Sittings · Document
Draft report (2025/2145(DEC)) 2026-02-20
Discharge 2024: General budget of the EU - Commission
Committee on Budgetary Control
Amendment 1
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 1a. Deplores the fact that, contrary to the stated values and very purpose of the founding of the Union, the Commission is regularly the subject of scandals involving its Commissioners or their close advisors: the Commissioner for Justice’s alleged money laundering through lottery tickets (potentially EUR 1 million); the Commission’s inexplicable leniency with regard to its Director-General for Transport, who is alleged to have accepted free flights from Qatar Airways; the Commission’s inexcusable decision to give seven years’ paid leave with a total salary of EUR 1,5 million to one of its directors accused of rape, without any attempt to recover the funds after the final conviction; the revolving-door case involving the appointment, to a role in a gas company, of an advisor to the Commission Vice-President in charge of the environment and the Green Deal, and by its operation; the scandal over the administration of the Trust Fund for Africa, which was denounced by the European Court of Auditors; the scandal of the Commission financing NGOs with public funds to help it have a pseudo-climate legislative package (Green Deal) adopted through lobbying; the financing of NGOs that are close to immigrationist, terrorist or Islamist movements; |
Or. fr
Amendment 2
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 2. Recalls that respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights is a precondition for sound financial management of the Union budget and that the Commission has a wide range of instruments at its disposal to ensure respect for these principles; notes with serious concern the continued rule of law backsliding, systemic corruption and attacks on fundamental rights in several Member States, with direct implications for the sound management of Union funds; highlights in particular the deteriorating situation in Hungary, marked by widespread corruption and entrenched oligarchic networks; deplores that, while problems persist or worsen, the pressure exerted by the Commission to induce meaningful reforms has diminished as the amounts of funds that remain frozen are decreasing; stresses that the Commission needs to move beyond monitoring and to make full and consistent use of the available instruments to suspend or protect Union funding where rule of law deficiencies affect sound financial management, in Hungary and in all other Member States concerned; | deleted |
Or. fr
Amendment 3
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 2. Recalls that respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights is a precondition for sound financial management of the Union budget and that the Commission has a wide range of instruments at its disposal to ensure respect for these principles; notes with serious concern the continued rule of law backsliding, systemic corruption and attacks on fundamental rights in several Member States, with direct implications for the sound management of Union funds; highlights in particular the deteriorating situation in Hungary, marked by widespread corruption and entrenched oligarchic networks; deplores that, while problems persist or worsen, the pressure exerted by the Commission to induce meaningful reforms has diminished as the amounts of funds that remain frozen are decreasing; stresses that the Commission needs to move beyond monitoring and to make full and consistent use of the available instruments to suspend or protect Union funding where rule of law deficiencies affect sound financial management, in Hungary and in all other Member States concerned; | 2. Recalls that respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights is a precondition for sound financial management of the Union budget and that the Commission has a wide range of instruments at its disposal to ensure respect for these principles; notes with serious concern the continued rule of law backsliding, systemic corruption and attacks on fundamental rights in several Member States, with direct implications for the sound management of Union funds; highlights in particular the deteriorating situation in Hungary, where the rule of law challenges require continued attention; calls on the Commission to apply consistent and proportionate measures in all Member States, including the strategic use of the suspension or freezing of Union funds where deficiencies in the rule of law undermine sound financial management; |
Or. en
Amendment 4
Kinga Kollár
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 2. Recalls that respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights is a precondition for sound financial management of the Union budget and that the Commission has a wide range of instruments at its disposal to ensure respect for these principles; notes with serious concern the continued rule of law backsliding, systemic corruption and attacks on fundamental rights in several Member States, with direct implications for the sound management of Union funds; highlights in particular the deteriorating situation in Hungary, marked by widespread corruption and entrenched oligarchic networks; deplores that, while problems persist or worsen, the pressure exerted by the Commission to induce meaningful reforms has diminished as the amounts of funds that remain frozen are decreasing; stresses that the Commission needs to move beyond monitoring and to make full and consistent use of the available instruments to suspend or protect Union funding where rule of law deficiencies affect sound financial management, in Hungary and in all other Member States concerned; | 2. Recalls that respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights is a precondition for sound financial management of the Union budget and that the Commission has a wide range of instruments at its disposal to ensure respect for these principles; notes with serious concern the continued rule of law backsliding, systemic corruption and attacks on fundamental rights in several Member States, with direct implications for the sound management of Union funds; highlights in particular the deteriorating situation in Hungary, marked by widespread corruption and entrenched oligarchic networks, while the lack of EU funds has an alarming effect on the provision of public services; deplores that, while problems persist or worsen, the pressure exerted by the Commission to induce meaningful reforms has diminished as the amounts of funds that remain frozen are decreasing; stresses that the Commission needs to move beyond monitoring and to make full and consistent use of the available instruments to suspend or protect Union funding where rule of law deficiencies affect sound financial management, in Hungary and in all other Member States concerned; |
Or. en
Amendment 5
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 2a. Calls for the equality of all Member States before the Treaties to be respected and for the need to ensure that each Member State has equal access to Union funds to be stressed, as currently not all Member States are treated equally by, and supported equally from, Union funds, which significantly undermines the functioning of the single market; |
Or. fr
Amendment 6
Céline Imart, Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 2 a. Stresses that respect for the rule of law must apply to all participants in Union programmes, including third countries; calls on the Commission to implement stronger transparency rules with regard to EU funds being granted to third countries, in particular to better prevent serious crimes, violence, terrorism and misuse of EU funds and to stop contracts immediately when there is evidence of such; |
Or. en
Amendment 7
Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 4. Notes that the Court highlights several issues in their Annual Report for 2024 that give cause for serious concern; welcomes that the overall error rate has declined from 5,6 % for 2023 to 3,6 % for 2024; stresses, however, that this decrease should be interpreted with caution, as it may not necessarily reflect an improvement in the effectiveness of control systems but could also be influenced by contextual factors such as the end of COVID-19 related emergency spending, a comparatively low level of budgetary implementation in 2024 and the early stage of implementation of the 2021-2027 MFF; is particularly concerned that while the error rate for the heading ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ has decreased from 9,3 % to 5,7 %, it is still considerably above the materiality threshold of 2 %; expresses serious concern in this context about proposals to introduce a new spending model under the next MFF that would rely even more heavily on Member States’ control systems, while the underlying causes of persistently high error rates do not yet appear to have been adequately addressed; | 4. Notes that the Court highlights several issues in their Annual Report for 2024 that give cause for serious concern; welcomes that the overall error rate has declined from 5,6 % for 2023 to 3,6 % for 2024; stresses, however, that this decrease should be interpreted with caution, as it may not necessarily reflect an improvement in the effectiveness of control systems but could also be influenced by contextual factors such as the end of COVID-19 related emergency spending, a comparatively low level of budgetary implementation in 2024 and the early stage of implementation of the 2021-2027 MFF; is particularly concerned that while the error rate for the heading ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ has decreased from 9,3 % to 5,7 %, it is still considerably above the materiality threshold of 2 %; expresses serious concern in this context about proposals to introduce a new spending model under the next MFF that would rely even more heavily on Member States’ control systems, while the underlying causes of persistently high error rates do not yet appear to have been adequately addressed; recalls that cohesion policy remains a fundamental instrument of the Union for promoting economic, social and territorial convergence and supporting balanced development across regions, and stresses that any future reform of spending models must preserve the objectives, predictability and dedicated budgetary framework of cohesion policy; |
Or. en
Amendment 8
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 4. Notes that the Court highlights several issues in their Annual Report for 2024 that give cause for serious concern; welcomes that the overall error rate has declined from 5,6 % for 2023 to 3,6 % for 2024; stresses, however, that this decrease should be interpreted with caution, as it may not necessarily reflect an improvement in the effectiveness of control systems but could also be influenced by contextual factors such as the end of COVID-19 related emergency spending, a comparatively low level of budgetary implementation in 2024 and the early stage of implementation of the 2021-2027 MFF; is particularly concerned that while the error rate for the heading ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ has decreased from 9,3 % to 5,7 %, it is still considerably above the materiality threshold of 2 %; expresses serious concern in this context about proposals to introduce a new spending model under the next MFF that would rely even more heavily on Member States’ control systems, while the underlying causes of persistently high error rates do not yet appear to have been adequately addressed; | 4. Notes that the Court highlights several issues in their Annual Report for 2024 that give cause for serious concern; welcomes that the overall error rate has declined from 5,6 % for 2023 to 3,6 % for 2024; stresses, however, that this decrease should be interpreted with caution, as it may not necessarily reflect an improvement in the financial management or in the effectiveness of control systems but could also be influenced by contextual factors such as the end of COVID-19 related emergency spending, a comparatively low level of budgetary implementation in 2024 and the early stage of implementation of the 2021-2027 MFF; is particularly concerned that while the error rate for the heading ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ has decreased from 9,3 % to 5,7 %, it is still considerably above the materiality threshold of 2 % with the Court still identifying weaknesses both on the Commissions and Members states side in term of control and detection; is worrying that the find of the Court are so recurrent that the current level of error for the Cohesion could be considered as the natural level of error for the Cohesion policy; expresses serious concern in this context about proposals to introduce a new spending model under the next MFF that would rely even more heavily on Member States’ control systems, while the underlying causes of persistently high error rates do not yet appear to have been adequately addressed; |
Or. en
Amendment 9
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 5. Expresses deep concern about the persistent shortcomings in the implementation of the RRF; notes that the Court has issued a qualified opinion on the legality and regularity of RRF expenditure for the third consecutive year and that it estimates the minimum financial impact of its findings to be above the materiality threshold; underlines the serious audit and control deficiencies identified by the Court, which continue to undermine assurance over the regular use of RRF funds; is particularly concerned about the significant accountability gap resulting from the lack of reliable and complete information on final beneficiaries of Union funding, due in particular to the Commission’s interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’ under the RRF, which contradicts the existing legislation; considers that, taken together, these shortcomings in the RRF would justify a refusal to grant discharge for the implementation of the RRF in 2024 if the discharge authority were able to take this decision separately; recalls that Parliament has repeatedly raised serious concerns in previous discharge resolutions regarding the RRF, including on the transparency of final beneficiaries, and therefore demands that the Commission provide, within six months, a complete and meaningful list of final beneficiaries, excluding merely intermediary entities such as ministries or managing authorities; states that, failing this, Parliament will bring the matter before the European Court of Justice to ensure that citizens and stakeholders have full access to this information; | 5. Expresses deep concern about the persistent shortcomings in the implementation of the RRF; notes that the Court has issued a qualified opinion on the legality and regularity of RRF expenditure for the third consecutive year and that it estimates the minimum financial impact of its findings to be above the materiality threshold; underlines the audit and control deficiencies identified by the Court, which continue to undermine assurance over the regular use of RRF funds; is particularly concerned about the significant accountability gap resulting from the lack of reliable and complete information on final beneficiaries of Union funding, due in particular to the Commission’s interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’ under the RRF, which contradicts the existing legislation; recalls that Parliament has repeatedly raised serious concerns in previous discharge resolutions regarding the RRF, including on the transparency of final beneficiaries, and therefore demands that the Commission provide a meaningful list of final beneficiaries, excluding merely intermediary entities such as ministries or managing authorities; |
Or. en
Amendment 10
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 5. Expresses deep concern about the persistent shortcomings in the implementation of the RRF; notes that the Court has issued a qualified opinion on the legality and regularity of RRF expenditure for the third consecutive year and that it estimates the minimum financial impact of its findings to be above the materiality threshold; underlines the serious audit and control deficiencies identified by the Court, which continue to undermine assurance over the regular use of RRF funds; is particularly concerned about the significant accountability gap resulting from the lack of reliable and complete information on final beneficiaries of Union funding, due in particular to the Commission’s interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’ under the RRF, which contradicts the existing legislation; considers that, taken together, these shortcomings in the RRF would justify a refusal to grant discharge for the implementation of the RRF in 2024 if the discharge authority were able to take this decision separately; recalls that Parliament has repeatedly raised serious concerns in previous discharge resolutions regarding the RRF, including on the transparency of final beneficiaries, and therefore demands that the Commission provide, within six months, a complete and meaningful list of final beneficiaries, excluding merely intermediary entities such as ministries or managing authorities; states that, failing this, Parliament will bring the matter before the European Court of Justice to ensure that citizens and stakeholders have full access to this information; | 5. Expresses deep concern about the persistent shortcomings in the implementation of the RRF; notes that the Court has issued a qualified opinion on the legality and regularity of RRF expenditure for the third consecutive year and that it estimates the minimum financial impact of its findings to be above the materiality threshold; underlines the serious audit and control deficiencies identified by the Court, which continue to undermine assurance over the regular use of RRF funds; is particularly concerned about the significant accountability gap resulting from the lack of reliable and complete information on final beneficiaries of Union funding, due in particular to the Commission’s interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’ under the RRF, which contradicts the existing legislation; these shortcomings significantly weaken the level of assurance concerning the implementation of the RRF and would warrant reinforced scrutiny; recalls that Parliament has repeatedly raised serious concerns in previous discharge resolutions regarding the RRF, including on the transparency of final beneficiaries, and therefore demands that the Commission provide, within six months, a complete and meaningful list of final beneficiaries, excluding merely intermediary entities such as ministries or managing authorities; |
Or. en
Amendment 11
Eero Heinäluoma, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 5. Expresses deep concern about the persistent shortcomings in the implementation of the RRF; notes that the Court has issued a qualified opinion on the legality and regularity of RRF expenditure for the third consecutive year and that it estimates the minimum financial impact of its findings to be above the materiality threshold; underlines the serious audit and control deficiencies identified by the Court, which continue to undermine assurance over the regular use of RRF funds; is particularly concerned about the significant accountability gap resulting from the lack of reliable and complete information on final beneficiaries of Union funding, due in particular to the Commission’s interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’ under the RRF, which contradicts the existing legislation; considers that, taken together, these shortcomings in the RRF would justify a refusal to grant discharge for the implementation of the RRF in 2024 if the discharge authority were able to take this decision separately; recalls that Parliament has repeatedly raised serious concerns in previous discharge resolutions regarding the RRF, including on the transparency of final beneficiaries, and therefore demands that the Commission provide, within six months, a complete and meaningful list of final beneficiaries, excluding merely intermediary entities such as ministries or managing authorities; states that, failing this, Parliament will bring the matter before the European Court of Justice to ensure that citizens and stakeholders have full access to this information; | 5. Expresses deep concern about the persistent shortcomings in the implementation of the RRF; notes that the Court has issued a qualified opinion on the legality and regularity of RRF expenditure for the third consecutive year and that it estimates the minimum financial impact of its findings to be above the materiality threshold; underlines the serious audit and control deficiencies identified by the Court, which continue to undermine assurance over the regular use of RRF funds; is particularly concerned about the significant accountability gap resulting from the lack of reliable and complete information on final beneficiaries of Union funding, due in particular to the Commission’s interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’ under the RRF, which contradicts the existing legislation; considers that, without addressing the identified shortcomings, the RRF model as a blueprint cannot be the basis for Union spending post-2027; recalls that Parliament has repeatedly raised serious concerns in previous discharge resolutions regarding the RRF, including on the transparency of final beneficiaries, and therefore demands that the Commission use all means at its disposal to ensure that Member States provide complete and meaningful lists of final beneficiaries, excluding merely intermediary entities such as ministries or managing authorities; |
Or. en
Amendment 12
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 5 a. Reiterates that citizens have the right to know who ultimately receives Union money; calls for harmonised, machine-readable publication of final recipients and contractors across instruments; |
Or. en
Amendment 13
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 5 b. Calls for strengthened disclosure of beneficial ownership for major contractors and intermediaries implementing Union-funded projects, in order to prevent conflicts of interest and hidden concentration of funds; |
Or. en
Amendment 14
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 5 a. Notes with concern the findings of the Court of Auditors’ Special Report 21/2025 on EU RRF support for an improved business environment, which found that out of over EUR 109 billion allocated to improving the business environment in the EU under the RRF, only one-third of completed reforms delivered significant results; considers that these findings raise serious questions about the value for money of the RRF and its milestone-based disbursement model; calls on the Commission to take these results into account when designing future performance-based instruments and to demonstrate how lessons learned will be applied to ensure that borrowed funds deliver measurable economic returns for Union citizens; |
Or. en
Amendment 15
Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 6. Notes with concern that the current implementation rate for the cohesion funds is significantly lower than the implementation rate during the previous MFF 2014-2020, which coincides with the fact that only around 50 % of funds under the RRF had been disbursed by the end of 2024, implying that the remaining 50 % of the funds must be disbursed before then end of the RRF implementation period in December 2026; notes with concern that the total amount of outstanding EU bonds rose to EUR 578,2 billion at the end of 2024 and notes the Court’s estimates that this amount could reach EUR 900 billion by the end of 2027, which may place a significant burden on future MFFs due to the associated interest payments and principal repayments; | 6. Notes with concern that the current implementation rate for the cohesion funds is significantly lower than the implementation rate during the previous MFF 2014-2020, which coincides with the fact that only around 50 % of funds under the RRF had been disbursed by the end of 2024, implying that the remaining 50 % of the funds must be disbursed before then end of the RRF implementation period in December 2026; notes with concern that the total amount of outstanding EU bonds rose to EUR 578,2 billion at the end of 2024 and notes the Court’s estimates that this amount could reach EUR 900 billion by the end of 2027, which will place a significant burden on future MFFs due to the associated interest payments and principal repayments; stresses that this unprecedented level of Union debt represents a structural fiscal risk that must be factored into all future budgetary decisions; recalls that debt servicing costs ultimately increase the burden on taxpayers in the Member States; |
Or. en
Amendment 16
Bert-Jan Ruissen
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 6. Notes with concern that the current implementation rate for the cohesion funds is significantly lower than the implementation rate during the previous MFF 2014-2020, which coincides with the fact that only around 50 % of funds under the RRF had been disbursed by the end of 2024, implying that the remaining 50 % of the funds must be disbursed before then end of the RRF implementation period in December 2026; notes with concern that the total amount of outstanding EU bonds rose to EUR 578,2 billion at the end of 2024 and notes the Court’s estimates that this amount could reach EUR 900 billion by the end of 2027, which may place a significant burden on future MFFs due to the associated interest payments and principal repayments; | 6. Notes with concern that the current implementation rate for the cohesion funds is significantly lower than the implementation rate during the previous MFF 2014-2020, which coincides with the fact that only around 50 % of funds under the RRF had been disbursed by the end of 2024, implying that the remaining 50 % of the funds must be disbursed before then end of the RRF implementation period in December 2026; notes with concern that the total amount of outstanding EU bonds rose to EUR 578,2 billion at the end of 2024 and notes with concern the Court’s estimates that this amount could reach EUR 900 billion by the end of 2027, which may place a significant burden on future MFFs due to the associated interest payments and principal repayments; |
Or. nl
Amendment 17
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 7. Stresses that transparency is not an abstract governance principle but a core element of an effective control environment; underlines that incomplete documentation, inconsistent registration practices or reliance on informal communication channels directly weaken audit trails and hinder the discharge authority’s capacity to assess legality, regularity and sound financial management; in that regard regrets that there have been numerous examples over the last years where the Commission failed to live up to reasonable standards of transparency as also stated in the European Court of Justice case concerning text messages between the Commission President and the CEO of Pfizer; recalls that the General Court annulled the Commission’s refusal decision in the New York Times/Stevi case2 concerning access to relevant text messages, underlining the need for credible searches and robust record-keeping for ephemeral communications; is similarly concerned that the Commission on many occasions has not provided answers to access to document requests within stipulated deadlines, especially concerning cases under the confirmatory applications where the European Ombudsman has found systemic and significant delays in the Commission administration’s response; | 7. Stresses that transparency is not an abstract governance principle but a core element of an effective control environment; underlines that incomplete documentation, inconsistent registration practices or reliance on informal communication channels directly weaken audit trails and hinder the discharge authority’s capacity to assess legality, regularity and sound financial management; emphasises that the Commission should ensure transparency practices meet high governance standards to guarantee that the discharge authority can fully assess legality, regularity, and sound financial management; notes the importance of timely responses to access-to-documents requests; encourages the Commission to strengthen its procedures to ensure that oversight bodies can fully assess legality, regularity and sound financial management; |
| _________________ | |
| 2 Stevi, New York Times v Commission, T-36/23, ECLI:EU:T:2025:483, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62023TJ0036. |
Or. en
Amendment 18
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 7. Stresses that transparency is not an abstract governance principle but a core element of an effective control environment; underlines that incomplete documentation, inconsistent registration practices or reliance on informal communication channels directly weaken audit trails and hinder the discharge authority’s capacity to assess legality, regularity and sound financial management; in that regard regrets that there have been numerous examples over the last years where the Commission failed to live up to reasonable standards of transparency as also stated in the European Court of Justice case concerning text messages between the Commission President and the CEO of Pfizer; recalls that the General Court annulled the Commission’s refusal decision in the New York Times/Stevi case2 concerning access to relevant text messages, underlining the need for credible searches and robust record-keeping for ephemeral communications; is similarly concerned that the Commission on many occasions has not provided answers to access to document requests within stipulated deadlines, especially concerning cases under the confirmatory applications where the European Ombudsman has found systemic and significant delays in the Commission administration’s response; | 7. Stresses that transparency is a core element of an effective control environment; underlines that incomplete documentation, inconsistent registration practices or reliance on informal communication channels directly weaken audit trails and hinder the discharge authority’s capacity to assess legality, regularity and sound financial management; underlines the repeated Commission shortcomings in meeting basic standards of transparency within legal deadlines especially concerning cases under the confirmatory applications where the European Ombudsman has found systemic and significant delays in the Commission administration’s response; |
| _________________ | |
| 2 Stevi, New York Times v Commission, T-36/23, ECLI:EU:T:2025:483, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62023TJ0036. |
Or. en
Amendment 19
Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 7. Stresses that transparency is not an abstract governance principle but a core element of an effective control environment; underlines that incomplete documentation, inconsistent registration practices or reliance on informal communication channels directly weaken audit trails and hinder the discharge authority’s capacity to assess legality, regularity and sound financial management; in that regard regrets that there have been numerous examples over the last years where the Commission failed to live up to reasonable standards of transparency as also stated in the European Court of Justice case concerning text messages between the Commission President and the CEO of Pfizer; recalls that the General Court annulled the Commission’s refusal decision in the New York Times/Stevi case2 concerning access to relevant text messages, underlining the need for credible searches and robust record-keeping for ephemeral communications; is similarly concerned that the Commission on many occasions has not provided answers to access to document requests within stipulated deadlines, especially concerning cases under the confirmatory applications where the European Ombudsman has found systemic and significant delays in the Commission administration’s response; | 7. Stresses that transparency is not an abstract governance principle but a core element of an effective control environment; underlines that incomplete documentation, inconsistent registration practices or reliance on informal communication channels directly weaken audit trails and hinder the discharge authority’s capacity to assess legality, regularity and sound financial management; in that regard regrets that there have been numerous examples over the last years where the Commission failed to live up to reasonable standards of transparency as also stated in the European Court of Justice case concerning text messages between the Commission President and the CEO of Pfizer; recalls that the General Court annulled the Commission’s refusal decision in the New York Times/Stevi case2 concerning access to relevant text messages, underlining the need for credible searches and robust record-keeping for ephemeral communications; considers that failures to ensure proper documentation and transparency at senior leadership level risk undermining public trust, institutional accountability and the credibility of the Commission as guardian of the Treaties; is similarly concerned that the Commission on many occasions has not provided answers to access to document requests within stipulated deadlines, especially concerning cases under the confirmatory applications where the European Ombudsman has found systemic and significant delays in the Commission administration’s response; calls on the Commission leadership to ensure full compliance with transparency obligations, proper registration of all work-related communications, including at the level of the President and Members of the College, and to strengthen internal procedures and accountability mechanisms in order to prevent similar shortcomings in the future; |
| _________________ | _________________ |
| 2 Stevi, New York Times v Commission, T-36/23, ECLI:EU:T:2025:483, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62023TJ0036. | 2 Stevi, New York Times v Commission, T-36/23, ECLI:EU:T:2025:483, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62023TJ0036. |
Or. en
Amendment 20
Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 7. Stresses that transparency is not an abstract governance principle but a core element of an effective control environment; underlines that incomplete documentation, inconsistent registration practices or reliance on informal communication channels directly weaken audit trails and hinder the discharge authority’s capacity to assess legality, regularity and sound financial management; in that regard regrets that there have been numerous examples over the last years where the Commission failed to live up to reasonable standards of transparency as also stated in the European Court of Justice case concerning text messages between the Commission President and the CEO of Pfizer; recalls that the General Court annulled the Commission’s refusal decision in the New York Times/Stevi case2 concerning access to relevant text messages, underlining the need for credible searches and robust record-keeping for ephemeral communications; is similarly concerned that the Commission on many occasions has not provided answers to access to document requests within stipulated deadlines, especially concerning cases under the confirmatory applications where the European Ombudsman has found systemic and significant delays in the Commission administration’s response; | 7. Stresses that transparency is not an abstract governance principle but a core element of an effective control environment; underlines that incomplete documentation, inconsistent registration practices or reliance on informal communication channels directly weaken audit trails and hinder the discharge authority’s capacity to assess legality, regularity and sound financial management; in that regard regrets that there have been numerous examples over the last years where the Commission failed to live up to reasonable standards of transparency as also stated in the European Court of Justice case concerning text messages between the Commission President and the CEO of Pfizer; recalls that the General Court annulled the Commission’s refusal decision in the New York Times/Stevi case2 concerning access to relevant text messages, underlining the need for credible searches and robust record-keeping for ephemeral communications; is similarly concerned that the Commission on many occasions has not provided answers to access to document requests within stipulated deadlines, especially concerning cases under the confirmatory applications where the European Ombudsman has found systemic and significant delays in the Commission administration’s response; stresses that such actions undermine the principles of the rule of law, weaken institutional credibility, and erode trust in the European Union. |
| _________________ | _________________ |
| 2 Stevi, New York Times v Commission, T-36/23, ECLI:EU:T:2025:483, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62023TJ0036. | 2 Stevi, New York Times v Commission, T-36/23, ECLI:EU:T:2025:483, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:62023TJ0036. |
Or. en
Amendment 21
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 7a. Deplores the scandal involving the purchase of 4,6 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines for EUR 71 billion by the President of the Commission and the recent purchase of a further 146 million doses for an unknown amount;whereas the European Commissioner for Health testified on 27 March 2023 before the COVI Special Committee that President von der Leyen was not involved in any COVID-19 vaccine contract negotiations, contrary to the information published by the New York Times (28 April 2021) and the conclusions of the European Court of Auditors in its special report on the purchase of COVID-19 vaccines;whereas the Commission required certain Members of Parliament, who were on the COVI Committee, to sign a confidentiality undertaking on 30 May 2023, without specifying the end date for that confidentiality obligation concerning an indemnity per dose paid by the Europeans to Pfizer in exchange for the non-delivery of certain doses still to be delivered;expresses its disappointment at the Commission’s continued lack of transparency regarding the agreements it concluded with the pharmaceutical companies responsible for producing COVID-19 vaccines, as well as regarding the SMS communications between the Commission President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company, to the extent that legal action has tarnished the Commission’s reputation, when the President could have easily explained herself to Parliament;deplores the Commission’s inaction in terms of medical research and compensation in relation to those suffering serious side-effects from COVID-19 vaccines; | |
| deplores the fact that the Commission has chosen to defend Pfizer rather than the Member States in the legal dispute between them over the refusal to order vaccine doses that are no longer needed after the end of the pandemic; |
Or. fr
Amendment 22
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 7b. Notes the extremely slow progress of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) in the investigations into the purchase of COVID-19 vaccines and the Qatargate scandal, and also notes the EPPO’s continued refusal to reply to Members’ questions about the resources dedicated to the investigations, about the timeline or about action carried out; |
Or. fr
Amendment 23
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 d (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 7d. Recalls that the possibility of an audit was part of the mega contracts for doses of COVID-19 vaccines; that entitlement lasts for five years following the settlement of the final balance; after that, pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer could destroy any documents linked to those contracts; |
Or. fr
Amendment 24
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 e (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 7e. Notes that since the COVID-19 period, the Commission exonerates itself too easily from the Treaties to invent powers (housing, elections, health, information, weather, etc.), enormous debts or other financial scaffolding endangering the financial health of European Union households and Member States in both the short and the long term; |
Or. fr
Amendment 25
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 7c. According to Politico, European Union countries had already admitted in 2024 to having thrown away 215 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines, at a cost of EUR 4 billion. Nevertheless, on 16 January 2024, the Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Authority (HERA) published an invitation to tender, on behalf of the Commission and 18 Member States, including France, for the supply of an additional 146 million vaccine doses, announcing in advance that the cost would remain secret and that only invited companies would be able to submit a tender. Regrets that the Commission is keeping the costs and the contracts secret, preventing the Members of Parliament from having any oversight of the contracts; |
Or. fr
Amendment 26
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 f (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 7f. Is surprised that the Commission’s major financial errors in recent years (COVID-19 vaccine contracts, remdesivir, variable interest rates for the RRF, carbon tax fraud, etc.) have not been subject to any proactive investigation, either ex ante or ex post, to identify any potential complicity or negligence; |
Or. fr
Amendment 27
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 8. Notes that Andrej Babiš has resumed office as Prime Minister of Czechia since December 2025; recalls he had previously been found to be in a situation of conflict of interest linked to his ownership of Agrofert while exercising that function and that this conflict of interest led to the suspension and financial correction of Union funding in the past; notes with concern that, at present, no verifiable legal arrangements have been put in place to definitively eliminate the risk that Union funds could benefit, directly or indirectly, his private business interests; | 8. Notes that certain situations of conflict of interest in Member States have in the past led to the suspension and financial correction of Union funding; recalls the importance of establishing verifiable legal arrangements to prevent any risk that Union funds could benefit, private business interests of public office holders; underlines that Member States should ensure effective safeguards are in place to uphold transparency, integrity and sound financial management of the EU funds; |
Or. en
Amendment 28
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 8. Notes that Andrej Babiš has resumed office as Prime Minister of Czechia since December 2025; recalls he had previously been found to be in a situation of conflict of interest linked to his ownership of Agrofert while exercising that function and that this conflict of interest led to the suspension and financial correction of Union funding in the past; notes with concern that, at present, no verifiable legal arrangements have been put in place to definitively eliminate the risk that Union funds could benefit, directly or indirectly, his private business interests; | 8. Notes the misappropriation of part of the post-COVID recovery plan through a EUR 282 million scheme of 2 400 EU-funded grants for hotels, restaurants and cultural venues, which was brought to light in Poland after a transparency campaign revealed that grants were provided for yachts, vodka bars and a company registered at the same address as a swingers’ club; notes with concern that, at present, no effective and verifiable legal arrangements have been put in place to definitively eliminate the risk that Union funds could benefit, directly or indirectly, private business interests; |
Or. fr
Amendment 29
Ondřej Knotek
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 8. Notes that Andrej Babiš has resumed office as Prime Minister of Czechia since December 2025; recalls he had previously been found to be in a situation of conflict of interest linked to his ownership of Agrofert while exercising that function and that this conflict of interest led to the suspension and financial correction of Union funding in the past; notes with concern that, at present, no verifiable legal arrangements have been put in place to definitively eliminate the risk that Union funds could benefit, directly or indirectly, his private business interests; | 8. Notes that Andrej Babiš has resumed office as Prime Minister of Czechia since December 2025; recalls he had previously been found to be in a situation of conflict of interest linked to his ownership of Agrofert while exercising that function and that this conflict of interest led to the suspension and financial correction of Union funding in the past; notes that the legal arrangement in line with the EU legislation has been put in place to definitively eliminate any concerns regarding Union funds; |
Or. en
Amendment 30
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9. Stresses that Members of the Commission must meet the highest standards of integrity, independence and accountability, both in their current functions and in their previous roles; notes with concern that several senior management positions remained vacant in DG NEAR during the period in which Commissioner Várhelyi, now Commissioner for Health and Animal Welfare, was responsible for this Directorate-General in his capacity as Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement, and that a spy ring allegedly operated out of the Permanent Representation of Hungary to the Union while he was in charge which, taken together, undermine trust in his ability to exercise office in a manner fully consistent with the Union’s values and the requirements of sound administration; | 9. Stresses that Members of the Commission must meet the highest standards of integrity, independence and accountability, both in their current functions and in their previous roles; |
Or. fr
Amendment 31
Tomáš Zdechovský, Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9. Stresses that Members of the Commission must meet the highest standards of integrity, independence and accountability, both in their current functions and in their previous roles; notes with concern that several senior management positions remained vacant in DG NEAR during the period in which Commissioner Várhelyi, now Commissioner for Health and Animal Welfare, was responsible for this Directorate-General in his capacity as Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement, and that a spy ring allegedly operated out of the Permanent Representation of Hungary to the Union while he was in charge which, taken together, undermine trust in his ability to exercise office in a manner fully consistent with the Union’s values and the requirements of sound administration; | 9. Stresses that Members of the Commission must meet the highest standards of integrity, independence and accountability, both in their current functions and in their previous roles; |
Or. en
Amendment 32
Carlo Fidanza
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9. Stresses that Members of the Commission must meet the highest standards of integrity, independence and accountability, both in their current functions and in their previous roles; notes with concern that several senior management positions remained vacant in DG NEAR during the period in which Commissioner Várhelyi, now Commissioner for Health and Animal Welfare, was responsible for this Directorate-General in his capacity as Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement, and that a spy ring allegedly operated out of the Permanent Representation of Hungary to the Union while he was in charge which, taken together, undermine trust in his ability to exercise office in a manner fully consistent with the Union’s values and the requirements of sound administration; | 9. Stresses that Members of the Commission must meet the highest standards of integrity, independence and accountability, both in their current functions and in their previous roles; |
Or. en
Amendment 33
Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9. Stresses that Members of the Commission must meet the highest standards of integrity, independence and accountability, both in their current functions and in their previous roles; notes with concern that several senior management positions remained vacant in DG NEAR during the period in which Commissioner Várhelyi, now Commissioner for Health and Animal Welfare, was responsible for this Directorate-General in his capacity as Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement, and that a spy ring allegedly operated out of the Permanent Representation of Hungary to the Union while he was in charge which, taken together, undermine trust in his ability to exercise office in a manner fully consistent with the Union’s values and the requirements of sound administration; | 9. Stresses that Members of the Commission must meet the highest standards of integrity, independence and accountability, both in their current functions and in their previous roles; |
Or. en
Amendment 34
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9a. Regrets the scandal involving Didier Reynders, former European Commissioner for Justice and the person in charge of considerations relating to the rule of law in certain Member States, concerning suspicions of money laundering: the Belgian authorities have accused him of having laundered approximately EUR 700 000 to EUR 1 million through cash deposits into his bank account (between 2008 and 2018) and a system of purchasing an enormous number of national lottery tickets, the winnings of which were then legitimately transferred. He was formally charged with money laundering in 2025, after searches and interrogations, which has created a major scandal given his past role as a promoter of the rule of law in the Commission; |
Or. fr
Amendment 35
Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9 a. Regrets that the European Union has been confronted with revelations of numerous scandals involving high-ranking representatives of its own institutions, including the European Commission, which was particularly evident in the scandal involving a former Commissioner for Justice, who personally engaged in politicised and unfair attacks on Member States while laundering money; |
Or. en
Amendment 36
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9 a. Calls on the Commission to strengthen transparency and accountability regarding the appointment and activities of its special advisers, by systematically publishing detailed information on their selection criteria, mandate, tasks, duration of assignment, remuneration, and declarations of interests; stresses that special advisers may exercise significant influence on policy development and therefore must be subject to clear governance standards, regular reporting obligations and proactive disclosure in line with the principles of sound financial management and Article 15(3) TFEU; |
Or. en
Amendment 37
Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9 b. Stresses that the Commission must act in a fully impartial and transparent manner, which includes eliminating conflicts of interest, providing clear accountability for the management of EU funds, and complying with its own guidelines on the rule of law; notes that the failure to apply these principles consistently leads to double standards and undermines trust in EU institutions; |
Or. en
Amendment 38
Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9 c. Stresses that all EU institutions, including the Commission, as bodies exercising official authority, must respect the procedural transparency and political accountability to the same extent as Member States; |
Or. en
Amendment 39
Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 d (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9 d. Stresses that the Commission's follow-up actions cannot lead to an extension of its competences beyond the scope provided for in the Treaties, or to interference in the constitutional prerogatives of Member States; |
Or. en
Amendment 40
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9b. Stresses that it has been shown that the European Union’s financial interests were not properly protected in the Commission, noting the unprecedented number of major scandals in that institution, and stresses the need to strengthen and further revise the institution’s anti-corruption and transparency rules and to apply the lessons learned; |
Or. fr
Amendment 41
Dick Erixon, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 10. Deplores that the Court in several Special Reports over the last years has repeatedly documented that the Commission systematically overestimates the positive climate effects of Union spending; at the same time regrets that the Commission methodologies for tracking climate and biodiversity effects of Union spending do not capture all of the effects of Union activities, for instance, the impact of some subsidies under the common agricultural policy that are harmful to climate and biodiversity; notes that only tracking the positive effects of the Union budget on climate and biodiversity leads to a systematic overestimation of the contribution of the Union budget to these objectives and provides an overly positive impression of the performance of the Union budget; stresses that these methodological shortcomings translate into concrete accountability gaps for the discharge authority; regrets in particular that the Commission was unable to provide traceable information on projects rejected or modified in 2024 on the basis of the Do No Significant Harm principle, despite its central role in the RRF and cohesion policy; underlines that the Parliament’s ability to exercise budgetary control also depends on verifiable, project-level evidence of environmental compliance and impact; | 10. Deplores that the Court in several Special Reports over the last years has repeatedly documented that the Commission systematically overestimates the positive climate effects of Union spending; points out, that higher standards for climate-related measures increase operating costs across Union programmes, thereby reducing available budget for other priorities and increasing costs for taxpayers; insists that all climate and environmental expenditure must be subject to rigorous cost-benefit analysis demonstrating clear return on investment before implementation, and that the Commission should report annually on the total administrative and compliance costs imposed by green budgeting requirements; |
Or. en
Amendment 42
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 10. Deplores that the Court in several Special Reports over the last years has repeatedly documented that the Commission systematically overestimates the positive climate effects of Union spending; at the same time regrets that the Commission methodologies for tracking climate and biodiversity effects of Union spending do not capture all of the effects of Union activities, for instance, the impact of some subsidies under the common agricultural policy that are harmful to climate and biodiversity; notes that only tracking the positive effects of the Union budget on climate and biodiversity leads to a systematic overestimation of the contribution of the Union budget to these objectives and provides an overly positive impression of the performance of the Union budget; stresses that these methodological shortcomings translate into concrete accountability gaps for the discharge authority; regrets in particular that the Commission was unable to provide traceable information on projects rejected or modified in 2024 on the basis of the Do No Significant Harm principle, despite its central role in the RRF and cohesion policy; underlines that the Parliament’s ability to exercise budgetary control also depends on verifiable, project-level evidence of environmental compliance and impact; | 10. Notes that, in several Special Reports over the last years, the Court has identified shortcomings in the Commission’s methodology for estimating the climate impact of Union spending; stresses that limitations of current methodologies may affect the reliability of reported figures and have implications for the discharge authority’s assessment of performance; further notes that the current methodologies for tracking climate and biodiversity expenditure do not fully capture all effects of Union activities, including certain measures under the common agricultural policy; notes that the application of the Do No Significant Harm principle helps prevent non-compliant measures from being implemented; emphasises that such methodological limitations can create accountability challenges for the discharge authority; underlines that Parliament’s ability to exercise effective budgetary control depends on transparent, verifiable and project-level evidence of environmental compliance and impact; |
Or. en
Amendment 43
Céline Imart, Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 10. Deplores that the Court in several Special Reports over the last years has repeatedly documented that the Commission systematically overestimates the positive climate effects of Union spending; at the same time regrets that the Commission methodologies for tracking climate and biodiversity effects of Union spending do not capture all of the effects of Union activities, for instance, the impact of some subsidies under the common agricultural policy that are harmful to climate and biodiversity; notes that only tracking the positive effects of the Union budget on climate and biodiversity leads to a systematic overestimation of the contribution of the Union budget to these objectives and provides an overly positive impression of the performance of the Union budget; stresses that these methodological shortcomings translate into concrete accountability gaps for the discharge authority; regrets in particular that the Commission was unable to provide traceable information on projects rejected or modified in 2024 on the basis of the Do No Significant Harm principle, despite its central role in the RRF and cohesion policy; underlines that the Parliament’s ability to exercise budgetary control also depends on verifiable, project-level evidence of environmental compliance and impact; | 10. Recognises the findings of the Court of Auditors concerning climate reporting, while underlining that Union spending, including under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), pursues multiple objectives, notably food security, farmers’ income stability and rural cohesion; stresses that climate tracking methodologies should reflect this broader policy context and avoid a one- dimensional assessment focused solely on environmental indicators; calls on the Commission to further improve transparency and traceability of climate- related expenditure, while ensuring that reporting requirements remain proportionate and do not create additional administrative burdens for farmers or managing authorities; regrets in particular that the Commission was unable to provide traceable information on projects rejected or modified in 2024 on the basis of the Do No Significant Harm principle, despite its central role in the RRF and cohesion policy; underlines that the Parliament’s ability to exercise budgetary control also depends on verifiable, project-level evidence of environmental compliance and impact; |
Or. en
Amendment 44
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 10. Deplores that the Court in several Special Reports over the last years has repeatedly documented that the Commission systematically overestimates the positive climate effects of Union spending; at the same time regrets that the Commission methodologies for tracking climate and biodiversity effects of Union spending do not capture all of the effects of Union activities, for instance, the impact of some subsidies under the common agricultural policy that are harmful to climate and biodiversity; notes that only tracking the positive effects of the Union budget on climate and biodiversity leads to a systematic overestimation of the contribution of the Union budget to these objectives and provides an overly positive impression of the performance of the Union budget; stresses that these methodological shortcomings translate into concrete accountability gaps for the discharge authority; regrets in particular that the Commission was unable to provide traceable information on projects rejected or modified in 2024 on the basis of the Do No Significant Harm principle, despite its central role in the RRF and cohesion policy; underlines that the Parliament’s ability to exercise budgetary control also depends on verifiable, project-level evidence of environmental compliance and impact; | 10. Deplores that the Court in several Special Reports over the last years has repeatedly documented that the Commission systematically overestimates the positive climate effects of Union spending; at the same time regrets that the Commission methodologies for tracking climate and biodiversity effects of Union spending are ex-ante tagging systems based on the expected effect of activities and do not factor in actual results or capture all of the effects of Union activities, for instance, the impact of some subsidies under the common agricultural policy that are harmful to climate and biodiversity; notes that only tracking spending targets and the positive effects of the Union budget on climate and biodiversity leads to a systematic overestimation of the contribution of the Union budget to these objectives and provides an overly positive impression of the performance of the Union budget; stresses that these methodological shortcomings translate into concrete accountability gaps for the discharge authority; regrets in particular that the Commission was unable to provide traceable information on projects rejected or modified in 2024 on the basis of the Do No Significant Harm principle, despite its central role in the RRF and cohesion policy; underlines that the Parliament’s ability to exercise budgetary control also depends on verifiable, project-level evidence of environmental compliance and impact; |
Or. en
Amendment 45
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 10. Deplores that the Court in several Special Reports over the last years has repeatedly documented that the Commission systematically overestimates the positive climate effects of Union spending; at the same time regrets that the Commission methodologies for tracking climate and biodiversity effects of Union spending do not capture all of the effects of Union activities, for instance, the impact of some subsidies under the common agricultural policy that are harmful to climate and biodiversity; notes that only tracking the positive effects of the Union budget on climate and biodiversity leads to a systematic overestimation of the contribution of the Union budget to these objectives and provides an overly positive impression of the performance of the Union budget; stresses that these methodological shortcomings translate into concrete accountability gaps for the discharge authority; regrets in particular that the Commission was unable to provide traceable information on projects rejected or modified in 2024 on the basis of the Do No Significant Harm principle, despite its central role in the RRF and cohesion policy; underlines that the Parliament’s ability to exercise budgetary control also depends on verifiable, project-level evidence of environmental compliance and impact; | 10. Deplores that the Court in several Special Reports over the last years has repeatedly documented that the Commission may lead to an overestimation of the positive climate and biodiversity impacts of European Union spendings and programmes; Calls on the Commission to improve its tracking methodologies and its performance indicators related to climate and biodiversity; regrets that the Commission methodologies for tracking climate and biodiversity effects of Union spending do not capture all of the effects of Union activities; notes that only tracking the positive effects of the Union budget on climate and biodiversity leads to a systematic overestimation of the contribution of the Union budget to these objectives and provides an overly positive impression of the performance of the Union budget; stresses that these methodological shortcomings translate into concrete accountability gaps for the discharge authority; regrets in particular that the Commission was unable to provide traceable information on projects rejected or modified in 2024 on the basis of the Do No Significant Harm principle, despite its central role in the RRF and cohesion policy; underlines that the Parliament’s ability to exercise budgetary control also depends on verifiable, project-level evidence of environmental compliance and impact; |
Or. en
Amendment 46
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 10. Deplores that the Court in several Special Reports over the last years has repeatedly documented that the Commission systematically overestimates the positive climate effects of Union spending; at the same time regrets that the Commission methodologies for tracking climate and biodiversity effects of Union spending do not capture all of the effects of Union activities, for instance, the impact of some subsidies under the common agricultural policy that are harmful to climate and biodiversity; notes that only tracking the positive effects of the Union budget on climate and biodiversity leads to a systematic overestimation of the contribution of the Union budget to these objectives and provides an overly positive impression of the performance of the Union budget; stresses that these methodological shortcomings translate into concrete accountability gaps for the discharge authority; regrets in particular that the Commission was unable to provide traceable information on projects rejected or modified in 2024 on the basis of the Do No Significant Harm principle, despite its central role in the RRF and cohesion policy; underlines that the Parliament’s ability to exercise budgetary control also depends on verifiable, project-level evidence of environmental compliance and impact; | 10. Deplores that the Court in several Special Reports over the last years has repeatedly documented that the Commission systematically overestimates the positive climate effects of Union spending; at the same time regrets that the Commission methodologies for tracking climate and biodiversity effects of Union spending do not capture all of the effects of Union activities, for instance, the impact of some subsidies under the common agricultural policy; notes that only tracking the positive effects of the Union budget on climate and biodiversity leads to a systematic overestimation of the contribution of the Union budget to these objectives and provides an overly positive impression of the performance of the Union budget; stresses that these methodological shortcomings translate into concrete accountability gaps for the discharge authority; regrets in particular that the Commission was unable to provide traceable information on projects rejected or modified in 2024 on the basis of the Do No Significant Harm principle, despite its central role in the RRF and cohesion policy; underlines that the Parliament’s ability to exercise budgetary control also depends on verifiable, project-level evidence of environmental compliance and impact; |
Or. fr
Amendment 47
Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 10 a. Regrets that actions taken by the Commission in the area of climate policy reflect irrational ideological perspectives and engagement with particular stakeholder groups, while the results achieved are not proportionate to the level of expenditure, which undermines the overall effectiveness of EU spending; |
Or. en
Amendment 48
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11. Recalls that the Commission’s 2024 review of NGO grant agreements confirmed the absence of breaches of the law; underlines that civil society organisations are legitimate beneficiaries of Union funding under the Treaties and often contribute to the delivery of Union objectives in a cost-effective and impact-oriented manner; stresses that budgetary control, safeguards and transparency requirements must be applied in a neutral, proportionate and evidence-based way, respecting legal certainty and that they must not single out NGOs as a risk category; emphasises that selective transparency undermines trust in the discharge process and that effective scrutiny requires the application of equivalent standards to all beneficiaries, including companies and consultancies; | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 49
