Sittings · Document
OPINION (2024/2085(INI)) 2025-03-20
On the implementation report on the Recovery and Resilience Facility
Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety · Rapporteur: Jonas Sjöstedt
AMENDMENTS
The Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety submits the following to the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, as the committees responsible:
Amendment 1
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| – having regard to the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 entitled ‘The European Green Deal’ (COM(2019)0640), |
Amendment 2
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| – having regard to its resolution of 15 January 2020 on the European Green Deal1a, ______________ 1a OJ C 270, 7.7.2021, p. 2. |
Amendment 3
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| – having regard to the Commission communication of 11 March 2020 entitled ‘A new Circular Economy Action Plan – For a cleaner and more competitive Europe’ (COM(2020)0098), |
Amendment 4
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 d (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| – having regard to its resolution of 10 February 2021 on the New Circular Economy Action Plan1a, ______________ 1a OJ C 465, 17.11.2021, p. 11. |
Amendment 5
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| A. whereas reforms and investments under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) help to make the EU more resilient and less dependent by diversifying key supply chains and thereby strengthening the strategic autonomy of the EU; whereas reforms and investments under the RRF also generate European added value; | A. whereas reforms and investments under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) aim to strengthen the Union’s economic resilience, including by supporting the green transition by, among other things, contributing to the achievement of the Union’s 2030 climate targets, to make the Union less dependent by diversifying key supply chains, and thereby strengthening the strategic autonomy of the Union; whereas reforms and investments under the RRF also generate European added value; |
Amendment 6
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Aa. whereas the Commission should ensure consistency between the RRF and other EU financial instruments in order to maximise the effectiveness of public investment; |
Amendment 7
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Da. whereas an investment-based green transition is key to achieving the much-welcomed and ambitious climate agenda set out in the Fit for 55 legislative package, and the RRF is a key financial instrument for implementing such a transition; whereas climate resilience is crucial for the long-term stability of Europe’s economy and society, and investments from the Recovery and Resilience Facility are an opportunity to strengthen adaptation to climate change; whereas extreme weather events, such as floods, fires and droughts, are constantly increasing and pose a serious threat to EU ecosystems, agriculture and infrastructure; whereas the RRF should finance measures to strengthen Member States’ resilience to climate disasters and reduce their economic and social impact, including measures to increase energy efficiency and reduce energy poverty; |
Amendment 8
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Db. whereas particular attention should be paid to the coordination of investments in health and the environment, in particular through projects that reduce the impact of pollution on citizens’ health; whereas the RRF should support projects that contribute to better air quality, access to clean water and reduced exposure to toxic substances, thereby reducing health costs and the long-term economic burden on national budgets; |
Amendment 9
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| E. whereas robust audit and control systems are crucial to protect the financial interests of the EU throughout the life cycle of the RRF; whereas the milestones commonly known as ‘super milestones’, in particular related to the rule of law, had to be fulfilled prior to any RRF disbursements; | E. whereas good governance and robust audit and control systems are crucial to protect the financial interests of the Union throughout the life cycle of the RRF and maximise the RRF’s impact, in particular with regard to climate and environmental policies; whereas the milestones commonly known as ‘super milestones’, in particular related to the rule of law, had to be fulfilled prior to any RRF disbursements; |
Amendment 10
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Ga. whereas ECA special report 14/2024 revealed shortcomings in the design of the RRF and the implementation of green transition measures, leading to overestimations of amounts allocated to climate action; whereas the ECA ‘found weak indications on how the implementation of RRF measures contributes to the green transition’; |
Amendment 11
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Strengthening Europe’s social and economic resilience | Strengthening Europe’s social, economic, environmental and climate resilience |
Amendment 12
