INTERIM REPORT on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement

7.11.2018 - (COM(2018)0322 – C8‑0000/2018 – 2018/0166R(APP))

Committee on Budgets
Co-Rapporteurs: Jan Olbrycht, Isabelle Thomas, Janusz Lewandowski, Gérard Deprez

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement

(COM(2018)0322 – C8‑0000/2018 – 2018/0166R(APP))

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to Articles 311, 312 and 323 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 2 May 2018 entitled ‘A Modern Budget for a Union that Protects, Empowers and Defends – The Multiannual Financial Framework for 2021-2027’ (COM(2018)0321),

–  having regard to the Commission proposal of 2 May 2018 for a Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 (COM(2018)0322), and the Commission proposals of 2 May 2018 on the system of Own Resources of the European Union (COM(2018)0325, COM(2018)0326, COM(2018)0327 and COM(2018)0328),

–  having regard to the Commission proposal of 2 May 2018 for an Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (COM(2018)0323),

–  having regard to the Commission proposal of 2 May 2018 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States (COM(2018)0324),

–  having regard to its resolutions of 14 March 2018 on ‘The next MFF: preparing the Parliament’s position on the MFF post-2020’ and on reform of the European Union’s system of own resources[1],

–  having regard to its resolution of 30 May 2018 on the 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework and own resources[2],

–  having regard to the ratification of the Paris Agreement by the European Parliament on 4 October 2016[3] and by the Council on 5 October 2016[4],

–  having regard to UN General Assembly Resolution 70/1 of 25 September 2015 entitled ‘Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’, which entered into force on 1 January 2016,

–  having regard to its resolution of 19 January 2017 on a European Pillar of Social Rights[5],

–  having regard to Rule 99(5) of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the interim report of the Committee on Budgets, the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Development, the Committee on International Trade, the Committee on Budgetary Control, the position in the form of amendments of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the opinions of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, the Committee on Transport and Tourism, the Committee on Regional Development, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, the Committee on Culture and Education, the Committee on Constitutional Affairs and the position in the form of amendments of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (A8-0358/2018),

A.  whereas, pursuant to Article 311 TFEU, the Union must provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies;

B.  whereas the current multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 was established, for the first time, at a lower level than its predecessor in terms of both commitment and payment appropriations; whereas the late adoption of the MFF and the sectoral legislative acts had a very negative impact on the implementation of the new programmes;

C.  whereas the MFF quickly proved its inadequacy in responding to a series of crises, new international commitments and new political challenges that were not integrated and/or anticipated at the time of adoption; whereas, for the purposes of securing the necessary funding, the MFF was pushed to its limits including an unprecedented recourse to the flexibility provisions and special instruments, after exhausting the available margins; whereas high-priority EU programmes on research and infrastructure were even cut a mere two years after their adoption;

D.  whereas the MFF mid-term revision launched at the end of 2016 proved to be imperative in broadening the potential of the existing flexibility provisions, while falling short of revising the MFF ceilings; whereas this revision was assessed positively by both Parliament and the Council;

E.  whereas the establishment of the new MFF will be a critical moment for the Union of 27, as it will provide for the possibility to endorse a common, long-term vision and decide on the future political priorities as well as the ability of the Union to deliver them; whereas the 2021-2027 MFF should provide the Union with the necessary resources to boost sustainable economic growth, research and innovation, empower young people, effectively address the challenges of migration, fight unemployment, persistent poverty and social exclusion, further strengthen economic, social and territorial cohesion, address sustainability, biodiversity loss and climate change, strengthen the EU’s security and defence, protect its external border and support the neighbourhood countries;

F.  whereas, in light of the global challenges that Member States cannot address alone, it should be possible to acknowledge European common goods and to assess areas where European spending would be more effective than national spending in order to transfer the corresponding financial resources to Union level and, therefore, to strengthen the Union’s strategic importance without necessarily increasing overall public expenditure;

G.  whereas on 2 May 2018, the Commission presented a set of legislative proposals on the 2021-2027 MFF and EU Own Resources, followed by legislative proposals for the setting-up of new EU programmes and instruments;

1.  Stresses that the 2021-2027 MFF must guarantee the Union’s responsibility for and ability to meet emerging needs, additional challenges and new international commitments, and attain its political priorities and objectives; points to the serious problems linked to the underfinancing of the 2014-2020 MFF, and reiterates the necessity of avoiding a repetition of previous mistakes by securing, from the outset, a strong and credible EU budget for the benefit of citizens over the next seven-year period;

2.  Considers that the Commission proposals on the 2021-2027 MFF and the Union’s Own Resources system represent the starting-point for the upcoming negotiations; expresses its position on these proposals, in anticipation of the Council’s negotiating mandate which is not yet available;

3.  Underlines that the Commission proposal regarding the global level of the next MFF, set at 1.08 % of the EU-27 GNI (1.11 % after the integration of the European Development Fund), represents, in terms of GNI percentage, a reduction in real terms compared to the current MFF; considers that the proposed level of the MFF will not allow the Union to deliver on its political commitments and respond to the important challenges ahead; intends, therefore, to negotiate the necessary increase;

4.  Declares, moreover, its opposition to any reduction in the level of long-standing EU policies enshrined in the Treaties, such as cohesion policy and the common agricultural and fisheries policies; is particularly opposed to any radical cuts that will have an adverse impact on the very nature and objectives of these policies, such as the cuts proposed for the Cohesion Fund or for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development; opposes, in this context, the proposal to reduce the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) despite its enlarged scope, and the integration of four existing social programmes, notably the Youth Employment Initiative;

5.  Underlines, furthermore, the importance of the horizontal principles that should underpin the MFF and all related EU policies; reaffirms, in this context, its position that the EU must deliver on its commitment to be a front-runner in implementing the UN Sustainable Development Goals, and deplores the lack of a clear and visible commitment to that end in the MFF proposals; requests, therefore, the mainstreaming of the Sustainable Development Goals in all EU policies and initiatives of the next MFF; further emphasises that all programmes under the next MFF should be in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights; highlights the importance of delivering on the European Pillar of Social Rights, on the elimination of discrimination, including against LGBTI persons, and on the creation of a portfolio for minorities, including Roma, all of which are vital to fulfilling the EU’s commitments towards an inclusive Europe; underlines that, in order to meet its obligations under the Paris Agreement, the EU’s contribution to the climate objectives target should reach at least 25 % of expenditure over the MFF 2021-2027 period, and 30 % as soon as possible, at the latest by 2027;

6.  Regrets, in this context, that despite the joint statement on gender mainstreaming annexed to the 2014-2020 MFF Regulation, no significant progress has been made in this area, and that the Commission took no account of its implementation in the MFF mid-term review; deeply regrets that gender mainstreaming has been completely sidelined in the MFF proposal, and deplores the lack of clear gender equality goals, requirements and indicators in the proposals on the relevant EU policies; calls for the annual budgetary procedures to evaluate and integrate the full impact of EU policies on gender equality (gender budgeting); expects a renewed commitment by Parliament, the Council and the Commission to gender mainstreaming in the next MFF, and its effective monitoring, including during the MFF mid-term revision;

7.  Underlines that increased accountability, simplification, visibility, transparency and performance-based budgeting must underpin the next MFF; recalls, in this context, the need to strengthen the focus of future spending on performance and results, based on ambitious and relevant performance targets and a comprehensive and shared definition of European added value; asks the Commission, taking into account the above‑mentioned horizontal principles, to streamline performance reporting, to extend it to a qualitative approach that includes environmental and social indicators, and to clearly present information on the main EU challenges still to be tackled;

8.  Is conscious of the serious challenges that the Union is facing and fully assumes its responsibility to secure, in a timely manner, a budget that is commensurate to the needs, expectations and concerns of EU citizens; stands ready to enter immediately into negotiations with the Council, in order to improve the Commission proposals and build a realistic MFF;

9.  Recalls that Parliament’s position is already clearly set out in its resolutions of 14 March and 30 May 2018, which constitute its political stance for the 2021-2027 MFF and Own Resources; recalls that these resolutions were adopted by very large majorities, which demonstrate Parliament’s unity and readiness for the upcoming negotiations;

10.  Expects, therefore, that the MFF will be placed at the top of the Council’s political agenda, and regrets that no significant progress has been observed so far; believes that the regular meetings between the successive Council presidencies and Parliament’s negotiating team should be stepped up and pave the way for official negotiations; expects that a good agreement will be reached prior to the 2019 European Parliament elections, in order to avoid serious setbacks for the launch of the new programmes due to the late adoption of the financial framework, as has been experienced in the past; underlines that this timetable will allow the newly elected European Parliament to adjust the 2021-2027 MFF during the mandatory mid-term revision;

11.  Recalls that revenue and expenditure should be treated as a single package in the upcoming negotiations; stresses, therefore, that no agreement can be reached on the future MFF without corresponding progress being made on the Union’s new Own Resources;

12.  Stresses that all elements of the MFF/Own Resources package, and notably the MFF figures, should remain on the negotiating table until a final agreement is reached; recalls, in this respect, Parliament’s critical stance on the procedure leading to the adoption of the current MFF Regulation and the dominant role that the European Council assumed in this process by deciding irrevocably on a number of elements, including the MFF ceilings and several sectoral policy-related provisions breaching both the spirit and the letter of the treaties; is particularly concerned that the first elements of the MFF ‘negotiating boxes’ prepared by the Council presidency follow the same logic, and contain issues to be co-decided between the Council and Parliament in the adoption of legislation setting up new EU programmes; intends, therefore, to adjust its own strategy accordingly;

13.  Considers that the unanimity requirement for the adoption and revision of the MFF Regulation represents a true impediment to the process; calls on the European Council to activate the passerelle clause provided for in Article 312(2) TFEU, so as to allow the Council to adopt the MFF Regulation by qualified majority;

14.  Adopts the present resolution with the purpose of outlining its negotiating mandate on every aspect of the Commission proposals, including concrete amendments both to the proposed MFF Regulation and to the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA); presents, furthermore, a table with figures for each EU policy and programme, based on Parliament’s positions, already adopted in previous MFF resolutions; stresses that these figures will also be part of the mandate of Parliament for the upcoming legislative negotiations leading to the adoption of the EU programmes for the period 2021-2027;

A. MFF-RELATED REQUESTS

15.  Requests, therefore, that the Council takes due account of the following positions of Parliament in the interests of achieving a positive outcome of the 2021-2027 MFF negotiations and acquiring Parliament’s consent in accordance with Article 312 TFEU;

Figures

16.  Reconfirms its formal position that the level of the 2021-2027 MFF should be set at EUR 1 324.1 billion in 2018 prices, representing 1.3 % of the EU-27 GNI, in order to ensure the necessary level of funding for key EU policies that will enable them to fulfil their mission and objectives;

