Sittings · Document

Draft report (2025/2145(DEC)) 2026-02-20

Discharge 2024: General budget of the EU - Commission

Committee on Budgetary Control

Amendment 251

Ondřej Knotek

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 built around ten key objectives, including ensuring a fair income for farmers; considers that direct income support under CAP should be provided to all farmers who are involved in food production; special attention should be given to 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 all farmers fulfilling the legal requirements receive direct income support, and not landowners;

Or. en

Amendment 252

Tomáš Zdechovský

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 built around ten key objectives, including ensuring a fair income for farmers; considers that direct income support under CAP should better targeted to farmers actively engaged in agricultural production, 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;

Or. en

Amendment 253

Georgios Aftias, Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 112

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
112. Is concerned by the allegations of large-scale fraud affecting Union agricultural funds, which were first reported in the media in February 2025, concerning the Greek Payment and Control Agency for Guidance and Guarantee Community Aids (OPEKEPE); recalls that EPPO published a press release in May 2025 confirming that they were conducting an investigation into an alleged organised fraud scheme involving agricultural funds and corruption involving public officials of OPEKEPE; recalls that EPPO has, according to press reports, handed over information to the Greek Parliament with a view to investigating two former ministers; notes that the OPEKEPE scandal has led to the resignation of several ministers and deputy ministers over their alleged involvement in the scandal; notes with concern EPPO’s press release of 22 October 2025 that explains that in the course of EPPO’s preliminary investigation, an organised criminal group, allegedly involved in a systematic large-scale subsidy fraud scheme and money-laundering activities, has been identified;	112. Acknowledges the allegations of large-scale fraud affecting Union agricultural funds, under shared management, which were first reported in the media in February 2025, concerning the Greek Payment and Control Agency for Guidance and Guarantee Community Aids (OPEKEPE); recalls that EPPO published a press release in May 2025 confirming that they were conducting an investigation into an alleged organised fraud scheme involving agricultural funds and corruption involving public officials of OPEKEPE; recalls that EPPO has, according to press reports, handed over information to the Greek Parliament with a view to investigating two former ministers; notes with concern EPPO’s press release of 22 October 2025 that explains that in the course of EPPO’s preliminary investigation, an organised criminal group, allegedly involved in a systematic large-scale subsidy fraud scheme and money-laundering activities, has been identified; acknowledges the prompt reaction of the Greek authorities including inter alia the decision to establish a special investigative task force, comprising the Financial Police and the Independent Authority for Public Revenue; underlines, in this context, that the assets of several individuals suspected of involvement in the alleged criminal activities have been seized;

Or. en

Amendment 254

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 112 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	112a. Points out that individuals who are neither farmers nor farm owners have received EU funds intended for farmers and that politicians have been accused in Greece;

Or. fr

Amendment 255

Georgios Aftias, Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 113

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
113. Acknowledges that DG AGRI issued in its AAR 2024 four reservations related to expenditure managed by OPEKEPE; notes that one such reservation covers all the IACS interventions under the CAP Strategic Plans, as DG AGRI’s conformity audit and the work of the certification body revealed a number of potential serious deficiencies in relation to the implementation of the identification system for agricultural parcels, as well as in the design and functioning of the management and control system; notes another reservation was issued concerning non-IACS expenditure under the CAP Strategic Plans covering the wine sector and apiculture due to potential serious deficiencies in relation to the design or set-up of the systems not covering the principles of economy, efficiency and measures to avoid double funding; notes that the third reservation for OPEKEPE concerns 2014-2022 rural development programmes, for which the adjusted error rate is estimated to be 7,45 %, due to DG AGRI’s audits in 2023 and 2024 that identified several weaknesses related to land parcel identification system, weaknesses in the OPEKEPE’s on-the-spot checks, serious deficiencies with regard to the supervision and checks of the local action groups, procedures to verify the potential creation of artificial conditions, checks on double financing and public procurement and deficiencies in the evaluation of the reasonableness of costs and verification of SME status; notes the fourth reservation concerning market measures outside of CAP Strategic Plans was issued covering fruit and vegetable producer organisations and exceptional measures, for which an adjusted error rate of 10 % is estimated following DG AGRI’s audit in 2024 that identified deficiencies in administrative and on-the-spot checks impacting exceptional measures and due to fact that, based on the Certification Body’s assessment, adjustments were made to the error rates for fruit and vegetable producer organisations and promotion;	113. Acknowledges that DG AGRI issued in its AAR 2024 four reservations related to expenditure managed by OPEKEPE; notes that one such reservation covers all the IACS interventions under the CAP Strategic Plans, as DG AGRI’s conformity audit and the work of the certification body revealed a number of potential serious deficiencies in relation to the implementation of the identification system for agricultural parcels, as well as in the design and functioning of the management and control system; notes another reservation was issued concerning non-IACS expenditure under the CAP Strategic Plans covering the wine sector and apiculture due to potential serious deficiencies in relation to the design or set-up of the systems not covering the principles of economy, efficiency and measures to avoid double funding; notes that the third reservation for OPEKEPE concerns 2014-2022 rural development programmes, for which the adjusted error rate is estimated to be 7,45 %, due to DG AGRI’s audits in 2023 and 2024 that identified several weaknesses related to land parcel identification system, weaknesses in the OPEKEPE’s on-the-spot checks, serious deficiencies with regard to the supervision and checks of the local action groups, procedures to verify the potential creation of artificial conditions, checks on double financing and public procurement and deficiencies in the evaluation of the reasonableness of costs and verification of SME status; notes the fourth reservation concerning market measures outside of CAP Strategic Plans was issued covering fruit and vegetable producer organisations and exceptional measures, for which an adjusted error rate of 10 % is estimated following DG AGRI’s audit in 2024 that identified deficiencies in administrative and on-the-spot checks impacting exceptional measures and due to fact that, based on the Certification Body’s assessment, adjustments were made to the error rates for fruit and vegetable producer organisations and promotion; acknowledges that the Greek Authorities drew up an Action Plan, which has been accepted by DG AGRI as a sufficient basis for remedying the above mentioned deficiencies; recalls that all corrective measures are subject to ongoing monitoring by the Commission;

Or. en

Amendment 256

Georgios Aftias, Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 114

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
114. Acknowledges the Commission’s written replies that in 2023 and again in June 2024, DG AGRI requested that the Greek competent authority places OPEKEPE’s accreditation under probation; notes the explanation in DG AGRI’s AAR that deficiencies affecting several accreditation criteria were identified by the Certification Body and by DG AGRI, and as a result, Greek authorities put the accreditation of OPEKEPE under probation in September 2024 and drew up an accreditation action plan; further notes that the Commission is following the progress of the implementation of this remedial action plan; insists that the Commission share the latest revised action plan and its assessment with the discharge authority;	114. Acknowledges the Commission’s written replies that in 2023 and again in June 2024, DG AGRI requested that the Greek competent authority places OPEKEPE’s accreditation under probation; notes the explanation in DG AGRI’s AAR that deficiencies affecting several accreditation criteria were identified by the Certification Body and by DG AGRI, and as a result, Greek authorities put the accreditation of OPEKEPE under probation in September 2024 and drew up an accreditation action plan; further notes that the Commission is following the progress of the implementation of this remedial action plan; insists that the Commission share the latest revised action plan and its assessment with the discharge authority; acknowledges the concrete measures by the Greek authorities to implement without delay the corrective measures, address the identified structural weaknesses, enhance transparency of beneficiaries and reinforce anti-fraud controls; welcomes, in this context, the significant reform recently introduced by law to fully transfer OPEKEPE to the Independent Authority for Public Revenues (AADE), whose unreproachable reputation offers the necessary guarantees for restoring credibility and modernising the system;

Or. en

Amendment 257

Ondřej Knotek

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 117

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
117. Recalls that the current Prime Minister of Czechia was found to be in a situation of conflict of interest during his previous mandate and the related the European Parliament resolution of 13 December 201812 ; notes the Commission’s written replies concerning the measures taken in response to the conflict of interest due to Andrej Babiš's ownership of Agrofert while serving as Prime Minister of Czechia; in particular notes that the Commission suspended in March 2020 the payment of one Agrofert project worth EUR 30 606,96; notes that in June 2022, the Commission applied a financial correction of EUR 3,3 million to Czechia, part of which (EUR 30 606,96) concerned the situation of conflict of interest of the Prime Minister during his mandate that ended in 202113 ; insists that the Commission should continue to monitor possible conflicts of interests that might affect Union funds, especially in relation to elected officials, and take action to protect the Union budget;	117. Insists that the Commission should continue to monitor possible conflicts of interests that might affect Union funds, especially in relation to elected officials, and take action to protect the Union budget;
_________________
12 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0530.
13 Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/908 of 8 June 2022 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ L 157, 10.6.2022, p. 15, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2022/908/oj).

Or. en

Amendment 258

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 117

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
117. Recalls that the current Prime Minister of Czechia was found to be in a situation of conflict of interest during his previous mandate and the related the European Parliament resolution of 13 December 201812 ; notes the Commission’s written replies concerning the measures taken in response to the conflict of interest due to Andrej Babiš's ownership of Agrofert while serving as Prime Minister of Czechia; in particular notes that the Commission suspended in March 2020 the payment of one Agrofert project worth EUR 30 606,96; notes that in June 2022, the Commission applied a financial correction of EUR 3,3 million to Czechia, part of which (EUR 30 606,96) concerned the situation of conflict of interest of the Prime Minister during his mandate that ended in 202113 ; insists that the Commission should continue to monitor possible conflicts of interests that might affect Union funds, especially in relation to elected officials, and take action to protect the Union budget;	117. Recalls that a high-level public official in Czechia was found to be in a situation of conflict of interest during a previous mandate and the related European Parliament resolution of 13 December 2018; notes the Commission’s written replies concerning the measures taken in response to the conflict of interest arising from the ownership of a private holding company while holding public office; in particular notes that the Commission suspended in March 2020 the payment of one project worth EUR 30 606,96; notes that in June 2022, the Commission applied a financial correction of EUR 3,3 million to Czechia, part of which (EUR 30 606,96) concerned the situation of conflict of interest during the mandate that ended in 2021; insists that the Commission should continue to monitor possible conflicts of interest that might affect Union funds, especially in relation to elected officials, and take action to protect the Union budget,
_________________
12 Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0530.
13 Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/908 of 8 June 2022 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ L 157, 10.6.2022, p. 15, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2022/908/oj).

Or. en

Amendment 259

Ondřej Knotek

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 118

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
118. Notes that Andrej Babiš has been re-elected and assumed the office of Prime Minister of Czechia in December 2025; takes note of his public announcement that he intends to relinquish ownership and control of Agrofert through the creation of an allegedly irreversible trust arrangement; notes, however, that no concrete legal documentation has so far been made public, that the trust structure has not yet been established as of 15 January 2026, that its jurisdiction, governance and trustees remain unknown and that Mr Babiš continues, at present, to own Agrofert and other business interests which could potentially benefit from Union funds; notes, further, that, even under the arrangement as described, Agrofert would ultimately be transferred to his children, thereby maintaining a clear long-term economic interest; stresses that the mere announcement of future arrangements is insufficient to dispel concerns of conflict of interest;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 260

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 118

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
118. Notes that Andrej Babiš has been re-elected and assumed the office of Prime Minister of Czechia in December 2025; takes note of his public announcement that he intends to relinquish ownership and control of Agrofert through the creation of an allegedly irreversible trust arrangement; notes, however, that no concrete legal documentation has so far been made public, that the trust structure has not yet been established as of 15 January 2026, that its jurisdiction, governance and trustees remain unknown and that Mr Babiš continues, at present, to own Agrofert and other business interests which could potentially benefit from Union funds; notes, further, that, even under the arrangement as described, Agrofert would ultimately be transferred to his children, thereby maintaining a clear long-term economic interest; stresses that the mere announcement of future arrangements is insufficient to dispel concerns of conflict of interest;	118. Notes that following national elections, a new government took office in Czechia in December 2025; takes note of public statements by the Prime Minister, indicating an intention to relinquish ownership and control of business interests potentially benefiting from Union funds through the creation of a trust arrangement; notes, however, that as of mid-January 2026, no publicly available legal documentation has been provided to demonstrate the effective establishment and operational safeguards of such arrangements; notes, further, that, any future arrangements should ensure the effective removal of economic interests and influence, in line with Union rules on conflict of interest;

Or. en

Amendment 261

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 120

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
120. Recalls that the 2020 Interinstitutional Agreement established a binding 30 % target for climate spending, but only an annual ‘ambition’ of 7,5 % in 2025 and 10 % in 2026 and 2027 for biodiversity spending; notes that the Commission tracks Union spending on climate and biodiversity-related activities by means of dedicated methodologies; stresses that the climate and biodiversity tracking methodologies are ex-ante tagging systems based on the expected effect of activities and do not factor in results; recalls that the mainstreaming of priorities in the Union budget entails the consideration of that priority in all stages of the budgetary cycle; underlines, therefore, that the tracking of spending related to climate or biodiversity objectives is only one step in a comprehensive green budgeting cycle, in which climate and biodiversity objectives are considered throughout the whole lifecycle of the budget;	120. Recalls that the 2020 Interinstitutional Agreement established a binding 30 % target for climate spending, but only an annual ‘ambition’ of 7,5 % in 2025 and 10 % in 2026 and 2027 for biodiversity spending;

Or. fr

Amendment 262

Dick Erixon

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 120

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
120. Recalls that the 2020 Interinstitutional Agreement established a binding 30 % target for climate spending, but only an annual ‘ambition’ of 7,5 % in 2025 and 10 % in 2026 and 2027 for biodiversity spending; notes that the Commission tracks Union spending on climate and biodiversity-related activities by means of dedicated methodologies; stresses that the climate and biodiversity tracking methodologies are ex-ante tagging systems based on the expected effect of activities and do not factor in results; recalls that the mainstreaming of priorities in the Union budget entails the consideration of that priority in all stages of the budgetary cycle; underlines, therefore, that the tracking of spending related to climate or biodiversity objectives is only one step in a comprehensive green budgeting cycle, in which climate and biodiversity objectives are considered throughout the whole lifecycle of the budget;	120. Recalls that the 2020 Interinstitutional Agreement established a binding 30 % target for climate spending; underlines, therefore, that the tracking of spending related to climate is only one step in a budgetary cycle that must also account for the costs and economic impact of climate and biodiversity measures on the Union's competitiveness, employment and growth; stresses that climate tracking should be accompanied by an equivalent assessment of the regulatory and administrative costs imposed by green measures on beneficiaries and Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 263

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 120 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	120a. Opposes all spending and references linked to the European Green Deal, taking the view that the deal is excessively costly for taxpayers and economically damaging for key sectors of the European economy;

Or. fr

Amendment 264

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 122

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
122. Is concerned that in several audits, the Court found that Union funds’ contribution to climate objectives was unclear and potentially overestimated due to weaknesses in the Commission tracking methodologies; recalls that in its special report 09/2022 on climate spending in the 2014-2020 Union budget, the Court found that the climate contribution of the Union budget had been overstated by EUR 72 billion under the 2014-2020 MFF, as reported spending was not always relevant to climate action, particularly under the CAP; looks forward to receiving the Court’s assessment of the Commission’s follow-up of its recommendations made in special report 09/2022 in 2026;	122. Is concerned that in several audits, the Court found that Union funds’ contribution to climate objectives was unclear and potentially overestimated due to weaknesses in the Commission tracking methodologies; recalls that in its special report 09/2022 on climate spending in the 2014-2020 Union budget, the Court found that the climate contribution of the Union budget had been overstated by EUR 72 billion under the 2014-2020 MFF, as reported spending was not always relevant to climate action; looks forward to receiving the Court’s assessment of the Commission’s follow-up of its recommendations made in special report 09/2022 in 2026;

Or. en

Amendment 265

Dick Erixon

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 123

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
123. Notes the Court’s Special Report 20/2024 on Common Agriculture Policy Plans and the Commission’s reply, in particular that the Court’s overall conclusion that the CAP Strategic Plans 2023-2027 are ‘greener’ than in the previous CAP period, but do not match the Union’s ambitions for the climate and the environment, and that key elements for assessing performance are missing; welcomes that the Court also recommends the Commission to estimate the CAP’s contribution to the Green Deal targets and strengthen the future CAP monitoring framework for the climate and the environment;	123. Notes that the Court of Auditors’ assessment of CAP Strategic Plans for 2023-2027 (Special Report 20/2024) found that while these plans are greener than the previous period, they fall short of EU climate and environmental ambitions, with key performance assessment elements missing; observes that the Court’s Annual Report 2024 demonstrates a stark contrast in error rates, with direct payments (excluding eco-schemes) being largely free from material error due to their entitlement-based nature and administrative simplicity, while eco-schemes, specifically designed to deliver environmental results, show significantly higher error risk with questions remaining about their effectiveness; calls on the Commission to assess whether resources currently channelled through high-error, low-performance eco-schemes could be more effectively allocated toward payment mechanisms that demonstrate both lower error rates and measurable climate results;

Or. en

Amendment 266

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 123

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
123. Notes the Court’s Special Report 20/2024 on Common Agriculture Policy Plans and the Commission’s reply, in particular that the Court’s overall conclusion that the CAP Strategic Plans 2023-2027 are ‘greener’ than in the previous CAP period, but do not match the Union’s ambitions for the climate and the environment, and that key elements for assessing performance are missing; welcomes that the Court also recommends the Commission to estimate the CAP’s contribution to the Green Deal targets and strengthen the future CAP monitoring framework for the climate and the environment;	123. Notes the Court’s Special Report 20/2024 on Common Agriculture Policy Plans and the Commission’s reply, in particular that the Court’s overall conclusion that the CAP Strategic Plans 2023-2027 are ‘greener’ than in the previous CAP period;

Or. fr

Amendment 267

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 123

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
123. Notes the Court’s Special Report 20/2024 on Common Agriculture Policy Plans and the Commission’s reply, in particular that the Court’s overall conclusion that the CAP Strategic Plans 2023-2027 are ‘greener’ than in the previous CAP period, but do not match the Union’s ambitions for the climate and the environment, and that key elements for assessing performance are missing; welcomes that the Court also recommends the Commission to estimate the CAP’s contribution to the Green Deal targets and strengthen the future CAP monitoring framework for the climate and the environment;	123. Notes that from 2021 to 2023, agricultural GHG emissions in the EU decreased by 3 %, while those for energy supply and industry decreased by 16 % each; considers climate change a challenge of magnitude requiring all sectors to contribute with their fair share; notes the Court’s Special Report 20/2024 on Common Agriculture Policy Plans and the Commission’s reply, in particular that the Court’s overall conclusion that the CAP Strategic Plans 2023-2027 are ‘greener’ than in the previous CAP period, but do not match the Union’s ambitions for the climate and the environment, and that key elements for assessing performance are missing; welcomes that the Court also recommends the Commission to estimate the CAP’s contribution to the Green Deal targets and strengthen the future CAP monitoring framework, with a view to improving its contribution to the Union's climate and environmental objectives;

Or. en

Amendment 268

Céline Imart, Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 123

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
123. Notes the Court’s Special Report 20/2024 on Common Agriculture Policy Plans and the Commission’s reply, in particular that the Court’s overall conclusion that the CAP Strategic Plans 2023-2027 are ‘greener’ than in the previous CAP period, but do not match the Union’s ambitions for the climate and the environment, and that key elements for assessing performance are missing; welcomes that the Court also recommends the Commission to estimate the CAP’s contribution to the Green Deal targets and strengthen the future CAP monitoring framework for the climate and the environment;	123. Court’s Special Report 20/2024 on Common Agriculture Policy Plans and the Commission’s reply; welcomes the Court’s overall conclusion that the CAP 2023-2027 is greener than in the previous programming period, reflecting significant efforts by farmers and Member States; underlines, however, that environmental and climate ambitions must remain compatible with the economic sustainability and competitiveness of European agriculture; stresses that further improvements to the monitoring framework should not result in additional obligations for farmers or managing authorities; calls on the Commission to assess the CAP’s contribution to the Green Deal in a balanced manner, taking into account food security, strategic autonomy and rural development objectives;

Or. en

Amendment 269

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 123

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
123. Notes the Court’s Special Report 20/2024 on Common Agriculture Policy Plans and the Commission’s reply, in particular that the Court’s overall conclusion that the CAP Strategic Plans 2023-2027 are ‘greener’ than in the previous CAP period, but do not match the Union’s ambitions for the climate and the environment, and that key elements for assessing performance are missing; welcomes that the Court also recommends the Commission to estimate the CAP’s contribution to the Green Deal targets and strengthen the future CAP monitoring framework for the climate and the environment;	123. Notes the Court’s Special Report 20/2024 on Common Agriculture Policy Plans and the Commission’s reply, notes the Court’s assessment that the CAP Strategic Plans 2023-2027 represent an improvement compared to the previous CAP period, including with regard to climate and the environment considerations, while identifying areas where monitoring and performance framework could be further strengthened; welcomes that the Court recommends that the Commission further develop methodologies to estimate the CAP’s contribution to climate and environmental objectives and strengthen the future CAP monitoring framework, with due regard to proportionality, administrative burden and the need to ensure predictability and legal certainty for farmers;

Or. en

Amendment 270

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 124

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
124. Notes the Court’s special report 14/2024 ‘Green transition – Unclear contribution from the Recovery and Resilience Facility’ and the Commission’s reply; is disappointed by Court’s overall conclusion that weaknesses in the design and implementation of the RRF call into question the achievement of its climate and environmental objectives and that the RRF’s contribution to the green transition is not clear; is concerned that the Court found that tracking climate expenditure involves a high level of approximation and some coefficients were leading to potential overestimations; welcomes that the Court also recommends the Commission to better estimate climate spending under future funding instruments and ensure adequate design of future funding instruments that are to support the climate and environmental objectives and targets;	124. Notes the Court’s special report 14/2024 ‘Green transition – Unclear contribution from the Recovery and Resilience Facility’ and the Commission’s reply; takes notes of Court’s findings highlighting weaknesses and limitation in the design and implementation of the RRF as regards the measurement of its contribution to climate and environmental objectives; notes that the Court found that tracking climate expenditure involves a high level of approximation and some coefficients were leading to potential overestimations; welcomes that the Court recommends the Commission to further refine methodologies for estimating climate spending in future funding instruments and to incorporate lessons in the design of future funding instruments supporting the climate and environmental objectives and targets;

Or. en

Amendment 271

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 126

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
126. Recalls that all Union spending must comply with the horizontal ‘do no significant harm’ (DNSH) principle, laid down in point 16 of the Interinstitutional Agreement, which stipulates that Union spending must not cause harm to the six environmental objectives set out in Article 17 of the Taxonomy Regulation14, namely climate mitigation and adaptation, sustainable use and protection of water resources, the circular economy, pollution prevention and control, and biodiversity protection; considers that, in light of the Court’s recurrent findings, the negative environmental effects of Union spending should also be tracked and reported on;	deleted
_________________
14 Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU) 2019/2088 (OB L 198, 22.6.2020, p. 13, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/852/oj).

