Sittings · Document
OPINION (2024/2085(INI)) 2025-04-10
On the implementation report on the Recovery and Resilience Facility
Committee on Transport and Tourism · Rapporteur: Giuseppe Lupo
AMENDMENTS
The Committee on Transport and Tourism 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 9 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| – having regard to its resolution of 13 June 2023 on large transport infrastructure projects in the EU – implementation of projects and monitoring and control of EU funds1a, | |
| _________________ | |
| 1a OJ C, C/2024/481, 23.1.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/481/oj. |
Amendment 2
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) help to make the EU more resilient over the medium term, while modernising EU economies through a value-for-money approach, and to make the EU 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; whereas RRF milestones and targets should be completed by 31 August 2026; whereas the effectiveness of the RRF could be diminished by incomplete or ineffective implementation of its milestones and targets; |
Amendment 3
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Aa. whereas the RRF plays a crucial role in supporting sustainable mobility investments and reforms, the transition to low-carbon transport and the goal of reducing transport-related emissions by 90 % by 2050; whereas investments in smart transport infrastructure, alternative fuels and digital mobility solutions under the RRF enhance connectivity and efficiency across the EU; |
Amendment 4
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Ab. whereas the RRF also supports the objectives of the forthcoming EU Industrial Action Plan for the Automotive Sector by fostering innovation and enhancing competitiveness; whereas all technologies that can contribute to achieving climate goals should be treated fairly, without preference or bias towards any particular technological solution; whereas it is essential to establish a level playing field that enables the best technologies to compete; |
Amendment 5
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Ca. whereas the grant component of NextGenerationEU (NGEU) will be repaid through the EU budget, and involves joint borrowing and risk sharing and therefore cannot be considered a cost-free measure; whereas the output gains from NGEU are still pending assessment by the Commission, including the potential impacts of NGEU on transport infrastructure, connectivity and mobility improvements; |
Amendment 6
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Ea. whereas the European Committee of the Regions highlighted that local and regional authorities have not been sufficiently involved, or have been excluded entirely, from the RRF implementation process; whereas, according to the RRF Regulation1a, Member States are required to consult local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders when preparing and implementing their national recovery and resilience plans (NRRPs), and to demonstrate how stakeholder input has been reflected; whereas, due to the tight time frame for drafting the NRRPs, most of these consultations were either rushed or did not occur at all, affecting the inclusiveness of the process; whereas the centralised governance structure of the RRF has at times limited the ability of certain regions and cities to access available support; ______________ 1a Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility, OJ L 57, 18.2.2021, p. 17, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj. |
Amendment 7
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Eb. whereas each NRRP had to dedicate at least 20 % of its total funding to projects contributing to the digital transition, but a share of total funding was directed towards the promotion of energy efficiency in all sectors, including transport; whereas energy efficiency has become a European priority in order to contribute to EU energy independence and security; whereas rail transport offers the best performance in terms of energy efficiency for both passenger and freight traffic; |
Amendment 8
Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Ec. whereas each NRRP had to dedicate at least 37 % of its total funding to climate objectives, and ‘sustainable mobility’ was one of the policy areas in which the most progress was expected; whereas these measures account for more than one quarter of climate expenditure financed by the RRF under the green transition pillar; whereas certain Member States used the RRF to promote sustainable urban development, including low-emission zones, public transport and refuelling or recharging infrastructure for clean vehicles; whereas the European Alternative Fuels Observatory highlighted the need for 410 000 new charging points annually to meet the Commission’s 2030 target of 3.5 million points; whereas the total number of charging points was only 891 500 in the first half of 2024; |
Amendment 9
Motion for a resolution
Recital E d (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Ed. whereas there was no obligation under the RRF for Member States to include cross-border projects in their NRRPs, which could have facilitated the deployment of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T); whereas, despite cross-border and multi-country projects being encouraged for their potential to enhance European integration and resilience, only a few Member States chose to include such investments, particularly in railway and waterway infrastructure aimed at developing European corridors; whereas this is regrettable given the substantial investment required for rail, especially high-speed, and waterway development by 2030, which far exceeds the capacity of public funding in the Member States; |
Amendment 10
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; 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; highlights, furthermore, that in the context of the current global geopolitical situation, it is essential to use RRF also as an instrument to develop and strengthen the EU’s security and defence capabilities; |
Amendment 11