17.  Calls, in this context, for the following level of funding to be secured for EU programmes and policies, presented in an order that reflects the MFF structure, as proposed by the Commission, and replicated in the detailed table (Annexes III and IV of the present resolution); calls for the relevant commitment and payment ceilings to be adjusted accordingly, as set out in Annexes I and II of the present resolution:

i.  Increase the budget for Horizon Europe to reach EUR 120 billion in 2018 prices;

ii.  Increase the allocation for the InvestEU Fund, so that it better reflects the 2014-2020 level of the financial instruments integrated into the new programme;

iii.  Increase the level of funding for transport infrastructure through the Connecting Europe Facility programme (CEF-Transport);

iv.  Double the specific funding for SMEs (compared to COSME) in the single market programme, with the aim of enhancing their access to markets, improving business conditions and the competitiveness of enterprises, and promoting entrepreneurship;

v.  Further increase the single market programme to finance a new objective on market surveillance;

vi.  Double the proposed level of funding for the EU anti-fraud programme, and increase the level of funding for the FISCALIS programme;

vii.  Introduce a specific allocation for sustainable tourism;

viii.  Further reinforce the European space programme, notably to reinforce SSA / GOVSATCOM as well as Copernicus;

ix.  Maintain the financing of cohesion policy for the EU-27 at the level of the 2014-2020 budget in real terms;

x.  Double the resources for tackling youth unemployment in the ESF+ (compared to the current Youth Employment Initiative), while ensuring the scheme’s effectiveness and added value;

xi.  Introduce a specific allocation (EUR 5.9 billion) for the Child Guarantee, in order to tackle child poverty both within the EU and through its external actions;

xii.  Triple the current budget for the Erasmus+ programme;

xiii.   Secure a sufficient level of funding for the DiscoverEU programme (Interrail);

xiv.  Increase the current funding for the Creative Europe programme;

xv.  Increase the current funding for the Rights and Values programme and introduce a specific allocation for a new Union values strand (at least EUR 500 million), in order to support civil society organisations which promote fundamental values and democracy within the EU at local and national level;

xvi.  Maintain the financing of the common agricultural policy (CAP) for the EU-27 at the level of the 2014-2020 budget in real terms while budgeting the initial amount of the agricultural reserve;

xvii.  Reinforce by 10 % the level of the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, in accordance with its new mission on the blue economy;

xviii.  Double the current funding for the Life+ programme, including dedicated envelopes for biodiversity and the management of the Natura 2000 network;

xix.  Introduce a specific allocation (EUR 4.8 billion) for a new Just Energy Transition Fund to address societal, socio-economic and environmental impacts on workers and communities adversely affected by the transition from coal and carbon dependence;

xx.  Reinforce the instrument(s) in support of neighbourhood and development policies (EUR 3.5 billion) to further contribute to the financing of an investment plan for Africa;

xxi.  Reinstate at least the 2020 level for all agencies, while defending the higher level proposed by the Commission, including for the agencies, which have been granted new competences and responsibilities, and calling for a comprehensive approach on fee-financing;

xxii.  Maintain the level of 2014-2020 funding for several EU programmes (e.g. nuclear decommissioning, cooperation with the overseas countries and territories (OCTs)), including those for which it is proposed that they be merged into larger programmes (e.g. assistance for the most deprived, health, consumer rights) and for which the Commission proposal thus represents a reduction in real terms;

xxiii.  Set, subject to the above‑mentioned changes, the financial envelopes of all other programmes at the level proposed by the Commission, including for CEF-Energy, CEF-Digital, the Digital Europe programme, the European Defence Fund and humanitarian aid;

18.  Intends to secure a sufficient level of funding on the basis of the Commission proposal for ‘Migration and Border Management’ (heading 4) and ‘Security and Defence’ including Crisis Response (heading 5); reaffirms its long-standing position that additional political priorities should be coupled with additional financial means, in order not to undermine existing policies and programmes and their financing under the new MFF;

19.  Intends to defend the Commission proposal on securing a sufficient level of funding for a strong, efficient and high-quality European public administration at the service of all Europeans; recalls that, during the current MFF, the EU institutions, bodies and decentralised agencies have implemented a 5 % reduction in staff, and believes that they should not be subject to any further reduction that would directly jeopardise the delivery of Union policies; reiterates, once more, its fierce opposition towards a repetition of the so-called redeployment pool for agencies;

20.  Is determined to prevent another payment crisis in the first years of the 2021-2027 MFF, as was the case during the current period; considers that the overall payment ceiling must take into account the unprecedented volume of outstanding commitments at the end of 2020, the estimated size of which is constantly growing due to major implementation delays, and which will need to be settled under the next MFF; demands, therefore, that the global level of payments, as well as the annual payment ceilings, particularly at the beginning of the period, are set at an appropriate level that also takes due account of this situation; intends to accept only a limited and well-justified gap between commitments and payments for the next MFF;

21.  Presents, on this basis, a table in Annexes III and IV to the present resolution setting out the exact figures proposed for each EU policy and programme; states that, for purposes of comparison, it intends to keep the structure of the individual EU programmes as proposed by the Commission, without any prejudice to possible changes that may be requested during the legislative procedure leading to the adoption of these programmes;

Mid-term revision

22.  Underlines the need to maintain an MFF mid-term revision, building on the positive precedent set in the current framework, and calls for:

i.  a compulsory and legally binding mid-term revision, following a review of the functioning of the MFF, and taking into account an assessment of the progress made towards the climate target, the mainstreaming of the Sustainable Development Goals and gender equality, and the impact of simplification measures on beneficiaries;

ii.  the relevant Commission proposal to be presented in time for the next Parliament and Commission to conduct a meaningful adjustment of the 2021-2027 framework, and no later than 1 July 2023;

iii.  the pre-allocated national envelopes not to be reduced through this revision;

Flexibility

23.  Welcomes the Commission’s proposals on flexibility, which represent a good basis for the negotiations; agrees with the overall architecture of the flexibility mechanisms in the 2021-2027 MFF; stresses that the special instruments have different missions and respond to different needs, and opposes any attempts to merge them; strongly supports the clear provision that both commitment and payment appropriations deriving from the use of special instruments should be entered in the budget over and above the relevant MFF ceilings, as well as the removal of any capping to the adjustments flowing from the global margin for payments; calls for a number of additional improvements to be introduced, inter alia the following:

i.  the replenishment of the Union reserve with an amount equivalent to the revenue resulting from fines and penalties;

ii.  the immediate re-use of de‑commitments made during year n-2, including those resulting from commitments made in the current MFF;

iii.  the lapsed amounts of special instruments to be made available for all special instruments, and not just the Flexibility Instrument;

iv.  a higher allocation for the Flexibility Instrument, the Emergency Aid Reserve, the European Union Solidarity Fund, and the Contingency Margin, the latter without compulsory offsetting;

Duration

24.  Underlines the need for the duration of the MFF to move progressively towards a 5+5 period with a mandatory mid-term revision; accepts that the next MFF should be set for a period of seven years by way of a transitional solution to be applied for one last time; expects the detailed arrangements linked to the implementation of a 5+5 framework to be endorsed at the time of the mid-term revision of the 2021-2027 MFF;

Structure

25.  Accepts the overall structure of seven MFF headings, as proposed by the Commission, which largely corresponds to Parliament’s own proposal; considers that this structure allows for greater transparency, improves the visibility of EU expenditure, while maintaining the necessary degree of flexibility; agrees, moreover, with the creation of ‘programme clusters’ that are expected to lead to a significant simplification and rationalisation of the EU budget structure and its clear alignment with the MFF headings;

26.  Notes that the Commission proposes to reduce the number of EU programmes by more than a third; stresses that Parliament’s position with regard to the structure and composition of the 37 new programmes will be determined in the course of adopting the relevant sectoral legislative acts; expects, in any case, that the proposed budget nomenclature will reflect all of the different components of each programme in a way that guarantees transparency and provides the level of information required for the budgetary authority to establish the annual budget and oversee its implementation;

Unity of the budget

27.  Welcomes the proposed integration of the European Development Fund into the Union budget, which responds to a long-standing Parliament demand for all off-budget instruments; recalls that the principle of unity, whereby all items of revenue and expenditure of the Union are shown in the budget, is both a Treaty requirement and a basic precondition of democracy;

28.  Challenges, therefore, the logic of and justification for establishing instruments outside the budget that prevent parliamentary oversight of public finances and undermine the transparency of decision-making; considers that decisions to set-up such instruments bypass Parliament in its triple responsibility as legislative, budgetary and control authority; considers that, when exceptions are deemed necessary to achieve specific objectives, for example through financial instruments or trust funds, these should be fully transparent, duly justified by proven additionality and added value, and backed by strong decision-making procedures and accountability provisions;

29.  Stresses, however, that the integration of these instruments into the EU budget should not result in a reduction of the financing of other EU policies and programmes; underlines, therefore, the need to decide on the global level of the next MFF without calculating the allocation of 0.03 % of EU GNI that corresponds to the European Development Fund, which should be added on top of the agreed ceilings;

30.  Stresses that the MFF ceilings should not obstruct the financing of the policy objectives of the Union through the Union budget; expects, therefore, that an upward revision of the MFF ceilings will be ensured whenever necessary for the financing of new policy objectives, without having recourse to intergovernmental financing methods;

B. LEGISLATIVE ISSUES

Rule of Law

31.  Stresses the importance of the new mechanism ensuring respect for the values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), whereby Member States that do not respect them shall be subject to financial consequences; warns, however, that final beneficiaries of the Union budget shall in no way be affected by the disregard shown by their government for fundamental rights and the rule of law; underlines, therefore, that such measures shall not affect the obligation of government entities or of Member States to make payments to final beneficiaries or recipients;

Ordinary legislative procedure and delegated acts

32.  Stresses that programme objectives and spending priorities, financial allocations, eligibility, selection and award criteria, conditions, definitions, and calculation methods should be determined in the relevant legislation, with full observance of Parliament’s prerogatives as a co-legislator; underlines that, when such measures, which can entail important policy choices, are not included in the basic act, they should be adopted by delegated acts; takes the view, in this context, that multiannual and/or annual work programmes should in general be adopted by delegated acts;

33.  States Parliament’s intention, whenever necessary, to enhance the provisions on governance, accountability, transparency and parliamentary oversight, on the empowerment of local and regional authorities and their partners, as well as on the engagement of NGOs and civil society in the next generation of programmes; also intends to improve and clarify, where needed, the coherence and synergies between and within the various funds and policies; recognises the need for enhanced flexibility in the allocation of resources within certain programmes, but stresses that this should not come at the expense of their original and long-term policy objectives, of predictability, and of Parliament’s rights;

Review clauses

34.  Points out that detailed and effective review clauses should be included in the individual MFF programmes and instruments, in order to ensure that meaningful assessments of them are carried out and that Parliament is subsequently fully involved in any decisions taken on necessary adaptations;