Or. fr

Amendment 272

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 127

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
127. Recalls that EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is a key component of the European Green Deal and one of the main instruments for achieving the Union’s climate ambition; notes the finding of 2024 IAS audit on the implementation and monitoring of the EU ETS that despite the heavy workload, complex legal framework and scarce resources they operate with, the Directorate-General for Climate Action (DG CLIMA) staff showed commitment to perform their tasks and willingness to improve the efficiency of the EU ETS related processes; appreciates the Commission’s written confirmation that DG CLIMA intends to address most internal audit recommendations by 2025 and all by mid-2028;	deleted

Or. fr

Amendment 273

Monika Hohlmeier, Céline Imart

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 131

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
131. Recognises the importance of the LIFE programme, the Union’s only standalone programme for the environment and climate action, to funding nature conservation, circular economy, climate action and clean energy transition projects and more broadly, to promoting sustainable development across the Union; recalls the provisions of the LIFE+ Regulation, including Article 11(6), which indicates that providing operating grants to support the functioning of non-profit making entities which are involved in the development, implementation and enforcement of Union legislation and policy, and which are primarily active in the area of the environment or climate action, including energy transition, is an eligible action for LIFE funding; notes that operating grants allocated to NGOs under the LIFE Programme represent only 1 % of the programme’s total budget;	131. Recognises the importance of the LIFE programme, the Union’s only standalone programme for the environment and climate action, in supporting nature conservation, circular economy initiatives, climate action and the clean energy transition, and more broadly in promoting sustainable development across the Union; recalls the provisions of the LIFE+ Regulation, including Article 11(6), which provides that operating grants may support non-profit entities active in the development and implementation of Union environmental and climate legislation; stresses, however, that such operating grants must be implemented with full transparency, strict compliance with financial rules and clear safeguards to ensure that Union funds are not used for political campaigning or lobbying activities directed at Union institutions or national and regional parliaments and governments, are not used for regional or national protect actions or lawsuits; notes that operating grants allocated to NGOs under the LIFE Programme represent approximately 1 % of the programme’s total budget, and calls on the Commission to ensure robust monitoring, clear separation between project implementation and advocacy activities, and full accountability and full transparency to taxpayers; calls for funds to support mutual understanding and constructive exchange instead of one-sided representation of NGOs or controversial actions;

Or. en

Amendment 274

Dick Erixon, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 131

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
131. Recognises the importance of the LIFE programme, the Union’s only standalone programme for the environment and climate action, to funding nature conservation, circular economy, climate action and clean energy transition projects and more broadly, to promoting sustainable development across the Union; recalls the provisions of the LIFE+ Regulation, including Article 11(6), which indicates that providing operating grants to support the functioning of non-profit making entities which are involved in the development, implementation and enforcement of Union legislation and policy, and which are primarily active in the area of the environment or climate action, including energy transition, is an eligible action for LIFE funding; notes that operating grants allocated to NGOs under the LIFE Programme represent only 1 % of the programme’s total budget;	131. Notes the existence of the LIFE programme; welcomes the establishment of the CONT Committee Scrutiny Working Group; calls on this Scrutiny Working Group to examine the specific objectives for which these funds were granted, the actual results delivered, and whether such funding was in full compliance with the Union’s ethical and financial rules;

Or. en

Amendment 275

Tomáš Zdechovský, Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 131

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
131. Recognises the importance of the LIFE programme, the Union’s only standalone programme for the environment and climate action, to funding nature conservation, circular economy, climate action and clean energy transition projects and more broadly, to promoting sustainable development across the Union; recalls the provisions of the LIFE+ Regulation, including Article 11(6), which indicates that providing operating grants to support the functioning of non-profit making entities which are involved in the development, implementation and enforcement of Union legislation and policy, and which are primarily active in the area of the environment or climate action, including energy transition, is an eligible action for LIFE funding; notes that operating grants allocated to NGOs under the LIFE Programme represent only 1 % of the programme’s total budget;	131. Recognises the importance of the LIFE programme, the Union’s only standalone programme for the environment and climate action, in supporting nature conservation, circular economy initiatives, climate action and the clean energy transition, and more broadly in promoting sustainable development across the Union; recalls the provisions of the LIFE+ Regulation, including Article 11(6), which provides that operating grants may support non-profit entities active in the development and implementation of Union environmental and climate legislation; stresses, however, that such operating grants must be implemented with full transparency, strict compliance with financial rules and clear safeguards to ensure that Union funds are not used for political campaigning or lobbying activities directed at Union institutions; notes that operating grants allocated to NGOs under the LIFE Programme represent approximately 1 % of the programme’s total budget, and calls on the Commission to ensure robust monitoring, clear separation between project implementation and advocacy activities, and full accountability to taxpayers;

Or. en

Amendment 276

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 131

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
131. Recognises the importance of the LIFE programme, the Union’s only standalone programme for the environment and climate action, to funding nature conservation, circular economy, climate action and clean energy transition projects and more broadly, to promoting sustainable development across the Union; recalls the provisions of the LIFE+ Regulation, including Article 11(6), which indicates that providing operating grants to support the functioning of non-profit making entities which are involved in the development, implementation and enforcement of Union legislation and policy, and which are primarily active in the area of the environment or climate action, including energy transition, is an eligible action for LIFE funding; notes that operating grants allocated to NGOs under the LIFE Programme represent only 1 % of the programme’s total budget;	131. Recognises the importance of the LIFE programme, the Union’s only standalone programme for the environment and climate action, to funding nature conservation, circular economy, climate action and clean energy transition projects and more broadly, to promoting sustainable development across the Union; recalls the provisions of the LIFE+ Regulation, including Article 11(6), which indicates that providing operating grants to support the functioning of non-profit making entities which are involved in the development, implementation and enforcement of Union legislation and policy, and which are primarily active in the area of the environment or climate action, including energy transition, is an eligible action for LIFE funding;

Or. nl

Amendment 277

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 132

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
132. Regrets the allegations of undue lobbying made against non-governmental organisations whose activities were supported by LIFE operating grants; notes that the reply of the Commission’s Executive Vice-President for a Clean, Just and Competitive Transition to CONT on 2 December 2025 in the discharge hearing confirms that the activities by non-governmental organisations supported by LIFE operating grants did not breach any legal framework and that the implementation of LIFE programme fully respected the Financial Regulation;	deleted

Or. fr

Amendment 278

Céline Imart, Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 132

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
132. Regrets the allegations of undue lobbying made against non-governmental organisations whose activities were supported by LIFE operating grants; notes that the reply of the Commission’s Executive Vice-President for a Clean, Just and Competitive Transition to CONT on 2 December 2025 in the discharge hearing confirms that the activities by non-governmental organisations supported by LIFE operating grants did not breach any legal framework and that the implementation of LIFE programme fully respected the Financial Regulation;	132. Regrets the allegations of undue lobbying made against non-governmental organisations whose activities were supported by LIFE operating grants; notes that the reply of the Commission’s Executive Vice-President for a Clean, Just and Competitive Transition to CONT on 2 December 2025 in the discharge hearing confirms that the activities by non-governmental organisations supported by LIFE operating grants did not breach any legal framework and that the implementation of LIFE programme fully respected the Financial Regulation; calls on the Commission to guarantee full transparency and exercise heightened vigilance with regard to both beneficiaries and the activities financed, in order to ensure that no such suspicions can compromise the integrity and credibility of the use of Union funds;

Or. en

Amendment 279

Tomáš Zdechovský, Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 132

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
132. Regrets the allegations of undue lobbying made against non-governmental organisations whose activities were supported by LIFE operating grants; notes that the reply of the Commission’s Executive Vice-President for a Clean, Just and Competitive Transition to CONT on 2 December 2025 in the discharge hearing confirms that the activities by non-governmental organisations supported by LIFE operating grants did not breach any legal framework and that the implementation of LIFE programme fully respected the Financial Regulation;	132. Takes note of the concerns raised regarding the use of LIFE operating grants by certain non-governmental organisations and stresses the importance of full transparency and strict compliance with the Financial Regulation in this context; notes that the reply of the Commission’s Executive Vice-President for a Clean, Just and Competitive Transition to CONT on 2 December 2025 in the discharge regarding the implementation of the LIFE programme; calls for, nevertheless, continued monitoring and, where necessary, further clarification of the safeguards in place to ensure that Union funds are used exclusively for the objectives defined in the programme;

Or. en

Amendment 280

Dick Erixon, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 132

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
132. Regrets the allegations of undue lobbying made against non-governmental organisations whose activities were supported by LIFE operating grants; notes that the reply of the Commission’s Executive Vice-President for a Clean, Just and Competitive Transition to CONT on 2 December 2025 in the discharge hearing confirms that the activities by non-governmental organisations supported by LIFE operating grants did not breach any legal framework and that the implementation of LIFE programme fully respected the Financial Regulation;	132. Takes note of the serious allegations of undue lobbying made against non-governmental organisations whose activities were supported by LIFE operating grants and considers that these allegations warrant thorough and independent examination; recalls, that the use of EU funds by organisations to lobby for further EU legislation raises legitimate concerns about the appropriate use of public money; considers that the assertion of full legal compliance does not address the broader question of whether EU-funded lobbying activities represent sound financial management and value for money for taxpayers;

Or. en

Amendment 281

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 132

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
132. Regrets the allegations of undue lobbying made against non-governmental organisations whose activities were supported by LIFE operating grants; notes that the reply of the Commission’s Executive Vice-President for a Clean, Just and Competitive Transition to CONT on 2 December 2025 in the discharge hearing confirms that the activities by non-governmental organisations supported by LIFE operating grants did not breach any legal framework and that the implementation of LIFE programme fully respected the Financial Regulation;	132. emphasises that, from an integrity perspective, it is highly undesirable that the Commission entered into contracts with non-governmental organisations containing agreements to influence European policymakers and lobby for the policy objectives of the Commission; recalls that the Commissioner for Budget and Anti-Fraud admitted in plenary on 22 March 2025 that these contracts were indeed inappropriate; eagerly awaits the Scrutiny Working Group's findings; emphasises, meanwhile, that including lobbying obligations in contracts with other beneficiaries is also inappropriate;

Or. nl

Amendment 282

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 132 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	132a. Deplores the fact, in this respect, that LIFE funds have been allocated to entities that lobby the EU institutions directly, in contradiction with the principles of sound financial management, transparency and separation of powers; given that details of grant contracts and the results of actions should be public, unless not in the interests of national security, deplores the fact that the Commission grants members of the Committee on Budgetary Control access to only a number of contracts of all the projects that it finances; urges the Commission to step up ex-ante and ex-post checks on LIFE beneficiaries to ensure that funds are used in accordance with the EU's financial regulations and the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making; calls on the Commission to make full use of the conclusions and recommendations of the European Court of Auditors' reports on the transparency of NGO funding when it comes to reforming its mechanisms for awarding and monitoring grants, and to make its actions and funding transparent and easily accessible, as the financial transparency system is currently incomplete and updated late and it contains unreliable data;

Or. fr

Amendment 283

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 132 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	132a. Questions the choice of experts playing a part in the selection of NGOs whose quality and independence is questionable; calls on the Commission, with a view to clearing up any doubts about allegations that the Commission encourages political lobbying by complicit NGOs, to open its proceedings and panels to Members of Parliament representing the opposition;

Or. fr

Amendment 284

Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 133

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
133. Notes that a review of a number of funding contracts between the Commission and economic operators, requested in the framework of this discharge procedure, shows that activities aimed at influencing public policy or decision-making are not limited to NGOs but also appear in contracts with other categories of beneficiaries; expresses concern that, in some cases, companies receiving Union funding for such activities may simultaneously have EU decision-makers sitting on their boards and receiving remuneration; further notes that the IAS performed a targeted engagement focussed exclusively on NGO funding under the LIFE programme to verify compliance with the guidance on funding for activities related to the development, implementation, monitoring and enforcement of Union legislation and policy but did not verify compliance with that guidance of agreements signed with other beneficiaries;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 285

Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 133

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
133. Notes that a review of a number of funding contracts between the Commission and economic operators, requested in the framework of this discharge procedure, shows that activities aimed at influencing public policy or decision-making are not limited to NGOs but also appear in contracts with other categories of beneficiaries; expresses concern that, in some cases, companies receiving Union funding for such activities may simultaneously have EU decision-makers sitting on their boards and receiving remuneration; further notes that the IAS performed a targeted engagement focussed exclusively on NGO funding under the LIFE programme to verify compliance with the guidance on funding for activities related to the development, implementation, monitoring and enforcement of Union legislation and policy but did not verify compliance with that guidance of agreements signed with other beneficiaries;	133. Notes that a review of a number of funding contracts between the Commission and economic operators, requested in the framework of this discharge procedure, shows that activities aimed at influencing public policy or decision-making are not limited to NGOs but also appear in contracts with other categories of beneficiaries; expresses concern that, in some cases, companies receiving Union funding for such activities may simultaneously have EU decision-makers sitting on their boards and receiving remuneration; further notes that the IAS performed a targeted engagement focussed exclusively on NGO funding under the LIFE programme to verify compliance with the guidance on funding for activities related to the development, implementation, monitoring and enforcement of Union legislation and policy but did not verify compliance with that guidance of agreements signed with other beneficiaries; calls on the CONT Committee Scrutiny Working Group to examine whether the current framework for assessing the use of Union funds for policy-influencing activities is adequate and consistently applied across all categories of beneficiaries, and to report its findings to the discharge authority;

Or. en

Amendment 286

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 133

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
133. Notes that a review of a number of funding contracts between the Commission and economic operators, requested in the framework of this discharge procedure, shows that activities aimed at influencing public policy or decision-making are not limited to NGOs but also appear in contracts with other categories of beneficiaries; expresses concern that, in some cases, companies receiving Union funding for such activities may simultaneously have EU decision-makers sitting on their boards and receiving remuneration; further notes that the IAS performed a targeted engagement focussed exclusively on NGO funding under the LIFE programme to verify compliance with the guidance on funding for activities related to the development, implementation, monitoring and enforcement of Union legislation and policy but did not verify compliance with that guidance of agreements signed with other beneficiaries;	133. Notes that a review of funding contracts under the discharge procedure indicates that activities related to influencing public policy or decision-making may occur across different categories of beneficiaries, also NGOs; stresses that safeguards must ensure that any potential conflicts of interest are prevented and that Union funds are managed transparently, independently of the type of beneficiary; further notes that the initial IAS review focused on NGO funding under the LIFE programme and that further Commission screening was done across all DGs, highlighting the need to ensure consistent oversight and verification across all beneficiaries to guarantee compliance with guidance on activities supporting the implementation and monitoring and enforcement of Union legislation and policy;

Or. en

Amendment 287

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 133

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
133. Notes that a review of a number of funding contracts between the Commission and economic operators, requested in the framework of this discharge procedure, shows that activities aimed at influencing public policy or decision-making are not limited to NGOs but also appear in contracts with other categories of beneficiaries; expresses concern that, in some cases, companies receiving Union funding for such activities may simultaneously have EU decision-makers sitting on their boards and receiving remuneration; further notes that the IAS performed a targeted engagement focussed exclusively on NGO funding under the LIFE programme to verify compliance with the guidance on funding for activities related to the development, implementation, monitoring and enforcement of Union legislation and policy but did not verify compliance with that guidance of agreements signed with other beneficiaries;	133. Notes that a review of funding contracts under the discharge procedure indicates that activities related to influencing public policy or decision-making may occur across different categories of beneficiaries, also NGOs; stresses that safeguards must ensure that any potential conflicts of interest are prevented and that Union funds are managed transparently, independently of the type of beneficiary; further notes that based on the findings of the CONT Committee and following a whistleblower report concerning the LIFE programme, IAS conducted an initial review of the LIFE and Horizon reports on NGO funding under the LIFE programme and that further Commission screening was done across all DGs, highlighting the need to ensure consistent oversight and verification across all beneficiaries to guarantee compliance with guidance on activities supporting the implementation and monitoring and enforcement of Union legislation and policy;

Or. en

Amendment 288

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 133 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	133 a. Notes that hearings of the CONT Committee Scrutiny Working Group revealed that each DG and executive agency have different methods of selecting external experts for their evaluation board, urges the Commission to create a standardised set of rules in the selection of external experts for the evaluation board; encourages the creation of a standardised review process for applications to operating grants including having at least two members of the Commission or agency staff reading and reviewing application proposals; urges the Commission to ensure that there are no conflicts of interests explicitly concerning economic and financial interests;

Or. en

Amendment 289

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 133 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	133 b. Notes that working packages form a main part of operating grants and are key in all steps of the contract including in the call for application, the application review process and approval process, the drafting and approval of a contract between the entity and the Commission, the implementation of the action including deliverables, in addition they are a condition for payment of funds, and they form part of the audit as legally laid out in the LIFE legislation, the call for applications legal document, and the legal contracts themselves; criticises that the Commission has given misleading statements on the role of working packages differing from the above mentioned legal definitions and different from the description by the director of CINEA;

Or. en

Amendment 290

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 134 – point iii a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(iii a) keep the discharge authority informed about the recovery rates of agricultural expenditure, particularly in light of the changes made to rules under the 2023-2027 CAP, and swiftly mitigate any deterioration in the recovery rate, including by considering the introduction of new incentives for Member States to recover funds;

Or. en

Amendment 291

Ondřej Knotek

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 134 – point iv

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(iv) improve the sound financial management of the current and future CAP by ensuring that direct income support is provided only to active farmers, 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;	(iv) improve the sound financial management of the current and future CAP by ensuring that direct income support is provided to all farmers fulfilling the legal requirements; special attention should be given to family-sized and small farms, farms in areas with natural or other specific challenges, young and female farmers;

Or. en

Amendment 292

Ondřej Knotek

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 134 – point viii

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(viii) monitor possible conflicts of interests affecting Union funds, and ensure that conflicts of interests are actually resolved, including for Members of the European Council and ensure, in particular, that no Union funds are paid, directly or indirectly, to Agrofert or any other business interests of Andrej Babiš as long as the identified conflict of interest has not been demonstrably and verifiably resolved;	(viii) monitor possible conflicts of interests affecting Union funds, and ensure that conflicts of interests are actually resolved;

Or. en

Amendment 293

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 134 – point viii

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(viii) monitor possible conflicts of interests affecting Union funds, and ensure that conflicts of interests are actually resolved, including for Members of the European Council and ensure, in particular, that no Union funds are paid, directly or indirectly, to Agrofert or any other business interests of Andrej Babiš as long as the identified conflict of interest has not been demonstrably and verifiably resolved;	(viii) monitor possible conflicts of interests affecting Union funds, and ensure that conflicts of interests are actually resolved, including for Members of the European Council and ensure, in particular, that no Union funds are paid, directly or indirectly, to any beneficaries where conflict of interest has been identified and has not been demonstrably and verifiably resolved;

Or. en

Amendment 294

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 134 – point xi

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(xi) improve its methodology used to track Union spending on climate and biodiversity-related activities of 2021-2027 MFF, including by addressing the relevant recommendations made in the Court’s special reports and also tracking the negative effects of Union spending on the environment and biodiversity objectives;	(xi) improve its methodology used to track Union spending on climate and biodiversity-related activities of 2021-2027 MFF, including by addressing the relevant recommendations made in the Court’s special reports, as well as improve the monitoring and reporting of actual results of investments and the negative effects of Union spending on the environment and biodiversity objectives;

Or. en

Amendment 295

Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 134 – point xii

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(xii) develop and implement a comprehensive green budgeting methodology in the next MFF by integrating climate, biodiversity and environmental considerations into all steps of the budget cycle;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 296

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 134 – point xii

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(xii) develop and implement a comprehensive green budgeting methodology in the next MFF by integrating climate, biodiversity and environmental considerations into all steps of the budget cycle;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 297

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 134 – point xiv a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(xiv a) make publicly available the content of work packages in operating grants between the Commission and external organisations and NGOs as long as it does not compromise sensitive security and business information;

Or. en

Amendment 298

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 134 – point xiv b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(xiv b) encourages the internal audit service to systematically review the work packages and other operative aspects of operating and grant agreements for inappropriate lobbying content towards EU institutions and national governments and parliaments, actions that violate the law, and lawsuits against EU institutions and national governments;

Or. en

Amendment 299

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 134 – point xiv c (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(xiv c) conduct in depth analysis on NGOs to ensure that EU funds do not fund NGOs that misuse EU funds or funnel the money to terrorist groups or other harmful and criminal organisations or individuals under the guise of an NGO;

Or. en

Amendment 300

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 134 – point xiv d (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(xiv d) work together to define advocacy more specifically, in order to create a distinction between acceptable use of EU funds for some types of advocacy such as the presentation of the results and problems of projects and unacceptable use of EU funds for example to fund the submission of amendments by members of the parliament or the Council, to fund lawsuits or litigations, or to fund lobbying of one Commission Directorate-General on behalf of another Commission Directorate-General as this a misuse of EU funds and can damage the reputation of the Union;

Or. en

Amendment 301

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 134 – point xiv a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(xiva) call for a comprehensive, independent and public audit of all LIFE programme funding since 2021 for LIFE-funded NGOs that are also involved in the design, promotion and assessment of EU environmental policies;

Or. fr

Amendment 302

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 136 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	136a. Notes that the EU has allocated EUR 9.88 billion to the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund for the period 2021-2027; this fund also funds the integration of migrants, including through associations, whose financing is often opaque; given the failure of this policy, which has proved costly and ineffective in the light of soaring crime rates and the failure of some individuals to integrate, this type of waste of European funds should be done away with or redirected7a.
	_________________
	7a https://social-economy-gateway.ec.europa.eu/eu-funding-programmes/asylum-migration-and-integration-fund_en

Or. fr

Amendment 303

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 136 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	132a. Notes, further, that when funds are intended for vulnerable groups, extra caution must be exercised, as these individuals can sometimes be weaponised under the pretext of obtaining funding;

Or. fr

Amendment 304

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 141

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
141. Notes that Member States submitted their first national annual accounts for the 2021-2027 AMIF and BMVI programmes in 2024; further notes that the Court has reviewed five audit authorities’ work in relation to their annual control reports and audits of AMIF and BMVI expenditure; welcomes the Court findings that the audit authorities had developed and implemented detailed procedures of sufficient quality to report on their work in the annual control report;	141. Notes that Member States submitted their first national annual accounts for the 2021-2027 AMIF and BMVI programmes in 2024; underlines the failure of Union policies in preventing migration flows and human trafficking; reiterates its concerns with regard to the role played by the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF); further notes that the Court has reviewed five audit authorities’ work in relation to their annual control reports and audits of AMIF and BMVI expenditure; welcomes the Court findings that the audit authorities had developed and implemented detailed procedures of sufficient quality to report on their work in the annual control report;

Or. fr

Amendment 305

Eero Heinäluoma, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 143

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
143. Notes the 2024 adoption of the Pact on Migration and Asylum in 2024 and the allocation of an additional EUR 2 billion to MFF heading 4 for 2024-2027 in the context of the mid-term revision of the MFF 2021-2027, also with a view to enabling the full implementation of the new rules of the Pact; appreciates the Commission’s written replies that confirm that it has made available additional EUR 3 billion under the AMIF and BMVI for the years 2025–2027 to, inter alia, support Member States hosting persons fleeing the war in Ukraine;	143. Welcomes the adoption of the Pact on Migration and Asylum in 2024 and recalls that its implementation is a corner stone for the new system of migration and asylum management in the EU, which will be in application mid-2026 in all Member States; welcomes, further, the allocation of an additional EUR 2 billion to MFF heading 4 for 2024-2027 in the context of the mid-term revision of the MFF 2021-2027, also with a view to enabling the full implementation of the new rules of the Pact and addressing the growing challenges in migration and border management resulting from the current geopolitical context; appreciates the Commission’s written replies that confirm that it has made available additional EUR 3 billion under the AMIF and BMVI for the years 2025–2027 to, inter alia, support Member States hosting persons fleeing the war in Ukraine; calls on the Commission to prioritise the full and timely implementation of the Pact, while ensuring that Parliament has access to all relevant documents for effective oversight;

Or. en

Amendment 306

Eero Heinäluoma, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 144

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
144. Stresses that managing the Union’s external borders is a pillar of the Pact on Migration and Asylum; maintains that the Union needs to better protect vulnerable people from smuggling and trafficking networks; notes that following the adoption of the Commission Communication of 11 December 202415 , the Commission has allocated approximately EUR 520 million to Union Member States bordering Russia and Belarus through the BMVI;	144. Stresses that managing the Union’s external borders is a pillar of the Pact on Migration and Asylum and an essential precondition for a functioning Schengen area of free movement; recognises that EU-funded projects that support the protection of the external border serve to ease the pressure on internal border protection, as stated by the Commissioner for Budget, Anti-Fraud and Public Administration in his hearing in CONT on 8 December 2025; acknowledges that while the overall number of migrants arriving irregularly in the Union decreased by 38 percent in 2024, patterns shifted across the continent with certain routes seeing significant increases, notably the Eastern Borders route, where a threefold increase in crossings was reported in 2024; maintains that the Union needs to better protect vulnerable people from smuggling and trafficking networks and address hybrid attacks and the instrumentalisation of migration by third countries or hostile non-state actors; notes that following the adoption of the Commission Communication of 11 December 202415 , the Commission has allocated approximately EUR 520 million to Union Member States bordering Russia and Belarus through the BMVI; highlights, in particular, the need for support to frontline Member States for the purposes of securing the external borders of the EU;
_________________	_________________
15 COM(2024)0570.	15 COM(2024)0570.

Or. en

Amendment 307

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 144

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
144. Stresses that managing the Union’s external borders is a pillar of the Pact on Migration and Asylum; maintains that the Union needs to better protect vulnerable people from smuggling and trafficking networks; notes that following the adoption of the Commission Communication of 11 December 202415 , the Commission has allocated approximately EUR 520 million to Union Member States bordering Russia and Belarus through the BMVI;	144. Stresses that managing the Union’s external borders is a pillar of the Pact on Migration and Asylum; maintains that the Union should further enhance efforts to protect vulnerable people from smuggling and trafficking networks; notes that following the adoption of the Commission Communication of 11 December 2024[15], the Commission has allocated approximately EUR 520 million, through the BMVI, to Union Member States bordering Russia and Belarus, in order to strengthen border management capacities and address security and migration-related challenges;
_________________
15 COM(2024)0570.

Or. en

Amendment 308

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 144

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
144. Stresses that managing the Union’s external borders is a pillar of the Pact on Migration and Asylum; maintains that the Union needs to better protect vulnerable people from smuggling and trafficking networks; notes that following the adoption of the Commission Communication of 11 December 202415, the Commission has allocated approximately EUR 520 million to Union Member States bordering Russia and Belarus through the BMVI;	144. Maintains that the Union needs to better protect vulnerable people from smuggling and trafficking networks; notes that following the adoption of the Commission Communication of 11 December 202415, the Commission has allocated approximately EUR 520 million to Union Member States bordering Russia and Belarus through the BMVI;
_________________	_________________
15 COM(2024)0570.	15 COM(2024)0570.

Or. fr

Amendment 309

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 144

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
144. Stresses that managing the Union’s external borders is a pillar of the Pact on Migration and Asylum; maintains that the Union needs to better protect vulnerable people from smuggling and trafficking networks; notes that following the adoption of the Commission Communication of 11 December 202415, the Commission has allocated approximately EUR 520 million to Union Member States bordering Russia and Belarus through the BMVI;	144. Stresses that managing the Union’s external borders is a pillar of the Pact on Migration and Asylum; maintains that the Union needs to better protect vulnerable people from smuggling and trafficking networks and that more financial resources are needed to combat these networks; notes that following the adoption of the Commission Communication of 11 December 202415, the Commission has allocated approximately EUR 520 million to Union Member States bordering Russia and Belarus through the BMVI;
_________________	_________________
15 COM(2024)0570.	15 COM(2024)0570.

