption safeguards or the equal treatment of final recipients and beneficiaries directly undermine the protection of the Union’s financial interests and constitute a systemic risks to the Union budget; recalls that the rule of law Conditionality Regulation constitutes one of the key instruments for safeguarding the Union’s financial interests and insists that it must be applied whenever its legal conditions are met across the entire EU budget, including performance-based instruments, to ensure that all Union expenditure remains subject to effective rule of law scrutiny;

Amendment 50

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 45

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

45. Calls for any duplications or overlaps between existing and future legislation to be avoided, in particular in the NRPPs, and calls for a unified, coherent and comprehensive framework across all EU funding programmes, under the umbrella of the Conditionality Regulation, covering both enabling conditions that must be fulfilled in order to access EU funding, and measures to withhold funds when relevant conditions are no longer met; requests the Commission to consolidate all rule of law tools into a unified and comprehensive framework that provides clear, objective and transparent criteria for application and the way in which the Commission will ensure coordination among these tools;

45. Deplores the overlaps with the conditionality mechanism introduced by the Commission’s proposal for the 2028-2034 MFF; calls for a unified, coherent and comprehensive framework across all EU funding programmes under the umbrella of the Conditionality Regulation, covering both enabling conditions that must be fulfilled in order to access EU funding and measures to freeze or withhold funds when relevant conditions are no longer met; requests that the Commission consolidate all rule of law tools into a single framework that provides clear, objective and transparent criteria for application and that clarifies how the Commission will ensure coordination of these tools;

Amendment 51

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 45 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

45a. Stresses the need for a seamless and coherent Union values toolbox covering democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights across all Union funds, including in the context of decisions taken by the Commission under the National Recovery and Resilience Plans (NRRPs); considers that the establishment of a single, streamlined procedure would address existing overlaps and enhance legal clarity; believes that the automatic triggering of proposals for decommitments, together with a strict prohibition on the reshuffling or reallocation of frozen funds, are essential elements of such a coherent framework; further calls for a clear and consistent relationship between the NRRP provisions and the application of both the Conditionality Regulation and the Financial Regulation;

Amendment 52

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 45 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

45b. Expresses concern that the Commission’s proposal remains insufficient because it: (a) neither substantially simplifies the rule of law toolbox nor provides for the coordination of the different rule of law instruments, but rather introduces overlaps and contradiction, thereby risking the creation of a fragmented system of parallel instruments, (b) provides that measures addressing breaches of the horizontal rule of law condition can be triggered by a Council implementing decision, with no decision-making role for Parliament in the procedure, (c) may lead to the use of Council implementing decisions on account of the link provided for between rule of law conditionality and Charter conditionality, making the application of the latter more difficult, (d) does not require a sufficiently direct link between a breach of the rule of law and the protection of the EU budget, in contrast to the conditionality mechanism, thus raising issues of legal certainty, (e) makes it clear that the Commission continues to consider the conditionality mechanism an instrument of last resort;

Amendment 53

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 47 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

47a. Requests the inclusion, in the proposed interinstitutional agreement1a, of a dedicated Annex II on cooperation concerning the conditionality regime, including concrete provisions for granting systematic, timely, structured and secure access to all relevant information and documentation in the implementation of the Conditionality Regulation; believes, in this context, that regular dialogue between the three institutions on the current state of play concerning the protection of the EU budget in connection with the rule of law would be an effective way of improving coordination regarding the rule of law toolbox;

_________________

1a Commission proposal of 16 July 2025 for an Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (COM(2025)0572).

Amendment 54

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 47 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

47b. Stresses that the effectiveness of the Union’s antifraud architecture depends not only on detection, investigation and prosecution, but also on the effective confiscation and recovery of proceeds of crime affecting the Union’s financial interests; recalls that the EPPO plays a central role in investigating and prosecuting offences against the EU budget, including fraud, corruption and cross-border VAT fraud; notes, however, that confiscated assets and proceeds of crime are not systematically returned to the Union budget; calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the EPPO and the Member States, to establish a clear and binding framework ensuring that assets and proceeds confiscated following EPPO investigations are effectively returned to the Union budget, in full or in part, and duly recorded as EU revenue; underlines that such a mechanism would strengthen deterrence, reinforce the credibility of EU anti-fraud efforts, contribute to the protection of the Union’s financial interests and ensure that recovered funds can be redeployed to finance Union priorities; stresses that transparency and reporting obligations on the amounts confiscated, returned and reallocated must be guaranteed, with full information provided to Parliament as budgetary and discharge authority;

Amendment 55

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 52

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

52. Considers that, in the face of unprecedented challenges requiring substantial increases in investment across multiple policy areas in the next MFF period, the revenue base of the EU budget must be broadened, strengthened, diversified and modernised; insists that, to this end, the existing own resources should be adjusted and upgraded, new own resources should be introduced without further delay, revenue other than own resources should be an essential ingredient to the mix of income sources, and well-defined borrowing and lending operations whose ensuing contingent liabilities are safely covered by the headroom under the own resources ceilings should remain an actionable fall-back option, at least in times of unforeseen crises;

52. Considers that, in the face of unprecedented challenges requiring substantial increases in investment across multiple policy areas in the next MFF period, the revenue base of the EU budget must be broadened, diversified and modernised, while the protection against fraud must be strengthened; insists that, to this end, the existing own resources should be adjusted and upgraded, new own resources should be introduced without further delay, revenue other than own resources should be an essential ingredient to the mix of income sources, and well-defined borrowing and lending operations whose ensuing contingent liabilities are safely covered by the headroom under the own resources ceilings should remain an actionable fall-back option, at least in times of unforeseen crises;

Amendment 56

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 52 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

52a. Considers that effective investigation and prosecution of fraud affecting the Union’s revenue, combined with the timely recovery of misappropriated amounts, are essential to safeguarding the Union budget, reinforcing the Union’s security and preserving the integrity of the internal market; underlines, therefore, that the next MFF must be supported by a strengthened EPPO and a more coherent, efficient and streamlined EU anti-fraud architecture;

Amendment 57

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 53 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

53a. Highlights that Repayment of NextGenerationEU will place substantial pressure on the EU budget1a, which is why Parliamentary oversight over borrowing decisions must be strengthened;

_________________

1a https://www.eca.europa.eu/ECAPublications/RV-2025-03/RV-2025-03_EN.pdf (p. 14)

Amendment 58

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 54 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

54a. Stresses that the protection of the Union’s financial interests and the sustainability of the Union budget also require determined action to address structural revenue losses stemming from large informal economies and widespread value added tax (VAT) fraud; recalls that EU bodies such as the European Court of Auditors (ECA), the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) have repeatedly identified VAT fraud as one of the most significant sources of losses to EU budgets and to the Union’s own resources; underlines that reducing the scale of informal economic activity and strengthening the fight against VAT fraud would contribute to fairer burden-sharing between Member States, safeguard the integrity of the internal market and help stabilise GNI-based contributions; calls for the Multiannual Financial Framework 2028–2034 to include clear provisions, adequate resources and appropriate instruments to support effective action against informal economic activity and VAT fraud, in order to strengthen the protection of the Union’s financial interests;

Amendment 59

Motion for a resolution

Annex II – Breakdown per programme (current prices)

Draft interim report Annex II - Breakdown per programme (constant prices)

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

MFF proposal

EP Position (1.27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Modification

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

MFF proposal

EP Position (1.27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Commitment appropriations (2025 constant prices, billion)

Decentralised agencies

8.687

8.022

-0.665

European Public Prosecutor Office

(0.665)

1.561

+ 0.896

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

The rapporteur for opinion declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not include in his opinion input from interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Interim report on the proposal for the multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034

References

2025/0571R(APP)

Committee(s) responsible

Date announced in plenary

BUDG

13.11.2025

Opinion by

Date announced in plenary

CONT

13.11.2025

Rapporteur for the opinion

Date appointed

Jacek Protas

15.12.2025

Discussed in committee

5.2.2026

Date adopted

5.3.2026

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

20

3

3

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols:

26.2.2026

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS

for the Committee on Budgets

on the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the Multiannual Financial Framework for the years 2028 to 2034

(COM(2025)0571 – C100000/2025 – 2025/0571(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Klára Dobrev

PA_Consent_Interim

OPINION

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

Amendment 1

Motion for a resolution

Citation 4 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 11 March 2025 on the European Social Fund Plus post-20271a,

__________________

1a OJ C, C/2025/3146, 20.6.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3146/oj.

Amendment 2

Motion for a resolution

Citation 4 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the La Hulpe Declaration on the Future of the European Pillar of Social Rights, signed by Parliament, the Commission, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Council on 16 April 2024,

Amendment 3

Motion for a resolution

Citation 4 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the European Pillar of Social Rights, the Commission communication of 4 March 2021 entitled ‘The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan’ (COM(2021)0102) and to the 2030 headline targets outlined in the action plan,

Amendment 4

Motion for a resolution

Citation 5 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the report of April 2024 by Enrico Letta entitled ‘Much more than a market’ (the Letta report),

Amendment 5

Motion for a resolution

Citation 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to Council Recommendation (EU) 2021/1004 of 14 June 2021 establishing a European Child Guarantee1a,

1a OJ L 223, 22.6.2021, p. 14, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reco/2021/1004/oj.

Amendment 6

Motion for a resolution

Citation 6 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the Council Recommendation of 30 October 2020 on A Bridge to Jobs – Reinforcing the Youth Guarantee and replacing the Council Recommendation of 22 April 2013 on establishing a Youth Guarantee1a,

1a OJ C 372, 4.11.2020, p. 1.

Amendment 7

Motion for a resolution

Citation 6 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, ratified by the EU in 2010,

Amendment 8

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

B. whereas the current MFF quickly proved its inadequacy in responding to a series of crises and new political challenges that were not anticipated at the time of its adoption; whereas, for the purpose of securing the necessary funding, the MFF was pushed to its limits including an unprecedented recourse to the flexibility provisions and special instruments, after exhausting the available margins;

B. whereas the current MFF quickly proved the need for adequate tools in responding to a series of crises and new political challenges that were not anticipated at the time of its adoption; whereas cohesion policy funds became the de facto first-choice source of emergency funding for addressing any challenge or unforeseen event, which resulted in constant changes to the regulatory framework and eroded the policy’s strategic focus and priorities; whereas cohesion policy must remain a long-term policy, based on the objectives set out in Articles 174 and 175 TFEU; whereas the 2028-2034 MFF must provide sufficient flexibility to cover possible emergency situations in a fast and effective way, without undermining policy objectives; whereas, for the purpose of securing the necessary funding, the MFF was pushed to its limits including an unprecedented recourse to the flexibility provisions and special instruments, after exhausting the available margins; whereas the objective of a strong European Social Union is not well reflected in the proposal for the 2028-2034 MFF, with fundamental rights, social rights and poverty eradication now addressed alongside other priorities in the proposed NRPP Regulation, mainly presented as prerequisites for achieving security and economic objectives;

Amendment 9

Motion for a resolution

Recital B a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ba. whereas the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) is the only EU fund in the current MFF primarily focused on social policies, and is therefore unique and highly necessary for achieving social inclusion, enhancing the effectiveness of labour markets, promoting equal access to quality employment and youth employment, improving equal access to, and the quality of, education and training, contributing to the eradication of poverty and child poverty, supporting workers in the twin transition and investing in social innovation; whereas the ESF+ is the main instrument for strengthening the social dimension of the EU by supporting the full implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR), its action plan and its headline targets; whereas on 16 July 2025, the Commission presented its proposal for setting up the European Social Fund (ESF), operating within the National and Regional Partnership Plan (NRPP) and lacking a ring-fenced financial envelope; whereas the continuation of these objectives in the next ESF must be ensured and reinforced with a dedicated financial envelope;

Amendment 10

Motion for a resolution

Recital B b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Bb. whereas child poverty is one of the most serious manifestations of poverty; notes with concern that, according to the Commission and the Council’s Joint Employment Report 2025, one in four children in the EU remains at risk of poverty and social exclusion; whereas indicators reflecting the share of children at risk of poverty have increased from 23.6 % in 2019 to 24.2 % in 20241a and, based on the current trajectory, the EU will not meet its target of reducing the number of children in poverty by at least five million by 2030; whereas the European Child Guarantee aims to prevent and combat the social exclusion of children in need by guaranteeing effective and free access to high-quality early childhood education and care, education and healthcare, and effective access to healthy nutrition and adequate housing;

__________________

1a Eurostat, ‘Children at risk of poverty or social exclusion’, 7 May 2025.

Amendment 11

Motion for a resolution

Recital B c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Bc. whereas the youth unemployment rate in the EU is 15.1 %; whereas being unemployed, particularly at a young age, contributes to financial problems, such as a lack of financial independence as well as social isolation, worsening mental health and well-being;

Amendment 12

Motion for a resolution

Recital B d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Bd. whereas access to decent, affordable, and sustainable housing is a fundamental right; whereas between 2010 and 2024, rents increased by 25 %, house prices increased by 53 %, and inflation increased by 39 % in the EU; whereas in 2024 housing costs represented on average 19 % of monthly disposable income in the EU, and whereas this figure rises to 37 % for people earning less than 60 % of median disposable income;

Amendment 13

Motion for a resolution

Recital B e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Be. whereas in 2024, 93.3 million people in the EU (21.0 % of the population) were at risk of poverty or social exclusion; whereas the eradication of poverty requires a coordinated and holistic approach, as well as integrated policies that aim at social cohesion and prevent widening inequalities;

Amendment 14

Motion for a resolution

Recital B f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Bf. whereas high-quality, accessible and affordable public services are essential to achieve high levels of social protection and cohesion; whereas the provision of such services is hampered by a number of factors, such as persistent problems related to continuity of services, increased demand and insufficient resources; whereas there is a need for adequate budgetary support for universally accessible and affordable public services, in order to ensure their proper functioning and their role in safeguarding people’s rights and social protection, including in areas such as employment, health, education, housing and energy;

Amendment 15

Motion for a resolution

Recital B g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Bg. whereas the 2028-2034 MFF should strengthen a results-oriented approach to cohesion policy, with clear objectives to promote upward social and economic convergence within the Member States by addressing persistent regional disparities, particularly through accelerating development and improving labour market and social outcomes in poorer and lagging regions, thereby reducing territorial and social inequalities;

Amendment 16

Motion for a resolution

Recital B h (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Bh. whereas demographic changes, driven by population ageing, declining fertility rates and increased life expectancy, present a profound societal transformation for which policy responses remain insufficient; whereas these developments risk increasing inequalities and placing additional pressure on social protection systems and labour markets;

Amendment 17

Motion for a resolution

Recital B i (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Bi. whereas inequalities are one of the greatest social challenges facing the outermost regions of the EU; whereas the outermost regions are disproportionately affected by high poverty, unemployment and school dropout rates and a gross domestic product that is significantly below the EU and Member State average, especially considering their dependence on specific industries and products;

Amendment 18

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, structural social challenges against a highly challenging economic backdrop, a competitiveness and skills gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

Amendment 19

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2. Underscores that the next MFF must focus on financing European public goods with discernible added value compared to national spending; rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration;

2. Underscores that the next MFF must focus on financing European public goods with discernible added value for people, workers and businesses compared to national spending; rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would severely strain social fabric and undermine social progress, fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration;

Amendment 20

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Opposes the merging of different policies in one plan per Member State, which generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns that the significant reduction in funding in Heading 1 threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

3. Opposes the merging of different policies in one plan per Member State, which creates serious risks for the implementation, focus and achievement of the Member States’ respective policy objectives, leads to increased centralisation, contradicts multilevel governance, a place-based approach and the partnership principle; warns that unifying, streamlining, centralising or merging funds may not necessarily improve their effectiveness and generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns that the significant reduction in funding in Heading 1 severely threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

Amendment 21

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3a. Recalls that economic, social and territorial cohesion is a fundamental objective of the EU, relying on a strong cohesion policy; notes that, while cohesion policy should remain a fundamental pillar of the EU growth model and the core long-term, decentralised investment policy for all regions, cohesion policy and related instruments must continue as a cornerstone of job creation in the EU; stresses that pursuing economic, social and territorial cohesion in an efficient, coherent and integrated manner, while investing in people and delivering on the targets of the EPSR action plan, is essential;

Amendment 22

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4. Welcomes the substantial increase proposed responding to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes in the Competitiveness Fund reduces transparency and limits Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that, even where programme mergers occur, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain the visibility of funding for individual priorities;

4. Welcomes the substantial increase proposed responding to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes in the Competitiveness Fund reduces transparency and limits Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that, even where programme mergers occur, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain the visibility of funding for individual priorities; stresses that addressing the investment gap in the EU economy requires strong investment in people, along with investment in technology and the environment, as essential drivers for building an EU economy that is sustainable, competitive and allows people to thrive; calls for the EU budget to fully harness the development potential of each Member State by creating quality jobs with rights and promoting full employment, combating poverty, social exclusion and inequality, supporting and modernising productive and strategic sectors, investing in and boosting the efficiency of public services, and conserving and restoring ecosystems, mitigating and adapting to climate change in a just transition;

Amendment 23

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8. Underlines that compliance with Union values and fundamental rights is an essential prerequisite to access EU funds and believes that the protection of the Union’s financial interests depends on respect for the rule of law at national level; calls for any duplication or overlaps between existing and future legislation to be avoided, in particular for the proposal on the NRPPs where such overlaps are observed, and to ensure a unified, coherent and comprehensive framework across all EU funding programmes, under the umbrella of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation2 ;

8. Underlines that compliance with Union values and fundamental rights, in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, is an essential prerequisite to access EU funds and believes that the protection of the Union’s financial interests depends on respect for the rule of law at national level; calls for any duplication or overlaps between existing and future legislation to be avoided, in particular for the proposal on the NRPPs where such overlaps are observed, and to ensure a unified, coherent and comprehensive framework across all EU funding programmes, under the umbrella of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation2 ;

__________________

__________________

2 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/2092/oj).

2 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/2092/oj).

Amendment 24

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

16. Notes that Heading 1 on ‘Europe’s social model and quality of life’ is allocated EUR 797.2 billion in 2025 prices, representing 45 % of the total 2028-2034 MFF; expresses deep concern that this is a decrease compared to the EUR 810.1 billion allocated in the 2021-2027 MFF, which amounted to 65 % of the total; considers this substantial cut unacceptable given the critical importance of maintaining the Union’s long-standing policies;

16. Notes that Heading 1 on ‘Europe’s social model and quality of life’ is allocated EUR 797.2 billion in 2025 prices, representing 45 % of the total 2028-2034 MFF; deplores that this is a decrease compared to the EUR 810.1 billion allocated in the 2021-2027 MFF, which amounted to 65 % of the total; considers this substantial cut wholly unacceptable given the critical importance of maintaining the Union’s long-standing policies, particularly regarding employment and social policy and the adequate funding of the ESF;

Amendment 25

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Regrets that the proposed NRPP Regulation (COM(2025)0558), which merges different policies into one plan per Member State, generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns, in addition, that the significant reduction in funding for Heading 1 also threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights, and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

17. Regrets that the proposed NRPP Regulation (COM(2025)0558), which merges different policies into one plan per Member State, creates serious risks for the implementation, focus and achievement of the Member States’ respective objectives, and generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries as well as potentially diluting the attention given to key social and employment challenges and the effectiveness of measures for addressing them; underlines that NRPPs 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 and other stakeholders, in particular social partners and civil society organisations, ensuring that resources are directed where they are most needed, to reduce regional disparities; warns, in addition, that the significant reduction in funding for Heading 1 also threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights, gender equality, the implementation of the EPSR, the protection and promotion of quality employment, and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

Amendment 26

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17a. Stresses the importance of a strong, social Europe that is fair, inclusive and ensures equal opportunities, built on the EPSR; emphasises that the 2028-2034 MFF should play a pivotal role in reducing inequality, poverty and social exclusion, by supporting the full implementation of the EPSR, its action plan and its headline targets; underlines that this requires social instruments with a clear policy framework, defined objectives and coherent investment priorities; calls for favourable treatment to be given to EU and Member State expenditure aimed at countering demographic decline;

Amendment 27

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17b. Strongly opposes the idea of the European Social Fund (ESF) becoming part of the NRPP, and reiterates its call for a self-standing, reinforced, strong ESF with a dedicated and sufficient budget, separated from the NRPP, and which must remain the EU’s key instrument for investing in people, providing for people in vulnerable situations and those most in need in our societies, delivering on the targets of the EPSR action plan – from early childhood education to quality employment, vocational training and skills development, social innovation, social inclusion, the eradication of poverty and the fight against social exclusion, in order to strengthen the social dimension of the EU; regrets, in this context, the lack of clarity in the proposed ESF Regulation regarding its policy objectives as a necessary condition for preserving the ESF’s effectiveness and European added value;

Amendment 28

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17c. Notes with concern the weak social dimension of proposed NRPP Regulation, whereby the minimum allocation for social objectives is set to 14 % of national envelopes, while at the same time providing insufficient clarity and transparency on what this percentage would represent in concrete financial terms, as no official, consolidated figures have been presented by the Commission; strongly criticises the large margin of discretion left to the Member States on the details of specific objectives and their funding, due to a lack of thematic concentrations, which further risks undermining predictability and accountability; considers, in particular, a cut in real terms for social spending unacceptable and calls on the Commission to propose a strong, stand-alone and separate ESF with a dedicated financial envelope and dedicated earmarkings for current and new priorities, which is ring-fenced and substantially increased in real terms, compared to the 2021-2027 ESF+ allocation;

Amendment 29

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17d. Reiterates that the aim of the ESF and social financing is twofold, namely to promote employment and to support social inclusion, which are closely linked to each other; deeply regrets that the proposed MFF package, and notably the proposed ESF Regulation, does not maintain any earmarking for fostering social inclusion, supporting the most deprived persons, tackling child poverty, supporting youth employment and the capacity building of social partners and civil society, as laid down in the current ESF+ Regulation, and warns against Member States only investing in employment policies; demands that the current earmarkings are at least reinstated, without allowing any flexibility for reallocating such resources to other priorities; calls, furthermore, for the introduction of additional earmarking, including for tackling homelessness, to further strengthen social objectives; stresses that Parliament’s position on the earmarking will be determined during the co-decision procedure for the relevant sectoral legislative acts;

Amendment 30

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17e. Highlights the fact that over 100 million people in the EU have some form of disability and that 28.8 % of persons with disabilities are at risk of poverty or social exclusion; recalls that, under the current Common Provisions Regulation1a, the implementation and application of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) is a horizontal enabling condition reflecting the EU and the Member States’ obligations as signatories, and deplores the elimination of this condition and of the other thematic enabling conditions, which have been an important tool for policy convergence and the implementation of EU policies and strategies at the national and local levels; calls, therefore, for the reinstatement of the UNCRPD into horizontal and thematic enabling conditions for access to social funding;

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 31

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17f. Considers that the current levels of child poverty require the EU to step up its efforts under the European Child Guarantee; stresses that its objectives cannot be achieved without an ambitious, sizeable and dedicated budget; reiterates, in this context, its call for a dedicated budget of at least EUR 20 billion for the European Child Guarantee in the 2028-2034 MFF to ensure that every child in need in the EU has effective and free access to high-quality early childhood education and care, education and school-based activities, at least one healthy meal each school day, healthcare, and effective access to adequate housing and healthy nutrition;

Amendment 32

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17g. Is deeply concerned that the availability and affordability of decent housing in Europe is decreasing at an alarming rate, in a context of declining overall investment in housing supply across many of the Member States, with public and private funding remaining below what is needed to meet demand; calls for dedicated programmes in the 2028-2034 MFF for investment in housing policies; stresses that the next programming period should prioritise grants and financial instruments designed to mobilise and scale up public and private investment, directly supporting sustainable, decent, affordable and social housing, and strategic investments in the green construction value chain, in order to foster resilience, innovation and long-term sustainability in the housing sector; calls on the Commission to ensure a substantial increase in EU public investment in affordable and decent housing, delivered through reliable, long-term and flexible instruments, including scalable and innovative financing models such as revolving funds; urges the Commission and the Member States to prioritise the fight against homelessness and the implementation of a housing-first principle in the design and implementation of the MFF; insists that investments in housing and energy under the MFF should prioritise homeless people and people living in conditions of inadequate and insecure housing, which undermines health and dignity; calls for stronger action against property speculation and for the defence of the right to decent and affordable housing for all; underlines that the 2028-2034 MFF must offer reinforced opportunities to scale up housing investments at EU level;

Amendment 33

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity and providing European public goods; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration, ensuring fair competition and equal opportunities across all Member States;

18. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity and providing European public goods; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration, ensuring fair competition and equal opportunities across all Member States; insists that Parliament should have a role in the approval and monitoring of all EU funding programmes including those under the proposed NRPP Regulation;

Amendment 34

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19. Rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration;

19. Rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration; asks that EU economic, territorial and social cohesion be pursued via specific and dedicated programmes setting common EU objectives, with the involvement of social partners;

Amendment 35

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20a. Highlights that the green and digital transitions are inextricably linked with the EU’s long-term prosperity, the well-being of its people, sustainability, growth and competitiveness, and that the rapid development of AI, including generative AI and algorithmic management, is expected to profoundly reshape labour markets, with significant risks of job displacement and widening inequalities, if not accompanied by adequate transition support; underlines that the ultimate success of the twin transition will depend heavily on ensuring that the transition is just and inclusive for workers, regions and businesses, and that it contributes to social justice for all, with a particular focus on the most vulnerable, in order to ensure that no one is left behind; insists, therefore, that the 2028-2034 MFF must continue to support the twin transition and to invest in people through lifelong learning, vocational education and training, upskilling and reskilling, as well as to support sustainable infrastructure, research and innovation with clear and adequate budgetary allocations, and with a view to fostering upward social and economic convergence and reducing territorial and social disparities; regrets that the proposal does not include a stand-alone instrument and calls, in this regard, for an extended and enlarged Just Transition Fund with an increased budget;