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 1. Highlights the fact that the RRF is an unprecedented instrument of solidarity in the light of two unprecedented crises and a cornerstone of the NGEU instrument, ending in 2026; highlights the stabilising effect of the RRF for Member States at a time of great economic uncertainty, as it mitigates negative economic and social consequences and supports governments by contributing to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights; | 1. Highlights the fact that the RRF is an unprecedented instrument of solidarity in the light of two unprecedented crises and a cornerstone of the NGEU instrument, ending in 2026; recalls that the RRF was set up for Member States with the aim of having a stabilising effect at a time of great economic uncertainty, in order to mitigate negative economic and social consequences and support governments by contributing to the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights; recalls, too, that one of the core goals of the RRF was to strengthen the environmental resilience and sustainable transition of EU economies; |
Amendment 13
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 2. Welcomes the fact that the RRF has provided temporary additional fiscal space since the pandemic and contributed to the prevention of divergences between Member States with diverse fiscal space; notes the Commission finding that the RRF has led to a sustained increase in investments across the EU and that the Commission expects the RRF to have a lasting impact across the EU beyond 2026 given its synergies with other EU funds; | 2. Acknowledges that the RRF has contributed to providing temporary additional fiscal space since the pandemic; emphasises the importance of additional financial and technical support for Member States whose energy systems require an accelerated adaptation to the green transition, carbon neutral energy systems and energy independence in countries with a high degree of dependence on fossil fuels, in order to ensure the resilience of the energy sector and enable the achievement of decarbonisation goals; |
Amendment 14
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 2a. Recalls that the RRF was initially introduced as targeted funding under the Green Deal communication, primarily aimed at industrial decarbonisation and the energy transition, but that, in response to the devastating economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was repurposed into a horizontal relief instrument; is concerned, however, that this development left the Green Deal, and most notably the Fit for 55 legislative package, without a proper financial envelope to support industries; |
Amendment 15
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 3. Takes note of the Commission’s projection in 2024 concerning the potential of NGEU’s impact on the EU’s real gross domestic product (GDP) by 2026, which is significantly lower than its simulation in 2020 (1.4 % compared with 2.3 %) and of the estimation that NGEU could lead to a sizeable, short-run increase in EU employment by up to 0.8 %; notes with satisfaction that long-term benefits of the RRF on GDP could be three to six times bigger than the NGEU budget disbursed, depending on the productivity effects of RRF investment; highlights, however, the difficulty of quantifying the precise social and economic impact of the RRF, as the impact of reforms only becomes clear following a delay; notes the Commission’s finding that approximately half of the expected increase in public investment between 2019 and 2025 is related to investment financed by the EU budget, particularly by the RRF; | 3. Takes note of the Commission’s 2024 projection concerning the potential of NGEU’s impact on the EU’s real gross domestic product (GDP) by 2026, which has been revised downwards to 1.4 % by 2026 compared to the initial estimate of 2.3 %, highlighting uncertainty as to the prognosis, and of the estimation that NGEU could lead to a sizeable, short-run increase in EU employment by up to 0.8 %; notes with satisfaction that long-term benefits of the RRF on GDP could be three to six times bigger than the NGEU budget disbursed, depending on the productivity effects of RRF investment; highlights, however, the difficulty of quantifying the precise social and economic impact of the RRF, as the impact of reforms only becomes clear following a delay; notes, in this regard, the uncertainty associated with the effects of ongoing investigations by the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) into wrongdoing related to RRF spending and potential misuse of funds, including in relation to green transition measures; notes the Commission’s finding that approximately half of the expected increase in public investment between 2019 and 2025 is related to investment financed by the EU budget, particularly by the RRF; |
Amendment 16