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11. Recalls that the Commission’s 2024 review of NGO grant agreements confirmed the absence of breaches of the law; underlines that civil society organisations are legitimate beneficiaries of Union funding under the Treaties and often contribute to the delivery of Union objectives in a cost-effective and impact-oriented manner; stresses that budgetary control, safeguards and transparency requirements must be applied in a neutral, proportionate and evidence-based way, respecting legal certainty and that they must not single out NGOs as a risk category; emphasises that selective transparency undermines trust in the discharge process and that effective scrutiny requires the application of equivalent standards to all beneficiaries, including companies and consultancies; | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 50
Tomáš Zdechovský, Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11. Recalls that the Commission’s 2024 review of NGO grant agreements confirmed the absence of breaches of the law; underlines that civil society organisations are legitimate beneficiaries of Union funding under the Treaties and often contribute to the delivery of Union objectives in a cost-effective and impact-oriented manner; stresses that budgetary control, safeguards and transparency requirements must be applied in a neutral, proportionate and evidence-based way, respecting legal certainty and that they must not single out NGOs as a risk category; emphasises that selective transparency undermines trust in the discharge process and that effective scrutiny requires the application of equivalent standards to all beneficiaries, including companies and consultancies; | 11. Underlines that any recipient of Union funding, including NGOs, should be subject to robust, proportionate and risk-based scrutiny and transparency requirements, in line with legal provisions and sound financial managements; stresses that budgetary control, safeguards and transparency requirements must be applied in a neutral, proportionate and evidence-based way, ensuring that transparency and oversight apply effectively across all categories of beneficiaries and the scrutiny is risk-based; emphasises lack of transparency undermines trust in the discharge process and that effective scrutiny requires the application of equivalent standards to all beneficiaries; |
Or. en
Amendment 51
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11. Recalls that the Commission’s 2024 review of NGO grant agreements confirmed the absence of breaches of the law; underlines that civil society organisations are legitimate beneficiaries of Union funding under the Treaties and often contribute to the delivery of Union objectives in a cost-effective and impact-oriented manner; stresses that budgetary control, safeguards and transparency requirements must be applied in a neutral, proportionate and evidence-based way, respecting legal certainty and that they must not single out NGOs as a risk category; emphasises that selective transparency undermines trust in the discharge process and that effective scrutiny requires the application of equivalent standards to all beneficiaries, including companies and consultancies; | 11. Recalls that the Commission’s 2024 review of NGO grant agreements confirmed the absence of breaches of the law; underlines that civil society organisations are beneficiaries of Union funding under the Treaties and often do not contribute to the delivery of Union objectives in a cost-effective and impact-oriented manner; stresses that budgetary control, safeguards and transparency requirements must be applied in a neutral, proportionate and evidence-based way, respecting legal certainty and that they must single out NGOs as a risk category; emphasises that selective transparency undermines trust in the discharge process and that effective scrutiny requires the application of equivalent standards to all beneficiaries, including companies and consultancies; |
Or. fr
Amendment 52
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11 a. Recalls that the Commission’s 2024 review of NGO grant agreements did not identify any breaches of the law; notes that, under the Treaties, civil society organisations are legitimate beneficiaries of Union funding and frequently support the attainment of Union objectives in a cost-effective and impact-focused manner; stresses that budgetary control, safeguards and transparency requirements must be applied in a neutral, proportionate and evidence-based way, with due regard for legal certainty, and should not single out NGOs as a specific risk category; highlights that selective transparency can undermine confidence in the discharge process, and that effective scrutiny requires the consistent application of comparable standards to all beneficiaries, including companies and consultancies; |
Or. en
Amendment 53
Céline Imart, Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11 a. Notes, nevertheless, that in light of the progress made by the Scrutiny Working Group established within Parliament, full clarification is still required following allegations of conflicts of interest between certain NGOs and the Commission; calls on the Commission to continue advancing greater transparency concerning the beneficiaries of Union funds, the experts, as well as providing a clear definition of what constitutes an NGO; further calls for the establishment of effective oversight of activities financed through Union funds and of full compliance by beneficiaries with the values and rule of law standards of the European Union; |
Or. en
Amendment 54
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11a. Notes that EU DisinfoLab, an NGO sanctioned in 2022 by the Belgian data protection authority, continues to receive Union funds (> EUR 1,2 million in 2024)8 a despite receiving an administrative sanction for conducting profiling activities and compiling politically focused files on people on social media, in violation of the General Data Protection Regulation; notes that two members of Jourová’s Cabinet met that entity in 2024 to organise an event; calls on the Commission to stop all payments to NGOs sanctioned by Member States and to not include them in its expert groups; | |
| _________________ | |
| 8 a EUR 1,21 million according to the Commission’s financial transparency register; https://www.autoriteprotectiondonnees.be/publications/decision-quant-au-fond-n-13-2022.pdf https://transparency-register.europa.eu/search-register-or-update/organisation-detail_en?id=593474530364-05 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101070093 |
Or. fr
Amendment 55
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 f (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11f. Regrets the lack of a clear and operational definition of ‘NGO’, including objective criteria of independence from public authorities; |
Or. fr
Amendment 56
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 e (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11e. Deplores the lack of genuine oversight by the Commission and its executive agencies over the actual status of NGOs (non-profit or profit-making) and the lack of a cap on directors’ remuneration so as to distinguish between ‘commercial’ NGOs and genuine solidarity NGOs5 a; | |
| _________________ | |
| 5 a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-10-2025-003339_EN.html |
Or. fr
Amendment 57
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11c. Deplores the lack of genuine oversight by the Commission and its executive agencies that would track the final beneficiary of the funds it allocates and make that information public, particularly in view of the opaque sub-grant system between NGOs; |
Or. fr
Amendment 58
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 g (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11g. Regrets the LIFE scandal that has besmirched the Commission, damaging the reputation of all the European institutions; recalls that this case stems from Union funds that the Commission used to pay NGOs to act as lobbyists to MEPs and institutions on Green Deal topics and to steer their votes in that direction; is concerned about such interference between European institutions, which runs counter to the democratic process, revealing the intolerable and purely political use that has been made of public funds; expects other similar cases to come to light; |
Or. fr
Amendment 59
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 d (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11d. Deplores the absence of a unified real-time transparency portal to track EU funds granted to NGOs, as recommended by the European Court of Auditors; |
Or. fr
Amendment 60
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11b. Recalls that, according to the European Court of Auditors, the total EU funding granted to NGOs under internal policies for the audited sub-period (2021-2023) is EUR 7,4 billion. Of over 4 400 NGOs which received funding, 30 received more than 40 % of the total funds, or EUR 3,3 billion4 a; | |
| _________________ | |
| 4 a European Court of Auditors Special Report 11/2025. |
Or. fr
Amendment 61
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11 b. Recalls the crucial role of civil society organisations, in upholding democratic values to support a vibrant and lively democratic society, ensuring a sound basis for broad coverage of all relevant views in different debates and highlights that CSOs may receive support from Union funds to exercise these functions, as provided in Article 11 of the Treaty on European Union; |
Or. en
Amendment 62
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11 a. Considers that direct or indirect EU funding for the production of journalistic content about EU affairs is inherently incompatible with the principle of editorial independence; stresses that media organisations receiving such funding cannot credibly maintain the appearance of impartiality when reporting on the institutions that finance them; calls on the Commission to refrain from issuing further calls for proposals for EU-funded media content production and to phase out existing funding agreements as they expire; underlines that an informed public debate about EU policy is best served by genuinely independent journalism, not by institutionally subsidised coverage; |
Or. en
Amendment 63
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11 b. Notes with concern that Euronews, a pan-European broadcaster, has received over EUR 350 million in Union funding over the past 15 years, while accumulating a total loss of EUR 180 million since its inception; notes that the broadcaster has undergone significant ownership changes resulting in its acquisition by investors with close ties to Member State governments, raising grave questions about editorial independence and the use of Union funds; expresses deep concern over reports that 48 employees addressed a letter to the Chairman complaining of direct interference and forced self-censorship; notes further that investigative reporting1a has revealed that the broadcaster produces sponsored content for third-country governments without adequate disclosure; considers that Union-funded media outlets must be subject to strict transparency requirements; notes with alarm that the European Court of Auditors and Commission internal reports have highlighted weak oversight, as the Commission’s monitoring is restricted to specific funded programs rather than the broadcaster’s overall ownership structure or general editorial independence; calls on the Commission to conduct a comprehensive review of all long-term Union funding agreements with media organisations to assess whether editorial independence is effectively safeguarded and whether Union funds are being used in accordance with the principle of sound financial management; | |
| _________________ | |
| 1a https://www.euractiv.com/news/inside-euronews-how-europes-broadcaster-became-an-influence-network/ |
Or. en
Amendment 64
Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12. Recalls that due to the urgent need to boost the Union's defence capabilities, the number and volume of Union defence funding instruments has increased since the start of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; underlines the need for a comprehensive Union approach to defence funding, with increased focus on countering hybrid threats, including those related to artificial intelligence, drones and cyber-attacks; underlines that democratic accountability, auditability and transparency must increase in parallel with expenditure and that security considerations cannot be used to justify weaker oversight, fragmented reporting or reduced access for the discharge authority; stresses the need for further improvement of the transparency of Union defence funding, including by ensuring audit arrangements equivalent in practical effect to those applicable to civilian spending, and that the discharge authority can exercise democratic scrutiny of all Union-funded activities, during the adoption, design and implementation phases; | 12. Recalls that due to the urgent need to boost the Union's defence capabilities, the number and volume of Union defence funding instruments has increased since the start of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; considers that defence and support for Ukraine must be treated as the budgetary priority in the current geopolitical context and that resources should be reallocated from lower-priority programmes to meet this objective; underlines the need for a comprehensive Union approach to defence funding, with increased focus on technologies that deliver the greatest operational advantage per euro invested, including artificial intelligence, drones and cyber capabilities; underlines that democratic accountability, auditability and transparency must increase in parallel with expenditure and that security considerations cannot be used to justify weaker oversight, fragmented reporting or reduced access for the discharge authority; stresses the need for further improvement of the transparency of Union defence funding, including by ensuring audit arrangements equivalent in practical effect to those applicable to civilian spending, and that the discharge authority can exercise democratic scrutiny of all Union-funded activities, during the adoption, design and implementation phases; |
Or. en
Amendment 65
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12. Recalls that due to the urgent need to boost the Union's defence capabilities, the number and volume of Union defence funding instruments has increased since the start of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; underlines the need for a comprehensive Union approach to defence funding, with increased focus on countering hybrid threats, including those related to artificial intelligence, drones and cyber-attacks; underlines that democratic accountability, auditability and transparency must increase in parallel with expenditure and that security considerations cannot be used to justify weaker oversight, fragmented reporting or reduced access for the discharge authority; stresses the need for further improvement of the transparency of Union defence funding, including by ensuring audit arrangements equivalent in practical effect to those applicable to civilian spending, and that the discharge authority can exercise democratic scrutiny of all Union-funded activities, during the adoption, design and implementation phases; | 12. Recalls that due to the urgent need to boost the Union's defence capabilities, the number and volume of Union defence funding instruments has increased since the start of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; underlines the need for a comprehensive Union approach to defence funding, with increased focus on countering hybrid threats, including those related to artificial intelligence, drones and cyber-attacks; underlines that democratic accountability, auditability and transparency must increase in parallel with expenditure and that security considerations cannot be used to justify weaker oversight, fragmented reporting or reduced access for the discharge authority; stresses the need for further improvement of the transparency of Union defence funding; |
Or. en
Amendment 66
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12. Recalls that due to the urgent need to boost the Union's defence capabilities, the number and volume of Union defence funding instruments has increased since the start of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; underlines the need for a comprehensive Union approach to defence funding, with increased focus on countering hybrid threats, including those related to artificial intelligence, drones and cyber-attacks; underlines that democratic accountability, auditability and transparency must increase in parallel with expenditure and that security considerations cannot be used to justify weaker oversight, fragmented reporting or reduced access for the discharge authority; stresses the need for further improvement of the transparency of Union defence funding, including by ensuring audit arrangements equivalent in practical effect to those applicable to civilian spending, and that the discharge authority can exercise democratic scrutiny of all Union-funded activities, during the adoption, design and implementation phases; | 12. Recalls that due to the urgent need to boost the Union's defence capabilities, the number and volume of Union defence funding instruments has increased since the start of the illegal Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; underlines the need for a comprehensive Union approach to defence funding, with increased focus on countering hybrid threats, including those related to artificial intelligence, drones and cyber-attacks; underlines that democratic accountability, auditability and transparency must increase in parallel with expenditure and while recognising that legitimate security requirements may limit the disclosure of certain sensitive information, without reducing the overall capacity of discharge authority to exercise effective oversight; stresses the need for further improvement of the transparency of Union defence funding, including by ensuring audit arrangements proportionate to the sensitivity of defence activities but fully ensuring effective oversight, and by guaranteeing that the discharge authority can exercise democratic scrutiny of all Union-funded activities, during the adoption, design and implementation phases; |
Or. en
Amendment 67
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12. Recalls that due to the urgent need to boost the Union's defence capabilities, the number and volume of Union defence funding instruments has increased since the start of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; underlines the need for a comprehensive Union approach to defence funding, with increased focus on countering hybrid threats, including those related to artificial intelligence, drones and cyber-attacks; underlines that democratic accountability, auditability and transparency must increase in parallel with expenditure and that security considerations cannot be used to justify weaker oversight, fragmented reporting or reduced access for the discharge authority; stresses the need for further improvement of the transparency of Union defence funding, including by ensuring audit arrangements equivalent in practical effect to those applicable to civilian spending, and that the discharge authority can exercise democratic scrutiny of all Union-funded activities, during the adoption, design and implementation phases; | 12. Welcomes that due to the urgent need to boost the Union's defence capabilities, the number and volume of Union defence funding instruments has increased since the start of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; underlines the need for a comprehensive Union approach to security and defence funding, responding to both conventional military threats and non-conventional threats, including hybrid threats, such as those related to artificial intelligence, drones and cyber-attacks; underlines that democratic accountability, auditability and transparency must increase in parallel with expenditure and that security considerations cannot by default weaken oversight, reporting or access for the discharge authority, unless duly justified; stresses the need for further improvement of the transparency of Union defence funding, including by ensuring audit arrangements equivalent in practical effect to those applicable to civilian spending, and that the discharge authority can exercise democratic scrutiny of all Union-funded activities, during the adoption, design and implementation phases; |
Or. en
Amendment 68
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12 a. Recalls the importance of ensuring that all allocation of funds is accompanied by appropriate oversight, with particular attention to respect for the Union’s fundamental values; invites the Commission to gather and assess relevant evidence in order to examine any cases of potentially fraudulent or irregular beneficiaries, in line with its responsibilities under the Financial Regulation and the Erasmus+ grant agreements; underlines the need to safeguard the programme against misuse by organisations whose activities are not compatible with the Union’s fundamental values, including human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and human rights; recalls that the Commission is legally obliged to ensure that programme beneficiaries commit to and uphold these values and refrain from professional misconduct; |
Or. en
Amendment 69
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12 a. Highlights that equality is a founding value of the Union and is enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; recalls the commitment of the Union to gender mainstreaming in its policymaking and implementation of Union funds, including gender budgeting; encourages the Commission to continue the efforts made in gender budgeting and in tracking the impact of the Union budget to foster gender equality; |
Or. en
Amendment 70
Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12 a. Notes that the year 2024, including the period preceding the European elections, was characterised by an increased exposure to risks of foreign interference and influence operations directed at democratic institutions and elected representatives; therefore calls for the continued and systematic reinforcement of internal safeguards, transparency obligations and structured cooperation with the relevant Union bodies; |
Or. en
Amendment 71
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12 b. Emphasises the importance of maintaining institutional integrity and strengthening the Parliament’s resilience against potential foreign interference; condemns any improper attempt to influence the legislative activities of the European Parliament; underlines, in this context, the essential responsibility of OLAF to carry out all necessary in-depth investigations; stresses the key role played by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in protecting the European Union’s financial interests; recalls the Agreement establishing an interinstitutional body for ethical standards for members of institutions and advisory bodies referred to in Article 13 of the Treaty on European Union and insists on its swift and effective implementation across all EU institutions; |
Or. en
Amendment 72
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12 a. Recalls the importance of a strict application of the financial rules of the Union in all programmes and on all beneficiaries, in order to avoid all forms of fraud, conflicts of interest, corruption, double funding and money laundering; reminds in this framework of the key role played by the whole Union’s anti-fraud architecture and expresses some concerns about the refusal of some Member States to cooperate with one of its elements, notably the EPPO; |
Or. en
Amendment 73
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12a. Opposes any form of EU-level taxation imposed directly on European citizens, recalling that the fiscal burden is already high in many Member States and should not be exacerbated by additional levies at Union level; |
Or. fr
Amendment 74
Carlo Fidanza
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 13. Calls on the Commission in particular to: | deleted |
| (i) urgently reassess and address the deterioration of the rule of law and risks to the Union budget in Hungary, and take all necessary actions in accordance with the Conditionality Regulation and other available tools, including full suspension of Union funds; | |
| (ii) consistently and accurately apply the provisions related to the ‘final recipients’, of Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility3 (the RRF Regulation), by revising its Guidance on RRPs, to communicate with Member States on the correct application of the definition of ‘final recipients’ and to provide the discharge authority, within six months, with a complete and meaningful list of final beneficiaries, excluding merely intermediary entities such as ministries or managing authorities; | |
| (iii) ensure full compliance with Union rules on access to documents, including regarding text messages and other electronic communications of the Commission President and Commissioners; | |
| (iv) ensure that no Union funds are paid, directly or indirectly, to Agrofert or any other business interests of Andrej Babiš if the identified conflict of interest has not been demonstrably and verifiably resolved; | |
| (v) calls on the President of the Commission, pursuant to Article 17(6) TEU, to withdraw confidence in Commissioner Várhelyi; | |
| (vi) calls on the Commission to strengthen the existing control framework through independent ex-ante verification of climate and biodiversity coefficients, systematic publication of project-level climate data and transparent reporting on environmentally harmful expenditure, in line with the Court’s recommendations; | |
| _________________ | |
| 3 OJ L 57, 18.2.2021, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj. |
Or. en
Amendment 75
Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point -i (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (-i) initiate the first informal step of the conditionality mechanism when serious systemic rule of law breaches occur in member states and there is a risk to the financial interests of the Union, in order to encourage member states to follow the rule of law and to ameliorate rule of law breaches early on; |
Or. en
Amendment 76
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point i
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (i) urgently reassess and address the deterioration of the rule of law and risks to the Union budget in Hungary, and take all necessary actions in accordance with the Conditionality Regulation and other available tools, including full suspension of Union funds; | deleted |
Or. fr
Amendment 77
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point i
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (i) urgently reassess and address the deterioration of the rule of law and risks to the Union budget in Hungary, and take all necessary actions in accordance with the Conditionality Regulation and other available tools, including full suspension of Union funds; | (i) urgently reassess and address situations in Members States where rule of law deficiencies may affect the sound financial management of the Union budget, and take all necessary actions in accordance with the Conditionality Regulation and other available tools, including suspension of Union funds; |
Or. en
Amendment 78
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point i
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (i) urgently reassess and address the deterioration of the rule of law and risks to the Union budget in Hungary, and take all necessary actions in accordance with the Conditionality Regulation and other available tools, including full suspension of Union funds; | (i) urgently reassess and address the deterioration of the rule of law and risks to the Union budget in Hungary and in all Member States, and take all necessary actions in accordance with the Conditionality Regulation and other available tools, including full suspension of Union funds; |
Or. en
Amendment 79
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point i
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (i) urgently reassess and address the deterioration of the rule of law and risks to the Union budget in Hungary, and take all necessary actions in accordance with the Conditionality Regulation and other available tools, including full suspension of Union funds; | (i) urgently reassess and address the deterioration of the rule of law and risks to the Union budget in Hungary, and take all necessary actions in accordance with the Conditionality Regulation and other available tools, including suspension of Union funds; |
Or. en
Amendment 80
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point i a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (i a) carefully evaluates the risks borne by the EU budget and to report them in a clear manner as requested by the Court and to present consistent measures to mitigate them; |
Or. en
Amendment 81
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point ii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (ii) consistently and accurately apply the provisions related to the ‘final recipients’, of Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility3 (the RRF Regulation), by revising its Guidance on RRPs, to communicate with Member States on the correct application of the definition of ‘final recipients’ and to provide the discharge authority, within six months, with a complete and meaningful list of final beneficiaries, excluding merely intermediary entities such as ministries or managing authorities; | (ii) consistently and accurately apply the provisions related to the ‘final recipients’, of Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility[1] (the RRF Regulation), which requires Member States, as part of their audit and control obligations, to collect and ensure access to data, including the name of the ‘final recipients’ of funds; recalls that “final recipient” should be read as the last entity receiving funds rather than contractor, sub-contractor, or intermediate bodies; calls on the Commission to provide this data to the discharge authority, in line with the transparency requirements laid down in the Regulation; |
| _________________ | |
| 3 OJ L 57, 18.2.2021, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj. |
Or. en
Amendment 82
Eero Heinäluoma, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point ii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (ii) consistently and accurately apply the provisions related to the ‘final recipients’, of Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility3 (the RRF Regulation), by revising its Guidance on RRPs, to communicate with Member States on the correct application of the definition of ‘final recipients’ and to provide the discharge authority, within six months, with a complete and meaningful list of final beneficiaries, excluding merely intermediary entities such as ministries or managing authorities; | (ii) consistently and accurately apply the provisions related to the ‘final recipients’, of Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility3 (the RRF Regulation), by revising its Guidance on RRPs, to communicate with Member States on the correct application of the definition of ‘final recipients’ and to provide the discharge authority with a complete and meaningful list of final beneficiaries, excluding merely intermediary entities such as ministries or managing authorities; |
| _________________ | _________________ |
| 3 OJ L 57, 18.2.2021, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj. | 3 OJ L 57, 18.2.2021, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj. |
Or. en
Amendment 83
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point ii a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (ii a) consider to apply a strict “no payment without traceability” principle, ensuring that payments are conditional upon systematic data availability down to final recipients and contractors; |
Or. en
Amendment 84
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point iii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iii) ensure full compliance with Union rules on access to documents, including regarding text messages and other electronic communications of the Commission President and Commissioners; | (iii) ensure compliance with Union rules on access to documents, while recognising that institutional communications of public interest should be made accessible in a proportionate manner and respecting the legal and security requirements, in order to safeguard democratic oversight and accountability; |
Or. en
Amendment 85
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point iii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iii) ensure full compliance with Union rules on access to documents, including regarding text messages and other electronic communications of the Commission President and Commissioners; | (iii) ensure full compliance with Union rules on access to documents |
Or. en
Amendment 86
Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point iii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iii) ensure full compliance with Union rules on access to documents, including regarding text messages and other electronic communications of the Commission President and Commissioners; | (iii) urgently ensure full compliance with Union rules on access to documents, including regarding text messages and other electronic communications of the Commission President and Commissioners; |
Or. en
Amendment 87
Ondřej Knotek
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point iv