Or. nl

Amendment 310

Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 144 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	144 a. Stresses that the effective management of the Union’s external borders requires both operational capacity and physical infrastructure; notes that several Member States have invested significant national resources in physical border protection measures; calls on the Commission to ensure that Union funds, including under the Integrated Border Management Fund, can be used to support the construction and maintenance of physical barriers at the Union’s external borders where Member States identify such measures as necessary for effective border management; underlines that the protection of the Union’s external borders is a prerequisite for the sound financial management of migration-related Union funds;

Or. en

Amendment 311

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 145

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
145. Recalls that solidarity and fair responsibility-sharing are core principles underpinning the Union’s migration and asylum policy; highlights in this context the role of the AMIF in supporting Member States in reception, asylum procedures, integration measures and resettlement, including for persons fleeing conflicts and humanitarian crises; underlines that the effective implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum requires sufficient, well-managed and timely funding to support solidarity measures across the Union;	deleted

Or. fr

Amendment 312

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Dick Erixon

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 145

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
145. Recalls that solidarity and fair responsibility-sharing are core principles underpinning the Union’s migration and asylum policy; highlights in this context the role of the AMIF in supporting Member States in reception, asylum procedures, integration measures and resettlement, including for persons fleeing conflicts and humanitarian crises; underlines that the effective implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum requires sufficient, well-managed and timely funding to support solidarity measures across the Union;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 313

Olivier Chastel

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 145

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
145. Recalls that solidarity and fair responsibility-sharing are core principles underpinning the Union’s migration and asylum policy; highlights in this context the role of the AMIF in supporting Member States in reception, asylum procedures, integration measures and resettlement, including for persons fleeing conflicts and humanitarian crises; underlines that the effective implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum requires sufficient, well-managed and timely funding to support solidarity measures across the Union;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 314

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 145

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
145. Recalls that solidarity and fair responsibility-sharing are core principles underpinning the Union’s migration and asylum policy; highlights in this context the role of the AMIF in supporting Member States in reception, asylum procedures, integration measures and resettlement, including for persons fleeing conflicts and humanitarian crises; underlines that the effective implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum requires sufficient, well-managed and timely funding to support solidarity measures across the Union;	145. Recalls that solidarity and fair responsibility-sharing are core principles underpinning the Union’s migration and asylum policy; points out, at the same time, that genuine solidarity is possible only if account is taken of the differences between Member States in terms of population density and spatial planning; highlights in this context the role of the AMIF in supporting Member States in reception, asylum procedures, integration measures and resettlement, including for persons fleeing conflicts and humanitarian crises; underlines that the effective implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum requires sufficient, well-managed and timely funding to support solidarity measures across the Union;

Or. nl

Amendment 315

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 145

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
145. Recalls that solidarity and fair responsibility-sharing are core principles underpinning the Union’s migration and asylum policy; highlights in this context the role of the AMIF in supporting Member States in reception, asylum procedures, integration measures and resettlement, including for persons fleeing conflicts and humanitarian crises; underlines that the effective implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum requires sufficient, well-managed and timely funding to support solidarity measures across the Union;	145. Recalls that solidarity and fair responsibility-sharing, in line with the Treaties, are core principles underpinning the Union’s migration and asylum policy; highlights in this context the role of the AMIF in supporting Member States in reception, asylum procedures, integration measures and resettlement, including for persons fleeing conflicts and humanitarian crises; underlines that the effective implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum requires sufficient, well-managed and timely funding to support solidarity measures across the Union;

Or. en

Amendment 316

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 145 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	145a. Stresses that the European Union's pact on migration and asylum is an unsuccessful attempt to implement large-scale reforms; points out that it must be recognised that illegal migration must be stopped before it reaches external borders and that, instead of migrant quotas, an effective system for returning migrants and preventing new illegal flows must be introduced; notes that changes are needed in the Union's regulatory framework on migration and asylum, including the establishment of a system of extraterritoriality and the examination of asylum applications outside the European Union;

Or. fr

Amendment 317

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 145 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	145a. points out that Member States are reaching their limits in terms of organising asylum reception and that new measures to limit inflows are necessary; notes that the European Pact on Asylum and Migration stipulates that accelerated border procedures may be applied in the case of asylum seekers with little chance of success, i.e. those with a maximum 20 % chance of being granted asylum; notes that this percentage should be increased in order to reflect the financial capacity of the Member States; points out the importance of sufficient funding to be able to apply these border procedures effectively;

Or. nl

Amendment 318

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 146

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
146. Observes that in 2024, 37,7 % of Union funding for migration and border management was allocated to decentralised agencies in the area of migration and Home Affairs; recalls that while decentralised agencies are independent from the Commission legally, financially, and in the execution of their obligations, the Commission has oversight responsibility over their activities; reminds that migration must be managed in full compliance with Union law, including fundamental rights; expresses its deep concern regarding reports of pushbacks at the Union’s external borders, including by Frontex in Greece and the related European Court of Human Rights judgement of 7 January 202516 ; appreciates the Commission’s written replies that more monitoring of Frontex’ activities in Greece is needed;	146. Observes that in 2024, 37,7 % of Union funding for migration and border management was allocated to decentralised agencies in the area of migration and Home Affairs; recalls that while decentralised agencies are independent from the Commission legally, financially, and in the execution of their obligations, the Commission has oversight responsibility over their activities; reminds that migration must be managed in full compliance with Union law, including fundamental rights; acknowledges that the Member States situated at the external borders as first countries of entry receive disproportionately higher volumes of migratory flows; commends Greece’s efforts to effectively safeguard the Union’s borders against sustained and large-scale migratory pressures, while fully complying with its obligations under international and European law and ensuring the protection of fundamental rights in the conduct of its operations; reminds that the Greek coast guard has rescued over 300,000 irregular migrants in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean sea during the last 10 years; takes note of the European Court of Human Rights judgement of 7 January 202516; stresses that Türkiye, as a candidate country for EU accession, qualifies as a safe third country; takes note of the Commission’s written replies that monitoring of Frontex’ activities falls under their oversight responsibility;
_________________	_________________
16 European Court of Human Rights, case of A.R.E. v Greece (application no 15783/21).	16 European Court of Human Rights, case of A.R.E. v Greece (application no 15783/21).

Or. en

Amendment 319

Olivier Chastel

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 146

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
146. Observes that in 2024, 37,7 % of Union funding for migration and border management was allocated to decentralised agencies in the area of migration and Home Affairs; recalls that while decentralised agencies are independent from the Commission legally, financially, and in the execution of their obligations, the Commission has oversight responsibility over their activities; reminds that migration must be managed in full compliance with Union law, including fundamental rights; expresses its deep concern regarding reports of pushbacks at the Union’s external borders, including by Frontex in Greece and the related European Court of Human Rights judgement of 7 January 202516 ; appreciates the Commission’s written replies that more monitoring of Frontex’ activities in Greece is needed;	146. Observes that in 2024, 37,7 % of Union funding for migration and border management was allocated to decentralised agencies in the area of migration and Home Affairs; recalls that while decentralised agencies are independent from the Commission legally, financially, and in the execution of their obligations, the Commission has oversight responsibility over their activities; reminds that migration must be managed in full compliance with Union law, including fundamental rights;
_________________
16 European Court of Human Rights, case of A.R.E. v Greece (application no 15783/21).

Or. en

Amendment 320

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 146

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
146. Observes that in 2024, 37,7 % of Union funding for migration and border management was allocated to decentralised agencies in the area of migration and Home Affairs; recalls that while decentralised agencies are independent from the Commission legally, financially, and in the execution of their obligations, the Commission has oversight responsibility over their activities; reminds that migration must be managed in full compliance with Union law, including fundamental rights; expresses its deep concern regarding reports of pushbacks at the Union’s external borders, including by Frontex in Greece and the related European Court of Human Rights judgement of 7 January 202516; appreciates the Commission’s written replies that more monitoring of Frontex’ activities in Greece is needed;	146. Observes that in 2024, 37,7 % of Union funding for migration and border management was allocated to decentralised agencies in the area of migration and Home Affairs; recalls that while decentralised agencies are independent from the Commission legally, financially, and in the execution of their obligations, the Commission has oversight responsibility over their activities; notes the reports of pushbacks at the Union’s external borders, including by Frontex in Greece and the related European Court of Human Rights judgement of 7 January 202516; appreciates the Commission’s written replies that more monitoring of Frontex’ activities in Greece is needed;
_________________	_________________
16 European Court of Human Rights, case of A.R.E. v Greece (application no 15783/21).	16 European Court of Human Rights, case of A. R. E. v Greece (application no 15783/21).

Or. fr

Amendment 321

Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 146

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
146. Observes that in 2024, 37,7 % of Union funding for migration and border management was allocated to decentralised agencies in the area of migration and Home Affairs; recalls that while decentralised agencies are independent from the Commission legally, financially, and in the execution of their obligations, the Commission has oversight responsibility over their activities; reminds that migration must be managed in full compliance with Union law, including fundamental rights; expresses its deep concern regarding reports of pushbacks at the Union’s external borders, including by Frontex in Greece and the related European Court of Human Rights judgement of 7 January 202516 ; appreciates the Commission’s written replies that more monitoring of Frontex’ activities in Greece is needed;	146. Observes that in 2024, 37,7 % of Union funding for migration and border management was allocated to decentralised agencies in the area of migration and Home Affairs; recalls that while decentralised agencies are independent from the Commission legally, financially, and in the execution of their obligations, the Commission has oversight responsibility over their activities; stresses that the effective protection of the Union’s external borders is essential for internal security and the sound management of migration-related Union funds; calls on the Commission to ensure that funding allocated to border management agencies is used effectively to strengthen external border protection and the fight against illegal migration, smuggling and trafficking networks; underlines that the discharge authority requires comprehensive performance data on the operational effectiveness of border management spending;
_________________
16 European Court of Human Rights, case of A.R.E. v Greece (application no 15783/21).

Or. en

Amendment 322

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 146

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
146. Observes that in 2024, 37,7 % of Union funding for migration and border management was allocated to decentralised agencies in the area of migration and Home Affairs; recalls that while decentralised agencies are independent from the Commission legally, financially, and in the execution of their obligations, the Commission has oversight responsibility over their activities; reminds that migration must be managed in full compliance with Union law, including fundamental rights; expresses its deep concern regarding reports of pushbacks at the Union’s external borders, including by Frontex in Greece and the related European Court of Human Rights judgement of 7 January 202516 ; appreciates the Commission’s written replies that more monitoring of Frontex’ activities in Greece is needed;	146. Observes that in 2024, 37.7 % of Union funding for migration and border management was allocated to decentralised agencies in the area of migration and Home Affairs; recalls that while decentralised agencies are legally and financially independent from the Commission, the Commission retains an oversight responsibility over their activities; reiterates that migration management must be carried out in full compliance with Union law, including fundamental rights; takes note of reports and relevant judicial developments concerning the implementation of Union law at the Union’s external borders; welcomes the Commission’s written replies highlighting the need to further strengthen monitoring and accountability mechanisms, including with regard to Frontex’s activities;
_________________
16 European Court of Human Rights, case of A.R.E. v Greece (application no 15783/21).

Or. en

Amendment 323

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 146 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	146a. Deplores the fact that the Court of Justice of the European Union imposed a fine on Hungary because it was not letting migrants enter the country before a final decision was made on their application; calls on the Commission to use part of the EUR 2 billion owed to Hungary for national border protection expenses to finance the fine imposed on Hungary by the Court of Justice of the European Union;

Or. fr

Amendment 324

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 148 – point iii

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(iii) continue to monitor and scrutinise the steps required by Member States and Union agencies for the full implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum by 2026, and report to the Parliament on progress towards its implementation;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 325

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 148 – point iii a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(iii a) provide support to frontline Member States for the purposes of securing the external borders of the EU;

Or. en

Amendment 326

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 148 – point iii b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(iii b) increase the transparency and accountability of the programming and implementation of the Union home affairs funds by ensuring detailed and comprehensive data, particularly as regards funds spent in third countries, while safeguarding the role of Parliament in ensuring democratic scrutiny of Union spending;

Or. en

Amendment 327

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 148 – point iv

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(iv) closely monitor Union-funded actions for border management, in particular with a view to ensuring full compliance with the fundamental rights in the Union and the principle of non-refoulement;	(iv) closely monitor Union-funded actions for border management, in particular with a view to ensuring the effectiveness of measures taken to limit inflows and full compliance with the fundamental rights in the Union and the principle of non-refoulement;

Or. nl

Amendment 328

Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 148 – point iv

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(iv) closely monitor Union-funded actions for border management, in particular with a view to ensuring full compliance with the fundamental rights in the Union and the principle of non-refoulement;	(iv) closely monitor Union-funded border management actions, in particular to ensure full compliance with Union fundamental rights obligations;

Or. en

Amendment 329

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 152

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
152. Recalls that the highly unstable geopolitical situation in the Union’s neighbourhood giving rise to greater security and defence challenges, including hybrid threats; stresses that Russia poses a considerable threat to the security of the Union; recalls that the European Parliament has called on the Union and its Member States to put in place a legal framework enabling Russia to be classified as a state sponsor of terrorism;	152. Recalls that the highly unstable geopolitical situation in the Union’s neighbourhood giving rise to greater security and defence challenges, including hybrid threats, and thereby to greater investment needs in security, defence and preparedness, since the beginning of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; draws attention to the fact that MFF heading 5, dedicated to security and defence, is the smallest of all MFF headings and regrets that the Union’s current budget for ensuring the security and defence of its citizens is not equal to the challenges to be met either in the short or the long term; reaffirms its position that Russia represents the primary and most significant threat to the EU and its Member States; recalls that the European Parliament has called on the Union and its Member States to put in place a legal framework enabling Russia to be classified as a state sponsor of terrorism;

Or. en

Amendment 330

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 153

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
153. Recalls that defence capabilities in the Union suffer from decades of under-investment and that, according to the Commission, the defence spending gap for the next decade currently stands at EUR 500 billion; notes that due to the urgent need to boost defence capabilities, the number of Union defence funding instruments has increased since Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; notes that Union defence instruments include extra-budgetary ones such as the European Peace Facility (EPF), and the Security Action for Europe (SAFE), a temporary defence loan instrument; stresses, furthermore, that in addition to defence funding programmes, other Union programmes can serve dual-use purposes, notably the Military Mobility component of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and the Union Secure Connectivity programme, established in 2023 primarily to provide Union Member States with guaranteed access to highly secure, sovereign and global connectivity services; also notes that after its mid-term review in September 2025, cohesion policy funds can also be used to improve military mobility and develop defence infrastructure, especially in the Eastern border regions;	153. Recalls that defence capabilities in the Union suffer from decades of under-investment and that, according to the Commission, the defence spending gap for the next decade currently stands at EUR 500 billion; notes that due to the urgent need to boost defence capabilities, the number of Union defence funding instruments has increased since Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; notes that Union defence instruments include extra-budgetary ones such as the European Peace Facility (EPF), and the Security Action for Europe (SAFE), a temporary defence loan instrument; stresses, furthermore, that in addition to defence funding programmes, other Union programmes can serve dual-use purposes, notably the Military Mobility component of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and the Union Secure Connectivity programme, established in 2023 primarily to provide Union Member States with guaranteed access to highly secure, sovereign and global connectivity services; also notes that after its mid-term review in September 2025, cohesion policy funds can also be used to improve military mobility and develop defence infrastructure, especially in the Eastern border regions; regrets that the limitations and conditions designed in the SAFE instrument weaken its ability to achieve the objectives for which it was created, hinder the effectiveness of fund allocation, and limit its full utilisation by Member States, particularly those most vulnerable to external threats;

Or. en

Amendment 331

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 153

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
153. Recalls that defence capabilities in the Union suffer from decades of under-investment and that, according to the Commission, the defence spending gap for the next decade currently stands at EUR 500 billion; notes that due to the urgent need to boost defence capabilities, the number of Union defence funding instruments has increased since Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; notes that Union defence instruments include extra-budgetary ones such as the European Peace Facility (EPF), and the Security Action for Europe (SAFE), a temporary defence loan instrument; stresses, furthermore, that in addition to defence funding programmes, other Union programmes can serve dual-use purposes, notably the Military Mobility component of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and the Union Secure Connectivity programme, established in 2023 primarily to provide Union Member States with guaranteed access to highly secure, sovereign and global connectivity services; also notes that after its mid-term review in September 2025, cohesion policy funds can also be used to improve military mobility and develop defence infrastructure, especially in the Eastern border regions;	153. Recalls that defence capabilities in the Union suffer from decades of under-investment and that, according to the Commission, the defence spending gap for the next decade currently stands at EUR 500 billion; welcomes that due to the urgent need to boost defence capabilities, the number of Union defence funding instruments has increased since Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; notes that Union defence instruments include extra-budgetary ones such as the European Peace Facility (EPF), and the Security Action for Europe (SAFE), a temporary defence loan instrument; stresses, furthermore, that in addition to defence funding programmes, other Union programmes can serve dual-use purposes, notably the Military Mobility component of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and the Union Secure Connectivity programme, established in 2023 primarily to provide Union Member States with guaranteed access to highly secure, sovereign and global connectivity services; also notes that after its mid-term review in September 2025, cohesion policy funds can also be used to improve military mobility and develop defence infrastructure, especially in the Eastern border regions;

Or. en

Amendment 332

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda, Csaba Molnár

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 154

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
154. Appreciates the Commission’s written replies that acknowledge that the multitude of defence-related instruments resulted in a fragmented funding landscape, with certain overlaps and gaps; stresses the need for further improving the transparency of Union defence funding, including by guaranteeing the Court's audit rights for all instruments and ensuring that the discharge authority can exercise democratic scrutiny of all Union-funded activities; highlights the need for increasing the user-friendliness of information on Union defence funding published, with a view to also benefiting applicants and beneficiaries, especially SMEs;	154. Appreciates the Commission’s written replies that acknowledge that the multitude of defence-related instruments resulted in a fragmented funding landscape, with certain overlaps and gaps; underlines the need for a comprehensive and long-term Union approach to security and defence funding, responding to both conventional military threats and non-conventional threats; stresses the need for further improving the transparency of Union defence funding, including by guaranteeing the Court's audit rights for all instruments and ensuring that the discharge authority can exercise democratic scrutiny of all Union-funded activities; highlights the need for increasing the user-friendliness of information on Union defence funding published, with a view to also benefiting applicants and beneficiaries, especially SMEs; underlines that the participation of SMEs across all Member States should be facilitated and promoted, and their fair and equitable access to EU-funded projects ensured; encourages sustained investment and support for SMEs and calls for simplified access to EU funding; stresses that all EU defence industry initiatives and financial instruments must ensure a level playing field for all defence industry actors across the EU;

Or. en

Amendment 333

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 155

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
155. Stresses that the rapid increase in Union defence and security expenditure in 2024 requires audit arrangements equivalent in practical effect to those applicable to civilian spending, including effective access for the European Court of Auditors, OLAF and the EPPO to all relevant documentation, even where projects involve classified or dual-use technologies; recalls that the Commission itself acknowledged that access to classified deliverables can be delayed or prevented where Member States are ‘originators’ of classification and that corrective measures, including suspension or termination of funding, may be necessary where audit access is obstructed;	155. Stresses that the rapid increase in Union defence and security expenditure in 2024 requires proportional audit arrangements, allowing effective access for the European Court of Auditors, OLAF and the EPPO to all relevant documentation, including projects with dual-use technologies, in line with the EU requirements; recalls that the Commission itself acknowledged that access to classified deliverables can be delayed where Member States are ‘originators’ of classification and underlines that, where audit access is limited, appropriate measures and constructive solutions should be pursued to ensure full compliance with financial oversight requirements and the sound management of Union funds;

Or. en

Amendment 334

Olivier Chastel

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 156

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
156. Reiterates its concern over the Commission’s decision to proceed with the adoption of the ‘Rearm EU’ initiative without prior consultation of the European Parliament; regrets that such a decision bypasses the principle of institutional balance and undermines Parliament’s role as co-legislator in shaping strategic and budgetary priorities; insists that the Commission should refrain from initiating substantial policy instruments that impact the Union’s financial and strategic architecture without ensuring full respect for the prerogatives of the Parliament;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 335

Eero Heinäluoma, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 157

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
157. Recalls that the EDF’s general objective is to foster the competitiveness, efficiency and innovation capacity of the European defence technological and industrial base (EDTIB) throughout the Union; notes that, as outlined in the Commission’s written replies, EDF funding amounting to EUR 227,9 million was allocated to 20 projects related to artificial intelligence and further EUR 171,1 million was allocated to 18 projects focused on aerial-drone technologies, while 50 projects focused on what can be classified as traditional defence equipment, relating to ground, air and naval combat, underwater, air missiles defence and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) risk mitigation, were supported with a total of EUR 1,49 billion from the EDF; expresses its concern that since 2021, less than EUR 400 million from EDF was spent on projects related to artificial intelligence and drone technologies, despite the fact that experience from ongoing and recent conflicts clearly demonstrates the rapidly growing role of cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence and unmanned systems, including drones, in modern warfare;	157. Recalls that the EDF’s general objective is to foster the competitiveness, efficiency and innovation capacity of the European defence technological and industrial base (EDTIB) throughout the Union; notes that, as outlined in the Commission’s written replies, EDF funding amounting to EUR 227,9 million was allocated to 20 projects related to artificial intelligence and further EUR 171,1 million was allocated to 18 projects focused on aerial-drone technologies, while 50 projects focused on what can be classified as traditional defence equipment, relating to ground, air and naval combat, underwater, air missiles defence and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) risk mitigation, were supported with a total of EUR 1,49 billion from the EDF;

Or. en

Amendment 336

Dick Erixon

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 157

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
157. Recalls that the EDF’s general objective is to foster the competitiveness, efficiency and innovation capacity of the European defence technological and industrial base (EDTIB) throughout the Union; notes that, as outlined in the Commission’s written replies, EDF funding amounting to EUR 227,9 million was allocated to 20 projects related to artificial intelligence and further EUR 171,1 million was allocated to 18 projects focused on aerial-drone technologies, while 50 projects focused on what can be classified as traditional defence equipment, relating to ground, air and naval combat, underwater, air missiles defence and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) risk mitigation, were supported with a total of EUR 1,49 billion from the EDF; expresses its concern that since 2021, less than EUR 400 million from EDF was spent on projects related to artificial intelligence and drone technologies, despite the fact that experience from ongoing and recent conflicts clearly demonstrates the rapidly growing role of cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence and unmanned systems, including drones, in modern warfare;	157. Recalls that the EDF’s general objective is to foster the competitiveness, efficiency and innovation capacity of the European defence technological and industrial base (EDTIB) throughout the Union; notes that, as outlined in the Commission’s written replies, EDF funding amounting to EUR 227,9 million was allocated to 20 projects related to artificial intelligence and further EUR 171,1 million was allocated to 18 projects focused on aerial-drone technologies, while 50 projects focused on what can be classified as traditional defence equipment, relating to ground, air and naval combat, underwater, air missiles defence and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) risk mitigation, were supported with a total of EUR 1,49 billion from the EDF; expresses its concern that since 2021, less than EUR 400 million from EDF was spent on projects related to artificial intelligence and drone technologies, despite the fact that experience from ongoing and recent conflicts clearly demonstrates the rapidly growing role of cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence and unmanned systems, including drones, in modern warfare; calls on the Commission to conduct a cost-effectiveness assessment of EDF spending and to rebalance future funding priorities toward technologies that demonstrably provide the greatest operational advantage per euro invested;

Or. en

Amendment 337

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 158

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
158. Notes the Court’s Special Report 04/2025 on EU military mobility and the Commission’s replies; is concerned by the Court’s overall conclusion that the second EU action plan on military mobility, published in November 2022, was not built on sufficiently solid foundations and that progress towards its objective, namely ensuring swift and seamless movement of personnel, materiel and assets at short notice and on a large scale, has been variable due to design weaknesses and obstacles to implementation; notes with concern the Court’s observation that the Commission had not carried out a robust assessment of the overall funding required to make its objectives and targets achievable; regrets the fact, highlighted by the Court, that parliamentary oversight of all Union military mobility activities is not possible, as not all projects are funded through the Union budget; notes that the European Parliament lacks the power to oversee military mobility activities of the European Defence Agency (EDA), which is an intergovernmental agency, or that of PESCO, which is a Member State-driven cooperation framework;	158. Notes the Court’s Special Report 04/2025 on EU military mobility and the Commission’s replies; is concerned by the Court’s overall conclusion that the second EU action plan on military mobility, published in November 2022, was not built on sufficiently solid foundations and that progress towards its objective, namely ensuring swift and seamless movement of personnel, materiel and assets at short notice and on a large scale, has been variable due to design weaknesses and obstacles to implementation; notes with concern the Court’s observation that the Commission had not carried out a robust assessment of the overall funding required to make its objectives and targets achievable; notes the fact, highlighted by the Court, that parliamentary oversight of all Union military mobility activities is not always feasible due to the fact, that not all projects are funded through the Union budget, as is the case of the European Defence Agency (EDA) or PESCO;

Or. en

Amendment 338

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 159

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
159. Expresses its concern that following three calls for proposals organised in 2021, 2022 and 2023, the entirety of the military mobility envelope under the CEF for the current programming period has already been exhausted, while at least EUR 100 billion investment is estimated to be needed for addressing the 500 hotspots identified in the Union as needing urgent upgrading17 ; notes the Commission’s written reply that the 2024 revision of the TEN-T Regulation introduced elements to integrate military mobility into Union transport policy; further notes that the European Commission and the High Representative adopted the Military Mobility Package 2025; reiterates its concern about the current lack of responsiveness and efficiency in military mobility, which is hampered by regulatory and procedural complexity and lack of harmonisation resulting in slow coordination and time loss;	159. Expresses its concern that following three calls for proposals organised in 2021, 2022 and 2023, the entirety of the military mobility envelope under the CEF for the current programming period has already been exhausted, while at least EUR 100 billion investment is estimated to be needed for addressing the 500 hotspots identified in the Union as needing urgent upgrading17 ; notes the Commission’s written reply that the 2024 revision of the TEN-T Regulation introduced elements to integrate military mobility into Union transport policy; further notes that the European Commission and the High Representative adopted the Military Mobility Package 2025; reiterates the importance of further strengthening the responsiveness and efficiency of military mobility across the Union to enhance harmonisation and streamline coordination to reduce delays and improve operational readiness;
_________________	_________________
17 Joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 16 October 2025 entitled ‘Preserving Peace – Defence Readiness Roadmap 2030’, JOIN(2025)0027).	17 Joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 16 October 2025 entitled ‘Preserving Peace – Defence Readiness Roadmap 2030’, JOIN(2025)0027).