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 4. Notes that the RRF has incentivised the implementation of some reforms included in the country-specific recommendations made in the context of the European Semester and that the RRF Scoreboard is used to monitor the progress made towards achieving milestones and targets, as well as compliance with horizontal principles, and in particular the six pillars, namely the green transition, the digital transformation, smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, social and territorial cohesion, health, economic, social and institutional resilience, and policies for the next generation, children and young people, including education; | 4. Notes that the RRF has incentivised the implementation of some reforms included in the country-specific recommendations made in the context of the European Semester and that the RRF Scoreboard is used to monitor the progress made towards achieving milestones and targets, as well as compliance with horizontal principles, and in particular the six pillars, namely the green transition, the digital transformation, smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, social and territorial cohesion, health, economic, social and institutional resilience, and policies for the next generation, children and young people, including education; notes, however, that while the scoreboard facilitates monitoring of progress, the ECA’s conclusions highlight that, ‘the green transition reporting presented in the RRF Scoreboard is confusing’ and ‘does not provide users with complete and reliable information about the actual amounts spent on the green transition’; |
Amendment 17
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 6. Welcomes the fact that the RRF provides support for both reforms and investments in the Member States, but notes that a lot still remains to be done; is concerned that the short period for the remaining RRF implementation will not allow for the implementation of several planned important reforms and large investments; | 6. Welcomes the fact that the RRF provides support for both reforms and investments in the Member States, but notes that a lot still remains to be done; is concerned that the short period for the remaining RRF implementation will not allow for the implementation of several planned important reforms and large investments impacted by the war in Ukraine and disruptions in the value chain; notes that the sustainability transformation needs to be sped up and the investment gap tackled, as Europe is dependent on critical resources, and that additional time for implementation is needed for riskier investments in sustainable technologies and decarbonisation in particular; |
Amendment 18
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 8. Recalls that, in reaction to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the REPowerEU revision contributes to Europe’s energy security by reducing its dependence on fossil fuels, diversifying its energy supplies, tackling energy poverty and investing in energy savings; emphasises that through REPowerEU, an additional EUR 20 billion in grants was made available in 2023, including EUR 8 billion generated from the front-loading of Emissions Trading System allowances and EUR 12 billion from the Innovation Fund; highlights Parliament’s successes in negotiations, in particular on the provisions on replenishing the Innovation Fund, the 30 % funding target for cross-border projects, the focus of investments on tackling energy poverty for vulnerable households, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and micro-enterprises, and the flexible use of unspent cohesion funds from the 2014-2020 MFF and of up to 7.5 % of national allocations under the 2021-2027 MFF; | 8. Recalls that, in reaction to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the REPowerEU revision contributes to Europe’s energy security by reducing its dependence on fossil fuels, diversifying its energy supplies, tackling energy poverty and investing in energy savings; emphasises that through REPowerEU, an additional EUR 20 billion in grants was made available in 2023, including EUR 8 billion generated from the front-loading of Emissions Trading System allowances and EUR 12 billion from the Innovation Fund; highlights Parliament’s successes in negotiations, in particular on the provisions on replenishing the Innovation Fund, the 30 % funding target for cross-border projects, the focus of investments on tackling energy poverty for vulnerable households, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and micro-enterprises, and the flexible use of unspent cohesion funds from the 2014-2020 MFF and of up to 7.5 % of national allocations under the 2021-2027 MFF; emphasises that sustainable investments should not only be limited to energy efficiency and networks or mobility, as a new competitive economy is built on circular and low-carbon solutions; |
Amendment 19