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, particularly in transport infrastructure projects, and acknowledges the significant reforms and investments made by the Member States for more modern and sustainable transport and networks, including projects that support the uptake of electric vehicles and other vehicle technologies, as well as the decarbonisation of public transport systems; highlights that these efforts are a crucial step towards meeting the EU’s environmental and climate goals, making its transport systems more sustainable, accessible and efficient, reducing emissions and promoting economic cohesion, but acknowledges that much still remains to be done; |
Amendment 12
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 6a. Is concerned that the limited time remaining for the RRF implementation, concluding at the end of 2026, may hinder the completion of several significant planned reforms and investments, such as the completion of crucial large-scale infrastructure projects, including sustainable mobility initiatives with longer implementation timelines and cross-border projects, which require effective coordination between the Member States and the Commission; |
Amendment 13
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 6b. Considers that the RRF’s effectiveness in driving GDP growth could be diminished by incomplete or ineffective implementation of its milestones and targets, particularly due to the overlap between the 2014-2020 and 2021-2027 programming periods, which has impacted the absorption rates of the current period, especially for large-scale transport projects; regrets that this overlap, coupled with the lack of administrative capacity in many Member States, has hindered the timely execution of key transport infrastructure initiatives and the ability to achieve desired economic and environmental outcomes by 2030; calls on the Member States and the Commission to reinforce administrative capacity to address these overlaps and ensure the swift and efficient completion of transport infrastructure projects; |
Amendment 14
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9. Recalls its call to focus RRF interventions on measures with European added value and therefore regrets the shortage of viable cross-border projects and the related risk of re-nationalising funding; | 9. Recalls its call to focus RRF interventions on measures with European added value and therefore regrets the shortage of viable cross-border projects, including high-speed railway and sustainable mobility infrastructure projects essential to completing the TEN-T network, and the related risk of re-nationalising funding; highlights the effectiveness of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) in addressing bottlenecks impacting cross-border connectivity; regrets its underfunding and calls for the CEF to be maintained as a centrally managed EU instrument under the new multiannual financial framework (MFF) to support such projects; |
Amendment 15
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 9a. Stresses that, in the field of transport, cross-border projects are crucial for military mobility, which is essential for adapting key sections of the TEN-T infrastructure for dual-use along strategic corridors, particularly at cross-border connections; considers this a missed opportunity for enabling the swift and efficient movement of military equipment across Europe and facilitating a coordinated response to security threats faced by EU Member States and their allies, while also helping to complete the TEN-T network; |
Amendment 16
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 1a. Supporting Europe’s preparedness for the green and digital transitions, including transport decarbonisation |
Amendment 17
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 10a. Regrets the lack of obligation for Member States to include cross-border projects in their NRRPs, which could have significantly bolstered the deployment of the TEN-T network and enhanced connectivity; |
Amendment 18
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 10b. Welcomes the fact that several Member States explicitly addressed the electrification of transport and its infrastructure and the production and uptake of electric vehicles in their (amended) NRRPs, recognising the importance of these actions in achieving the EU’s sustainable transition and reducing emissions across the transport sector; |
Amendment 19
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 10c. Welcomes, furthermore, the investments made in urban mobility, especially in cycling and recharging infrastructure, as well as measures to develop the market for zero-emission vehicles via notably favourable tax schemes or measures designed to ease the permitting procedures for recharging infrastructure; |
Amendment 20
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 11a. Recalls that applying the EU public procurement framework to investments supported under the RRF can result in high-quality, sustainable infrastructure projects, ensure fair competition and reward best practices in project delivery; calls, in this regard, on the Commission to seize the opportunity of the upcoming revision of the Public Procurement Directive1a to ensure that EU funds promote fair competition and the deployment of innovative solutions on the market; ______________ 1a Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC, OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/24/oj. |
Amendment 21
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12. Stresses that the RRF is the first major performance-based instrument at EU level which is exclusively based on financing not linked to costs (FNLC); regrets that the Council did not agree to insert specific rules in the Financial Regulation to address the risks of this delivery model, such as double funding; | 12. Stresses that the RRF is the first major performance-based instrument at EU level which is exclusively based on financing not linked to costs (FNLC); points out that simplification has also been targeted with the increased use of simplified cost options (SCOs) and the application of the single audit approach in cohesion policy funds; regrets that the Council did not agree to insert specific rules in the Financial Regulation to address the risks of this delivery model, such as double funding, which could impact the transparency and effectiveness of transport infrastructure investments; emphasises the need for robust control mechanisms to prevent double funding and ensure the integrity of transport-related expenditure under the RRF; |