Legislative proposals

35.  Calls on the Commission to present the relevant legislative proposals on top of those which it has already tabled, and notably a proposal for a regulation establishing a Just Energy Transition Fund as well as a specific programme on sustainable tourism; supports, furthermore, the introduction of the European Child Guarantee in the ESF+, the integration of a specific Union values strand in the Rights and Values programme, as well as a revision of the Regulation establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund; regrets that the relevant Commission proposals do not contain measures that respond to the requirements of Article 174 TFEU in relation to northernmost regions with very low population density and island, cross-border and mountain regions; considers that a revision of the Financial Regulation should also be proposed whenever the need arises as a result of the MFF negotiations;

C. OWN RESOURCES

36.  Stresses that the current system of Own Resources is highly complex, unfair, non-transparent and totally incomprehensible to the EU’s citizens; calls again for a simplified system that will be more understandable to EU citizens;

37.  Welcomes, in this context, as an important step towards a more ambitious reform, the Commission’s set of proposals adopted on 2 May 2018 on a new system of Own resources; invites the Commission to take into account Opinion No 5/2018 of the European Court of Auditors concerning the Commission’s proposal on the new system of Own resources of the European Union, which underlines that better calculation and further simplification of the system is needed;

38.  Recalls that the introduction of new Own Resources should have a dual purpose: firstly, to bring about a substantial reduction in the proportion of GNI-based contributions, and secondly, to guarantee the adequate financing of EU spending under the post-2020 MFF;

39.  Supports the suggested modernisation of existing Own Resources, which implies:

–  maintaining the customs duties as traditional Own Resources for the EU, while decreasing the percentage Member States retain as ‘collection costs’, and going back to the initial rate of 10 %;

–  simplifying the Value Added Tax-based Own Resource, i.e. introducing a uniform call rate without exceptions;

–  maintaining the GNI-based Own Resource, with the objective of moving progressively towards 40 % its share in the financing of the EU budget, while preserving its balancing function;

40.  Requests, in line with the Commission proposal, the programmed introduction of a basket of new Own Resources which, without increasing the fiscal burden for citizens, would correspond to essential strategic objectives of the EU, the European added value of which is evident and irreplaceable:

–  the proper functioning, consolidation and strengthening of the single market, in particular by the implementation of a common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB), as a basis for a new Own Resource through the setting of a uniform levy rate on the revenue from the CCCTB and the taxation of large companies in the digital sector profiting from the single market;

–  the fight against climate change and the acceleration of energy transition, through measures such as a share of the emission trading scheme income;

–  the fight to protect the environment through a contribution based on the quantity of non-recycled plastic packing;

41.  Demands the extension of the list of potential new Own Resources, which should include:

–  an Own Resource based on a Financial Transaction Tax (FTT), while calling on all Member States to reach an agreement on an efficient scheme;

–  the introduction of a carbon border adjustment mechanism as a new Own Resource for the EU budget, which should ensure a level playing field in international trade and reduce the off-shoring of production, while internalising the costs of climate change in the prices of imported goods;

42.  Expresses strong approval of the abolition of all rebates and other correction mechanisms, accompanied, should the need arise, by a limited phasing out period;

43.  Insists on the introduction of other revenue that should constitute extra revenue for the EU budget without entailing a corresponding reduction in GNI contributions:

–  fines paid by companies for breaching the Union’s rules, or fines for late payments of contributions;

–  proceeds from fines generated by rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union, including lump sum or penalty payments imposed on Member States, stemming from infringement actions;

44.  Underlines, moreover, the introduction of other forms of revenue, in line with the Commission proposals, in the case of:

–  fees linked to the implementation of mechanisms in direct relation with the EU, such as the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS);

–  seigniorage, in the form of assigned revenue, for the purpose of financing a new Investment Stabilisation Function;

45.  Points to the need to maintain the credibility of the EU budget vis-à-vis the financial markets, which implies an increase in the Own Resources ceilings;

46.  Calls on the Commission to come up with a proposal to address the paradoxical situation whereby contributions from the UK to the reste à liquider (RAL) pre-2021 will enter the budget as general revenue, thus being counted towards the Own Resource ceiling, while that ceiling will be calculated on the basis of the EU-27 GNI, in other words without the UK, once the country has left the EU; considers that UK contributions should, on the contrary, be calculated on top of the Own Resources ceiling;

47.  Draws attention to the fact that the customs union is an important source of the Union's financial capacity; stresses, in this context, the need to harmonise customs control and management across the Union in order to prevent and combat fraud and irregularities harming the Union's financial interests;

48.  Strongly supports the presentation by the Commission of a proposal for a Council regulation laying down implementing measures for the system of Own Resources of the European Union; recalls that Parliament has to give its consent to this regulation; recalls that this regulation is an integral part of the Own Resource package presented by the Commission, and expects the Council to address the four related texts on Own Resources as a single package together with the MFF;

D. MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROPOSAL FOR A REGULATION LAYING DOWN THE 2021-2027 MFF

49.  Takes the view that the proposal for a Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 should be modified as follows:

Modification    1 Proposal for a regulation Recital 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(1)  Taking into account the need for an adequate level of predictability for preparing and implementing medium-term investments, the duration of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) should be set at seven years starting on 1 January 2021.	(1)  Taking into account the need for an adequate level of predictability for preparing and implementing medium-term investments as well as the need for democratic legitimacy and accountability, the duration of this Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) should be set at seven years starting on 1 January 2021 with a view to moving subsequently to a five-plus-five-year period that would be aligned with the political cycle of the European Parliament and the Commission.
Modification    2 Proposal for a regulation Recital 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(2)  The annual ceilings on commitments appropriations by category of expenditure and the annual ceilings on payment appropriations established by the MFF must respect the applicable ceilings for commitments and own resources, which are set in accordance with the Council Decision on the system of own resources of the European Union adopted in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 311 TFEU.	(2)  The MFF should establish annual ceilings on commitments appropriations by category of expenditure and annual ceilings on payment appropriations so as to ensure that Union expenditure develops in an orderly manner and within the limits of its Own Resources, while also ensuring that the Union can provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 311 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and can honour its obligations to third parties in accordance with Article 323 TFEU.
Modification    3 Proposal for a regulation Recital 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	(2a)  The level of ceilings should be set on the basis of the amounts necessary for the financing and running of the Union programmes and policies as well as the required margins to be left available for adjustments to future needs. Furthermore, the ceilings for payments should account for the large amount of outstanding commitments expected at the end of 2020. The amounts set in this Regulation as well as in the basic acts for 2021-2027 programmes should be agreed in 2018 prices and, for the sake of simplification and predictability, adjusted on the basis of a fixed deflator of 2 % per year.
Modification    4 Proposal for a regulation Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(3)  If it is necessary to mobilise the guarantees given under the general budget of the Union for financial assistance to Member States authorised in accordance with Article [208(1)] of Regulation No EU [xxx/201x] of the European Parliament and of the Council ('the Financial Regulation'), the necessary amount should be mobilised over and above the ceilings of the commitments and payments appropriations of the MFF, while respecting the own resources ceiling.	(3)  If it is necessary to mobilise the guarantees given under the general budget of the Union for financial assistance to Member States authorised in accordance with Article [208(1)] of Regulation No EU [xxx/201x] of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘the Financial Regulation’), the necessary amount should be mobilised over and above the ceilings of the commitments and payments appropriations of the MFF, and should therefore be taken into account when setting any own resources ceiling.
Modification    5 Proposal for a regulation Recital 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(4)  The MFF should not take account of budget items financed by assigned revenue within the meaning of the Financial Regulation.	(4)  Assigned revenue financing budget items within the meaning of the Financial Regulation should not be counted towards the MFF ceilings, but all available information should be displayed with full transparency during the procedure of the adoption of the annual budget and during its implementation.
Modification    6 Proposal for a regulation Recital 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(6)  Specific and maximum possible flexibility should be implemented to allow the Union to fulfil its obligations in compliance with Article 323 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).	(6)  Maximum flexibility should be ensured within the MFF, in particular to guarantee that the Union can fulfil its obligations in compliance with Article 311 and Article 323 of the TFEU.
Modification    7 Proposal for a regulation Recital 7
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(7)  The following special instruments are necessary to allow the Union to react to specified unforeseen circumstances, or to allow the financing of clearly identified expenditure which cannot be financed within the limits of the ceilings available for one or more headings as laid down in the MFF in order to allow the budget procedure to run smoothly: the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, the European Union Solidarity Fund, the Emergency Aid Reserve, the Global Margin for Commitments (Union Reserve), the Flexibility Instrument and the Contingency Margin. The Emergency Aid Reserve is not aimed at addressing the consequences of market related crises affecting the agricultural production or distribution. Specific provision should therefore be made for the possibility to enter commitment and corresponding payment appropriations into the budget over and above the ceilings set out in the MFF where it is necessary to use special instruments.	(7)  The following special instruments are necessary to allow the Union to react to specified unforeseen circumstances, or to allow the financing of clearly identified expenditure which cannot be financed within the limits of the ceilings available for one or more headings as laid down in the MFF, thereby allowing the annual budgetary procedure to run smoothly: the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, the European Union Solidarity Fund, the Emergency Aid Reserve, the Global Margin for Commitments (Union Reserve for Commitments), the Flexibility Instrument and the Contingency Margin. Specific provision should therefore be made for the possibility to enter commitment and corresponding payment appropriations into the budget over and above the ceilings set out in the MFF where it is necessary to use special instruments.
Modification    8 Proposal for a regulation Recital 7 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	(7 a)  In particular, while the Union and its Member States should make every effort to ensure that commitments authorised by the budgetary authority are effectively implemented for their original purpose, it should be possible to mobilise commitment appropriations that have not been executed or that have been de-committed through the Union Reserve for Commitments, provided that this is not a means for beneficiaries to circumvent the relevant de-commitment rules.
Modification    9 Proposal for a regulation Recital 9
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(9)  Rules should be laid down for other situations that may require the MFF to be adjusted. Those adjustments may be related to the delayed adoption of new rules or programmes under shared management, or to measures linked to sound economic governance or to the protection of the Union’s budget in the case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States adopted in accordance with the relevant basic acts.	(9)  Rules should be laid down for other situations that may require the MFF to be adjusted. Those adjustments may be related to the delayed adoption of new rules or programmes under shared management, or to the suspension of budgetary commitments in accordance with the relevant basic acts.
Modification    10 Proposal for a regulation Recital 10
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(10)  It is necessary to carry-out a review of the functioning of the MFF at mid-term of its implementation. The results of this review should be taken into account in any revision of this Regulation for the remaining years of the MFF.	(10)  In order to take into account new policies and priorities, the MFF should be revised at mid-term on the basis of a review of the functioning and implementation of the MFF, which should also contain a report setting out the methods for the practical implementation of a five-plus-five-year financial framework.
Modification    11 Proposal for a regulation Recital 10 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	(10 a)  In order to fulfil the Union’s commitment to being a front runner in implementing the UN Sustainable Development Goals, including gender equality, the MFF revision shall be prepared taking into account progress made in their implementation in all EU policies and initiatives of the 2021-2027 MFF, measured on the basis of performance indicators drawn up by the Commission, as well as progress in the mainstreaming of gender in all EU activities. The MFF revision shall also be prepared taking into account progress made in achieving the overall target of contributing 25 % of EU expenditure to climate objectives over the 2021-2027 MFF period, and the achievement of an annual 30 % spending target as soon as possible and at the latest by 2027, measured on the basis of reformed performance indicators that differentiate between mitigation and adaptation. The revision should also assess, in consultation with national and local stakeholders, whether the adopted simplification measures have actually achieved a reduction in red tape for beneficiaries in the implementation of programmes;
Modification    12 Proposal for a regulation Recital 12 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	(12 a)  All expenditure at Union level dedicated to the implementation of Union policies based on the Treaties is expenditure of the Union within the meaning of Article 310(1) TFEU, and should therefore be entered in the budget of the Union in accordance with the budgetary procedure laid down in Article 314 TFEU, thereby ensuring respect for the fundamental principles of the democratic representation of citizens in decision-making, parliamentary oversight of public finances and transparency of decision-making. The MFF ceilings may not obstruct the financing through the Union budget of the policy objectives of the Union. It is therefore necessary to provide for an upward revision of the MFF whenever this is needed to facilitate the financing of Union policies, in particular new policy objectives, without having recourse to intergovernmental or quasi-intergovernmental financing methods.
Modification    13 Proposal for a regulation Recital 13
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(13)  Specific rules are also necessary for dealing with large scale infrastructure projects whose lifetime extends well beyond the period set for the MFF. It is necessary to establish maximum amounts for the contributions from the general budget of the Union to those projects, thereby ensuring that they do not have any impact on other projects financed from that budget.	(13)  Specific rules are also necessary for dealing with large‑scale infrastructure projects whose lifetime extends well beyond the period set for the MFF. The financing of these large-scale projects, which are of strategic importance for the Union, needs to be secured in the general budget of the Union, but it is necessary to establish maximum amounts for its contributions to those projects, thereby ensuring that possible cost overruns do not have any impact on other projects financed from that budget;
Modification    14 Proposal for a regulation Recital 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(14)  It is necessary to provide for general rules on interinstitutional cooperation in the budgetary procedure.	(14)  It is necessary to provide for general rules on transparency and interinstitutional cooperation in the budgetary procedure, respecting the budgetary powers of the institutions as laid down in the Treaties, so as to ensure that budgetary decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen, as required by Article 10(3) TEU, and that the budgetary procedure runs smoothly, as provided for in Article 312(3) TFEU, second paragraph.
Modification    15 Proposal for a regulation Recital 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(15)  The Commission should present a proposal for a new multiannual financial framework before 1 July 2025, to enable the institutions to adopt it sufficiently in advance of the start of the subsequent multiannual financial framework. In accordance with Article 312(4) TFEU the ceilings corresponding to the last year set out in this Regulation are to continue to apply in the event that a new financial framework is not adopted before the end of the term of the MFF laid down in this Regulation.	(15)  The Commission should present a proposal for a new multiannual financial framework before 1 July 2025. This timeframe will provide the newly appointed Commission with the necessary time to draw up its proposals, and enable the European Parliament emerging from the 2024 elections to come forward with its own position on the post-2027 MFF. It will also enable the institutions to adopt it sufficiently in advance of the start of the subsequent multiannual financial framework. In accordance with Article 312(4) TFEU the ceilings corresponding to the last year set out in this Regulation are to continue to apply in the event that a new financial framework is not adopted before the end of the term of the MFF laid down in this Regulation.
Modification    16 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 1 – article 3 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
Respect of own resources ceiling	Relationship to own resources
Modification    17 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 1 – article 3 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
4.  For each of the years covered by the MFF, the total appropriations for payments required, after annual adjustment and taking account of any other adjustments and revisions as well as the application of paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 2, may not be such as to produce a call-in rate for own resources that exceeds the own resources ceiling set in accordance with the Council decision on the system of own resources of the European Union adopted in accordance with the third paragraph of Article 311 TFEU ('Own Resources Decision') in force.	4.  For each of the years covered by the MFF, the total appropriations for payments required, after annual adjustment and taking account of any other adjustments and revisions as well as the application of paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 2, may not be such as to produce a call-in rate for own resources that exceeds the limits of the Union’s own resources, without prejudice to the obligation of the Union to provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 311 TFEU, and the obligation of the institutions to ensure that the financial means are made available to allow the Union to fulfil its legal obligations in respect of third parties in accordance with Article 323 TFEU.
Modification    18 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 1 – article 3 – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
5.  Where necessary, the ceilings set in the MFF shall be lowered in order to ensure compliance with the own resources ceiling set in accordance with the Own Resources Decision in force.	deleted
Modification    19 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 2 – article 5 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
4.  Without prejudice to Article 6, 7 and 8, no further technical adjustments shall be made in respect of the year concerned, either during the year or as ex post corrections during subsequent years.	deleted
Modification    20 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 2 – article 7 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
Adjustments related to measures linked to sound economic governance or to the protection of the Union’s budget in the case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States	Adjustments related to the suspension of budgetary commitments
Modification    21 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 2 – article 7
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
In the case of the lifting, in accordance with the relevant basic acts, of a suspension of budgetary commitments concerning Union funds in the context of measures linked to sound economic governance or to the protection of the Union’s budget in the case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States, the amounts corresponding to the suspended commitments shall be transferred to the following years and the corresponding ceilings of the MFF shall be adjusted accordingly. Suspended commitments of year n may not be entered in the budget beyond year n+2.	In the case of the lifting, in accordance with the relevant basic acts, of a suspension of budgetary commitments, the corresponding amounts shall be transferred to the following years and the corresponding ceilings of the MFF shall be adjusted accordingly. Suspended commitments of year n may not be entered in the budget beyond year n+2. As from year n+3, an amount equivalent to the lapsed commitments shall be entered in the Union Reserve for Commitments provided for in Article 12.
Modification    22 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 3 – article 10 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