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11. Recalls the application of the ‘do no significant harm’ (DNSH) principle for all reforms and investments supported by the RRF, with a targeted derogation under REPowerEU for energy infrastructure and facilities needed to meet immediate security of supply needs; encourages the Commission to assess the feasibility of a more uniform interpretation of the DNSH principle between the RRF and the EU taxonomy for sustainable activities, while taking into account the specificities of the RRF as a public expenditure programme; | 11. Recalls the application of the ‘do no significant harm’ (DNSH) principle for all reforms and investments supported by the RRF, with a targeted derogation under REPowerEU for energy infrastructure and facilities needed to meet immediate security of supply needs; encourages the Commission to assess the feasibility of a more uniform interpretation of the DNSH principle between the RRF and the EU taxonomy for sustainable activities, especially for environmental targets in areas such as biodiversity, to reduce the administrative burden for public authorities and the final recipients of the funds, and to enhance the overall efficiency of fund allocation, while taking into account the specificities of the RRF as a public expenditure programme; encourages the Member States to conduct proper impact assessments for projects and investments, and to share best practices from implementing the DNSH principle to diminish complexity and uncertainty in its application; |
Amendment 20
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 13. Notes that only 13 Member States have requested loans and that EUR 92 billion of the EUR 385.8 billion available will remain unused since this amount was not committed by the deadline of 31 December 2023; takes note of the fact that loans were attractive for Member States that faced higher borrowing costs on the financial markets or that sought to compensate for a reduction in RRF grants; recalls that Parliament had advocated for a higher share of grants than loans and considers that a political discussion is needed on the use of unspent funds in the light of tight public budgets; | 13. Notes that only 13 Member States have requested loans and that EUR 92 billion of the EUR 385.8 billion available will remain unused since this amount was not committed by the deadline of 31 December 2023; takes note of the fact that loans were attractive for Member States that faced higher borrowing costs on the financial markets or that sought to compensate for a reduction in RRF grants; recalls that Parliament had advocated for a higher share of grants than loans and considers that a political discussion is needed on the use of unspent funds in the light of tight public budgets; reiterates that the decarbonisation targets of the Green Deal, notably the Climate Law and the reforms under the Fit for 55 package, still need to be financially addressed; |
Amendment 21
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 14. Recalls the legal obligation to ensure full repayment of NGEU expenditure by 31 December 2058 at the latest; reminds the Council and the Commission of their legal commitment under the interinstitutional agreement concluded in 2020 to ensure a viable path to refinancing NGEU debt, including through sufficient proceeds from new own resources introduced after 2021 without any undue reduction in programme expenditure or investment instruments under the MFF; deplores the lack of progress made in this regard and urges the Council to adopt new own resources without delay; | 14. Recalls the legal obligation to ensure full repayment of NGEU expenditure by 31 December 2058 at the latest; reminds the Council and the Commission of their legal commitment under the interinstitutional agreement concluded in 20201a to ensure a viable path to refinancing NGEU debt, including through sufficient proceeds from new own resources introduced after 2021 without any undue reduction in programme expenditure or investment instruments under the MFF; deplores the lack of progress made in this regard and urges the Council to adopt new own resources without delay; regrets the flaws in the design of the RRF, in particular the lack of traceability, and in its implementation; recalls the need to carry out a detailed analysis of the adequacy and performance of the RRF model when developing future financial instruments; underlines, in any case, that the RRF can only serve as a model for future financial instruments once its design flaws have been addressed; underlines, however, that any further joint borrowing with a decarbonisation objective should be much more targeted to specific priorities and measure the decrease in greenhouse gas emissions; |
| _________________ | |
| 1a Interinstitutional Agreement of 16 December 2020 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources (OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, p. 28, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_interinstit/2020/1222/oj). |
Amendment 22
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 18. Welcomes the fact that all Member States have surpassed the targets for the green (37 %) and the digital transitions (20 %), with average expenditure towards climate and digital objectives of the RRF as a whole standing at 42 % and 26 % respectively; notes that the ECA has cast doubt on how the implementation of RRF measures has contributed to the green transition and has recommended improvements to the methodologies used to estimate the climate impact; highlights the fact that the same methodological deficiencies exist across all pillars of the RRF; | 18. Acknowledges that all Member States have surpassed the targets for the green (37 %) and the digital transitions (20 %), with average expenditure towards climate and digital objectives of the RRF as a whole