Amendment 22
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, as this amount was not committed by the deadline of 31 December 2023; takes note of the fact that loans were attractive to Member States facing higher borrowing costs on financial markets or seeking to compensate for a reduction in RRF grants; recalls that Parliament had advocated a higher share of grants rather than loans and considers that, especially in the light of tight public budgets, a political discussion is needed regarding the use of unspent funds, such as the option to reallocate these unspent funds under the next multiannual financial framework to better address the EU’s key strategic priorities; |
Amendment 23
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 13a. Highlights the EU’s urgent strategic priorities including defence and security, and therefore calls for the proposal on how unused RRF funds can be quickly redirected to reinforce Europe’s defence and security capabilities, particularly through investments in dual-use technologies and robust critical defence infrastructure that can respond to crises without delay; |
Amendment 24
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 15. Notes the Commission’s estimation that between 2024 and 2027, NGEU borrowing costs will exceed expectations by EUR 17 billion to EUR 27 billion; recalls that recourse to special instruments had to be made in the last three budgetary procedures to cover EURI instrument costs; | 15. Notes the Commission’s estimation that between 2024 and 2027, NGEU borrowing costs will exceed expectations by EUR 17 billion to EUR 27 billion; recalls that the annual repayment cost of the grant component of the RRF will peak at EUR 26 billion in 2028; recalls that recourse to special instruments had to be made in the last three budgetary procedures to cover EURI instrument costs; |
Amendment 25
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 16. Takes note of the Commission’s target to fund up to 30 % of NGEU costs by issuing greens bonds; notes that by 31 December 2024 the Commission had issued European green bonds amounting to EUR 68.2 billion; | 16. Takes note of the Commission’s target to fund up to 30 % of NGEU costs by issuing green bonds; notes that by 31 December 2024 the Commission had issued European green bonds amounting to EUR 68.2 billion; insists on the potential of green bonds to fund sustainable mobility projects and welcomes their successful use for the transport sector; calls on the Commission and the Member States to explore reallocating unspent RRF funds to finance similar initiatives; |
Amendment 26
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 16a. Urges the Commission and the Member States to attract private investments and, in particular, to promote public-private partnerships for cross-border rail initiatives under the RRF, as well as to foster collaboration for cross-border rail projects at both Member State and EU level; |
Amendment 27
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 17. Notes that 47 % of the available RRF funds had been disbursed by 31 December 2024, with grants reaching 55 % and loans 37 %; is concerned, however, about the ECA’s finding that only 50 % of disbursed funds had reached final beneficiaries in 15 out of 22 Member States by October 2023; | 17. Notes that 47 % of the available RRF funds had been disbursed by 31 December 2024, with grants reaching 55 % and loans 37 %; is concerned, however, about the ECA’s finding that only 50 % of disbursed funds had reached final beneficiaries in 15 out of 22 Member States by October 2023; urges the Member States and the Commission to ensure that funds are disbursed swiftly into the real economy, particularly to accelerate transport infrastructure projects essential for enhancing connectivity and economic growth across the EU; |
Amendment 28
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 18a. Notes that the RRF allocates an estimated EUR 87.9 billion to sustainable mobility initiatives, representing approximately 25.7 % of the climate-related expenditure across the NRRPs; welcomes the fact that the largest share of this funding, around EUR 42 billion, is dedicated to railway infrastructure projects, including the construction, renovation and electrification of railway lines, as well as the procurement of zero-emission trains; |
Amendment 29
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 18b. Calls on the Member States to implement fast-track approval processes, where appropriate, for cross-border rail projects funded under the RRF, to ensure timely delivery and avoid unnecessary delays, and to make sure RRF-funded rail projects integrate the most advanced, efficient and viable technologies, such as the European Rail Traffic Management Systems (ERTMS), automated freight systems and smart ticketing; |
Amendment 30
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 19. Notes the tangible impact that the RRF could have on social objectives, with Member States planning to spend around EUR 163 billion; stresses the need to accelerate investments in the development of rural and remote areas, social protection and the integration of vulnerable groups, and youth employment, where expenditure is lagging behind; calls for an in-depth evaluation by the Commission, under the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard, of the projects and reforms related to education and young people implemented by Member States under the RRF; | 19. Notes the tangible impact that the RRF could have on social objectives, with Member States planning to spend around EUR 163 billion; stresses the need to accelerate investments in the development of rural and remote areas, social protection and the integration of vulnerable groups, and youth employment, where expenditure is lagging behind; highlights the importance of increasing investments in transport infrastructure in this context, particularly in underserved regions, to improve connectivity, support regional cohesion and contribute to the green transition; calls for an in-depth evaluation by the Commission, under the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard, of the projects and reforms related to education and young people implemented by Member States under the RRF; |