Or. en

Amendment 339

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 161 – point i

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(i) take measures to improve the transparency of Union spending on defence across all instruments, including by guaranteeing the Court's audit rights for all instruments and ensuring that the discharge authority can exercise democratic scrutiny of all Union-funded activities, not only during negotiation but also during the implementation phase;	(i) continue efforts to enhance the transparency of Union spending on defence across relevant instruments, including by facilitating the Court’s audit work in line with the applicable legal framework and by ensuring that the discharge authority is appropriately informed so as to exercise democratic scrutiny of Union-funded activities, particularly throughout implementation;

Or. en

Amendment 340

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 161 – point ii

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(ii) provide the discharge authority with annual consolidated reporting covering all defence-related expenditure from the Union budget, off-budget instruments and all other relevant instruments, such as military mobility and security-related programmes, in order to enable democratic scrutiny and avoid fragmentation;	(ii) provide the discharge authority with regular consolidated information on defence-related expenditure from the Union budget, and other relevant instruments in order to enable democratic scrutiny and improving overall coherence;

Or. en

Amendment 341

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 161 – point v

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(v) repeats its call to further strengthen Union security and defence measures by substantially increasing the funding available to improve dual-use transport infrastructure corridors and by taking action to eliminate administrative, procedural and regulatory barriers to cross-border military movements, while prioritising Union funding to projects that best respond to the current European threat landscape;	(v) repeats its call to further strengthen Union security and defence measures by substantially increasing the funding available to improve dual-use transport infrastructure corridors and by taking action to eliminate administrative, procedural and regulatory barriers to cross-border military movements, while prioritising Union funding to projects that best respond to the current European threat landscape, and underlines the importance of harmonising joint defence procurement and related procedures among Member States in order to enhance interoperability, efficiency and strategic coherence;

Or. en

Amendment 342

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 161 – point v a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(v a) remove the constraints and conditions designed in defence instruments, particularly the SAFE instrument, which undermine the ability of Member States to allocate these funds as efficiently as possible, with a view to fully achieving the objectives for which the instrument was established;

Or. en

Amendment 343

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 161 – point v a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(va) point out that the Union has played a role in achieving lasting peace in Europe and that it must do everything in its power to bring peace back to Europe, which is essential for the economic prosperity, stability and security of the European Union and the continent;

Or. fr

Amendment 344

Dick Erixon

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 167 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	167 a. Notes with concern the findings of the Court of Auditors’ Special Report 20/2025 on the Commission’s support to fight hunger in sub-Saharan Africa, which found that the Commission did not systematically assess the reasonableness of project costs, with no evidence of detailed budget analysis or comparison of similar costs between different projects; is alarmed by the Court’s specific examples of wasted resources, including computers provided without internet connection, unused motorbikes, trucks with tyres too worn to drive safely, and electronic equipment procured but never used; stresses that such failures represent a fundamental breach of the duty of sound financial management; calls on the Commission to ensure that all project budgets undergo detailed cost-benefit analysis before approval and that equipment procurement is rigorously checked against actual needs and local maintenance capacity;

Or. en

Amendment 345

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 168 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	168 a. Notes that budget support through INTPA and DG NEAR to countries outside of the EU amounted to 1.56 billion Euros in 2024, notes that in 2024, the distribution of budget support operations by regions included 52% to the European Neighbourhood, 22% to sub-Saharan Africa, 15% to the Asia-Pacific, 5% to overseas countries and territories, 3% to Western Balkans and 3% to the Caribbean;

Or. en

Amendment 346

Niclas Herbst

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 169 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	169 a. Recalls that education is a central pillar of peacebuilding, coexistence and preparation for a negotiated two-state solution, and a key means of countering extremism, intolerance and radical ideologies; highlights in this regard Palestinian-led educational initiatives in Gaza, including the Gaza Children’s Village which demonstrably promote coexistence, dialogue, respect for the “other,” and non-violence through their teaching practices and learning materials, in line with UNESCO standards; calls for a clear distinction to be made between peace-oriented educational initiatives and official Palestinian Authority curricula when assessing Union engagement in the education sector; contrasts these practices directly with the continued presence in Palestinian Authority textbooks – authorised and reprinted for the 2025-26 school year – of antisemitism, incitement to violence, glorification of jihad and martyrdom, and the rejection of peaceful conflict resolution, despite repeated public statements that curriculum reform, including at Grade 12, has been completed; stresses that genuine reform must be assessed on the basis of the content taught in classrooms; urges the Commission, in its future engagement, to recognise and actively support educational actors who demonstrably teach peace-oriented curricula on the ground, while maintaining a firm and transparent stance towards the Palestinian Authority until all official textbooks and teaching materials are brought fully into line with UNESCO standards of peace and tolerance.

Or. en

Amendment 347

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 169 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	169a. Points out that, at the CONT hearing of 21 November 2024, the Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement stated that the Palestinian Authority's EU-funded reform agenda includes ending the 'pay for slay' programme;

Or. fr

Amendment 348

Céline Imart, Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 169 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	169 a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that Union funds are not granted, directly or indirectly, to entities engaged in or facilitating entryism, radicalisation, or activities incompatible with the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU; further calls on it to strengthen due diligence, monitoring and control mechanisms in order to prevent any form of ideological infiltration in programmes financed by the Union;

Or. en

Amendment 349

Monika Hohlmeier, Tomáš Zdechovský, Andrey Kovatchev

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 169 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	169 a. Expresses concern over reports based on internal documents allegedly indicating attempts by Hamas to infiltrate or monitor international, including EU-funded, humanitarian projects in the Gaza Strip; recalls that, notably following Parliament’s requests, verification mechanisms have been strengthened since 2023 through enhanced audits, risk analyses and external monitoring; stresses that any allegation of misuse of EU funds must be thoroughly verified and urges the Commission to investigate all claims of undue infiltration or influence in EU-funded projects and to suspend or recover funding where breaches are confirmed; underlines that any diversion of EU funds to terrorist organisations would undermine the integrity of EU assistance; calls on the Commission and the EEAS to ensure that no Union funds are allocated to individuals or organisations linked to terrorist or extremist movements opposed to the Union’s fundamental values; recalls the importance of independent oversight of UNRWA by external experts, the Court of Auditors and experienced international partners; calls on the Commission, where necessary, to work with reliable partners in Gaza and the Palestinian territories to ensure the continued delivery of humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian population;

Or. en

Amendment 350

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 170

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
170. Welcomes the Commission’s continued engagement with the Palestinian Authority on curriculum reform and acknowledges the tangible progress reported in 2025, including the ongoing review and amendment of textbooks by the Palestinian Ministry of Education and Higher Education to ensure alignment with UNESCO standards; notes in particular that the revised Grade 12 textbooks were finalised and made public in early October 2025 and are currently undergoing review by the Union;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 351

Monika Hohlmeier, Tomáš Zdechovský, Andrey Kovatchev

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 170

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
170. Welcomes the Commission’s continued engagement with the Palestinian Authority on curriculum reform and acknowledges the tangible progress reported in 2025, including the ongoing review and amendment of textbooks by the Palestinian Ministry of Education and Higher Education to ensure alignment with UNESCO standards; notes in particular that the revised Grade 12 textbooks were finalised and made public in early October 2025 and are currently undergoing review by the Union;	170. Notes the Commission’s continued engagement with the Palestinian Authority on curriculum reform and the ongoing review and amendment of textbooks by the Palestinian Ministry of Education and Higher Education to ensure alignment with UNESCO standards; notes, however, that Palestinian textbooks containing antisemitic content are reportedly still in circulation and have been newly printed, with Members of the Committee on Budgetary Control having received recent examples published in 2025; calls on the Commission, together with the EEAS, to ensure that no Union funds are allocated, directly or indirectly, to the drafting, teaching or dissemination of educational materials that promote hatred, violence or antisemitism, including where such materials are distributed through UN organisations;

Or. en

Amendment 352

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 170 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	170 a. Strongly condemns the Palestinian Authority for reprinting and authorising textbooks for the 2025-2026 school year that continue to contain antisemitism, incitement to violence, glorification of jihad and martyrdom, rejection of peacemaking and denial of Israel's existence, in clear breach of UNESCO standards and of the Palestinian Authority's formal commitments to the Union;

Or. en

Amendment 353

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 170 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	170 b. Rejects claims that Grade 12 curriculum reform has been completed or finalised, noting that textbooks currently in classroom continue to display the same ideological content repeatedly identified by Parliament, including in previous discharge and budgetary control resolutions, as incompatible with peace, tolerance and non-violence;

Or. en

Amendment 354

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 170 c (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	170 c. Demands that the Commission refrain from accepting, endorsing or certifying any claims of curriculum reform, at Grade 12 or in other grades, unless and until it provides Parliament with clear, public and verifiable evidence demonstrating the removal of all antisemitic, hateful and violent content from textbooks and teacher guides in active classroom use;

Or. en

Amendment 355

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 170 d (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	170 d. Recalls that Union emergency and multiannual financial assistance, including the payment of salaries of Palestinian civil servants responsible for drafting, teaching and implementing educational materials, was explicitly conditioned under the agreed Reform Matrix on measurable and verifiable curriculum reform; stresses that these conditions have not been fulfilled; considers, therefore, that any further education-related disbursements cannot be considered compliant with the agreed conditionality framework until full compliance is demonstrated;

Or. en

Amendment 356

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 170 e (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	170 e. Warns that reliance on non-public assessments, confidential submissions or unverifiable assurances would undermine parliamentary oversight, weaken Union conditionality and risk continued Union support for the dissemination of educational content that fuels hatred and violence;

Or. en

Amendment 357

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 171

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
171. Notes that, as in previous years, no Union funding in 2024 has been used to support the production of Palestinian textbooks, and that Union assistance under both the 2024 Emergency Support package and the Multiannual Comprehensive Programme for Palestinian Recovery and Resilience (2025-2027) is strictly limited to traceable expenditure items such as salaries, social allowances and arrears to hospitals; notes that this multiannual programme is conditional upon an ambitious Reform Matrix agreed with the Palestinian Authority, which includes a systematic review of learning materials;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 358

Monika Hohlmeier, Tomáš Zdechovský, Andrey Kovatchev

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 171

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
171. Notes that, as in previous years, no Union funding in 2024 has been used to support the production of Palestinian textbooks, and that Union assistance under both the 2024 Emergency Support package and the Multiannual Comprehensive Programme for Palestinian Recovery and Resilience (2025-2027) is strictly limited to traceable expenditure items such as salaries, social allowances and arrears to hospitals; notes that this multiannual programme is conditional upon an ambitious Reform Matrix agreed with the Palestinian Authority, which includes a systematic review of learning materials;	171. 171. Notes that, as in previous years, no Union funding in 2024 has been used to support the production of Palestinian textbooks, and that Union assistance under both the 2024 Emergency Support package and the Multiannual Comprehensive Programme for Palestinian Recovery and Resilience (2025-2027) is strictly limited to traceable expenditure items such as salaries, social allowances and arrears to hospitals; notes that this multiannual programme is conditional upon an ambitious Reform Matrix agreed with the Palestinian Authority, which includes a systematic review of learning materials; stresses that financial support from the Union for the Palestinian Authority in the area of education should be provided on the condition that textbook content is aligned with UNESCO standards, that all anti-Semitic references are deleted, and that examples which incite to hatred and violence are removed, as repeatedly requested in the resolutions accompanying the discharge decisions;

Or. en

Amendment 359

Monika Hohlmeier, Tomáš Zdechovský, Andrey Kovatchev

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 172

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
172. Urges the Commission, in the context of delivering support and humanitarian aid to the Palestinian population, to enhance support to UNRWA as well as to all trusted partners, including local CSOs; recalls the importance for the Commission to guarantee independent controls of UNRWA by external experts, the Court and experienced international partners;	172. Urges the Commission, in the context of delivering support and humanitarian aid to the Palestinian population, to cooperate with reliable partners on the ground to guarantee the uninterrupted and secure delivery of humanitarian assistance and to ensure that no Union funds are allocated to individuals or organisations linked to terrorist or extremist movements opposed to the Union’s fundamental values; expresses deep concern over allegations that UNRWA employees in Gaza were involved in the despicable terrorist attacks by Hamas against Israel on 7 October 2023; recalls the importance for the Commission to guarantee independent controls of UNRWA by external experts, the Court and experienced international partners; calls on the EEAS, where necessary, to work with other reliable partners in Gaza and the Palestinian territories to ensure the continued delivery of humanitarian aid to the Palestinian population;

Or. en

Amendment 360

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 172

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
172. Urges the Commission, in the context of delivering support and humanitarian aid to the Palestinian population, to enhance support to UNRWA as well as to all trusted partners, including local CSOs; recalls the importance for the Commission to guarantee independent controls of UNRWA by external experts, the Court and experienced international partners;	172. Recalls the importance for the Commission to guarantee independent controls of UNRWA by external experts, the Court and experienced international partners;

Or. fr

Amendment 361

Céline Imart, Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 172

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
172. Urges the Commission, in the context of delivering support and humanitarian aid to the Palestinian population, to enhance support to UNRWA as well as to all trusted partners, including local CSOs; recalls the importance for the Commission to guarantee independent controls of UNRWA by external experts, the Court and experienced international partners;	172. Calls on the Commission, in the context of providing support and humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian population, to review its financial engagement with UNRWA with a view to safeguarding the Union’s financial interests, and to ensure that Union funds are channelled through partners meeting the highest standards of accountability and oversight;

Or. en

Amendment 362

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 172

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
172. Urges the Commission, in the context of delivering support and humanitarian aid to the Palestinian population, to enhance support to UNRWA as well as to all trusted partners, including local CSOs; recalls the importance for the Commission to guarantee independent controls of UNRWA by external experts, the Court and experienced international partners;	172. Urges the Commission, in the context of delivering support and humanitarian aid to the Palestinian population, to enhance support to all trusted partners, including local CSOs; recalls the importance for the Commission to guarantee independent controls of UNRWA by external experts, the Court and experienced international partners;

Or. en

Amendment 363

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 172 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	172 a. Takes note with grave concern of internal Hamas documents revealing affiliations between Hamas' Interior Security Mechanism and EU-funded NGOs; is deeply worried about the risk of EU taxpayer funds indirectly supporting terrorist activities; calls on the Commission to take immediate steps to investigate these allegations and, where necessary, to suspend and recover funding from non-compliant NGOs;

Or. en

Amendment 364

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 173

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
173. Expresses grave concern over serious shortcomings in the management of DG NEAR under the responsibility of Commissioner Várhelyi during his mandate as Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement (2019–2024); notes that, during this period, an unprecedented number of senior management positions remained vacant for exceptionally long durations, severely undermining the Directorate-General’s leadership capacity; notes in particular that the post of Director-General remained vacant for 28 months, Director A for 25 months, Director NEAR B (Southern Neighbourhood) for 48 months, Director NEAR D (Western Balkans) for 35 months, Director of the Support Group for Ukraine for 32 months, and Director R for 22 months; underlines that these prolonged vacancies affected some of the Union’s most politically sensitive and operationally critical portfolios, including during the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the Hamas terrorist attack against Israel; further notes the results of the April 2022 DG NEAR staff survey showing significant declines in confidence in senior management’s leadership, the worst results of the DG’s staff survey ever recorded; considers that leaving DG NEAR without stable senior leadership for years cannot be reconciled with the duty of sound administration and effective management expected from a Commissioner;	deleted

Or. fr

Amendment 365

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 173

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
173. Expresses grave concern over serious shortcomings in the management of DG NEAR under the responsibility of Commissioner Várhelyi during his mandate as Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement (2019–2024); notes that, during this period, an unprecedented number of senior management positions remained vacant for exceptionally long durations, severely undermining the Directorate-General’s leadership capacity; notes in particular that the post of Director-General remained vacant for 28 months, Director A for 25 months, Director NEAR B (Southern Neighbourhood) for 48 months, Director NEAR D (Western Balkans) for 35 months, Director of the Support Group for Ukraine for 32 months, and Director R for 22 months; underlines that these prolonged vacancies affected some of the Union’s most politically sensitive and operationally critical portfolios, including during the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the Hamas terrorist attack against Israel; further notes the results of the April 2022 DG NEAR staff survey showing significant declines in confidence in senior management’s leadership, the worst results of the DG’s staff survey ever recorded; considers that leaving DG NEAR without stable senior leadership for years cannot be reconciled with the duty of sound administration and effective management expected from a Commissioner;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 366

Carlo Fidanza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 173

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
173. Expresses grave concern over serious shortcomings in the management of DG NEAR under the responsibility of Commissioner Várhelyi during his mandate as Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement (2019–2024); notes that, during this period, an unprecedented number of senior management positions remained vacant for exceptionally long durations, severely undermining the Directorate-General’s leadership capacity; notes in particular that the post of Director-General remained vacant for 28 months, Director A for 25 months, Director NEAR B (Southern Neighbourhood) for 48 months, Director NEAR D (Western Balkans) for 35 months, Director of the Support Group for Ukraine for 32 months, and Director R for 22 months; underlines that these prolonged vacancies affected some of the Union’s most politically sensitive and operationally critical portfolios, including during the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the Hamas terrorist attack against Israel; further notes the results of the April 2022 DG NEAR staff survey showing significant declines in confidence in senior management’s leadership, the worst results of the DG’s staff survey ever recorded; considers that leaving DG NEAR without stable senior leadership for years cannot be reconciled with the duty of sound administration and effective management expected from a Commissioner;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 367

Monika Hohlmeier, Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 173

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
173. Expresses grave concern over serious shortcomings in the management of DG NEAR under the responsibility of Commissioner Várhelyi during his mandate as Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement (2019–2024); notes that, during this period, an unprecedented number of senior management positions remained vacant for exceptionally long durations, severely undermining the Directorate-General’s leadership capacity; notes in particular that the post of Director-General remained vacant for 28 months, Director A for 25 months, Director NEAR B (Southern Neighbourhood) for 48 months, Director NEAR D (Western Balkans) for 35 months, Director of the Support Group for Ukraine for 32 months, and Director R for 22 months; underlines that these prolonged vacancies affected some of the Union’s most politically sensitive and operationally critical portfolios, including during the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the Hamas terrorist attack against Israel; further notes the results of the April 2022 DG NEAR staff survey showing significant declines in confidence in senior management’s leadership, the worst results of the DG’s staff survey ever recorded; considers that leaving DG NEAR without stable senior leadership for years cannot be reconciled with the duty of sound administration and effective management expected from a Commissioner;	173. Notes that during the period between 2019–2024 a number of senior management in DG NEAR remained vacant for extended periods; notes in particular that vacancies were at Director-General and Director level; notes the results of the April 2022 DG NEAR staff survey, encourages the Commission to draw lessons and ensure timely appointments, leadership continuity, and effective management structures across all Directorates-General, in line with sound administration principles;

Or. en

Amendment 368

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 173

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
173. Expresses grave concern over serious shortcomings in the management of DG NEAR under the responsibility of Commissioner Várhelyi during his mandate as Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement (2019–2024); notes that, during this period, an unprecedented number of senior management positions remained vacant for exceptionally long durations, severely undermining the Directorate-General’s leadership capacity; notes in particular that the post of Director-General remained vacant for 28 months, Director A for 25 months, Director NEAR B (Southern Neighbourhood) for 48 months, Director NEAR D (Western Balkans) for 35 months, Director of the Support Group for Ukraine for 32 months, and Director R for 22 months; underlines that these prolonged vacancies affected some of the Union’s most politically sensitive and operationally critical portfolios, including during the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the Hamas terrorist attack against Israel; further notes the results of the April 2022 DG NEAR staff survey showing significant declines in confidence in senior management’s leadership, the worst results of the DG’s staff survey ever recorded; considers that leaving DG NEAR without stable senior leadership for years cannot be reconciled with the duty of sound administration and effective management expected from a Commissioner;	173. Expresses grave concern over serious shortcomings in the management of DG NEAR under the responsibility of Commissioner Várhelyi during his mandate as Commissioner for Neighbourhood and Enlargement (2019–2024); notes that, during this period, an unprecedented number of senior management positions remained vacant for exceptionally long durations, severely undermining the Directorate-General’s leadership capacity; notes in particular that the post of Director-General remained vacant for 28 months, Director A for 25 months, Director NEAR B (Southern Neighbourhood) for 48 months, Director NEAR D (Western Balkans) for 35 months, Director of the Support Group for Ukraine for 32 months, and Director R for 22 months; underlines that these prolonged vacancies affected some of the Union’s most politically sensitive and operationally critical portfolios, including during the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the Hamas terrorist attack against Israel; further notes the results of the April 2022 DG NEAR staff survey showing significant declines in confidence in senior management’s leadership, the worst results of the DG’s staff survey ever recorded; considers that leaving DG NEAR without stable senior leadership for years cannot be reconciled with the duty of sound administration and effective management expected from a Commissioner; calls on the Commission to ensure that critical leadership positions are filled without delay and that contingency mechanisms are in place to avoid prolonged administrative gaps in the future;

Or. en

Amendment 369

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 174

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
174. Notes the statements made by Commissioner Várhelyi during the exchange of views in the Committee on Budgetary Control on 12 January 2026, in which he claimed that the post of Director of the Support Group for Ukraine had only been created in 2022 and filled immediately thereafter; deplores that this information provided to Parliament was inaccurate, as the Support Group for Ukraine was established in 2014 and, between 2020 and 2023, its leadership was ensured on an interim basis by the Deputy Director-General of DG NEAR in addition to her many other functions;	deleted

Or. fr

Amendment 370

Carlo Fidanza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 174

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
174. Notes the statements made by Commissioner Várhelyi during the exchange of views in the Committee on Budgetary Control on 12 January 2026, in which he claimed that the post of Director of the Support Group for Ukraine had only been created in 2022 and filled immediately thereafter; deplores that this information provided to Parliament was inaccurate, as the Support Group for Ukraine was established in 2014 and, between 2020 and 2023, its leadership was ensured on an interim basis by the Deputy Director-General of DG NEAR in addition to her many other functions;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 371

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 174

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
174. Notes the statements made by Commissioner Várhelyi during the exchange of views in the Committee on Budgetary Control on 12 January 2026, in which he claimed that the post of Director of the Support Group for Ukraine had only been created in 2022 and filled immediately thereafter; deplores that this information provided to Parliament was inaccurate, as the Support Group for Ukraine was established in 2014 and, between 2020 and 2023, its leadership was ensured on an interim basis by the Deputy Director-General of DG NEAR in addition to her many other functions;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 372

Tomáš Zdechovský, Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 174

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
174. Notes the statements made by Commissioner Várhelyi during the exchange of views in the Committee on Budgetary Control on 12 January 2026, in which he claimed that the post of Director of the Support Group for Ukraine had only been created in 2022 and filled immediately thereafter; deplores that this information provided to Parliament was inaccurate, as the Support Group for Ukraine was established in 2014 and, between 2020 and 2023, its leadership was ensured on an interim basis by the Deputy Director-General of DG NEAR in addition to her many other functions;	174. Notes that during the establishment and operation of the Support Group for Ukraine, leadership was provided on an interim basis while permanent arrangements were being implemented, notes that the Ukraine Support Group was dissolved in 2023 with portfolios being redistributed to the Ukraine Facility and other units, encourages the Commission to ensure clear and accurate reporting to Parliament on the management and leadership of units;

Or. en

Amendment 373

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 175

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
175. Notes recent investigative reporting published in October 2025 by several European media outlets alleging that Hungarian intelligence services engaged in espionage activities in Brussels, including attempts to recruit Hungarian nationals working in Union institutions; notes that these activities reportedly intensified during the period 2015–2019, when Mr. Várhelyi served as Hungary’s Permanent Representative to the Union and was formally the superior of intelligence officers operating under diplomatic cover; underlines that, while these allegations concern a period prior to his appointment as Commissioner, they further contribute to serious concerns regarding his conduct and independence; notes that the Commission has confirmed that it is examining these allegations internally and it expects to be informed of the outcome of this examination as soon as it is concluded;	deleted

Or. fr

Amendment 374

Carlo Fidanza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 175

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
175. Notes recent investigative reporting published in October 2025 by several European media outlets alleging that Hungarian intelligence services engaged in espionage activities in Brussels, including attempts to recruit Hungarian nationals working in Union institutions; notes that these activities reportedly intensified during the period 2015–2019, when Mr. Várhelyi served as Hungary’s Permanent Representative to the Union and was formally the superior of intelligence officers operating under diplomatic cover; underlines that, while these allegations concern a period prior to his appointment as Commissioner, they further contribute to serious concerns regarding his conduct and independence; notes that the Commission has confirmed that it is examining these allegations internally and it expects to be informed of the outcome of this examination as soon as it is concluded;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 375

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 175

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
175. Notes recent investigative reporting published in October 2025 by several European media outlets alleging that Hungarian intelligence services engaged in espionage activities in Brussels, including attempts to recruit Hungarian nationals working in Union institutions; notes that these activities reportedly intensified during the period 2015–2019, when Mr. Várhelyi served as Hungary’s Permanent Representative to the Union and was formally the superior of intelligence officers operating under diplomatic cover; underlines that, while these allegations concern a period prior to his appointment as Commissioner, they further contribute to serious concerns regarding his conduct and independence; notes that the Commission has confirmed that it is examining these allegations internally and it expects to be informed of the outcome of this examination as soon as it is concluded;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 376

Tomáš Zdechovský, Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 175

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
175. Notes recent investigative reporting published in October 2025 by several European media outlets alleging that Hungarian intelligence services engaged in espionage activities in Brussels, including attempts to recruit Hungarian nationals working in Union institutions; notes that these activities reportedly intensified during the period 2015–2019, when Mr. Várhelyi served as Hungary’s Permanent Representative to the Union and was formally the superior of intelligence officers operating under diplomatic cover; underlines that, while these allegations concern a period prior to his appointment as Commissioner, they further contribute to serious concerns regarding his conduct and independence; notes that the Commission has confirmed that it is examining these allegations internally and it expects to be informed of the outcome of this examination as soon as it is concluded;	175. Notes recent investigative reporting published in October 2025 by several European media outlets alleging that Hungarian intelligence services engaged in espionage activities in Brussels, including attempts to recruit Hungarian nationals working in Union institutions; notes that these reports refers to the period of 2015-2019; notes that the Commission has confirmed that it is examining these allegations internally; states that we expect the Commission to conduct a thorough analysis and investigation based on the real evidence and to inform the Parliament as soon as the investigation has been finalised;

Or. en

Amendment 377

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 176

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
176. Considers that, taken together, the serious and prolonged management failures in DG NEAR, the provision of inaccurate information to Parliament in the context of the discharge procedure, and the additional concerns relating to conduct and independence outlined above demonstrate a pattern that is incompatible with the standards of accountability, reliability and sound administration required of a Member of the Commission; concludes therefore that Commissioner Várhelyi cannot be considered fit to exercise the responsibilities of a Commissioner entrusted with the management of politically sensitive portfolios and significant Union funds;	deleted

Or. fr

Amendment 378

Carlo Fidanza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 176

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
176. Considers that, taken together, the serious and prolonged management failures in DG NEAR, the provision of inaccurate information to Parliament in the context of the discharge procedure, and the additional concerns relating to conduct and independence outlined above demonstrate a pattern that is incompatible with the standards of accountability, reliability and sound administration required of a Member of the Commission; concludes therefore that Commissioner Várhelyi cannot be considered fit to exercise the responsibilities of a Commissioner entrusted with the management of politically sensitive portfolios and significant Union funds;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 379

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 176

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
176. Considers that, taken together, the serious and prolonged management failures in DG NEAR, the provision of inaccurate information to Parliament in the context of the discharge procedure, and the additional concerns relating to conduct and independence outlined above demonstrate a pattern that is incompatible with the standards of accountability, reliability and sound administration required of a Member of the Commission; concludes therefore that Commissioner Várhelyi cannot be considered fit to exercise the responsibilities of a Commissioner entrusted with the management of politically sensitive portfolios and significant Union funds;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 380