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iv) ensure that no Union funds are paid, directly or indirectly, to Agrofert or any other business interests of Andrej Babiš if the identified conflict of interest has not been demonstrably and verifiably resolved; | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 88
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point iv
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iv) ensure that no Union funds are paid, directly or indirectly, to Agrofert or any other business interests of Andrej Babiš if the identified conflict of interest has not been demonstrably and verifiably resolved; | (iv) ensure that no Union funds are paid, directly or indirectly, to beneficiaries where a conflict of interest has been identified and has not been demonstrably and verifiably resolved, in accordance with the applicable Union rules and safeguards; |
Or. en
Amendment 89
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point v
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (v) calls on the President of the Commission, pursuant to Article 17(6) TEU, to withdraw confidence in Commissioner Várhelyi; | deleted |
Or. fr
Amendment 90
Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point v
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (v) calls on the President of the Commission, pursuant to Article 17(6) TEU, to withdraw confidence in Commissioner Várhelyi; | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 91
Tomáš Zdechovský, Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point v
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (v) calls on the President of the Commission, pursuant to Article 17(6) TEU, to withdraw confidence in Commissioner Várhelyi; | (v) calls on the Commission to ensure that all Commissioners and senior officials exercise their functions in full compliance with Union rules on integrity, conflicts of interest and sound administration; |
Or. en
Amendment 92
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point vi
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi) calls on the Commission to strengthen the existing control framework through independent ex-ante verification of climate and biodiversity coefficients, systematic publication of project-level climate data and transparent reporting on environmentally harmful expenditure, in line with the Court’s recommendations; | (vi) calls on the Commission to adequately apply the control framework for the Union expenditure related to climate and biodiversity objectives, including proportionate verification mechanism, timely reporting of project-level climate data and transparent communication on environmentally impacts, in line with the Court’s recommendations and with due regard for operational feasibility and economic competitiveness; |
Or. en
Amendment 93
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point vi
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi) calls on the Commission to strengthen the existing control framework through independent ex-ante verification of climate and biodiversity coefficients, systematic publication of project-level climate data and transparent reporting on environmentally harmful expenditure, in line with the Court’s recommendations; | (vi) calls on the Commission to strengthen the existing control framework through independent ex-ante verification of climate and biodiversity coefficients, systematic publication of project-level climate data and transparent reporting on environmentally harmful expenditure, in line with the Court’s recommendations, and to improve the monitoring and reporting of results, beyond mere spending targets, with a view to maximising the impact of Union climate and biodiversity funding; |
Or. en
Amendment 94
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point vi
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi) calls on the Commission to strengthen the existing control framework through independent ex-ante verification of climate and biodiversity coefficients, systematic publication of project-level climate data and transparent reporting on environmentally harmful expenditure, in line with the Court’s recommendations; | (vi) calls on the Commission to strengthen the existing control framework through independent ex-ante verification of the impact of its policies on European companies and on the purchasing power of European citizens; |
Or. fr
Amendment 95
Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point vi a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi a) ensure that under no circumstances, beneficiaries of Union funding should use EU funding for detailed lobbying activities directed towards Union institutions, as the EU taxpayer should not be paying for interest related lobbying and as this can create reputational damage and risk upsetting the institutional balance in the Union; welcomes the Commissions new approach and new guidelines published in May 2024 to protect the EU budget; notes it is of course possible to express interests, but that the EU should not be paying for lobbying building capacity or direct lobbying of EU institutions or national and regional parliaments and governments, are not used for regional or national protect actions or lawsuits; |
Or. en
Amendment 96
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point vi a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (via ) Calls for the immediate suspension or cancellation of grant agreements concluded with NGOs when they violate EU financial rules and for the Commission’s guidelines to be supplemented by concrete proposals to ensure that the budget allocated to the Commission by Member States and taxpayers is not used for lobbying or communication activities in favour of the Commission, especially during election periods; |
Or. fr
Amendment 97
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point vi a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi a) Recalls the importance of appropriate oversight of Union funding, with particular attention to respect for the Union’s fundamental values; invites the Commission, in line with the Financial Regulation to examine any potentially fraudulent or irregular beneficiaries; and recalls its legal obligation to ensure that beneficiaries uphold these values and refrain from professional misconduct; |
Or. en
Amendment 98
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point vi c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi c) calls on the Commission to ensure that the EPPO has adequate resources to investigate cases of fraud related to RRF expenditure or EU funding, given the increasing number of investigations and high estimated damages; |
Or. en
Amendment 99
Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point vi a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi a) calls on the Commission to increase the transparency of its actions, comply with its own guidelines on the rule of law, and urgently clarify all discrepancies; |
Or. en
Amendment 100
Olivier Chastel
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 – point vi b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi b) Recalls that equality is a founding value of the Union and is enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; recalls the commitment of the Union to gender mainstreaming in its policy-making and implementation of Union funds, including gender budgeting; calls on the Commission to continue the efforts made in gender budgeting and in tracking the impact of the Union budget to foster gender equality; recalls the obligation of the Commission to accompany all legislative proposals with an impact assessment when they are projected to have a significant economic, social, and environmental impact in order to guarantee, among other things, fair distribution of funds; |
Or. en
Amendment 101
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 19. Strongly regrets the adverse opinion on the legality and regularity of the Union budget expenditure issued by the Court for the sixth year in a row; considers this increasingly problematic and stresses that if the situation should continue to persist or even further deteriorate, the discharge authority cannot continue to grant discharge to the Commission; | 19. Strongly regrets the adverse opinion on the legality and regularity of the Union budget expenditure issued by the Court for the sixth year in a row; considers this increasingly problematic and stresses that if the situation should continue to persist or even further deteriorate, the discharge authority cannot continue to grant discharge to the Commission; underlines the importance of reinforcing the final management and the control mechanisms of both the Commission and Member States that is considered as not reliable by the Court and therefore compromises the reliability of the Annual Management and Performance Report; |
Or. en
Amendment 102
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 19. Strongly regrets the adverse opinion on the legality and regularity of the Union budget expenditure issued by the Court for the sixth year in a row; considers this increasingly problematic and stresses that if the situation should continue to persist or even further deteriorate, the discharge authority cannot continue to grant discharge to the Commission; | 19. Strongly regrets the adverse opinion on the legality and regularity of the Union budget expenditure issued by the Court for the sixth year in a row; considers this increasingly problematic; |
Or. en
Amendment 103
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 19. Strongly regrets the adverse opinion on the legality and regularity of the Union budget expenditure issued by the Court for the sixth year in a row; considers this increasingly problematic and stresses that if the situation should continue to persist or even further deteriorate, the discharge authority cannot continue to grant discharge to the Commission; | 19. Regrets, nevertheless, the adverse opinion on the legality and regularity of the Union budget expenditure issued by the Court for the sixth year in a row; considers this a matter of concern; underlines the importance of continued and sustained efforts by the Commission to address the underlying weaknesses identified by the Court; |
Or. en
Amendment 104
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 22. Notes that, unlike the Court, which must report all errors regardless of whether a financial correction is possible, the Commission only reports irregularities for which it considers recoveries are legally justified; recalls that the Commission’s definition of ‘irregularity’ excludes irregularities caused by weaknesses in national administrations or in the Commission itself, whereas the Court’s definition of “error’ includes all payments made without meeting the required conditions; | 22. Notes that, unlike the Court, which must report all errors regardless of whether a financial correction is possible, the Commission only reports irregularities for which it considers recoveries are legally justified; recalls that the Commission’s definition of ‘irregularity’ excludes irregularities caused by weaknesses in national administrations or in the Commission itself, whereas the Court’s definition of “error’ includes all payments made without meeting the required conditions; notes the difficulties for the discharge authority when the Court of Auditors and the Commission apply different legal and methodological definitions, given their distinct institutional roles; |
Or. en
Amendment 105
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 22 a. Reiterates its support for the independent audit approach and methodology of the Court and invites the Commission to cooperate with the Court with a view to increasing harmonisation and providing for more comparable estimates of the level of error; |
Or. en
Amendment 106
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 22 b. Stresses the importance of ensuring that public authorities effectively recover revenues lost due to fraud, evasion and administrative fragmentation, as part of a balanced approach to safeguarding public finances and reinforcing taxpayers’ trust; invites the Commission to publish an annual “recovered resources scoreboard”, aggregating information on recoveries, financial corrections and confiscations linked to Union spending and enforcement cooperation, with a view to enhancing transparency and accountability; |
Or. en
Amendment 107
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 22 c. Is concerned that the Commission and the Court have different interpretations of what the “error rate” represents, thus generating confusion; expresses its support for the audit approach and methodology of the Court and strongly calls on both institutions to find a common approach; is concerned that the Commission is systematically underestimating the existing error level and that this could lead to an ineffective protection of the financial interests of the Union; |
Or. en
Amendment 108
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 23. Reiterates its concern over the Court’s observation that the Commission’s risk assessment is likely to underestimate the actual level of risk in several areas; notes that the recurrent weaknesses identified in Member States’ management and control systems continue to limit the degree of reliance that can be placed on their work; welcomes that, as of 2025, the Court will discontinue the practice of selecting audit samples from transactions already reviewed by the Commission or national audit authorities, a change rendered necessary because this approach, though expected to reveal few or no errors, has repeatedly proven unreliable; underlines that this development raises serious doubts about the effectiveness of the Union’s control systems and reinforces Parliament’s longstanding call for reliable assurance mechanisms across all management modes; | 23. Reiterates its concern over the Court’s observation that the Commission’s risk assessment is likely to underestimate the actual level of risk in several areas; notes that identified weaknesses in certain management and control systems may affect the overall reliability of audit conclusions; highlights the need to ensure robust oversight across management modes; welcomes that, as of 2025, the Court will discontinue the practice of selecting audit samples from transactions already reviewed by the Commission or national audit authorities, a change rendered necessary because this approach, though expected to reveal few or no errors, has repeatedly proven unreliable; underlines that this development raises serious doubts about the effectiveness of the Union’s control systems and reinforces Parliament’s longstanding call for reliable assurance mechanisms across all management modes; |
Or. en
Amendment 109
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 24. Calls on the Commission to accelerate the deployment of interoperable anti-fraud and data-mining tools across management modes, enabling cross-checks on beneficial ownership, procurement risk indicators and double-funding signals; urges the Commission to report annually to the discharge authority on the coverage and effectiveness of these tools, including uptake by managing authorities; | 24. Urges the Commission to accelerate the deployment of interoperable anti-fraud and data-mining tools across management modes, enabling cross-checks on beneficial ownership, procurement risk indicators and double-funding signals; urges the Commission to report annually to the discharge authority on the coverage and effectiveness of these tools, including uptake by managing authorities; reiterates the urgent need for the mandatory use of data mining and artificial intelligence tools to effectively combat fraud and irregularities |
Or. en
Amendment 110
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 25. Underlines that the estimated level of error in the Union’s expenditure, as reported in the Court’s statement of assurance, reflects amounts that were paid out without meeting all the applicable rules and conditions; considers that, although this is not an indicator of fraud or corruption and does not automatically imply a wasteful use of resources, it does indicate cases where corrective action is required and where the protection of the Union’s financial interests can be strengthened; regrets that persistent levels of error, while often technical in nature, may nevertheless undermine public confidence in the Union and expose the Commission to reputational risks regarding its capacity to ensure sound financial management of the Union budget; | 25. Underlines that the estimated level of error in the Union’s expenditure, as reported in the Court’s statement of assurance, reflects amounts that were paid out without meeting all the applicable rules and conditions; considers that, although this is not an indicator of fraud or corruption and does not automatically imply a wasteful use of resources, it does indicate cases where corrective action is required and where the protection of the Union’s financial interests can be strengthened; regrets that persistent levels of error, while often technical in nature, may nevertheless undermine public confidence in the Union and expose the Commission to reputational risks regarding its capacity to ensure sound financial management of the Union budget and to effectively protect the Union financial interests in particular in view of the weaknesses identified by the Court; |
Or. en
Amendment 111
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 25. Underlines that the estimated level of error in the Union’s expenditure, as reported in the Court’s statement of assurance, reflects amounts that were paid out without meeting all the applicable rules and conditions; considers that, although this is not an indicator of fraud or corruption and does not automatically imply a wasteful use of resources, it does indicate cases where corrective action is required and where the protection of the Union’s financial interests can be strengthened; regrets that persistent levels of error, while often technical in nature, may nevertheless undermine public confidence in the Union and expose the Commission to reputational risks regarding its capacity to ensure sound financial management of the Union budget; | 25. Underlines that the estimated level of error in the Union’s expenditure, as reported in the Court’s statement of assurance, reflects payments that, according to the Court’s assessment, did not fully comply with applicable rules and conditions; considers that, although this is not an indicator of fraud or corruption and does not automatically imply a wasteful use of resources, highlights areas where corrective measures can reinforce the proper application of rules and strengthen the protection of the Union’s financial instruments; regrets that persistent levels of error, while often technical in nature, may nevertheless undermine public confidence and underscore the importance of continued vigilance to ensure sound financial management of the Union budget; |
Or. en
Amendment 112
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 27. Recalls that the Commission bears primary responsibility for preventing and detecting fraud affecting the Union’s financial interests; notes that the Court of Auditors, in line with its mandate, must report any cases of irregularity identified during its audit work; further notes that the Court refers suspicions of criminal offences falling under the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) and suspicions of fraud, corruption or other illegal activities to the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF); notes that in 2024 the Court reported 19 cases of suspected fraud to OLAF and, in parallel, transmitted 7 of these cases to the EPPO, which have so far resulted in six OLAF investigations and seven EPPO investigations; commends the Court for its systematic reporting to OLAF and the EPPO, especially given that information stemming from audit activities carries a high degree of reliability; stresses that all cases of irregular expenditure identified by the Court should be reported to OLAF and the EPPO, leaving it to these competent bodies to assess whether there is fraudulent intent warranting further investigation; | 27. Recalls that the Commission bears primary responsibility for preventing and detecting fraud affecting the Union’s financial interests; notes that the Court of Auditors, in line with its mandate, must report any cases of irregularity identified during its audit work; further notes that the Court refers suspicions of criminal offences falling under the competence of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) and suspicions of fraud, corruption or other illegal activities to the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF); notes that in 2024 the Court reported 19 cases of suspected fraud to OLAF and, in parallel, transmitted 7 of these cases to the EPPO, which have so far resulted in six OLAF investigations and seven EPPO investigations; commends the Court for its systematic reporting to OLAF and the EPPO, especially given that information stemming from audit activities carries a high degree of reliability; stresses that all cases of irregular expenditure identified by the Court should be reported to OLAF and the EPPO, leaving it to these competent bodies to assess whether there is fraudulent intent warranting further investigation; underlines the importance of continued coordination between Commission, OLAF, EPPO and the Court to ensure timely and effective follow-up of all reported cases, in line with their respective mandates; |
Or. en
Amendment 113
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 27 a. Highlights the role of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) in protecting the financial interests of the Union, defending the rule of law, and ensuring the efficient implementation of the Union budget in accordance with the principles enshrined in the Treaties; reiterates the need to provide these bodies with sufficient resources to guarantee fully functioning cross-border investigation and detection capabilities; |
Or. en
Amendment 114
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 34 a. Is worried by the different risks on the EU budget identified by the Court including the outstanding commitment, which may represent future debts if they are not decommitted, the risk of decommitment in cohesion policy funds from 2027 onwards., which may jeopardise the achievement of EU objectives; the inceresd exposure of eth EU budget with the need for the Commission to act more proactively to ensure that its mitigating risk tool (such as the CPF) have sufficient capacity; |
Or. en
Amendment 115
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 35. Notes that outstanding Union borrowing increased by more than 30,0 % in 2024, reflecting the Commission’s expanded use of capital markets to finance large-scale programmes such as Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE) and NGEU; notes that by 2027 total outstanding borrowing could exceed EUR 900,0 billion, almost ten times the level recorded in 2020 prior to the launch of NGEU; notes that since December 2022 the Commission has applied a diversified funding strategy as its standard method for raising funds on capital markets, and that at the end of 2024 the nominal value of outstanding Union borrowing stood at EUR 601,3 billion, up from EUR 458,5 billion in 2023; | 35. Notes that outstanding Union borrowing increased by more than 30,0 % in 2024, reflecting the Commission’s expanded use of capital markets to finance large-scale programmes such as Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE) and NGEU; notes with concerns that by 2027 total outstanding borrowing could exceed EUR 900,0 billion, almost ten times the level recorded in 2020 prior to the launch of NGEU; notes that since December 2022 the Commission has applied a diversified funding strategy as its standard method for raising funds on capital markets, and that at the end of 2024 the nominal value of outstanding Union borrowing stood at EUR 601,3 billion, up from EUR 458,5 billion in 2023; is worried that with the new strategy the EU budget is set to face higher interest rate risks; |
Or. en
Amendment 116
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 35. Notes that outstanding Union borrowing increased by more than 30,0 % in 2024, reflecting the Commission’s expanded use of capital markets to finance large-scale programmes such as Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE) and NGEU; notes that by 2027 total outstanding borrowing could exceed EUR 900,0 billion, almost ten times the level recorded in 2020 prior to the launch of NGEU; notes that since December 2022 the Commission has applied a diversified funding strategy as its standard method for raising funds on capital markets, and that at the end of 2024 the nominal value of outstanding Union borrowing stood at EUR 601,3 billion, up from EUR 458,5 billion in 2023; | 35. Notes that outstanding Union borrowing reaching EUR 601,3 billion at the end of 2024, reflecting the financing of agreed Union programmes, included programmes such as Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE) and NGEU, in line with the Commission’s diversified funding strategy; notes that by 2027 total outstanding borrowing could exceed EUR 900,0 billion, almost ten times the level recorded in 2020 prior to the launch of NGEU; notes that since December 2022 the Commission has applied a diversified funding strategy as its standard method for raising funds on capital markets, underscores the importance of transparent reporting and sound financial management in the context of increased borrowing to maintain fiscal sustainability and accountability; |
Or. en
Amendment 117
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 35. Notes that outstanding Union borrowing increased by more than 30,0 % in 2024, reflecting the Commission’s expanded use of capital markets to finance large-scale programmes such as Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE) and NGEU; notes that by 2027 total outstanding borrowing could exceed EUR 900,0 billion, almost ten times the level recorded in 2020 prior to the launch of NGEU; notes that since December 2022 the Commission has applied a diversified funding strategy as its standard method for raising funds on capital markets, and that at the end of 2024 the nominal value of outstanding Union borrowing stood at EUR 601,3 billion, up from EUR 458,5 billion in 2023; | 35. Is concerned that outstanding Union borrowing increased by more than 30,0 % in 2024, reflecting the Commission’s expanded use of capital markets to finance large-scale programmes such as Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE) and NGEU; notes with concern that by 2027 total outstanding borrowing could exceed EUR 900,0 billion, almost ten times the level recorded in 2020 prior to the launch of NGEU; notes that since December 2022 the Commission has applied a diversified funding strategy as its standard method for raising funds on capital markets, and that at the end of 2024 the nominal value of outstanding Union borrowing stood at EUR 601,3 billion, up from EUR 458,5 billion in 2023; |
Or. fr
Amendment 118
Dick Erixon, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 35 a. Stresses that the Union’s growing debt burden, with outstanding bonds projected to reach EUR 900 billion by end 2027, represents an unprecedented fiscal commitment that must be governed by the principles of sound financial management and fiscal responsibility; notes that the associated interest payments and principal repayments will significantly constrain the budgetary space available under future MFFs; considers that a culture of fiscal discipline must be strengthened across all Union institutions and programmes; calls on the Commission to apply a systematic ‘value for money’ assessment to all spending programmes and to identify areas where expenditure can be reduced or reallocated to achieve greater efficiency and impact; underlines that every euro spent from the Union budget represents a contribution from taxpayers in the Member States and must be treated accordingly; |
Or. en
Amendment 119
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 36. Notes that interest expenditure linked to the financing of the non-repayable NGEU support reached EUR 5,4 billion for the period 2021 to 2024, including EUR 3,4 billion in 2024 alone, which is almost 50,0 % higher than the initial forecast of EUR 3,7 billion; observes that total interest expenditure in the current MFF may range between EUR 29,0 and EUR 30,4 billion, approximately double the Commission’s original estimate of EUR 14,9 billion; notes that a 2024 briefing entitled ‘Management of debt liabilities in the EU budget under the post-2027 MFF’ requested by the Committees on Budgets5estimated that interest payments for the non-repayable NGEU support in the next MFF could amount to EUR 70,9 and EUR 73,8 billion, underscoring the long-term budgetary impact of NGEU borrowing; | 36. Is concerned that interest expenditure linked to the financing of the non-repayable NGEU support reached EUR 5,4 billion for the period 2021 to 2024, including EUR 3,4 billion in 2024 alone, which is almost 50,0 % higher than the initial forecast of EUR 3,7 billion; observes that total interest expenditure in the current MFF may range between EUR 29,0 and EUR 30,4 billion, approximately double the Commission’s original estimate of EUR 14,9 billion; notes that a 2024 briefing entitled ‘Management of debt liabilities in the EU budget under the post-2027 MFF’ requested by the Committees on Budgets5 estimated that interest payments for the non-repayable NGEU support in the next MFF could amount to EUR 70,9 and EUR 73,8 billion, underscoring the long-term budgetary impact of NGEU borrowing; |
| _________________ | _________________ |
| 5 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2024/766173/IPOL_BRI(2024)766173_EN.pdf. | 5 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2024/766173/IPOL_BRI(2024)766173_EN.pdf. |
Or. fr
Amendment 120
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 36a. Stresses that the Next Generation EU (NGEU) recovery plan was financed by the issuance of common debt on variable-rate markets, demonstrating a degree of amateurism. From 2028, the Union will have to pay interest on those loans, which could reach up to EUR 222 billion over the entire duration of the NGEU borrowing scheme, i.e. 0,6 % of the EU’s average annual GDP1 b; | |
| _________________ | |
| 1 b https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2023/754286/IPOL_BRI(2023)754286_EN.pdf |
Or. fr
Amendment 121
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 37. Notes with concern that the Union budget’s exposure continued to increase in 2024, reflecting the growing volume of borrowing operations and associated guarantees; points out that the total exposure of the Union budget amounted to EUR 342,0 billion at the end of 2024, which amounts to an increase of 14,8 % compared with EUR 298,0 billion at the end of 2023; underlines that this trend underscores the importance of a robust system to ensure that the Union can meet its debt obligations under all circumstances; stresses that, in the context of rising debt levels, the development of genuine new own resources is essential to prevent debt servicing costs from crowding out priorities under future multiannual financial frameworks; | 37. Notes with concern that the Union budget’s exposure continued to increase in 2024, reflecting the growing volume of borrowing operations and associated guarantees; points out that the total exposure of the Union budget amounted to EUR 342,0 billion at the end of 2024, which amounts to an increase of 14,8 % compared with EUR 298,0 billion at the end of 2023; |
Or. fr
Amendment 122
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 37. Notes with concern that the Union budget’s exposure continued to increase in 2024, reflecting the growing volume of borrowing operations and associated guarantees; points out that the total exposure of the Union budget amounted to EUR 342,0 billion at the end of 2024, which amounts to an increase of 14,8 % compared with EUR 298,0 billion at the end of 2023; underlines that this trend underscores the importance of a robust system to ensure that the Union can meet its debt obligations under all circumstances; stresses that, in the context of rising debt levels, the development of genuine new own resources is essential to prevent debt servicing costs from crowding out priorities under future multiannual financial frameworks; | 37. Notes with concern that the Union budget’s exposure continued to increase in 2024, reflecting the growing volume of borrowing operations and associated guarantees; points out that the total exposure of the Union budget amounted to EUR 342,0 billion at the end of 2024, which amounts to an increase of 14,8 % compared with EUR 298,0 billion at the end of 2023; underlines that this trend underscores the importance of a robust system to ensure that the Union can meet its debt obligations under all circumstances; stresses that, in the context of rising debt levels, the development of genuine new own resources is essential to prevent debt servicing costs from crowding out priorities under future multiannual financial frameworks; support the Court recommendations to the Commission to act more proactively to ensure that its mitigating tools (such as the Common Provision Fund -CPF) have sufficient capacity as well as to provide a more transparent reporting on total annual budget exposure, making its estimate public, and including the exposure from programmes covered by budgetary guarantees; |
Or. en
Amendment 123
Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 37. Notes with concern that the Union budget’s exposure continued to increase in 2024, reflecting the growing volume of borrowing operations and associated guarantees; points out that the total exposure of the Union budget amounted to EUR 342,0 billion at the end of 2024, which amounts to an increase of 14,8 % compared with EUR 298,0 billion at the end of 2023; underlines that this trend underscores the importance of a robust system to ensure that the Union can meet its debt obligations under all circumstances; stresses that, in the context of rising debt levels, the development of genuine new own resources is essential to prevent debt servicing costs from crowding out priorities under future multiannual financial frameworks; | 37. Notes with concern that the Union budget’s exposure continued to increase in 2024, reflecting the growing volume of borrowing operations and associated guarantees; points out that the total exposure of the Union budget amounted to EUR 342,0 billion at the end of 2024, which amounts to an increase of 14,8 % compared with EUR 298,0 billion at the end of 2023; underlines that this trend underscores the importance of a robust system to ensure that the Union can meet its debt obligations under all circumstances; stresses that, in the context of rising debt levels, the primary response must be expenditure discipline, reallocation of existing resources and the identification of savings across all spending programmes, rather than the creation of new revenue streams that risk increasing the fiscal burden on citizens already bearing high taxation at national level; |
Or. en
Amendment 124
Bert-Jan Ruissen
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 37. Notes with concern that the Union budget’s exposure continued to increase in 2024, reflecting the growing volume of borrowing operations and associated guarantees; points out that the total exposure of the Union budget amounted to EUR 342,0 billion at the end of 2024, which amounts to an increase of 14,8 % compared with EUR 298,0 billion at the end of 2023; underlines that this trend underscores the importance of a robust system to ensure that the Union can meet its debt obligations under all circumstances; stresses that, in the context of rising debt levels, the development of genuine new own resources is essential to prevent debt servicing costs from crowding out priorities under future multiannual financial frameworks; | 37. Notes with concern that the Union budget’s exposure continued to increase in 2024, reflecting the growing volume of borrowing operations and associated guarantees; points out that the total exposure of the Union budget amounted to EUR 342,0 billion at the end of 2024, which amounts to an increase of 14,8 % compared with EUR 298,0 billion at the end of 2023; underlines that this trend underscores the importance of a robust system to ensure that the Union can meet its debt obligations under all circumstances; points out that, in the context of rising debt levels, the incurrence of new debt should be avoided as far as possible; |
Or. nl
Amendment 125
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 37. Notes with concern that the Union budget’s exposure continued to increase in 2024, reflecting the growing volume of borrowing operations and associated guarantees; points out that the total exposure of the Union budget amounted to EUR 342,0 billion at the end of 2024, which amounts to an increase of 14,8 % compared with EUR 298,0 billion at the end of 2023; underlines that this trend underscores the importance of a robust system to ensure that the Union can meet its debt obligations under all circumstances; stresses that, in the context of rising debt levels, the development of genuine new own resources is essential to prevent debt servicing costs from crowding out priorities under future multiannual financial frameworks; | 37. Notes that the Union budget’s exposure continued to increase in 2024, reflecting the growing volume of borrowing operations and associated guarantees; points out that the total exposure of the Union budget amounted to EUR 342,0 billion at the end of 2024, which amounts to an increase of 14,8 % compared with EUR 298,0 billion at the end of 2023; underlines that this trend underscores the importance of a robust system to ensure that the Union can meet its debt obligations under all circumstances; stresses that, in the context of rising debt levels, the development of genuine new own resources is essential to prevent debt servicing costs from crowding out priorities under future multiannual financial frameworks; |
Or. en
Amendment 126
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – point i
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (i) strengthen the reliability and transparency of financial reporting, in particular by improving the presentation of negative net assets and accrued expenses, and by ensuring that the long-term budgetary implications of NGEU borrowing are communicated clearly and systematically to the budgetary authority; | (i) strengthen the reliability and transparency of financial reporting; in particular by further improving the clarity of the presentation of negative net assets and accrued expenses,and by ensuring that the long-term budgetary implications of NGEU borrowing are communicated clearly and systematically to the budgetary authority; |
Or. en
Amendment 127
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – point ii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (ii) take all necessary measures to address the persistent weaknesses in the legality and regularity of expenditure, including by improving guidance to managing authorities, and accelerating efforts to remedy recurrent shortcomings in reimbursement-based spending and consistently apply the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation where risks persist; | (ii) take all necessary measures to address the persistent weaknesses in the legality and regularity of expenditure, including by improving guidance to managing authorities, and accelerating efforts to remedy recurrent shortcomings in reimbursement-based spending; |
Or. fr
Amendment 128
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – point ii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (ii) take all necessary measures to address the persistent weaknesses in the legality and regularity of expenditure, including by improving guidance to managing authorities, and accelerating efforts to remedy recurrent shortcomings in reimbursement-based spending and consistently apply the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation where risks persist; | (ii) take all necessary measures to address the persistent weaknesses in the legality and regularity of expenditure, including by improving clear guidance to managing authorities, continuing efforts to address identified shortcomings in reimbursement-based spending and ensuring consistent application of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation where risks persist; |
Or. en
Amendment 129
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – point ii a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iia) calls for the procedural rights of the Member State concerned to be guaranteed, and for any procedure to be conducted in accordance with the principles of objectivity, non-discrimination and equal treatment of the Member State concerned and a non-partisan and evidence-based approach; |
Or. fr
Amendment 130
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – point iv
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iv) strengthen monitoring of the implementation of 2021-2027 shared management funds, including more active follow-up on low absorption rates, enhanced administrative support to Member States, and the systematic identification of structural bottlenecks that slow down implementation; | (iv) strengthen monitoring of the implementation of 2021-2027 shared management funds; calls on the Commission to intensify targeted technical assistance to Member States including more active follow-up on low absorption rates, enhanced administrative support to Member States, and the systematic identification of structural bottlenecks that slow down implementation; |
Or. en
Amendment 131
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – point vii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vii) urges the Commission to review and simplify the Union budget’s flexibility framework for the next MFF, including establishing clear sequencing for mobilising margins and special instruments, avoiding overlaps between flexibility tools, and improving the transparency of their use; | (vii) Supports a simplification of the Union budget’s flexibility architecture in the next MFF, including establishing clear sequencing for mobilising margins and special instruments, avoiding overlaps between flexibility tools, and improving the transparency of their use; underlines that that flexibility cannot undermine predictability, transparency, and the democratic oversight by the budgetary authority; |
Or. en
Amendment 132
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – point vii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vii) urges the Commission to review and simplify the Union budget’s flexibility framework for the next MFF, including establishing clear sequencing for mobilising margins and special instruments, avoiding overlaps between flexibility tools, and improving the transparency of their use; | (vii) encourages the Commission to review and clarify the Union budget’s flexibility framework for the next MFF, including establishing a clear sequence for mobilising margins and special instruments, ensuring complementarity between flexibility tools, and enhanced transparency and predictability in their use; |
Or. en
Amendment 133
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – point ix
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (ix) calls on the Commission to continue to ensure robust cooperation with OLAF and the EPPO, including timely transmission of suspected fraud cases and reinforced fraud-prevention strategies, especially in high-risk expenditure areas and large-scale financial instruments; | (ix) ensure the provision of sufficient financial and human resources to the Union's Anti-Fraud Architecture, notably OLAF and EPPO, and facilitate robust cooperation between them, including timely transmission of suspected fraud cases and reinforced fraud-prevention strategies, especially in high-risk expenditure areas and large-scale financial instruments; |
Or. en
Amendment 134
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – point ix
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (ix) calls on the Commission to continue to ensure robust cooperation with OLAF and the EPPO, including timely transmission of suspected fraud cases and reinforced fraud-prevention strategies, especially in high-risk expenditure areas and large-scale financial instruments; | (ix) reiterates the importance of a strong and robust cooperation with the Commission, OLAF and the EPPO, including timely transmission of suspected fraud cases and reinforced fraud-prevention strategies, especially in high-risk expenditure areas and large-scale financial instruments; |
Or. en
Amendment 135
Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – point ix a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (ix a) assess the impact of sustained high inflation on the EU budget over the course of several years, including its effects on programme implementation, purchasing power of Union spending, borrowing costs and the real value of repayments; stresses that the Union will need to meet significant debt-repayment obligations in the coming years, notably those linked to the financing of NGEU; |
Or. en
Amendment 136
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – point ix b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (ix b) calls on the Commission to publish clear, user-friendly performance and spending summaries, including one-page overviews and interactive dashboards with machine-readable datasets, in line with OECD recommendations on strengthening performance reporting by integrating financial and performance information (OECD Papers on Budgeting, No. 2025/07); stresses that shifting from input and activity reporting to results- and impact-oriented reporting should also reduce administrative burden for both auditors and beneficiaries by focusing on materiality and proportionality; calls on the Commission to streamline indicators, simplify templates, avoid duplicate data requests and apply the ‘once-only’ principle, so that beneficiaries can spend more time delivering outcomes and less time on compliance formalities; |
Or. en
Amendment 137
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 – point ix a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (ix a) shift the focus of budget mainstreaming for horizontal priorities from expenditure-based tracking to a results-oriented approach across all EU-funded projects; insists that the effectiveness of these priorities must be measured by concrete outcomes and demonstrable impact rather than the volume of resources allocated; to systematically report on the actual performance of mainstreamed spending and demands that the Commission discontinue or fundamentally redesign any measures that fail to demonstrate clear added value and tangible results; |
Or. en
Amendment 138
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 42. Notes with satisfaction that the revenue systems that the Court examined were generally effective; at the same time asks the Commission to address the remaining weaknesses identified by the Court, especially those related to long-outstanding issues concerning VAT reservations and open points concerning traditional own resources (TOR); | 42. Underscores the importance for Member States to fulfil their responsibilities for collecting value-added tax (VAT) and traditional own resources (TOR) as it serves to protect the financial interests of the Union, while guaranteeing that the burden of financing EU expenditure is fairly shared among the Member States and ensuring fair taxation and fair competition in the Single Market; notes with satisfaction that the revenue systems that the Court examined were generally effective; at the same time asks the Commission to intensify efforts to improve the collection of existing own resources, including by addressing the remaining weaknesses identified by the Court, especially those related to long-outstanding issues concerning VAT reservations and open points concerning traditional own resources (TOR); |
Or. en
Amendment 139
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 42. Notes with satisfaction that the revenue systems that the Court examined were generally effective; at the same time asks the Commission to address the remaining weaknesses identified by the Court, especially those related to long-outstanding issues concerning VAT reservations and open points concerning traditional own resources (TOR); | 42. Notes with satisfaction that the revenue systems that the Court examined were generally effective; at the same time urges the Commission to address the remaining weaknesses identified by the Court, especially those related to long-outstanding issues concerning VAT reservations and open points concerning traditional own resources (TOR); |
Or. en
Amendment 140
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 42 a. Notes that fragmentation of tax rules and administrative practices generates a measurable “cost of non-Europe”, including legal uncertainty, arbitrage opportunities, unequal enforcement capacity and excessive compliance burdens; stresses that reducing these costs can mobilise resources without imposing additional burdens on ordinary citizens; |
Or. en
Amendment 141
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 42 b. Stresses that non-coordination undermines the single market and fair competition; calls for targeted EU-level coordination focusing on definitions, reporting and interoperability, while respecting Member States’ competence on rates; |
Or. en
Amendment 142
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 43. Underlines that reform of the Union customs system continues to be a problem related to own resources but also to the fight against organised crime; regrets that the Court has observed that the Commission has not developed a detailed plan for implementation of the customs reform proposal of May 2023; | 43. Underlines that reform of the Union customs system continues to be important for both the modernisation of own resources and the effective fight against organised crime; notes that the Court’s observation on the need further clarity on implementation planning; underlines the importance of delivering on agreed reform elements in timely and coordinated manner; |
Or. en
Amendment 143
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 43. Underlines that reform of the Union customs system continues to be a problem related to own resources but also to the fight against organised crime; regrets that the Court has observed that the Commission has not developed a detailed plan for implementation of the customs reform proposal of May 2023; | 43. Underlines that reform of the Union customs system continues to be a problem related to own resources but also to the fight against organised crime at European and national level; regrets that the Court has observed that the Commission has not developed a detailed plan for implementation of the customs reform proposal of May 2023; |
Or. en
Amendment 144
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 44. Stresses that fast adoption and implementation of all elements of the proposal for a customs reform must remain an absolute priority; highlights that the establishment of the EU Customs Authority and the EU Customs Data Hub should ensure real-time risk assessment, fraud detection, and uniform rule application, replacing fragmented national systems for a stronger and digitalized Customs Union and should ensure a significant reduction of the customs gap and should therefore be accelerated as much as possible; | 44. Stresses that fast adoption and implementation of all elements of the proposal for a customs reform must remain an absolute priority; highlights that the establishment of the EU Customs Authority and the EU Customs Data Hub should ensure real-time risk assessment, fraud detection, and uniform rule application, replacing fragmented national systems for a stronger and digitalized Customs Union and should ensure a significant reduction of the customs gap and should therefore be accelerated as much as possible; calls on the Commission to present a clear agenda for the implementation of the customs reform, including for the operationalisation of the EU Customs Authority and the EU Customs Data Hub; |
Or. en
Amendment 145
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 44. Stresses that fast adoption and implementation of all elements of the proposal for a customs reform must remain an absolute priority; highlights that the establishment of the EU Customs Authority and the EU Customs Data Hub should ensure real-time risk assessment, fraud detection, and uniform rule application, replacing fragmented national systems for a stronger and digitalized Customs Union and should ensure a significant reduction of the customs gap and should therefore be accelerated as much as possible; | 44. Stresses that fast adoption and implementation of all elements of the proposal for a customs reform should remain a key priority for strengthening the Customs Union; highlights that the establishment of the EU Customs Authority and the EU Data Hub should contribute to real-time risk assessment, fraud detection, and uniform application of customs rules, replacing fragmented national systems for a stronger digitalised Customs Union; underlines the importance of ensuring that reform delivers a significant reduction of the customs gap and enhances the effectiveness of the EU customs controls; |
Or. en
Amendment 146
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 45. Commends the efforts made by EPPO and OLAF to fight against the organised exploitation of the current weaknesses in the Union customs controls; | 45. Commends the efforts made by EPPO and OLAF to fight against the organised exploitation of the current weaknesses in the Union customs controls; encourages reinforcing EPPO’s operational capacity and expertise on organised crime patterns affecting Union revenues and expenditure, including through specialised joint tasking and intelligence-led risk analysis; |
Or. en
Amendment 147
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 45 a. Underlines the importance of precautionary measures in the context of combating VAT fraud; encourages, in this regard, the exploration of new approaches, such as sampling and statistical extrapolation of results of the limited number of controls to the overall population of transactions affected, or the preventive blocking of VAT numbers suspected to be used for fraud purposes; |
Or. en
Amendment 148
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 46. Welcomes the proposals for new own resources presented by the Commission, including as part of the package of proposals for the next MFF, which should at the very least be able to cover the expenses related to the interest and repayment of loans under the RRF in order to ensure that such expenses do not limit Union funds available for regular Union spending programmes; | 46. Welcomes the proposals for new own resources presented by the Commission, including as part of the package of proposals for the next MFF, which should at the very least be able to cover the expenses related to the interest and repayment of loans under the RRF in order to ensure that such expenses do not limit Union funds available for regular Union spending programmes; recognises, at the same time, that other revenue sources might also be considered should existing proposals not materialise; considers that the revenue potential of a digital service tax and a financial transaction tax should be explored as possible solutions; |
Or. en
Amendment 149
Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 46. Welcomes the proposals for new own resources presented by the Commission, including as part of the package of proposals for the next MFF, which should at the very least be able to cover the expenses related to the interest and repayment of loans under the RRF in order to ensure that such expenses do not limit Union funds available for regular Union spending programmes; | 46. Rejects the proposals for new own resources presented by the Commission, including as part of the package of proposals for the next MFF; stresses that any new own resources must be assessed against the risk of double taxation for citizens already bearing high fiscal burdens at national level, the potential impact on Union competitiveness and business relocation, and the additional administrative costs of collection and compliance; underlines that the primary response to debt servicing obligations should be expenditure discipline and reallocation of existing resources, rather than the automatic creation of new revenue streams; |
Or. en
Amendment 150
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 – point i
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (i) intensify its actions to ensure the fastest possible implementation of the customs reform, including the establishment and initial operation of the EU Customs Authority and the development, implementation, and maintenance of the EU Customs Data Hub; | (i) intensify its actions to ensure the fastest possible implementation of the customs reform, including the establishment and initial operation of the EU Customs Authority and the development, implementation, and maintenance of the EU Customs Data Hub with a clear timeline; |
Or. en
Amendment 151
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 – point i
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (i) intensify its actions to ensure the fastest possible implementation of the customs reform, including the establishment and initial operation of the EU Customs Authority and the development, implementation, and maintenance of the EU Customs Data Hub; | (i) take the necessary steps to support the timely and effective implementation of the customs reform, including the establishment and initial operation of the EU Customs Authority and the development, implementation, and maintenance of the EU Customs Data Hub; |
Or. en
Amendment 152
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 – point iii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iii) address the remaining weaknesses identified by the Court especially those which concern long-outstanding issues concerning VAT reservations and open points concerning traditional own resources (TOR); | (iii) intensify efforts to improve the collection of the Union's existing revenue sources, including by addressing the remaining weaknesses identified by the Court especially those which concern long-outstanding issues concerning VAT reservations and open points concerning traditional own resources (TOR); |
Or. en
Amendment 153
Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 – point iv
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iv) continue work towards the introduction of additional new own resources; | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 154
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 – point iv a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iv a) stresses that the rapid growth of e-commerce continues to pose a major challenge for customs authorities and significantly contributes to the customs gap; Calls for reinforced controls on e-commerce platforms. Stresses that effective customs controls require adequate human, technical and financial resources at both Union and national level; |
Or. en
Amendment 155
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 47 – point iv a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iva) calls on the Commission to better combat fraud against EU funds and to strengthen its recovery mechanism rather than considering the creation of new EU taxes; |
Or. fr
Amendment 156
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 51. Notes with concern the Court’s observation that research and innovation expenditure is most affected by error, particularly in the area of personnel costs; notes that the Court found quantifiable errors relating to 26 of the 99 research and innovation transactions it sampled; | 51. Notes with concern the Court’s observation that research continues to be a high-risk spending area, particularly in the area of personnel costs; notes that the Court found quantifiable errors relating to 26 of the 99 research and innovation transactions it sampled; recognises that the way funds are disbursed has a direct impact on the risk of error and the complex rules associated with reimbursement-based funding generally used in the area of research; underlines, in this regard, the need to simplify rules governing EU research and innovation programmes with a view to reducing the risk of errors while facilitating access of beneficiaries, notably SMEs, to Union funding; |
Or. en
Amendment 157
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 53. Is concerned that the Court detected gaps in the traceability of reported results, particularly for Horizon 2020; considers it essential to verify and ensure the traceability and reliability of data used to establish performance indicators; notes with concern that, owing to the introduction and increasing use of simplified cost options and delivery models based on financing not linked to costs, weaknesses in the traceability and reliability of performance data can adversely affect Union financial interests; | 53. Notes that the Court identified areas where traceability of reported results, particularly for Horizon 2020, could be improved; underlines the importance of verifying and ensuring the traceability and reliability of data used to establish performance indicators; notes that, owing to the introduction and increasing use of simplified cost options and financing models not linked to costs, weaknesses in the traceability and reliability of performance data must be addressed to protect the Union financial interests; |
Or. en
Amendment 158
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 54. Notes with concern the Court’s finding that the Commission could not provide project-level information for InvestEU, as it is implemented through indirect management, complemented by monitoring visits; regrets the Commission’s reply that InvestEU implementing partners are neither required by the guarantee agreements nor by the InvestEU Regulation to report key performance indicators (KPIs) at project level; considers that project-level data should be the basis for enhanced performance reporting for financial instruments implemented under indirect management, such as InvestEU; | 54. Notes with concern the Court’s finding that the Commission could not provide project-level information for InvestEU, as it is implemented through indirect management, complemented by monitoring visits; regrets the Commission’s reply that InvestEU implementing partners are neither required by the guarantee agreements nor by the InvestEU Regulation to report key performance indicators (KPIs) at project level; considers that project-level data should be the basis for enhanced performance reporting for financial instruments implemented under indirect management, such as InvestEU; stresses that the European Investment Bank, as the main implementing partner of InvestEU, must be held to the highest standards of transparency and accountability commensurate with the scale of taxpayer-backed guarantees it manages; calls on the Commission to use its leverage as guarantor to require the EIB to provide project-level KPI data and to make this data available to the discharge authority in a timely, machine-readable format; |
Or. en
Amendment 159
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 56. Recalls the importance of Union research and innovation (R&I) funding programmes for the scientific, societal, economic and technological development of the Union, reducing inequalities, achieving the green and digital transitions and decreasing the Union’s energy dependency on Russia; underlines that in order to enhance the Union’s competitiveness and close the innovation gap, increased funding for R&I is needed, also with a view to addressing the Draghi report’s pertinent recommendations; | 56. Recalls the importance of Union research and innovation (R&I) funding programmes for the scientific, societal, economic and technological development of the Union, reducing inequalities, achieving the green and digital transitions and decreasing the Union’s energy dependency on Russia; underlines that in order to enhance the Union’s competitiveness and close the innovation gap, increased funding for R&I is needed, also with a view to addressing the Draghi report’s pertinent recommendations; recalls that the Draghi report underlines that excellence in research and innovation is fundamental to the EU’s competitiveness and that within the EU research and innovation system, including the Horizon Europe programme, there should only be one selection criterion, namely, excellence; reiterates, in this regard, its position that funding for research and innovation should continue to be determined by the principle of excellence and should remain merit-based; |
Or. en
Amendment 160
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 56. Recalls the importance of Union research and innovation (R&I) funding programmes for the scientific, societal, economic and technological development of the Union, reducing inequalities, achieving the green and digital transitions and decreasing the Union’s energy dependency on Russia; underlines that in order to enhance the Union’s competitiveness and close the innovation gap, increased funding for R&I is needed, also with a view to addressing the Draghi report’s pertinent recommendations; | 56. Recalls the importance of Union research and innovation (R&I) funding programmes for the scientific, societal, economic and technological development of the Union, reducing inequalities, achieving the green and digital transitions and decreasing the Union’s energy dependency on Russia; underlines that in order to enhance the Union’s competitiveness and close the innovation gap, the efficient allocation and management of existing R&I funding must be improved, including by reducing administrative burdens on applicants and ensuring that funding decisions are based on scientific excellence and economic impact, also with a view to addressing the Draghi report’s pertinent recommendations; |
Or. en
Amendment 161
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 56. Recalls the importance of Union research and innovation (R&I) funding programmes for the scientific, societal, economic and technological development of the Union, reducing inequalities, achieving the green and digital transitions and decreasing the Union’s energy dependency on Russia; underlines that in order to enhance the Union’s competitiveness and close the innovation gap, increased funding for R&I is needed, also with a view to addressing the Draghi report’s pertinent recommendations; | 56. Recalls the importance of Union research and innovation (R&I) funding programmes for the scientific, societal, economic and technological development of the Union, adequately addressing emerging priorities and challenges, reducing inequalities, achieving the green and digital transitions and decreasing the Union’s energy dependency on Russia; underlines that in order to enhance the Union’s competitiveness and close the innovation gap, increased funding for R&I is needed, also with a view to addressing the Draghi report’s pertinent recommendations; |
Or. en
Amendment 162
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 56. Recalls the importance of Union research and innovation (R&I) funding programmes for the scientific, societal, economic and technological development of the Union, reducing inequalities, achieving the green and digital transitions and decreasing the Union’s energy dependency on Russia; underlines that in order to enhance the Union’s competitiveness and close the innovation gap, increased funding for R&I is needed, also with a view to addressing the Draghi report’s pertinent recommendations; | 56. Recalls the importance of Union research and innovation (R&I) funding programmes for the scientific, societal, economic and technological development of the Union, reducing inequalities, achieving the green and digital transitions and decreasing the Union’s energy dependency on Russia; underlines that in order to enhance the Union’s competitiveness and close the innovation gap, increased funding for R&I is needed; |
Or. en
Amendment 163