Amendment 36

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20b. Strongly regrets the discontinuation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for Displaced Workers; recalls the importance of an active labour market and social protection measures in reintegrating displaced workers into the labour market following major restructuring events; calls on the Commission to ensure continued dedicated support for workers at risk from, or displaced by, major restructuring events through an instrument in the 2028-2034 MFF, outside of the ESF, with an ambitious budgetary envelope, given the scale and frequency of recent restructures;

Amendment 37

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20c. Underlines the crucial role played by the European instrument for temporary Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE) in protecting workers and mitigating the severely negative socio-economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic; stresses the need to support short-time work schemes building on the positive experience of SURE; calls for a reinforced SURE mechanism, as supporting such employment protection measures can stabilise public expenditure dedicated to employment policies and just transition measures, in order to mitigate the immediate impacts on jobs of the necessary transformation of the EU economy, and for an EU industrial policy for quality jobs and the reinforcement of the EU’s economic and social resilience;

Amendment 38

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20d. Calls on the Commission to strengthen investments in labour mobility and the mutual recognition and validation of skills and qualifications between the Member States in the 2028-2034 MFF, in order to support rapid upskilling and reskilling and help to address labour shortages linked to the green and digital transitions; stresses that the next MFF should ensure that investments in climate action, energy efficiency and sustainable construction systematically contribute to quality local job creation and skills development, and do not exacerbate existing regional disparities;

Amendment 39

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22a. Appreciates the high-quality work performed by the EU agencies working in the area of employment, social affairs and inclusion – Eurofound, the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, the European Training Foundation and the European Labour Authority; recalls the particular mandates of these agencies and the specific composition of their management bodies based on the tripartite principle, thus including representatives of national authorities and social partners; stresses the importance, autonomy and added value of these five agencies in their fields of expertise; reiterates the need to equip these agencies, at a level commensurate with their assigned tasks, with a sufficient number of staff, employed in a stable manner and with sufficient material resources;

Amendment 40

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the 2028-2034 MFF and relevant EU instruments, in particular the ESF and other cohesion policy funds, adequately take into account the disproportionate impact of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine on the NUTS 2 regions bordering Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, specifically through targeted support to mitigate labour market disruptions and strengthen social cohesion, including measures to prevent poverty or social exclusion and to support employment and skills;

Amendment 41

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 28

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

28. Insists that the MFF regulation must require the Commission to present a review of the functioning of the MFF, by July 2031 at the latest, taking full account of the economic situation at that time, as well as the latest macroeconomic projections; is also of the view that such a compulsory review should, as appropriate, be accompanied by a legislative proposal for the revision of this Regulation in accordance with the procedures set out in the TFEU; stresses that any such revision should not reduce pre-allocated national envelopes, as set out in the NRPP Regulation;

28. Insists that the MFF regulation must require the Commission to present a review of the functioning of the MFF, by July 2031 at the latest, taking full account of the economic situation at that time, as well as the latest macroeconomic and employment projections; is also of the view that such a compulsory review should, as appropriate, be accompanied by a legislative proposal for the revision of this Regulation in accordance with the procedures set out in the TFEU; stresses that any such revision should not reduce pre-allocated national envelopes, as set out in the NRPP Regulation;

Amendment 42

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries; acknowledges the need for flexibility but firmly rejects any approach that sacrifices transparency under the guise of efficiency; regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality, or democratic accountability; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap and undermine public trust in the EU;

30. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries; acknowledges the need for flexibility but firmly rejects any approach that sacrifices transparency under the guise of efficiency; regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality, or democratic accountability, or constructive dialogue with key stakeholders and social partners, as outlined in Article 8 of the current Common Provisions Regulation1a; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap and undermine public trust in the EU;

____________________

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 43

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 32

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

32. Acknowledges the proposal for a Performance Regulation as a first step in putting in place a horizontal expenditure tracking and performance monitoring framework for the budget; considers that this approach can lead to greater coherence in the monitoring and implementation of EU spending programmes and in the mainstreaming of important EU objectives; stresses that the inclusion of horizontal principles in a single framework must enable more effective tracking methodologies and parliamentary scrutiny without creating additional burdens;

32. Acknowledges the proposal for a Performance Regulation as a first step in putting in place a horizontal expenditure tracking and performance monitoring framework for the budget; considers that this approach can lead to greater coherence in the monitoring and implementation of EU spending programmes and in the mainstreaming of important EU objectives; stresses that the inclusion of horizontal principles, such as social policies, gender equality and equality of persons with disabilities, in a single framework must enable more effective tracking methodologies and parliamentary scrutiny without creating additional burdens; calls to further improve the gender mainstreaming tracking methodology, in particular as regards granularity; underlines that it is crucial to involve Parliament and key stakeholders, including social partners and civil society, in the definition of indicators, in this regard, which must be linked to European, national, regional and local realities;

Amendment 44

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 32 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

32a. Recalls that, in line with Article 33(2) of the Financial Regulation1a, programmes and activities under the 2028-2034 MFF should, where feasible and appropriate, and in accordance with the relevant sector-specific rules, be implemented to achieve their set objectives, respecting working and employment conditions under applicable national law, EU law and International Labour Organization conventions and collective agreements; stresses the importance of this principle and calls on the Commission to provide technical guidance on its implementation across all funding and spending programmes under the 2028-2034 MFF;

__________________

1a Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (OJ L, 2024/2509, 26.9.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2509/oj).

Amendment 45

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 32 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

32b. Underlines that different social policies serve different social objectives, which should be clearly reflected throughout the relevant sectoral legislative acts of the 2028-2034 MFF; notes with concern, in this context, that the policy areas and output and result indicators as laid down in the current proposal for a Performance Regulation related to social policy1a could result in a situation wherein not all the objectives of the EPSR and its action plan, or the achievement of the EPSR’s headline targets, are addressed in the NRPPs; reiterates its call for a stand-alone ESF with a dedicated budget that is ring-fenced, with clear earmarking;

__________

1a Commission proposal of 16 July 2025 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a budget expenditure tracking and performance framework and other horizontal rules for the Union programmes and activities (COM(2025)0545).

Amendment 46

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 34 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

34a. Underlines that the ESF must be clearly identified with a separate budgetary nomenclature under Heading 1;

Amendment 47

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 34 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

34b. Asks for a nomenclature that defines common EU social objectives, social investment, labour market inclusiveness, just transition measures, inclusive societies and the fight against poverty, to be developed in consultation with European social partners; invites European social partners to act in a spirit of cooperation to ensure that the MFF has a positive impact on employment and the quality of work for the competitiveness of EU enterprises;

Amendment 48

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 39

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

39. Reiterates its call for a reinforced investment partnership with the EIB Group to leverage the EU budget, mobilise private investment and de-risk important policy areas such as climate, competitiveness, and innovation, defence and the external dimension;

39. Reiterates its call for a reinforced investment partnership with the EIB Group to leverage the EU budget, mobilise private investment and de-risk important policy areas such as climate, housing, competitiveness, and innovation, social economy and entrepreneurship, defence and the external dimension;

Amendment 49

Motion for a resolution

Annex I

Motion for a resolution

COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

Total

2028-2034

1. Economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, maritime, prosperity and security

145 722

140 577

134 993

129 890

124 157

110 208

100 698

886 247

2. Competitiveness, prosperity and security

70 064

83 507

83 760

86 200

85 768

86 073

85 231

580 603

3. Global Europe

25 726

25 809

25 757

30 213

34 613

34 581

34 549

211 248

4. Administration

14 083

14 397

14 746

14 980

15 205

15 415

15 621

104 447

TOTAL COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS

255 595

264 290

259 256

261 283

259 744

246 278

236 099

1782 544

TOTAL PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS

254 642

280 970

271 744

262 166

242 178

234 788

223 490

1769 979

COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

Total

2028-2034

1. Economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, maritime, prosperity and security

154 642

152 165

149 043

146 277

142 618

129 126

120 344

994 216

2. Competitiveness, prosperity and security

74 353

90 391

92 477

97 075

98 520

100 849

101 858

655 523

3. Global Europe

27 300

27 936

28 437

34 025

39 760

40 517

41 289

239 265

4. Administration

14 945

15 584

16 281

16 870

17 466

18 061

18 669

117 875

TOTAL COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS

271 239

286 076

286 239

294 247

298 364

288 554

282 160

2 006 879

TOTAL PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS

270 228

304 131

300 027

295 242

278 186

275 092

267 092

1 989 998

Amendment

COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

Total

2028-2034

1. Economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, maritime, prosperity and security

174 088

168 863

163 279

158 176

152 443

138 494

128 984

1 084 247

2. Competitiveness, prosperity and security

70 064

83 507

83 760

86 200

85 768

86 073

85 231

580 603

3. Global Europe

25 726

25 809

25 757

30 213

34 613

34 581

34 549

211 248

4. Administration

14 083

14 397

14 746

14 980

15 205

15 415

15 621

104 447

TOTAL COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS

255 595

264 290

259 256

261 283

259 744

246 278

236 099

1782 544

TOTAL PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS

254 642

280 970

271 744

262 166

242 178

234 788

223 490

1769 979

COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

Total

2028-2034

1. Economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, maritime, prosperity and security

154 642

152 165

149 043

146 277

142 618

129 126

120 344

994 216

2. Competitiveness, prosperity and security

74 353

90 391

92 477

97 075

98 520

100 849

101 858

655 523

3. Global Europe

27 300

27 936

28 437

34 025

39 760

40 517

41 289

239 265

4. Administration

14 945

15 584

16 281

16 870

17 466

18 061

18 669

117 875

TOTAL COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS

271 239

286 076

286 239

294 247

298 364

288 554

282 160

2 006 879

TOTAL PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS

270 228

304 131

300 027

295 242

278 186

275 092

267 092

1 989 998

Amendment 50

Motion for a resolution

Annex II

Motion for a resolution

Commitment appropriations (2025 constant prices, billion)

MFF proposal

EP Position (1.27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Multiannual Financial Framework

1.613,71

1.782,50

168,79

Heading 1: Europe’s Social model and quality of life, excluding NGEU

797,11

886,25

89,14

02

02

National and Regional Partnership Plans and Interreg Plan - Operational Expenditure

771,32

860,41

89,09

Support to the Turkish-Cypriot Community

0,39

0,43

0,04

Others

20,24

20,24

0,00

Margins

5,16

5,16

0,00

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

522,21

580,60

58,40

04

02

European Competitiveness Fund

207,40

231,42

24,02

04

03

Horizon Europe

154,88

172,82

17,94

04

04

EURATOM/ITER

8,71

9,71

1,01

04

05

INSC-D (Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation - Decommissioning)

0,85

0,95

0,10

04

06

Ignalina Programme

0,60

0,67

0,07

05

02

CEF (Transport, Energy, Military Mobility)

72,25

80,62

8,37

05

03

Single Market and Customs Programme

5,54

6,18

0,64

05

04

Pericles (protection of the Euro)

0,01

0,01

0,00

06

02

Erasmus+

36,19

40,38

4,19

06

03

AgoraEU

7,61

8,49

0,88

06

04

UCPM+ (EU Civil Protection Mechanism and health preparedness)

9,46

10,55

1,10

06

05

Justice

0,71

0,79

0,08

Others

10,92

10,92

0,00

Margins

7,09

7,09

0,00

Heading 3: Global Europe

190,00

211,25

21,25

07

Global Europe

176,83

197,49

20,66

08

02

Common Foreign and Security Policy

2,99

3,34

0,35

08

03

Overseas countries and territories

0,89

0,99

0,10

XX

XX

Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAS) And Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOS)

1,18

1,32

0,14

Others

1,00

1,00

0,00

Margins

7,12

7,12

0,00

Heading 4: Administration

104,40

104,40

0,00

Amendment

Commitment appropriations (2025 constant prices, billion)

MFF proposal

EP Position (1.27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Multiannual Financial Framework

1.613,71

1.782,50

168,79

Heading 1: Europe’s Social model and quality of life, excluding NGEU

797,11

886,25

89,14

02

02

National and Regional Partnership Plans and Interreg Plan - Operational Expenditure

771,32

860,41

89,09

02

03

European Social Fund – Operational Expenditure

198

Support to the Turkish-Cypriot Community

0,39

0,43

0,04

Others

20,24

20,24

0,00

Margins

5,16

5,16

0,00

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

522,21

580,60

58,40

04

02

European Competitiveness Fund

207,40

231,42

24,02

04

03

Horizon Europe

154,88

172,82

17,94

04

04

EURATOM/ITER

8,71

9,71

1,01

04

05

INSC-D (Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation - Decommissioning)

0,85

0,95

0,10

04

06

Ignalina Programme

0,60

0,67

0,07

05

02

CEF (Transport, Energy, Military Mobility)

72,25

80,62

8,37

05

03

Single Market and Customs Programme

5,54

6,18

0,64

05

04

Pericles (protection of the Euro)

0,01

0,01

0,00

06

02

Erasmus+

36,19

40,38

4,19

06

03

AgoraEU

7,61

8,49

0,88

06

04

UCPM+ (EU Civil Protection Mechanism and health preparedness)

9,46

10,55

1,10

06

05

Justice

0,71

0,79

0,08

Others

10,92

10,92

0,00

Margins

7,09

7,09

0,00

Heading 3: Global Europe

190,00

211,25

21,25

07

Global Europe

176,83

197,49

20,66

08

02

Common Foreign and Security Policy

2,99

3,34

0,35

08

03

Overseas countries and territories

0,89

0,99

0,10

XX

XX

Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAS) And Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOS)

1,18

1,32

0,14

Others

1,00

1,00

0,00

Margins

7,12

7,12

0,00

Heading 4: Administration

104,40

104,40

0,00

Amendment 51

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 1

Motion for a resolution

02

European Fund for Economic, Territorial, Social Cohesion, Agriculture and Rural, Fisheries and Maritime, Prosperity and Security

02

01

Support expenditure of the National and Regional Partnership Fund

02

01

02

Social Climate Plans Chapter - administrative expenditure

02

02

National and Regional Partnership Plans and Interreg Plan - Operational Expenditure

02

02

01

Europe’s sustainable prosperity

02

02

02

Europe’s defence capabilities and security

02

02

02

01

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security

02

02

02

02

Other

02

02

03

Supporting people, strengthening Europe’s societies and Europe’s social model

02

02

03

01

Resources from the Social Climate Fund / Social Climate Plan Chapter - Operational Expenditure

02

02

03

02

Other

02

02

04

Sustaining Europe’s quality of life

02

02

04

01

CAP and CFP interventions

02

02

04

02

Other

02

02

05

Protecting Union’s democracy, rule of law and uphold Union values

02

02

06

Flexibility

02

02

07

Interreg Plan

02

02

08

Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission

02

03

EU Facility

02

03

01

Union actions

02

03

01

01

Crisis situation - European Union Solidarity

02

03

01

02

Unity safety net (Stabilisation of agricultural markets)

02

03

01

03

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security

02

03

01

04

Other Union Actions

02

03

02

Emerging challenges and priorities cushion

Amendment

02

European Fund for Economic, Territorial, Social Cohesion, Agriculture and Rural, Fisheries and Maritime, Prosperity and Security

02

01

Support expenditure

02

01

01

Support expenditure of the National and Regional Partnership Fund

02

01

02

Social Climate Plans Chapter - administrative expenditure

02

01

03

Support expenditure of the European Social Fund

02

02

National and Regional Partnership Plans and Interreg Plan - Operational Expenditure

02

02

01

Europe’s sustainable prosperity

02

02

02

Europe’s defence capabilities and security

02

02

02

01

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security

02

02

02

02

Other

02

02

03

Supporting people, strengthening Europe’s societies and Europe’s social model

02

02

03

01

Resources from the Social Climate Fund / Social Climate Plan Chapter - Operational Expenditure

02

02

03

02

Other

02

02

04

Sustaining Europe’s quality of life

02

02

04

01

CAP and CFP interventions

02

02

04

02

Other

02

02

05

Protecting Union’s democracy, rule of law and uphold Union values

02

02

06

Flexibility

02

02

07

Interreg Plan

02

02

08

Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission

02

03

EU Facility

02

03

01

Union actions

02

03

01

01

Crisis situation - European Union Solidarity

02

03

01

02

Unity safety net (Stabilisation of agricultural markets)

02

03

01

03

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security

02

03

01

04

Other Union Actions

02

03

02

Emerging challenges and priorities cushion

02

04

European Social Fund

02

04

01

European Social Fund – Operational Expenditure

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for opinion declares that she included in her opinion input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that she received, in the preparation of the opinion, prior to the adoption thereof in committee, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

1. Interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register

European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC)

Social Platform

2. Representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur for opinion.

Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur for opinion declares that she has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Interim report on the proposal for the multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034

References

2025/0571R(APP)

Committee(s) responsible

Date announced in plenary

BUDG

13.11.2025

Opinion by

Date announced in plenary

EMPL

13.11.2025

Rapporteur for the opinion

Date appointed

Klára Dobrev

11.12.2025

Discussed in committee

15.1.2026

Date adopted

25.2.2026

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

40

5

7

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols:

5.3.2026

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, CLIMATE AND FOOD SAFETY

for the Committee on Budgets

on the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the Multiannual Financial Framework for the years 2028 to 2034

(COM(2025)0571 – C100000/2025 – 2025/0571R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Michalis Hadjipantela

PA_Consent_Interim

OPINION

The Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety submits the following to the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible:

Amendment 1

Motion for a resolution

Citation 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6a. having regard to the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework agreed at the 15th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP 15) in Montreal on 19 December 2022, the Paris Agreement adopted at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP 21) in Paris on 12 December 2015, the UN Sustainable Development Goals, the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 entitled ‘The European Green Deal’ (COM(2019)0640), the Commission communication of 26 February 2025 entitled ‘The Clean Industrial Deal: A joint roadmap for competitiveness and decarbonisation’ (COM(2025)0085), Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan, the EU’s Mission on Cancer and the final report of the Special Committee on Beating Cancer1a, the Commission communication of 11 March 2020 entitled ‘A new Circular Economy Action Plan: For a cleaner and more competitive Europe’ (COM(2020)0098), the Commission statement on the LIFE Programme of 1 April 2025, and European Court of Auditors special report 25/2025 of 11 December 2025 entitled ‘LIFE strategic projects – Bridge the gap between strategy and implementation, but impact not entirely clear’,

______________

1a European Parliament resolution of 16 February 2022 on strengthening Europe in the fight against cancer – towards a comprehensive and coordinated strategy (OJ C 342, 6.9.2022, p. 109).

Amendment 2

Motion for a resolution

Recital D

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

D. whereas the establishment of the new MFF will be a critical moment for the Union, as it will provide for the possibility to endorse a common vision and decide on the future political priorities as well as the ability of the Union to deliver them;

D. whereas the establishment of the new MFF will be a critical moment for the Union, as it will provide for the possibility to endorse a common vision and decide on the future political priorities as well as the ability of the Union to deliver on them and on its existing objectives, including those on the climate and the environment;

Amendment 3

Motion for a resolution

Recital E a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ea. whereas the LIFE programme is the Union’s only financial instrument exclusively dedicated to the environment, biodiversity and climate action, and has, for more than 30 years, provided high EU added value, translating EU environmental legislation and strategies into concrete, measurable and replicable actions on the ground; whereas LIFE has supported cross-border cooperation, policy implementation, innovation and capacity-building;

Amendment 4

Motion for a resolution

Recital E b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Eb. whereas the 8th Environment Action Programme (EAP) scoreboard1a, published in 2025, shows uneven progress towards the EU’s 2030 environmental and climate targets, with only 6 out of 28 indicators assessed as ‘on track’ or ‘likely on track’, and 22 assessed as ‘likely off track’ or ‘off track’ for meeting the 2030 targets; whereas the report notes that achieving the 8th EAP vision of living well and within planetary boundaries by 2050 will require sufficient funding and timely and effective implementation across all sectors and Member States;

______________

1a European Environment Agency, ‘Monitoring report on progress towards the 8th EAP objectives 2025’, 10 December 2025.

Amendment 5

Motion for a resolution

Recital E b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Eb. whereas the cost of not fully implementing EU environmental law and policy amounts to at least EUR 180 billion a year; whereas full, timely and cost-effective implementation of EU environmental law is an investment, because the cost of inaction is significantly higher1a;

_________________

1a European Commission: Directorate-General for Environment, Logika Group, RPA Europe and EMRC, ‘Update of the costs of not implementing EU environmental law’, Publications Office of the European Union, 2025, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/7361333.

Amendment 6

Motion for a resolution

Recital E c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ec. whereas the development and mainstreaming of the circular economy and the bioeconomy supports the Union’s objective of achieving climate neutrality by 2050 and the intermediate 2030 and 2040 targets;

Amendment 7

Motion for a resolution

Recital E c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ec. whereas there is an investment gap between Member States’ current environmental spending and the spending level that is necessary to close the implementation gap, standing at EUR 122 billion per year; whereas 48 % of this investment gap concerns pollution, including water management, 30 % relates to nature and biodiversity, with circular economy and waste accounting for the remaining 22 %; whereas necessary investments in climate mitigation and adaptation are not included in the estimation1a;

_________________

1a Commission communication of 7 July 2025 entitled ‘2025 Environmental Implementation Review – Environmental implementation for prosperity and security’, p. 6-7, (COM(2025)0420).

Amendment 8

Motion for a resolution

Recital E d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ed. whereas the European Environment Agency (EEA) and its European Environment Information and Observation Network (Eionet) play a central role in collecting, harmonising and analysing environmental, climate and sustainability data, supporting the implementation, monitoring and enforcement of EU environmental law and informing evidence-based policymaking across the Union; whereas the EEA has shown that climate change, water stress, pollution and biodiversity loss are already generating major economic, social and security risks across the Union, affecting productivity, public health, food systems and infrastructure;

Amendment 9

Motion for a resolution

Recital E e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ee. whereas the commitment under Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan to reduce environmental pollution and exposure to carcinogenic substances and radiation is a key component of cancer prevention;

Amendment 10

Motion for a resolution

Recital E f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ef. whereas clear, reliable and timely information on the use of the EU budget and the results it delivers is essential for transparency and accountability; whereas a robust performance framework is needed to maximise the effectiveness and efficiency of every euro invested;

Amendment 11

Motion for a resolution

Recital E g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Eg. whereas Parliament called for a separate and dedicated fund for water resilience within the 2028-2034 multiannual financial framework (MFF); whereas the EEA has shown that water scarcity, droughts, floods and water pollution already affect large parts of the Union, with around one fifth of EU territory and nearly one third of the population exposed to water stress each year – a situation that risks being further exacerbated by the anticipated rise in water demand;

Amendment 12

Motion for a resolution

Recital E h (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Eh. whereas under the current MFF, a share of Emissions Trading System (ETS) revenue is treated as assigned revenue, while the new Commission proposal for the next MFF suggests treating it as an own resource entering the Union budget, where it would be used for general financing;

Amendment 13

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is essential to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, competitiveness gaps, and the worsening climate, pollution and biodiversity crises, as well as public health and food security challenges; highlights that a prudent and sustainable MFF must reflect that climate and environmental ambitions are implemented in an efficient and effective manner, in line with the just transition, supported by careful impact assessments and contributions to territorial cohesion, taking into account regional specificities, while reducing administrative burdens on final beneficiaries and, in particular, on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), farmers, local authorities and other stakeholders;

Amendment 14

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1a. Calls for the proposed 35 % spending target for climate action and environmental objectives to be safeguarded in the next MFF; emphasises that this level constitutes a minimum baseline, which in itself is not sufficient to reach the climate, environmental and biodiversity objectives of the Union; insists that nature and biodiversity protection receive clearly identifiable and adequate dedicated spending targets under the relevant headings and national and regional partnership plans; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that budgetary support effectively delivers the clean and circular transition, particularly ahead of the upcoming Circular Economy Act and including through investments that strengthen Europe’s competitiveness, energy security, innovation and decarbonisation efforts; underlines that achieving climate neutrality by 2050, meeting biodiversity objectives and upholding the European Climate Law will require the mobilisation of substantial public and private investment;

Amendment 15

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2. Underscores that the next MFF must focus on financing European public goods with discernible added value compared to national spending; rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration;

2. Underscores that the next MFF must focus on financing European public goods with clear added value compared to national spending; rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would fragment the single market, hinder the implementation of Union policies, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration; recognises that effective policies in areas such as climate change, environmental protection and civil protection may require differentiated national implementation, while safeguarding transparency, competitiveness and the streamlined operation of the single market; highlights that the next MFF must reflect a significantly higher level of ambition to close existing investment gaps, ensure the delivery of the 2030 objectives on the climate, biodiversity, energy and the environment, and lay the foundations for a 2040 framework consistent with the Union’s objective of achieving climate neutrality by 2050 in line with its international commitments, notably under the Paris Agreement and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework; highlights that funding must strengthen the resilience of society, food production, the availability of drinking water and flood defences; stresses that such investments in prevention at source constitute high-value European public goods that also reduce cross-border risks and economic losses;

Amendment 16

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Opposes the merging of different policies in one plan per Member State, which generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns that the significant reduction in funding in Heading 1 threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

3. Opposes the merging of different policies in one plan per Member State, which generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns that the significant reduction in funding for Heading 1 (‘Europe’s social model and quality of life’) and the proposed blending of existing programmes in Heading 2 threaten to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion, achieving climate, biodiversity and environmental objectives, safeguarding social rights, and ensuring food safety and security, environmental sustainability, water and climate resilience, the clean and circular transition, as well as a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers; stresses that the simplification and consolidation of programmes under the 2028-2034 MFF must not weaken environmental ambition, transparency or Parliament’s capacity to scrutinise environment- and climate-related expenditure;