standing at 42 % and 26 %, respectively; notes, however, that malpractice in the management of the RRF has led the ECA to cast doubt on how the implementation of many RRF measures has contributed to the green transition, with potential large overestimations from projects lacking verifiable environmental benefits, and notes that the ECA has recommended improvements to the methodologies used to estimate the climate impact; also notes, in particular, the ECA’s finding that, while the green transition objective has a broader scope than climate action, including biodiversity and environment, the RRF tracks only climate-related measures while the tracking system for environmental objectives is not used; highlights the fact that the same methodological deficiencies exist across all pillars of the RRF; urges the Commission to address the design and implementation shortcomings of the RRF as reported by the ECA; reiterates the need for sound governance of EU financial instruments and the need to ensure that funding for climate action investments under the RRF is spent on new projects, rather than being used for recurrent national government expenditure; |
Amendment 23
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 20. Welcomes the contributions made under the smart, sustainable and inclusive growth pillar, in particular to competitiveness and support for SMEs; notes the need for an acceleration of investments in transnational cooperation, support for enterprises, and regulatory changes for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, which are lagging behind; | 20. Welcomes the contributions made under the smart, sustainable and inclusive growth pillar, in particular to competitiveness and support for SMEs; notes the need for an acceleration of investments to tackle the persistent investment gap in order to create a new sustainable and competitive economy in Europe, while paying attention to transnational cooperation, support for enterprises, and regulatory changes for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; |
Amendment 24
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 24. Notes the high administrative burden and complexity brought by the RRF; stresses the considerable efforts required at national level to implement the RRF in parallel with structural funds; notes that between 2021 and 2024 the Technical Support Instrument supported more than 500 RRF-related reforms in the Member States, directly or indirectly related to the preparation, amendment, revision and implementation of the NRRPs; takes note of the Commission guidance of July 2024 with simplifications and clarifications to streamline RRF implementation but expects the Commission to act swiftly on its promise to cut the administrative burden by 25 %; | 24. Notes the high administrative burden and complexity brought by the RRF; stresses the considerable efforts required at national level to implement the RRF in parallel with structural funds, while insisting on the fundamental need for rigorous financial oversight; notes that between 2021 and 2024 the Technical Support Instrument supported more than 500 RRF-related reforms in the Member States, directly or indirectly related to the preparation, amendment, revision and implementation of the NRRPs; stresses the need to strengthen administrative capacity in Member States with limited institutional resources, including additional technical and advisory support from the EU; takes note of the Commission guidance of July 2024 with simplifications and clarifications to streamline RRF implementation but expects the Commission to act swiftly on its promise to cut the administrative burden by 25 %, without jeopardising high environmental or social standards and without being detrimental to sound governance, better traceability and proper control mechanisms related to the disbursement of funds for green investments, in order to avoid misuse and underperformance of funds; |
Amendment 25
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 24a. Recalls that EU-level ‘off-the-shelf instruments’ were introduced in the 2014-2020 MFF to make EU funds more efficient and accessible to local authorities and regions, especially to those with lower administrative capacities, in particular to support investments in climate change, energy efficiency and green infrastructure; |
Amendment 26
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 24b. Highlights the fact that the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (STEP) Regulation allows Member States to amend their recovery plans to allocate an additional amount of up to 6 % of their RRF allocations as cash contribution exclusively to STEP priorities (including clean technologies) via the InvestEU Member State compartment; |
Amendment 27
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 24c. Calls on the Commission, as the end of the RRF deployment window approaches, to mainstream the spirit and the implementation rules of ‘off-the-shelf instruments’ and the STEP initiative, including within the Member State compartment, risk capital and guarantee services, to accelerate the green transition, particularly in regions with high fiscal constraints and areas impacted by the energy crisis exacerbated by Russia’s aggression; considers that this approach should enable more effective deployment of EU funds, while promoting private-sector involvement; |