1.  The European Union Solidarity Fund, the objectives and scope of which are set out in Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002, shall not exceed a maximum annual amount of EUR 600 million (2018 prices). On 1 October of each year, at least one quarter of that annual amount shall remain available in order to cover needs arising until the end of that year. The portion of the annual amount not used in year n may be used up to year n+1. The portion of the annual amount stemming from the previous year shall be drawn on first. That portion of the annual amount from year n which is not used in year n+1 shall lapse.	1.  The European Union Solidarity Fund is intended to allow for financial assistance in the event of major disasters occurring on the territory of a Member State or of a candidate country, as defined in the relevant basic act, and shall not exceed a maximum annual amount of EUR 1 000 million (2018 prices). On 1 October of each year, at least one quarter of that annual amount shall remain available in order to cover needs arising until the end of that year. The portion of the annual amount not used in year n may be used up to year n+1. The portion of the annual amount stemming from the previous year shall be drawn on first. That portion of the annual amount from year n which is not used in year n+1 shall lapse.
Modification    23 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 3 – article 10 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	1a.  The appropriations for the European Union Solidarity Fund shall be entered in the general budget of the Union as a provision.
Modification    24 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 3 – article 11 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
2.  The annual amount of the Reserve is fixed at EUR 600 million (2018 prices) and may be used up to year n+1 in accordance with the Financial Regulation. The Reserve shall be entered in the general budget of the Union as a provision. The portion of the annual amount stemming from the previous year shall be drawn on first. That portion of the annual amount from year n which is not used in year n+1 shall lapse. By 1 October of each year, at least one quarter of the annual amount for year n shall remain available to cover needs arising until the end of that year. No more than half of the amount available until 30 September each year may be mobilised for, respectively, internal or external operations. As of 1 October, the remaining part of the amount available may be mobilised either for internal or external operations to cover needs arising until the end of that year.	2.  The annual amount of the Emergency Aid Reserve is fixed at EUR 1 000 million (2018 prices) and may be used up to year n+1 in accordance with the Financial Regulation. The Reserve shall be entered in the general budget of the Union as a provision. The portion of the annual amount stemming from the previous year shall be drawn on first. That portion of the annual amount from year n which is not used in year n+1 shall lapse. By 1 October of each year, at least EUR 150 million (2018 prices) of the annual amount for year n shall remain available to cover needs arising until the end of that year. No more than half of the amount available until 30 September each year may be mobilised for, respectively, internal or external operations. As of 1 October, the remaining part of the amount available may be mobilised either for internal or external operations to cover needs arising until the end of that year.
Modification    25 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 3 – article 12 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
Global Margin for Commitments (Union Reserve)	Global Margin for Commitments (Union Reserve for Commitments)
Modification    26 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 3 – article 12 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
1.  The Global Margin for Commitments (Union Reserve), to be made available over and above the ceilings established in the MFF for the years 2022 to 2027, shall comprise the following: (a) margins left available below the MFF ceilings for commitments of year n-1; (b) as of 2023, in addition to the margins referred to in point (a), an amount equivalent to de-commitments of appropriations made during year n-2, without prejudice to Article [15] of the Financial Regulation.	1.  The Global Margin for Commitments (Union Reserve for Commitments), to be made available over and above the ceilings established in the MFF for the years 2021 to 2027, shall comprise the following: (a) margins left available below the MFF ceilings for commitments of previous years; (a a) unexecuted commitment appropriations of year n-1; (b) an amount equivalent to de-commitments of appropriations made during year n-2, without prejudice to Article [15] of the Financial Regulation; (b a) an amount equivalent to the amount of suspended commitments of year n-3 that may no longer be entered in the budget pursuant to Article 7; (b aa) an amount equivalent to the amount of revenue resulting from fines and penalties.
Modification    27 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 3 – Article 12 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
2.  The Global Margin for Commitments (Union Reserve) or part thereof may be mobilised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the budgetary procedure provided for in Article 314 TFEU.	2.  The Global Margin for Commitments (Union Reserve for Commitments) or part thereof may be mobilised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the budgetary procedure provided for in Article 314 TFEU. Margins of year n may be mobilised for years n and n+1 through the Union Reserve for Commitments, provided this does not conflict with pending or planned amending budgets.
Modification    28 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 3 – article 12 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	3.  At the end of 2027, amounts that remain available under the Union Reserve for Commitments shall be carried over to the next MFF up to 2030.
Modification    29 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 3 – article 13 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
The Flexibility Instrument may be used for the financing, for a given financial year, of clearly identified expenditure which could not be financed within the limits of the ceilings available for one or more other headings. Subject to the second subparagraph, the ceiling of the annual amount available for the Flexibility Instrument is set at EUR 1 000 million (2018 prices).	The Flexibility Instrument may be used for the financing, for a given financial year, of clearly identified expenditure which could not be financed within the limits of the ceilings available for one or more other headings or within the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, the European Union Solidarity Fund and the Emergency Aid Reserve. Subject to the second subparagraph, the ceiling of the annual amount available for the Flexibility Instrument is set at EUR 2 000 million (2018 prices).
Modification    30 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 3 – article 14 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
1.  A Contingency Margin of up to 0.03 % of the Gross National Income of the Union shall be constituted outside the ceilings of the MFF, as a last resort instrument to react to unforeseen circumstances. It may be mobilised only in relation to an amending or annual budget.	1.  A Contingency Margin of up to 0.05% of the Gross National Income of the Union shall be constituted outside the ceilings of the MFF, as a last resort instrument to react to unforeseen circumstances. It may be mobilised only in relation to an amending or annual budget. It may be mobilised for both commitment and payment appropriations, or for payment appropriations only.
Modification    31 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 3 – article 14 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
2.  Recourse to the Contingency Margin shall not exceed, at any given year, the maximum amount provided in the annual technical adjustment of the MFF, and shall be consistent with the own resources ceiling.	2.  Recourse to the Contingency Margin shall not exceed, at any given year, the maximum amount provided in the annual technical adjustment of the MFF.
Modification    32 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 3 – article 14 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
3.  Amounts made available through the mobilisation of the Contingency Margin shall be fully offset against the margins in one or more MFF headings for the current or future financial years.	deleted
Modification    33 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 3 – article 14 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
4.  The amounts offset in accordance with paragraph 3 shall not be further mobilised in the context of the MFF. Recourse to the Contingency Margin shall not result in exceeding the total ceilings of commitment and payment appropriations laid down in the MFF for the current and future financial years.	deleted
Modification    34 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 4 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
Review and Revision of the MFF	Revisions
Modification    35 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 4 – article 15 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
1.  Without prejudice to Article 3(2) and Articles 16 to 20 and 24, in the event of unforeseen circumstances, the MFF may be revised in compliance with the own resources ceiling set in accordance with the Own Resources Decision in force.	1.  Without prejudice to Article 3(2) and Articles 16 to 20 and 24, the relevant MFF ceilings shall be revised upward in the event that this is necessary to facilitate the financing of Union policies, in particular new policy objectives, in circumstances where it would otherwise be necessary to establish additional intergovernmental or quasi-intergovernmental financing methods that would circumvent the budgetary procedure laid down in Article 314 TFEU.
Modification    36 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 4 – article 15 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
3.  Any proposal for revision of the MFF in accordance with paragraph 1 shall examine the scope for reallocating expenditure between the programmes covered by the heading concerned by the revision, with particular reference to any expected under-utilisation of appropriations.	deleted
Modification    37 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 4 – article 16 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
Mid-term review of the MFF	Mid-term revision of the MFF
Modification    38 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 4 – article 16
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
Before 1 January 2024, the Commission shall present a review of the functioning of the MFF. This review shall, as appropriate, be accompanied by relevant proposals.	Before 1 July 2023, the Commission shall present a legislative proposal for the revision of this Regulation in accordance with the procedures set out in the TFEU, based on a review of the functioning of the MFF. Without prejudice to Article 6 of this Regulation, pre‑allocated national envelopes shall not be reduced through such a revision.   The proposal shall be drawn up taking into account an assessment of: -  progress towards the overall target of contributing 25 % of EU expenditure to climate objectives over the 2021-2027 MFF period, and towards a 30 % annual spending target as soon as possible; -  the mainstreaming of the UN Sustainable Development Goals; -  the mainstreaming of a gender perspective in the Union budget (gender budgeting); -  the impact of simplification measures on the reduction in red tape for beneficiaries in the implementation of the financial programmes, to be carried out in consultation with stakeholders;
Modification    39 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 4 – article 17
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
When notifying the European Parliament and the Council of the results of the technical adjustments to the MFF, the Commission shall, where appropriate, submit any proposal to revise the total appropriations for payments which it considers necessary, in the light of implementation, to ensure a sound management of the yearly payments ceilings, and in particular their orderly progression in relation to the appropriations for commitments.	When notifying the European Parliament and the Council of the results of the technical adjustments to the MFF, or when the ceilings for payments may prevent the Union from honouring its legal commitments, the Commission shall submit any proposal to revise the total appropriations for payments which it considers necessary, in the light of implementation, to ensure a sound management of the yearly payments ceilings, and in particular their orderly progression in relation to the appropriations for commitments.
Modification    40 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 5 – article 21 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
1.  A maximum amount of EUR 14 196 million (in 2018 prices) shall be available from the general budget of the Union for the period 2021 to 2027 for the large scale projects under [Regulation XXXX/XX of the European Parliament and the Council - Space Programme].	1.  A maximum amount shall be available jointly for the European satellite navigation programmes (EGNOS and Galileo) and for Copernicus (the European Earth observation programme) from the general budget of the Union for the period 2021 to 2027. This maximum amount shall be set at 15 % above the indicative amounts set for both large-scale projects under [Regulation XXXX/XX of the European Parliament and the Council – Space Programme]. Any reinforcement within this maximum amount shall be financed through the margins or the special instruments, and shall not result in reductions in other programmes and projects.
Modification    41 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 5 – article 21 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	2a.  Should additional financing needs from the Union budget arise for the above-mentioned large-scale projects, the Commission shall propose a revision of the MFF ceilings accordingly.
Modification    42 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 6 – title
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
Interinstitutional cooperation in the budgetary procedure	Transparency and interinstitutional cooperation in the budgetary procedure
Modification    43 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 6 – article 22
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
Interinstitutional cooperation in the budgetary procedure	Transparency and interinstitutional cooperation in the budgetary procedure
Modification    44 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 6 – article 22 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	Both the European Parliament and the Council shall be represented by members of the respective institution when meetings are held at political level.
Modification    45 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 6 – article 22 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	6a.  The European Parliament and the Council shall meet in public when adopting their respective positions on the draft budget.
Modification    46 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 6 – article 23
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
All expenditure and revenue of the Union and Euratom shall be included in the general budget of the Union in accordance with Article [7] of the Financial Regulation, including expenditure resulting from any relevant decision taken unanimously by the Council after consulting the European Parliament, in the framework of Article 332 TFEU.	All expenditure and revenue of the Union and Euratom shall be included in the general budget of the Union in accordance with Article 310(1) TFEU, including expenditure resulting from any relevant decision taken unanimously by the Council after consulting the European Parliament, in the framework of Article 332 TFEU.
Modification    47 Proposal for a regulation Chapter 7 – article 24
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
Before 1 July 2025, the Commission shall present a proposal for a new multiannual financial framework.	Before 1 July 2023, together with its proposals for the mid-term revision, the Commission shall present a report setting out the methods for the practical implementation of a five-plus-five year period for the financial framework.   Before 1 July 2025, the Commission shall present a proposal for a new multiannual financial framework.   If no Council regulation determining a new multiannual financial framework has been adopted before 31 December 2027, the ceilings and other provisions corresponding to the last year of the MFF shall be extended until a regulation determining a new financial framework is adopted. If a new Member State accedes to the Union after 2020, the extended financial framework shall, if necessary, be revised in order to take the accession into account.
E. MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROPOSAL FOR AN INTERINSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT
50.  Stresses that, as a result of the negotiation and adoption of a new MFF Regulation, the proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management should be modified as follows:
Modification    48 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Part 1 Section A – point 6 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Modification   6 a  Information relating to operations not included in the general budget of the Union and to the foreseeable development of the various categories of the Union’s Own Resources is set out, by way of indication, in separate tables. This information shall be updated annually together with the documents accompanying the draft budget.
Modification    49 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Part 1 Section A – point 7