Tomáš Zdechovský, Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 176

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
176. Considers that, taken together, the serious and prolonged management failures in DG NEAR, the provision of inaccurate information to Parliament in the context of the discharge procedure, and the additional concerns relating to conduct and independence outlined above demonstrate a pattern that is incompatible with the standards of accountability, reliability and sound administration required of a Member of the Commission; concludes therefore that Commissioner Várhelyi cannot be considered fit to exercise the responsibilities of a Commissioner entrusted with the management of politically sensitive portfolios and significant Union funds;	176. Encourages the Commission incorporate lessons learned and to take measures to strengthen timely appointments of management positions in all DGs, and provide Parliament with accurate and timely information to maintain trust in the administration of politically sensitive portfolios affection Union funds;

Or. en

Amendment 381

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 176

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
176. Considers that, taken together, the serious and prolonged management failures in DG NEAR, the provision of inaccurate information to Parliament in the context of the discharge procedure, and the additional concerns relating to conduct and independence outlined above demonstrate a pattern that is incompatible with the standards of accountability, reliability and sound administration required of a Member of the Commission; concludes therefore that Commissioner Várhelyi cannot be considered fit to exercise the responsibilities of a Commissioner entrusted with the management of politically sensitive portfolios and significant Union funds;	176. Encourages the Commission incorporate lessons learned and to take measures to strengthen timely appointments of management positions in all DGs, and provide Parliament with accurate and timely information to maintain trust in the administration of politically sensitive portfolios affecting Union funds;

Or. en

Amendment 382

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 178

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
178. Notes that Ukraine’s anti-corruption specialised bodies (NABU, SAPO and HACC) continue to deliver investigations, prosecutions and judgments in high-level cases, demonstrating that independent anti-corruption institutions are starting to function and that recent resignations of accused ministers show a degree of governmental responsiveness and accountability; regrets, however, that progress remains limited, that investigations by other law-enforcement bodies have stagnated, and that legislative initiatives adopted or tabled in 2024, including attempts to place NABU and SAPO under the authority of the Prosecutor General, risked undermining the independence and effectiveness of the anti-corruption framework; welcomes the swift reversal of these amendments following domestic and international pressure, but expresses concern at reports from anti-corruption institutions and civil society of growing pressure from state authorities, reduced transparency, and attempts to limit liability for corruption offences; calls on the authorities to prevent backsliding, address procedural delays and obstructions in high-level cases, and revise statutes of limitation in line with European standards;	178. Notes that Ukraine’s anti-corruption specialised bodies (NABU, SAPO and HACC) continue to deliver investigations, prosecutions and judgments in high-level cases, demonstrating that independent anti-corruption institutions are starting to function and that recent resignations of accused ministers show a degree of governmental responsiveness and accountability; calls on the authorities to prevent backsliding, address procedural delays and obstructions in high-level cases, and revise statutes of limitation in line with European standards;

Or. en

Amendment 383

Gilles Boyer, Olivier Chastel

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 178

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
178. Notes that Ukraine’s anti-corruption specialised bodies (NABU, SAPO and HACC) continue to deliver investigations, prosecutions and judgments in high-level cases, demonstrating that independent anti-corruption institutions are starting to function and that recent resignations of accused ministers show a degree of governmental responsiveness and accountability; regrets, however, that progress remains limited, that investigations by other law-enforcement bodies have stagnated, and that legislative initiatives adopted or tabled in 2024, including attempts to place NABU and SAPO under the authority of the Prosecutor General, risked undermining the independence and effectiveness of the anti-corruption framework; welcomes the swift reversal of these amendments following domestic and international pressure, but expresses concern at reports from anti-corruption institutions and civil society of growing pressure from state authorities, reduced transparency, and attempts to limit liability for corruption offences; calls on the authorities to prevent backsliding, address procedural delays and obstructions in high-level cases, and revise statutes of limitation in line with European standards;	178. Notes that Ukraine’s anti-corruption specialised bodies (NABU, SAPO and HACC) continue to deliver investigations, prosecutions and judgments in high-level cases, demonstrating that independent anti-corruption institutions are starting to function and that recent resignations of accused ministers show a degree of governmental responsiveness and accountability; highlights the reforms undertaken by Ukraine in the midst a full-fledged invasion; regrets, however, that progress remains limited, that investigations by other law-enforcement bodies have stagnated, and that legislative initiatives adopted or tabled in 2024, including attempts to place NABU and SAPO under the authority of the Prosecutor General, risked undermining the independence and effectiveness of the anti-corruption framework; welcomes the swift reversal of these amendments following domestic and international pressure, but expresses concern at reports from anti-corruption institutions and civil society of growing pressure from state authorities, reduced transparency, and attempts to limit liability for corruption offences; calls on the authorities to prevent backsliding, address procedural delays and obstructions in high-level cases, and revise statutes of limitation in line with European standards;

Or. en

Amendment 384

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 179

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
179. Notes with concern the recent fraud allegations in Ukraine’s energy sector, including suspected large-scale misappropriation, procurement manipulation and illicit enrichment involving state-owned energy companies and regulatory bodies; underlines that these allegations, if confirmed, point to structural vulnerabilities in governance, oversight and internal control systems; stresses that such cases risk undermining public trust, weakening Ukraine’s reform credibility and jeopardising EU financial support;	179. Notes the recent fraud allegations in Ukraine’s energy sector; underlines that these allegations, if confirmed, point to structural vulnerabilities in governance, oversight and internal control systems; stresses the need to build public trust to strenght Ukraine’s reform credibility, through a reinforced procurement and internal control systems, particulary of the EU financial support;

Or. en

Amendment 385

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 181 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	181 a. Stresses the strategic importance of EU's engagement in the Western Balkans through pre-accession assistance and related instruments, which play a key role in supporting reforms, strengthening institutional resilience and promoting stability and economic development in the region which are all prerequisites for a stronger Union; underlines that sustained EU financial support must be accompanied by sound financial management, transparency and performance monitoring in order to ensure effective use of Union funds and maintain the credibility of the enlargement policy; notes that the implementation of EU external action and pre-accession assistance in the Western Balkans takes place in complex political, economic and institutional contexts; calls on the Commission to continue strengthening administrative capacity, governance structures and technical support in beneficiary countries in order to improve absorption, ensure sound financial management and enhance the effectiveness of Union expenditure;

Or. en

Amendment 386

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 181

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
181. Underlines that, beyond its oversight role, the Audit Board may issue recommendations to the Ukrainian authorities on addressing financial irregularities or structural shortcomings in the management of Union funds; stresses that Ukraine, represented by the Ministry of Economy, must provide a written response to each recommendation, either outlining implementation measures or providing a justified explanation for non-implementation; highlights that the Audit Board’s findings may carry significant financial consequences, as its reports, similarly to those of OLAF, may constitute grounds for the Commission to reduce, suspend or withhold Union funding under the Ukraine Facility;	181. Underlines that, beyond its oversight role, the Audit Board may issue recommendations to the Ukrainian authorities on addressing financial irregularities or structural shortcomings in the management of Union funds; stresses that Ukraine, represented by the Ministry of Economy, must provide a written response to each recommendation, either outlining implementation measures or providing a justified explanation for non-implementation;

Or. en

Amendment 387

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 184

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
184. Is concerned about the allocation of EFSD+ under the new flexible ‘Support to Investments’ envelope in favour of benefiting countries where the Global Gateway investments are easier to implement at the expense of prioritising LDCs and fragile and conflict-affected countries;	184. Is concerned about the allocation of EFSD+ under the new flexible ‘Support to Investments’ envelope in favour of benefiting countries where the Global Gateway investments are easier to implement at the expense of European countries or prioritising LDCs and fragile and conflict-affected countries;

Or. fr

Amendment 388

Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 185

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
185. Notes that despite longstanding Union funding to strengthen Libyan border and migration controls reports indicate that such assistance has not prevented the continuation of systemic violations, including forced returns, inhumane detention conditions and deaths, and may have made the Union vulnerable to reputational damage; underlines that the discovery of mass graves in Libya in 2025 and continued allegations from civil society and human rights organisations about the treatment of migrants heighten concerns about whether Union funding in this context aligns with fundamental Union values, including respect for human rights, and stresses the need for rigorous monitoring, transparency and accountability mechanisms to ensure that migration-related assistance does not indirectly contribute to further harm;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 389

Dick Erixon

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 185

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
185. Notes that despite longstanding Union funding to strengthen Libyan border and migration controls reports indicate that such assistance has not prevented the continuation of systemic violations, including forced returns, inhumane detention conditions and deaths, and may have made the Union vulnerable to reputational damage; underlines that the discovery of mass graves in Libya in 2025 and continued allegations from civil society and human rights organisations about the treatment of migrants heighten concerns about whether Union funding in this context aligns with fundamental Union values, including respect for human rights, and stresses the need for rigorous monitoring, transparency and accountability mechanisms to ensure that migration-related assistance does not indirectly contribute to further harm;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 390

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 185

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
185. Notes that despite longstanding Union funding to strengthen Libyan border and migration controls reports indicate that such assistance has not prevented the continuation of systemic violations, including forced returns, inhumane detention conditions and deaths, and may have made the Union vulnerable to reputational damage; underlines that the discovery of mass graves in Libya in 2025 and continued allegations from civil society and human rights organisations about the treatment of migrants heighten concerns about whether Union funding in this context aligns with fundamental Union values, including respect for human rights, and stresses the need for rigorous monitoring, transparency and accountability mechanisms to ensure that migration-related assistance does not indirectly contribute to further harm;	deleted

Or. fr

Amendment 391

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 185 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	185 b. Recalls that the EU and its Member States have an ongoing commitment to support the recovery and resilience of Syria's national services and that recent EU funding for 2025-2027 is explicitly linked to progress on a peaceful, inclusive transition; notes with concern that recent revisions to the Syrian national curriculum raise serious questions regarding Islamisation, promotion of jihad, antisemitism, the representation of women and girls, the inclusion of religious and ethnic minorities, and the promotion of peace and tolerance; calls on the Commission to ensure that EU-funded support to the education sector is fully aligned with its stated commitments on women's rights, minority inclusion, and UNESCO standards, and to report to Parliament on how these provisions are monitored and enforced;

Or. en

Amendment 392

Bert-Jan Ruissen

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 185 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	185 a. Recalls that the EU-Jordan Strategic and Comprehensive Partnership for 2025-2027, backed by an estimated EUR 3 billion package, places education at the core of human capital development and long-term stability; notes with concern that elements of the Jordanian national curriculum contain antisemitic stereotypes, intolerant narratives and, in some cases, the glorification of violence, which risk undermining social cohesion and the objectives of the partnership; calls on the Commission to ensure that EU financial assistance to Jordan, including grants and macro-financial assistance, is aligned with EU values and contributes to education that promotes peace, tolerance and coexistence; calls on the Commission to report to Parliament on how compliance with these standards is assessed and addressed;

Or. en

Amendment 393

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 185

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
185. Notes that despite longstanding Union funding to strengthen Libyan border and migration controls reports indicate that such assistance has not prevented the continuation of systemic violations, including forced returns, inhumane detention conditions and deaths, and may have made the Union vulnerable to reputational damage; underlines that the discovery of mass graves in Libya in 2025 and continued allegations from civil society and human rights organisations about the treatment of migrants heighten concerns about whether Union funding in this context aligns with fundamental Union values, including respect for human rights, and stresses the need for rigorous monitoring, transparency and accountability mechanisms to ensure that migration-related assistance does not indirectly contribute to further harm;	185. Notes that despite longstanding Union funding to strengthen Libyan border and migration controls, reports indicate that such assistance has not yet resulted in effective and sustainable migration flow management and continues to raise serious operational, humanitarian and governance concerns, potentially exposing the Union to reputational risks; stresses the need for rigorous monitoring, transparency and accountability mechanisms to ensure that migration-related assistance does not indirectly contribute to further harm;

Or. en

Amendment 394

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 189 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	189a. Highlights the waste of EU funds outside the Union, particularly in Africa, such as the EUR 5 billion EU Emergency Trust Fund for Africa (EUTF for Africa) (2015-2024), established to tackle the root causes of irregular migration through development, security and border management projects; the European Court of Auditors (ECA) has strongly criticised this fund in several reports, including in 2024 (Special Report SR-2024-17) with the example of blenders being given to schools without electricity6a;
	_________________
	6a https://www.eca.europa.eu/ECAPublications/SR-2024-17/SR-2024-17_EN.pdf

Or. fr

Amendment 395

Pasquale Tridico

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 195 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	195 a. Recalls that development aid and in particular budget support aims to strengthen the partnership with the Union’s partner countries, promote sustainable development, eradicate poverty, reduce inequalities and consolidate peace and democracy, ultimately aiming to contribute to the achievement of the SDGs; notes that Union budget support is to be guided by the internationally agreed Busan effectiveness principles, such as ownership by partner countries, results focus, inclusiveness and accountability; highlights the fact that, because it fosters transparency and good governance, budget support also contributes to the fight against corruption and fraud; recalls that budget support must correspond to the needs of partner countries as well as the Union’s key policies; recalls that it is also necessary to measure the performance of programmes and their impact in partner countries and on civilian populations;

Or. en

Amendment 396

Pasquale Tridico

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 195 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	195 b. Recalls that 2 EUTFs were created under the EDFs, namely the European Union Emergency Trust Fund for stability and addressing root causes of irregular migration and displaced persons in Africa (the ‘EUTF for Africa’) and the European Union Trust Fund Bêkou for the Central African Republic (the ‘EUTF Bêkou’); recalls Parliament’s regular stance that the Commission ensures that any trust fund established as a new development tool must always be in line with the Union’s overall strategy and development policy objectives, i.e. the reduction and, in the long term, eradication of poverty as enshrined in Article 208 TFEU;

Or. en

Amendment 397

Pasquale Tridico

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 195 c (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	195 c. Recalls that EUTF for Africa has mobilized over EUR 5 billion, with 88% of contributions (EUR 4.4 billion) coming from the European Development Fund and the EU budget; focusing on three key regions: the Sahel and Lake Chad, the Horn of Africa, and North Africa, supporting a total of 27 African countries; deplores that, despite several requests from Parliament, the process of managing and allocating these funds still lacks transparency and that the adherence of these actions to Official Development Assistance (ODA) principles cannot be ensured; recalls that ECA reported that the monitoring and reporting system lacks accuracy;

Or. en

Amendment 398

Pasquale Tridico

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 195 d (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	195 d. Underlines that ECA’s special report 17/2024 on the EU trust fund for Africa denounces that despite an innovative approach to identifying human rights risks in a difficult environment, these risks were not comprehensively addressed; deplores that, in particular, it was found that the assessment of potential risks to human rights was not comprehensive and that human rights monitoring and reporting were not sufficiently robust; deplores that the EUTF has already encountered serious human rights violations on numerous occasions; emphasises in particular the support given to the authorities and the Libyan coast guard, which contributed to blatant violations, arbitrary detentions and failure to respect the principle of non-refoulement;

Or. en

Amendment 399

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 196 – point i a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(ia) call for EU funding for third countries to be discontinued unless those countries conclude agreements with Member States on the return of their nationals who are criminals or have been expelled from Europe;

Or. fr

Amendment 400

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 196 – point vii

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(vii) ensure that no Union assistance benefits entities that are involved in human rights violations, repression or democratic backsliding, and apply conditionality rigorously, including through suspension of assistance where fundamental Union values are undermined;	(vii) ensure that no Union assistance benefits entities that are involved in human rights violations, repression or democratic backsliding, and apply conditionality rigorously, including through suspension of assistance where fundamental Union values are undermined or where the country in question refuses to take back its nationals when they are thrown out the European Union;

Or. fr

Amendment 401

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 196 – point vii a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(vii a) ensure that Union assistance to third countries is linked to respect for EU values and objectives, especially the protection of Christians, who are often a minority at risk of persecution in local communities, and cooperation in border management and security protection.

Or. en

Amendment 402

Gilles Boyer, Olivier Chastel

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 196 – point vii a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(vii a) ensure as well that no Union programmes benefits entities that are not respecting fundamental Union values, and apply conditionality rigorously, including through suspension of programmes with partners undermining fundamental Union values;

Or. en

Amendment 403

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 196 – point viii

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(viii) continue support UNRWA and reliable humanitarian partners, coupled with independent oversight by external experts and the Court, to ensure effective control and confidence in the use of Union funds;	deleted

Or. fr

Amendment 404

Carlo Fidanza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 196 – point viii

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(viii) continue support UNRWA and reliable humanitarian partners, coupled with independent oversight by external experts and the Court, to ensure effective control and confidence in the use of Union funds;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 405

Gilles Boyer, Olivier Chastel

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 196 – point viii a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(viii a) calls on the Commission to clarify what steps it is taking to ensure full compliance of EU-funded humanitarian partners with Union financial regulations and anti-terrorism frameworks; requests a detailed response outlining the safeguards, monitoring mechanisms and corrective measures implemented to uphold the integrity and accountability of EU external assistance;

Or. en

Amendment 406

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 196 – point ix

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(ix) calls on the President of the Commission, pursuant to Article 17(6) TEU, to withdraw confidence in Commissioner Várhelyi;	deleted

Or. fr

Amendment 407

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 196 – point ix

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(ix) calls on the President of the Commission, pursuant to Article 17(6) TEU, to withdraw confidence in Commissioner Várhelyi;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 408

Carlo Fidanza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 196 – point ix

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(ix) calls on the President of the Commission, pursuant to Article 17(6) TEU, to withdraw confidence in Commissioner Várhelyi;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 409

Tomáš Zdechovský, Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 196 – point ix

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(ix) calls on the President of the Commission, pursuant to Article 17(6) TEU, to withdraw confidence in Commissioner Várhelyi;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 410

Dick Erixon

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 196 – point xiv a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(xiv a) engage with the European Investment Bank to ensure that EIB lending to non-EU countries is made conditional on effective cooperation with the Union on migration management, including the conclusion and implementation of readmission agreements; stresses that taxpayers have a legitimate expectation that EU-backed lending serves as leverage for the Union’s strategic interests, including border security;

Or. en

Amendment 411

Dick Erixon

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 198

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
198. Continues to be critical of the process whereby the Commission in 2023 decided to sell 23 of its office buildings in Brussels and lease 17 of them back for a period until 2029; notes that apparently the decision to do this was taken without clear impact assessments of all transactions; finds it especially worrying that the Commission only received one bid for the transaction from a Belgian state-owned company, which had submitted an indicative offer before the Commission launched the call for applications and that the offer did not fulfil the requirements in the call for tenders concerning the time period for the validity of a bank guarantee; expresses its deep concern that the Commission’s evaluation committee lacked independence since all members were subordinates of the authorising officer;	198. Continues to be critical of the process whereby the Commission in 2023 decided to sell 23 of its office buildings in Brussels and lease 17 of them back for a period until 2029; notes that apparently the decision to do this was taken without clear impact assessments of all transactions; finds it especially worrying that the Commission only received one bid for the transaction from a Belgian state-owned company, which had submitted an indicative offer before the Commission launched the call for applications and that the offer did not fulfil the requirements in the call for tenders concerning the time period for the validity of a bank guarantee; expresses its deep concern that the Commission’s evaluation committee lacked independence since all members were subordinates of the authorising officer; notes with grave concern that the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) has launched a criminal investigation into the 2024 sale of 23 Union real estate assets to the Belgian state investment fund, worth approximately EUR 900 million, and that Belgian federal police conducted searches at multiple Commission buildings on 12 February 2026 as part of evidence-collecting activities; stresses that a sale of Union real estate assets of such magnitude warrants the highest standards of transparency, competitive tendering and independent evaluation; calls on the Commission to cooperate fully with the EPPO investigation and to provide the discharge authority with a detailed account of all procedural steps taken in the sale, including the valuation methodology used, the assessment of competing bids, and the role of the former Commissioner for Budget in the decision-making process;

Or. en

Amendment 412

Daniel Freund

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 198

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
198. Continues to be critical of the process whereby the Commission in 2023 decided to sell 23 of its office buildings in Brussels and lease 17 of them back for a period until 2029; notes that apparently the decision to do this was taken without clear impact assessments of all transactions; finds it especially worrying that the Commission only received one bid for the transaction from a Belgian state-owned company, which had submitted an indicative offer before the Commission launched the call for applications and that the offer did not fulfil the requirements in the call for tenders concerning the time period for the validity of a bank guarantee; expresses its deep concern that the Commission’s evaluation committee lacked independence since all members were subordinates of the authorising officer;	198. Continues to be critical of the process whereby the Commission in 2023 decided to sell 23 of its office buildings in Brussels and lease 17 of them back for a period until 2029; notes that apparently the decision to do this was taken without clear impact assessments of all transactions; finds it especially worrying that the Commission only received one bid for the transaction from a Belgian state-owned company, which had submitted an indicative offer before the Commission launched the call for applications and that the offer did not fulfil the requirements in the call for tenders concerning the time period for the validity of a bank guarantee; expresses its deep concern that the Commission’s evaluation committee lacked independence since all members were subordinates of the authorising officer; notes in this context the recent evidence-collecting activities carried out by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in relation to this transaction, which further reinforce serious doubts regarding the handling and governance of the sale;

Or. en

Amendment 413

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 198

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
198. Continues to be critical of the process whereby the Commission in 2023 decided to sell 23 of its office buildings in Brussels and lease 17 of them back for a period until 2029; notes that apparently the decision to do this was taken without clear impact assessments of all transactions; finds it especially worrying that the Commission only received one bid for the transaction from a Belgian state-owned company, which had submitted an indicative offer before the Commission launched the call for applications and that the offer did not fulfil the requirements in the call for tenders concerning the time period for the validity of a bank guarantee; expresses its deep concern that the Commission’s evaluation committee lacked independence since all members were subordinates of the authorising officer;	198. Continues to be critical of the process whereby the Commission in 2023 decided to sell 23 of its office buildings in Brussels and lease 17 of them back for a period until 2029; notes that apparently the decision to do this was taken without clear impact assessments of all transactions; finds it especially worrying that the Commission only received one bid for the transaction from a Belgian state-owned company, which had submitted an indicative offer before the Commission launched the call for applications and that the offer did not fulfil the requirements in the call for tenders concerning the time period for the validity of a bank guarantee; notes, that an investigation is currently being led by the European Public Prosecutor's Office; calls on the Commission to provide the discharge authority with all relevant information and documentation concerning this transaction, in full transparency and in due respect of the ongoing investigation;

Or. en

Amendment 414

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 198

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
198. Continues to be critical of the process whereby the Commission in 2023 decided to sell 23 of its office buildings in Brussels and lease 17 of them back for a period until 2029; notes that apparently the decision to do this was taken without clear impact assessments of all transactions; finds it especially worrying that the Commission only received one bid for the transaction from a Belgian state-owned company, which had submitted an indicative offer before the Commission launched the call for applications and that the offer did not fulfil the requirements in the call for tenders concerning the time period for the validity of a bank guarantee; expresses its deep concern that the Commission’s evaluation committee lacked independence since all members were subordinates of the authorising officer;	198. Continues to be critical of the process whereby the Commission in 2023 decided to sell 23 of its office buildings in Brussels at a cost of nearly EUR 1 million and lease 17 of them back for a period until 2029; notes that apparently the decision to do this was taken without clear impact assessments of all transactions; finds it especially worrying that the Commission only received one bid for the transaction from a Belgian state-owned company, which had submitted an indicative offer before the Commission launched the call for applications and that the offer did not fulfil the requirements in the call for tenders concerning the time period for the validity of a bank guarantee; expresses its deep concern that the Commission’s evaluation committee lacked independence since all members were subordinates of the authorising officer;

Or. fr

Amendment 415

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 198 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	198a. Notes the search of the Commission's premises by the police on 12 February 2026, prompted by suspicions of fraud in the sale of buildings belonging to the Commission for nearly EUR 1 billion;

Or. fr

Amendment 416

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 199

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
199. Notes that the Commission reports that 54 requests for article 24 assistance under the Staff Regulation were submitted in the period 2021-2024 and that only 8 have been followed up on with the opening of an administrative inquiry; finds that this number is worryingly low, as it means that 85 % of the requests have been dismissed without any follow-up; welcomes that the office of the Chief Confidential Counsellor has been strengthened, taking into account that around 300 Commission staff asked her for help in harassment related cases within one single year; further notes that 14 complaints were submitted directly to the Investigation and Discipline Office of the Commission (IDOC), where four cases were closed as non-cases after assessment, two cases were closed without follow-up after administrative inquiry; pre-disciplinary proceedings led to one warning, one written warning, and three reprimands, one case is still in pre-disciplinary phase and two cases are currently with the Disciplinary Board, while two case were reported directly to OLAF both of which were dismissed on grounds of insufficient suspicion; stresses that these numbers seems to be very low for an organisation with more than 30.000 employees and encourages the Commission to improve the possibilities for employees to come forward with cases of harassment in a safe environment; regrets that the Commission has not come up with a self standing report analysing the reasons for the apparent dysfunctionality of the formal harassment procedure as requested in the context of the 2023 discharge exercise;	199. Notes that the Commission reports that 54 requests for article 24 assistance under the Staff Regulation were submitted in the period 2021-2024 and that only 8 have been followed up on with the opening of an administrative inquiry; finds that this number is worryingly low, as it means that 85 % of the requests have been dismissed without any follow-up; welcomes that the office of the Chief Confidential Counsellor has been strengthened, taking into account that around 300 Commission staff asked her for help in harassment related cases within one single year; further notes that 14 complaints were submitted directly to the Investigation and Discipline Office of the Commission (IDOC), where four cases were closed as non-cases after assessment, two cases were closed without follow-up after administrative inquiry; pre-disciplinary proceedings led to one warning, one written warning, and three reprimands, one case is still in pre-disciplinary phase and two cases are currently with the Disciplinary Board, while two case were reported directly to OLAF both of which were dismissed on grounds of insufficient suspicion; stresses that these numbers seems to be very low for an organisation with more than 30.000 employees and encourages the Commission to improve the possibilities for employees to come forward with cases of harassment in a safe environment;

Or. en

Amendment 417

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 202

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
202. Underlines that transparency in the administration and access to information and documents are key elements in ensuring a just and democratically sound society; in that regard regrets that there have been numerous examples over the last years where the Commission has not lived up to reasonable transparency standards as also evidenced by the lost court case concerning text messages between the Commission President and the CEO of Pfizer19 ; stresses that it is important for the credibility of the Commission that it ensures a strict and trustworthy implementation of the new guidelines concerning the use of text messages in relation to workflows and that at least two qualified persons check whether text messages exchanged in relation to work convey important information before they are deleted, in particular those text messages exchanged by Commissioners and the Commission President;	202. Underlines that transparency in the administration and access to information and documents are key elements in ensuring sound, accountable, and democratically robust governance; notes that the Commission aims to reach the high standards of transparency; considers that the use of text messages does not undermine transparency, by guaranteeing that informal exchanges do not replace official communication and that any information related to decision-making or workflow is transmitted through official channels in full respect of transparency requirements;
_________________
19 Case T-36/23.

