Choice of performance indicators for audit and budgetary control in the context of financing measures to support the implementation of future European competitiveness
TA-10-2026-0021 · P10_TA(2026)0021 · PE778.327
- Adopted in plenary on · Adopted 318–247–67 · See the decision →
- Full procedure 2025/2034
Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.
Parliament's resolution on choosing performance indicators for audit and budgetary control in EU competitiveness financing calls for a simplified, harmonised performance framework with reliable, transparent indicators that measure results and impacts, not just spending.¶¶¶ It demands that indicators be SMART, RACER, based on reliable data, traceable to final beneficiaries, and publicly available in real time, with independent verification and mid-term evaluations.¶ It proposes specific output, result and impact indicators for innovation, industrial relocation, energy, skills and administrative burden, and calls for a 'one in, two out' principle for regulation.¶¶¶
Key points
- Recalls that EU spending must deliver tangible results in line with sound financial management and be invested where EU action has added value.¶
- Insists on SMART performance indicators, a balance between input, output, result and impact indicators, and indicators derived from programme objectives.¶
- Notes with concern that most indicators are input/output, baselines are missing, data is unreliable, and definitions diverge; calls for measurable, verifiable indicators with traceable data.¶
- Regrets the complex, fragmented 2021-2027 performance framework with over 5 000 heterogeneous indicators and around 7 000 RRF milestones; calls for a more comprehensive, harmonised framework.¶¶
- Calls for simplification of the performance framework, reducing administrative burden especially for SMEs and local authorities, applying the 'once-only' principle.¶
- Demands that the ECF and future instruments include mid-term evaluations and that corrective measures be introduced without delay if results fall short.¶
- Insists on real-time public availability of indicator data and methodologies, traceability to project and final beneficiary level, and prevention of double funding.¶
- Calls for mandatory ex ante and ex post verification of milestones and targets, referral of suspected fraud to OLAF and EPPO, and possibility to suspend payments.¶
- Demands independent verification of performance data by national audit bodies and the ECA, with results available to Parliament and citizens.¶
- Considers rule of law an essential precondition for competitiveness and calls for indicators related to justice, corruption and checks and balances.¶
- Calls for a shift towards result and impact indicators that capture real effects on competitiveness, such as productivity growth and job creation.¶
- Proposes specific indicators for innovation, industrial relocation, energy, skills and administrative burden, and calls for a 'one in, two out' principle.¶¶¶
Who is affected
- The European Commission and Member States, which must ensure reliable, traceable performance indicators and simplify reporting.¶¶¶
- Small and medium-sized enterprises and local authorities, which should see reduced administrative burden and faster access to EU funding.¶
- Beneficiaries of EU funds, who must be identifiable down to final beneficiary level for transparency and audit.¶
- National audit bodies and the European Court of Auditors, which are to verify performance data.¶
Figures and deadlines
Legal basis: Article 318 and Article 322(1)(a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union¶