Text proposed by the Commission Modification 7.  The institutions shall, for the purposes of sound financial management, ensure as far as possible during the budgetary procedure and at the time of the budget's adoption that sufficient margins are left available beneath the ceilings for the various headings of the MFF. 7.  The institutions shall, for the purposes of sound financial management, ensure as far as possible during the budgetary procedure and at the time of the budget’s adoption that sufficient amounts are left available within the margins beneath the ceilings for the various headings of the MFF or within the available special instruments.
Modification    50 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Part 1 Section A – point 8
Text proposed by the Commission Modification Updating of forecasts for payment appropriations after 2027 8.  In 2024, the Commission shall update the forecasts for payment appropriations after 2027. That update shall take into account all relevant information, including the real implementation of budget appropriations for commitments and budget appropriations for payments, as well as the implementation forecasts. It shall also consider the rules designed to ensure that payment appropriations develop in an orderly manner compared to commitment appropriations and the growth forecasts of the Union's Gross National Income. Updating of forecasts for payment appropriations 8.  Every year, the Commission shall update the forecasts for payment appropriations until and after 2027. That update shall take into account all relevant information, including the real implementation of budget appropriations for commitments and budget appropriations for payments, as well as the implementation forecasts. It shall also consider the rules designed to ensure that payment appropriations develop in an orderly manner compared to commitment appropriations and the growth forecasts of the Union's Gross National Income.
Modification    51 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Part 1 Section B – point 9
Text proposed by the Commission Modification 9.  When the conditions for mobilising the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, as set out in the relevant basic act, are met, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council a proposal for a transfer to the relevant budgetary lines. Transfers related to the Globalisation Adjustment Fund shall be made in accordance with the Financial Regulation. 9.  When the conditions for mobilising the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, as set out in the relevant basic act, are met, the Commission shall make a proposal to mobilise it. The decision to mobilise the Globalisation Adjustment Fund shall be taken jointly by the European Parliament and the Council. At the same time as it presents its proposal for a decision to mobilise the Globalisation Adjustment Fund, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament and the Council a proposal for a transfer to the relevant budgetary lines. In the event of disagreement, the matter shall be addressed at the next budget trilogue. Transfers related to the Globalisation Adjustment Fund shall be made in accordance with the Financial Regulation.
Modification    52 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Part 1 Section B – point 10
Text proposed by the Commission Modification 10.  When the conditions for mobilising the European Union Solidarity Fund as set out in the relevant basic act are met, the Commission shall make a proposal for the appropriate budgetary instrument in accordance with the Financial Regulation. 10.  When the conditions for mobilising the European Union Solidarity Fund as set out in the relevant basic act are met, the Commission shall make a proposal to mobilise it. The decision to mobilise the Solidarity Fund shall be taken jointly by the European Parliament and the Council. At the same time as it presents its proposal for a decision to mobilise the Solidarity Fund, the Commission shall present to the European Parliament and the Council a proposal for a transfer to the relevant budgetary lines. In the event of disagreement, the matter shall be addressed at the next budget trilogue. Transfers related to the Solidarity Fund shall be made in accordance with the Financial Regulation.
Modification    53 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Part 1 Section B – point 11
Text proposed by the Commission Modification 11.  When the Commission considers that the Emergency Aid Reserve needs to be called on, it shall present to the European Parliament and the Council a proposal for a transfer from the Reserve to the corresponding budgetary lines in accordance with the Financial Regulation. 11.  When the Commission considers that the Emergency Aid Reserve needs to be called on, it shall present to the European Parliament and the Council a proposal for a transfer from the Reserve to the corresponding budgetary lines in accordance with the Financial Regulation. In the event of disagreement, the matter shall be addressed at the next budget trilogue.
Modification    54 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Part 1 Section B – point 12
Text proposed by the Commission Modification Flexibility Instrument   12.  The Commission shall make a proposal for the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument after it has examined all possibilities for re-allocating appropriations under the heading requiring additional expenditure. The proposal shall identify the needs to be covered and the amount. Such a proposal may be made in relation to a draft budget or draft amending budget. The Flexibility Instrument may be mobilised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the budgetary procedure set out in Article 314 TFEU. Flexibility Instrument   12.  The Commission shall make a proposal for the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument after it has exhausted the margins of the relevant headings. The proposal shall identify the needs to be covered and the amount. The Flexibility Instrument may be mobilised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the budgetary procedure set out in Article 314 TFEU.
Modification    55 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Part 1 Section B – point 13
Text proposed by the Commission Modification 13.  The mobilisation of the Contingency Margin, or part thereof, shall be proposed by the Commission after a thorough analysis of all other financial possibilities. Such a proposal may be made in relation to a draft budget or draft amending budget. The Contingency Margin may be mobilised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the budgetary procedure set out in Article 314 TFEU. 13.  The mobilisation of the Contingency Margin, or part thereof, shall be proposed by the Commission after a thorough analysis of all other financial possibilities. The Contingency Margin may be mobilised by the European Parliament and the Council in the framework of the budgetary procedure set out in Article 314 TFEU.
Modification    56 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Part 2 Section A – point 14 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Modification   14a.  In order to facilitate the adoption of a new MFF or a revision thereof, and to give effect to Article 312(5) TFEU, the institutions shall convene regular meetings, namely:   -  Meetings of the Presidents as set out in Article 324 of the Treaty;   -  Briefings and debriefings of a delegation of the European Parliament by the Council presidency before and after relevant Council meetings;   -  Informal trilateral meetings in the course of the Council proceedings aimed at taking account of Parliament’s views in any document produced by the Council presidency;   -  Trilogues once both Parliament and the Council have adopted their respective negotiating mandates;   -  Mutual appearances by the Council presidency in the relevant parliamentary committee and of Parliament’s negotiating team in the relevant Council formation.     Parliament and the Council will transmit to each other as soon as available any document formally adopted in their respective preparatory bodies or formally submitted on their behalf.
Modification    57 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Part 1 Section B – point 15 - indent 2
Text proposed by the Commission Modification -  the revenue, expenditure, assets and liabilities of the European Development Fund (EDF), the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF), the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), and other possible future mechanisms, -  the revenue, expenditure, assets and liabilities of the European Development Fund (EDF), the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF), the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), and other possible future mechanisms which are not financed through the Union budget, but which exist to support Union policy objectives deriving from the Treaties,
Modification    58 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Part 1 Section B – point 15 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Modification   15 a.  When adopting autonomous transfers pursuant to Article 30(1) of the Financial Regulation, the Commission shall immediately inform the budgetary authority of the detailed grounds for such transfers. When Parliament or the Council express a reservation on an autonomous transfer, the Commission shall address it, including, if appropriate, by reversing the transfer.
Modification    59 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Part 3 Section A – point 24 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Modification 24 a.  When, in the framework of the budgetary procedure, the budgetary authority decides on specific reinforcements, the Commission shall not offset any of them in the subsequent years of its financial programming, unless specifically instructed to do so by the former.
Modification    60 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Annex Part A - point 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Modification 1 a.  Each institution undertakes to refrain from transmitting to the other institutions any non-urgent budgetary positions, transfers or other notifications entailing the activation of deadlines during their recess periods, so as to ensure that each institution is able to duly exercise its procedural prerogatives. The services of the institutions shall inform each other in due time of the dates of recess of their respective institutions.
Modification    61 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Annex Part B - point 2
Text proposed by the Commission Modification 2.  In due time before the adoption of the draft budget by the Commission, a trilogue shall be convened to discuss the possible priorities for the budget of the coming financial year. 2.  In due time before the adoption of the draft budget by the Commission, a trilogue shall be convened to discuss the possible priorities for the budget of the coming financial year and any questions arising from the implementation of the budget of the ongoing financial year.
Modification    62 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Annex Part C – point 8
Text proposed by the Commission Modification 8.  In the interest of loyal and sound institutional cooperation, the European Parliament and the Council commit to maintaining regular and active contacts at all levels, through their respective negotiators, throughout the whole budgetary procedure and, in particular, during the conciliation period. The European Parliament and the Council undertake to ensure the timely and constant mutual exchange of relevant information and documents at both formal and informal levels, as well as to hold technical or informal meetings as needed, during the conciliation period, in cooperation with the Commission. The Commission shall ensure timely and equal access to information and documents for the European Parliament and the Council. 8.  In the interest of loyal and sound institutional cooperation, the European Parliament and the Council commit to maintaining regular and active contacts at all levels, through their respective negotiators, throughout the whole budgetary procedure and, in particular, during the conciliation period. The European Parliament and the Council undertake to ensure the timely and constant mutual exchange of relevant information and documents at both formal and informal levels, in particular by transmitting to each other all procedural documents adopted within their respective preparatory bodies as soon as available. They undertake, furthermore, to hold technical or informal meetings as needed, during the conciliation period, in cooperation with the Commission. The Commission shall ensure timely and equal access to information and documents for the European Parliament and the Council.
Modification    63 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Annex Part D – point 12 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Modification   12a.  The European Parliament and the Council shall meet in public when adopting their respective positions on the draft budget.
Modification    64 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Annex Part E - point 15
Text proposed by the Commission Modification 15.  The European Parliament and the Council shall be represented at an appropriate level in the Conciliation Committee, such that each delegation can commit politically its respective institution, and that actual progress towards the final agreement may be made. 15.  Both the European Parliament and the Council shall be represented by members of the respective institution in the Conciliation Committee, so that each delegation can commit its respective institution politically, and that actual progress towards the final agreement may be made.
Modification    65 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Annex Part E - point 19
Text proposed by the Commission Modification 19.  The dates of the meetings of the Conciliation Committee and the trilogues shall be set in advance by agreement of the three institutions. 19.  The dates of the meetings of the Conciliation Committee and the trilogues shall be set in advance by agreement of the three institutions. Additional meetings, including at technical level, may be organised, as required, during the conciliation period.
Modification    66 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Annex Part E – point 21 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Modification   21a.  In order to make full use of the 21-day conciliation period stipulated by the Treaty and to allow the institutions to update their respective negotiating positions, the European Parliament and the Council undertake to examine the state of play of the conciliation procedure at every meeting of their relevant preparatory bodies throughout the aforementioned period, and shall refrain from leaving it to its last stages.
Modification    67 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Annex Part G - title
Text proposed by the Commission Modification Part G.  Reste à liquider (RAL) Part G.  Budget implementation, payments and Reste à liquider (RAL)
Modification    68 Proposal for an Interinstitutional Agreement Annex Part G - point 36
Text proposed by the Commission Modification 36.  Given the need to ensure an orderly progression of the total appropriations for payments in relation to the appropriations for commitments so as to avoid any abnormal shift of RAL from one year to another, the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission agree to monitor closely the level of the RAL so as to mitigate the risk of hampering the implementation of Union programmes because of a lack of payment appropriations at the end of the MFF.   In order to ensure a manageable level and profile for the payments in all headings, de-commitment rules shall be applied strictly in all headings, in particular the rules for automatic de-commitments.   In the course of the budgetary procedure, the institutions shall meet regularly with a view to jointly assessing the state of play and the outlook for budgetary implementation in the current and future years. This shall take the form of dedicated interinstitutional meetings at the appropriate level, before which the Commission shall provide the detailed state of play, broken down by fund and Member State, on payment implementation, reimbursement claims received and revised forecasts. In particular, in order to ensure that the Union can fulfill all its financial obligations stemming from existing and future commitments in the period 2021 to 2027 in accordance with Article 323 TFEU, the European Parliament and the Council shall analyse and discuss the Commission’s estimates as to the required level of payment appropriations. 36.  Given the need to ensure an orderly progression of the total appropriations for payments in relation to the appropriations for commitments so as to avoid any abnormal shift of RAL from one year to another, the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission agree to monitor closely the payment forecasts and the level of the RAL so as to mitigate the risk of hampering the implementation of Union programmes because of a lack of payment appropriations at the end of the MFF.   In the course of the budgetary procedure, the institutions shall meet regularly with a view to jointly assessing the state of play and the outlook for budgetary implementation in the current and future years. This shall take the form of dedicated interinstitutional meetings at the appropriate level, before which the Commission shall provide the detailed state of play, broken down by fund and Member State, on payment implementation, reimbursement claims received and revised short-to-long-term forecasts. In particular, in order to ensure that the Union can fulfil all its financial obligations stemming from existing and future commitments in the period 2021 to 2027 in accordance with Article 323 TFEU, the European Parliament and the Council shall analyse and discuss the Commission’s estimates as to the required level of payment appropriations.
°
°           °