Amendment 17

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4. Welcomes the substantial increase proposed responding to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes in the Competitiveness Fund reduces transparency and limits Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that, even where programme mergers occur, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain the visibility of funding for individual priorities;

4. Welcomes the substantial increase proposed responding to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes in the Competitiveness Fund reduces transparency and limits Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives and the distribution between policy objectives; insists that even where programme mergers occur, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain the predictability and visibility of funding for specific priorities as identified in the proposal for a regulation on establishing the European Competitiveness Fund, also as regards the InvestEU tool; stresses that adequate investment in research and innovation should be ensured to support the clean and circular transition, and climate and environmental objectives, generate health-relevant evidence on environmental risk factors, and enable preventive solutions that reduce long-term societal costs, while strengthening competitiveness and technological leadership; emphasises that such investments support economic growth through innovation, industrial decarbonisation and advanced technologies; stresses that research into a healthy and pollution-free living environment strengthens the long-term well-being of EU citizens and the European economy; underlines, in this regard, the importance of technological neutrality within the MFF framework and of spending fully in line with the environmental and food safety acquis;

Amendment 18

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

7. Recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; underscores that the allocation of funds to specific policy objectives is to be decided jointly by Parliament and the Council; deplores the fact that the indicative nomenclature proposed in the programme legislation is woefully insufficient; reiterates its call for the post-2027 MFF to include two special instruments – one dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters and one for general-purpose crisis response;

7. Recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; underscores that the allocation of funds to specific policy objectives is to be decided jointly by Parliament and the Council; deplores the fact that the indicative nomenclature proposed in the programme legislation is woefully insufficient; reiterates its call for the post-2027 MFF to include two special instruments – one dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of climate-related disasters and one for general-purpose crisis response;

Amendment 19

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

14a. Underlines that the post-2027 long-term budget must be designed and adequately resourced to enable the EU to deliver on its existing and long-term environmental, climate and biodiversity objectives, including those set out in the European Green Deal, the 8th EAP, the Zero Pollution Action Plan, the Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, and on nature restoration, while enabling competitiveness as set out in the Clean Industrial Deal, as well as quality jobs and cohesion; recalls that the 8th EAP requires the phase out of environmentally harmful subsidies, including fossil fuel subsidies; welcomes the Commission’s commitment to phase out such subsidies in the next MFF; calls for the Commission to present its planned roadmap in this regard;

Amendment 20

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

14b. Emphasises that the Commission estimates the additional investment needed to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 at 1.5 % of GDP per year compared to 2011-2020 and that, while the EU budget alone cannot cover the gap, it must remain a vital contributor, using an approach that safeguards economic competitiveness and fiscal responsibility; underlines the role of the European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change in providing independent advice to decision-makers; stresses that a stable climate, resilient ecosystems, clean air, soil and water, and the sustainable use of resources are preconditions for economic resilience, food security and long-term growth; recalls that healthy soil is a precondition for achieving food security and thus the Union’s strategic autonomy and food production resilience;

Amendment 21

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

14c. Underlines the importance of the just transition; stresses the need for proportionate and minimally market-distortive support for lower-income, energy-intensive, climate-exposed and otherwise vulnerable regions, to prevent the widening of disparities and safeguard social cohesion, while ensuring the transition to sustainable practices and a level playing field for businesses and competitiveness; emphasises that the 2028-2034 MFF must provide stability and predictability for the Union so as to support the transition required across the economy to increased sustainability and to continue the successful decoupling of economic growth from greenhouse gas emissions; recalls the importance of market-based instruments in this respect; considers that regulatory volatility can undermine the market’s ability to make necessary long-term investments and the Union’s ability to reach its set objectives;

Amendment 22

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

16a. Calls for ambitious, predictable and accessible EU funding for environmental infrastructure, clean-tech deployment and the clean transition, including simplified procedures for SMEs and local authorities and, where appropriate, wider use of financial instruments to crowd in private investment; stresses that MFF support should provide cost-effective investments in energy efficiency, building renovation and clean heating, reducing energy costs and energy poverty, while supporting the clean and just transition for transport and mobility; highlights, in this context, the role of the European Investment Bank Group in de-risking projects, as suitable, in areas such as industrial decarbonisation, water and waste infrastructure, bioeconomy, circular economy and climate adaptation;

Amendment 23

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

16b. Stresses the crucial role of local and regional authorities in the effective delivery of climate adaptation measures, environment and biodiversity protection, and quality-of-life investments; underlines that overly centralised implementation models can reduce responsiveness to local needs; calls on the Commission to ensure that future MFF programmes provide for simplified, proportionate and, where appropriate, direct access to funding for municipalities and local communities, in particular for water management, flood and drought prevention, air quality improvement, urban climate resilience and the mainstreaming of circular economy principles, providing support for waste prevention, reuse and recycling infrastructure, including by promoting consumer incentives such as deposit return schemes; calls for large-scale and locally-driven nature-based solutions such as tree and vine planting and ecological forest restoration initiatives in regions heavily affected by natural disasters and land degradation, with direct access to funding for regional and local authorities to achieve and maximise, to the best extent possible, environmental goals and benefits, and climate resilience, while strengthening rural economies;

Amendment 24

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

16c. Stresses that water resilience is vital to the EU’s strategic autonomy; calls on the Commission to ensure that the 2028-2034 MFF treats water resilience as a horizontal strategic priority; calls for increased support for modern climate-resilient water infrastructure and nature-based solutions to address flood and drought risks through increased water retention capacity, cross-border cooperation and targeted investments in water efficiency and infrastructure, including leakage reduction, reuse, efficient irrigation, a river-basin-based approach to water management and climate adaptation and resilience, and renewable-powered desalination, in order to safeguard drinking water supplies, ecosystems and agri-food production and support regional development; stresses that inland waters and seawaters are interconnected and calls for a holistic source-to-sea approach to prevent and reduce inland water pollution affecting sea basins and estuaries;

Amendment 25

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Regrets that the proposed NRPP Regulation (COM(2025)0558), which merges different policies into one plan per Member State, generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns, in addition, that the significant reduction in funding for Heading 1 also threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights, and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

17. Regrets that the proposed NRPP Regulation (COM(2025)0558), which merges different policies into one plan per Member State, generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries and risks diluting accountability; warns, in addition, that the significant reduction in funding for Heading 1 also threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights, ensuring food security, environmental sustainability including biodiversity protection, and water and climate resilience, and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers; calls on the Commission and the Member States to prioritise investments that are in line with the national restoration plans and the national energy and climate plans, in order to enhance the climate and environmental resilience and performance of the agri-food sector, implement advanced technologies, reduce nutrient losses and pesticide risks, and support farmers, particularly small and medium-sized farms, in the transition to more sustainable practices, while maintaining the economic viability and competitiveness of the sector and of rural areas;

Amendment 26

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity and providing European public goods; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration, ensuring fair competition and equal opportunities across all Member States;

18. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain and strengthen the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity and providing European public goods; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration and enabling the implementation of Union policies, ensuring fair competition, the clean transition and equal opportunities across all Member States; notes that preventive action to reduce cross-border health risks, including those related to air pollution and environmental degradation, and civil protection investments constitute European public goods with clear added value for citizens’ quality of life and economic resilience;

Amendment 27

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, economic, social and environmental sustainability, defence and civil protection, technological sovereignty and economic resilience, thereby supporting the implementation of the Clean Industrial Deal; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency, undermine funding predictability for final beneficiaries or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth, enhance innovation capacity, support the decarbonisation of the economy, boost environmental sustainability, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs and lead to new economic opportunities as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

Amendment 28

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20a. Stresses that the LIFE programme plays a central role in mainstreaming the EU’s environmental objectives and commitments, by providing targeted, long-term and high-quality support for nature conservation, biodiversity restoration, climate adaptation, pollution prevention and environmental governance, including where such actions do not easily fit within multi-purpose or competitiveness-driven funding instruments; considers, therefore, that actions currently supported under the LIFE programme should continue in a clear and operational manner, so that the implementation of environmental and climate policies on the ground remains effective and visible to beneficiaries and citizens; calls on the Commission to ensure that LIFE actions are implemented through transparent governance arrangements so that Parliament and stakeholders can track spending, objectives and results and avoid unnecessary fragmentation; calls for strengthened transparency and accountability safeguards for all beneficiaries, including the publication of awarded grants and project outputs;

Amendment 29

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20a. Calls for funding related to critical minerals to be sufficient and predictable in order to achieve the objectives set out under the RESourceEU framework; stresses that ensuring the availability of critical minerals is essential for the green transition and the long-term competitiveness and autonomy of the EU;

Amendment 30

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20b. Takes the view that in order to ensure the necessary continuity of the actions and aims currently set out under the LIFE programme, the anticipated actions should be continued in a self-standing programme with a dedicated budget line, while also considering other clear measures to ring-fence current LIFE activities;

Amendment 31

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20c. Recalls that civil society organisations play an important role under the LIFE programme in improving the governance of environmental, climate change and energy transition matters, including by enhancing stakeholder involvement at all levels, and through capacity-building, communication and awareness-raising activities; stresses that all public funding, including for advocacy activities, must be in line with the Commission guidance on funding for activities related to the development, implementation, monitoring and reinforcement of Union legislation; recalls, in this regard, the Commission’s statement of 1 April 2025 on the LIFE programme1a;

_________________

1a European Commission statement on the LIFE programme, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/da/statement_25_942.

Amendment 32

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21. Notes that Heading 3 ‘Global Europe’ is allocated EUR 190 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing a significant increase from EUR 121.5 billion in the current period while maintaining its 10 % share of the total MFF; considers that this reinforcement of EUR 68.5 billion is positive, as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including development needs, humanitarian crises and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; calls for the necessary funds to support enlargement and accession processes; warns that the merger of programmes could lead, once again, to weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement and reduced funding visibility for specific priorities, as occurred with NDICI-Global Europe; insists that the pillars maintain clear and separate budget lines to ensure transparency in allocations; recalls its position that the needs-based nature of humanitarian aid requires ring-fenced funding delivered through a stand-alone spending programme and dedicated nomenclature and underlines that effective humanitarian aid provision is contingent on predictability through a sufficient annual baseline allocation;

21. Notes that Heading 3 ‘Global Europe’ is allocated EUR 190 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing a significant increase from EUR 121.5 billion in the current period while maintaining its 10 % share of the total MFF; considers that this reinforcement of EUR 68.5 billion is positive, as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including the climate, biodiversity and pollution crises, development needs, humanitarian crises and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; calls for the necessary funds to support enlargement and accession processes; warns that the merger of programmes could lead, once again, to weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement and reduced funding visibility for specific priorities, as occurred with NDICI-Global Europe; insists that the pillars maintain clear and separate budget lines to ensure transparency in allocations; recalls its position that the needs-based nature of humanitarian aid requires ring-fenced funding delivered through a stand-alone spending programme and dedicated nomenclature and underlines that effective humanitarian aid provision is contingent on predictability through a sufficient annual baseline allocation;

Amendment 33

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21a. Stresses that the EU’s external action and enlargement policies must also contribute to initiatives targeted at environmental protection, climate action, water resilience, the clean and circular transition, and disaster preparedness in partner countries, particularly in neighbouring regions exposed to climate-related and environmental challenges; calls for the use of Global Europe instruments to support cross-border environmental cooperation, including in areas such as wildfire prevention and management, drought resilience and marine protection;

Amendment 34

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23a. Stresses the importance of the work of the European Chemicals Agency, the EEA and the European Food Safety Authority; calls for measures that ensure that funding allocations are directed at environmental and health protection objectives in an effective way, while avoiding unnecessary duplications;

Amendment 35

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23b. Recalls that the work of these agencies is highly dependent on IT infrastructure and that this needs to be reflected in appropriations; points out that further investment in digitalisation will be required in order to increase efficiency and effectiveness, strengthen cybersecurity and operational resilience, enable greater interoperability and deliver more timely services that are more user-focused, supported by artificial intelligence;

Amendment 36

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 25

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

25. Restates also its view that there should be a second special instrument, the Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters, dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters; considers that both special instruments should be able to carry over unspent amounts throughout the MFF period, to guarantee flexibility;

25. Emphasises the need to strengthen the EU’s capacity to prevent and respond to wildfires, floods, storms and other natural disasters, which are increasing in frequency and severity with climate change as a driving factor, particularly in vulnerable regions; stresses that prevention and preparedness measures, including nature-based solutions, are generally more cost-effective than post-disaster reconstruction; emphasises the need for preparedness and resilience by design to ensure that relevant programmes and activities support reforms and investments that strengthen disaster risk and crisis management, invest in climate resilience, enhance the resilience of vital societal functions, and build more resilient, secure and prepared societies; calls for a reinforced Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters and for adequate resources for the EU Civil Protection Mechanism, including investments in aerial firefighting capacity, early warning systems and the pre-positioning of assets in high-risk regions such as the Eastern Mediterranean; underlines that civil protection investments are high-value European public goods that reduce human, environmental and economic losses and should therefore be clearly prioritised in the MFF architecture; is concerned that the proposed funding will not be sufficient to effectively ensure strengthened protection and rapid responses, considering the serious threats posed by the dramatic increase in the number of natural disasters; stresses that the EU Civil Protection Mechanism should remain the primary EU-level framework for disaster preparedness, response and coordination;

Amendment 37

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries; acknowledges the need for flexibility but firmly rejects any approach that sacrifices transparency under the guise of efficiency; regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality, or democratic accountability; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap and undermine public trust in the EU;

30. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries; acknowledges the need for flexibility but firmly rejects any approach that sacrifices transparency, predictability and support to Union priorities under the guise of efficiency; regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality, or democratic accountability; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap and undermine public trust in the EU; underlines that simplification should primarily reduce burdens for final beneficiaries, including SMEs, rather than concentrating discretion in the executive; stresses that simplification and consolidation must not result in the loss of visibility of spending on climate mitigation and adaptation, the environment, biodiversity, circular economy and zero-pollution objectives;

Amendment 38

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 32 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

32a. Emphasises that biodiversity-, environmental- and climate-related expenditure must be integrated into the overall governance of the MFF, including through the use of dedicated biodiversity and climate methodologies to accurately monitor and track funding and its impacts based on solid tracking, coefficients and performance indicators as proposed in the new performance framework, regular reviews of spending effectiveness and the clear involvement of Parliament in the scrutiny of relevant programmes and instruments; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure that major infrastructure and investment projects supported by the MFF are consistent with the EU’s climate and environmental objectives through the improved and robust tracking of actions supported by the budget related to environmental objectives, while avoiding unnecessary administrative burdens for beneficiaries and maximising the effectiveness and efficiency of every euro invested; takes the view that this can be achieved by paying particular attention to aligning resources with strategic priorities; stresses that environmental conditionality should be predictable, proportionate and aimed at providing clarity for stakeholders;

Amendment 39

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 53

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

53. Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to identify new own resources, as well as putting forward certain calibrations to traditional own resources, with a view to strengthening the Union’s financial autonomy and reducing reliance on national contributions; supports the broader basket approach proposed by the Commission as this represents a realistic pathway to securing the necessary support in the Council; takes note of the various types of own resources proposed; underlines, however, that any basket of new own resources must imperatively be adopted at the same time as the next multiannual financial framework and must generate a stable and sufficient flow of revenues of at least roughly EUR 60 billion per year, as this level is essential to ensure steady repayment of borrowing undertaken under NGEU, meet the Union’s commitments and finance joint investment in European public goods; calls on the Council to swiftly reach agreement on new own resources in order to provide long-term budgetary certainty;

53. Notes the Commission’s efforts to identify new own resources, as well as putting forward certain calibrations to traditional own resources, with a view to strengthening the Union’s financial autonomy and reducing reliance on national contributions; supports the broader basket approach proposed by the Commission as this represents a realistic pathway to securing the necessary support in the Council; takes note of the various types of own resources proposed; underlines, however, that any basket of new own resources must imperatively be adopted at the same time as the next multiannual financial framework and must generate a stable and sufficient flow of revenues of at least roughly EUR 60 billion per year, as this level is essential to ensure steady repayment of borrowing undertaken under NGEU, meet the Union’s commitments and finance joint investment in European public goods; calls on the Council to swiftly reach agreement on new own resources in order to provide long-term budgetary certainty; considers that auction revenues derived from the ETS should remain earmarked for the purposes laid down in the Emissions Trading System Directive1a and should not be absorbed into the general financing of the Union budget in order to ensure consistency with the directive’s objective as an environmental protection measure; believes that the earmarking of this revenue is in line with the Union’s climate goals and should therefore be retained;

_____________

1a Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (OJ L 275, 25.10.2003, p. 32, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2003/87/oj).

Modification 40

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 13 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

13a. The Commission should structure the next MFF in a manner that clearly reflects the EU’s priorities in the coming years, particularly with respect to the resources needed to sustain the EU’s leading role in environmental policy, the just transition, public health and environment-related health problems;

Amendment 41

Motion for a resolution

Annex II – Heading 2 – row 9

Motion for a resolution

04

02

European Competitiveness Fund

207.40

231.42

24.02

Amendment

04

02

European Competitiveness Fund

207.40

225.02

17.62

Amendment 42

Motion for a resolution

Annex II – Heading 2 – row 9 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

04

02 (a)

Programme for the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE)

6.4

6.4

Amendment 43

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 2 – row 3 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

04

01

01 (a)

Support expenditure for the programme for the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE)

Amendment 44

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 2 – row 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

04

02 (a)

Programme for the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE)

Amendment 45

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 2 – row 8 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

04

02 (a)

01

Nature and biodiversity

Amendment 46

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 2 – row 8 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

04

02 (a)

02

Circular economy and quality of life

Amendment 47

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 2 – row 8 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

04

02 (a)

03

Climate change mitigation and adaptation

Amendment 48

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 2 – row 8 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

04

02 (a)

04

Clean energy transition

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

The rapporteur for opinion declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not include in his opinion input from interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Interim report on the proposal for the multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034

References

2025/0571R(APP)

Committee(s) responsible

Date announced in plenary

BUDG

13.11.2025

Opinion by

Date announced in plenary

ENVI

13.11.2025

Rapporteur for the opinion

Date appointed

Michalis Hadjipantela

8.12.2025

Discussed in committee

11.12.2025

Date adopted

5.3.2026

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

51

8

3

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols:

26.2.2026

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT AND TOURISM

for the Committee on Budgets

on the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2028 to 2034

(COM(2025)0571 – C100000/2025 – 2025/0571R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Merja Kyllönen

PA_Consent_Interim

OPINION

The Committee on Transport and Tourism submits the following to the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible:

Amendment 1

Motion for a resolution

Citation 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to Special report 02/2026 of the European Court of Auditors of 19 January 2026 entitled ‘EU transport infrastructure – Further delays and some cost increases, but a reinforced governance framework is in place for the future’ (an update of ECA special report 10/2020),

Amendment 2

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap, insufficient connectivity, the need to reinforce critical infrastructure, as well as the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

Amendment 3

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Opposes the merging of different policies in one plan per Member State, which generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns that the significant reduction in funding in Heading 1 threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

3. Opposes the merging of different policies in one plan per Member State, which generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns that a single national plan per Member State, as well as the significant reduction in funding in Heading 1, threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, including through the establishment and development of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T), safeguarding social rights and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

Amendment 4

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4. Welcomes the substantial increase proposed responding to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes in the Competitiveness Fund reduces transparency and limits Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that, even where programme mergers occur, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain the visibility of funding for individual priorities;

4. Welcomes the substantial increase proposed responding to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in research and innovation, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, transport, military mobility, technological sovereignty, and economic resilience; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes in the Competitiveness Fund reduces transparency and limits Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that, even where programme mergers occur, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain the visibility of funding for individual priorities;

Amendment 5

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

5. Welcomes the reinforcement of the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) – Global Europe as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including the United States’ retreat from its role as a global guarantor of peace and security, enlargement and development needs, humanitarian crises, and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; opposes the weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement, as well as the reduced funding visibility for specific priorities inherent in the design of Global Europe as proposed by the Commission;

5. Welcomes the reinforcement of the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) – Global Europe as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including the United States’ retreat from its role as a global guarantor of peace and security, enlargement and development needs, humanitarian crises, and the need to support Ukraine, Moldova, the Western Balkans and other partners; opposes the weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement, as well as the reduced funding visibility for specific priorities inherent in the design of Global Europe as proposed by the Commission;

Amendment 6

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6. Recalls its position that ‘simplification cannot mean more leeway for the Commission without the necessary checks and balances and must therefore be achieved with full respect for the institutional balance provided for in the Treaties’; opposes, therefore, the proposed approach that sacrifices transparency and controls under the guise of efficiency, compromising programme quality and democratic accountability, and undermining Parliament’s role as the budgetary and discharge authority; underlines Parliament’s commitment to securing the necessary transparency mechanisms to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests, which is vital to safeguard public trust in the EU;

6. Recalls its position that ‘simplification cannot mean more leeway for the Commission without the necessary checks and balances and must therefore be achieved with full respect for the institutional balance provided for in the Treaties’; opposes, therefore, the proposed approach that sacrifices transparency, coordination and controls under the guise of efficiency, compromising programme quality and democratic accountability, and undermining Parliament’s role as the budgetary and discharge authority; underlines Parliament’s commitment to securing the necessary transparency mechanisms to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests, which is vital to safeguard public support for and trust in the EU;

Amendment 7

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

7. Recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; underscores that the allocation of funds to specific policy objectives is to be decided jointly by Parliament and the Council; deplores the fact that the indicative nomenclature proposed in the programme legislation is woefully insufficient; reiterates its call for the post-2027 MFF to include two special instruments – one dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters and one for general-purpose crisis response;

7. Recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; underscores that the allocation of funds to specific policy objectives is to be decided jointly by Parliament and the Council; deplores the fact that the indicative nomenclature proposed in the programme legislation is woefully insufficient to ensure transparency, coherence and control of EU expenditure; stresses that any significant redeployment of funds must require the explicit approval of the European Parliament and the Council; reiterates its call for the post-2027 MFF to include two special instruments – one dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters and one for general-purpose crisis response;

Amendment 8

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Regrets that the proposed NRPP Regulation (COM(2025)0558), which merges different policies into one plan per Member State, generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns, in addition, that the significant reduction in funding for Heading 1 also threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights, and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

17. Regrets that the proposed NRPP Regulation (COM(2025)0558), which merges different policies into one plan per Member State, generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for managing authorities and final beneficiaries, and may create unnecessary competition for financial resources between fundamental EU policy areas; warns, in addition, that the significant reduction in funding for Heading 1 also threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights, and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

Amendment 9

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17a. Recalls that an efficient transport system has been and remains vital for European integration, territorial cohesion and strong supply chains that underpin the EU’s competitiveness and its resilience to both internal and external shocks; expresses concern, in this regard, that the proposed design of the national and regional partnership plans (NRPPs), which consolidate cohesion, social, agricultural and fisheries funds, may risk diluting much-needed transport priorities, jeopardising not only the achievement of the above-mentioned objectives but also urban mobility; emphasises, therefore, the importance of prioritising within the Cohesion Fund projects with high European added value that support TEN-T infrastructure, in order to better connect key transport corridors with outermost, peripheral and remote regions, rural and mountainous areas, islands, and less-connected and border regions; calls for funding for the national sections of the TEN-T to be earmarked in the NRPPs in order to ensure the timely completion of the TEN-T; draws attention, furthermore, to the fact that a budgetary allocation of EUR 11.3 billion has been transferred from the Cohesion Fund for direct management under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) for Member States eligible for Cohesion Fund support, which contributes to the development of the TEN-T and to economic convergence across the EU, with a particular focus on cross-border and missing links;

Amendment 10

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17b. Recalls that tourism is a strategic sector of the EU economy, contributing significantly to employment, in particular through small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and to economic, social and territorial cohesion, in particular in regions with permanent structural constraints, including islands, outermost regions, and coastal and rural areas; stresses that the tourism sector is particularly exposed to the adverse effects of climate change, seasonality and external shocks, and therefore requires targeted, proportionate and long-term support, also at EU level, in its transition towards sustainability, resilience and digital transformation; calls, consequently, for the inclusion of a specific long-term budget line on tourism under the next MFF, while emphasising the role of the NRPPs and the European Competitiveness Fund (ECF) in strengthening tourism;

Amendment 11

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity and providing European public goods; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration, ensuring fair competition and equal opportunities across all Member States;

18. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity and providing European public goods, in particular through cross-border projects; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration, ensuring fair competition and equal opportunities across all Member States;

Amendment 12

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, transport, military mobility, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth, as well as promote excellence and quality, stable and well-paid jobs as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

Amendment 13

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20a. Highlights that an efficient, innovative, sustainable and secure transport sector is fundamental to the internal market and the EU’s strategic security; calls for transport to be duly considered and adequately funded to continue strengthening its contribution to the EU’s competitiveness; stresses the need for clear visibility of the funding allocated to the various specific objectives of transport policy; underscores, furthermore, the importance of multimodal and intermodal transport, as well as urban hubs, as a structural driver for competitiveness, resilience and decarbonisation, stressing the need to develop, modernise, secure and optimise current infrastructure and ensure technical compatibility between different modes, including across borders; calls, therefore, for the systematic mainstreaming of transport needs across all ECF policy windows and, in particular, for a reinforced allocation of funds to the ECF policy windows ‘Clean transition and industrial decarbonisation’, ‘Digital leadership’ and ‘Resilience and security, defence industry and space’, together with close, complementary coordination between the CEF, the ECF and NRPPs;

Amendment 14

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20b. Draws attention to the legally binding deadlines set out in Regulation (EU) 2024/16791a for the completion of the core TEN-T by 2030 and the extended core TEN-T by 2040; reiterates that implementing the TEN-T is not only an objective enshrined in the TFEU, but is also crucial for Europe’s resilience and the proper functioning of the internal market; stresses that the full implementation of the TEN-T hinges on the timely completion of interoperable cross-border rail infrastructure, which is a precondition for a seamless single European rail area and is mandated by Regulation (EU) 2024/1679; recalls that the gross domestic product (GDP) multiplier of TEN-T investments is estimated at 3.3, meaning that every euro invested generates EUR 3.3 of additional GDP, and that each billion euro invested in the core TEN-T between 2017 and 2030 creates, on average, 13 000 additional job-years;

__________________

1a Regulation (EU) 2024/1679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network, amending Regulations (EU) 2021/1153 and (EU) No 913/2010 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 (OJ L, 2024/1679, 28.6.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1679/oj).