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 56. Recalls the importance of Union research and innovation (R&I) funding programmes for the scientific, societal, economic and technological development of the Union, reducing inequalities, achieving the green and digital transitions and decreasing the Union’s energy dependency on Russia; underlines that in order to enhance the Union’s competitiveness and close the innovation gap, increased funding for R&I is needed, also with a view to addressing the Draghi report’s pertinent recommendations; | 56. Underlines that, in order to enhance the Union’s competitiveness, technological leadership and strategic autonomy and to close the innovation gap with global competitors, increased funding for R&I is needed and a stronger and more targeted investment effort in research and innovation, combined with regulatory simplification and better mobilisation of private capital, is essential, also with a view to addressing the Draghi report’s pertinent recommendations; |
Or. en
Amendment 164
Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 57. Notes that the ex-post evaluation of Horizon 2020 estimated that for each euro of costs linked to the programme, five euros worth of benefits would be generated for society by 2040; deeply regrets that 74 % of proposals assessed as high quality by independent experts could not be funded due to budget constraints; notes that an additional EUR 159 billion would have been needed to fund all high-quality proposals; stresses the importance of ensuring sufficient funding for Union R&I to boost the Union’s sustainable prosperity and competitiveness; | 57. Notes that the ex-post evaluation of Horizon 2020 estimated that for each euro of costs linked to the programme, five euros worth of benefits would be generated for society by 2040; deeply regrets that 74 % of proposals assessed as high quality by independent experts could not be funded due to budget constraints; notes that an additional EUR 159 billion would have been needed to fund all high-quality proposals; highlights the importance of making full use of the Seal of Excellence and other complementary EU and national funding instruments, including those under cohesion policy, to support high-quality but unfunded research and innovation projects and to strengthen regional innovation ecosystems across the Union; stresses the importance of ensuring sufficient funding for Union R&I to boost the Union’s sustainable prosperity and competitiveness; |
Or. en
Amendment 165
Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 58. Underlines the importance of simplifying the rules and procedures governing Union R&I funding to facilitate beneficiaries’ access to funding and programme implementation; is worried by the Court’s finding that despite the simplifications introduced under Horizon Europe to facilitate the beneficiaries’ cost reporting, the Court found no significant differences between Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe as regards the regularity of expenditure; | 58. Underlines that excessive administrative complexity disproportionately excludes actors and regions that have less resources, and therefore, simplification is a key prerequisite for equitable access to the Programme in order to render a wider pool of actors across the Union to become more competitive in R&I; stresses that simplification measures should be designed in a way to benefit first-time applicants, SMEs and regional universities, while promoting smaller and more flexible consortia, modular project structures and staged participation in order to facilitate broader participation and effective inclusion across all territories of the Union; is worried by the Court’s finding that despite the simplifications introduced under Horizon Europe to facilitate the beneficiaries’ cost reporting, the Court found no significant differences between Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe as regards the regularity of expenditure; |
Or. en
Amendment 166
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 60
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 60. Notes that in 2024 the Commission has continued the roll out of simplified cost options such as lump sums and unit costs in Horizon Europe, with lump sum funding accounting for 27 % of the total call budget in the work programmes for 2024; recalls the Court’s clarification that when lump sum grants are given, the beneficiaries are paid a pre-defined lump sum for each completed work package, regardless of the actual costs incurred; further notes that the Commission’s target is to provide by 2027 at least 50 % of the call budget in published work programmes in the form of lump sums; is concerned, that for the reasons explained in box 5.4 of its Annual report, the Court was not able to assess whether including a specific item of equipment in the budget proposal was necessary and justified in the case of a lump sum grant it audited; | 60. Notes that in 2024 the Commission has continued the roll out of simplified cost options such as lump sums and unit costs in Horizon Europe, with lump sum funding accounting for 27 % of the total call budget in the work programmes for 2024; recalls the Court’s clarification that when lump sum grants are given, the beneficiaries are paid a pre-defined lump sum for each completed work package, regardless of the actual costs incurred; further notes that the Commission’s target is to provide by 2027 at least 50 % of the call budget in published work programmes in the form of lump sums; is concerned, that for the reasons explained in box 5.4 of its Annual report, the Court was not able to assess whether including a specific item of equipment in the budget proposal was necessary and justified in the case of a lump sum grant it audited; calls on the Commission to ensure that future funding instruments include safeguards to avoid overcompensation for equipment that was not actually purchased although included in the lump sum budget, in line with the Court's observations; |
Or. en
Amendment 167
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 61. Acknowledges that the Horizon Europe interim evaluation found that lump sums provided real simplification for beneficiaries, as estimated savings range between 14 % and 30 % of their administrative costs; notes the findings of the Commission’s assessment of Lump Sum Funding in Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe 2018-2024, including that beneficiaries also reported to the Commission that they would welcome more clarity on how lump sum grants would be audited; appreciates that in 2024, the Commission put in place an ex-post control strategy for Horizon Europe grants, including a methodology for ex-post technical reviews in lump sum grants; notes that the Commission has launched the first 30 Horizon Europe ex-post technical reviews in the fourth quarter of 2024; | 61. Acknowledges that the Horizon Europe interim evaluation found that lump sums provided real simplification for beneficiaries, as estimated savings range between 14 % and 30 % of their administrative costs; notes the findings of the Commission’s assessment of Lump Sum Funding in Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe 2018-2024, including that beneficiaries also reported to the Commission that they would welcome more clarity on how lump sum grants would be audited; appreciates that in 2024, the Commission put in place an ex-post control strategy for Horizon Europe grants, including a methodology for ex-post technical reviews in lump sum grants; notes that the Commission has launched the first 30 Horizon Europe ex-post technical reviews in the fourth quarter of 2024; recognises, at the same time, the Court's observation while lump sums are appropriate for clearly defined work packages, difficulties in the implementation of such schemes would arise in situations where work packages are delayed, partly completed or replaced by other activities; calls, therefore, on the Commission to review a representative sample of lump sum grants, and analyse the lessons learnt from their implementation and the methods used to establish the EU financial support, before further extending the use of lump sum grants in future funding instruments; |
Or. en
Amendment 168
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 62a. Calls for the immediate withdrawal of the discriminatory decision excluding Hungarian universities from the Horizon Europe programme; |
Or. fr
Amendment 169
Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 63. Notes that Union research and innovation programmes, including Horizon Europe, support the development of advanced technologies for civil applications, but acknowledges that certain technologies may carry inherent dual-use risks; notes the Commission’s reply that it is currently not monitoring specifically after the end of a project if the results of Union-funded R&I projects are taken forward for dual use, military or defence applications; underlines the importance of ensuring that Union funding is fully consistent with the Union’s values and obligations under international law; stresses at the same time the need for the Commission to strengthen the follow-up of Union-funded research results, including their transition to commercial use, in order to maximise societal impact and ensure an adequate return on investment for taxpayers; | 63. Notes that strengthening European defence requires enhanced support for research and innovation under Horizon Europe; highlights the significant potential of emerging technologies, particularly in areas such as artificial intelligence, cybersecurity and quantum computing, to contribute to the Union’s security and resilience; considers that civilian research and innovation programmes should therefore be appropriately supported and strategically aligned, including, where relevant, by enabling their results to be used for dual-use purposes in order to help safeguard the EU’s defence capabilities; stresses the need to avoid high costs resulting from fragmented national solutions and duplication of efforts; underlines that joint projects at EU level are more cost-efficient, generate clear European added value and strengthen interoperability; emphasises that synergies between Member States should be further promoted in order to ensure an efficient and economical use of the Union budget and to maximise the impact of public investment; |
Or. en
Amendment 170
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 63. Notes that Union research and innovation programmes, including Horizon Europe, support the development of advanced technologies for civil applications, but acknowledges that certain technologies may carry inherent dual-use risks; notes the Commission’s reply that it is currently not monitoring specifically after the end of a project if the results of Union-funded R&I projects are taken forward for dual use, military or defence applications; underlines the importance of ensuring that Union funding is fully consistent with the Union’s values and obligations under international law; stresses at the same time the need for the Commission to strengthen the follow-up of Union-funded research results, including their transition to commercial use, in order to maximise societal impact and ensure an adequate return on investment for taxpayers; | 63. Notes that Union research and innovation programmes, including Horizon Europe, support the development of advanced technologies for civil applications, but acknowledges that certain technologies may carry inherent dual-use risks; notes the Commission’s reply that it is currently not monitoring specifically after the end of a project if the results of Union-funded R&I projects are taken forward for dual use, military or defence applications; underlines the importance of ensuring that Union funding is fully consistent with the Union’s values and obligations under international law; stresses at the same time the need for the Commission to strengthen the follow-up of Union-funded research results, including their transition to commercial use, in order to maximise societal impact and ensure an adequate return on investment for European taxpayers and European companies; |
Or. fr
Amendment 171
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 63. Notes that Union research and innovation programmes, including Horizon Europe, support the development of advanced technologies for civil applications, but acknowledges that certain technologies may carry inherent dual-use risks; notes the Commission’s reply that it is currently not monitoring specifically after the end of a project if the results of Union-funded R&I projects are taken forward for dual use, military or defence applications; underlines the importance of ensuring that Union funding is fully consistent with the Union’s values and obligations under international law; stresses at the same time the need for the Commission to strengthen the follow-up of Union-funded research results, including their transition to commercial use, in order to maximise societal impact and ensure an adequate return on investment for taxpayers; | 63. Notes that Union research and innovation programmes, including Horizon Europe, support the development of advanced technologies for civil applications, but acknowledges that certain technologies may carry inherent dual-use risks; notes with concern the Commission’s reply that it is currently not monitoring specifically after the end of a project if the results of Union-funded R&I projects are taken forward for dual use, military or defence applications; underlines the importance of ensuring that Union funding is fully consistent with the Union’s values and obligations under international law; stresses at the same time the need for the Commission to strengthen the follow-up of Union-funded research results, including their transition to commercial use, in order to maximise societal impact and ensure an adequate return on investment for taxpayers; |
Or. en
Amendment 172
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 63. Notes that Union research and innovation programmes, including Horizon Europe, support the development of advanced technologies for civil applications, but acknowledges that certain technologies may carry inherent dual-use risks; notes the Commission’s reply that it is currently not monitoring specifically after the end of a project if the results of Union-funded R&I projects are taken forward for dual use, military or defence applications; underlines the importance of ensuring that Union funding is fully consistent with the Union’s values and obligations under international law; stresses at the same time the need for the Commission to strengthen the follow-up of Union-funded research results, including their transition to commercial use, in order to maximise societal impact and ensure an adequate return on investment for taxpayers; | 63. Notes that Union research and innovation programmes, including Horizon Europe, support the development of advanced technologies for civil applications, but acknowledges that certain technologies may carry inherent dual-use risks; calls on the Commission to ensure appropriate monitoring of the follow-up of Union-funded R&I projects with potential dual use, military or defence applications in line with the EU requirements; underlines the importance of ensuring that Union funding is fully consistent with the Union’s values and obligations under international law; stresses at the same time the need for the Commission to strengthen the follow-up of Union-funded research results, including their transition to commercial use, in order to maximise societal impact and ensure an adequate return on investment for taxpayers; |
Or. en
Amendment 173
Dick Erixon, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 63 a. Calls on the Commission to press the European Investment Bank to strengthen conflict-of-interest prevention mechanisms, including stricter cooling-off periods for EIB vice-presidents and clearer rules governing their participation in decisions concerning their countries of origin; stresses that public confidence in the sound management of taxpayer-backed lending depends on the highest standards of institutional integrity; |
Or. en
Amendment 174
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 63 b. Expresses concern regarding the bankruptcy of Northvolt AB, despite the company having received EUR 942.6 million in EIB lending; notes that similar risk profiles appear to exist with other significant EIB investments; recalls that EIB lending is ultimately backed by EUR 248.8 billion in subscribed capital representing taxpayer liability; calls on the Commission to engage with the EIB to ensure that risk assessment profiles for large-scale investments are subject to independent review and that the EIB discloses the lessons learned from cases where significant lending has resulted in default; stresses that the discharge authority requires comprehensive information on the EIB’s risk management practices to fulfil its oversight responsibilities; |
Or. en
Amendment 175
Dick Erixon, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63 c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 63 c. Endorses the findings of Contact Committee statement CC 1/2025 identifying critical audit gaps in relation to the European Investment Bank; notes the paradox of the EIB’s continuously expanding mandate alongside persistently restricted external audit powers; calls on the Commission to actively support the granting of full audit access for the European Court of Auditors to the EIB, including through the necessary Treaty changes; stresses that the off-balance-sheet nature of EIB borrowing, which does not appear in national debt statistics, makes rigorous external audit not merely desirable but essential for sound financial management and democratic accountability; |
Or. en
Amendment 176
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63 d (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 63 d. Notes that the portion of EIB payments overdue by more than 90 days tripled in 2024, totalling EUR 281.3 million (0.06 % of the total loan portfolio), compared with EUR 82.4 million (0.02 %) at the end of 2023; highlights that these increases in non-performing exposures and overdue payments significantly exceeded the 2 % growth in the overall loan portfolio; calls on the Commission to request from the EIB a detailed analysis of the drivers behind the deterioration of portfolio quality and to report to the discharge authority on measures taken to reverse this trend; |
Or. en
Amendment 177
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 64. Recalls that on 10 March 2022 the European Parliament decided to set up the PEGA Committee to investigate alleged infringement or maladministration in the application of Union law in relation to the use of Pegasus and equivalent spyware surveillance software and the European Parliament recommendation of 15 June 2023 to the Council and the Commission adopted following PEGA Committee’s work6 ; expresses its profound concern about media reports7 alleging that Union funding has directly supported companies implicated in the development, deployment and export of spyware by entities whose technologies have been linked to unlawful surveillance of journalists, human rights defenders and political actors in the Union and in third countries; notes the Commission’s reply that the proper use of Union funds is ensured by various contractual provisions related to, for example, the obligation to respect the highest ethical standards and applicable law when implementing the action, and the obligation to ensure the respect of basic Union values and that failure to respect these obligations can result in various contractual measures, including suspension of contract or payments and contract termination; notes also the Commission’s written reply that it considers that it has put in place several measures to address the risk that spyware falls into the wrong hands and increase protection for the potential victims of spyware, including European Media Freedom Act, e-Privacy Directive, Cyber Resilience Act and Dual-use regulation and that its annual Rule of Law reports also cover developments regarding the allegations of illegal use of spyware; | 64. Recalls that on 10 March 2022 the European Parliament decided to set up the PEGA Committee to investigate alleged infringement or maladministration in the application of Union law in relation to the use of Pegasus and equivalent spyware surveillance software and the European Parliament recommendation of 15 June 2023 to the Council and the Commission adopted following PEGA Committee’s work [6] ; notes media reporting regarding potential risks that Union funding could be indirectly linked to companies developing surveillance technologies, but stresses that no conclusions regarding unlawful conduct should be drawn without verified evidence; notes the Commission’s reply that the proper use of Union funds is ensured by various contractual provisions requiring respect of the applicable law and Union values and that failure to respect these obligations may result in various contractual measures, including suspension of contract or payments and contract termination; notes also the Commission’s written reply that it considers that it has put in place several measures to address the risk that spyware falls into the wrong hands and increase protection for the potential victims of spyware, including European Media Freedom Act, e-Privacy Directive, Cyber Resilience Act and Dual-use regulation and that its annual Rule of Law reports also cover developments regarding the allegations of illegal use of spyware; |
| _________________ | |
| 6 Texts adopted: P9_TA(2023)0244. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2023-0244_EN.html. | |
| 7 https://www.ftm.eu/articles/spyware-industry-eu-subsidies-surveillance-concers. |
Or. en
Amendment 178
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 65. Notes the Commission’s reply to CONT that the companies in question have received a total of EUR 12,77 million from the Union budget since 2021; regrets that despite the discharge rapporteur’s repeated requests, the Commission only shared with the CONT committee partial information on the total amount of Union funding allocated to spyware or intrusive surveillance software firms, as the reply it provided is limited to information already publicly available in the Financial Transparency System (FTS), which currently only publishes information on beneficiaries and contractors under direct management and on implementing partners under indirect management; considers that based on media reports, it cannot be excluded that the companies in question might have also received Union funding from programmes under shared management and that additional spyware companies may have benefitted from Union funding; deplores the fact that the discharge authority received an incomplete reply to its request; | 65. Notes the Commission’s reply to CONT that the companies in question have received a total of EUR 12,77 million from the Union budget since 2021; regrets that the Commission only shared with the CONT committee partial information on the total amount of Union funding allocated to spyware or intrusive surveillance software firms, as the reply it provided is limited to information already publicly available in the Financial Transparency System (FTS), which currently only publishes information on beneficiaries and contractors under direct management and on implementing partners under indirect management; deplores the fact that the discharge authority received an incomplete reply to its request; |
Or. en
Amendment 179
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda, Csaba Molnár
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 65. Notes the Commission’s reply to CONT that the companies in question have received a total of EUR 12,77 million from the Union budget since 2021; regrets that despite the discharge rapporteur’s repeated requests, the Commission only shared with the CONT committee partial information on the total amount of Union funding allocated to spyware or intrusive surveillance software firms, as the reply it provided is limited to information already publicly available in the Financial Transparency System (FTS), which currently only publishes information on beneficiaries and contractors under direct management and on implementing partners under indirect management; considers that based on media reports, it cannot be excluded that the companies in question might have also received Union funding from programmes under shared management and that additional spyware companies may have benefitted from Union funding; deplores the fact that the discharge authority received an incomplete reply to its request; | 65. Notes the Commission’s reply to CONT that the companies in question have received a total of EUR 12,77 million from the Union budget since 2021; regrets that despite the discharge rapporteur’s repeated requests, the Commission only shared with the CONT committee partial information on the total amount of Union funding allocated to spyware or intrusive surveillance software firms, as the reply it provided is limited to information already publicly available in the Financial Transparency System (FTS), which currently only publishes information on beneficiaries and contractors under direct management and on implementing partners under indirect management; considers that based on media reports, it cannot be excluded that the companies in question might have also received Union funding from programmes under shared management and that additional spyware companies may have benefitted from Union funding; deplores the fact that the discharge authority received an incomplete reply to its request; calls on the Commission to present an action plan to prevent the abuse of spyware in the Union; |
Or. en
Amendment 180
Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 65. Notes the Commission’s reply to CONT that the companies in question have received a total of EUR 12,77 million from the Union budget since 2021; regrets that despite the discharge rapporteur’s repeated requests, the Commission only shared with the CONT committee partial information on the total amount of Union funding allocated to spyware or intrusive surveillance software firms, as the reply it provided is limited to information already publicly available in the Financial Transparency System (FTS), which currently only publishes information on beneficiaries and contractors under direct management and on implementing partners under indirect management; considers that based on media reports, it cannot be excluded that the companies in question might have also received Union funding from programmes under shared management and that additional spyware companies may have benefitted from Union funding; deplores the fact that the discharge authority received an incomplete reply to its request; | 65. Notes the strategic importance of research in the field of defence for strengthening the Union’s security and long-term resilience; emphasises that defence and security research requires close and trusted cooperation among the Member States in order to ensure an improved, cost-reducing and more effective use of EU taxpayers’ money, avoid unnecessary duplication and foster synergies; underlines that research activities in this domain necessarily involve highly sensitive data, technologies and information which must be subject to the highest standards of protection against external interference or malicious manipulation; stresses, in this context, the urgent need to develop a common and robust protective architecture at European level to counter hybrid threats and safeguard critical knowledge, infrastructure and innovation ecosystems; underlines that European research and innovation are more cost-effective than separate national research activities; |
Or. en
Amendment 181
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 67. Recalls that to achieve the Union’s ambition of reaching climate neutrality by 2050, the Union needs to transform its energy system; notes the Commission’s written reply that since 2021, EUR 12,63 million was spent on renewable hydrogen production and related infrastructure from the CEF -renewable energy and EUR 187,21 million of CEF-Transport funding was spent on refuelling stations; notes further that between 2021 and 2024 the Commission allocated EUR 791,13 million in grants under the Innovation Fund to e-fuel projects; calls for caution in the allocation of Union funds to technologies with an uncertain or limited long-term role in the decarbonisation pathway such as e-fuels, in order to ensure that scarce public resources are prioritised for solutions with the highest climate impact and scalability; | 67. Recalls that to achieve the Union’s ambition of reaching climate neutrality by 2050, the Union needs to transform its energy system; notes the Commission’s written reply that since 2021, EUR 12,63 million was spent on renewable hydrogen production and related infrastructure from the CEF -renewable energy and EUR 187,21 million of CEF-Transport funding was spent on refuelling stations; notes further that between 2021 and 2024 the Commission allocated EUR 791,13 million in grants under the Innovation Fund to e-fuel projects; stresses that the Connecting Europe Facility programme must also contribute to addressing key challenges related to electrification of end-uses, cyber threats and climate change, by supporting smart grids, charging infrastructure, interconnections and, more broadly, the resilience and security of the European energy system, while reducing fossil fuel dependence, mitigating price volatility and enabling the Union to meet its 2030 and 2050 decarbonisation objectives; |
Or. en
Amendment 182
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 67. Recalls that to achieve the Union’s ambition of reaching climate neutrality by 2050, the Union needs to transform its energy system; notes the Commission’s written reply that since 2021, EUR 12,63 million was spent on renewable hydrogen production and related infrastructure from the CEF -renewable energy and EUR 187,21 million of CEF-Transport funding was spent on refuelling stations; notes further that between 2021 and 2024 the Commission allocated EUR 791,13 million in grants under the Innovation Fund to e-fuel projects; calls for caution in the allocation of Union funds to technologies with an uncertain or limited long-term role in the decarbonisation pathway such as e-fuels, in order to ensure that scarce public resources are prioritised for solutions with the highest climate impact and scalability; | 67. Notes the Commission’s written reply that since 2021, EUR 12,63 million was spent on renewable hydrogen production and related infrastructure from the CEF -renewable energy and EUR 187,21 million of CEF-Transport funding was spent on refuelling stations; notes further that between 2021 and 2024 the Commission allocated EUR 791,13 million in grants under the Innovation Fund to e-fuel projects; calls for caution in the allocation of Union funds to technologies with an uncertain or limited long-term role in the decarbonisation pathway such as e-fuels, in order to ensure that scarce public resources are prioritised for the most useful solutions; |
Or. fr
Amendment 183
Dick Erixon, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 67. Recalls that to achieve the Union’s ambition of reaching climate neutrality by 2050, the Union needs to transform its energy system; notes the Commission’s written reply that since 2021, EUR 12,63 million was spent on renewable hydrogen production and related infrastructure from the CEF -renewable energy and EUR 187,21 million of CEF-Transport funding was spent on refuelling stations; notes further that between 2021 and 2024 the Commission allocated EUR 791,13 million in grants under the Innovation Fund to e-fuel projects; calls for caution in the allocation of Union funds to technologies with an uncertain or limited long-term role in the decarbonisation pathway such as e-fuels, in order to ensure that scarce public resources are prioritised for solutions with the highest climate impact and scalability; | 67. Recalls that to achieve the Union’s ambition of reaching climate neutrality by 2050, the Union needs to transform its energy system; notes the Commission’s written reply that since 2021, EUR 12,63 million was spent on renewable hydrogen production and related infrastructure from the CEF -renewable energy and EUR 187,21 million of CEF-Transport funding was spent on refuelling stations; notes further that between 2021 and 2024 the Commission allocated EUR 791,13 million in grants under the Innovation Fund to e-fuel projects; underlines that Union funding should respect the principle of technological neutrality, allowing the market to determine the most cost-effective pathways to decarbonisation; stresses that prejudging which technologies will succeed risks misallocating scarce public resources and undermining innovation; calls on the Commission to ensure that funding criteria are based on measurable emissions reduction outcomes rather than prescriptive technology preferences; |
Or. en
Amendment 184
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 67. Recalls that to achieve the Union’s ambition of reaching climate neutrality by 2050, the Union needs to transform its energy system; notes the Commission’s written reply that since 2021, EUR 12,63 million was spent on renewable hydrogen production and related infrastructure from the CEF -renewable energy and EUR 187,21 million of CEF-Transport funding was spent on refuelling stations; notes further that between 2021 and 2024 the Commission allocated EUR 791,13 million in grants under the Innovation Fund to e-fuel projects; calls for caution in the allocation of Union funds to technologies with an uncertain or limited long-term role in the decarbonisation pathway such as e-fuels, in order to ensure that scarce public resources are prioritised for solutions with the highest climate impact and scalability; | 67. Recalls that to achieve the Union’s ambition of reaching climate neutrality by 2050, the Union needs to transform its energy system; notes the Commission’s written reply that since 2021, EUR 12,63 million was spent on renewable hydrogen production and related infrastructure from the CEF -renewable energy and EUR 187,21 million of CEF-Transport funding was spent on refuelling stations; notes further that between 2021 and 2024 the Commission allocated EUR 791,13 million in grants under the Innovation Fund to e-fuel projects; underlines the importance of allocating Union funds to support solutions with potential for long-term decarbonisation and scalability, while taking an evidence-based approach to emerging solutions in order to ensure the efficient use of public resources and maximise climate impact; |