51.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

Annex I – MFF 2021-2027: ceilings and instruments outside the ceilings (2018 prices)

(EUR million – 2018 prices)

	Commission proposal	Parliament position
Commitment appropriations	Total 2021-2027	2021	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	Total 2021-2027
I. Single Market, Innovation and Digital	166 303	31 035	31 006	31 297	30 725	30 615	30 757	30 574	216 010
II. Cohesion and Values	391 974	60 026	62 887	64 979	65 785	66 686	69 204	67 974	457 540
Of which: Economic, social and territorial cohesion	330 642	52 143	52 707	53 346	53 988	54 632	55 286	55 994	378 097
III. Natural Resources and Environment	336 623	57 780	57 781	57 789	57 806	57 826	57 854	57 881	404 718
IV. Migration and Border Management	30 829	3 227	4 389	4 605	4 844	4 926	5 066	5 138	32 194
V. Security and Defence	24 323	3 202	3 275	3 223	3 324	3 561	3 789	4 265	24 639
VI. Neighbourhood and the World	108 929	15 368	15 436	15 616	15 915	16 356	16 966	17 729	113 386
VII. European Public Administration	75 602	10 388	10 518	10 705	10 864	10 910	11 052	11 165	75 602
Of which: Administrative expenditure of the institutions	58 547	8 128	8 201	8 330	8 432	8 412	8 493	8 551	58 547
TOTAL COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS	1 134 583	181 025	185 293	188 215	189 262	190 880	194 688	194 727	1 324 089
as a percentage of GNI	1.11 %	1.29 %	1.31 %	1.31 %	1.30 %	1.30 %	1.31 %	1.29 %	1.30 %
TOTAL PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS	1 104 805	174 088	176 309	186 391	187 490	188 675	189 961	191 398	1 294 311
as a percentage of GNI	1.08 %	1.24 %	1.24 %	1.30 %	1.29 %	1.28 %	1.28 %	1.27 %	1.27 %
OUTSIDE THE MFF CEILINGS
Emergency aid reserve	4 200	1 000	1 000	1 000	1 000	1 000	1 000	1 000	7 000
European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF)	1 400	200	200	200	200	200	200	200	1 400
European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF)	4 200	1 000	1 000	1 000	1 000	1 000	1 000	1 000	7 000
Flexibility Instrument	7 000	2 000	2 000	2 000	2 000	2 000	2 000	2 000	14 000
European Investment Stabilisation Function	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.
European Peace Facility	9 223	753	970	1 177	1 376	1 567	1 707	1 673	9 223
TOTAL OUTSIDE THE MFF CEILINGS	26 023	4 953	5 170	5 377	5 576	5 767	5 907	5 873	38 623
TOTAL MFF + OUTSIDE THE MFF CEILINGS	1 160 606	185 978	190 463	193 592	194 838	196 647	200 595	200 600	1 362 712
as a percentage of GNI	1.14 %	1.32 %	1.34 %	1.35 %	1.34 %	1.34 %	1.35 %	1.33 %	1.34 %

Annex II – MFF 2021-2027: ceilings and instruments outside the ceilings (current prices)

(EUR million – current prices)

	Commission proposal	Parliament position
Commitment appropriations	Total 2021-2027	2021	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027	Total 2021-2027
I. Single Market, Innovation and Digital	187 370	32 935	33 562	34 555	34 601	35 167	36 037	36 539	243 395
II. Cohesion and Values	442 412	63 700	68 071	71 742	74 084	76 601	81 084	81 235	516 517
Of which: Economic, social and territorial cohesion	373 000	55 335	57 052	58 899	60 799	62 756	64 776	66 918	426 534
III. Natural Resources and Environment	378 920	61 316	62 544	63 804	65 099	66 424	67 785	69 174	456 146
IV. Migration and Border Management	34 902	3 425	4 751	5 084	5 455	5 658	5 936	6 140	36 448
V. Security and Defence	27 515	3 397	3 545	3 559	3 743	4 091	4 439	5 098	27 872
VI. Neighbourhood and the World	123 002	16 308	16 709	17 242	17 923	18 788	19 878	21 188	128 036
VII. European Public Administration	85 287	11 024	11 385	11 819	12 235	12 532	12 949	13 343	85 287
Of which: Administrative expenditure of the institutions	66 028	8 625	8 877	9 197	9 496	9 663	9 951	10 219	66 028
TOTAL COMMITMENT APPROPRIATIONS	1 279 408	192 105	200 567	207 804	213 140	219 261	228 107	232 717	1 493 701
as a percentage of GNI	1.11 %	1.29 %	1.31 %	1.31 %	1.30 %	1.30 %	1.31 %	1.29 %	1.30 %
TOTAL PAYMENT APPROPRIATIONS	1 246 263	184 743	190 843	205 790	211 144	216 728	222 569	228 739	1 460 556
as a percentage of GNI	1.08 %	1.24 %	1.24 %	1.30 %	1.29 %	1.28 %	1.28 %	1.27 %	1.27 %
OUTSIDE THE MFF CEILINGS
Emergency aid reserve	4 734	1 061	1 082	1 104	1 126	1 149	1 172	1 195	7 889
European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF)	1 578	212	216	221	225	230	234	239	1 578
European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF)	4 734	1 061	1 082	1 104	1 126	1 149	1 172	1 195	7 889
Flexibility Instrument	7 889	2 122	2 165	2 208	2 252	2 297	2 343	2 390	15 779
European Investment Stabilisation Function	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.	p.m.
European Peace Facility	10 500	800	1 050	1 300	1 550	1 800	2 000	2 000	10 500
TOTAL OUTSIDE THE MFF CEILINGS	29 434	5 256	5 596	5 937	6 279	6 624	6 921	7 019	43 633
TOTAL MFF + OUTSIDE THE MFF CEILINGS	1 308 843	197 361	206 163	213 741	219 419	225 885	235 028	239 736	1 537 334
as a percentage of GNI	1.14 %	1.32 %	1.34 %	1.35 %	1.34 %	1.34 %	1.35 %	1.33 %	1.34 %

Annex III – MFF 2021-2027: breakdown per programme (2018 prices)

N.B.: For the purpose of comparison, the table follows the structure of the individual EU programmes as proposed by the Commission, without any prejudice to possible changes that may be requested during the legislative procedure leading to the adoption of these programmes.

(EUR million – 2018 prices)

	2014-2020 MFF (EU27+EDF)	Commission proposal 2021-2027	Parliament position 2021-2027
I. Single Market, Innovation and Digital	116 361	166 303	216 010
1. Research and Innovation	69 787	91 028	127 537
Horizon Europe	64 674	83 491	120 000
Euratom Research and Training Programme	2 119	2 129	2 129
International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER)	2 992	5 406	5 406
Other	2	2	2
2. European Strategic Investments	31 886	44 375	51 798
InvestEU Fund	3 968	13 065	14 065
Connecting Europe Facility (total H1 contribution) including:	17 579	21 721	28 083
Connecting Europe Facility – Transport	12 393	11 384	17 746
Connecting Europe Facility – Energy	4 185	7 675	7 675
Connecting Europe Facility–- Digital	1 001	2 662	2 662
Digital Europe Programme	172	8 192	8 192
Other	9 097	177	177
Decentralised agencies	1 069	1 220	1 281
3. Single Market	5 100	5 672	8 423
Single Market Programme (incl. COSME)	3 547	3 630	5 823
EU Anti-Fraud Programme	156	161	322
Cooperation in the field of taxation (FISCALIS)	226	239	300
Cooperation in the field of customs (CUSTOMS)	536	843	843
Sustainable Tourism			300
Other	61	87	87
Decentralised agencies	575	714	748
4. Space	11 502	14 404	15 225
European Space Programme	11 308	14 196	15 017
Decentralised agencies	194	208	208
Margin	-1 913	10 824	13 026
II. Cohesion and Values	387 250	391 974	457 540
5. Regional Development and Cohesion	272 647	242 209	272 647
ERDF + Cohesion Fund including:	272 411	241 996	272 411
European Regional Development Fund	196 564	200 622
Cohesion Fund	75 848	41 374
Of which contribution to the Connecting Europe Facility – Transport	11 487	10 000
Support to the Turkish-Cypriot Community	236	213	236
6. Economic and Monetary Union	273	22 281	22 281
Reform Support Programme	185	22 181	22 181
Protection of the Euro Against Counterfeiting	7	7	7
Other	81	93	93
7. Investing in People, Social Cohesion and Values	115 729	123 466	157 612
European Social Fund+ (including EUR 5.9 billion for a Child Guarantee)	96 216	89 688	106 781
Of which health, employment and social innovation	1 075	1 042	1 095
Erasmus+	13 699	26 368	41 097
European Solidarity Corps	373	1 113	1 113
Creative Europe	1 403	1 642	2 806
Justice	316	271	316
Rights and values, including at least EUR 500 million for a Union values strand	594	570	1 627
Other	1 158	1 185	1 185
Decentralised agencies	1 971	2 629	2 687
Margin	-1 399	4 018	4 999
III. Natural Resources and Environment	399 608	336 623	404 718
8. Agriculture and Maritime Policy	390 155	330 724	391 198
EAGF + EAFRD including:	382 855	324 284	383 255
European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF)	286 143	254 247
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)	96 712	70 037
European Maritime and Fisheries Fund	6 243	5 448	6 867
Other	962	878	962
Decentralised agencies	95	113	113
9. Environment and Climate Action	3 492	5 085	11 520
Programme for Environment and Climate Action (LIFE)	3 221	4 828	6 442
Just Energy Transition Fund			4 800
Decentralised agencies	272	257	278
Margin	5 960	814	1 999
IV. Migration and Border Management	10 051	30 829	32 194
10. Migration	7 180	9 972	10 314
Asylum and Migration Fund	6 745	9 205	9 205
Decentralised agencies*	435	768	1 109
11. Border Management	5 492	18 824	19 848
Integrated Border Management Fund	2 773	8 237	8 237
Decentralised agencies*	2 720	10 587	11 611
Margin	-2 621	2 033	2 033
V. Security and Defence	1 964	24 323	24 639
12. Security	3 455	4 255	4 571
Internal Security Fund	1 200	2 210	2 210
Nuclear Decommissioning including:	1 359	1 045	1 359
Nuclear Decommissioning (Lithuania)	459	490	692
Nuclear safety and decommissioning (incl. for Bulgaria and Slovakia)	900	555	667
Decentralised agencies	896	1 001	1 002
13. Defence	575	17 220	17 220
European Defence Fund	575	11 453	11 453
Military Mobility	0	5 767	5 767
14. Crisis Response	1 222	1 242	1 242
Union Civil Protection Mechanism (rescEU)	560	1 242	1 242
Other	662	p.m.	p.m.
Margin	-3 289	1 606	1 606
VI. Neighbourhood and the World	96 295	108 929	113 386
15. External Action	85 313	93 150	96 809
Instrument(s) in support of neighbourhood and development policies, including the EDF successor and an investment plan for Africa	71 767	79 216	82 716
Humanitarian Aid	8 729	9 760	9 760
Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)	2 101	2 649	2 649
Overseas Countries and Territories (including Greenland)	594	444	594
Other	801	949	949
Decentralised agencies	144	132	141
16. Pre-accession assistance	13 010	12 865	13 010
Pre-Accession Assistance	13 010	12 865	13 010
Margin	-2 027	2 913	3 567
VII. European Public Administration	70 791	75 602	75 602
European Schools and Pensions	14 047	17 055	17 055
Administrative expenditure of the institutions	56 744	58 547	58 547
TOTAL	1 082 320	1 134 583	1 324 089
In % GNI (EU-27)	1.16 %	1.11 %	1.30 %

* The EP amount for decentralised agencies in clusters 10 and 11 includes the financial impact of the Commission proposals of 12 September 2018 on EASO and the European Border and Coast Guard.