Amendment 15

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20c. Stresses that the CEF has proven instrumental in developing transport infrastructure and remains essential for completing cross-border projects, alleviating bottlenecks and addressing missing links in the TEN-T by delivering high-quality, sustainable infrastructure that ensures interoperability, multimodality and dual use; notes that EU co-funding under the CEF is particularly important for projects marked by high engineering complexity, limited commercial viability, high upfront costs and insufficient market finance, such as projects for cross-border sections; calls, therefore, for priority to be given to cross-border infrastructure investments with high added value for the EU, backed by a budget commensurate with current challenges and the objective of completing the TEN-T; calls for adequate budgetary allocations within the relevant MFF programmes to take into account the needs of outermost, peripheral and remote regions, islands, and less-connected and border regions – including strategic areas facing harsh geographic and climatic conditions, such as northern and Arctic territories – ensuring fair access to funding related to transport and military mobility for projects that improve connectivity and logistic supply chains, reinforce regional resilience and support the functioning of the single market; notes, furthermore, that connectivity with candidate countries, including through the Solidarity Lanes, should also receive adequate funding in order to facilitate their smooth integration into the internal market;

Amendment 16

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20d. Welcomes the proposed increase in the budget allocated to the CEF, but notes that, despite its co-financing nature, the envisaged allocation of EUR 51.5 billion (in current prices) for transport and military mobility remains vastly insufficient to meet the scale of the tasks ahead; recalls that, according to the TEN-T coordinators’ position paper of April 20241a, the total investment needed to complete the core and extended core TEN-T amounts to EUR 845 billion over the next 14 years; notes that the total investment costs for the main cross-border projects are estimated at EUR 200 billion, and that an additional EUR 140 billion is required for the major national projects underpinning the TEN-T; notes, furthermore, that the investment needs for the cross-border connections listed in the annex of the CEF proposal1b amount to EUR 100 billion; underscores the fact that these figures do not cover maintenance costs, which are projected to rise sharply over the next decade as the TEN-T infrastructure ages; recalls, in this context, that in previous negotiations on CEF I and CEF II, the Council has succeeded in lowering budget allocations by around 25 % compared to the budgets proposed by the European Parliament and the Commission; reiterates, therefore, that in the light of the identified financing needs and the clear cost-benefits of addressing the above-mentioned challenges, any cuts proposed by the Council would be detrimental to the EU’s long-term competitiveness, military deterrence capacity and its decarbonisation and digitalisation transitions; calls, consequently, for increasing the CEF financial envelope to up to EUR 100 billion in current prices (EUR 88.5 billion in constant prices), to safeguard the real value of EU investment over the programming period and to ensure the needs referred to above are met; stresses, moreover, that the transport budget allocation should not risk dilution in favour of other priorities within the CEF, and that military mobility should not again become politically vulnerable, as has happened previously; calls for any specific differentiation in the increase of transport and military mobility allocations within the CEF to be addressed in the relevant sectoral legislation and for both allocations to be protected from internal redeployments without the explicit approval of the budgetary authority;

__________________

1a Trans-European Transport Network, ‘Connecting Europe – A transport funding and financing that is adapted to the challenges ahead’, TEN-T Coordinators’ position paper, April 2024.

1b Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 July 2025 establishing the Connecting Europe Facility for the period 2028-2034, amending Regulation (EU) 2024/1679 and repealing Regulation (EU) 2021/1153 (COM(2025)0547).

Amendment 17

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20e. Underlines that effective military mobility is indispensable to European security and defence, and stresses that making up the EU’s strategic shortfalls in this area has become ever more urgent in the light of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; recalls the Council’s unprecedented 75 % cut to military mobility funding in the 2021-2027 MFF compared with the Commission’s and Parliament’s position; stresses that, in the current geopolitical climate, such underfunding must not recur, particularly given that Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 forced the military mobility budget to be frontloaded and fully exhausted by early 2024; takes note of the proposal in the forthcoming MFF to increase the military mobility budget within the CEF to EUR 17 billion; considers that, in view of the EU’s security environment and its commitments as a reliable NATO partner, military mobility should be treated as a distinct and durable priority within EU transport policy; insists, therefore, that the resources allocated to military mobility in the next MFF be considerably increased to meet the estimated investment of at least EUR 100 billion required to address the 500 identified hotspots1a; underlines, furthermore, that the financial envelope for the CEF should differentiate the budget allocated to transport from that allocated to military mobility, with their respective specific objectives reflected in appropriate budget lines, expressed both in constant and current prices, in order to ensure long-term predictability for large, cross-border and strategically relevant projects that no Member State can deliver alone; stresses that military mobility initiatives and funding must evolve in parallel with and not delay the completion of a smart, resilient, interoperable, decarbonised and sustainable TEN-T; asserts that the channelling of resources towards military mobility must be subject to close monitoring; points out that these investments will also benefit civilian transport infrastructure, thereby contributing to a stronger and more streamlined EU transport network;

__________________

1a Joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 16 October 2025 entitled ‘Preserving Peace – Defence Readiness Roadmap 2030’ (JOIN(2025)0027).

Amendment 18

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20f. Reiterates that predictability regarding the available budget and funding priorities is a key element for the CEF, as major, technically demanding and capital-intensive infrastructure projects require long-term planning and investments with centralised coordination at EU level; considers, therefore, that the increased level of flexibility and simplification proposed for the next MFF, in particular in relation to programme objectives, priority actions and budgetary allocations, is detrimental to the predictability necessary for the successful implementation of the CEF; stresses the need to maintain a stable and detailed CEF budget envelope in the next MFF to ensure predictability for beneficiaries, and calls for avoiding, as far as possible, redeployments within the CEF and to other programmes without the intervention of the budgetary authority, including any autonomous transfers by the Commission;

Amendment 19

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20g. Recalls the importance of the EU agencies in the implementation of EU transport policies and their central role in steering the transition towards safer, more sustainable and better-connected transport systems, supporting network modernisation, technological innovation and high environmental standards to ensure a safer and more sustainable European transport network; underlines that, in particular, the European Union Agency for Railways and the European Union Aviation Safety Agency are expected to face a further increase in workload stemming from their expanded responsibilities under the Military Mobility Package, as well as from upcoming legislative initiatives; insists that the evolving mandates of the three transport agencies be matched by adequate funding, in particular by ensuring sufficient available margins within Heading 2, so that new budgetary needs arising from additional tasks entrusted to these agencies are not met through redeployments from sectoral programmes such as the CEF; calls for staff ceilings in decentralised agencies to be assessed in the light of their financing structure, ensuring that agencies carrying out substantial fee-financed activities can align staffing with operational demand without increasing reliance on the EU budget;

Amendment 20

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries; acknowledges the need for flexibility but firmly rejects any approach that sacrifices transparency under the guise of efficiency; regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality, or democratic accountability; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap and undermine public trust in the EU;

30. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries, which is of crucial importance in particular for SMEs; acknowledges the need for flexibility but firmly rejects any approach that sacrifices transparency under the guise of efficiency; regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality, or democratic accountability; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap and undermine public trust in the EU;

Amendment 21

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 31

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

31. Notes with concern that the MFF proposals include widespread use of financing not linked to costs for a substantial portion of the instruments under the next MFF; draws attention to the fact that without adequate safeguards to ensure sound financial management in the implementation of Union funding or clear steps to address the shortcomings identified in previous or existing performance-based instruments, this approach entails substantial risks; considers that any possible increase in efficiencies cannot come at the expense of the protection of the financial interests of the Union; calls for appropriate oversight and accountability mechanisms to be established in all relevant legal acts;

31. Notes with concern that the MFF proposals include widespread use of financing not linked to costs for a substantial portion of the instruments under the next MFF; draws attention to the fact that without adequate safeguards to ensure sound financial management in the implementation of Union funding or clear steps to address the shortcomings identified in previous or existing performance-based instruments, this approach entails substantial risks; underlines that a solution needs to be found to address the divergences of cost-estimates connected to milestones and targets and that the real costs of a project need to be established; considers that any possible increase in efficiencies cannot come at the expense of the protection of the financial interests of the Union; calls for appropriate oversight and accountability mechanisms to be established in all relevant legal acts;

Amendment 22

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 39

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

39. Reiterates its call for a reinforced investment partnership with the EIB Group to leverage the EU budget, mobilise private investment and de-risk important policy areas such as climate, competitiveness, and innovation, defence and the external dimension;

39. Reiterates its call for a reinforced investment partnership with the EIB Group to leverage the EU budget, mobilise private investment and de-risk important policy areas such as climate, competitiveness, innovation, transport, tourism, defence and the external dimension; underlines that public-private partnerships and joint undertakings can improve the efficiency of transport infrastructure, provided they operate within a predictable regulatory framework;

Amendment 23

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 42

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

42. Insists that all substantive policy choices such as programme objectives, spending priorities, financial allocations, eligibility, selection and award criteria, conditions, definitions and calculation methods must be determined in the relevant legislation, with full respect for Parliament’s prerogatives as co-legislator and budgetary authority and not in the work programme; demands that any elements entailing policy choices that are not included in the basic act be adopted exclusively through delegated acts, rejecting any use of implementing acts or other procedures that would bypass parliamentary scrutiny; in this respect, requires that all multiannual and annual work programmes be adopted through delegated acts to ensure Parliament’s systematic involvement in policy decision-making; categorically rejects any attempt to relegate strategic decisions to comitology procedures or other arrangements; warns that Parliament will not accept any proposal that fails to guarantee its full legislative and oversight powers;

42. Insists that all substantive policy choices such as programme objectives, spending priorities, financial allocations, funding rates, eligibility, selection and award criteria, conditions, definitions and calculation methods must be determined in the relevant basic acts, with full respect for Parliament’s prerogatives as co-legislator and not in the work programme; demands that any elements entailing policy choices that are not included in the basic act be adopted exclusively through delegated acts, rejecting any use of implementing acts or other procedures that would bypass parliamentary scrutiny; in this respect, requires that all multiannual and annual work programmes be adopted through delegated acts to ensure Parliament’s systematic involvement in policy decision-making and scrutiny; categorically rejects any attempt to relegate strategic policy decisions to comitology procedures or other arrangements; warns that Parliament will not accept any proposal that fails to guarantee its full legislative and oversight powers;

Amendment 24

Motion for a resolution

Annex II – Heading 2

Motion for a resolution

Commitment appropriations (2025 constant prices, billion)

MFF proposal

EP Position (1.27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Multiannual Financial Framework

1.613,71

1.782,50

168,79

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

522,21

580,60

58,40

05

02

CEF (Transport, Energy, Military Mobility)

72,25

80,62

8,37

Amendment

Commitment appropriations (2025 constant prices, billion)

MFF proposal

EP Position (1.27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Multiannual Financial Framework

1.613,71

1.782,50

168,79

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

522,21

580,60

58,40

05

02

CEF (Transport, Energy, Military Mobility)

72,25

88,5

16,25

Amendment 25

Motion for a resolution

Annex III – Heading 2 – Title 5

Motion for a resolution

[…]

Amendment

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

05

Connecting Europe Facility (CEF)

05

01

Support expenditure for CEF

05

01

01

Support expenditure for CEF Transport

05

01

02

Support expenditure for CEF Military mobility

05

01

03

Support expenditure for CEF Energy

05

02

CEF Transport

05

02

01

Projects of common interest with cross-border dimension implementing the trans-European transport network,

05

02

01

01

Core network

05

02

01

02

Comprehensive network

05

02

02

Projects of common interest with Union dimension relating to the completion of a smart, resilient, decarbonised and sustainable trans-European transport network

05

02

02

01

Smart trans-European transport network

05

02

02

02

Resilient trans-European transport network

05

02

02

03

Decarbonised trans-European transport network

05

02

02

04

Sustainable trans-European transport network

05

02

03

Projects of common interest with cross-border dimension with third countries implementing the trans-European transport network

05

03

CEF Military Mobility

05

04

CEF Energy

05

04

01

projects of common interest and projects of mutual interest as set out in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2022/869

05

04

02

cross-border cooperation in the field of renewable energy

05a

Single Market

05a

01

Support expenditure for Single Market

05a

01

01

Support expenditure for Single Market and Customs Programme

05a

01

02

Support expenditure for Pericles (protection of the Euro)

05a

03

Single Market and Customs Programme

05a

03

01

Internal market, competition, consumers, standardisation

05a

03

01

01

Internal market, market surveillance and European standardisation (GROW)

05a

03

01

02

Company law (JUST)

05a

03

01

03

Support to competition policy (COMP)

05a

03

01

04

Internal market for financial services and international standards for finance and auditing (FISMA)

05a

03

01

05

Consumers (FISMA and JUST)

05a

03

02

Statistics

05a

03

03

Anti-fraud measures

05a

03

04

Customs

05a

03

05

Fiscalis

05a

04

Pericles (protection of the Euro)

05a

04

01

Pericles

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

The rapporteur for opinion declares under her exclusive responsibility that she did not include in her opinion input from interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Interim report on the proposal for the multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034

References

2025/0571R(APP)

Committee(s) responsible

Date announced in plenary

BUDG

13.11.2025

Opinion by

Date announced in plenary

TRAN

13.11.2025

Rapporteur for the opinion

Date appointed

Merja Kyllönen

16.12.2025

Discussed in committee

27.1.2026

Date adopted

24.2.2026

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

35

7

0

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols:

26.2.2026

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

for the Committee on Budgets

on the interim report on the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034

(COM(2025)0571 – C10-0000/2025 – 2025/0571R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Dragoş Benea

PA_Consent_Interim

OPINION

The Committee on Regional Development submits the following to the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible:

Amendment 1

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to Articles 311, 312 and 323 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

– having regard to Articles 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 311, 312, 323, 349 and 355 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

Amendment 2

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the report by Enrico Letta of 17 April 2024 entitled ‘Much more than a market’ (the Letta report),

Amendment 3

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the Commission report of 27 March 2024 entitled ‘Ninth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion’ (the Ninth Cohesion Report),

Amendment 4

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 8 May 2025 on the ninth report on economic and social cohesion1a,

______________

1a Texts adopted, P10_TA(2025)0098.

Amendment 5

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 10 September 2025 on the role of cohesion policy investment in resolving the current housing crisis1a,

__________________

1a Texts adopted, P10_TA(2025)0187.

Amendment 6

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2025/1914 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2025 amending Regulations (EU) 2021/1058 and (EU) 2021/1056 as regards specific measures to address strategic challenges in the context of the mid-term review1a,

__________________

1a OJ L, 2025/1914, 19.9.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2025/1914/oj.

Amendment 7

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the report of the High-Level Group on the Future of Cohesion Policy of 19 February 2024 entitled ‘Forging a sustainable future together: cohesion for a competitive and inclusive Europe’,

Amendment 8

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the Commission report of 27 March 2024 entitled ‘The long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas: key achievements and ways forward’ (COM(2024)0450),

Amendment 9

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 h (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 17 June 2025 on strengthening rural areas in the EU through cohesion policy1a,

______________

1a OJ C, C/2025/6257, 19.12.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/6257/oj.

Amendment 10

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 i (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 10 September 2025 on possibilities for simplification of cohesion funds1a,

______________

1a Texts adopted, P10_TA(2025)0188.

Amendment 11

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 j (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 8 March 2022 on cohesion policy as an instrument to reduce healthcare disparities and enhance cross-border health cooperation1a,

______________

1a OJ C 347, 9.9.2022, p. 27.

Amendment 12

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 k (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 10 September 2025 on the role of cohesion policy in supporting the just transition1a,

______________

1a Texts adopted, P10_TA(2025)0186.

Amendment 13

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 l (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 13 June 2023 on the assessment of the new Commission communication on outermost regions1a,

______________

1a OJ C, C/2024/480, 23.1.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/480/oj.

Amendment 14

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 m (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the European Court of Auditors Special report 24/2025 entitled ‘Financial instruments in Cohesion policy – A revolving use of funds materialised partially’,

Amendment 15

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 n (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to Regulation (EU) No 228/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 March 2013 laying down specific measures for agriculture in the outermost regions of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 247/20061a,

______________

1a OJ L 78, 20.3.2013, p. 23, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/228/oj.

Amendment 16

Motion for a resolution

Citation 9 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 10 September 2025 on the future of agriculture and the post-2027 common agricultural policy1a,

______________

1a Texts adopted, P10_TA(2025)0189.

Amendment 17

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

B. whereas the current MFF quickly proved its inadequacy in responding to a series of crises and new political challenges that were not anticipated at the time of its adoption; whereas, for the purpose of securing the necessary funding, the MFF was pushed to its limits including an unprecedented recourse to the flexibility provisions and special instruments, after exhausting the available margins;

B. whereas the current MFF quickly proved its inadequacy in responding to a series of crises and new political challenges that were not anticipated at the time of its adoption; whereas, for the purpose of securing the necessary funding, the MFF was pushed to its limits including an unprecedented recourse to the flexibility provisions and special instruments, redirecting funds destined for cohesion and regional development to other purposes, after exhausting the available margins; whereas the continued reprogramming of cohesion policy funds created unpredictability and an additional administrative burden and hampered the achievement of the policy’s long-term objectives; whereas crisis instruments should provide additional funding and not be used permanently to the detriment of existing programmes;

Amendment 18

Motion for a resolution

Recital C

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

C. whereas the MFF mid-term revision agreed in 2024 proved to be imperative due to the lack of resources that continue to undermine the current MFF to this day;

C. whereas the MFF mid-term revision agreed in 2024 proved to be imperative due to the lack of resources that continue to undermine the current MFF to this day; whereas it also had a negative impact on the overall budget of the cohesion policy for 2021-2027;

Amendment 19

Motion for a resolution

Recital D

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

D. whereas the establishment of the new MFF will be a critical moment for the Union, as it will provide for the possibility to endorse a common vision and decide on the future political priorities as well as the ability of the Union to deliver them;

D. whereas the establishment of the new MFF will be a critical moment for the Union, as it will provide for the possibility to endorse a common vision and decide on the future political priorities as well as the ability of the Union to deliver them, without neglecting the overall objective of reducing regional disparities across the EU and while preserving economic, social and territorial cohesion at EU level, as laid out in Article 174 TFEU;

Amendment 20

Motion for a resolution

Recital D a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Da. whereas the entire EU budget should strengthen economic, social and territorial cohesion by applying the ‘do no harm to cohesion’ principle across all headings and instruments;

Amendment 21

Motion for a resolution

Recital E

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

E. whereas on 16 July 2025, the Commission presented a set of proposals on the 2028-2034 MFF Regulation and the EU Own Resources Decision, followed by legislative proposals for the setting up of new EU programmes, funds and instruments;

E. whereas on 16 July 2025, the Commission presented a set of proposals on the 2028-2034 MFF Regulation and the EU Own Resources Decision, followed by legislative proposals for the setting up of new EU programmes, funds and instruments; whereas the proposals did not integrate Parliament’s key demands expressed in its resolution of 7 May 2025 on a revamped long-term budget for the Union in a changing world1a, in particular regarding cohesion; whereas the proposals do not guarantee a minimum level of funding for cohesion policy, and depart from the territorial logic that is needed for an effective cohesion policy; whereas the objective of a strong social union is not well reflected in the proposals; whereas the complexity of the financial instruments, combined with excessive bureaucracy, could discourage private investment in the regions of the EU; whereas a formal, fully fledged revised proposal for the NRPP Regulation from the Commission would have been more appropriate institutionally than some ‘non-paper suggestions’ to tackle the major issues highlighted by Parliament;

____________

1a European Parliament resolution of 7 May 2025 on a revamped long-term budget for the Union in a changing world (OJ C, C/2026/575, 24.2.2026, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/575/oj).

Amendment 22

Motion for a resolution

Recital E a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ea. whereas the architecture and allocations of the new MFF must comply with Article 174 TFEU and guarantee the ability of the cohesion policy to reduce development gaps between regions and support lagging regions through stable funding, strategic continuity and a clear place within the EU budget;

Amendment 23

Motion for a resolution

Recital E b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Eb. whereas the EU’s budget must remain accessible to all territories and include allocations for all categories of regions, based on an evidence-based assessment of territorial needs, in order to ensure fairness, predictability and long-term programming; whereas in accordance with Article 174 TFEU, particular attention should be paid to rural areas, areas affected by industrial transition, and regions that suffer from natural or demographic handicaps such as the northernmost regions with very low population density, and island, cross-border and mountain regions; whereas targeted investments are required to ensure the right to stay in these areas;

Amendment 24

Motion for a resolution

Recital E c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ec. whereas in accordance with Article 349 TFEU, the EU must devise and implement specific measures to support the outermost regions, and those measures must be incorporated into the next MFF in the form of an appropriate specific appropriation for those regions;

Amendment 25

Motion for a resolution

Recital E d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ed. whereas cohesion policy funding in 2021-2027 is estimated to support an increase in EU GDP of up to 0.5 % and create around 1.3 million jobs across the EU1a; whereas, according to the Ninth Cohesion Report, every euro invested through cohesion policy in the 2014-2020 and 2021-2027 periods will generate around three additional euro of GDP by 2043;

__________________

1a Commission staff working document of 28 April 2023 entitled ’ Cohesion 2021-2027: forging an ever stronger Union – Report on the outcome of 2021-2027 cohesion policy programming’ (SWD(2023)0134).

Amendment 26

Motion for a resolution

Recital E e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ee. whereas the implementation of investment projects funded by the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) has advanced more slowly than planned and the absorption of funds by 2026 is at significant risk in several Member States1a; whereas the RRF model, designed in an emergency framework and based mainly on the fulfilment of milestones and intermediate steps, cannot be a model for the MFF for 2028-2034, which must be based on stable multiannual programming, predictability and a genuine assessment of the results and impact of investments;

__________________

1a European Court of Auditors, Special report 13/2025, ‘Support from the Recovery and Resilience Facility for the digital transition in EU Member States – A missed opportunity for strategic focus in addressing digital needs’.

Amendment 27

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises; emphasises that, along with these new challenges, the EU still needs to address persisting structural problems such as the lack of convergence within and between Member States, the need for high-quality employment and equal opportunities, the threats to European food security or the demographic challenge;

Amendment 28

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

2. Underscores that the next MFF must focus on financing European public goods with discernible added value compared to national spending; rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration;

2. Underscores that the next MFF must focus on financing European public goods with discernible added value compared to national spending; rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would lead to a multi-speed Europe, fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, exacerbate territorial inequalities and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration; believes that the MFF should maintain the European perspective in its funding programmes and that there should be a coherent approach to the different national allocations to avoid creating major imbalances between Member States in terms of funding priorities; stresses that this is not incompatible with a certain degree of flexibility within specific policies and programmes to take account of national and regional specificities;

Amendment 29

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

3. Opposes the merging of different policies in one plan per Member State, which generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns that the significant reduction in funding in Heading 1 threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

3. Opposes the merging of different policies in one plan per Member State, which generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries, presents serious deficiencies in terms of governance, management and accountability, and goes against the principle of subsidiarity; warns that the significant reduction in funding in Heading 1 threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights and ensuring food security, environmental sustainability and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers; calls, therefore, for an allocation of at least EUR 886 237 615 000 (in 2025 prices) for Heading 1, which represents an 11 % increase on the Commission’s proposal, in order to guarantee an adequate level of funding for its main policies;

Amendment 30

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4. Welcomes the substantial increase proposed responding to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes in the Competitiveness Fund reduces transparency and limits Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that, even where programme mergers occur, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain the visibility of funding for individual priorities;

4. Welcomes the substantial increase proposed responding to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes in the Competitiveness Fund reduces transparency and limits Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives and may lead to a geographical concentration of funding; insists that, even where programme mergers occur, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain the visibility, predictability and funding for individual priorities;

Amendment 31

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4a. Is also concerned about the shift in emphasis and resources from cohesion to other areas and the effects that this will have on the performance and competitiveness of the EU single market; underlines that the cohesion policy is not charity or solidarity, but investment in the development of EU regions that underpins competitiveness and directly or indirectly benefits all Member States; stresses that strengthening the resilience of the regions reduces the external dependencies of the EU, making it less vulnerable and contributing to its strategic autonomy;

Amendment 32

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6. Recalls its position that ‘simplification cannot mean more leeway for the Commission without the necessary checks and balances and must therefore be achieved with full respect for the institutional balance provided for in the Treaties’; opposes, therefore, the proposed approach that sacrifices transparency and controls under the guise of efficiency, compromising programme quality and democratic accountability, and undermining Parliament’s role as the budgetary and discharge authority; underlines Parliament’s commitment to securing the necessary transparency mechanisms to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests, which is vital to safeguard public trust in the EU;

6. Recalls its position that ‘simplification cannot mean more leeway for the Commission without the necessary checks and balances and must therefore be achieved with full respect for the institutional balance provided for in the Treaties’; opposes, therefore, the proposed approach that sacrifices transparency and controls under the guise of efficiency, compromising programme quality and democratic accountability, and undermining Parliament’s role as the budgetary and discharge authority; underlines Parliament’s commitment to securing the necessary transparency mechanisms to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests, which is vital to safeguard public trust in the EU and ensure sound financial management;

Amendment 33

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6a. Underlines that the Commission should continue monitoring the use of funds under shared management, systematically tracking projects and initiatives funded by the EU and regularly publishing data on implementation and results on a single platform;

Amendment 34

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

7. Recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; underscores that the allocation of funds to specific policy objectives is to be decided jointly by Parliament and the Council; deplores the fact that the indicative nomenclature proposed in the programme legislation is woefully insufficient; reiterates its call for the post-2027 MFF to include two special instruments – one dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters and one for general-purpose crisis response;

7. Recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in allocating resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this must not compromise long-term policy objectives, funding predictability or Parliament’s prerogatives; warns, in this respect, that not providing for specific earmarking for all categories of regions and leaving 25 % of the national envelopes unprogrammed under the National and Regional Partnership Plans (NRPPs) undermines the Member States’ and regions’ abilities to plan long-term structural cohesion projects; underscores that the allocation of funds to specific policy objectives is to be decided jointly by Parliament and the Council; deplores the fact that the indicative nomenclature proposed in the programme legislation is woefully insufficient, as it fails to differentiate between key policies; reiterates its call for the post-2027 MFF to include two special instruments – one dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters and one for general-purpose crisis response;

Amendment 35

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

8. Underlines that compliance with Union values and fundamental rights is an essential prerequisite to access EU funds and believes that the protection of the Union’s financial interests depends on respect for the rule of law at national level; calls for any duplication or overlaps between existing and future legislation to be avoided, in particular for the proposal on the NRPPs where such overlaps are observed, and to ensure a unified, coherent and comprehensive framework across all EU funding programmes, under the umbrella of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation2 ;

8. Underlines that compliance with Union values and fundamental rights is an essential prerequisite to access EU funds and believes that the protection of the Union’s financial interests depends on respect for the rule of law at national level; calls for any duplication or overlaps between existing and future legislation to be avoided, in particular for the proposal on the NRPPs where such overlaps are observed, and to ensure a unified, coherent and comprehensive framework across all EU funding programmes, under the umbrella of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation2; calls for concrete safeguards so that regions, municipalities and final beneficiaries are not penalised for the non-fulfilment of rule of law requirements or breaches of the Charter of Fundamental Rights at national level;

__________________

__________________

2 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/2092/oj).