Or. en

Amendment 418

Daniel Freund

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 202 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	202 a. Notes with concern that in 2024 the Commission revised its internal rules on public access to documents; considers that these changes are incompatible with the right of access to documents as developed in Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001; stresses that for example, the rules state that only “content that constitutes important information that is not short-lived shall be registered” and require the automatic disappearance of text messages; notes that the legality of these rules is currently being challenged before the Court of Justice1a
	_________________
	1a https://www.access-info.org/2025-03-25/joint-legal-challenge-filed-against-european-commissions-new-access-to-documents-rules/

Or. en

Amendment 419

Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 203

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
203. Stresses that access to documents is a key principle to ensure transparency in public administration; points out that unfortunately the Commission in many situations has not provided answers within stipulated deadlines especially concerning cases under the confirmatory applications where the European Ombudsman has found systemic and significant delays in the Commission administration; highlights that it is essential for the credibility of the Commission that journalists and the general public can have access to documents within the legally applicable deadlines;	203. Stresses that access to documents is a key principle to ensure transparency in public administration; points out that unfortunately the Commission in many situations has not provided answers within stipulated deadlines especially concerning cases under the confirmatory applications where the European Ombudsman has found systemic and significant delays in the Commission administration; highlights that it is essential for the credibility of the Commission that journalists and the general public can have access to documents within the legally applicable deadlines; stresses, furthermore, that transparency requires not only timely access but also that the documents themselves are drafted in clear, comprehensible language, as overly technocratic and jargon-heavy communication effectively denies citizens meaningful access to information even when documents are formally available;

Or. en

Amendment 420

Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 203 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	203 a. Expresses concern that the Commission's public communications are characterised by an excessively technocratic style that renders them largely incomprehensible to ordinary citizens; notes the findings of the peer-reviewed study 'Clear messages to the European public?' (Rauh, 2022, Journal of European Integration, 45(4): 683-701) which demonstrates that the Commission's press releases use more complex language and fewer familiar words than the outputs of national governments and even than abstract scientific publications; considers that such communication practices effectively obscure political decisions from public scrutiny and undermine the quality of EU governance; calls on the Commission to adopt measurable plain language standards for all public-facing communications, including press releases, programme descriptions and budget documentation, and to report annually on compliance with these standards;

Or. en

Amendment 421

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 204

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
204. Recalls that the European Ombudsman has found cases of maladministration in relation to several legislative proposals that the Commission has presented in 2025; notes with great concern that these cases include the Omnibus I package where the consultation time between Commission departments had been reduced to less than 24 hours over a weekend and where there were no clear internal records of a climate consistency assessment being carried out; stresses the importance of adhering to the rules about better law-making; underlines that the European Union will not win any global competitive race by destroying some of the very foundations the Union is built on including principles on how to ensure robust, durable and legally sound legislation that ensures a stable regulatory business environment for the private sector to operate in;	204. Notes the European Ombudsman's concerns on several legislative proposals that the Commission has presented in 2025; stresses the importance of adhering to the rules on better law-making; underlines that the Union’s global competitiveness depends on maintaining strong foundations, robust and legally sound legislation that ensures a stable and predictable regulatory environment for businesses;

Or. en

Amendment 422

Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 204

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
204. Recalls that the European Ombudsman has found cases of maladministration in relation to several legislative proposals that the Commission has presented in 2025; notes with great concern that these cases include the Omnibus I package where the consultation time between Commission departments had been reduced to less than 24 hours over a weekend and where there were no clear internal records of a climate consistency assessment being carried out; stresses the importance of adhering to the rules about better law-making; underlines that the European Union will not win any global competitive race by destroying some of the very foundations the Union is built on including principles on how to ensure robust, durable and legally sound legislation that ensures a stable regulatory business environment for the private sector to operate in;	204. Recalls that the European Ombudsman has found cases of maladministration in relation to several legislative proposals that the Commission has presented in 2025; notes with great concern that these cases include the Omnibus I package where the consultation time between Commission departments had been reduced to less than 24 hours over a weekend and where there were no clear internal records of a climate consistency assessment being carried out; stresses the importance of adhering to the rules about better law-making; underlines that the European Union will not win any global competitive race by destroying some of the very foundations the Union is built on including principles on how to ensure robust, durable and legally sound legislation that ensures a stable regulatory business environment for the private sector to operate in; considers that the Commission should pursue regulatory simplification through proper procedural channels, and calls for all future simplification proposals to be accompanied by a quantified assessment of the administrative burden they aim to reduce;

Or. en

Amendment 423

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 204

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
204. Recalls that the European Ombudsman has found cases of maladministration in relation to several legislative proposals that the Commission has presented in 2025; notes with great concern that these cases include the Omnibus I package where the consultation time between Commission departments had been reduced to less than 24 hours over a weekend and where there were no clear internal records of a climate consistency assessment being carried out; stresses the importance of adhering to the rules about better law-making; underlines that the European Union will not win any global competitive race by destroying some of the very foundations the Union is built on including principles on how to ensure robust, durable and legally sound legislation that ensures a stable regulatory business environment for the private sector to operate in;	204. Recalls that the European Ombudsman has found cases of maladministration in relation to several legislative proposals that the Commission has presented in 2025; notes with great concern that these cases include the Omnibus I package where the consultation time between Commission departments had been reduced to less than 24 hours over a weekend; stresses the importance of adhering to the rules about better law-making; underlines that the European Union will not win any global competitive race by destroying some of the very foundations the Union is built on including principles on how to ensure robust, durable and legally sound legislation that ensures a stable regulatory business environment for the private sector to operate in;

Or. fr

Amendment 424

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 204

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
204. Recalls that the European Ombudsman has found cases of maladministration in relation to several legislative proposals that the Commission has presented in 2025; notes with great concern that these cases include the Omnibus I package where the consultation time between Commission departments had been reduced to less than 24 hours over a weekend and where there were no clear internal records of a climate consistency assessment being carried out; stresses the importance of adhering to the rules about better law-making; underlines that the European Union will not win any global competitive race by destroying some of the very foundations the Union is built on including principles on how to ensure robust, durable and legally sound legislation that ensures a stable regulatory business environment for the private sector to operate in;	204. Recalls that the European Ombudsman has found cases of maladministration in relation to several legislative proposals that the Commission has presented in 2025; notes with great concern that these cases include the Omnibus I package where the consultation time between Commission departments had been reduced to less than 24 hours over a weekend, where there were no clear internal records of a climate consistency assessment being carried out, and where the Commission was unable to explain how it selected stakeholders for its meetings when, according to documents shared with the Ombudsman, most invited stakeholders were industry representatives; stresses the importance of adhering to the rules about better law-making; underlines the importance of robust, durable and legally sound legislation that ensures a stable regulatory business environment for the private sector to operate in;

Or. en

Amendment 425

Daniel Freund

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 204 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	204 a. Notes that, following the opening of a criminal investigation into corruption allegations involving a senior Commission official by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in late 2024 and further to the recommendation issued by OLAF in 2024, the Commission launched its own disciplinary procedure concerning that official; notes that the Commission recently announced that it had concluded the procedure, finding that the official concerned had breached the applicable rules of the Staff Regulations, including provisions relating to conflicts of interest, transparency, gift acceptance and document disclosure; recalls that the disciplinary procedure followed the findings by OLAF, which examined allegations that confidential information concerning a major aviation agreement with the State of Qatar had been exchanged in return for gifts; notes that, given the senior official’s position as Director-General at the Commission’s Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport at the time, he exercised significant influence over the negotiation process and, consequently, over the resulting Agreement on Air Transport between the European Union and its Member States and the State of Qatar, signed on 18 October 2021; in light of the nature of the facts which led the Commission to initiate a disciplinary procedure and of the nature of the measures decided upon by the College of Commissioners in respect of that senior official, calls on the Commission, therefore, to immediately suspend the application of that Agreement;

Or. en

Amendment 426

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 204 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	204 a. Recalls the Code of Conduct for the Members of the European Commission, which stipulates that Commissioners must avoid any activity that could compromise their independence or the perception thereof, particularly during politically sensitive periods such as election campaigns; expresses, in this regard, its profound concern that on 5 February 2026 the Executive Vice-President for Cohesion and Reforms and the Commissioner for Defence and Space participated in a press conference supporting a national candidate in Slovenia, during the campaign weeks before the election; requests that the Commission examine the circumstances surrounding the participation of the two Commissioners in the press conference; expects the Commission to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of independence and neutrality, and to ensure that such situations do not occur in the future;

Or. en

Amendment 427

Daniel Freund

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 204 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	204 b. Notes with serious concern the recently reported exchanges between DG TRADE staff and tobacco industry representatives, which suggest that DG TRADE staff may have acted in ways benefiting a company in the sector by encouraging third countries to weaken regulatory restrictions and tax policies on certain tobacco products; notes that, in its decision of 19 December 2023, the European Ombudsman found that the Commission’s failure to ensure a comprehensive approach across all departments to transparency in meetings with the tobacco industry constituted maladministration; recalls that, as a Party to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), the EU must protect its policies from the commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry and limit interactions to what is strictly necessary for regulatory purposes; stresses, therefore, that no interactions concerning third-country tobacco control policies should be permitted; regrets that the meetings reportedly held were not disclosed; calls for full implementation of Article 5.3 of the FCTC, ensuring interactions are strictly limited and fully transparent; calls on the Commission to urgently investigate this case and report its findings to the discharge authority;

Or. en

Amendment 428

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 204 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	204a. Notes that, while he was Director-General for Transport at the Commission, Henrik Hololei of Estonia allegedly passed on confidential documents to Qatar concerning, among other things, the position of France and Germany and the draft agreement then being prepared in Brussels ahead of the negotiations on the aviation agreement signed in October 2021 between the EU and Qatar; points out that, between 2015 and 2021, he took advantage of trips, family holidays, shopping sprees and chauffeur services that went far beyond 'simple' travel at Qatar's expense; notes that it was not until 29 January 2026 that journalists announced his anonymous dismissal1a, even though the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) had recommended in mid-2024 that the Commission consider disciplinary measures; is concerned that he probably continued to receive a salary all those years of more than EUR 15 000 per month;
	_________________
	1a https://www.contexte.com/fr/actualite/transports/informations-contre-cadeaux-lolaf-aurait-etabli-de-possibles-faits-de-corruption-de-lancien-directeur-general-des-transports-a-la-commission_207437

Or. fr

Amendment 429

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 204 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	204 a. Regrets that certain investigations concerning scandals involving high-ranking officials have been conducted in a prolonged and not fully transparent manner, raising concerns as to the reliability of the information communicated;

Or. en

Amendment 430

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 204 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	204a. Recalls that the Ombudsman criticised the Commission and its procedure for dealing with revolving door moves by its staff (OI/1/2021/KR); notes that the Ombudsman concluded that 'The Commission should apply a more robust approach in relation to revolving door moves of its most senior staff to private sector jobs, shortly after departure or retirement ...'; however, the Commission has authorised former European Commissioner and former French Finance Minister Thierry Breton (2019-2024) to (re)join the Bank of America International Advisory Board, an activity that will take up three days of his time per year and for which he has stated that he is neither a salaried employee nor an employee, raising questions about his motivations and status; he is returning to a position he previously held (2013-2019); criticises the fact that the procedure does not provide for transparency with regard to remuneration or compensation arrangements; calls on the Commission, therefore, to forbid revolving door moves by commissioners or directors-general to non-European companies or organisations of systemic size at the end of their term of office;

Or. fr

Amendment 431

Pasquale Tridico

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 204 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	204 a. Reminds that following an OLAF investigation launched in 2023 a disciplinary procedure was initiated in March 2025 against the former Director General of DG MOVE for accepting gift from Qatar while the Commission was negotiating the EU-Qatar free sky agreement; takes note that the Commission decided to fire the senior official for breaking the applicable rules on conflicts of interest, transparency, gift acceptance and document disclosure; expresses concerns that EPPO was not involved in the procedure neither the national justice system;

Or. en

Amendment 432

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 204 c (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	204c. Deplores the Commission's interventionism and interference in the electoral processes of Member States or foreign countries in the name of the DSA or for other reasons, such as Thierry Breton's letter opposing Elon Musk's interview with Donald Trump in the summer of 2024;

Or. fr

Amendment 433

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 205

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
205. Deplores the technical, organisational and procedural shortcomings of the functioning of EPSO over the last years which have led to serious reputational damage to the general Union recruiting process and have had severe negative consequences for many candidates who have invested time and resources in trying to participate in selection procedures that have been cancelled, delayed or have had serious technical shortcomings;	205. Strongly deplores the persistent and systemic technical, organisational and procedural shortcomings of the functioning of EPSO over the last years, including repeated delays, cancellations of competitions and serious technical failures in online testing and selection procedures, which have led to serious reputational damage to the general Union recruiting process and have had severe negative consequences for many candidates who have invested considerable time and resources in trying to participate in selection procedures that have been cancelled, delayed or have had serious technical shortcomings; stresses that these deficiencies risk undermining the attractiveness, credibility and long-term administrative capacity of the Union's institutions and therefore require urgent corrective action;

Or. en

Amendment 434

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 205 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	205 a. Expresses concern over the findings of the European Ombudsman in several inquiries into the functioning of the EPSO, in which maladministration was identified in the handling of candidate complaints, particularly in relation to remote testing procedures, technical and platform deficiencies and inconsistent or unclear communication with candidates regarding technical problems; notes that the Ombudsman criticised EPSO for its inflexibility, contradictory instructions, unjustified decisions and rejection of valid complaints even where candidates had followed official reporting guidelines; welcomes the Ombudsman’s recommendations for improvement, including the possibility for candidates to take tests in physical test centres, the provision of clear and comprehensive information on complaint procedures and the need for a more transparent, fair and responsive handling of candidate complaints; calls on the Commission, in cooperation with EPSO and the other Union institutions, to ensure the full and timely implementation of the Ombudsman’s recommendations and to restore confidence in the fairness, accessibility and reliability of EPSO selection procedures;

Or. en

Amendment 435

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 206

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
206. Encourages the Commission and EPSO leadership to evaluate all aspects of the selection procedure in order to ensure that the Commission and other Union institutions can rely of EPSO for the identification and selection of highly qualified and motivated candidates for all types of jobs in the institutions; at the same time encourages the Commission to address persistent imbalances in geographical representation throughout the services;	206. Encourages the Commission and EPSO leadership to treat the resolution of these deficiencies with priority and evaluate all shortcomings regarding the critical aspects of the selection procedure, including governance, digital infrastructure and communication with candidates, in order to ensure that the Commission and other Union institutions can rely fully and without delay on EPSO for the identification and selection of highly qualified and motivated candidates for all types of jobs in the institutions; at the same time encourages the Commission to address persistent imbalances in geographical representation throughout the services;

Or. en

Amendment 436

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 206 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	206 a. Encourages JSIS to provide coverage for a broader range illnesses, including further autoimmune diseases, and to reimburse a wider range of testing and treatments; also encourages JSIS to make the hotline available during full work hours from 9h until 17:30h and for the line to be answered promptly;

Or. en

Amendment 437

Virginie Joron

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 208 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	208a. Points out that the purpose of school is to learn to read, write and count; notes that learning to write immediately is not systematically given priority in some European schools; notes that teachers are sometimes not replaced; is aware of recurring power cuts affecting some European schools and complaints about the cleanliness of premises and toilets in particular, while efforts are being made to install gender-neutral toilets and promote woke ideology in school libraries; notes that language learning starts late and is sometimes entrusted to foreigners, even though it seems possible to find French-speaking Belgian citizens in Belgium;

Or. fr

Amendment 438

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Dick Erixon

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 210 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	210 a. Notes with concern that, in 2024, the Commission complied with the deadlines laid down in Parliament’s Rules of Procedure in respect of only a limited proportion of written questions, including an especially low compliance rate for priority questions, with numerous replies being submitted after the prescribed time limits; recalls that the provision of timely and substantive replies constitutes a core component of effective parliamentary scrutiny and democratic accountability;

Or. en

Amendment 439

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 211 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	211a. Notes that, during her hearing in September 2025, the Commission's Director-General for Budget did not explain under which budget line or why the Commission had declared a payment to Pfizer of EUR 53.57 million in 2024 in its financial transparency system;

Or. fr

Amendment 440

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 212 – point vi

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(vi) guarantee strict and trustworthy implementation of the new guidelines concerning the use of text messages in relation to workflows, in particular in relation to Commissioners and the Commission President, so as to avoid future justified critique of the Commission’s handling of such texts;	(vi) ensures that the use of text messages does not undermine transparency, by guaranteeing that informal exchanges do not replace official communication and that any information related to decision-making or workflow is transmitted through official channels in full respect of transparency requirements;

Or. en

Amendment 441

Daniel Freund

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 212 – point vi a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(vi a) revise the 2024 changes and amend its Rules of Procedure to ensure full compliance with Regulation 1049/2001;

Or. en

Amendment 442

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 212 – point vii a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(vii a) ensure a predictable, consistent and non-arbitrary application of its Better Regulation rules, by defining ‘urgent’ situations that justify a derogation from the requirements set out in the rules and establish, where derogations are granted, a procedure to ensure that the urgent preparation of legislative proposals still complies with the principles of a transparent, evidence-based and inclusive law-making process;

Or. en

Amendment 443

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 212 – point vii b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(vii b) examine, in light of the Code of Conduct for the Members of the European Commission, the circumstances surrounding the participation of the Executive Vice-President for Cohesion and Reforms and the Commissioner for Defence and Space in a press conference on 5 February 2026 supporting a national candidate in Slovenia during the campaign just weeks before the election, and share its assessment with the discharge authority, as well as ensure that such situations do not occur in the future;

Or. en

Amendment 444

Dick Erixon

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 212 – point ix a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(ix a) commission an independent readability audit of its main public-facing outputs, including press releases, programme guides and annual activity reports, benchmarked against national government communications in the official languages of the Union; insists that the results be published and that the Commission develop a concrete action plan with clear targets and deadlines to bring its communication to a level that is accessible to citizens with a secondary education; stresses that funds allocated to the Commission's communication activities cannot be considered well spent if the outputs remain incomprehensible to the taxpayers who finance them;

Or. en

Amendment 445

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 215 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	215 a. Notes that, under the RRF, payments by the European Commission are conditional upon the satisfactory fulfilment of agreed milestones and targets, rather than on the verification of compliance of individual expenditures with EU and national rules, which makes it challenging to assess compliance with applicable legal requirements.

Or. en

Amendment 446

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 215 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	215 b. Notes that the Recovery and Resilience Facility Regulation does not specify criteria for interpreting the term “satisfactory” in relation to the fulfilment of milestones and targets, and that, in the case of qualitative criteria, this assessment depends on multiple judgments, leading to various possible interpretations as to whether milestones or targets have been satisfactorily met. Notes that cases of vaguely defined milestones or targets, which have been identified, result in the criteria for assessing their fulfilment remaining unclear.

Or. en

Amendment 447

Tomáš Zdechovský, Jacek Protas, Andrzej Halicki

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 217

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
217. Recalls that the RRF super milestones for Poland mandated specific reforms in the field of justice including first, the dismantling of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court and its replacement by an independent Chamber of the Supreme Court, and second, that all judges affected by the rulings of the Disciplinary Chamber had the right to have their case reviewed by the new Chamber within a clear timeframe; notes that, in an attempt to achieve compliance with that super milestone, the PiS Government abolished the Disciplinary Chamber and created a new Chamber of Professional Responsibility in June 2022, and highlights that no Union funds were disbursed as this represented a cosmetic change; notes that, after Donald Tusk’s cabinet came to power in 2023, however, the Commission used those same reforms passed by the PiS Government over one year earlier to declare that the super milestones had been fulfilled; highlights that this sequence raises serious doubt as to whether Poland’s judicial-independence milestones is fully and durably met, and that the release of RRF funds may have been premature, given that core elements of the super milestones remain unfulfilled; highlights that also the Court found serious weaknesses in the appointment of judges in Poland but, due to the ongoing Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) case C-517/24 regarding a request for preliminary ruling directly related to this matter, the Court decided, in its 2024 annual reports, to refrain from concluding on the satisfactory fulfilment of these two milestones; underlines that the outcome of case C-517/24 will be decisive for assessing the regularity of the RRF payments concerned;	217. Recalls that the RRF super milestones for Poland mandated specific reforms in the field of justice including first, the dismantling of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court and its replacement by an independent Chamber of the Supreme Court, and second, that all judges affected by the rulings of the Disciplinary Chamber had the right to have their case reviewed by the new Chamber within a clear timeframe; notes that, in an attempt to achieve compliance with that super milestone, the PiS Government abolished the Disciplinary Chamber and created a new Chamber of Professional Responsibility in June 2022, and highlights that no Union funds were disbursed as this represented a cosmetic change; notes that the Commission subsequently assessed further developments and declared the super milestones fulfilled, allowing for the disbursement of RRF funds; stresses that the fulfilment of judicial-independence milestones must be complete, effective and durable in practice, in line with Union law and the case-law of the Court of Justice, in order to ensure legal certainty and protect the Union budget;

Or. en

Amendment 448

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 217

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
217. Recalls that the RRF super milestones for Poland mandated specific reforms in the field of justice including first, the dismantling of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court and its replacement by an independent Chamber of the Supreme Court, and second, that all judges affected by the rulings of the Disciplinary Chamber had the right to have their case reviewed by the new Chamber within a clear timeframe; notes that, in an attempt to achieve compliance with that super milestone, the PiS Government abolished the Disciplinary Chamber and created a new Chamber of Professional Responsibility in June 2022, and highlights that no Union funds were disbursed as this represented a cosmetic change; notes that, after Donald Tusk’s cabinet came to power in 2023, however, the Commission used those same reforms passed by the PiS Government over one year earlier to declare that the super milestones had been fulfilled; highlights that this sequence raises serious doubt as to whether Poland’s judicial-independence milestones is fully and durably met, and that the release of RRF funds may have been premature, given that core elements of the super milestones remain unfulfilled; highlights that also the Court found serious weaknesses in the appointment of judges in Poland but, due to the ongoing Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) case C-517/24 regarding a request for preliminary ruling directly related to this matter, the Court decided, in its 2024 annual reports, to refrain from concluding on the satisfactory fulfilment of these two milestones; underlines that the outcome of case C-517/24 will be decisive for assessing the regularity of the RRF payments concerned;	217. Recalls that the RRF super milestones for Poland mandated specific reforms in the field of justice including first, the dismantling of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court and its replacement by an independent Chamber of the Supreme Court, and second, that all judges affected by the rulings of the Disciplinary Chamber had the right to have their case reviewed by the new Chamber within a clear timeframe; notes that, in an attempt to achieve compliance with that super milestone, the PiS Government abolished the Disciplinary Chamber and created a new Chamber of Professional Responsibility in June 2022; highlights that no Union funds were disbursed because the Commission wanted to exert political pressure on the right-wing popular and nationalist government elected by the Polish people; in doing so, the Commission stepped outside its role as a neutral guarantor; notes that, after Donald Tusk’s europhile cabinet came to power in 2023, however, the Commission used those same reforms passed by the PiS Government over one year earlier to declare that the super milestones had been fulfilled; highlights that this sequence raises serious doubt as to whether Poland’s judicial-independence milestones is fully and durably met, and that the release of RRF funds may have been premature, given that core elements of the super milestones remain unfulfilled; highlights that also the Court found serious weaknesses in the appointment of judges in Poland but, due to the ongoing Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) case C-517/24 regarding a request for preliminary ruling directly related to this matter, the Court decided, in its 2024 annual reports, to refrain from concluding on the satisfactory fulfilment of these two milestones; underlines that the outcome of case C-517/24 will be decisive for assessing the regularity of the RRF payments concerned;

Or. fr

Amendment 449

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 218

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
218. Notes with particular concern that the Court has found that projects relating to one milestone and three targets in two payments had begun before the eligibility period; notes that the Regulation stipulates that only measures which started from 1 February 2020 onwards may be financed under the RRF, but does not further define what constitutes the ‘start’ of a measure; notes that, in October 2024, the Commission issued guidance interpreting the ‘start’ of a measure as the beginning of its implementation on the ground, when costs materialise; recalls, however, the Court’s view that the start of a measure should be considered the date of the first legal commitment (e.g. a contract, purchase order, or financing decision), as this constitutes the start of the first activity related to the measure; does not share the Commission’s interpretation that the eligibility period concerns only the date of start of works on a specific project rather than the beginning of the preparatory or projection phase;	218. Notes that the Court has found that projects relating to one milestone and three targets in two payments had begun before the eligibility period; notes that the Regulation stipulates that only measures which started from 1 February 2020 onwards may be financed under the RRF, but does not further define what constitutes the ‘start’ of a measure; notes that, in October 2024, the Commission issued guidance interpreting the ‘start’ of a measure as the beginning of its implementation on the ground, when costs materialise, acknowledges that the Court considers the start of a measure to be the date of the first legal commitment (e.g., contract, purchase order, or financing decision), which constitutes the start of the first activity related to the measure; while the Commission considers the start as the beginning of implementation on the ground when costs materialise; recognises the existence of different interpretations of what constitutes the ‘start’ of a measure under the RRF;