Or. en
Amendment 185
Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 67. Recalls that to achieve the Union’s ambition of reaching climate neutrality by 2050, the Union needs to transform its energy system; notes the Commission’s written reply that since 2021, EUR 12,63 million was spent on renewable hydrogen production and related infrastructure from the CEF -renewable energy and EUR 187,21 million of CEF-Transport funding was spent on refuelling stations; notes further that between 2021 and 2024 the Commission allocated EUR 791,13 million in grants under the Innovation Fund to e-fuel projects; calls for caution in the allocation of Union funds to technologies with an uncertain or limited long-term role in the decarbonisation pathway such as e-fuels, in order to ensure that scarce public resources are prioritised for solutions with the highest climate impact and scalability; | 67. Highlights that achieving climate neutrality by 2050 is of decisive importance; emphasises the need to ensure a reliable, affordable and resilient European energy supply; notes, in this context, that the Commission should promote a technology-neutral approach to research and innovation; calls in particular for the support of cross-border projects in order to foster genuinely European solutions in the field of energy supply, guarantee a cost-efficient use of EU funds, strengthen internal market solutions, and create European added value; stresses that all technologies with the potential to contribute to decarbonisation should be thoroughly researched to assess their effectiveness and scalability, while ensuring that public resources are used efficiently and deliver measurable added value; |
Or. en
Amendment 186
Dick Erixon, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 68. Recalls that the Digital Markets Act (DMA) aims to ensure fair and innovation-friendly digital markets in Europe, preventing any single actor from dominating it at the expense of consumers, competitors, or democratic oversight; notes that during 2024, the Directorate-General for Competition (DG COMP)faced serious understaffing, as reported in its Annual Activity Report (AAR) 2024; notes that DG COMP reallocated staff to units responsible for the enforcement of the DMA which created staff shortages in other departments; | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 187
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 68. Recalls that the Digital Markets Act (DMA) aims to ensure fair and innovation-friendly digital markets in Europe, preventing any single actor from dominating it at the expense of consumers, competitors, or democratic oversight; notes that during 2024, the Directorate-General for Competition (DG COMP)faced serious understaffing, as reported in its Annual Activity Report (AAR) 2024; notes that DG COMP reallocated staff to units responsible for the enforcement of the DMA which created staff shortages in other departments; | 68. Recalls that the Digital Markets Act (DMA) aims to ensure fair and innovation-friendly digital markets in Europe, preventing any single actor from dominating it at the expense of consumers, competitors, or democratic oversight; stresses the significant negative effects that digital market dominance poses to culture, media, democracy, and fundamental rights, including job losses, market distortion, and the spread of information manipulation and disinformation; notes that during 2024, the Directorate-General for Competition (DG COMP)faced serious understaffing, as reported in its Annual Activity Report (AAR) 2024; notes that DG COMP reallocated staff to units responsible for the enforcement of the DMA which created staff shortages in other departments; |
Or. en
Amendment 188
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 68a. Notes the finding of a report published by the US Congress on 3 February 20269 a that in more than 90 meetings organised between 2022 and 2024 under the auspices of the Code of Practice on Disinformation, the Commission is said to have put pressure on platforms to amend their overall content moderation rules and censor more content; points out that after a meeting with the Commission before the Slovakian elections, TikTok was required to ban content stating 'we need to stop the sexualisation of children'; learns that the Commission interfered with and put pressure on several digital platforms during elections in several Member States; calls on the Commission to clarify immediately the resources involved in the 2024 budget and to appear before Parliament to answer the serious accusations set out in the report; | |
| _________________ | |
| 9 a https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/2026-02/THE-FOREIGN-CENSORSHIP-THREAT-PART-II-2-3-26.pdf. |
Or. fr
Amendment 189
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 69 a. secure the provision of significantly increased Union funding for research and innovation, determined by the principle of excellence and merit; |
Or. en
Amendment 190
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69 – point ii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (ii) introduce requirements for implementing partners to provide performance reporting based on project-level data also for financial instruments implemented under indirect management, such as InvestEU; | (ii) introduce binding requirements for implementing partners, in particular the European Investment Bank, to provide performance reporting based on project-level data for all financial instruments implemented under indirect management, such as InvestEU; demands that such reporting include results-oriented indicators measuring the actual return on investment for citizens, enabling the discharge authority to assess whether Union-backed investments deliver genuine and measurable economic value rather than merely increasing volumes deployed; |
Or. en
Amendment 191
Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69 – point iii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iii) conduct a review of the simplification measures introduced for Horizon Europe to assess whether they provide genuine simplification for project beneficiaries and applicants; | (iii) conduct a review of the simplification measures introduced for Horizon Europe to assess whether they provide genuine simplification for project beneficiaries and applicants, including their impact on participation rates, geographical balance and access for new applicants, in particular from less performing regions; stresses the need to ensure that simplification effectively reduces administrative burden, improves access to funding and allows for synergies with other Union instruments, including cohesion policy and the Seal of Excellence, in order to support high-quality projects and strengthen regional innovation ecosystems across the Union; |
Or. en
Amendment 192
Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69 – point vi
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi) conduct a comprehensive review of Union funding for the development, deployment and export of spyware or intrusive surveillance software across all management modes since 2021, and share it with the discharge authority; | (vi) pursue a technology-neutral approach to research and innovation, including by promoting cross-border projects, in order to support the achievement of climate neutrality by 2050 and strengthen a resilient European energy supply while guaranteeing cost-effectiveness, accelerating progress towards the European climate goals, and enhancing competitiveness; |
Or. en
Amendment 193
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda, Csaba Molnár
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69 – point vi
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi) conduct a comprehensive review of Union funding for the development, deployment and export of spyware or intrusive surveillance software across all management modes since 2021, and share it with the discharge authority; | (vi) conduct a comprehensive review of Union funding for the development, deployment and export of spyware or intrusive surveillance software across all management modes since 2021, and prepare an action plan to prevent the abuse of spyware in the Union, and share them with the discharge authority; |
Or. en
Amendment 194
Olivier Chastel
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69 – point vii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vii) ensure that Union research funding, including under Horizon Europe and through agreements with non-EU partners, does not contribute to the development of spyware or equivalent intrusive surveillance technologies in line with the Parliament’s relevant recommendations adopted on 15 June 20238 ; | deleted |
| _________________ | |
| 8 Texts adopted: P9_TA(2023)0244, paragraph 112. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2023-0244_EN.html, |
Or. en
Amendment 195
Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69 – point vii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vii) ensure that Union research funding, including under Horizon Europe and through agreements with non-EU partners, does not contribute to the development of spyware or equivalent intrusive surveillance technologies in line with the Parliament’s relevant recommendations adopted on 15 June 20238 ; | (vii) reinforce cooperation among Member States in defence- and security-related research through European programmes, thereby promoting joint spending, to ensure harmonised and robust protection of sensitive data and technologies against foreign interference and hybrid threats and where appropriate, to enable the responsible use of research results for dual-use purposes in order to support the Union’s resilience, defence capabilities, and strategic independence; |
| _________________ | |
| 8 Texts adopted: P9_TA(2023)0244, paragraph 112. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2023-0244_EN.html, |
Or. en
Amendment 196
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69 – point vii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vii) ensure that Union research funding, including under Horizon Europe and through agreements with non-EU partners, does not contribute to the development of spyware or equivalent intrusive surveillance technologies in line with the Parliament’s relevant recommendations adopted on 15 June 20238 ; | (vii) ensure that Union research funding, including under Horizon Europe and through agreements with non-EU partners, is allocated in a manner consistent with Union values and does not contribute to the support of spyware or intrusive surveillance technologies in line with the Parliament’s relevant recommendations adopted on 15 June 20238 ; |
| _________________ | _________________ |
| 8 Texts adopted: P9_TA(2023)0244, paragraph 112. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2023-0244_EN.html, | 8 Texts adopted: P9_TA(2023)0244, paragraph 112. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2023-0244_EN.html, |
Or. en
Amendment 197
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 70. Notes that the budget for the programmes under MFF-Heading 2 ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ was EUR 61,4 billion (32,1 % of the Union budget) distributed as follows: 47,7 % for the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and other regional operations, 16,4 % for the European Social Fund (ESF), 6,7 % for the Cohesion Fund (CF), 6,6 % for Erasmus+, 2,2 % for CEF Transport, 3,6 % for EU Recovery, and 3,1 % for other schemes; | 70. Underlines the role of Union cohesion policy in reducing economic, social and territorial disparities within the EU, as established by the Treaties, as well as for supporting the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights; insists on continued support for cohesion in the post-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework, following the principles of partnership and multilevel governance, and with the involvement of local and regional authorities and relevant stakeholders; notes that the budget for the programmes under MFF-Heading 2 ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ was EUR 61,4 billion (32,1 % of the Union budget) distributed as follows: 47,7 % for the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and other regional operations, 16,4 % for the European Social Fund (ESF), 6,7 % for the Cohesion Fund (CF), 6,6 % for Erasmus+, 2,2 % for CEF Transport, 3,6 % for EU Recovery, and 3,1 % for other schemes; |
Or. en
Amendment 198
Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 77. Notes that the Court, in its Review 04/2025 ‘The Future of EU Cohesion Policy: Drawing lessons from the past’ recalled the longstanding challenge related to the complexity of the regulatory framework, and that, despite efforts to simplify rules and procedures, the complexity of Union regulation and the coexistence of national and regional requirements continues to impose significant administrative burdens and contributes to a high error rate; notes that, while simplified cost options have been introduced to reduce reporting obligations, their use remains limited, especially in the ERDF; stresses that persistent weaknesses in Member States’ management and control systems must be remedied before the introduction of any future spending model under the next MFF that increases reliance on national controls; | 77. Notes that the Court, in its Review 04/2025 ‘The Future of EU Cohesion Policy: Drawing lessons from the past’, recalled the longstanding challenge related to the complexity of the regulatory framework, and that, despite efforts to simplify rules and procedures, the complexity of Union regulation and the coexistence of national and regional requirements continues to impose significant administrative burdens and contributes to a high error rate; recalls, however, that cohesion policy has played an important role over recent decades in reducing economic, social and territorial disparities between regions, supporting structural reforms, promoting competitiveness and investment, and contributing to convergence and stability across the Union, thereby demonstrating the added value of cohesion spending for European taxpayers; notes that, while simplified cost options have been introduced to reduce reporting obligations, their use remains limited, especially in the ERDF; stresses that persistent weaknesses in Member States’ management and control systems must be remedied before the introduction of any future spending model under the next MFF that increases reliance on national controls, in order to ensure that cohesion policy continues to deliver measurable results, efficiency and value for public taxpayers’ money; |
Or. en
Amendment 199
Eero Heinäluoma, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 77. Notes that the Court, in its Review 04/2025 ‘The Future of EU Cohesion Policy: Drawing lessons from the past’ recalled the longstanding challenge related to the complexity of the regulatory framework, and that, despite efforts to simplify rules and procedures, the complexity of Union regulation and the coexistence of national and regional requirements continues to impose significant administrative burdens and contributes to a high error rate; notes that, while simplified cost options have been introduced to reduce reporting obligations, their use remains limited, especially in the ERDF; stresses that persistent weaknesses in Member States’ management and control systems must be remedied before the introduction of any future spending model under the next MFF that increases reliance on national controls; | 77. Notes that the Court, in its Review 04/2025 ‘The Future of EU Cohesion Policy: Drawing lessons from the past’ recalled the longstanding challenge related to the complexity of the regulatory framework, and that, despite efforts to simplify rules and procedures, the complexity of Union regulation and the coexistence of national and regional requirements continues to impose significant administrative burdens and contributes to a high error rate; notes that, while simplified cost options have been introduced to reduce reporting obligations, their use remains limited, especially in the ERDF; stresses that persistent weaknesses in Member States’ management and control systems must be remedied before the introduction of any future spending model under the next MFF that increases reliance on national controls; stresses the need to define clear and binding supervisory and control responsibilities for both the Commission and the Member States prior to the beginning of implementation; considers that the Commission should not rely solely on Member States’ control systems, but should define minimum requirements and verification mechanisms, similar to those provided for under shared management, in order to avert any non-compliance with national and EU rules, as requested by the Court; |
Or. en
Amendment 200
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 77 a. Considering the weakness identified in the Member States management and control systems and the shortcomings in the Commission’s own audit work, supports the Court evaluation that the Commission’s estimated error rates in the 2024 AMPR and AARs are not reliable; reminds that the Court’s error rate includes the errors that remained undetected by the Member States and the Commission and demonstrate that the Commission’s error rates are underestimated; |
Or. en
Amendment 201
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 77 b. Reminds that in shared management, it is the Commission’s responsibility to make sure that member states set up management and control systems that function effectively during the implementation of programmes; is worried that both the Commission and the court have identified that not all member states’ management and control systems function effectively, thus effecting negatively the reliability of the Commission error rates, as they rely on these national systems, which do not work effectively; calls into question the possibility for the Commission to continue to rely on national systems; |
Or. en
Amendment 202
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 79. Notes that the discharge authority is considering introducing an acceptable level of error rate in cohesion policy above which annual discharge would be postponed; | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 203
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 79. Notes that the discharge authority is considering introducing an acceptable level of error rate in cohesion policy above which annual discharge would be postponed; | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 204
Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 81. Recalls that, following a discharge-related access to documents request concerning contracts with 30 economic operators, the Commission had to undertake a broad and resource-intensive identification exercise due to limitations in its internal data systems, which resulted in the identification of hundreds of entities with similar or related names; acknowledges the efforts made by the Commission services to respond promptly and transparently; further recalls that, as of the next MFF, the Commission will be required to use data stored in the Arachne data-mining and risk-scoring tool to feed a centralised transparency website, with Member States obliged to provide automated access to relevant data, an obligation which will apply from 2027 onwards and on which the Commission has already begun preparatory work; stresses, however, that the Commission should assess, ahead of the rollout of the new compulsory system, whether more efficient interim solutions can be put in place to enable the rapid and reliable identification of contractual relationships with specific economic operators, at least under direct and indirect management where it does not depend on data input from Member States; | 81. Recalls that, following a discharge-related access to documents request concerning contracts with 30 economic operators, the Commission had to undertake a broad and resource-intensive identification exercise due to limitations in its internal data systems, which resulted in the identification of hundreds of entities with similar or related names; acknowledges the efforts made by the Commission services to respond promptly and transparently; further recalls that, as of the next MFF, the Commission will be required to use data stored in the Arachne data-mining and risk-scoring tool to feed a centralised transparency website, with Member States obliged to provide automated access to relevant data, an obligation which will apply from 2027 onwards and on which the Commission has already begun preparatory work; urges the Commission to implement an interoperable system to allow a European tracing of funds with the start of the new MFF; |
Or. en
Amendment 205
Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 82. Notes that the Court, in its Special Report 24/2025 ‘Financial instruments in EU cohesion policy: A revolving use of funds materialised partially’ found that, while one of the advantages of financial instruments in cohesion policy over grants is that reflows can be used to support additional final recipients, leading to more efficient use of public financing, only a limited reuse of reflows materialises during eligibility periods, partly due to acceptable reasons, such as the long-term nature of investments; notes that after the eligibility period, reflows are generally reused for cohesion purposes but with limitations; deplores that the legal framework on the reuse obligation is insufficiently clear and ambiguous, and that the Commission lacks oversight, leading to varying practices among Member States’ managing authorities; | 82. Notes that the Court, in its Special Report 24/2025 ‘Financial instruments in EU cohesion policy: A revolving use of funds materialised partially’ found that, while one of the advantages of financial instruments in cohesion policy over grants is that reflows can be used to support additional final recipients, leading to more efficient use of public financing, only a limited reuse of reflows materialises during eligibility periods, partly due to acceptable reasons, such as the long-term nature of investments; notes that after the eligibility period, reflows are generally reused for cohesion purposes but with limitations; deplores that the legal framework on the reuse obligation is insufficiently clear and ambiguous, and that the Commission lacks oversight, leading to varying practices among Member States’ managing authorities; calls on the Commission to further strengthen guidance, coordination and monitoring in order to ensure greater legal certainty and more effective reuse of reflows across Member States, in order to maximise the long-term impact of cohesion funding for beneficiaries and taxpayers; |
Or. en
Amendment 206
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 82 a. Is concerned by the Court’s finding that managing authorities prioritise the rapid spending of initial allocations to avoid losing EU funds, rather than focusing on the quality of expenditure and the reuse of returned funds; notes that the Court confirmed that the Commission does not monitor, verify or audit the actual use of legacy funds from financial instruments, and that audit documentation on the reuse obligation was limited, covering only 3 % of the total number of financial instruments; stresses that, without proper oversight by the Commission, there is insufficient incentive for Member States to prioritise the reuse of reflows over absorption of fresh allocations; calls on the Commission to establish structural best practices for the reuse of reflows and to report regularly to the discharge authority on implementation; |
Or. en
Amendment 207
Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 83. Is concerned about the Court’s observation that implementation of the cohesion policy funds (ERDF, CF, ESF+), accounting for over 90 % of the shared management funds under the CPR for 2021-2027, remained low; highlights that when the Court compares their implementation (prefinancing and interim payments) with the previous programming period, the overall absorption rate of these three funds was only 5 % by the end of 2024 compared to 14 % at the equivalent point of the previous MFF (end of 2017); notes with concern that as the end of the eligibility period for the underlying expenditure9 and the deadline for payment of the final balance for the 2021-2027 MFF are set one year earlier than in the previous programming period, the pressure to absorb Union funds will increase further; | 83. Is concerned about the Court’s observation that implementation of the cohesion policy funds (ERDF, CF, ESF+), accounting for over 90 % of the shared management funds under the CPR for 2021-2027, remained low; highlights that when the Court compares their implementation (prefinancing and interim payments) with the previous programming period, the overall absorption rate of these three funds was only 5 % by the end of 2024 compared to 14 % at the equivalent point of the previous MFF (end of 2017); underlines that the current programming period has been implemented in an exceptionally challenging context marked by successive crises, inflationary pressures, supply chain disruptions and evolving geopolitical and economic conditions, which have affected the pace of implementation in many Member States; notes with concern that as the end of the eligibility period for the underlying expenditure9 and the deadline for payment of the final balance for the 2021-2027 MFF are set one year earlier than in the previous programming period, the pressure to absorb Union funds will increase further; calls on the Commission to work closely with Member States, in particular those facing structural or capacity constraints, to provide technical assistance, administrative simplification and sufficient flexibility in implementation in order to ensure the full and effective absorption of cohesion funds and maximise their impact on economic convergence and regional development; |
| _________________ | _________________ |
| 9 Article 63(2) of Regulation (EU) 2021/1060. | 9 Article 63(2) of Regulation (EU) 2021/1060. |
Or. en
Amendment 208
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 83. Is concerned about the Court’s observation that implementation of the cohesion policy funds (ERDF, CF, ESF+), accounting for over 90 % of the shared management funds under the CPR for 2021-2027, remained low; highlights that when the Court compares their implementation (prefinancing and interim payments) with the previous programming period, the overall absorption rate of these three funds was only 5 % by the end of 2024 compared to 14 % at the equivalent point of the previous MFF (end of 2017); notes with concern that as the end of the eligibility period for the underlying expenditure9 and the deadline for payment of the final balance for the 2021-2027 MFF are set one year earlier than in the previous programming period, the pressure to absorb Union funds will increase further; | 83. Is concerned about the Court’s observation that implementation of the cohesion policy funds (ERDF, CF, ESF+), accounting for over 90 % of the shared management funds under the CPR for 2021-2027, remained low; notes that when the Court compares their implementation (prefinancing and interim payments) with the previous programming period, the overall absorption rate of these three funds was only 5 % by the end of 2024 compared to 14 % at the equivalent point of the previous MFF (end of 2017); acknowledges, at the same time, that the 2021-2027 programmes were adopted seven months later than those of the 2014-2020 programming period and that the pre-financing rates under the 2014-2020 programmes were higher and cleared at a different moment than those under the current MFF; notes, in this regard, that the absorption rate at the comparable implementation stage, at the end of June 2017, for the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the Cohesion Fund (CF) and the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) stood at 3.49 %, which is comparable to the rate at the end of 2024; notes with concern that as the end of the eligibility period for the underlying expenditure9 and the deadline for payment of the final balance for the 2021-2027 MFF are set one year earlier than in the previous programming period, the pressure to absorb Union funds will increase further; |
| _________________ | _________________ |
| 9 Article 63(2) of Regulation (EU) 2021/1060. | 9 Article 63(2) of Regulation (EU) 2021/1060. |
Or. en
Amendment 209
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 83 a. Recalls that in 2024, several amendments to the cohesion policy framework, namely STEP and RESTORE, entered into force; highlights the importance of these instruments to enhance EU competitiveness and addressing the consequences of natural disasters; reiterates, nevertheless, that constant amendments to the cohesion policy framework lead to legal uncertainty and instability and risk undermining the long-term structural cohesion policy objectives of reducing disparities across the EU; stresses that cohesion policy needs a stable regulatory framework in order to provide predictability for beneficiaries; |
Or. en
Amendment 210
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 83 b. Reiterates its deep concern over the disproportionate impact that the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine continues to have on the Union's eastern regions bordering Russia and/or Belarus; draws attention to the costs borne by these regions as a result of their shared border with hostile neighbouring countries, notably the respective Member States' need to direct public funding into security, defence and preparedness, while facing dramatically reduced resources due to a disruption in economic activities, cross-border trade and other exchanges; is concerned, further, about the loss in EU financial support experienced by some border regions as a result of amendments to cohesion funds under the current programming period, notably to ERDF funds initially earmarked for cross-border cooperation with Russia and Belarus and funds reallocated in the context of the 2025 cohesion mid-term review (MTR); calls on the Commission to carry out an ex-post evaluation of the financial impact of these amendments on eastern border regions, covering the extent to which Union funds originally intended for regions sharing a border with Russia and/or Belarus have ultimately remained in them or conversely been directed elsewhere, and share its evaluation with the discharge authority; calls, further, on the Commission to urgently propose targeted financial support for eastern border regions to counter the disproportionate impact of the Russian war of aggression, including remedying any financial losses suffered by these regions as a result of amendments to cohesion policy funds under the current programming period; |
Or. en
Amendment 211
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 83 a. Underlines that territorial cohesion requires strengthening local economic resilience through sustainable tourism, protection of cultural assets, youth employment and vocational skills development, including in green reconstruction, energy efficiency and civil-protection services; stresses the need to safeguard access to essential services in rural and remote areas and calls on the Commission to assess whether Union spending effectively contributes to reducing depopulation pressure; |
Or. en
Amendment 212
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 d (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 83 d. Stresses the importance of Union cohesion policy for economic and territorial convergence and development in the regions of the Union, as well as for supporting the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights; |
Or. en
Amendment 213
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 83 b. Highlights the increasing exposure of certain regions, including Mediterranean coastal and inland territories, to climate-related risks such as storms, floods and coastal erosion; stresses that prevention and adaptation measures are more cost-effective than post-disaster reconstruction; calls on the Commission and Member States to frontload investments in risk prevention, hydraulic safety, slope stability and nature-based solutions to ensure rapid and measurable resilience outcomes and safeguard the effectiveness of Union spending; |
Or. en
Amendment 214
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 83 c. Stresses the importance of resilient infrastructure planning to address structural bottlenecks affecting cohesion policy delivery, including sustainable ports, intermodal logistics, rail connectivity and climate-resilient water systems; notes that regions exposed to drought stress and flood risks require accelerated investment in water infrastructure, leakage reduction, resilient irrigation and smart water management in order to enhance territorial resilience and reduce implementation risks; |
Or. en
Amendment 215
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 86a. Rejects the integration of political agendas such as the Green Deal and so-called woke ideology into the EU’s financial framework, viewing them as the imposition of failed left-liberal concepts that undermine economic pragmatism, social cohesion and Member State sovereignty; |
Or. fr
Amendment 216
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 86b. Is concerned about the thousands of times a year that consultancy firms are used, at a total cost of hundreds of millions of euros that cannot be quantified with certainty, for services that are poorly detailed or are not included in the Commission’s Financial Transparency System; recalls the McKinsey case in France and the related suspicions of conflicts of interest; fears the revelation of a new scandal in this regard; notes, for example, the EUR 3,2 million6 b allocated to PWC for the obscure advisory mission ‘knowledge building and exchange of experience: support for regions to cope with talent division and mitigate the challenges linked to the decline of the tertiary educated population’; is concerned that administrative tasks of public interest are entrusted to private companies, as was the case with the selection or screening of Bauhaus projects for the competent authorities that was entrusted by DG REGIO to another firm for EUR 4 million in 2026[2]6 a; | |