2 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/2092/oj).

Amendment 36

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

9. Reiterates the need for sustainable and resilient revenue for the Union budget that should match the expenditure side; welcomes the Commission’s efforts to identify new own resources, as well as to put forward certain calibrations to traditional own resources; supports the broader basket approach proposed by the Commission and calls on the Council to swiftly reach an agreement on new own resources in order to provide long-term budgetary certainty; considers that the revenue potential of a digital services tax should be explored as a possible solution, should other proposed own resources not gain support among Member States; notes the Commission’s proposal for a novel type of crisis mechanism based on extraordinary borrowing that offers the Union the ability to respond swiftly to unexpected developments;

9. Reiterates the need for sustainable and resilient revenue for the Union budget that should match the expenditure side; welcomes the Commission’s efforts to identify new own resources, as well as to put forward certain calibrations to traditional own resources, but believes that these proposals remain insufficient; supports the broader basket approach proposed by the Commission and calls on the Council to swiftly reach an agreement on new own resources in order to provide long-term budgetary certainty; considers that the revenue potential of a digital services tax should be explored as a possible solution, should other proposed own resources not gain support among Member States; notes the Commission’s proposal for a novel type of crisis mechanism based on extraordinary borrowing that offers the Union the ability to respond swiftly to unexpected developments;

Amendment 37

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10. Stands ready to work constructively and engage in meaningful negotiations with the Council and Commission to deliver a long-term budget that addresses the Union’s needs; highlights that the post-2027 MFF is being constructed in a far from ‘business as usual’ context and takes seriously its institutional role as enshrined in the Treaties; underlines that it will only approve a long-term budget that is fit for purpose for the Union in a changing world; calls for an agreement to be reached between the institutions by the end of 2026 and for the swift adoption of the MFF to enable timely implementation of spending programmes from 1 January 2028;

10. Stands ready to work constructively and engage in meaningful negotiations with the Council and Commission to deliver a long-term budget that addresses the Union’s needs; expects the Commission to involve the EU regions in the continuous consultation on the upcoming MFF, including by proactively consulting the regional parliaments; highlights that the post-2027 MFF is being constructed in a far from ‘business as usual’ context and takes seriously its institutional role as enshrined in the Treaties; underlines that it will only approve a long-term budget that is fit for purpose for the Union in a changing world, that respects the subsidiarity and proportionality principles and that takes into account regional priorities; calls for an agreement to be reached between the institutions by the end of 2026 and for the swift adoption of the MFF to enable timely implementation of spending programmes from 1 January 2028;

Amendment 38

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10a. Points out that implementing new EU legislation can entail very high costs for municipalities, particularly in remote or sparsely populated areas; considers that the implementing authorities must be equipped under the new MFF with sufficient financial resources to implement EU law, to enable them to comply with the new EU legislative norms; points out that these financial resources should correspond to the implementation costs that the local and regional authorities incur;

Amendment 39

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

12. Demands that the European Parliament be involved in all the stages of the MFF process, as required by Article 312(5) TFEU; considers that the Council must take due account of Parliament’s position set out here to secure Parliament’s consent in accordance with Article 312 TFEU;

12. Demands that the European Parliament be involved in all the stages of the MFF process, as required by Article 312(5) TFEU; considers that the Council must take due account of Parliament’s position set out here to secure Parliament’s consent in accordance with Article 312 TFEU; stresses that involving Parliament in the negotiations is a key element for ensuring democratic control and legitimacy for the next MFF;

Amendment 40

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

14. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU GNI, excluding NGEU repayments; considers that NGEU debt servicing should be treated separately from appropriations for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture bringing the total amount to 1.38 % of GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to deliver on its commitments, respond to geopolitical challenges and achieve its strategic objectives;

14. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU GNI, excluding NGEU repayments; considers that NGEU debt servicing should be treated separately from appropriations for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture bringing the total amount to 1.38 % of GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to deliver on its commitments enshrined in the Treaties, respond to geopolitical challenges and achieve its strategic objectives, in particular competitiveness, security and cohesion;

Amendment 41

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

15a. Calls on the Commission, in order to make sure that EU financial resources are spent where they bring the biggest added value, to organise public consultations on local and regional level, with the goal of understanding the funding needs of the local and regional authorities; calls for the participation of citizens in EU policymaking to be increased in this way;

Amendment 42

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

16. Notes that Heading 1 on ‘Europe’s social model and quality of life’ is allocated EUR 797.2 billion in 2025 prices, representing 45 % of the total 2028-2034 MFF; expresses deep concern that this is a decrease compared to the EUR 810.1 billion allocated in the 2021-2027 MFF, which amounted to 65 % of the total; considers this substantial cut unacceptable given the critical importance of maintaining the Union’s long-standing policies;

16. Notes that Heading 1 on ‘Economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, fisheries and maritime, prosperity and security’ is allocated EUR 797.2 billion in 2025 prices, representing 45 % of the total 2028-2034 MFF; expresses deep concern that this is a decrease compared to the EUR 810.1 billion allocated in the 2021-2027 MFF, which amounted to 65 % of the total; considers this substantial cut unacceptable given the critical importance of maintaining the Union’s long-standing policies and their capacity to deliver long-term objectives;

Amendment 43

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

16a. Underlines, in this regard that, in line with an obligation stemming from the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the EU must systematically mainstream the rights of persons with disabilities through all programmes in the post-2027 MFF by developing a methodology to track spending that benefits persons with disabilities, and by checking that all programmes and EU-funded projects guarantee equal opportunity and access for persons with disabilities;

Amendment 44

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17. Regrets that the proposed NRPP Regulation (COM(2025)0558), which merges different policies into one plan per Member State, generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for final beneficiaries; warns, in addition, that the significant reduction in funding for Heading 1 also threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights, and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

17. Regrets that the proposed NRPP Regulation (COM(2025)0558), which merges different policies and funds into one plan per Member State, generates significant uncertainty regarding funding predictability for policymakers, managing authorities and final beneficiaries, and may create unnecessary competition for financial resources between stakeholders and beneficiaries of various EU policies, create false incentives and politicise and delay the distribution of funds; insists that the one plan per Member State approach implicitly erodes the European dimension of the EU budget and reinforces the national dimension through excessive centralisation, excluding local and regional authorities from shaping priorities and undermining multilevel governance, partnership and the territorial dimension of spending; warns, in addition, that the significant reduction in funding for Heading 1 also threatens to undermine EU policies enshrined in the Treaties and the Union’s objectives of strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion, safeguarding social rights, and ensuring food security and a fair standard of living for farmers and fishers;

Amendment 45

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17a. Calls for the establishment of regional chapters in the NRPPs, in accordance with the Member States’ institutional frameworks, with clearly defined resources, partnership rules and a strong territorial focus; calls for the full involvement of regional and local authorities in the design, implementation, monitoring and application of cohesion policy, based on the current understanding of shared management, multilevel governance and the partnership principle, as regions alone have a complete understanding of territorial needs; stresses the need for clearly defined resources, partnership rules and a strong territorial focus, with regions acting as managing authorities, including in the definition of milestones and targets and the implementation of the plans, allowing national and regional priorities to be tailored to the specific characteristics of countries;

Amendment 46

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17b. Calls, furthermore, for more direct access to EU funding for regional and local authorities, as well as cities and urban authorities, for example by widening the use of integrated territorial investments;

Amendment 47

Motion for a resolution

Subheading 3 a (new) (before paragraph 17 c (new))

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Economic, social and territorial cohesion

Amendment 48

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17c. Notes that, as the proposal stands, it is not possible to determine the level of resources that will be available specifically for cohesion policy funds and cohesion objectives; stresses that managing authorities require clear and predictable financial envelopes to plan investments effectively, allocate resources according to regional and sectoral priorities and ensure timely implementation; calls for the cohesion policy to maintain its own clear, distinct and ring-fenced budget, separate from other policies and clearly identified in the EU budget nomenclature;

Amendment 49

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17d. Calls for the cohesion policy to remain a fundamental pillar of the EU growth model and the core long-term, decentralised investment policy for all regions, with a ring-fenced budget of at least EUR 268 324 200 000 for the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and EUR 51 954 600 000 for the Cohesion Fund (in 2025 prices); underlines that this is the minimum level necessary to ensure the financing of traditional cohesion objectives fostering convergence in areas such as digitalisation, research, development and innovation, the environment, transport and energy infrastructure, cross-border cooperation and social and other public services, but also for funding the new objectives and priorities within this policy as per the current NRPP proposal, such as a clean and just industrial transition, crisis and conflict preparedness, defence and security, housing, and the protection of democracy and the rule of law;

Amendment 50

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17e. Notes that, according to the Commission proposal, a minimum of EUR 218 billion from the non-ring-fenced part of the national envelopes will have to be invested in less developed regions; considers it unacceptable that the amount of EUR 218 billion is already 6 % lower than the 2021-2027 allocation for these regions for ERDF/European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) interventions alone; notes that common agricultural policy (CAP) and common fisheries policy (CFP) interventions in less developed regions, financed from the non-ring-fenced resources within the national plans, will count towards the minimum allocation for less developed regions; demands an actual ring-fenced allocation for less developed regions, to finance cohesion policy interventions exclusively;

Amendment 51

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17f. Considers it unacceptable that there is no earmarked funding for transition or more developed regions; draws attention to the fact that 11 Member States no longer have any regions below the threshold of 75 % of the EU’s average GDP and that, in the absence of clear obligations relating to territorial distribution, these Member States will be able to use cohesion policy funds without having to guarantee that they will be directed towards the regions with the greatest development gaps; emphasises that many regions, although not considered less developed, are currently caught in ‘development traps’ and face economic stagnation, demographic decline and persistent social vulnerabilities;

Amendment 52

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17g. Reiterates that cohesion policy funds should remain available to all categories of regions; calls for ring-fenced allocations for each category of region; demands that these allocations fund cohesion policy interventions exclusively, excluding CAP, CFP and home affairs interventions; calls for a safety-net mechanism that cannot be easily circumvented by the Member States, to prevent any region from facing a disproportionate reduction compared to the 2021-2027 period;

Amendment 53

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 h (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17h. Calls for the overall envelope for cohesion policy interventions to be distributed as follows:

(a) 75 % for less developed regions,

(b) 17 % for transition regions,

(c) 8 % for more developed regions;

Amendment 54

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 i (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17i. Calls for targeted allocations for regions facing permanent or exceptional challenges, including eastern border regions affected by the consequences of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the outermost regions and other territories covered by Articles 174 and 349 TFEU;

Amendment 55

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 j (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17j. Proposes to keep the same co-financing rate as in the current 2021-2027 programming period, including for the outermost regions; considers that specific co-financing rates should be envisaged for regions that are currently categorised as less developed regions but that will become transition regions in the future, as well as for the more developed regions in the Member States with a GNI per capita below 90 % of the EU average; calls for the possibility of setting higher co-financing rates for projects targeting vulnerable groups, on migration and integration, and on social innovation and for projects in rural and remote areas;

Amendment 56

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 k (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17k. Notes that the ERDF, the Cohesion Fund and the ESF allocations will be set ex post, once the Member States have decided which measures to fund as part of their national plans; warns that this approach renders these funds effectively obsolete; notes, furthermore, that the legislative proposals for these funds do not include funding priorities, eligibility criteria or intervention fields, which will be defined by the Commission, the Council and the Member States as part of the NRPPs and based on the future performance framework regulation1a; regrets Parliament’s diminished role and the risk of erosion of long-term investments with European added value;

__________________

1a Commission proposal of 16 July 2025 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a budget expenditure tracking and performance framework and other horizontal rules for the Union programmes and activities (COM(2025)0545).

Amendment 57

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 l (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17l. Recalls that, in line with Article 177 TFEU, the Cohesion Fund finances transport, environment and energy infrastructure in the Member States whose GNI per capita is under 90 % of the EU average; is worried that, in the next MFF, the Member States currently covered by the Cohesion Fund may not be able to benefit from the same level and conditions of funding for this type of investment as in the current and previous programming periods; underlines that the exclusion of the Cohesion Fund transfer to the Connecting Europe Facility negatively affects the allocation for the Member States that are eligible for the Cohesion Fund;

Amendment 58

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 m (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17m. Underlines that the identity of the cohesion policy need to be preserved; calls for clearly ring-fenced allocations for the ERDF, the ESF, the Cohesion Fund and the Just Transition Fund (JTF); considers that the specific objectives related to the cohesion policy funds should be defined in the fund-specific regulations;

Amendment 59

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 n (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17n. Notes with concern that only 14 % of the reduced Heading 1 allocation is earmarked for ‘social investments’; insists that this percentage is inadequate to meet the scale of current social challenges; calls for a stand-alone ESF with a dedicated and ring-fenced financial envelope, which ensures the achievement of all the objectives of the European Pillar of Social Rights;

Amendment 60

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 o (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17o. Calls for spending that has an impact on social cohesion to be consistent with the objectives of the European Pillar of Social Rights, especially with regard to reducing poverty, inequality and exclusion;

Amendment 61

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 p (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17p. Welcomes the possibility of using EU funds, especially cohesion policy funds, to finance decent, affordable and sustainable housing, which is an essential investment for strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion, combating energy poverty and social exclusion, and supporting labour mobility and the attractiveness of regions; considers that the significant contribution of cohesion policy funds to this specific objective in the NRPPs should be taken into account when determining the overall envelope of the policy;

Amendment 62

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 q (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17q. Calls for a dedicated budget line on housing; calls on the Commission to ensure that there is a major increase in EU public investment in affordable and sustainable housing; draws attention to the need to also promote and support public-private partnerships in this regard;

Amendment 63

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 r (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17r. Recalls the obligation to pay particular attention to areas affected by industrial transition under Article 174 TFEU; warns that the discontinuation of the JTF and the integration of the Social Climate Fund (SCF) into the NRPPs risk weakening the structural commitment to transition, effectively transforming a crucial instrument of territorial convergence (the JTF) into a mechanism focused purely on social income support (the SCF), thereby weakening the capacity to address structural challenges, including demographic decline; calls for a dedicated just transition instrument with ring-fenced resources and clear territorial criteria to be maintained;

Amendment 64

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 s (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17s. Recalls that, in accordance with Article 349 TFEU, the EU is required to take appropriate account of the specific and permanent challenges faced by the outermost regions in all relevant EU policies and instruments, including the MFF; notes that the Commission proposal leaves it to the Member States to decide how to account for such challenges; stresses that such regions are also strategic EU assets, as a result of their geographical position, and generate significant added economic and defence value for the EU; considers therefore that the specific additional allocation for outermost regions – a long-standing component of the cohesion policy, reflecting their special status – must be fully preserved in the next programming period;

Amendment 65

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 t (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17t. Recalls, in addition, that, in accordance with Article 174 TFEU, particular attention should be paid to the northernmost regions with very low population density, as recognised also in the accession treaties of Sweden and Finland; acknowledges the role of these regions in the EU’s strategic autonomy and in the clean transition; emphasises that the Greenland situation should serve as a warning not to leave gaps in EU action that can be exploited by foreign powers, with the EU left devoid of the instruments and tools needed to drive development; calls, therefore, for the additional allocation for the northern sparsely populated areas to be fully preserved in the next programming period;

Amendment 66

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 u (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17u. Proposes that the additional allocation for the outermost regions and the northern sparsely populated regions be set at a minimum of EUR 2 644 104 713 (in 2025 prices); stresses that this allocation alone is insufficient if the specific constraints of these regions are not systematically considered in the design, eligibility conditions and implementation rules of EU programmes;

Amendment 67

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 v (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17v. Stresses, furthermore, that the programme of options specifically related to remoteness and insularity (POSEI Agriculture) must be strengthened and preserved as a distinct EU instrument, outside the scope of national and regional plans, with the aim of ensuring stable, predictable support that is truly tailored to the needs of the outermost regions; calls for additional funding for the establishment of a POSEI Transport to mitigate the structurally high transport costs of the outermost regions and ensure mobility, connectivity and fair access to the single market; reiterates also the need to reinstate a POSEI Fisheries to address the additional costs of the sector and support its viability;

Amendment 68

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 w (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17w. Stresses that the regions on the EU’s eastern border with Ukraine, Russia and Belarus face specific threats and challenges resulting from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, as well as hybrid attacks from Belarus and Russia; stresses that building resilience and ensuring security in these regions should be a top priority; draws attention to the additional costs incurred by local and regional authorities in connection with the current situation, particularly in the areas of mobility, infrastructure resilience, security and migration; draws attention also to the deepening economic difficulties these regions are facing as a result of private investors’ apprehensions and declining investment levels owing to heightened tensions at the border; stresses, in this context, the importance of providing these regions with specific financial support and of establishing a programme with a dedicated budget for regions located on the EU’s eastern border with Ukraine, Russia and Belarus, in order to respond to their specific needs and challenges and to ensure their security; underlines the need, in this context, to revise the Guidelines on regional State aid1a;

______________

1a Commission communication of 29 April 2021 entitled ‘Guidelines on regional State aid’ (OJ C 153, 29.4.2021, p. 1).

Amendment 69

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 x (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17x. Welcomes the continuation of the Interreg programme in the next MFF, to be implemented within a single Interreg plan at EU level, aimed at a uniform and streamlined implementation of all four components of the programme; draws attention to the fact that Interreg’s envelope is separate from the NRPPs’ envelope, and considers that this should be properly reflected in the budgetary nomenclature; regrets the fact that, in 2025 prices, Interreg will receive EUR 9 billion, exactly the same amount as in 2021-2027; asks for a minimum allocation of EUR 10 853 336 400 (in 2025 prices) for Interreg, given its high EU added value and the growing cross-border cooperation needs on the EU’s eastern border, including with Ukraine and Moldova;

Amendment 70

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 y (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17y. Stresses that regions located on the Union’s eastern border with Ukraine, Russia and Belarus face unprecedented geopolitical, economic and social pressures, which generate additional costs for local and regional authorities in terms of infrastructure resilience, population mobility, social support and administrative capacity; considers, therefore, that further reflection is needed on these realities in relation to the level of financial support and the flexibility of Interreg programmes dedicated to external borders, so that allocations adequately reflect the specific risks and needs of these territories;

Amendment 71

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 z (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17z. Welcomes the inclusion of the PEACEPLUS programme in the MFF proposal but is concerned at the omission of a specific allowance in addition to an appropriate allocation from Ireland’s Interreg allocation, as was the case in the previous programme; calls for the additional allocation for the PEACEPLUS programme to be fully preserved;

Amendment 72

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 aa (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17aa. Stresses that the EU already provides substantial and indispensable support to cities and urban areas through the cohesion policy, further reinforced by several sectoral instruments; firmly insists, therefore, that the current ‘urban earmarking’ of at least 8 % of investments per Member State must be unequivocally maintained under the NRPPs;

Amendment 73

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 ab (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17ab. Highlights the growing challenge of keeping rural areas economically, socially and demographically viable, owing to factors such as the lack of essential services, high-quality jobs, infrastructure and opportunities for young people; calls for 10 % of cohesion policy funds to be reserved for cohesion policy objectives in rural communities, such as local transport infrastructure, digital connectivity and access to essential services such as healthcare, education, postal and banking services, to counteract rural depopulation and ensure balanced regional development;

Amendment 74

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 ac (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17ac. Encourages the Member States to use cohesion policy resources for the development of strategic food storage infrastructure in order to strengthen territorial resilience and crisis response capacity, including for the eventuality of armed conflicts or major disruptions of supply chains; stresses that such investments contribute to food security, the protection of the population and the continuity of critical public services at regional level, including during peacetime;

Amendment 75

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 ad (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17ad. Underlines the crucial role of community-led local development (CLLD) in achieving cohesion policy objectives, by supporting place-based, bottom-up and participatory approaches that empower local communities and build territorial capacity; calls for CLLD to be strengthened within the NRPPs, and for stability and continuity to be ensured for instruments that have proven their effectiveness in delivering territorial development, in particular LEADER and similar approaches such as the European Innovation Partnership – AGRI;

Amendment 76

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 ae (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17ae. Calls for future NRPPs, in which both the CAP and the cohesion policy are integrated, to prioritise the maintenance and modernisation of water infrastructure, as a key precondition for territorial cohesion, economic activity and long-term development; highlights the fact that several regions have already developed innovative and efficient water management and resilience models, demonstrating how sustainable water management and resilience can drive economic activity, innovation and job creation;

Amendment 77

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 af (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17af. Calls for the current structure of the CAP, consisting of two distinct pillars – Pillar I for direct payments and Pillar II for rural development – to be maintained; emphasises that Pillar II supports the development and modernisation of agriculture and rural areas, pursuing objectives that are distinct from those of cohesion policy and aiming primarily at enhancing the competitiveness of the agricultural sector; stresses, therefore, the need to maintain separate funding, in order to ensure the effectiveness of interventions, budgetary transparency and clarity, genuine complementarity between the CAP and cohesion policy, and the long-term sustainability of investments in agriculture and rural development;

Amendment 78

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 ag (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17ag. Calls for the setting up of an EU-level agricultural reinsurance mechanism to complement national insurance systems, which would take account of the increasing intensity, unpredictability and severity of extreme weather events; emphasises that the mechanism is a priority to improve resilience in the farming sector, ensure that farmers’ income remains stable, mitigate systemic risks and ensure fair competition conditions in the single market, while helping to keep agricultural production going and improving the EU’s food security;

Amendment 79

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 ah (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17ah. Stresses the need to ring-fence and secure separate funds to provide compensation for damage resulting from the adverse impact on agriculture of the EU-Mercosur trade agreement;

Amendment 80

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 ai (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17ai. Believes that territorial impact assessments including rural proofing should be carried out as part of the development and evaluation of the NRPPs;

Amendment 81

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 aj (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17aj. Notes that the Commission proposes an n+1 rule for decommitments within the NRPPs, as part of its efforts to accelerate implementation; points out that this rule, together with the planned front-loading of expenditure and the transition from a cost-based to a performance-based system, will put increased pressure on managing authorities, particularly in the first years of the next programming period, which will overlap with the closure of the current one; indicates that the n+1 rule may cause difficulties in implementing quality projects or large, strategic and long-term investments and discourage investments in territories with absorption difficulties; proposes an n+3 rule for the next programming period;

Amendment 82

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 ak (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17ak. Stresses that the provisions proposed for the EU Facility are very general and wide in scope and leave it to the Commission to identify the objectives and actions to be supported and to define how the EU Facility will be implemented by means of work programmes; emphasises that the detailed governance and implementation rules of the EU Facility should be decided by the co-legislators in the relevant codecision procedure;

Amendment 83

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity and providing European public goods; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration, ensuring fair competition and equal opportunities across all Member States;

18. Stresses that it is imperative to maintain the European dimension of the EU budget as a fundamental instrument for achieving common objectives, expressing Union solidarity, strengthening its cohesion, fighting the internal territorial, social and economic disparities, and providing European public goods; considers that this is only possible in the context of regular consultation with local and regional authorities, who are best equipped to assess local and regional needs and provide concrete actions; underlines that the EU budget must remain the financial backbone supporting the deepening of Union integration, ensuring fair competition and equal opportunities across all Member States and its territories;