Amendment 31
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, particularly due to varying interpretations of its implementation rules, which have led to execution timelines being extended; stresses the considerable efforts required at national level to implement the RRF along with structural funds; highlights that between 2021 and 2024, the Technical Support Instrument supported over 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 % and simplify processes further for beneficiaries; notes the importance of accurate future planning and adaptable deadlines; underlines that reducing regulatory and administrative burdens at all levels and simplifying implementation are key to ensuring equal access to funding for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), regional authorities and disadvantaged regions; |
Amendment 32
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, particularly those related to transport investments, 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; |
Amendment 33
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 26. Notes that some milestones and targets may be no longer achievable because of objective circumstances; stresses that any NRRP revisions should be made in accordance with the RRF Regulation, including of the applicable deadlines, and should not entail backtracking on commitments or lower quality projects; | 26. Notes that some milestones and targets may be no longer achievable because of objective circumstances; stresses that any NRRP revisions should be made in accordance with the RRF Regulation, including of the applicable deadlines, and should not entail backtracking on commitments or lower quality projects; notes that safety should be a key consideration when it comes to avoiding lower quality projects, particularly in the transport sector, where delays or cost-cutting measures could lead to the use of substandard materials, ultimately compromising the safety, sustainability and long-term effectiveness of these investments; |
Amendment 34
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 28. Urges the Member States to increase their efforts to address administrative bottlenecks and provide sufficient administrative capacity to accelerate RRF implementation in view of the 2026 deadline and to avoid concentrating RRF projects in more developed regions and capitals by enabling RRF funds to flow into projects in the most vulnerable regions, thereby serving the RRF’s objective to enhance the EU’s social, territorial and economic cohesion; calls for the automatic 12-month extension of projects that have an implementation rate of at least 20 % before the 2026 deadline; welcomes the possibility to establish a prioritisation and transfer system after the 2026 deadline in order to allow for the finalisation of ongoing projects through other funding schemes, including the European Investment Fund and a possible new European competitiveness fund; | 28. Urges the Member States to increase their efforts to address administrative bottlenecks and ensure sufficient administrative capacity to accelerate RRF implementation ahead of the 2026 deadline; calls for measures to avoid concentrating RRF projects in more developed regions and capitals by ensuring RRF funds flow into projects in rural, peripheral and outermost regions, thereby serving the RRF’s objective to enhance the EU’s social, territorial and economic cohesion; calls for the automatic 24-month extension of projects that directly address this objective, including those related to policy objectives of the TEN-T network, projects that have an implementation rate of at least 20 % before the 2026 deadline, and projects with a cross-border element or those that enhance cross-border connectivity; welcomes the possibility to establish a prioritisation and transfer system after the 2026 deadline in order to allow for the finalisation of ongoing projects through other funding schemes, including the Connecting Europe Facility, the European Investment Fund and a possible new European competitiveness fund; |
Amendment 35
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 29a. Emphasises the importance of fully utilising and optimising existing EU funding instruments for climate, energy and transport; highlights the need to improve coordination, simplify the administrative process and enhance efficiency in the use of current resources to address long-term funding gaps for cross-border projects and transport development, while avoiding the complexity and administrative burden of additional financial structures; |
Amendment 36
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 29b. Urges the Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, to ensure a comprehensive performance monitoring and evaluation framework by improving the quality of the data reported for the common indicators, regular reporting and public disclosure of project timelines, budgets and outcomes; |
Amendment 37
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 31a. Urges the Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, to identify the projects most at risk of not being completed by 31 December 2026, systematically monitor the progress of these projects and agree on actions to overcome the delays, and proactively mitigate the risk of funding projects that may not be completed on time; |
Amendment 38