Or. en

Amendment 450

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 221

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
221. Notes that by the end of 2024, payments under the RRF amounted to EUR 197,5 billion out of EUR 358,9 billion in committed grants, leaving up to EUR 161,4 billion still to be disbursed by the end of 2026; notes that this substantial volume of outstanding payments, concentrated in the final two years of the instrument, increases the risk of implementation bottlenecks and further delays, particularly in Member States facing structural capacity constraints; stresses that the timely absorption of the remaining RRF grants will depend on the quality and maturity of reforms and investments, the stability of national governance systems, and the Commission’s ability to process a high volume of payment requests efficiently within a compressed timeframe;	221. Notes that by the end of 2024, payments under the RRF amounted to EUR 197,5 billion out of EUR 358,9 billion in committed grants, leaving up to EUR 161,4 billion still to be disbursed by the end of 2026; notes that this substantial volume of outstanding payments, concentrated in the final two years of the instrument, increases the risk of implementation bottlenecks and further delays, particularly in Member States facing structural capacity constraints; stresses that the timely absorption of the remaining RRF grants will depend on the quality and maturity of reforms and investments, the stability of national governance systems, the availability of administrative capacity and technical support, and the Commission’s ability to process a high volume of payment requests efficiently within a compressed timeframe; calls on the Commission to work closely with Member States, in particular those facing structural capacity constraints, by providing targeted technical assistance, guidance and administrative support in order to ensure the full and effective implementation of RRF investments and reforms across all Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 451

Tomáš Zdechovský, Karlo Ressler

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 224

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
224. Stresses its concern about the Court’s findings in Special Report N°22/2024 on double funding resulting from the RRF model’; highlights that Member States national plans may include so-called ‘zero cost measures’, i.e. measures estimated to have no costs to be financed by the RRF, and for which no checks for double-funding are carried out, as the Commission considers that measures receiving no RRF funds pose no such a risk; notes that, in 2024, the Court nevertheless identified a case of double funding in Croatia; further notes that the Commission does not collect confirmed data on double funding cases under the RRF in 2024 and relies primarily on Member States’ systems, despite the Court identifying double funding as a structural blind spot;	224. Stresses its concern about the Court’s findings in Special Report N°22/2024 on double funding resulting from the RRF model; highlights that Member States national plans may include so-called ‘zero cost measures’, i.e. measures estimated to have no costs to be financed by the RRF, and for which no checks for double-funding are carried out, as the Commission considers that measures receiving no RRF funds pose no such a risk; notes that the Court reported potential cases of double funding in relation to RRF measures; recalls that the reported finding in Croatia concerns such a zero-cost measure, and that neither the Commission nor the Member State consider that any RRF funds were duplicated; underlines that the ECA’s finding reflects a different interpretation of what constitutes “funded” rather than actual double funding; calls on the Commission to continue monitoring and providing guidance to Member States on the application of the double funding rules, while acknowledging the legal and methodological framework established in the RRF Regulation;

Or. en

Amendment 452

Georgios Aftias

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 225

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
225. Recalls that the Regulation stipulates that, measures and actions relating to previously fulfilled M&Ts must not have been reversed, and that Member States are required to confirm this non-reversal in the management declarations accompanying their payment requests; notes with concern that the Court found one case of reversal of a Greek target relating to the establishment and full operation of 50 mental health care establishments, which was deemed in the Court’s 2023 annual report as not satisfactorily fulfilled as five of the 50 establishments were found not operational; deplores the RRF legal framework does not allow the Commission to effectively address reversals after 31 December 2026;	225. Recalls that the Regulation stipulates that, measures and actions relating to previously fulfilled M&Ts must not have been reversed, and that Member States are required to confirm this non-reversal in the management declarations accompanying their payment requests;

Or. en

Amendment 453

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 225

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
225. Recalls that the Regulation stipulates that, measures and actions relating to previously fulfilled M&Ts must not have been reversed, and that Member States are required to confirm this non-reversal in the management declarations accompanying their payment requests; notes with concern that the Court found one case of reversal of a Greek target relating to the establishment and full operation of 50 mental health care establishments, which was deemed in the Court’s 2023 annual report as not satisfactorily fulfilled as five of the 50 establishments were found not operational; deplores the RRF legal framework does not allow the Commission to effectively address reversals after 31 December 2026;	225. Recalls that the Regulation stipulates that, measures and actions relating to previously fulfilled M&Ts must not have been reversed, and that Member States are required to confirm this non-reversal in the management declarations accompanying their payment requests; deplores the RRF legal framework does not allow the Commission to effectively address reversals after 31 December 2026;

Or. en

Amendment 454

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 225

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
225. Recalls that the Regulation stipulates that, measures and actions relating to previously fulfilled M&Ts must not have been reversed, and that Member States are required to confirm this non-reversal in the management declarations accompanying their payment requests; notes with concern that the Court found one case of reversal of a Greek target relating to the establishment and full operation of 50 mental health care establishments, which was deemed in the Court’s 2023 annual report as not satisfactorily fulfilled as five of the 50 establishments were found not operational; deplores the RRF legal framework does not allow the Commission to effectively address reversals after 31 December 2026;	225. Recalls that the Regulation stipulates that, measures and actions relating to previously fulfilled M&Ts must not have been reversed, and that Member States are required to confirm this non-reversal in the management declarations accompanying their payment requests; notes with concern that the Court found one case of reversal of a Greek target relating to the establishment and full operation of 50 mental health care establishments, which was deemed in the Court’s 2023 annual report as not satisfactorily fulfilled as five of the 50 establishments were found not operational; deplores the RRF legal framework does not allow the Commission to effectively address reversals after 31 December 2026; calls on the Commission to strengthen monitoring mechanisms and ensure that reforms and investments financed under the RRF remain operational and deliver durable impact beyond the disbursement period, in order to protect the Union’s financial interests and taxpayers’ money;

Or. en

Amendment 455

Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 225

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
225. Recalls that the Regulation stipulates that, measures and actions relating to previously fulfilled M&Ts must not have been reversed, and that Member States are required to confirm this non-reversal in the management declarations accompanying their payment requests; notes with concern that the Court found one case of reversal of a Greek target relating to the establishment and full operation of 50 mental health care establishments, which was deemed in the Court’s 2023 annual report as not satisfactorily fulfilled as five of the 50 establishments were found not operational; deplores the RRF legal framework does not allow the Commission to effectively address reversals after 31 December 2026;	225. Recalls that the Regulation stipulates that, measures and actions relating to previously fulfilled M&Ts must not have been reversed, and that Member States are required to confirm this non-reversal in the management declarations accompanying their payment requests; notes with concern that the Court found one case of reversal of a Greek target relating to the establishment and full operation of 50 mental health care establishments, which was deemed in the Court’s 2023 annual report as not satisfactorily fulfilled as five of the 50 establishments were found not operational; deplores the RRF legal framework does not allow the Commission to effectively address reversals after 31 December 2026; Calls for a stronger focus on health promotion, disease prevention and the reduction of health inequalities, including dedicated funding for mental health, non-communicable diseases, gender-sensitive health interventions and the health needs of children and young people

Or. en

Amendment 456

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 225

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
225. Recalls that the Regulation stipulates that, measures and actions relating to previously fulfilled M&Ts must not have been reversed, and that Member States are required to confirm this non-reversal in the management declarations accompanying their payment requests; notes with concern that the Court found one case of reversal of a Greek target relating to the establishment and full operation of 50 mental health care establishments, which was deemed in the Court’s 2023 annual report as not satisfactorily fulfilled as five of the 50 establishments were found not operational; deplores the RRF legal framework does not allow the Commission to effectively address reversals after 31 December 2026;	225. Recalls that the Regulation stipulates that, measures and actions relating to previously fulfilled M&Ts must not have been reversed, and that Member States are required to confirm this non-reversal in the management declarations accompanying their payment requests; notes with concern that the Court found one case of reversal of a target relating to the establishment and full operation of 50 mental health care establishments, which was deemed in the Court’s 2023 annual report as not satisfactorily fulfilled as five of the 50 establishments were found not operational; deplores the RRF legal framework does not allow the Commission to effectively address reversals after 31 December 2026;

Or. en

Amendment 457

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 227

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
227. Notes that, under the European Semester, the implementation of measures set out in the medium-term fiscal-structural plans is monitored annually, with Member States submitting progress reports to the Commission; notes that, in line with the guidance20 to Member States on the information requirements for the medium-term fiscal-structural plans and for the annual progress reports, for the lifetime of the RRF, these reports are required to include information on progress in implementing any of the RRP reforms and investments included in the medium-term fiscal-structural plans;	227. Notes that, under the European Semester, the implementation of measures set out in the medium-term fiscal-structural plans is monitored annually, with Member States submitting progress reports to the Commission; notes that, in line with the guidance20 to Member States on the information requirements for the medium-term fiscal-structural plans and for the annual progress reports, for the lifetime of the RRF, these reports are required to include information on progress in implementing any of the RRP reforms and investments included in the medium-term fiscal-structural plans; underlines that these reports are essential to ensure transparency, accountability, and the effective use of Union funds, and calls on the Commission to verify that Member States provide complete, timely, and accurate information in line with the objectives of the RRF.
_________________	_________________
20 Guidance C/2024/3975, 21 June 2024.	20 Guidance C/2024/3975, 21 June 2024.

Or. en

Amendment 458

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 228

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
228. Notes that since 2021, the Commission has issued 20 final audit reports covering milestones and targets, containing 591 recommendations to 15 Member States; expresses particular concern that for most (64 %) of the 136 recommendations related to critical and very important findings, the implementation deadline set in the audit report had already passed; notes the Commission acknowledgement that such delays in implementation by some Member States represent 22 % of the total recommendations related to critical and very important findings;	228. Notes that since 2021, the Commission has issued 20 final audit reports covering milestones and targets, containing 591 recommendations to 15 Member States; expresses particular concern that for most (64 %) of the 136 recommendations related to critical and very important findings, the implementation deadline set in the audit report had already passed; notes the Commission acknowledgement that such delays in implementation by some Member States represent 22 % of the total recommendations related to critical and very important findings; notes, further, the Commission’s acceptance of the Court’s recommendation to analyse the reasons for delays in implementation by Member States and its ongoing review of the status of all outstanding recommendations; expects it to urgently address delays in implementing the Commission’s recommendations from the ex-post audits;

Or. en

Amendment 459

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 229

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
229. Notes the Court’s observation that Member State control systems to ensure compliance with public procurement and state aid are insufficiently effective; notes the Court identified weaknesses in 22 individual public procurement procedures including lack of checks to prevent/detect conflict of interest; weakness in justifying the use of urgent procedure; and weakness in estimating the procurement value and project duration leading to significant differences between the tender documents and the actual contracts signed;	229. Notes the Court’s observation that while the Commission has enhanced its checks on public procurement and state aid, Member State control systems to ensure compliance remain insufficiently effective; notes the Court identified weaknesses in 22 individual public procurement procedures including lack of checks to prevent/detect conflict of interest; weakness in justifying the use of urgent procedure; and weakness in estimating the procurement value and project duration leading to significant differences between the tender documents and the actual contracts signed; notes that the Commission is reviewing its guidance to Member States with a view to improving the related controls at national level; underlines that while compliance with public procurement and state aid rules generally has no bearing on the regularity of RRF payments made by the Commission to Member States, these rules are crucial for ensuring a fully functioning internal market; considers, therefore, that funding must be subject to compliance with applicable internal market rules; recognises, the acknowledgement by the Commissioner for Budget, Anti-Fraud and Public Administration during his hearing in CONT on 8 December 2025 that one of the weaknesses which cannot be repeated is the fact that rules on public procurement and state aid are not included as conditions for payment, and the Commission’s commitment to correct this for funding under the next MFF;

Or. en

Amendment 460

Pasquale Tridico

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 229 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	229 a. Reminds that control milestones continued to be added by the Commission following the detection of Member States’ weaknesses in their control systems; support the Court vision that the existence of control milestones is a positive step in improving member state control systems, but also indicates that Member State systems are not entirely effective; reiterates its concern about the persistent weaknesses identified by the Court in the implementation of Member States control systems, which poses a risk to the protection of the EU’s financial interests; reiterates its call on the Commission to take decisive and swift action whenever necessary, and to make full use of the provisions of the RRF Regulation if deficiencies persist in the control systems of Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 461

Ondřej Knotek

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 230

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
230. Notes the Court identified weaknesses, for five Member States, in their management declarations, which are to provide assurance that the information submitted with the payment requests is complete, accurate and reliable; notes the Court’s finding that the five Member States, including Czechia, Spain, France, Croatia and Slovakia, were aware of insufficient evidence for the satisfactory fulfilment of some M&Ts when submitting the payment request, but that none of them included any reservation in their management declaration highlighting that a milestone/target was only partially fulfilled at the time of the payment request;	230. Notes the Court identified weaknesses, for five Member States, in their management declarations, which are to provide assurance that the information submitted with the payment requests is complete, accurate and reliable; notes the Court’s finding that the five Member States were aware of insufficient evidence for the satisfactory fulfilment of some M&Ts when submitting the payment request, but that none of them included any reservation in their management declaration highlighting that a milestone/target was only partially fulfilled at the time of the payment request;

Or. en

Amendment 462

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 232

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
232. Notes the Court’s observation that, as regards serious irregularities not corrected by the Member State, the Director-General of DG ECFIN qualified its assurance with a reservation following the high risk identified in one member state (Czechia) due to two cases of conflict of interest for which the Member State refused to take corrective actions; notes that this reservation concerns two RRF payments, and that the Commission also assessed 20 payments as medium risk and five payments as low risk of serious irregularities; notes with concern that, as the risk assessment criteria are similar to those used by Member States for checks on public procurement and state aid, the Court considers that this assessment also underestimates the level of risk;	232. Notes the Court’s observation that, as regards serious irregularities not corrected by the Member State, the Director-General of DG ECFIN qualified its assurance with a reservation following the high risk identified in one member state (Czechia) due to two cases of conflict of interest for which the Member State refused to take corrective actions; notes that this reservation concerns two RRF payments, and that the Commission also assessed 20 payments as medium risk and five payments as low risk of serious irregularities; notes with concern the Court’s view that, as the risk assessment criteria are broadly aligned with those used by Member States in areas such as public procurement and state aid, the overall assessment may not fully capture the level of underlying risk.

Or. en

Amendment 463

Ondřej Knotek

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 232

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
232. Notes the Court’s observation that, as regards serious irregularities not corrected by the Member State, the Director-General of DG ECFIN qualified its assurance with a reservation following the high risk identified in one member state (Czechia) due to two cases of conflict of interest for which the Member State refused to take corrective actions; notes that this reservation concerns two RRF payments, and that the Commission also assessed 20 payments as medium risk and five payments as low risk of serious irregularities; notes with concern that, as the risk assessment criteria are similar to those used by Member States for checks on public procurement and state aid, the Court considers that this assessment also underestimates the level of risk;	232. Notes the Court’s observation that, as regards serious irregularities not corrected by the Member State, the Director-General of DG ECFIN qualified its assurance with a reservation following the high risk identified in one member state due to two cases of conflict of interest for which the Member State refused to take corrective actions; notes that this reservation concerns two RRF payments, and that the Commission also assessed 20 payments as medium risk and five payments as low risk of serious irregularities; notes with concern that, as the risk assessment criteria are similar to those used by Member States for checks on public procurement and state aid, the Court considers that this assessment also underestimates the level of risk;

Or. en

Amendment 464

Pasquale Tridico

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 233

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
233. Is concerned by the Court reporting that information available to the Commission on detected fraud is limited; highlights that, at the end of 2024, the EPPO was handling 311 active cases related to NGEU, and that all but four of these concerned the RRF, representing approximately 17 % of all active expenditure fraud investigations; notes that the estimated damage to the Union’s financial interests is EUR 2.8 billion, representing 30 % (2023: 25 %) of the overall estimated damage resulting from all EU expenditure fraud; is worried that, in 2024, the Member States’ management declarations had reported only five cases of detected suspected fraud, meaning a very limited of the EPPO open cases were reported by Member States themselves, casting doubts on Member States’ ability to detect and fight fraud; stresses that the figures presented by the EPPO confirm that the risk of fraud is present in the RRF, and that they call into question the ability of Member States to identify and report suspected fraud and the remedial measures taken;	233. Is concerned by the Court reporting that information available to the Commission on detected fraud is limited; highlights that, at the end of 2024, the EPPO was handling 311 active cases related to NGEU, and that all but four of these concerned the RRF, representing approximately 17 % of all active expenditure fraud investigations; notes that the estimated damage to the Union’s financial interests is EUR 2.8 billion, representing 30 % (2023: 25 %) of the overall estimated damage resulting from all EU expenditure fraud; is worried that, in 2024, the Member States’ management declarations had reported only five cases of detected suspected fraud, meaning a very limited of the EPPO open cases were reported by Member States themselves, casting doubts on Member States’ ability to detect and fight fraud; stresses that the figures presented by the EPPO confirm that the risk of fraud is present in the RRF, and that they call into question the ability of Member States to identify and report suspected fraud and the remedial measures taken; is worried that reporting of cases from EU institutions, including the Commission, accounts for not even 3%, raising further concerns on the Commission’s ability to oversight the RRF; is also alarmed that since the RRF implementation is less than halfway through, EPPO expects the number of cases will continue to grow;

Or. en

Amendment 465

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 233

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
233. Is concerned by the Court reporting that information available to the Commission on detected fraud is limited; highlights that, at the end of 2024, the EPPO was handling 311 active cases related to NGEU, and that all but four of these concerned the RRF, representing approximately 17 % of all active expenditure fraud investigations; notes that the estimated damage to the Union’s financial interests is EUR 2.8 billion, representing 30 % (2023: 25 %) of the overall estimated damage resulting from all EU expenditure fraud; is worried that, in 2024, the Member States’ management declarations had reported only five cases of detected suspected fraud, meaning a very limited of the EPPO open cases were reported by Member States themselves, casting doubts on Member States’ ability to detect and fight fraud; stresses that the figures presented by the EPPO confirm that the risk of fraud is present in the RRF, and that they call into question the ability of Member States to identify and report suspected fraud and the remedial measures taken;	233. Is concerned by the Court reporting that information available to the Commission on detected fraud is limited and underlines the need to improve information flows with a view to ensuring the protection of the financial interests of the Union, particularly through enhanced precautionary measures; highlights that, at the end of 2024, the EPPO was handling 311 active cases related to NGEU, and that all but four of these concerned the RRF, representing approximately 17 % of all active expenditure fraud investigations; notes that the estimated damage to the Union’s financial interests is EUR 2.8 billion, representing 30 % (2023: 25 %) of the overall estimated damage resulting from all EU expenditure fraud; acknowledges that Member States may report suspected cases of fraud through various channels, including the management declaration accompanying their payment requests, and that they are in any case obliged to notify relevant authorities of suspected fraud, in particular OLAF and EPPO; notes that, in 2024, the Member States’ management declarations had reported five cases of detected suspected fraud; notes, further, that 90 % of newly opened investigations have been launched upon notification made by the national authorities to EPPO directly; stresses that the figures presented by the EPPO confirm that the risk of fraud is present in the RRF;

Or. en

Amendment 466

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 233

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
233. Is concerned by the Court reporting that information available to the Commission on detected fraud is limited; highlights that, at the end of 2024, the EPPO was handling 311 active cases related to NGEU, and that all but four of these concerned the RRF, representing approximately 17 % of all active expenditure fraud investigations; notes that the estimated damage to the Union’s financial interests is EUR 2.8 billion, representing 30 % (2023: 25 %) of the overall estimated damage resulting from all EU expenditure fraud; is worried that, in 2024, the Member States’ management declarations had reported only five cases of detected suspected fraud, meaning a very limited of the EPPO open cases were reported by Member States themselves, casting doubts on Member States’ ability to detect and fight fraud; stresses that the figures presented by the EPPO confirm that the risk of fraud is present in the RRF, and that they call into question the ability of Member States to identify and report suspected fraud and the remedial measures taken;	233. Is concerned by the Court reporting that information available to the Commission on detected fraud is limited; highlights that, at the end of 2024, the EPPO was handling 311 active cases related to NGEU, and that all but four of these concerned the RRF, representing approximately 17 % of all active expenditure fraud investigations; notes that the estimated damage to the Union’s financial interests is EUR 2.8 billion, representing 30 % (2023: 25 %) of the overall estimated damage resulting from all EU expenditure fraud; is worried that, in 2024, the Member States’ management declarations had reported only five cases of detected suspected fraud, meaning a very limited of the EPPO open cases were reported by Member States themselves, casting doubts on Member States’ ability to detect and fight fraud; stresses that this situation showcases the need to further strengthen national detection and reporting capacities, the cooperation with the EPPO and the Commission, and the overall effectiveness and consistency of anti-fraud systems across the Union; emphasises that protecting the Union's funds and taxpayers’ money requires a robust, coordinated and well-resourced anti-fraud framework at both Union and national level;

Or. en

Amendment 467

Daniel Freund

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 233

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
233. Is concerned by the Court reporting that information available to the Commission on detected fraud is limited; highlights that, at the end of 2024, the EPPO was handling 311 active cases related to NGEU, and that all but four of these concerned the RRF, representing approximately 17 % of all active expenditure fraud investigations; notes that the estimated damage to the Union’s financial interests is EUR 2.8 billion, representing 30 % (2023: 25 %) of the overall estimated damage resulting from all EU expenditure fraud; is worried that, in 2024, the Member States’ management declarations had reported only five cases of detected suspected fraud, meaning a very limited of the EPPO open cases were reported by Member States themselves, casting doubts on Member States’ ability to detect and fight fraud; stresses that the figures presented by the EPPO confirm that the risk of fraud is present in the RRF, and that they call into question the ability of Member States to identify and report suspected fraud and the remedial measures taken;	233. Is concerned by the Court reporting that information available to the Commission on detected fraud is limited; highlights that, at the end of 2024, the EPPO was handling 311 active cases related to NGEU, and that all but four of these concerned the RRF, representing approximately 17 % of all active expenditure fraud investigations; notes that the estimated damage to the Union’s financial interests is EUR 2.8 billion, representing 30 % (2023: 25 %) of the overall estimated damage resulting from all EU expenditure fraud; highlights, however, that the EPPO had only officially notified the Commission of 75 cases related to the RRF, and that 80% of these notified cases related to one measure in a single Member State, Italy; also notes the EPPO finding that national law enforcement authorities remained the main source of reporting, with 90% of the new investigations opened based on their information; also notes from the ECA Special report 06/2026 on Tackling fraud in the RRF that Member States had reported 51 cases of suspected fraud to DG ECFIN from the start of the RRF in 2021 until end of 2024; stresses that the figures presented by the EPPO confirm that the risk of fraud is present in the RRF;

Or. en

Amendment 468

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 234

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
234. Notes that, on 3 November 2025, the Commission adopted an Implementing Decision on the partial suspension of the disbursement of the second instalment of the non-repayable support for Bulgaria as one control milestone had not been deemed satisfactorily fulfilled; notes that the Bulgarian government had passed a reform aiming to ensure a politically independent appointment of the Anti-corruption Commission, and that the Commission’s Implementing Decision further notes that the National Assembly retains a predominant role in both the nomination and appointment of the management of the Anti-corruption Commission, notably its three members, and the Nomination Committee in itself cannot mitigate this role; notes that Bulgaria has six months to find a way to revise the legislative framework and demonstrate it meets the required threshold of political independence to receive the second instalment of the RRF non-repayable support; reminds the Commission that the suspension should only be lifted where Bulgaria has taken the necessary measures to ensure a satisfactory fulfilment of the milestone;	234. Welcomes the reforms completed by Bulgaria and the subtantial progress achieved in 2025, during which the country received approximately 31% of its total allocated RRF funding through two tranches amounting to 1.91 billion; acknoledges key reforms in the areas of public procurement and judicial transparency, energy market liberalisation, coal phase-out measures, renewable energy expansion, education, healthcare and e-health systems, and sustainable transport; notes that, taken together, these payments mark renewed momentum in Bulgaria's economic, energy, social and institutional reformos under the RRF; notes that, on 3 November 2025, the Commission adopted an Implementing Decision on the partial suspension of the disbursement of the second instalment of the non-repayable support for Bulgaria as one control milestone had not been deemed satisfactorily fulfilled; ackoledges the efforts undertaken by the Bulgarian government to introduce reforms aiming to ensure a politically independent appointment of the Anti-corruption Commission; notes that the Commission’s Implementing Decision further notes that the National Assembly retains a predominant role in both the nomination and appointment of the management of the Anti-corruption Commission; notes that Bulgaria has six months to revise the legislative framework to reach the required threshold; underlines that the suspension should only be lifted where Bulgaria has taken the necessary measures to ensure a satisfactory fulfilment of the milestone;

Or. en

Amendment 469

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 234 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	234 a. Notes the ECA’s repeated findings of certain national audit authorities’ shortcomings in terms of scope, quality, documentation and reporting; stresses the need for a clear framework of responsibilities to guarantee quality and consistency; Insists that audit bodies in Member States comply with internationally accepted audit standards; warns that failure to do so undermines the reliability of their work and poses risks to the Single Audit approach;

Or. en

Amendment 470

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 234 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	234 b. Regrets the incomplete audit trails observed by the ECA in the RRF, which weaken traceability and limit the ability of Parliament and the ECA to exercise scrutiny;

Or. en

Amendment 471

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 234 c (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	234 c. Stresses that all Commission databases and information systems used for the collection, exchange and monitoring of data between the Commission and the Member States must be accessible to the ECA; underlines that the ECA should have direct and prompt access to the original data as recorded in the system, without prior modification, aggregation or editing by national authorities or Commission services; emphasises that such access is essential to ensure the independence, reliability and effectiveness of audits and to uphold transparency and accountability in the implementation of the Union budget;

Or. en

Amendment 472

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 234 d (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	234 d. Expresses concern that audits of RRF and other performance based instruments focus on system audits rather than controls on actual expenditure incurred; warns that such system audits may not reveal underlying issues which can spill over and seriously undermine the sound financial management of the Union budget and the protection of the financial interest of the Union; calls on the Commission to take decisive corrective measures, strengthen audit and accreditation procedures, and ensure that similar systemic failures cannot recur, while respecting the principle of proportionality regarding reporting and documentation duties;

Or. en

Amendment 473

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 235

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
235. Considers that the RRF constitutes a constitutional test for democratic accountability, given its size, speed and exceptional delivery model; stresses that Parliament’s role as discharge authority is meaningful only if transparency, traceability and verification standards are applied rigorously and consistently across all Member States;	235. Considers that the RRF constitutes a constitutional test for democratic accountability, given its size, speed and exceptional delivery model; recalls that the RRF is financed through unprecedented common European borrowing and therefore requires the highest standards of financial responsibility, transparency and value for money for European taxpayers; stresses that Parliament’s role as discharge authority is meaningful only if transparency, traceability and verification standards are applied rigorously and consistently across all Member States and if the assessment of milestones and targets is carried out in a fully objective and non-politicised manner ensuring equal treatment of Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 474

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 235

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
235. Considers that the RRF constitutes a constitutional test for democratic accountability, given its size, speed and exceptional delivery model; stresses that Parliament’s role as discharge authority is meaningful only if transparency, traceability and verification standards are applied rigorously and consistently across all Member States;	235. Considers that the RRF constitutes a constitutional test for democratic accountability, given its size, speed and exceptional delivery model; stresses that Parliament’s role as discharge authority is meaningful only if transparency, traceability and verification standards are applied rigorously and consistently across all Member States; considers that any shift towards performance-based instruments must be accompanied by parliamentary scrutiny in order to guarantee democratic accountability; opposes any proposal that would upset the institutional balance and undermine Parliament’s role as discharge authority;

Or. en

Amendment 475

Pasquale Tridico

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 235

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
235. Considers that the RRF constitutes a constitutional test for democratic accountability, given its size, speed and exceptional delivery model; stresses that Parliament’s role as discharge authority is meaningful only if transparency, traceability and verification standards are applied rigorously and consistently across all Member States;	235. Considers that the RRF constitutes a constitutional test for democratic accountability, given its size, speed and exceptional delivery model; stresses that Parliament’s role as discharge authority is meaningful only if transparency, traceability and verification standards are applied rigorously and consistently across all Member States; support the Court’s view that traceability of funds is important for the protection of EU’s financial interests enabling the identification of natural persons ultimately benefitting from EU funds;

Or. en

Amendment 476

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 236

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
236. Notes the Court’s observation that traceability of RRF funds is not systematic across Member States, and that the systems in place in two Member States did not ensure the systematic collection of data on expenditure incurred by final recipients of RRF funds; deplores the Court’s finding that, despite the Commission’s guidance on the methodology to be followed by Member States for publishing the 100 biggest final recipients21 , significant variations in the type of information published occur; also notes that two Member States reported amounts allocated (i.e. budgeted) or disbursed but in some cases only to the level of intermediate bodies, and in some cases combined with national funding, and that one Member State only reported data related to measures with M&Ts submitted for payment to the Commission, which did not fully reflect implementation of ongoing measures;	236. Notes the Court’s observation that traceability of RRF funds is not systematic across Member States, and that the systems in place in two Member States did not ensure the systematic collection of data on expenditure incurred by final recipients of RRF funds; deplores the Court’s finding that, despite the Commission’s guidance on the methodology to be followed by Member States for publishing the 100 biggest final recipients21 , significant variations in the type of information published occur; expresses serious concern that such shortcomings in transparency and traceability risk undermining public trust and effective democratic scrutiny of RRF expenditure; also notes that two Member States reported amounts allocated (i.e. budgeted) or disbursed but in some cases only to the level of intermediate bodies, and in some cases combined with national funding, and that one Member State only reported data related to measures with M&Ts submitted for payment to the Commission, which did not fully reflect implementation of ongoing measures;
_________________	_________________
21 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.	21 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.