Amendment 84

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 18 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

18a. Considers that, in order to guarantee fair and open access to EU funding, the Commission needs to increase its communication efforts and make information on the funding opportunities accessible to all potential beneficiaries;

Amendment 85

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 19

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

19. Rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration;

19. Rejects any move towards an ‘à la carte’ Europe where differentiated participation undermines the unity and coherence of EU policies and programmes; warns that such an approach would fragment the single market, create unfair competitive advantages, and erode the principle of solidarity that underpins European integration; regrets the loss of the European perspective in key EU structural policies such as cohesion, agricultural and fisheries policies; stresses that fund allocation should never be at the discretion of Member States, but should be based on shared management, partnership and multilevel governance; reiterates that the NRPPs should be drawn up in conjunction with regional and local authorities and should include a chapter for each region, given that the regions are the managing authorities responsible for planning and setting targets and milestones at regional level, and for putting the plans into practice; stresses, at the same time, that a balanced approach must be found and a certain degree of flexibility ensured within specific, separate policies and programmes, allowing national and regional priorities tailored to the specific characteristics of the countries concerned to be taken into account and new challenges to be addressed;

Amendment 86

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, including support for dual-use products, infrastructure and services, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster not just economic growth but also social, economic and territorial cohesion, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs and the ‘right to stay’, as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports; recalls the ‘do no harm to cohesion’ principle and warns that investing in competitiveness or innovation from a place-blind perspective, without acknowledging the territorial dimension of spending, risks concentrating high-value-added industries in certain more developed areas and Member States and exacerbating the current innovation divide; stresses the need to ensure equal access to funding opportunities for participants in all Member States and regions;

Amendment 87

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20a. Is convinced that, in order to ensure its competitiveness on the global stage, the EU needs to fully exploit the potential of all its regions; highlights the need for synergy and complementarity between cohesion policy funds and the Competitiveness Fund under Heading 2, to prevent any overlap or competition between instruments and to ensure instead that cohesion policy programmes become key drivers of regional competitiveness;

Amendment 88

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20b. Reiterates that micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) must be at the heart of the EU’s competitiveness strategy under the next MFF; stresses that EU competitiveness spending must primarily support the productive fabric of the EU, local value chains and territorially anchored economic activity, rather than concentrating resources on a limited number of large actors or projects; underlines that the cohesion policy plays a central role in strengthening the long-term competitiveness and resilience of MSMEs across all regions, which cannot be effectively done through fragmented or purely national approaches;

Amendment 89

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20c. Recalls the key role of smart specialisation strategies (S3) in strengthening regional innovation ecosystems and EU value chains; calls for S3 to remain a central tool linking place-based cohesion investments with EU-level competitiveness objectives and facilitating synergy between Headings 1 and 2;

Amendment 90

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20d. Points out that the next MFF should boost EU competitiveness through investments supporting lower energy prices, primarily through investments in a just energy transition and in public goods such as energy infrastructure and electrification; underlines that, without predictable cohesion policy funding, it would be extremely difficult to implement EU climate policy, achieve the 2040 and 2050 climate goals and increase the resilience and competitiveness of the EU economy across all regions;

Amendment 91

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20e. Stresses the importance of further strengthening and expanding InvestEU as part of the EU’s competitiveness framework, in order to ensure continued access to loans, guarantees and financial support for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs); underlines that InvestEU should provide more flexible and accessible financing instruments, particularly for SMEs, including but not limited to those operating within the social economy, which play a key role as drivers of local economic development, job creation and social cohesion, especially in depopulated and rural areas;

Amendment 92

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20f. Regrets the fact that, despite Parliament’s call for an increase in directly managed support for the protection of the environment and biodiversity and climate action, building on the current LIFE programme, the Commission did not propose to continue the LIFE programme which, since 1992, has been the cornerstone of EU funding for the climate and the environment; calls for LIFE to be reinstated as a stand-alone programme as part of the 2028-2034 MFF;

Amendment 93

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21. Notes that Heading 3 ‘Global Europe’ is allocated EUR 190 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing a significant increase from EUR 121.5 billion in the current period while maintaining its 10 % share of the total MFF; considers that this reinforcement of EUR 68.5 billion is positive, as it demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that this level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges including development needs, humanitarian crises and the need to support Ukraine and other partners; calls for the necessary funds to support enlargement and accession processes; warns that the merger of programmes could lead, once again, to weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement and reduced funding visibility for specific priorities, as occurred with NDICI-Global Europe; insists that the pillars maintain clear and separate budget lines to ensure transparency in allocations; recalls its position that the needs-based nature of humanitarian aid requires ring-fenced funding delivered through a stand-alone spending programme and dedicated nomenclature and underlines that effective humanitarian aid provision is contingent on predictability through a sufficient annual baseline allocation;

21. Notes that Heading 3 ‘Global Europe’ is allocated EUR 190 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing a significant increase from EUR 121.5 billion in the current period while maintaining its 10 % share of the total MFF; considers that this reinforcement of EUR 68.5 billion demonstrates the Union’s commitment to strengthening its role as a global actor in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment and helps to strengthen the overseas countries and territories associated with the EU; underlines the importance of this increase, given the scale of global challenges including development needs, humanitarian crises and the need to support Ukraine and other partners, and in particular to support Ukraine’s efforts in Russia’s war of aggression and in its accession, both of which have direct impacts on people’s quality of life, especially in the EU’s border regions; stresses that it is crucial to promote European preference, especially among candidate countries that benefit from funding to support their enlargement processes; warns that the merger of programmes could lead, once again, to weakened parliamentary oversight and involvement and reduced funding visibility for specific priorities, as occurred with NDICI-Global Europe; insists that the pillars maintain clear and separate budget lines to ensure transparency in allocations; recalls its position that the needs-based nature of humanitarian aid requires ring-fenced funding delivered through a stand-alone spending programme and dedicated nomenclature and underlines that effective humanitarian aid provision is contingent on predictability through a sufficient annual baseline allocation; underlines that respect for EU values and fundamental rights is an essential prerequisite for accessing EU funds, and believes that the protection of the EU’s financial interests relies on the beneficiaries of EU funds respecting the rule of law;

Amendment 94

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 22 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

22a. Stresses that such a well-functioning administration on the local and regional level is also key for the success of EU policies, including its territorial cohesion efforts; considers, therefore, that for every new obligation in EU law that falls on citizens and local and regional authorities, the EU should dedicate sufficient financial resources to guarantee the correct implementation of the new EU norms;

Amendment 95

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 23

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

23. Notes with concern that the Commission’s self-imposed stable staffing has proven inadequate to meet operational requirements; acknowledges that, for the 2028-2034 MFF, the Commission has requested additional posts; insists that the staffing needs of all institutions and bodies have to be taken into account when establishing additional posts; highlights the particularly alarming situation whereby some EU agencies receive inadequate operational funding, severely limiting their capacity to fulfil their mandates and deliver on policy objectives;

23. Notes with concern that the Commission’s self-imposed stable staffing has proven inadequate to meet operational requirements; acknowledges that, for the 2028-2034 MFF, the Commission has requested additional posts; insists that the staffing needs of all institutions and bodies have to be taken into account when establishing additional posts; highlights the particularly alarming situation whereby some EU agencies receive inadequate operational funding, severely limiting their capacity to fulfil their mandates and deliver on policy objectives; stresses that a strong EU administration is necessary to ensure the effective monitoring and evaluation of sectoral programmes and to support sound financial management and parliamentary scrutiny;

Amendment 96

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 25

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

25. Restates also its view that there should be a second special instrument, the Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters, dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters; considers that both special instruments should be able to carry over unspent amounts throughout the MFF period, to guarantee flexibility;

25. Restates also its view that there should be a second special instrument, the Solidarity Reserve for Natural Disasters, provided with an annual amount of EUR 3 billion (in 2025 prices) and dedicated to ensuring solidarity in the event of natural disasters; considers that both special instruments should be able to carry over unspent amounts throughout the MFF period, to guarantee flexibility;

Amendment 97

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 26

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

26. Notes that the Commission proposes EUR 88 billion for the Ukraine Reserve within the MFF regulation to finance pre-accession assistance, recovery and reconstruction efforts; considers that this amount could provide substantial support; observes, however, that should the conflict continue, this allocation would be insufficient to meet Ukraine’s needs; calls for an increase and frontloading of the Reserve, with a view to providing additional support to Ukraine;

26. Notes that the Commission proposes EUR 88 billion for the Ukraine Reserve within the MFF regulation to finance pre-accession assistance and forward-looking sustainable recovery and reconstruction efforts; considers that this amount could provide substantial support; encourages the efforts to end the conflict with a just peace; observes, however, that should the conflict continue, this allocation would be insufficient to meet Ukraine’s needs, particularly in view of the geographical spread of the challenges related to the impacts of the war across vast territories throughout the Ukrainian regions; calls for an increase and frontloading of the Reserve, with a view to providing additional support to Ukraine;

Amendment 98

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 28

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

28. Insists that the MFF regulation must require the Commission to present a review of the functioning of the MFF, by July 2031 at the latest, taking full account of the economic situation at that time, as well as the latest macroeconomic projections; is also of the view that such a compulsory review should, as appropriate, be accompanied by a legislative proposal for the revision of this Regulation in accordance with the procedures set out in the TFEU; stresses that any such revision should not reduce pre-allocated national envelopes, as set out in the NRPP Regulation;

28. Insists that the MFF regulation must require the Commission to present a review of the functioning of the MFF, by July 2031 at the latest, taking full account of the economic situation at that time, as well as the latest macroeconomic projections; is also of the view that such a compulsory review should, as appropriate, be accompanied by a legislative proposal for the revision of this Regulation in accordance with the procedures set out in the TFEU; stresses that any such revision should not reduce pre-allocated national envelopes or the agreed allocation for each regional and territorial chapter, as set out in the NRPP Regulation;

Amendment 99

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries; acknowledges the need for flexibility but firmly rejects any approach that sacrifices transparency under the guise of efficiency; regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality, or democratic accountability; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap and undermine public trust in the EU;

30. Takes note of the Commission’s narrative that its proposals seek to increase flexibility and simplification in the next MFF and calls on the Member States to refrain from taking measures at national level that undermine or dilute EU-level simplification efforts, including practices such as gold-plating; recalls that Parliament has consistently argued for simplification for final beneficiaries; acknowledges the need for flexibility but firmly rejects any approach that sacrifices transparency under the guise of efficiency; observes that simplification measures should entail a balance between the need for better accessibility to funds and the protection of the EU budget and should duly consider concerns and inputs from institutional and non-institutional stakeholders; regrets that the Commission’s simplification proposals primarily benefit its own processes rather than final beneficiaries, thereby exacerbating the democratic deficit in the Union; insists that simplification must not compromise programme quality, democratic accountability and the appropriate involvement of local and regional authorities and civil society; stresses that Parliament will put forward all the transparency mechanisms necessary to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests; warns that flexibility without transparency would widen the democratic accountability gap, increase the risk of corruption and maladministration and undermine public trust in the EU;

Amendment 100

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30a. Draws attention to the highly complex, rigid and overly extensive policy reference framework, which severely constrains the flexibility of the Member States and regions to define priorities reflecting national and regional specificities; warns that, under these conditions, the NRPPs are likely to become predominantly compliance-driven instruments, prioritising adherence to regulatory requirements over the effective addressing of genuine territorial needs and challenges;

Amendment 101

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30b. Considers that cohesion investments can, where relevant, also contribute to climate objectives without limiting the capacity of regions to respond to their own specific economic and social needs;

Amendment 102

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30c. Underlines the need to improve the relationship between cohesion policy and EU economic governance, while avoiding a punitive approach; stresses that the European Semester should comply with cohesion policy objectives under Articles 174 and 175 TFEU; calls for the participation of the regions in the fulfilment of these objectives and for a stronger territorial approach; calls for a process of reflection on the concept of macroeconomic conditionality and for the possibility to be explored of replacing this concept with new forms of conditionality to better reflect the new challenges ahead;

Amendment 103

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30d. Stresses that cohesion policy must be preserved as a long-term investment policy; underlines that it should remain primarily investment-oriented, with reforms pursued only where they facilitate investments; emphasises that the design of the reforms and investments must be conducted from the bottom up at the appropriate governance level, ensuring ownership by local and regional authorities as well as the Member States, while ensuring continuity and predictability for managing authorities and beneficiaries;

Amendment 104

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30e. Warns that linking access to funds to the fulfilment of milestones, targets and reforms set at national level may become an obstacle for regions and, in particular, for less developed or outermost regions, which have limited administrative capacity; underlines that there is a risk of these regions being deprived of funding for reasons external to the implementation of the cohesion policy, such as the non-fulfilment of national reforms outside the scope of cohesion; calls for all conditions set to be proportionate and clearly linked to the objectives and performance of the cohesion policy;

Amendment 105

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 30 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

30f. Believes that eligibility rules and State aid criteria for investments directed at the same policy goal should be consistent across programmes implemented in the same place, enabling programmes under shared management to benefit, where appropriate, from the application of the same criteria as for programmes under direct management;

Amendment 106

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 31

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

31. Notes with concern that the MFF proposals include widespread use of financing not linked to costs for a substantial portion of the instruments under the next MFF; draws attention to the fact that without adequate safeguards to ensure sound financial management in the implementation of Union funding or clear steps to address the shortcomings identified in previous or existing performance-based instruments, this approach entails substantial risks; considers that any possible increase in efficiencies cannot come at the expense of the protection of the financial interests of the Union; calls for appropriate oversight and accountability mechanisms to be established in all relevant legal acts;

31. Notes with concern that the MFF proposals include widespread use of financing not linked to costs for a substantial portion of the instruments under the next MFF; draws attention to the fact that without adequate safeguards to ensure sound financial management in the implementation of Union funding or clear steps to address the shortcomings identified in previous or existing performance-based instruments, this approach entails substantial risks, especially in terms of the complex nature of performance indicators; considers that any possible increase in efficiencies cannot come at the expense of the protection of the financial interests of the Union; calls for appropriate oversight and accountability mechanisms to be established in all relevant legal acts; notes that the model of financing not linked to cost is not feasible as a method for certain policy areas and groups such as vulnerable groups; calls, therefore, for relevant programmes, such as the ESF, to be able to opt out of using this model; warns that the issue of liability in cases of non-achievement of milestones has not been sufficiently addressed by the Commission proposal and that conflicts arising from this can seriously threaten the achievements of cohesion policy objectives; notes that the continued use of simplified cost options is impossible under the model of financing not linked to cost without the creation of an appropriate legal basis;

Amendment 107

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 32

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

32. Acknowledges the proposal for a Performance Regulation as a first step in putting in place a horizontal expenditure tracking and performance monitoring framework for the budget; considers that this approach can lead to greater coherence in the monitoring and implementation of EU spending programmes and in the mainstreaming of important EU objectives; stresses that the inclusion of horizontal principles in a single framework must enable more effective tracking methodologies and parliamentary scrutiny without creating additional burdens;

32. Stresses that any horizontal expenditure tracking and performance monitoring framework must be firmly anchored also in cost-based evaluation, ensuring a clear link between financial inputs and results achieved; warns that performance frameworks which dilute or remove cost-efficiency criteria risk weakening accountability, reducing parliamentary scrutiny and obscuring the real value added of EU spending; underlines that transparent, cost-related performance assessment is essential to improve budgetary design, strengthen citizens’ trust and ensure that EU funds deliver measurable and tangible outcomes for taxpayers;

Amendment 108

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 32 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

32a. Calls for the tracking methodology for gender mainstreaming to be further improved, in particular as regards granularity, and expects more detailed guidelines to be drawn up in consultation with Parliament and relevant stakeholders;

Amendment 109

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 32 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

32b. Takes note of the different approaches under the proposed Performance Regulation between direct management, where the regulation focuses on expenditure tracking, and shared management, where payments are conditional on the proposed indicators;

Amendment 110

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 32 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

32c. Underlines that, in the new performance framework, effective protection of the EU’s financial interests requires strong and reliable control systems; notes that the Commission continues to depend to a large extent on national system arrangements for ensuring compliance with EU and national rules, including in programmes implemented under direct management; stresses that enhanced traceability of expenditure, clear accountability structures and robust monitoring mechanisms are indispensable to prevent irregularities, ensure value for money and strengthen public trust in EU spending;

Amendment 111

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 36

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

36. Emphasises the need for robust governance ensuring parliamentary accountability, oversight and control, alongside an effective anti-fraud architecture; rejects any approach that limits Parliament to a consultative or information-only role in the mobilisation of any instrument or fund under the next MFF; stresses that budgetary flexibility must not circumvent the prerogatives of the budgetary authority and that all redeployments, reprogramming and mobilisation of cushions or other reserves must be subject to Parliament’s approval; considers that genuine flexibility requires both rapid response capacity and democratic legitimacy, which can only be achieved through Parliament’s full participation in decisions on the allocation and use of resources;

36. Emphasises the need for robust governance ensuring parliamentary accountability, oversight and control, alongside respect for multilevel governance and an effective anti-fraud architecture; rejects any approach that limits Parliament to a consultative or information-only role in the mobilisation of any instrument or fund under the next MFF; stresses that budgetary flexibility must not circumvent the prerogatives of the budgetary authority and that all redeployments, reprogramming and mobilisation of cushions or other reserves must be subject to Parliament’s approval; considers that genuine flexibility requires both rapid response capacity and democratic legitimacy, which can only be achieved through Parliament’s full participation in decisions on the allocation and use of resources;

Amendment 112

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 36 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

36a. Stresses that, under EU budget management, there must be a dedicated mechanism for consulting local people on EU funding, involving local authorities where appropriate; considers that the participation of the people living in remote and sparsely populated areas is essential in order to formulate budgetary needs; believes that such mechanisms of direct consultation on the EU budget will help people understand EU policies and their relevance to them; notes that participative elements of this kind in the EU budget would have a generally positive effect on public support for the EU integration project as a whole;

Amendment 113

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 37 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

37a. Notes that a flexibility amount corresponding to 25 % of allocations under the NRPPs is to be left unprogrammed, to be used in response to crises and emerging priorities; underlines that the inability to programme and use one quarter of the total NRPP allocation from the beginning of the programming period undermines the long-term treaty-based objectives of the cohesion policy; recalls its position that the cohesion policy should not be reduced to a crisis management tool; underlines, therefore, that the flexibility amount should be set at a maximum level of 5 % of the amount allocated to Member States under the NRPPs; emphasises that the flexibility amount should be definitively allocated following the mid-term review, except in unforeseeable crisis situations;

Amendment 114

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 37 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

37b. Believes that, before creating any new EU instrument, including territorial development instruments, within an ongoing programming period, the Commission must carry out a necessity test to demonstrate that objectives cannot be achieved by expanding the remit, funding and beneficiaries of existing programmes;

Amendment 115

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 42

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

42. Insists that all substantive policy choices such as programme objectives, spending priorities, financial allocations, eligibility, selection and award criteria, conditions, definitions and calculation methods must be determined in the relevant legislation, with full respect for Parliament’s prerogatives as co-legislator and budgetary authority and not in the work programme; demands that any elements entailing policy choices that are not included in the basic act be adopted exclusively through delegated acts, rejecting any use of implementing acts or other procedures that would bypass parliamentary scrutiny; in this respect, requires that all multiannual and annual work programmes be adopted through delegated acts to ensure Parliament’s systematic involvement in policy decision-making; categorically rejects any attempt to relegate strategic decisions to comitology procedures or other arrangements; warns that Parliament will not accept any proposal that fails to guarantee its full legislative and oversight powers;

42. Insists that all substantive policy choices such as programme objectives, spending priorities, financial allocations, eligibility, selection and award criteria, conditions, definitions and calculation methods must be determined in the relevant legislation, with full respect for Parliament’s prerogatives as co-legislator and budgetary authority and not in the work programme; considers that the allocation key should respect and be adapted to the specific objectives pursued by each policy; demands that any elements entailing policy choices that are not included in the basic act be adopted exclusively through delegated acts, firmly rejecting any use of implementing acts or other procedures that would bypass parliamentary scrutiny; in this respect, requires that all multiannual and annual work programmes be adopted through delegated acts to ensure Parliament’s systematic involvement in policy decision-making; categorically rejects any attempt to relegate strategic decisions to comitology procedures or other arrangements; warns that Parliament will not accept any proposal that fails to guarantee its full legislative and oversight powers;

Amendment 116

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 44

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

44. Underlines that compliance with Union values and fundamental rights is an essential 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 2021-2027 MFF; believes that the protection of the Union’s financial interests depends on respect for the rule of law and Union values 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;

44. Underlines that compliance with Union values and fundamental rights is an essential prerequisite to access EU funds; highlights the need for continued strong links between respect for the rule of law and access to EU funds; believes that the protection of the Union’s financial interests is intrinsically linked to respect for the rule of law and Union values; stresses that the Conditionality Regulation has been a key tool for protecting the EU’s financial interests against breaches of the rule of law, and that it should be applied whenever its legal conditions are met across the entire EU budget, including for performance-based instruments and funding provided for under Article 122 TFEU; calls on the Commission and the Council to apply the regulation strictly and consistently and to take measures without undue delay wherever necessary; stresses that direct risks to the EU budget are posed, in particular, by rule of law deficiencies that affect the judiciary and breaches pertaining to the functioning of the judicial system, cases of rules violations, manipulation or favouritism in calls for tender and applications involving EU funding, as well as cases of administrative harassment that undermine the equal treatment of local and regional authorities, companies or other final recipients and beneficiaries and their access to EU funds, and deficiencies affecting procurement, audit bodies, anti-corruption safeguards or control systems; stresses that such risks require the consistent and stringent application of conditionality; emphasises that the politicisation of public administration and undue concentration in procurement procedures represent systemic risks to the rule of law that threaten sound financial management;

Amendment 117

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 46

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

46. Demands that Union funds be withheld where essential requirements are not fulfilled and that frozen funds only be released to the Member States concerned once they have fully implemented meaningful reforms and verifiably demonstrated compliance with the rule of law in practice;

46. Demands that Union funds be withheld where essential requirements are not fulfilled and that frozen funds only be released to the Member States concerned once they have fully implemented meaningful reforms and verifiably demonstrated compliance with the rule of law in practice; stresses that relevant measures must ensure that final beneficiaries, and notably regions, municipalities and cities, are not penalised directly or indirectly for the failure of national authorities to comply with the conditions laid down in the Conditionality Regulation;

Amendment 118

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 47

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

47. Acknowledges that the Commission proposes, in the context of the NRPPs, the possibility to make funding that is decommitted because of a lack of remedial measures in response to an identified breach of the rule of law under the Conditionality Regulation available again to programmes in direct or indirect management; demands clarification as to how such decommitted amounts could be channelled to other programmes and calls for the prohibition of reshuffling of frozen funds; insists that the decision to use de-committed funds is a prerogative of the budgetary authority in the framework of the annual budgetary procedure and should not be left to the discretion of the Commission;

47. Welcomes the fact that the Commission proposes, in the context of the NRPPs, the possibility to make funding that is decommitted because of a lack of remedial measures in response to an identified breach of the rule of law under the Conditionality Regulation available again to programmes in direct or indirect management; believes that such an approach to conditionality may resolve the issues identified concerning the possibility of reallocating the suspended amounts and the protection of final recipients or beneficiaries, as the proposal provides for the funds to be made available again for use under direct or indirect management, in particular for instruments and programmes that contribute to supporting EU democracy, civil society, EU values or the fight against corruption and against the risk of organised crime infiltration; requests that funds suspended or frozen because of breaches of the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU must be considered forfeited by the Member State concerned and must not be reallocated to that Member State, but recommends that the funds that are made available again should be redirected, at least in part, to non-state actors primarily within the Member State where the violations occurred; insists that the decision to use de-committed funds is a prerogative of the budgetary authority in the framework of the annual budgetary procedure and should not be left to the discretion of the Commission;

Amendment 119

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 53 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

53a. Cautions, however, that, while changes to the system of own resources are inevitable, some of the ideas proposed by the Commission have a direct impact on the competitiveness of EU industries and businesses, an example being own resources based on revenue from the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and the Corporate Resource for Europe, which would disproportionately burden certain Member States; recalls, in particular, that the EU ETS is a market mechanism, not a fiscal instrument, with the purpose of reducing emissions, not generating revenue, and that after 2030, the number of allowances under the EU ETS and the revenue that this scheme generates will quickly decrease to zero;

Modification 120

Proposal for a regulation

Chapter 2 – Article 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Modification

Article 5a

In the event of either new rules being adopted after 1 January 2028 or the National and Regional Partnership Plans being adopted after 1 July 2028, the amounts corresponding to the allocations not used in 2028 shall be transferred in equal proportions to each of the years from 2029 to 2034 inclusive, and the corresponding MFF ceilings shall be adjusted accordingly, with the exception of those amounts needed to ensure income support for farmers for the year 2028.