Amendment 28
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 25. Believes that implementation delays underscore the risk that measures for which RRF funding has been paid will not be completed by the 2026 payment deadline; recalls the Commission’s statement at the Recovery and Resilience Dialogue (RRD) of 16 September 2024 that it will not reimburse non-implemented projects but considers it a shortcoming that RRF funds paid for milestones and targets assessed as fulfilled cannot be recovered if related measures are not eventually completed; | 25. Believes that implementation delays underscore the risk that measures for which RRF funding has been paid will not be completed by the 2026 payment deadline; recalls the Commission’s statement at the Recovery and Resilience Dialogue (RRD) of 16 September 2024 that it will not reimburse non-implemented projects but considers it a shortcoming affecting its credibility, including with regard to green investment, that RRF funds paid for milestones and targets assessed as fulfilled cannot be recovered if related measures are not eventually completed; |
Amendment 29
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 31. Welcomes the extensive work of the ECA in relation to the RRF and deems it important to thoroughly assess its findings, in particular its findings that milestones and targets are often rather vague and output-oriented and are therefore not fit to measure results and impacts, and its findings regarding the risks of double funding resulting from overlaps with other policies; notes that the Commission has accepted many but not all of the ECA’s recommendations; | 31. Welcomes the extensive work of the ECA in relation to the RRF and deems it important to thoroughly assess its findings, in particular its findings that milestones and targets are often rather vague and output-oriented and are therefore not fit to measure results and impacts, and its findings regarding the risks of double funding resulting from overlaps with other policies; regrets that the Commission has accepted many but not all of the ECA’s recommendations; |
Amendment 30
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 32a. Is concerned that the implementation of the RRF allows practices described as greenwashing; highlights, in particular, the ECA’s finding that the climate coefficients do not allow an exact quantification of the expected climate contribution; notes that this is further aggravated by the structural problem related to the lack of data on actual expenditure and agrees with the ECA recommendation that this problem should be overcome through reporting on actual expenditure1a; | |
| _________________ | |
| 1a ECA special report 09/2022 of 30 May 2022 entitled ‘Climate spending in the 2014-2020 EU budget – Not as high as reported’. |
Amendment 31
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 33. Is concerned about persistent weaknesses in national reporting and control mechanisms, due in part to absorption pressure affecting the capacity to detect ineligible expenditure; regrets the reliance on manual cross-checks and self-declarations in the absence of interoperable IT tools and harmonised standards, which entail the risk that expenditure is declared twice; | 33. Is concerned about persistent weaknesses in national reporting and control mechanisms, due in part to absorption pressure affecting the capacity to detect ineligible expenditure; regrets the reliance on manual cross-checks and self-declarations in the absence of interoperable IT tools and harmonised standards, which entail the risk that expenditure is declared twice; reiterates its call to enhance scrutiny of the actual positive environmental impact of projects declared as green investments; |
Amendment 32
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 35. Highlights the important role of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) and OLAF in protecting the EU’s financial interests; welcomes the fact that EPPO investigations into RRF-related fraud and corruption cases have led to several arrests, indictments and seizures of RRF funds and expects the number of investigations (233 cases in 2024) to grow as RRF implementation advances; | 35. Highlights the important role of the EPPO and OLAF in protecting the EU’s financial interests; welcomes the fact that EPPO investigations into RRF-related fraud and corruption cases involving a total amount of over EUR 600 million have led to several arrests, indictments and seizures of RRF funds and expects the number of investigations (233 cases in 2024) to grow as RRF implementation advances, with the result that the relevant financial resources will not be available for green spending; calls on the EPPO and OLAF to continue their investigations, also in view of the need to ensure the proper use of European taxpayers’ contributions; |
Amendment 33