Or. en

Amendment 477

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 236

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
236. Notes the Court’s observation that traceability of RRF funds is not systematic across Member States, and that the systems in place in two Member States did not ensure the systematic collection of data on expenditure incurred by final recipients of RRF funds; deplores the Court’s finding that, despite the Commission’s guidance on the methodology to be followed by Member States for publishing the 100 biggest final recipients21 , significant variations in the type of information published occur; also notes that two Member States reported amounts allocated (i.e. budgeted) or disbursed but in some cases only to the level of intermediate bodies, and in some cases combined with national funding, and that one Member State only reported data related to measures with M&Ts submitted for payment to the Commission, which did not fully reflect implementation of ongoing measures;	236. Notes that for 2024 the Court assessed the national systems of five Member States to see whether they were capable of tracking RRF funds from the national budget down to final recipients and beyond, as well as providing data on expenditure incurred by final recipients; notes the Court’s observation that traceability of RRF funds is not systematic across Member States, and that the systems in place in two Member States did not ensure the systematic collection of data on expenditure incurred by final recipients of RRF funds; regrets the Court’s finding that, despite the Commission’s guidance on the methodology to be followed by Member States for publishing the 100 biggest final recipients21 , significant variations in the type of information published occur; also notes that two Member States reported amounts allocated (i.e. budgeted) or disbursed but in some cases only to the level of intermediate bodies, and in some cases combined with national funding, and that one Member State only reported data related to measures with M&Ts submitted for payment to the Commission, which did not fully reflect implementation of ongoing measures;
_________________	_________________
21 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.	21 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.

Or. en

Amendment 478

Eero Heinäluoma, José Cepeda, Csaba Molnár

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 237

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
237. Recalls that Article 22(2)(d)(ii) of the RRF Regulation (EU) 2021/241 provides for the obligations of the Member States, for the purpose of audit and control and to provide comparable information on the use of RRF funds, to collect name of contractor and sub-contractor, where the final recipient is a contracting authority, and that Article 25a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2023/43522 amending the RRF Regulation requires Member States to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding under the RRF, and, in the case of a legal person, the recipient’s full name and VAT identification number or tax identification number, or another unique identifier established at national level shall be published; notes the Commission position, presented in its Guidance on Recovery and Resilience Plans23 , describes a final recipient as the ‘last entity receiving funds that is not a contractor or subcontractor’; expresses deep concern over this interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’, which contradicts the existing legislation; stresses that, should the Commission continue to refuse to ensure full transparency, Parliament will consider all available measures to enforce compliance, to prevent a similar interpretation from being applied to the transparency provisions in other financial regulations; considers that persistent failure to ensure meaningful publication of final recipients seriously calls into question Parliament’s ability to grant discharge on an informed basis; 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;	237. Recalls that Article 22(2)(d)(ii) of the RRF Regulation (EU) 2021/241 obliges Member States, for the purpose of audit and control, to collect comparable information on the use of RRF funds, including on the names of final recipients, contractors and sub-contractors, and beneficial owners; recalls, further, that while the Regulation does not oblige Member States to collect and publish information about expenditure incurred by final recipients in pursuit of milestones or targets nor to provide such information with their RRF payment requests, they are however required to publish this information for the 100 ‘final recipients’ receiving the largest amounts of funding under the RRF; notes that the Commission position, presented in its Guidance on Recovery and Resilience Plans23 , describes a final recipient as the ‘last entity receiving funds that is not a contractor or subcontractor’; expresses deep concern over this interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’, and reiterates its view that this contradicts the existing legislation; stresses that it expects the Commission to enforce compliance with existing legislation and to 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; underlines that, to ensure transparency, Parliament will consider all available measures to enforce compliance, and to prevent a similar interpretation from being applied to the transparency provisions in other financial regulations; considers that persistent failure to ensure meaningful publication of final recipients seriously calls into question Parliament’s ability to grant discharge on an informed basis; recalls that Parliament has repeatedly raised serious concerns in previous discharge resolutions regarding the RRF, including on the transparency of final beneficiaries;
_________________	_________________
22 Regulation (EU) 2023/435 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 February 2023 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/241 as regards REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans and amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) 2021/1060 and (EU) 2021/1755, and Directive 2003/87/EC (OJ L 63, 28.2.2023, p. 1; ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/435/oj).
23 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.	23 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.

Or. en

Amendment 479

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 237

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
237. Recalls that Article 22(2)(d)(ii) of the RRF Regulation (EU) 2021/241 provides for the obligations of the Member States, for the purpose of audit and control and to provide comparable information on the use of RRF funds, to collect name of contractor and sub-contractor, where the final recipient is a contracting authority, and that Article 25a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2023/43522 amending the RRF Regulation requires Member States to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding under the RRF, and, in the case of a legal person, the recipient’s full name and VAT identification number or tax identification number, or another unique identifier established at national level shall be published; notes the Commission position, presented in its Guidance on Recovery and Resilience Plans23 , describes a final recipient as the ‘last entity receiving funds that is not a contractor or subcontractor’; expresses deep concern over this interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’, which contradicts the existing legislation; stresses that, should the Commission continue to refuse to ensure full transparency, Parliament will consider all available measures to enforce compliance, to prevent a similar interpretation from being applied to the transparency provisions in other financial regulations; considers that persistent failure to ensure meaningful publication of final recipients seriously calls into question Parliament’s ability to grant discharge on an informed basis; 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;	237. Recalls that Article 22(2)(d)(ii) of the RRF Regulation (EU) 2021/241 provides for the obligations of the Member States, for the purpose of audit and control and to provide comparable information on the use of RRF funds, to collect name of contractor and sub-contractor, where the final recipient is a contracting authority, and that Article 25a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2023/435[6] amending the RRF Regulation requires Member States to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding under the RRF, and, in the case of a legal person, the recipient’s full name and VAT identification number or tax identification number, or another unique identifier established at national level shall be published; notes the Commission position, presented in its Guidance on Recovery and Resilience Plans[7], which describes a final recipient as the ‘last entity receiving funds that is not a contractor or subcontractor’; expresses deep concern over this interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’, underlines the importance of full transparency and the need to clearly identify all final beneficiaries; considers that persistent failure to ensure meaningful publication of final recipients weakens the Parliament's ability to assess the implementation of RRF funds on an informed basis; recalls that Parliament has repeatedly highlighted serious concerns in previous discharge resolutions regarding the RRF, including on the transparency of final beneficiaries, and therefore encourages demands that the Commission to provide a meaningful list of final beneficiaries, excluding merely intermediary entities such as ministries or managing authorities;
_________________
22 Regulation (EU) 2023/435 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 February 2023 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/241 as regards REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans and amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) 2021/1060 and (EU) 2021/1755, and Directive 2003/87/EC (OJ L 63, 28.2.2023, p. 1; ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/435/oj).
23 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.

Or. en

Amendment 480

Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 237

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
237. Recalls that Article 22(2)(d)(ii) of the RRF Regulation (EU) 2021/241 provides for the obligations of the Member States, for the purpose of audit and control and to provide comparable information on the use of RRF funds, to collect name of contractor and sub-contractor, where the final recipient is a contracting authority, and that Article 25a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2023/43522 amending the RRF Regulation requires Member States to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding under the RRF, and, in the case of a legal person, the recipient’s full name and VAT identification number or tax identification number, or another unique identifier established at national level shall be published; notes the Commission position, presented in its Guidance on Recovery and Resilience Plans23 , describes a final recipient as the ‘last entity receiving funds that is not a contractor or subcontractor’; expresses deep concern over this interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’, which contradicts the existing legislation; stresses that, should the Commission continue to refuse to ensure full transparency, Parliament will consider all available measures to enforce compliance, to prevent a similar interpretation from being applied to the transparency provisions in other financial regulations; considers that persistent failure to ensure meaningful publication of final recipients seriously calls into question Parliament’s ability to grant discharge on an informed basis; 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;	237. Recalls that Article 22(2)(d)(ii) of the RRF Regulation (EU) 2021/241 provides for the obligations of the Member States, for the purpose of audit and control and to provide comparable information on the use of RRF funds, to collect name of contractor and sub-contractor, where the final recipient is a contracting authority, and that Article 25a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2023/43522 amending the RRF Regulation requires Member States to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding under the RRF, and, in the case of a legal person, the recipient’s full name and VAT identification number or tax identification number, or another unique identifier established at national level shall be published; notes the Commission position, presented in its Guidance on Recovery and Resilience Plans23 , describes a final recipient as the ‘last entity receiving funds that is not a contractor or subcontractor’; expresses deep concern over this interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’, which contradicts the existing legislation; stresses that, should the Commission continue to refuse to ensure full transparency, Parliament will consider all available measures to enforce compliance, to prevent a similar interpretation from being applied to the transparency provisions in other financial regulations; 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;
_________________	_________________
22 Regulation (EU) 2023/435 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 February 2023 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/241 as regards REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans and amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) 2021/1060 and (EU) 2021/1755, and Directive 2003/87/EC (OJ L 63, 28.2.2023, p. 1; ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/435/oj).	22 Regulation (EU) 2023/435 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 February 2023 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/241 as regards REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans and amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) 2021/1060 and (EU) 2021/1755, and Directive 2003/87/EC (OJ L 63, 28.2.2023, p. 1; ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/435/oj).
23 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.	23 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.

Or. en

Amendment 481

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 237

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
237. Recalls that Article 22(2)(d)(ii) of the RRF Regulation (EU) 2021/241 provides for the obligations of the Member States, for the purpose of audit and control and to provide comparable information on the use of RRF funds, to collect name of contractor and sub-contractor, where the final recipient is a contracting authority, and that Article 25a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2023/43522 amending the RRF Regulation requires Member States to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding under the RRF, and, in the case of a legal person, the recipient’s full name and VAT identification number or tax identification number, or another unique identifier established at national level shall be published; notes the Commission position, presented in its Guidance on Recovery and Resilience Plans23 , describes a final recipient as the ‘last entity receiving funds that is not a contractor or subcontractor’; expresses deep concern over this interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’, which contradicts the existing legislation; stresses that, should the Commission continue to refuse to ensure full transparency, Parliament will consider all available measures to enforce compliance, to prevent a similar interpretation from being applied to the transparency provisions in other financial regulations; considers that persistent failure to ensure meaningful publication of final recipients seriously calls into question Parliament’s ability to grant discharge on an informed basis; 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;	237. Recalls that Article 22(2)(d)(ii) of the RRF Regulation (EU) 2021/241 provides for the obligations of the Member States, for the purpose of audit and control and to provide comparable information on the use of RRF funds, to collect name of contractor and sub-contractor, where the final recipient is a contracting authority, and that Article 25a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2023/43522 amending the RRF Regulation requires Member States to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding under the RRF, and, in the case of a legal person, the recipient’s full name and VAT identification number or tax identification number, or another unique identifier established at national level shall be published; notes the Commission position, presented in its Guidance on Recovery and Resilience Plans23 , describes a final recipient as the ‘last entity receiving funds that is not a contractor or subcontractor’; expresses deep concern over this interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’, which contradicts the existing legislation; stresses that, should the Commission continue to refuse to ensure full transparency, Parliament will consider all available measures to enforce compliance, to prevent a similar interpretation from being applied to the transparency provisions in other financial regulations; considers that persistent failure to ensure meaningful publication of final recipients seriously calls into question Parliament’s ability to grant discharge on an informed basis; 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 to ensure that citizens and stakeholders have full access to this information;
_________________	_________________
22 Regulation (EU) 2023/435 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 February 2023 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/241 as regards REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans and amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) 2021/1060 and (EU) 2021/1755, and Directive 2003/87/EC (OJ L 63, 28.2.2023, p. 1; ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/435/oj).	22 Regulation (EU) 2023/435 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 February 2023 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/241 as regards REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans and amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) 2021/1060 and (EU) 2021/1755, and Directive 2003/87/EC (OJ L 63, 28.2.2023, p. 1; ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/435/oj).
23 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.	23 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.

Or. en

Amendment 482

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Dick Erixon, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 237

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
237. Recalls that Article 22(2)(d)(ii) of the RRF Regulation (EU) 2021/241 provides for the obligations of the Member States, for the purpose of audit and control and to provide comparable information on the use of RRF funds, to collect name of contractor and sub-contractor, where the final recipient is a contracting authority, and that Article 25a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2023/43522 amending the RRF Regulation requires Member States to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding under the RRF, and, in the case of a legal person, the recipient’s full name and VAT identification number or tax identification number, or another unique identifier established at national level shall be published; notes the Commission position, presented in its Guidance on Recovery and Resilience Plans23 , describes a final recipient as the ‘last entity receiving funds that is not a contractor or subcontractor’; expresses deep concern over this interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’, which contradicts the existing legislation; stresses that, should the Commission continue to refuse to ensure full transparency, Parliament will consider all available measures to enforce compliance, to prevent a similar interpretation from being applied to the transparency provisions in other financial regulations; considers that persistent failure to ensure meaningful publication of final recipients seriously calls into question Parliament’s ability to grant discharge on an informed basis; 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;	237. Recalls that Article 22(2)(d)(ii) of the RRF Regulation (EU) 2021/241 provides for the obligations of the Member States, for the purpose of audit and control and to provide comparable information on the use of RRF funds, to collect name of contractor and sub-contractor, where the final recipient is a contracting authority, and that Article 25a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2023/43522 amending the RRF Regulation requires Member States to publish information on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding under the RRF, and, in the case of a legal person, the recipient’s full name and VAT identification number or tax identification number, or another unique identifier established at national level shall be published; notes the Commission position, presented in its Guidance on Recovery and Resilience Plans23 , describes a final recipient as the ‘last entity receiving funds that is not a contractor or subcontractor’; expresses deep concern over this interpretation of the concept of ‘final recipient’, which contradicts the existing legislation; stresses that, should the Commission continue to refuse to ensure full transparency, Parliament will consider all available measures to enforce compliance, to prevent a similar interpretation from being applied to the transparency provisions in other financial regulations; considers that persistent failure to ensure meaningful publication of final recipients seriously calls into question Parliament’s ability to grant discharge on an informed basis; 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; stresses that full and reliable information on the final recipients and beneficiaries is essential in order to prevent misuse of funds, detect fraud and ensure equal standards of accountability across all Member States;
_________________	_________________
22 Regulation (EU) 2023/435 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 February 2023 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/241 as regards REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans and amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) 2021/1060 and (EU) 2021/1755, and Directive 2003/87/EC (OJ L 63, 28.2.2023, p. 1; ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/435/oj).	22 Regulation (EU) 2023/435 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 February 2023 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/241 as regards REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans and amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) 2021/1060 and (EU) 2021/1755, and Directive 2003/87/EC (OJ L 63, 28.2.2023, p. 1; ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/435/oj).
23 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.	23 COM(2024)0474 Annex 5, Annex to the Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the RRF, 10.10.2024.

Or. en

Amendment 483

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 239

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
239. Highlights furthermore that, on 4 February 2025, CONT Members requested the Commission to provide for each Member State the list of the 100 largest natural persons or entities receiving funds under the RRF, including contractors and subcontractors; finds it unacceptable that only six Member States shared the requested data with the Commission services, and a Member State expressed its intention to share the list in the future, while three other Member States indicated they would not submit the data, claiming that the request was not in line with the reporting requirements under the RRF Regulation, while the remaining 17 Member States failed to react to the Commission’s request;	239. Highlights furthermore that, on 4 February 2025, CONT Members requested the Commission to provide for each Member State the list of the 100 largest natural persons or entities receiving funds under the RRF, including contractors and subcontractors; finds it unacceptable that only six Member States shared the requested data with the Commission services, and a Member State expressed its intention to share the list in the future, while three other Member States indicated they would not submit the data, claiming that the request was not in line with the reporting requirements under the RRF Regulation, while the remaining 17 Member States failed to react to the Commission’s request; notes that Members had already requested the list in previous years but received no response from the Commission;

Or. fr

Amendment 484

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 239

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
239. Highlights furthermore that, on 4 February 2025, CONT Members requested the Commission to provide for each Member State the list of the 100 largest natural persons or entities receiving funds under the RRF, including contractors and subcontractors; finds it unacceptable that only six Member States shared the requested data with the Commission services, and a Member State expressed its intention to share the list in the future, while three other Member States indicated they would not submit the data, claiming that the request was not in line with the reporting requirements under the RRF Regulation, while the remaining 17 Member States failed to react to the Commission’s request;	239. Highlights furthermore that, on 4 February 2025, CONT Members requested for the purposes of discharge under Article 319 TFEU the Commission to provide for each Member State the list of the 100 largest natural persons or entities receiving funds under the RRF, including contractors and subcontractors; finds it unacceptable that only six Member States shared the requested data with the Commission services, and a Member State expressed its intention to share the list in the future, while three other Member States indicated they would not submit the data, claiming that the request was not in line with the reporting requirements under the RRF Regulation, while the remaining 17 Member States failed to react to the Commission’s request;

Or. en

Amendment 485

Pasquale Tridico

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 239 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	239 a. Reminds the RRF's crucial contribution to preventing a severe economic downturn and social crisis following the COVID-19 pandemic, and its ability to provide a strong crisis response tool;

Or. en

Amendment 486

Virginie Joron, Ondřej Knotek, Tamás Deutsch, Julien Sanchez

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 239 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	239a. Deplores the fact that the Court had to issue a qualified opinion on the legality and regularity of expenditure under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF); in this respect, deplores the use of this new type of so-called temporary and flexible – but extremely costly – instrument, which the European Court of Auditors regularly deplores for its lack of transparency in achieving milestones and objectives, as well as its lack of objectivity in granting funding, entirely in the hands of the Commission; criticises the planned development of this type of instrument, which offers few guarantees of follow-up and thus that the Union's financial interests will be protected; denounces, further, the fact that the colossal debt generated by this type of instrument places the Union in a position of dependence on its creditors, potentially exposing it to the risk of interference from outside Europe;

Or. fr

Amendment 487

Tomáš Zdechovský, Jacek Protas, Andrzej Halicki

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point iv

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(iv) consider suspending payments to Poland if compliance with the two super milestones aimed at strengthening the independence and impartiality of the judiciary backslides or remains partial;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 488

Virginie Joron, Tamás Deutsch

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point iv

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(iv) consider suspending payments to Poland if compliance with the two super milestones aimed at strengthening the independence and impartiality of the judiciary backslides or remains partial;	(iv) point out that a diversion of part of the post-COVID recovery plan via a programme of 2 400 EU-funded grants worth EUR 282 million for hotels, restaurants and cultural venues came to light in Poland after a transparency campaign revealed grants being awarded for yachts, vodka bars and a company registered at the same address as a swingers' club8a;
	_________________
	8a https://www.politico.eu/article/poland-freezes-covid-cash-payouts-after-swingers-club-and-yacht-storm/

Or. fr

Amendment 489

Daniel Freund

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point v

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(v) urgently reinforce fraud detection mechanisms, including the use of a mandatory fraud risk assessment for all large-scale RRF projects;	deleted

Or. en

Amendment 490

Olivier Chastel, Gilles Boyer

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point v a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(v a) deplores the fact that the Court’s access to FENIX, the reporting tool on the RRF, remains still an open issue; Demands to the Commission to establish, with any further delay, a binding interinstitutional arrangement ensuring the Court’s full, systematic and real-time access to all the relevant databases including Arachne and Fenix.

Or. en

Amendment 491

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point vi

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(vi) consistently and accurately apply the provisions related to the ‘final recipients’, of 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;	(vi) consistently and accurately apply the provisions related to the ‘final recipients’ of 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 establish more standardised and comparable reporting formats across all Member States, including comprehensive and reliable data on final recipients and beneficiaries, in order to enable a proper assessment of the performance, impact and added value of RRF expenditure for taxpayers’ money, 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;

Or. en

Amendment 492

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point vi

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(vi) consistently and accurately apply the provisions related to the ‘final recipients’, of 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;	(vi) consistently and accurately apply the provisions related to the ‘final recipients’ of the RRF Regulation to ensure Member States collecting and providing data on the last entities receiving funds, making this information available to the discharge authority, excluding intermediary entities such as ministries or managing authorities;

Or. en

Amendment 493

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point vi

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(vi) consistently and accurately apply the provisions related to the ‘final recipients’, of 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;	(vi) consistently and accurately apply the provisions related to the ‘final recipients’, of 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;

Or. en

Amendment 494

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point vi a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(vi a) calls for greater transparency in the RRF through the timely publication of Commission assessments, national reports, audits and recovery actions in an accessible and verifiable format, enabling proper scrutiny by Parliament, the ECA and citizens; supports a layered approach to access—full real-time access for the ECA, unrestricted information rights for Parliament, and transparent public access in line with CJEU rulings—while ensuring compliance with GDPR and EU data protection rules; stresses that published data must reflect actual project implementation and results;

Or. en

Amendment 495

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point vii

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(vii) ensure consistent performance information, in the post-2027 MFF, by establishing a single set of clearly defined policy areas and a consistent methodology to link challenges, objectives, measures, funding and performance indicators to one or more policy areas;	(vii) ensure consistent performance information, in the post-2027 MFF, by establishing a single set of clearly defined policy areas and a consistent methodology to link challenges, objectives, measures, funding and performance indicators to one or more policy areas, including through the use of harmonised reporting frameworks and measurable, comparable indicators across all Member States, enabling a clear assessment of results, efficiency and value for the Union's funding;

Or. en

Amendment 496

Tomáš Zdechovský

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point x

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
(x) propose, for post-2026 instruments and regulation revisions, an obligation for Member States to report suspected fraud and irregularities using a harmonised taxonomy aligned with OLAF/EPPO standards and needs and to include penalties for systemic under-reporting.	(x) propose, for post-2026 instruments and regulation revisions, an obligation for Member States to report suspected fraud and irregularities using a harmonised taxonomy aligned with OLAF/EPPO standards;

Or. en

Amendment 497

Eero Heinäluoma, Jens Geier, José Cepeda

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point x a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(x a) perform a macroeconomic evaluation with the objective of assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of EU support to Member States through the RRF, including the extent to which support has been timely and proportional to the intended objectives of the Facility, notably recovery from the COVID-19 crisis, and share it with the discharge authority;

Or. en

Amendment 498

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Joachim Stanisław Brudziński

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point x a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(x a) work closely with Member States, in particular with those facing administrative capacity constraints, by providing targeted technical assistance and guidance in order to ensure the full and effective implementation of RRF investments and reforms across all Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 499

Monika Hohlmeier

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point x a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(x a) calls for the introduction of predictive analytic tools powered by AI as well as machine learning capabilities that would enable auditors to conduct real-time risk assessments and identify anomalies more effectively;

Or. en

Amendment 500

Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 241 – point x b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(x b) calls on the Commission to require more standardised and comparable reporting formats across all Member States, including comprehensive and reliable data on final recipients and beneficiaries, in order to enable a proper assessment of the performance, impact and added value of RRF expenditure for taxpayers’ money; calls on the Commission to make full transparency and traceability of RRF funding a core condition for disbursement where serious deficiencies in national reporting or control systems are identified, and to make full use of its supervisory, audit and corrective powers under the RRF framework to ensure harmonised, reliable and timely reporting across the Union;

Or. en