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 32. Regrets the lack of a proper RRF audit trail and the persistent lack of transparency despite the bi-annual reporting requirement for Member States on the 100 largest final recipients, which was introduced into REPowerEU upon Parliament’s request; regrets the delays in reporting by some Member States and the limited informative value of the information provided, which ultimately prevents compliance checks by the Commission or the ECA; reiterates its call for the lists of the largest final recipients for each Member State to include information on the economic operators involved and their beneficial owners; | 32. Regrets the lack of a proper RRF audit trail and the persistent lack of transparency despite the bi-annual reporting requirement for Member States on the 100 largest final recipients, which was introduced into REPowerEU upon Parliament’s request; regrets the delays in reporting by some Member States and the limited informative value of the information provided, which ultimately prevents compliance checks by the Commission or the ECA; reiterates its call for the lists of the largest final recipients for each Member State to include information on the economic operators involved and their beneficial owners; highlights the importance of reporting about the final recipients of NRRPs and final implementation rates; |
Amendment 39
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 41a. Considers it crucial to ensure that future performance-based instruments establish more realistic timelines for project implementation, while placing greater emphasis on monitoring the progress of Member States; highlights the need for flexibility to adjust the course of action if projects are not advancing at the required pace; |
Amendment 40
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 43. Considers that better training and capacity-building across all regions and authorities involved, in particular at national level, could have accelerated the RRF’s implementation; considers that the Commission could have assisted Member States more at the planning stage and provided earlier implementation guidance, in particular with a view to strengthening their audit and control systems and the cross-border dimension of the RRF; | 43. Considers that better training and capacity-building across all regions and authorities involved, in particular at national level, could have accelerated the RRF’s implementation; considers that the Commission could have assisted Member States more at the planning stage, notably in the development of the NRRPs, and provided earlier implementation guidance, in particular with a view to strengthening their audit and control systems and the cross-border dimension of the RRF; calls on the Commission, in collaboration with the Member States, to assess how future, or existing, funding mechanisms can be better tailored to support cross-border projects, and national projects that directly improve cross-border connectivity, by extending project durations, reducing supply chain vulnerabilities and promoting sustainable transport initiatives; suggests that these mechanisms could benefit from the reallocation of unspent RRF funds or from the originally intended funds for such projects; calls for the Commission to assess where cross-border missing links most urgently need to be addressed to reduce supply chain vulnerabilities; |
Amendment 41
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 44a. Highlights that, in the context of the use of the RRF, the EU lacks a comprehensive analysis from the Commission on how the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have impacted the physical accessibility of different Member States, especially the security of supply chains; urges the Commission, therefore, to act promptly and carry out the analysis, so that the missing links are recognised and the necessary measures can be planned and implemented; |
Amendment 42
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 46. Reiterates its call for an open platform which contains data on all projects, final recipients and the regional distribution of funding, thereby facilitating auditing and democratic oversight; | 46. Reiterates its call for an open platform which contains data on all projects, final recipients and the regional distribution of funding, thereby facilitating auditing and democratic oversight; welcomes the idea of a true single point of entry for beneficiaries to all EU funding and advisory services; calls for a stronger focus on transparency, accountability and traceability of EU funds; demands the reporting and availability of updated data from the NRRPs on the amount of funds received by final recipients, particularly for transport infrastructure projects contributing to the completion of the TEN-T network and enhancing cross-border connectivity; |
ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT
Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for the opinion received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the opinion, prior to the adoption thereof in committee:
| Entity and/or person |
| - Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER) - European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) |
The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur for the opinion.
Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur for the opinion declares that he has submitted to the concerned natural persons the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.
INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION
| Date adopted | 9.4.2025 | |
| Result of final vote | +: –: 0: | 37 5 0 |
| Members present for the final vote | Daniel Attard, Adrian-George Axinia, Rachel Blom, Nikolina Brnjac, Nina Carberry, Carlo Ciccioli, Vivien Costanzo, Johan Danielsson, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Borja Giménez Larraz, Sérgio Gonçalves, Roman Haider, Sérgio Humberto, Dariusz Joński, François Kalfon, Martine Kemp, Sophia Kircher, Merja Kyllönen, Luis-Vicențiu Lazarus, Julien Leonardelli, Vicent Marzà Ibáñez, Alexandra Mehnert, Ştefan Muşoiu, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Philippe Olivier, Matteo Ricci, Arash Saeidi, Marjan Šarec, Andreas Schieder, Rosa Serrano Sierra, Virginijus Sinkevičius, Stanislav Stoyanov, Kai Tegethoff, Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, Maciej Wąsik, Roberts Zīle, Kosma Złotowski | |
| Substitutes present for the final vote | Elena Nevado del Campo, Ana Vasconcelos | |
| Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote | Grégory Allione, Andreas Glück |