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 40. Stresses that decisions should be made at the level that is most appropriate; is convinced that the application of the partnership principle and a stronger involvement of LRAs could make project implementation more efficient, reduce disparities within Member States and bring about more viable cross-border projects; | 40. Stresses that decisions should be made at the level that is most appropriate; is convinced that the application of the partnership principle and a stronger involvement of LRAs could make project implementation more efficient, reduce disparities within Member States and bring about more viable cross-border projects; believes that LRAs should, if they so request, be empowered to manage funds effectively, particularly in the case of small-scale and community-driven projects, which can have a significant impact on achieving local climate and industry targets; |
Amendment 34
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 41. Believes that the combination of reforms and investments has proved successful but that a clearer link is needed between the two; insists that the level of ambition of NRRPs should be commensurate with the RRF timeline in order to ensure their successful implementation; urges the Commission to apply the lessons learned and the ECA’s observations, and to ensure that future performance-based instruments are designed also to measure results and impacts and not only outputs; | 41. Believes that the combination of reforms and investments is useful and that a clearer link is needed between the two; insists that the level of ambition of NRRPs should be commensurate with the RRF timeline in order to ensure their successful implementation; urges the Commission to apply the lessons learned and the ECA’s observations, and to ensure that future performance-based instruments are designed also to measure results and impacts and not only outputs and ensure sound governance, strict financial oversight and enhanced accountability mechanisms in order to prevent inefficiencies and misallocation of funds; |
Amendment 35
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 48. Notes the declared intention of the Commission to draw on the RRF experience when designing its proposals for the post-2027 EU funding programmes, due later this year; acknowledges that the independent ex post evaluation will come too late to feed into the process leading up to the next programming period, but expects the Commission and the co-legislators to take due account of the lessons learned from the RRF and of the recommendations of relevant stakeholders, in particular LRA, civil society organisations and social partners; | 48. Notes the declared intention of the Commission to draw on the RRF experience when designing its proposals for the post-2027 EU funding programmes, due later this year; acknowledges that the independent ex post evaluation will come too late to feed into the process leading up to the next programming period, but expects the Commission and the co-legislators to take due account of the lessons learned from the RRF and of the recommendations of relevant stakeholders, in particular LRA, civil society organisations and social partners; calls on the Commission to incorporate lessons learned from the shortcomings encountered in the RRF and to apply them to future financial instruments to ensure their sound governance and control; |
ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT
The rapporteur for opinion declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.
INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION
| Date adopted | 18.3.2025 | |
| Result of final vote | +: –: 0: | 60 22 3 |
| Members present for the final vote | Grégory Allione, Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis, Mathilde Androuët, Pascal Arimont, Bartosz Arłukowicz, Sakis Arnaoutoglou, Anja Arndt, Thomas Bajada, Alexander Bernhuber, Barbara Bonte, Stine Bosse, Lynn Boylan, Pascal Canfin, Laurent Castillo, Mohammed Chahim, Christophe Clergeau, Annalisa Corrado, Antonio Decaro, Ondřej Dostál, Viktória Ferenc, Pietro Fiocchi, Emma Fourreau, Heléne Fritzon, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz, Roman Haider, Anja Hazekamp, Esther Herranz García, Martin Hojsík, Romana Jerković, Marc Jongen, Radan Kanev, Stefan Köhler, András Tivadar Kulja, Katri Kulmuni, Peter Liese, Javi López, César Luena, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Ignazio Roberto Marino, Tilly Metz, Jana Nagyová, Jutta Paulus, Michele Picaro, Jessica Polfjärd, Carola Rackete, Massimiliano Salini, Silvia Sardone, Majdouline Sbai, Oliver Schenk, Lena Schilling, Jonas Sjöstedt, Sander Smit, Susana Solís Pérez, Claudiu-Richard Târziu, Marta Temido, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Flavio Tosi, Dimitris Tsiodras, Filip Turek, Ana Vasconcelos, Aurelijus Veryga, Kristian Vigenin, Alexandr Vondra, Emma Wiesner, Anna Zalewska, Milan Zver | |
| Substitutes present for the final vote | Adrian-George Axinia, Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain, Valérie Deloge, Sigrid Friis, Martin Häusling, Paolo Inselvini, Nora Junco García, Kateřina Konečná, Norbert Lins, Valentina Palmisano, Virgil-Daniel Popescu, Chloé Ridel, Raffaele Topo, Roberto Vannacci, Vlad Vasile-Voiculescu, Anders Vistisen | |
| Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote | Elena Nevado del Campo, Villy Søvndal |