Amendment 121

Motion for a resolution

Point 8 – Annex II – Heading 1

Motion for a resolution

Annex II: Breakdown per programme (constant prices)

Commitment appropriations (2025 constant prices, billion)

MFF proposal

EP Position (1.27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Multiannual Financial Framework

1.613,71

1.782,50

168,79

Heading 1: Europe’s Social model and quality of life, excluding NGEU

797,11

886,25

89,14

02

02

National and Regional Partnership Plans and Interreg Plan - Operational Expenditure

771,32

860,41

89,09

Support to the Turkish-Cypriot Community

0,39

0,43

0,04

Others

20,24

20,24

0,00

Margins

5,16

5,16

0,00

Amendment

Annex II: Breakdown per programme (constant prices)

Commitment appropriations (2025 constant prices, billion)

MFF proposal

EP Position (1.27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Multiannual Financial Framework

1.613,71

1.782,50

168,79

Heading 1: Economic, social and territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural, fisheries and maritime, prosperity and security

797,11

886,25

89,14

02

02

Economic, territorial and social cohesion as part of the National and Regional Partnership Plans

Of which European Regional Development Fund

268,32

Of which Cohesion Fund

51,95

Of which European Social Fund

Of which Just Transition Fund

02

03

Sustaining Europe’s quality of life as part of the National and Regional Partnership Plans

02

04

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security as part of the National and Regional Partnership Plans

02

05

Protecting the Union’s democracy, the rule of law and upholding Union values as part of the National and Regional Partnership Plans

02

06

Flexibility

02

07

EU Facility – Union actions

62,77

02

07

04

01

Other Union actions – urban innovation, sustainable urban development

0,482

02

07

04

02

Other Union actions – supporting cross-border and multi-country projects and interregional innovation investments

0,603

02

08

EU Facility – emerging challenges and priorities cushion

8,62

02

09

Interreg Plan

10,85

02

10

Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission

Additional funding for the outermost regions and the northern sparsely populated regions

2,64

Support to the Turkish-Cypriot Community

0,39

0,43

0,04

Others

20,24

20,24

0,00

Margins

5,16

5,16

0,00

Amendment 122

Motion for a resolution

Point 9 – Annex III – Heading 1

Motion for a resolution

Annex III: Indicative nomenclature (without pre-empting the outcome of the respective ordinary legislative procedures)

Heading 1: Europe’s Social model and quality of life

02

European Fund for Economic, Territorial, Social Cohesion, Agriculture and Rural, Fisheries and Maritime, Prosperity and Security

02

01

Support expenditure of the National and Regional Partnership Fund

02

01

02

Social Climate Plans Chapter - administrative expenditure

02

02

National and Regional Partnership Plans and Interreg Plan - Operational Expenditure

02

02

01

Europe’s sustainable prosperity

02

02

02

Europe’s defence capabilities and security

02

02

02

01

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security

02

02

02

02

Other

02

02

03

Supporting people, strengthening Europe’s societies and Europe’s social model

02

02

03

01

Resources from the Social Climate Fund / Social Climate Plan Chapter - Operational Expenditure

02

02

03

02

Other

02

02

04

Sustaining Europe’s quality of life

02

02

04

01

CAP and CFP interventions

02

02

04

02

Other

02

02

05

Protecting Union’s democracy, rule of law and uphold Union values

02

02

06

Flexibility

02

02

07

Interreg Plan

02

02

08

Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission

02

03

EU Facility

02

03

01

Union actions

02

03

01

01

Crisis situation - European Union Solidarity

02

03

01

02

Unity safety net (Stabilisation of agricultural markets)

02

03

01

03

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security

02

03

01

04

Other Union Actions

02

03

02

Emerging challenges and priorities cushion

Amendment

Annex III: Indicative nomenclature (without pre-empting the outcome of the respective ordinary legislative procedures)

Heading 1: Economic, territorial and social cohesion, agriculture and rural, fisheries and maritime, prosperity and security

02

European Fund for Economic, Territorial, Social Cohesion, Agriculture and Rural, Fisheries and Maritime, Prosperity and Security

02

01

Support expenditure of the National and Regional Partnership Fund

02

01

02

Social Climate Plans Chapter - administrative expenditure

02

02

Economic, territorial and social cohesion as part of the National and Regional Partnership Plans

02

02

01

Sustainable prosperity across all regions

02

02

01

01

Integrated development of urban and rural areas, including territorial services and infrastructure

02

02

01

02

Strengthening the Union’s industrial base

02

02

01

03

Supporting a just transition

02

02

01

04

Supporting the digital transformation

02

02

01

05

Supporting research, development and innovation

02

02

01

06

Furthering the savings and investments union

02

02

01

07

Supporting social and affordable housing

02

02

01

08

Enhancing Union transport infrastructure and contributing to the TEN-T infrastructure

02

02

01

09

Tourism, including sustainability

02

02

01

10

Supporting efficient water management

02

02

02

Europe’s defence capabilities and security

02

02

02

01

Reinforcing the Union’s defence industrial base and military mobility, in particular by developing dual-use TEN-T infrastructure

02

02

02

02

Strengthening preparedness to deal with crises and disasters

02

02

02

03

Strengthening the Union’s security

02

02

03

Strengthening social cohesion by supporting people, strengthening the Union’s societies and social model

02

02

03

01

Supporting employment

02

02

03

02

Improving education and the lifelong acquisition of skills

02

02

03

03

Promoting equal opportunities, fostering social inclusion, fighting poverty, supporting social infrastructure

02

02

03

04

Addressing demographic change

02

02

03

05

Addressing the social impacts of the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions from buildings and road transport

02

02

03

06

Resources from the Social Climate Fund / Social Climate Plan Chapter - Operational Expenditure

02

02

03

07

Other

02

03

Sustaining Europe’s quality of life as part of the National and Regional Partnership Plans

02

03

01

CAP pillar I interventions

02

03

02

CAP pillar II interventions

02

03

03

CFP interventions

02

03

04

Other

02

04

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security as part of the National and Regional Partnership Plans

02

05

Protecting Union’s democracy, rule of law and uphold Union values as part of the National and Regional Partnership Plans

02

05

01

Enhancing the efficiency of public administration and the institutional capacities of public authorities

02

05

02

Other

02

06

Flexibility

02

07

EU Facility – Union actions

02

07

01

Crisis situation - European Union Solidarity

02

07

02

Unity safety net (Stabilisation of agricultural markets)

02

07

03

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security

02

07

04

Other Union Actions

02

07

04

01

Other Union actions – urban innovation, sustainable urban development

02

07

04

02

Other Union actions – supporting cross-border and multi-country projects and interregional innovation investments

02

08

EU Facility – Emerging challenges and priorities cushion

02

09

Interreg

02

09

01

Cross-border cooperation

02

09

02

Transnational cooperation

02

09

03

Interregional cooperation

02

09

04

Outermost regions’ cooperation

02

10

Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission

Amendment 123

Motion for a resolution

Point 9 – annex III – heading 2 – line 04 03 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Programme for the environment and climate action (LIFE)

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

The Chair in his capacity as rapporteur for opinion declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not include in his opinion input from interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Interim report on the proposal for the multiannual financial framework for 2028-2034

References

2025/0571R(APP)

Committee(s) responsible

Date announced in plenary

BUDG

13.11.2025

Opinion by

Date announced in plenary

REGI

13.11.2025

Rapporteur for the opinion

Date appointed

Dragoş Benea

1.12.2025

Discussed in committee

3.12.2025

28.1.2026

Date adopted

25.2.2026

Result of final vote

+:

–:

0:

31

0

2

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols:

5.3.2026

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

for the Committee on Budgets

on the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2028 to 2034

(COM(2025)0571 – C100000/2025 – 2025/0571R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Stefano Bonaccini

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development submits the following to the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible:

Amendment 1

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

— having regard to Articles 311, 312 and 323 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

– having regard to Articles 311, 312, 323 and 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

Amendment 2

Motion for a resolution

Citation 1 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to Regulation (EU) No 228/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 March 2013 laying down specific measures for agriculture in the outermost regions of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 247/20061a,

_____________________

1a OJ L 78, 20.3.2013, p. 23, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/228/oj.

Amendment 3

Motion for a resolution

Citation 4 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the Commission communication of 3 May 2022 entitled ‘Putting people first, securing sustainable and inclusive growth, unlocking the potential of the EU’s outermost regions’, which sets out a renewed strategy for the outermost regions (COM(2022)0198),

Amendment 4

Motion for a resolution

Citation 4 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 10 September 2025 on the future of agriculture and the post-2027 common agricultural policy1a,

____________________

1a Texts adopted, P10_TA(2025)0189.

Amendment 5

Motion for a resolution

Citation 4 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the Vision for Agriculture and Food, introduced by the Commission on 19 February 2025,

Amendment 6

Motion for a resolution

Citation 4 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 13 June 2023 on the assessment of the new Commission communication on outermost regions1a,

______________________

1a OJ C, C/2024/480, 23.1.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/480/oj.

Amendment 7

Motion for a resolution

Citation 4 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to the findings of the Commission’s 2024 evaluation support study of the EU support schemes for agriculture in the outermost regions (POSEI) and smaller Aegean islands (SAI), which confirm the effectiveness and relevance of POSEI for food security and territorial, social and economic cohesion, and for maintaining agricultural activity in particularly vulnerable insular and outermost regions,

Amendment 8

Motion for a resolution

Citation 9 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 16 February 2023 on the Commission communication on ensuring availability and affordability of fertilisers1a,

_______________________

1a OJ C 283, 11.8.2023, p. 51.

Amendment 9

Motion for a resolution

Citation 9 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

– having regard to its resolution of 14 June 2023 on ensuring food security and long-term resilience of the EU agriculture1a,

___________________

1a OJ C, C/2024/483, 23.1.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/483/oj.

Amendment 10

Motion for a resolution

Recital A

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

A. whereas, pursuant to Article 311 TFEU, the Union must provide itself with the necessary means to attain its objectives and carry through its policies;

A. whereas, pursuant to Articles 311 and 349 TFEU, the Union must provide itself with the necessary means to attain its objectives and carry through its policies;

Amendment 11

Motion for a resolution

Recital A a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Aa. whereas the common agricultural policy (CAP) is one of the EU’s founding policies and reflects its key role in ensuring the supply of safe, high-quality food to over 450 million citizens, while contributing significantly to the economy through an agri-food system that generates approximately EUR 900 billion in added value and supports more than 30 million jobs; whereas the next multiannual financial framework (MFF) should recognise food security as a strategic priority for EU security and sovereignty;

Amendment 12

Motion for a resolution

Recital A b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ab. whereas 137 million Europeans live in rural areas, which account for 83 % of the EU’s territory; whereas cohesion policy and the CAP, in particular rural development under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, pursue distinct yet complementary objectives in supporting rural areas; whereas cohesion policy should address key challenges facing the EU, including regional disparities, demographic change and depopulation, by promoting employment, innovation, sustainable growth and local development, particularly in the regions and communities most in need; whereas, under the National and Regional Partnership Plans (NRPP) model, cohesion policy objectives and the CAP rural development objectives could compete for the same financial resources, thereby limiting complementarities and reducing potential synergies;

Amendment 13

Motion for a resolution

Recital A c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ac. whereas the current mandatory revision clause should be maintained in order to ensure the timely and effective adaptation of the EU budget to future financing needs, including those arising from further enlargement, without negatively affecting the stability of national envelopes, in particular under the CAP, so as to safeguard farmers’ income and planning security; whereas strengthening the eastern regions bordering Russia, Belarus and Ukraine through targeted support is of strategic importance, as their increased exposure to geopolitical pressures and lower administrative capacity lead to more acute challenges, including demographic decline and market disruptions, thereby weakening their territorial resilience and requiring reinforced support for farmers and rural communities in those regions;

Amendment 14

Motion for a resolution

Recital A d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ad. whereas Article 38 TFEU lays down that the Union shall define and implement a common agricultural and fisheries policy; whereas Article 39 TFEU sets out the objectives of the CAP, including to ‘ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, in particular by increasing the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture’ and that ‘account shall be taken of the particular nature of agricultural activity’ when ‘working out the common agricultural policy’; whereas Article 40 TFEU states that ‘in order to attain the objectives set out in Article 39, a common organisation of agricultural markets shall be established’ and that, to this end, ‘one or more agricultural guidance and guarantee funds may be set up’; whereas Article 175 TFEU establishes that ‘the Union shall also support the achievement of these objectives by the action it takes through the Structural Funds (European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, Guidance Section; European Social Fund; European Regional Development Fund)’;

Amendment 15

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

B. whereas the current MFF quickly proved its inadequacy in responding to a series of crises and new political challenges that were not anticipated at the time of its adoption; whereas, for the purpose of securing the necessary funding, the MFF was pushed to its limits including an unprecedented recourse to the flexibility provisions and special instruments, after exhausting the available margins;

B. whereas the current MFF quickly proved its inadequacy in responding to a series of crises, including the inflation crisis, and new political challenges that were not anticipated at the time of its adoption; whereas, for the purpose of securing the necessary funding, the MFF was pushed to its limits including an unprecedented recourse to the flexibility provisions and special instruments, after exhausting the available margins;

Amendment 16

Motion for a resolution

Recital D

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

D. whereas the establishment of the new MFF will be a critical moment for the Union, as it will provide for the possibility to endorse a common vision and decide on the future political priorities as well as the ability of the Union to deliver them;

D. whereas the establishment of the new MFF will be a critical moment for the Union, as it will provide for the possibility to endorse a common vision and decide on the future political priorities as well as the ability of the Union to deliver them; whereas setting those new priorities cannot come at the expense of traditional priorities or common EU policies that form the foundations of its political project, and which should remain central to the EU’s action and strategic autonomy and, therefore, its security and defence;

Amendment 17

Motion for a resolution

Recital E a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

Ea. whereas the Vision for Agriculture and Food, presented by the Commissioner for Agriculture and Food on 19 February 2025, recognises the essential role of farmers, fair income, simplified rules and targeted support for rural areas, and emphasises the need to secure stable and adequate funding for agricultural policy to maintain EU food production, competitiveness and rural livelihoods; whereas concerns have been expressed by farmers’ organisations and sectoral bodies that the Commission’s post-2027 MFF proposals risk undermining the financial stability and delivery of the Vision’s objectives by integrating the CAP into broader funding instruments without guaranteed and ring-fenced allocations;

Amendment 18

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises;

1. Calls for the 2028-2034 MFF to be set at 1.27 % of EU gross national income (GNI), excluding NextGenerationEU (NGEU) repayments, to ensure the Union’s capacity to achieve its political priorities and strategic objectives, as well as respond to emerging needs; considers that NGEU debt servicing, representing an additional 0.11 % of GNI, should be treated separately from funding for EU programmes within the future MFF architecture so as to ensure that available resources for these programmes remain unaffected, bringing the total to 1.38 % of EU GNI; stresses that this level is the absolute minimum to enable the Union to address major challenges, including the return of large-scale warfare in the Union’s immediate neighbourhood, a highly challenging economic and social backdrop, a competitiveness gap and the worsening climate and biodiversity crises; highlights the disproportionate effect of climate change on vulnerable populations and peripheral areas due to socio-economic factors, further hampering their ability to recover from disasters, particularly in less developed regions;

Amendment 19

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

4b. Calls for a POSEI scheme for transport, modelled on the POSEI scheme for agriculture, to be set up to support transport in the outermost regions in order to offset the abnormally high transport costs caused by structural characteristics, which have a direct impact on the cost of living, trade between regions, and business competitiveness; stresses that a dedicated POSEI scheme for transport outside the scope of cohesion policy funds would help cut transport costs by providing mobility and connectivity and safeguarding fair access to the single market, thereby enhancing competitiveness in these regions and the EU as a whole, without disadvantaging residents in these regions, who already face some of the highest costs of living in the EU;

Amendment 20

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

6. Recalls its position that ‘simplification cannot mean more leeway for the Commission without the necessary checks and balances and must therefore be achieved with full respect for the institutional balance provided for in the Treaties’; opposes, therefore, the proposed approach that sacrifices transparency and controls under the guise of efficiency, compromising programme quality and democratic accountability, and undermining Parliament’s role as the budgetary and discharge authority; underlines Parliament’s commitment to securing the necessary transparency mechanisms to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests, which is vital to safeguard public trust in the EU;

6. Recalls its position that ‘simplification cannot mean more leeway for the Commission without the necessary checks and balances and must therefore be achieved with full respect for the institutional balance provided for in the Treaties’; opposes, therefore, the proposed approach that sacrifices transparency, accountability and controls under the guise of efficiency, compromising programme quality and democratic accountability, and undermining Parliament’s role as the budgetary and discharge authority; underlines Parliament’s commitment to securing the necessary transparency mechanisms to fulfil its role as the guardian of citizens’ interests, which is vital to safeguard public trust in the EU;

Amendment 21

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

10. Stands ready to work constructively and engage in meaningful negotiations with the Council and Commission to deliver a long-term budget that addresses the Union’s needs; highlights that the post-2027 MFF is being constructed in a far from ‘business as usual’ context and takes seriously its institutional role as enshrined in the Treaties; underlines that it will only approve a long-term budget that is fit for purpose for the Union in a changing world; calls for an agreement to be reached between the institutions by the end of 2026 and for the swift adoption of the MFF to enable timely implementation of spending programmes from 1 January 2028;

10. Stands ready to work constructively and engage in meaningful negotiations with the Council and the Commission to provide a long-term budget that meets the Union’s needs; stresses that the post-2027 MFF is not being prepared in a ‘business as usual’ context and takes its institutional role, enshrined in the Treaties, seriously; points out that the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) was created in an exceptional crisis context; notes that the implementation of RRF-funded investment projects has advanced more slowly than planned and that the absorption of funds by 2026 is at significant risk in several Member States1a; stresses that the RRF model, designed as an emergency framework and based mainly on the fulfilment of milestones and intermediate steps, cannot serve as a model for the 2028-2034 MFF, which must be based on stable multiannual programming, predictability and a genuine assessment of the results and impact of investments; stresses that it will only approve a long-term budget that is fit for purpose for the Union in a changing world; calls for an agreement between the institutions by the end of 2026 and for the swift adoption of the MFF in order to allow for the timely implementation of spending programmes as of 1 January 2028;

_________________

1a European Court of Auditors (ECA) Special Report 13/2025 entitled ‘Support from the Recovery and Resilience Facility for the digital transition in EU Member States – A missed opportunity for strategic focus in addressing digital needs’.

Amendment 22

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17a. Strongly deplores the proposed reduction in funding for the post-2027 CAP and the shift away from the policy’s two-pillar structure; regrets the inclusion of the CAP in the NRPP, and stresses that this generates uncertainty as regards funding predictability for final beneficiaries; calls for a transfer of the provisions and measures relating to the agricultural policy currently included in the NRPP framework to the legal and financial framework of the CAP; takes note of the letter from the President of the Commission to the Presidents of Parliament and of the Council of 6 January 2026; regrets, however, that the proposal to increase the resources available for CAP relies mainly on voluntary flexibility mechanisms for Member States, which risk creating distortions, increasing administrative burdens and undermining predictability for farmers across different Member States; stresses that the proposed commitments should therefore be translated into real, tangible support for farmers, using the CAP distribution key for the allocation of funds; calls, therefore, for a robust, autonomous and clearly ring-fenced CAP budget in the next MFF, accompanied by stand-alone performance indicators and preserved at least at its current level in real terms, taking into account the high inflation rates recorded during the current programming period, and emphasises that the budget should be subject to annual indexation based on actual inflation rather than the application of the standard 2 % MFF deflator, in order to uphold the principle of non-regression and maintain the real purchasing power of the support granted to farmers; stresses that any reduction in Heading 1 funding would have a direct and disproportionate impact on farmers’ income stability, long-term predictability, production costs, the competitiveness of the agricultural sector and the EU’s food security and sovereignty; stresses that generational renewal is essential for the EU’s food security and for the long-term resilience of agriculture and rural areas; calls for a significant, ring-fenced share of CAP funding to be dedicated to supporting the establishment of young farmers; emphasises the need to support tailored investments that make agriculture more attractive to young, women and new farmers, particularly through improved access to land, complementary income support, farm succession, training, the digital transition, and specific mentoring programmes focusing on practical interregional exchanges and business planning; underlines that addressing climate, environmental and other challenges affecting rural areas, the agricultural sector and food security contributes to the economic viability and competitiveness of the sector and of rural areas and to the long-term stability of agricultural production, while stressing that climate resilience and environmental performance, objectives and horizontal spending targets must avoid any negative impacts on farmers, rural areas and the CAP, and must be accompanied by adequate funding and appropriate incentives;

Amendment 23

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 b (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17b. Underlines the importance of safeguarding the integrity, commonality and two-pillar structure of the CAP, with dedicated and sufficient funding for both pillars; expresses deep concern about the attempts to renationalise or merge fundamental EU policies through the proposed NRPP regulation, which would risk undermining a level playing field for farmers, the principles of subsidiarity and partnership, the integrity of the internal market, and the EU’s economic, social and territorial cohesion; recalls that preserving a common CAP, with earmarked funding supporting areas with natural constraints, contributes to the preservation of rural areas and to economic, social and territorial cohesion in line with Article 174 TFEU, particularly in territories facing permanent natural or demographic constraints and in mountainous areas; stresses that direct payments generate clear EU added value by reducing income inequality among farmers and mitigating the inflationary effect on land markets, and that these payments should continue to ensure income stability, high-quality production and protection against price volatility, while being better targeted at farmers actively engaged in agricultural production and in the provision of public goods, ensuring full financial predictability, legal certainty for CAP beneficiaries, and appropriate support for small, family and medium-sized farms; recalls that the provision of income support must remain strictly linked to the objectives of Article 39 TFEU, and rejects the application of macroeconomic conditionality to CAP payments and making such payments contingent on non-agricultural indicators, including those envisaged under the performance framework or milestones and targets set at national level; recalls, furthermore, that adequately financed sectoral programmes, particularly in the fruit and vegetable, wine and milk sectors, together with coupled support, remain necessary to support innovation and high-quality, sustainable production and to address sector-specific vulnerabilities and rising costs; calls for the administrative simplification of CAP rules, in particular for small and medium-sized farms; underlines the need to maintain and strengthen existing agricultural programmes and market-stabilisation tools, while also supporting biodiversity-related investments that contribute to productive capacity; calls, lastly, for the impact of EU agricultural subsidies to be maximised for farmers by ensuring that national measures outside the CAP are designed in such a way as not to negatively affect them; stresses that a fair and efficient distribution of CAP support, including direct payments, both within and among the Member States, is essential to ensure fair competition within the single market;

Amendment 24

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 c (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17c. Calls for the continuation and strengthening of measures that guarantee the viability of rural areas by ensuring the full involvement of local and regional authorities in their management and providing adequate financing through a rural development fund; underlines that this fund should target both farmers and rural communities, and include on-farm and off-farm measures supporting farm modernisation, innovation, climate adaptation, generational renewal, risk management and the reduction of regional disparities, while taking into account the different agronomic, social and economic conditions and leaving no one behind; calls for instruments such as LEADER, the European Innovation Partnership for Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability (EIP-AGRI), local action groups (LAGs) and quality schemes to remain adequately financed and anchored within the CAP, while allowing synergies with other policies; emphasises that co-financing rates for these measures should be maintained at their current levels in order to ensure a level playing field across the EU; highlights the fact that proposed higher co-financing rates at national level for CAP measures, including agri-environmental and climate actions and other rural development measures, may lead to both a reduced uptake of these measures by Member States and to uneven levels of support across the EU; stresses that the idea of a generic ‘rural target’ with no precise set of CAP measures to be supported cannot adequately address the complex and interconnected structural challenges faced by rural areas; calls, therefore, for a minimum ring-fenced budget for rural development to be maintained at least at current levels, comprising, among other things, the EUR 48.7 billion allocated for the rural target plus the additional EUR 45 billion made available for agriculture from the mid-term review funds for rural areas;

Amendment 25

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 d (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17d. Welcomes the increase in the agricultural crisis reserve in the Unity Safety Net as it will enable it to respond more effectively to future crises without undermining support for farmers or the long-term objectives of the CAP; calls for its rapid and transparent activation in cases of market disturbances, extreme weather events, cost crises or other situations directly affecting farmers; highlights the importance of identifying margins that allow additional resources to be pooled when necessary, such as in cases resulting from free trade agreements; calls for the establishment of new tools to manage and mitigate natural, market and sanitary risks, including an EU-level reinsurance scheme to provide greater stability, resilience and predictability for farmers;

Amendment 26

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 e (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17e. Stresses the need to support investments and practical agricultural innovation projects aimed at enhancing competitiveness and productivity, including through incentives for innovative and sustainable plant breeding, at strengthening territorial resilience and at ensuring a fair transition towards more sustainable practices in agriculture; underlines, in particular, the need to support increased digitalisation and modern, strategic infrastructure, including sustainable, modernised water infrastructure and irrigation systems, to improve crisis preparedness and climate and water resilience; emphasises, in that respect, that an adequate share of the proposed European Competitiveness Fund (ECF) should be ring-fenced for the farming sector to ensure a more effective use of the EU budget and to help make rural areas more attractive and enable new businesses to develop; underlines that it is essential for the ECF to finance projects that deliver EU added value;

Amendment 27

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 f (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17f. Recalls that, pursuant to Article 349 TFEU, the EU is required to devise and implement specific policies and programmes for the outermost regions in order to address their permanent structural constraints; stresses that this obligation should be fully reflected in the 2028-2034 MFF; emphasises, in this regard, that POSEI should be maintained and strengthened as a distinct and autonomous instrument, fully funded by the EU, and be provided with stable, dedicated and predictable resources; underlines that POSEI is an essential source of income for agricultural producers in the outermost regions and remains indispensable for maintaining agricultural activity, competitiveness and diversification and for promoting economic, social and territorial cohesion, thereby providing favourable conditions for investment, job creation and the retention of people in these areas; calls, in this context, for a dedicated and ring-fenced financial allocation outside the scope of the CAP Regulation1a so as to ensure the continuity of POSEI under the conditions laid down in Regulation (EU) No 228/20131b; notes, furthermore, that POSEI budgetary allocations have not been revised since 2007 and calls for them to be adjusted appropriately to reflect the cumulative impact of inflation;

____________________

1a Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 (OJ L 435, 6.12.2021, p. 187, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2116/oj).

1b Regulation (EU) No 228/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 March 2013 laying down specific measures for agriculture in the outermost regions of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 247/2006 (OJ L 78, 20.3.2013, p. 23, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/228/oj).