| _________________ | |
| 6 a https://ted.europa.eu/en/notice/-/detail/715301-2025 | |
| 6 b EUR 33 230 011,2 according to data reported in the Financial Transparency System (https://ec.europa.eu/budget/financial-transparency-system/index.html) |
Or. fr
Amendment 217
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 87. Expresses deep concern over the findings in the 2025 Rule of Law Report regarding the rule of law situation in Hungary, particularly the persistent and systemic challenges in the judiciary and the media sectors; notes with alarm that the transparency of case allocation in lower courts has not been improved, and that undue pressure on some judges continues within the judiciary, notably in relation to internal debates on key issues related to judicial independence; notes with concern in the same vein that the implementation of the 2024-2025 National Anti-Corruption Strategy lags behind, with the decrease of the number of convictions for corruption crimes, the absence of progress in establishing a robust track-record on high-level corruption, and the continuous reporting by the Hungarian Integrity Authority of obstacles in fulfilling its oversight tasks effectively; | deleted |
Or. fr
Amendment 218
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 87a. Is concerned about the punitive and anti-democratic spiral in which the Commission is attacking the governments of various European countries which were democratically elected on a programme that rejects these destructive ideologies; |
Or. fr
Amendment 219
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda, Csaba Molnár
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 87 a. Reiterates its serious concerns about the Commission's decision of 13 December 2023, concluding that the Hungarian government had satisfied the Charter requirements in relation to judicial independence and lifting the suspension on the disbursement of funds for related programmes, resulting in Hungary becoming eligible to receive approximately EUR 10.2 billion from various funds governed by the CPR; reminds that on 25 March 2024, the European Parliament brought an action before the Court of Justice in order to review the legality of the Commission decision, as well as to bring legal certainty to the implementation of the rule of law mechanism; notes that while the CJEU ruling is still pending, the Advocate General proposed on 12 February 2026 that the Court of Justice annul the Commission's decision lifting the suspension on the disbursement of funds to Hungary; |
Or. en
Amendment 220
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 88. Notes that from the EUR 20,9 billion allocations under the CPR initially blocked due to fundamental rights concerns, only EUR 8,6 billion remain blocked for the Hungarian government in January 2026; further notes that from the EUR 6,3 billion initially blocked under the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation because of rule of law and corruption concerns, EUR 1 and 1,1 billion have been decommitted at the end of 2024 and 2025 respectively; expresses deep concern that, while the rule law continues to deteriorate and corruption flourishes through entrenched oligarchic networks in Hungary, the amount of Union funds that remains frozen due to rule of law and corruption concerns decreases, and consequently, the pressure applied by the Commission on the Hungarian government to make reforms shrinks constantly; | 88. Notes that from the EUR 20,9 billion allocations under the CPR initially blocked due to fundamental rights concerns, only EUR 8,6 billion remain blocked for the Hungarian government in January 2026; further notes that from the EUR 6,3 billion initially blocked under the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation because of rule of law and corruption concerns, EUR 1 and 1,1 billion have been decommitted at the end of 2024 and 2025 respectively; expresses deep concern about the amount of Union funds that remains frozen, and about the pressure applied by the Commission on the Hungarian Government; |
Or. fr
Amendment 221
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 88a. Calls on the Commission to immediately withdraw its discriminatory decision excluding Hungarian universities, students, teachers and researchers from Erasmus+ mobility programmes; |
Or. fr
Amendment 222
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda, Csaba Molnár
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 88 a. Notes the request by the Hungarian government on 28 and 29 March 2025 to transfer EUR 545 million from two cohesion programmes to new priorities under the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (STEP), of which EUR 395 million from funds frozen due to the failure to meet the horizontal enabling condition under the Charter of Fundamental Rights; deeply regrets the Commission’s approval of the amendments on 25 September 2025, that despite again blocking reimbursements for the new STEP priorities due to non-compliance with Charter requirements, nevertheless gave the Hungarian government access to EUR 317,3 million in pre-financing; reaffirms that the reallocation or reshuffling of frozen appropriations to other programmes or objectives would signal to governments non-compliant with Union values and with their obligations to protect the Union’s financial interests that losses can be offset elsewhere; recalls its position that funds suspended pursuant to the Conditionality Regulation or due to non-fulfilment of horizontal enabling conditions should not be eligible for programme amendments or transfers; calls, therefore, on the Commission to exercise its right of initiative and propose measures to close any existing loopholes in the Union's legislative framework that may enable governments to transfer funds suspended due to breaches of their Rule of Law or Charter of Fundamental Rights obligations, and ensure that any future funding instruments are proofed for circumvention; |
Or. en
Amendment 223
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 89
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 89. Notes that MOL, a publicly listed Hungarian petrochemical conglomerate, is effectively controlled through three so-called public interest trusts affiliated with the Hungarian Government, each holding a 10 % share; recalls that Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2506 of 15 December 2022 prohibits the Commission from entering into new legal commitments, under direct or indirect management, with Hungarian public interest trusts and entities maintained by them when implementing the Union budget; notes with concern that at least one funding agreement appears to have been concluded between the Commission and MOL after the adoption of that Decision; takes note of the Commission’s reply that it is investigating the matter, and expects the Commission to provide the discharge authority without delay with a clear explanation of how such a commitment could have been signed; | deleted |
Or. fr
Amendment 224
Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 90
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 90. Notes that the Hungarian government is set to receive the third-largest allocation under the SAFE instrument, amounting to EUR 16,2 billion, intended to support major defence-industry investments; recalls that the Commission has the power to withhold approval of national defence investment plans under SAFE where there are concerns regarding the protection of the Union’s financial interests; notes that the Hungarian government recently sold a controlling 75 %+1 stake in its state defence-industry holding to 4iG, a company widely seen as close to the government; strongly warns that, in light of the continued deterioration of the rule of law, persistent corruption risks and systemic weaknesses in oversight as described above, the Union’s financial interests cannot be considered adequately protected if SAFE funding were to be disbursed to Hungary without, at the very least, setting strict conditions that must be met prior to any disbursement of funds; | deleted |
Or. en
Amendment 225
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 90
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 90. Notes that the Hungarian government is set to receive the third-largest allocation under the SAFE instrument, amounting to EUR 16,2 billion, intended to support major defence-industry investments; recalls that the Commission has the power to withhold approval of national defence investment plans under SAFE where there are concerns regarding the protection of the Union’s financial interests; notes that the Hungarian government recently sold a controlling 75 %+1 stake in its state defence-industry holding to 4iG, a company widely seen as close to the government; strongly warns that, in light of the continued deterioration of the rule of law, persistent corruption risks and systemic weaknesses in oversight as described above, the Union’s financial interests cannot be considered adequately protected if SAFE funding were to be disbursed to Hungary without, at the very least, setting strict conditions that must be met prior to any disbursement of funds; | 90. Notes that the Hungarian government is set to receive the third-largest allocation under the SAFE instrument, amounting to EUR 16,2 billion, intended to support major defence-industry investments; recalls that the Commission has the power to withhold approval of national defence investment plans under SAFE where there are concerns regarding the protection of the Union’s financial interests; notes that the Hungarian government recently sold a controlling 75 %+1 stake in its state defence-industry holding to 4iG; |
Or. fr
Amendment 226
Csaba Molnár, Eero Heinäluoma
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 90
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 90. Notes that the Hungarian government is set to receive the third-largest allocation under the SAFE instrument, amounting to EUR 16,2 billion, intended to support major defence-industry investments; recalls that the Commission has the power to withhold approval of national defence investment plans under SAFE where there are concerns regarding the protection of the Union’s financial interests; notes that the Hungarian government recently sold a controlling 75 %+1 stake in its state defence-industry holding to 4iG, a company widely seen as close to the government; strongly warns that, in light of the continued deterioration of the rule of law, persistent corruption risks and systemic weaknesses in oversight as described above, the Union’s financial interests cannot be considered adequately protected if SAFE funding were to be disbursed to Hungary without, at the very least, setting strict conditions that must be met prior to any disbursement of funds; | 90. Notes that the Hungarian government is set to receive the third-largest allocation under the SAFE instrument, amounting to EUR 16,2 billion, intended to support major defence-industry investments; recalls that the Commission has the power to withhold approval of national defence investment plans under SAFE where there are concerns regarding the protection of the Union’s financial interests; notes that the Hungarian government recently sold a controlling 75 %+1 stake in its state defence-industry holding to 4iG, a company widely seen as close to the government; strongly warns that, in light of the continued deterioration of the rule of law, persistent corruption risks and systemic weaknesses in oversight as described above, the Union’s financial interests cannot be considered adequately protected if SAFE funding were to be disbursed to Hungarian government without, at the very least, setting strict conditions that must be met prior to any disbursement of funds; |
Or. en
Amendment 227
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 91
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 91. Highlights with alarm that since the 2024 Rule of law Report, Slovakia adopted a series of amendments to the Criminal Code, passed in the second half of 2024, including the closure of specialised anti-corruption entities, National Crime Agency and Special Prosecutor’s Office, which resulted in delays in investigations transferred to other bodies and significant drops in the number of corruption cases; notes with concern Slovakia’s Government plan to replace the current office for whistleblowers with an institution whose chair would be appointed directly by the parliamentary speaker, which risks politicising the office, aligning its work with the Government’s priorities, scaling back protection of whistleblowers, and undercutting scrutiny of how the Government handles Union funds; stresses that these developments pose an increased, substantial risk to the sound financial management of the Union budget; emphasises that the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation is not limited to last-resort measures, but also allows for early action with partial suspensions, where rule of law breaches are identified that pose a serious risk to the sound financial management of the Union budget; | deleted |
Or. fr
Amendment 228
Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 91
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 91. Highlights with alarm that since the 2024 Rule of law Report, Slovakia adopted a series of amendments to the Criminal Code, passed in the second half of 2024, including the closure of specialised anti-corruption entities, National Crime Agency and Special Prosecutor’s Office, which resulted in delays in investigations transferred to other bodies and significant drops in the number of corruption cases; notes with concern Slovakia’s Government plan to replace the current office for whistleblowers with an institution whose chair would be appointed directly by the parliamentary speaker, which risks politicising the office, aligning its work with the Government’s priorities, scaling back protection of whistleblowers, and undercutting scrutiny of how the Government handles Union funds; stresses that these developments pose an increased, substantial risk to the sound financial management of the Union budget; emphasises that the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation is not limited to last-resort measures, but also allows for early action with partial suspensions, where rule of law breaches are identified that pose a serious risk to the sound financial management of the Union budget; | 91. Highlights with alarm that since the 2024 Rule of Law Report, Slovakia adopted a series of amendments to the Criminal Code, passed in the second half of 2024, including the closure of specialised anti-corruption entities, the National Crime Agency and the Special Prosecutor’s Office, which resulted in delays in investigations transferred to other bodies and significant drops in the number of corruption cases; notes with concern Slovakia’s Government plan to replace the current office for whistleblowers with an institution whose chair would be appointed directly by the parliamentary speaker, which risks politicising the office, aligning its work with the Government’s priorities, scaling back protection of whistleblowers, and undercutting scrutiny of how the Government handles Union funds; stresses that these developments pose an increased, substantial risk to the sound financial management of the Union budget; emphasises that the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation is not limited to last-resort measures, but also allows for early action with partial suspensions where rule of law breaches are identified that pose a serious risk to the sound financial management of the Union budget; fully supports the Commission’s decision and calls on the Commission to start the first step of the conditionality mechanism and to launch an infringement proceeding regarding this matter; |
Or. en
Amendment 229
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 92 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 92a. Notes that the unilateral legal and financial harassment initiated by the Commission against certain Member States for political reasons damages the relationship of mutual trust and creates a climate of tension that is detrimental to cooperation between the countries of Europe; |
Or. fr
Amendment 230
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda, Csaba Molnár
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 93
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 93. Deplores that, according to civil society’s analysis, the vast majority of recommendations from the Rule of Law Report repeat the previous ones; considers that this raises concerns as to whether the recommendations are taken sufficiently seriously by Member States and whether the Commission is applying adequate pressure to ensure their effective implementation; stresses that, many of the shortcomings listed in the Rule of Law Report have a direct impact on the sound financial management of the Union budget and therefore considers it essential from a budgetary control perspective that the exercise produces tangible and measurable results; | 93. Deplores that, according to civil society’s analysis, the vast majority of recommendations from the Rule of Law Report repeat the previous ones; considers that this raises concerns as to whether the recommendations are taken sufficiently seriously by Member States and whether the Commission is applying adequate pressure to ensure their effective implementation; stresses that, many of the shortcomings listed in the Rule of Law Report have a direct impact on the sound financial management of the Union budget and therefore considers it essential from a budgetary control perspective that the exercise produces tangible and measurable results; invites, therefore, the Commission to translate the country-specific recommendations from its annual Rule of Law Reports into concrete milestones to be systematically acted upon by the Member States, and to trigger the Conditionality Regulation where systematic rule of law breaches, identified under the pillars of the Report, have a sufficiently direct link to the protection of the EU budget; |
Or. en
Amendment 231
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 93
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 93. Deplores that, according to civil society’s analysis, the vast majority of recommendations from the Rule of Law Report repeat the previous ones; considers that this raises concerns as to whether the recommendations are taken sufficiently seriously by Member States and whether the Commission is applying adequate pressure to ensure their effective implementation; stresses that, many of the shortcomings listed in the Rule of Law Report have a direct impact on the sound financial management of the Union budget and therefore considers it essential from a budgetary control perspective that the exercise produces tangible and measurable results; | 93. Deplores that, according to civil society’s analysis, the vast majority of recommendations from the Rule of Law Report repeat the previous ones; considers that this raises concerns as to whether the recommendations are sufficiently serious; |
Or. fr
Amendment 232
Tomáš Zdechovský
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 94. Notes the Commission reply that the Secretariat-General (SG) coordinates between the use of three different instruments of the Conditionality Regulation, the Rule of Law Report, the RRF and of the CPR horizontal enabling conditions to ensure consistency across all programmes, instruments and Member States, and that within each instrument, there is a lead service entrusted with the implementation and relevant associated services also feed into this work; further notes that the Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers (DG JUST) and SG jointly lead the work on the Rule of Law Report, DG EMPL leads for the work on the Charter horizontal enabling condition, SG REFORM with the Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN) for the work on the RRF and the Directorate-General for Budget (DG BUDG) for the work on the Conditionality Regulation; deplores, however, that the role of the Commission President on the decision-making behind frozen funds remains opaque; notes that, despite a solid framework on paper, the decision-making process remains insufficiently transparent in practice; regrets that in the past, the Commission only provided the bare minimum of information, without key details, and did not share the full documentation, even after Parliament had requested it; stresses that clear and transparent decision-making structures are essential to avoid any perception of the freezing of funds being subject to political considerations; | 94. Notes the Commission reply that the Secretariat-General (SG) coordinates between the use of three different instruments of the Conditionality Regulation, the Rule of Law Report, the RRF and of the CPR horizontal enabling conditions to ensure consistency across all programmes, instruments and Member States, and that within each instrument, there is a lead service entrusted with the implementation and relevant associated services also feed into this work; further notes that the Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers (DG JUST) and SG jointly lead the work on the Rule of Law Report, DG EMPL leads for the work on the Charter horizontal enabling condition, SG REFORM with the Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN) for the work on the RRF and the Directorate-General for Budget (DG BUDG) for the work on the Conditionality Regulation; underlines that while a solid framework exists on paper, the practical application of procedures could be further enhanced; encourages the Commission to provide timely and sufficient information to the discharge authority in order to maintain confidence in the proper and impartial implementation of funding decisions; |
Or. en
Amendment 233
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 95 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 95 a. Deplores the Commission’s decision to eliminate operating grants for civil society health NGOs representing thousands of patients, healthcare professionals and communities from the EU4Health 2025 Work Programme and demands that they are restored; underlines that such grants accounted for just over 1% of the EU4Health budget in 2024; notes with concern that their removal has led to staff reductions, halted projects, cancelled exchanges and a loss of continuity in civil society’s contribution to European public health objectives, thereby weakening patient support and democratic participation; emphasises the need for predictable and stable support mechanisms for health civil society organisations; considers that any future funding should be based on clear criteria of European added value, transparency, political neutrality and measurable impact, in order to ensure that resources are directed where they deliver the greatest benefit for patients and health systems; underlines the importance of ensuring stable and predictable support for civil society actors representing patients, healthcare professionals and affected communities, in order to maintain their capacity to contribute to Union health policy objectives and implementation; |
Or. en
Amendment 234
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 95 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 95a. Notes the low implementation of the budget of the EU4Health programme; this reflects the Commission’s inability to supervise and manage health funds properly. Taxpayers’ money would be better used locally and directly in Member States’ hospitals and health systems; |
Or. fr
Amendment 235
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 95 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 95b. Is concerned about the acceleration of attempts to restrict freedom of expression by the Commission over the past several years and the subsidies granted to pseudo fact-checkers or unanimously pro-European media outlets; notes the explosion of budget waste in this area, with EUR 9 billion planned for the period 2028-2034 (AgoraEU programme); |
Or. fr
Amendment 236
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 95 c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 95c. Notes that many media outlets are subsidised by public or private funds and organise conferences on European policies. The Commission is reported to have invested EUR 210 million in various media between 2021 and 2027. For example, it is understood that Euractiv received EUR 40 million in 10 years. Calls on the Commission to verify that all these recipients of funds ensure the visibility of the amount received on the first page of their website7 a; | |
| _________________ | |
| 7 a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-10-2025-004549-ASW_EN.html |
Or. fr
Amendment 237
Dick Erixon
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 95 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 95 a. Notes with concern that the Commission allocated EUR 8 million in 2024 and EUR 20,9 million in 2025, representing an increase of 160 %, for calls for proposals for the production of content about EU affairs by consortia of news media organisations; notes that three media consortia currently receive EU funding; stresses that such funding risks creating structural financial dependency between media organisations that should serve as independent watchdogs and the institutions they cover; underlines that a free, independent press is a cornerstone of democratic accountability and that public trust in both media and EU institutions is undermined when journalists reporting on EU affairs receive direct or indirect funding from those institutions; calls on the Commission to publish a comprehensive overview of all financial support, including grants, contracts and indirect funding, provided to media organisations, and to ensure this information is accessible through a unified inter-institutional media transparency portal; |
Or. en
Amendment 238
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 – point iii
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iii) link recommendations from the Rule of Law Report to the implementation of concrete measures by the Member State concerned to have a stronger impact and at best contribute to protecting the Union’s financial interests, and refers in this regard to the recommendations made in Parliament’s resolution of 18 June 2025 on the Commission’s 2024 Rule of Law Report; | deleted |
Or. fr
Amendment 239
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 – point iii a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (iiia) recalls that the Commission must respect the European Treaties, which define the competences of the Member States and the Commission; |
Or. fr
Amendment 240
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 – point v
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (v) closely align the rule of law report with the Conditionality Regulation and report in more detail on the breaches of the principles of the rule of law that can be used as input to trigger the Conditionality Regulation; | deleted |
Or. fr
Amendment 241
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda, Csaba Molnár
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 – point v a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (v a) exercise its right of initiative and propose measures to close any existing loopholes in the Union's legislative framework that may enable governments to transfer funds suspended due to breaches of their Rule of Law or Charter of Fundamental Rights obligations, and ensure that any future funding instruments are proofed for circumvention; |
Or. en
Amendment 242
Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 – point vi
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi) urgently reassess and address the deterioration of the rule of law and risks to the Union budget in Hungary and take all necessary actions in accordance with the Conditionality Regulation and other available tools, including full suspension of Union funds; | deleted |
Or. fr
Amendment 243
Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 – point vi
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi) urgently reassess and address the deterioration of the rule of law and risks to the Union budget in Hungary and take all necessary actions in accordance with the Conditionality Regulation and other available tools, including full suspension of Union funds; | (vi) urgently reassess and address the deterioration of the rule of law and risks to the Union budget in Hungary and take all necessary actions in accordance with the Conditionality Regulation and other available tools, including suspension of Union funds; |
Or. en
Amendment 244
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 – point vi a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (via) Stresses that all Union spending must fully respect the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, ensuring that national governments maintain the right to determine their own financial priorities without unnecessary interference from Brussels; demands that the Commission avoid using its budgetary powers to pressure Member States into compliance with centrally dictated policies that undermine their sovereignty; |
Or. fr
Amendment 245
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 – point vi a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi a) carry out an ex-post evaluation of the financial impact of cohesion policy amendments on eastern border regions, notably the ERDF funds initially earmarked for cross-border cooperation with Russia and Belarus as well as funds reallocated in the context of the 2025 cohesion mid-term review, share its evaluation with the discharge authority, and urgently propose targeted financial support for these regions to counter the disproportionate impact of Russia's war of aggression, including remedying losses suffered as a result of the amendments during the current programming period; |
Or. en
Amendment 246
Pasquale Tridico
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 – point vi a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi a) re-consider the single audit approach until the weaknesses identified in the managing and audit authorities in Member States are tackled; |
Or. en
Amendment 247
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 – point vi b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| (vi b) urgently restore operating grants for civil society health NGOs, which it had eliminated from the EU4Health 2025 Work Programme; |
Or. en
Amendment 248
Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 100 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 100a. Regrets the deficiencies of the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the delays, sometimes up to two years, in payments to farmers in France’s outermost regions; |
Or. fr
Amendment 249
Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 105
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 105. Recalls that under the performance-based model of CAP 2023-2027, Member States set the rules to be complied with by final beneficiaries in accordance with the general framework of the Union, while the Commission focuses on performance results and the functioning of the systems that Member States put in place to ensure the respect of those conditions and no longer on the individual transactions; further recalls that accordingly for CAP 2023-2027, Member States are obliged to report to the Commission on output and result indicators related to policy performance, and not on control statistics; | 105. Recalls that under the performance-based model of CAP 2023-2027, Member States set the rules to be complied with by final beneficiaries in accordance with the general framework of the Union, while the Commission focuses on performance results and the functioning of the systems that Member States put in place to ensure the respect of those conditions and no longer on the individual transactions; further recalls that accordingly for CAP 2023-2027, Member States are obliged to report to the Commission on output and result indicators related to policy performance, and not on control statistics; notes the Court's observation that recoveries concerning agricultural expenditure have been relatively successful, attributed in part to the so-called 50-50 rule that incentivised Member States to recover funds; notes that this rule has not been retained in the 2023-2027 CAP and the Court's warning that this might lead to a deterioration of the rate of recovery for agricultural expenditure; |
Or. en
Amendment 250
Céline Imart, Monika Hohlmeier
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 111. Recalls that CAP 2023-2027 is built around ten key objectives, including ensuring a fair income for farmers; considers that direct income support under CAP should be provided only to active farmers whose main activity is agriculture, with a specific focus on those most in need, such as family-sized and small farms, farms in areas with natural or other specific challenges, young and female farmers; considers that the Commission should take measures to increase the effectiveness of Union agricultural funds and ensure that only active farmers receive direct income support, and not landowners; | 111. Recalls that CAP 2023-2027 is structured around ten key objectives, including ensuring a fair and stable income for farmers, safeguarding food security and strengthening the resilience of the agricultural sector; stresses that direct income should continue to support active farmers, while preserving legal certainty and avoiding excessive administrative constraints; underlines in particular the importance of supporting family farms, young farmers, women farmers and farms located in areas facing natural constraints; calls on the Commission to improve the efficiency and targeting of Union agricultural funds while respecting the diversity of national farming structures; |
Or. en