Amendment 28

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 g (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17g. Advocates the promotion of EU agricultural products to boost their competitiveness and relevance, including on external markets, with a view to further improving export opportunities;

Amendment 29

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17 h (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

17h. Highlights that any intention to increase the EU budget needs to be supported by increased contributions from Member States to make up for the lack of sufficient own resources;

Amendment 30

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence and security, including food security, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

Amendment 31

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20. Welcomes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

20. Notes the significant reinforcement of Heading 2 on ‘Competitiveness, prosperity and security’, which is allocated EUR 522.2 billion in 2025 prices in the 2028-2034 MFF, representing 30 % of the total MFF compared to EUR 224.8 billion or 17 % in the current period; notes that this more than doubling of resources reflects the Union’s commitment to research, strategic autonomy, the clean transition, defence, technological sovereignty and economic resilience; acknowledges that this substantial increase responds to Parliament’s long-standing calls for greater investment in these areas; stresses, however, that the consolidation of programmes must not reduce transparency and accountability or limit Parliament’s ability to ensure appropriate funding for specific policy objectives; insists that despite programme mergers, budget lines must remain sufficiently detailed to enable meaningful parliamentary oversight and maintain visibility of funding for individual priorities; recalls its position that competitiveness must foster economic growth, as well as promote quality, stable and well-paid jobs as underlined in both the Draghi and Letta reports;

Amendment 32

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 20 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

20a. Underlines the importance of maintaining at least the current level of funding for agricultural and agri-food research and innovation under Horizon Europe in order to strengthen competitiveness, resilience and food security, particularly in the face of climate change and animal diseases; highlights the need to streamline the application process and to increase and better target investment in research and innovation in agriculture and the agri-food sector, including by making full use of the bioeconomy strategy, digitalisation and innovation as essential tools, in order to enhance sustainability and competitiveness; stresses the need to develop and adopt adequately funded strategies to improve and strengthen the resilience of food production systems and preventive animal health measures, including veterinary vaccines and coordinated vaccination strategies across Member States, which should also be a priority under Horizon Europe;

Amendment 33

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 21 a (new)

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

21a. Calls for the development of an enhanced EU agri-food import control system, including the establishment of a specialist office to verify compliance with sanitary and phytosanitary standards, which would function as a genuine ‘agri-food Frontex’, with its own budget, technology and teams at EU border inspection points; emphasises that this mechanism is crucial to guarantee compliance with quotas, ensure food security for EU consumers and protect EU agricultural production from unfair competition from non-EU countries;

Amendment 34

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 28

Motion for a resolution

Amendment

28. Insists that the MFF regulation must require the Commission to present a review of the functioning of the MFF, by July 2031 at the latest, taking full account of the economic situation at that time, as well as the latest macroeconomic projections; is also of the view that such a compulsory review should, as appropriate, be accompanied by a legislative proposal for the revision of this Regulation in accordance with the procedures set out in the TFEU; stresses that any such revision should not reduce pre-allocated national envelopes, as set out in the NRPP Regulation;

28. Insists that the MFF regulation must require the Commission to present a review of the functioning of the MFF, by July 2031 at the latest, taking full account of the economic situation at that time, as well as the latest macroeconomic projections; is also of the view that such a compulsory review should, as appropriate, be accompanied by a legislative proposal for the revision of this Regulation in accordance with the procedures set out in the TFEU; stresses that any such revision should not reduce pre-allocated national envelopes, so as not to disrupt companies’ business plans, as set out in the NRPP Regulation;

Amendment 35

Motion for a resolution

Annex II

Text proposed by the Commission

Commitment appropriations (2025 constant prices, billion)

MFF proposal

EP Position (1.27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Multiannual Financial Framework

1.613,71

1.782,50

168,79

Heading 1: Europe’s Social model and quality of life, excluding NGEU

797,11

886,25

89,14

02

02

National and Regional Partnership Plans and Interreg Plan - Operational Expenditure

771,32

860,41

89,09

Support to the Turkish-Cypriot Community

0,39

0,43

0,04

Others

20,24

20,24

0,00

Margins

5,16

5,16

0,00

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

522,21

580,60

58,40

04

02

European Competitiveness Fund

207,40

231,42

24,02

04

03

Horizon Europe

154,88

172,82

17,94

04

04

EURATOM/ITER

8,71

9,71

1,01

04

05

INSC-D (Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation - Decommissioning)

0,85

0,95

0,10

04

06

Ignalina Programme

0,60

0,67

0,07

05

02

CEF (Transport, Energy, Military Mobility)

72,25

80,62

8,37

05

03

Single Market and Customs Programme

5,54

6,18

0,64

05

04

Pericles (protection of the Euro)

0,01

0,01

0,00

06

02

Erasmus+

36,19

40,38

4,19

06

03

AgoraEU

7,61

8,49

0,88

06

04

UCPM+ (EU Civil Protection Mechanism and health preparedness)

9,46

10,55

1,10

06

05

Justice

0,71

0,79

0,08

Others

10,92

10,92

0,00

Margins

7,09

7,09

0,00

Heading 3: Global Europe

190,00

211,25

21,25

07

Global Europe

176,83

197,49

20,66

08

02

Common Foreign and Security Policy

2,99

3,34

0,35

08

03

Overseas countries and territories

0,89

0,99

0,10

XX

XX

Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAS) And Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOS)

1,18

1,32

0,14

Others

1,00

1,00

0,00

Margins

7,12

7,12

0,00

Heading 4: Administration

104,40

104,40

0,00

Amendment

Commitment appropriations (2025 constant prices, billion)

MFF proposal

EP Position (1.27% GNI, excluding NGEU repayment)

Nominal change

Multiannual Financial Framework

1.613,71

1.782,50

168,79

Heading 1: Europe’s Social model and quality of life, excluding NGEU

797,11

886,25

89,14

02

02

National and Regional Partnership Plans and Interreg Plan - Operational Expenditure

771,32

860,41

89,09

02

02 04 01

CAP interventions - income support

minimum 293,7

320,72

27,02

02

02 04 02

CAP interventions - rural development

106,91

106,91

02

02 04 03

Unity Safety Net

6,3

6,3

02

02 04 04

POSEI

9,1

9,1

Support to the Turkish-Cypriot Community

0,39

0,43

0,04

Others

20,24

20,24

0,00

Margins

5,16

5,16

0,00

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

522,21

580,60

58,40

04

02

European Competitiveness Fund

207,40

231,42

24,02

04

03

Horizon Europe

154,88

172,82

17,94

04

04

EURATOM/ITER

8,71

9,71

1,01

04

05

INSC-D (Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation - Decommissioning)

0,85

0,95

0,10

04

06

Ignalina Programme

0,60

0,67

0,07

05

02

CEF (Transport, Energy, Military Mobility)

72,25

80,62

8,37

05

03

Single Market and Customs Programme

5,54

6,18

0,64

05

04

Pericles (protection of the Euro)

0,01

0,01

0,00

06

02

Erasmus+

36,19

40,38

4,19

06

03

AgoraEU

7,61

8,49

0,88

06

04

UCPM+ (EU Civil Protection Mechanism and health preparedness)

9,46

10,55

1,10

06

05

Justice

0,71

0,79

0,08

Others

10,92

10,92

0,00

Margins

7,09

7,09

0,00

Heading 3: Global Europe

190,00

211,25

21,25

07

Global Europe

176,83

197,49

20,66

08

02

Common Foreign and Security Policy

2,99

3,34

0,35

08

03

Overseas countries and territories

0,89

0,99

0,10

XX

XX

Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Agreements (SFPAS) And Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOS)

1,18

1,32

0,14

Others

1,00

1,00

0,00

Margins

7,12

7,12

0,00

Heading 4: Administration

104,40

104,40

0,00

Amendment 36

Motion for a resolution

Annex III

Text proposed by the Commission

Heading 1: Europe’s Social model and quality of life

02

European Fund for Economic, Territorial, Social Cohesion, Agriculture and Rural, Fisheries and Maritime, Prosperity and Security

02

01

Support expenditure of the National and Regional Partnership Fund

02

01

02

Social Climate Plans Chapter - administrative expenditure

02

02

National and Regional Partnership Plans and Interreg Plan - Operational Expenditure

02

02

01

Europe’s sustainable prosperity

02

02

02

Europe’s defence capabilities and security

02

02

02

01

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security

02

02

02

02

Other

02

02

03

Supporting people, strengthening Europe’s societies and Europe’s social model

02

02

03

01

Resources from the Social Climate Fund / Social Climate Plan Chapter - Operational Expenditure

02

02

03

02

Other

02

02

04

Sustaining Europe’s quality of life

02

02

04

01

CAP and CFP interventions

02

02

04

02

Other

02

02

05

Protecting Union’s democracy, rule of law and uphold Union values

02

02

06

Flexibility

02

02

07

Interreg Plan

02

02

08

Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission

02

03

EU Facility

02

03

01

Union actions

02

03

01

01

Crisis situation - European Union Solidarity

02

03

01

02

Unity safety net (Stabilisation of agricultural markets)

02

03

01

03

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security

02

03

01

04

Other Union Actions

02

03

02

Emerging challenges and priorities cushion

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

04

Competitiveness Fund

04

01

Support expenditure for Competitiveness Fund

04

01

01

Support expenditure for European Competitiveness Fund

04

01

02

Support expenditure for Horizon Europe

04

01

03

Support expenditure for EURATOM/ITER

04

01

04

Support expenditure for INSC-D (International Nuclear Safety Cooperation - Decommissioning)

04

01

05

Support expenditure for Ignalina Programme

04

02

European Competitiveness Fund

04

02

01

Clean transition and decarbonisation

04

02

02

Health and bioeconomy

04

02

03

Digital leadership

04

02

04

Resilience, Defence Industry and Space

04

02

05

Competitiveness Hub and Cross-cutting Competitiveness Actions

04

02

06

Contribution to ECF InvestEU Instrument

04

03

Horizon Europe

04

03

01

Excellent Science​

04

03

02

Competitiveness and Society

04

03

03

Innovation

04

03

04

European Research Area

04

04

EURATOM/ITER

04

04

01

EURATOM/ITER

04

04

01

01

Fusion

04

04

01

02

ITER - Construction, operation and exploitation of the ITER facilities — European Joint Undertaking for ITER — and the Development of Fusion Energy

04

04

01

03

Fission

04

04

01

04

Nuclear direct actions of the Joint Research Centre

04

05

INSC-D (Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation - Decommissioning)

04

05

01

International Nuclear Safety Cooperation

04

05

02

International Nuclear Safety Cooperation - Provisioning of the Common Provisioning Fund

04

05

03

Decommissioning

04

06

Ignalina Programme

04

06

01

Nuclear decommissioning assistance to Lithuania

05

Connectivity and Single Market

05

01

Support expenditure for Connectivity and Single Market

05

01

01

Support expenditure for CEF (Transport, Energy, Military Mobility)

05

01

02

Support expenditure for Single Market and Customs Programme

05

01

03

Support expenditure for Pericles (protection of the Euro)

05

02

CEF (Transport, Energy, Military Mobility)

05

02

01

CEF - Transport

05

02

01

01

Transport

05

02

01

02

Military Mobility

05

02

02

CEF - Energy

05

03

Single Market and Customs Programme

05

03

01

Internal market, competition, consumers, standardisation

05

03

01

01

Internal market, market surveillance and European standardisation (GROW)

05

03

01

02

Company law (JUST)

05

03

01

03

Support to competition policy (COMP)

05

03

01

04

Internal market for financial services and international standards for finance and auditing (FISMA)

05

03

01

05

Consumers (FISMA and JUST)

05

03

02

Statistics

05

03

03

Anti-fraud measures

05

03

04

Customs

05

03

05

Fiscalis

05

04

Pericles (protection of the Euro)

05

04

01

Pericles

06

Education, culture, rights and values (provisional title)

06

01

Support expenditure for education, culture, rights and values

06

01

01

Support expenditure for Erasmus+

06

01

02

Support expenditure for AgoraEU

06

01

03

Support expenditure for UCPM+ (EU Civil Protection Mechanism and health preparedness)

06

01

04

Support expenditure for Justice

06

02

Erasmus+

06

02

01

Education and training

06

02

02

Youth, Sport and the European Solidarity Corps

06

03

AgoraEU

06

03

01

Culture

06

03

02

Media

06

03

03

CERV (Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values)

06

03

03

01

Equality, Rights, Citizens and Values

06

03

03

02

Democratic participation and rule of law

06

03

03

03

Daphne

06

04

UCPM+ (EU Civil Protection Mechanism and health preparedness)

06

04

01

Civil protection - rescEU & Health preparedness

06

05

Justice

06

05

01

Justice

Heading 3: Global Europe

Title

Chapter

Article

Item

Description

07

Global Europe

07

01

Support expenditure for Global Europe cluster

07

01

01

Support expenditure for the Global Europe excluding Ukraine

07

01

02

Support expenditure for support to Ukraine

07

02

Europe Pillar

07

02

01

Enlargement - Preparation for accession

07

02

02

Eastern Neighbourhood - Programmes

07

02

03

Western Europe - Programmes

07

02

04

Support to Ukraine

07

02

10

Europe - Crisis, peace and foreign policy needs

07

02

11

Europe - Humanitarian Aid

07

02

12

Europe - Resilience

07

02

13

Europe - Competitiveness

07

02

14

Europe - MFA grants

07

02

20

Europe - Provisioning of the Common Provisioning Fund

07

02

30

Europe - Territorial and Cross-Border Cooperation

07

03

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf Pillar

07

03

01

Middle East - Programmes

07

03

02

North Africa - Programmes

07

03

03

The Gulf - Programmes

07

03

10

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - Crisis, peace and foreign policy needs

07

03

11

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - Humanitarian Aid

07

03

12

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - Resilience

07

03

13

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - Competitiveness

07

03

14

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - MFA grants

07

03

20

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - Provisioning of the Common Provisioning Fund

07

03

30

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - Territorial and Cross-Border Cooperation

07

04

Sub-Saharan Africa Pillar

07

04

01

West Africa - Programmes

07

04

02

East and Central Africa - Programmes

07

04

03

Southern Africa and Indian Ocean - Programmes

07

04

10

Sub-Saharan Africa - Crisis, peace and foreign policy needs

07

04

11

Sub-Saharan Africa - Humanitarian Aid

07

04

12

Sub-Saharan Africa - Resilience

07

04

13

Sub-Saharan Africa - Competitiveness

07

04

14

Sub-Saharan Africa - MFA grants

07

04

20

Sub-Saharan Africa - Provisioning of the Common Provisioning Fund

07

05

Asia and the Pacific Pillar

07

05

01

Central Asia - Programmes

07

05

02

South and East Asia - Programmes

07

05

03

The Pacific - Programmes

07

05

10

Asia and the Pacific - Crisis, peace and foreign policy needs

07

05

11

Asia and the Pacific - Humanitarian Aid

07

05

12

Asia and the Pacific - Resilience

07

05

13

Asia and the Pacific - Competitiveness

07

05

14

Asia and the Pacific - MFA grants

07

05

20

Asia and the Pacific - Provisioning of the Common Provisioning Fund

07

06

Americas and the Caribbean Pillar

07

06

01

Americas - Programmes

07

06

02

The Caribbean - Programmes

07

06

10

Americas and the Caribbean - Crisis, peace and foreign policy needs

07

06

11

Americas and the Caribbean - Humanitarian Aid

07

06

12

Americas and the Caribbean - Resilience

07

06

13

Americas and the Caribbean - Competitiveness

07

06

14

Americas and the Caribbean - MFA grants

07

06

20

Americas and the Caribbean - Provisioning of the Common Provisioning Fund

07

07

Global Pillar

07

07

01

Global Programmes

07

07

10

Global - Crisis, peace and foreign policy needs

07

07

11

Global - Humanitarian aid

07

07

12

Global - Resilience

07

07

13

Global - Competitiveness

07

08

Emerging challenges and priorities cushion

07

09

Completion of previous external action programmes

07

09

99

Completion of previous actions

07

09

99

01

Completion of previous actions under the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument

07

09

99

02

Completion of previous actions under Humanitarian Aid

07

09

99

03

Completion of previous actions under the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance

07

09

99

04

Completion of previous actions under the Reform and Growth Facility for Western Balkans

07

09

99

05

Completion of previous actions under the Ukraine Facility

08

Other External Action programmes

08

01

Support expenditure for other External Action programmes cluster

08

01

01

Support expenditure for the Common Foreign and Security Policy

08

01

02

Support expenditure for overseas countries and territories

08

02

Common Foreign and Security Policy

08

02

01

Common Security and Defence Policy of the European Union

08

02

01

01

EULEX Kosovo

08

02

01

02

Other civilian CSDP missions

08

02

01

03

Civilian CSDP emergency and preparatory measures

08

02

01

04

Other civilian CFSP actions

08

02

02

European Union Special Representatives

08

02

03

Non-proliferation, disarmament and arms export control

08

03

Overseas countries and territories

08

03

01

All overseas countries and territories

08

03

02

Overseas countries and territories other than Greenland

08

03

03

Greenland

08

03

99

Completion of previous programmes and activities

08

20

Pilot projects, preparatory actions, prerogatives and other actions

08

20

01

Pilot projects

08

20

02

Preparatory actions

08

20

03

Other actions

08

20

03

01

Provision of paid-up shares of subscribed capital of Multi-Lateral Development Banks

08

20

03

02

Callable portion of subscribed capital of Multi-Lateral Development Banks

08

20

03

03

International organisations and agreements

08

20

04

Actions financed under the prerogatives of the Commission and specific powers conferred on the Commission

08

20

04

01

International Organisations of Vine and Wine

08

20

04

02

External trade relations and Aid for Trade

08

20

04

03

Information policy and strategic communication for external action

08

20

04

04

Strategic evaluations and audits

08

20

04

05

Promotion of the coordination between the Union and Member States on development cooperation and humanitarian aid

Amendment

Heading 1: Europe’s Social model and quality of life

02

European Fund for Economic, Territorial, Social Cohesion, Agriculture and Rural, Fisheries and Maritime, Prosperity and Security

02

01

Support expenditure of the National and Regional Partnership Fund

02

01

02

Social Climate Plans Chapter - administrative expenditure

02

02

National and Regional Partnership Plans and Interreg Plan - Operational Expenditure

02

02

01

Europe’s sustainable prosperity

02

02

02

Europe’s defence capabilities and security

02

02

02

01

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security

02

02

02

02

Other

02

02

03

Supporting people, strengthening Europe’s societies and Europe’s social model

02

02

03

01

Resources from the Social Climate Fund / Social Climate Plan Chapter - Operational Expenditure

02

02

03

02

Other

02

02

04

Sustaining Europe’s quality of life

02

02

04

01

CAP - Income support

02

02

04

02

CAP - rural development measures

02

02

04

03

Unity Safety Net

02

02

04

04

POSEI

02

02

04a

CFP interventions

02

02

05

Protecting Union’s democracy, rule of law and uphold Union values

02

02

06

Flexibility

02

02

07

Interreg Plan

02

02

08

Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission

02

03

EU Facility

02

03

01

Union actions

02

03

01

01

Crisis situation - European Union Solidarity

02

03

01

02

Unity safety net (Stabilisation of agricultural markets)

02

03

01

03

Migration, asylum, border management, visa and internal security

02

03

01

04

Other Union Actions

02

03

02

Emerging challenges and priorities cushion

Heading 2: Competitiveness, Prosperity, and Security

04

Competitiveness Fund

04

01

Support expenditure for Competitiveness Fund

04

01

01

Support expenditure for European Competitiveness Fund

04

01

01

01

Support expenditure for European Competitiveness Fund - Agriculture component

04

01

02

Support expenditure for Horizon Europe

04

01

02

01

Support expenditure for Horizon Europe - Agriculture component

04

01

03

Support expenditure for EURATOM/ITER

04

01

04

Support expenditure for INSC-D (International Nuclear Safety Cooperation - Decommissioning)

04

01

05

Support expenditure for Ignalina Programme

04

02

European Competitiveness Fund

04

02

01

Clean transition and decarbonisation

04

02

02

Health and bioeconomy

04

02

03

Digital leadership

04

02

04

Resilience, Defence Industry and Space

04

02

05

Competitiveness Hub and Cross-cutting Competitiveness Actions

04

02

06

Contribution to ECF InvestEU Instrument

04

03

Horizon Europe

04

03

01

Excellent Science​

04

03

02

Competitiveness and Society

04

03

03

Innovation

04

03

04

European Research Area

04

04

EURATOM/ITER

04

04

01

EURATOM/ITER

04

04

01

01

Fusion

04

04

01

02

ITER - Construction, operation and exploitation of the ITER facilities — European Joint Undertaking for ITER — and the Development of Fusion Energy

04

04

01

03

Fission

04

04

01

04

Nuclear direct actions of the Joint Research Centre

04

05

INSC-D (Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation - Decommissioning)

04

05

01

International Nuclear Safety Cooperation

04

05

02

International Nuclear Safety Cooperation - Provisioning of the Common Provisioning Fund

04

05

03

Decommissioning

04

06

Ignalina Programme

04

06

01

Nuclear decommissioning assistance to Lithuania

05

Connectivity and Single Market

05

01

Support expenditure for Connectivity and Single Market

05

01

01

Support expenditure for CEF (Transport, Energy, Military Mobility)

05

01

02

Support expenditure for Single Market and Customs Programme

05

01

03

Support expenditure for Pericles (protection of the Euro)

05

02

CEF (Transport, Energy, Military Mobility)

05

02

01

CEF - Transport

05

02

01

01

Transport

05

02

01

02

Military Mobility

05

02

02

CEF - Energy

05

03

Single Market and Customs Programme

05

03

01

Internal market, competition, consumers, standardisation

05

03

01

01

Internal market, market surveillance and European standardisation (GROW)

05

03

01

02

Company law (JUST)

05

03

01

03

Support to competition policy (COMP)

05

03

01

04

Internal market for financial services and international standards for finance and auditing (FISMA)

05

03

01

05

Consumers (FISMA and JUST)

05

03

02

Statistics

05

03

03

Anti-fraud measures

05

03

04

Customs

05

03

05

Fiscalis

05

04

Pericles (protection of the Euro)

05

04

01

Pericles

06

Education, culture, rights and values (provisional title)

06

01

Support expenditure for education, culture, rights and values

06

01

01

Support expenditure for Erasmus+

06

01

02

Support expenditure for AgoraEU

06

01

03

Support expenditure for UCPM+ (EU Civil Protection Mechanism and health preparedness)

06

01

04

Support expenditure for Justice

06

02

Erasmus+

06

02

01

Education and training

06

02

02

Youth, Sport and the European Solidarity Corps

06

03

AgoraEU

06

03

01

Culture

06

03

02

Media

06

03

03

CERV (Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values)

06

03

03

01

Equality, Rights, Citizens and Values

06

03

03

02

Democratic participation and rule of law

06

03

03

03

Daphne

06

04

UCPM+ (EU Civil Protection Mechanism and health preparedness)

06

04

01

Civil protection - rescEU & Health preparedness

06

05

Justice

06

05

01

Justice

Heading 3: Global Europe

Title

Chapter

Article

Item

Description

07

Global Europe

07

01

Support expenditure for Global Europe cluster

07

01

01

Support expenditure for the Global Europe excluding Ukraine

07

01

02

Support expenditure for support to Ukraine

07

02

Europe Pillar

07

02

01

Enlargement - Preparation for accession

07

02

02

Eastern Neighbourhood - Programmes

07

02

03

Western Europe - Programmes

07

02

04

Support to Ukraine

07

02

10

Europe - Crisis, peace and foreign policy needs

07

02

11

Europe - Humanitarian Aid

07

02

12

Europe - Resilience

07

02

13

Europe - Competitiveness

07

02

14

Europe - MFA grants

07

02

20

Europe - Provisioning of the Common Provisioning Fund

07

02

30

Europe - Territorial and Cross-Border Cooperation

07

03

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf Pillar

07

03

01

Middle East - Programmes

07

03

02

North Africa - Programmes

07

03

03

The Gulf - Programmes

07

03

10

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - Crisis, peace and foreign policy needs

07

03

11

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - Humanitarian Aid

07

03

12

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - Resilience

07

03

13

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - Competitiveness

07

03

14

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - MFA grants

07

03

20

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - Provisioning of the Common Provisioning Fund

07

03

30

Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf - Territorial and Cross-Border Cooperation

07

04

Sub-Saharan Africa Pillar

07

04

01

West Africa - Programmes

07

04

02

East and Central Africa - Programmes

07

04

03

Southern Africa and Indian Ocean - Programmes

07

04

10

Sub-Saharan Africa - Crisis, peace and foreign policy needs

07

04

11

Sub-Saharan Africa - Humanitarian Aid

07

04

12

Sub-Saharan Africa - Resilience

07

04

13

Sub-Saharan Africa - Competitiveness

07

04

14

Sub-Saharan Africa - MFA grants

07

04

20

Sub-Saharan Africa - Provisioning of the Common Provisioning Fund

07

05

Asia and the Pacific Pillar

07

05

01

Central Asia - Programmes

07

05

02

South and East Asia - Programmes

07

05

03

The Pacific - Programmes

07

05

10

Asia and the Pacific - Crisis, peace and foreign policy needs

07

05

11

Asia and the Pacific - Humanitarian Aid

07

05

12

Asia and the Pacific - Resilience

07

05

13

Asia and the Pacific - Competitiveness

07

05

14

Asia and the Pacific - MFA grants

07

05

20

Asia and the Pacific - Provisioning of the Common Provisioning Fund

07

06

Americas and the Caribbean Pillar

07

06

01

Americas - Programmes

07

06

02

The Caribbean - Programmes

07

06