Annex IV - MFF 2021-2027: breakdown per programme (current prices)

(EUR million – current prices)

	2014-2020 MFF (EU27+EDF)	Commission proposal 2021-2027	Parliament position 2021-2027
I. Single Market, Innovation and Digital	114 538	187 370	243 395
1. Research and Innovation	68 675	102 573	143 721
Horizon Europe	63 679	94 100	135 248
Euratom Research and Training Programme	2 085	2 400	2 400
International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER)	2 910	6 070	6 070
Other	1	3	3
2. European Strategic Investments	31 439	49 973	58 340
InvestEU Fund	3 909	14 725	15 852
Connecting Europe Facility (total H1 contribution) including:	17 435	24 480	31 651
Connecting Europe Facility – Transport	12 281	12 830	20 001
Connecting Europe Facility–- Energy	4 163	8 650	8 650
Connecting Europe Facility – Digital	991	3 000	3 000
Digital Europe Programme	169	9 194	9 194
Other	8 872	200	200
Decentralised agencies	1 053	1 374	1 444
3. Single Market	5 017	6 391	9 494
Single Market Programme (incl. COSME)	3 485	4 089	6 563
EU Anti-Fraud Programme	153	181	363
Cooperation in the field of taxation (FISCALIS)	222	270	339
Cooperation in the field of customs (CUSTOMS)	526	950	950
Sustainable Tourism			338
Other	59	98	98
Decentralised agencies	572	804	843
4. Space	11 274	16 235	17 160
European Space Programme	11 084	16 000	16 925
Decentralised agencies	190	235	235
Margin	-1 866	12 198	14 680
II. Cohesion and Values	380 738	442 412	516 517
5. Regional Development and Cohesion	268 218	273 240	307 578
ERDF + Cohesion Fund including:	267 987	273 000	307 312
European Regional Development Fund	193 398	226 308
Cohesion Fund	74 589	46 692
Of which contribution to the Connecting Europe Facility – Transport	11 306	11 285
Support to the Turkish-Cypriot Community	231	240	266
6. Economic and Monetary Union	275	25 113	25 113
Reform Support Programme	188	25 000	25 000
Protection of the Euro Against Counterfeiting	7	8	8
Other	79	105	105
7. Investing in People, Social Cohesion and Values	113 636	139 530	178 192
European Social Fund+ (including EUR 5.9 billion in 2018 prices for a Child Guarantee)	94 382	101 174	120 457
Of which health, employment and social innovation	1 055	1 174	1 234
Erasmus+	13 536	30 000	46 758
European Solidarity Corps	378	1 260	1 260
Creative Europe	1 381	1 850	3 162
Justice		305	356
Rights and values, including at least EUR 500 million in 2018 prices for a Union values strand		642	1 834
Other	1 131	1 334	1 334
Decentralised agencies	1 936	2 965	3 030
Margin	-1 391	4 528	5 634
III. Natural Resources and Environment	391 849	378 920	456 146
8. Agriculture and Maritime Policy	382 608	372 264	440 898
EAGF + EAFRD including:	375 429	365 006	431 946
European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF)	280 351	286 195
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)	95 078	78 811
European Maritime and Fisheries Fund	6 139	6 140	7 739
Other	946	990	1 085
Decentralised agencies	94	128	128
9. Environment and Climate Action	3 437	5 739	12 995
Programme for Environment and Climate Action (LIFE)	3 170	5 450	7 272
Just Energy Transition Fund			5 410
Decentralised agencies	267	289	313
Margin	5 804	918	2 254
IV. Migration and Border Management	9 929	34 902	36 448
10. Migration	7 085	11 280	11 665
Asylum and Migration Fund	6 650	10 415	10 415
Decentralised agencies*	435	865	1 250
11. Border Management	5 439	21 331	22 493
Integrated Border Management Fund	2 734	9 318	9 318
Decentralised agencies*	2 704	12 013	13 175
Margin	-2 595	2 291	2 291
V. Security and Defence	1 941	27 515	27 872
12. Security	3 394	4 806	5 162
Internal Security Fund	1 179	2 500	2 500
Nuclear Decommissioning including:	1 334	1 178	1 533
Nuclear Decommissioning (Lithuania)	451	552	780
Nuclear safety and decommissioning (incl. for Bulgaria and Slovakia)	883	626	753
Decentralised agencies	882	1 128	1 129
13. Defence	590	19 500	19 500
European Defence Fund	590	13 000	13 000
Military Mobility	0	6 500	6 500
14. Crisis Response	1 209	1 400	1 400
Union Civil Protection Mechanism (rescEU)	561	1 400	1 400
Other	648	p.m.	p.m
Margin	-3 253	1 809	1 809
VI. Neighbourhood and the World	93 381	123 002	128 036
15. External Action	82 569	105 219	109 352
Instrument(s) in support of neighbourhood and development policies, including the EDF successor and an investment plan for Africa	70 428	89 500	93 454
Humanitarian Aid	8 561	11 000	11 000
Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)	2 066	3 000	3 000
Overseas Countries and Territories (including Greenland)	582	500	669
Other	790	1 070	1 070
Decentralised agencies	141	149	159
16. Pre-accession assistance	12 799	14 500	14 663
Pre-Accession Assistance	12 799	14 500	14 663
Margin	-1 987	3 283	4 020
VII. European Public Administration	69 584	85 287	85 287
European Schools and Pensions	13 823	19 259	19 259
Administrative expenditure of the institutions	55 761	66 028	66 028
TOTAL	1 061 960	1 279 408	1 493 701
In % GNI (EU-27)	1.16 %	1.11 %	1.30 %

* The EP amount for decentralised agencies in clusters 10 and 11 includes the financial impact of the Commission proposals of 12 September 2018 on EASO and the European Border and Coast Guard.

• [1]  Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0075 and P8_TA(2018)0076.
• [2]  Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0226.
• [3]  OJ C 215, 19.6.2018, p. 249.
• [4]  OJ L 282, 19.10.2016, p. 1.
• [5]  OJ C 242, 10.7.2018, p. 24.

OPINION of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (11.10.2018)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the Interim report on MFF 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position in view of an agreement
(COM(2018)0322 – 2018/0166R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Marietje Schaake

PA_Consent_Interim

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Foreign Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its report:

1.  Stresses, in light of the growing challenges affecting global and regional stability, the need to significantly increase appropriations for EU external action under the new multiannual financial framework (MFF) while preserving the EU’s foreign policy based on democracy, the rule of law, respect for human rights and fundamental rights; notes the modest real-term funding increase proposed by the Commission and calls for a further relative increase in external action commitments, which needs to be preserved in the interinstitutional negotiations;

2.  Recalls its position that the European Neighbourhood Instrument, the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA III) and the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights, including their goals and objectives, should be preserved as independent instruments due to their specific nature, and stresses the need to avoid competition between the different policies; urges that the connection among thematic and geographical programmes be strengthened, given the cross-cutting nature of many issues such as human rights, gender equality, non-discrimination of persons with disabilities and climate change; recalls also its request to maintain the existing financial balance in the distribution of funds between the EU’s southern and eastern neighbourhood;

3.  Recalls that the Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace (IcSP) is the only EU instrument for civilian conflict prevention including mediation, dialogue and reconciliation; regrets that important aspects of the IcSP such as support to reconciliation commissions, actions on child soldiers, combating the illicit use of firearms or on the rehabilitation of victims of armed violence, are not included in the current Commission proposal establishing the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI);

4.  Welcomes the proposal for the incorporation of the European Development Fund (EDF) into the EU budget, and calls for a reinforcement of Parliament’s powers of scrutiny;

5.  Urges that specific objectives on the gender dimension be included by increasing the available budget for this area;

6.  Reiterates that reform of the current architecture of external financing instruments should enhance accountability, transparency, democratic and parliamentary oversight, efficiency and coherence while taking the Union’s strategic priorities into account; stresses that these objectives cannot be achieved without a solid governance structure that allows for political control, is strategy-driven, inclusive and accountable, and includes clear objectives, benchmarks and monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, including an enhanced performance-based budgeting approach; emphasises, furthermore, the need to ensure the involvement of civil society in shaping and implementing the EU’s external action; regrets that the Commission’s proposals for the NDICI and IPA III contain virtually no such provisions on governance aspects, and that no specific mechanism is envisaged for the European Parliament’s involvement in strategic choices on priorities and funding; notes, therefore, that the proposals are not acceptable in their current form;

7.  Recognises the need for enhanced flexibility; insists, however, that funds used under the proposed ‘emerging challenges and priorities’ cushion cannot be used to serve other objectives such as migration management and security, and that enhanced flexibility cannot come at the expense of long-term policy objectives and reduced possibilities for the European Parliament to exercise its political steering and scrutiny rights; believes that it is necessary to include clear criteria on how to allocate reserve funds and to include an appropriate monitoring mechanism;

8.  Strongly criticises the fact that the performance-based allocations of Article 17 include ‘cooperation on migration’ among the criteria to determine supplementary financial allocations; stresses that the original purpose of the ‘more for more’ principle was to build stronger partnerships with the neighbours making more progress towards democratic reform, and that ‘cooperation on migration’ seriously jeopardises this approach and the EU’s respect for the principles included in Article 21 of the TEU;

9.  Stresses the need for a more democratic debate on EU external assistance also through a stronger involvement of the European Parliament in the strategic political steering of the EU’s external action instruments;

10.  Considers that expenditure from the defence cluster should only be spent on defence purposes such as the defence-related part of actions under the Connecting Europe Facility, the European Defence Fund and the Horizon Europe programme, including dual use infrastructures and assets as key enablers for a more efficient defence and for a closer civilian-military synergy;

11.  Calls on the Commission to implement gender budgeting in accordance with Article 8 TFEU.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
References	2018/0166R(APP)
Committee responsible	BUDG
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	AFET 13.9.2018
Rapporteur        Date appointed	Marietje Schaake 10.7.2018
Date adopted	9.10.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	35 4 11
Members present for the final vote	Michèle Alliot-Marie, Francisco Assis, Petras Auštrevičius, Goffredo Maria Bettini, Victor Boştinaru, Klaus Buchner, Fabio Massimo Castaldo, Lorenzo Cesa, Javier Couso Permuy, Andi Cristea, Georgios Epitideios, Knut Fleckenstein, Eugen Freund, Manolis Kefalogiannis, Tunne Kelam, Wajid Khan, Andrey Kovatchev, Eduard Kukan, Arne Lietz, Barbara Lochbihler, Sabine Lösing, Ramona Nicole Mănescu, David McAllister, Clare Moody, Javier Nart, Pier Antonio Panzeri, Ioan Mircea Paşcu, Tonino Picula, Cristian Dan Preda, Jozo Radoš, Michel Reimon, Sofia Sakorafa, Jean-Luc Schaffhauser, Jordi Solé, Dobromir Sośnierz, Dubravka Šuica, Charles Tannock, László Tőkés, Ivo Vajgl, Anders Primdahl Vistisen
Substitutes present for the final vote	Ana Gomes, Andrzej Grzyb, Norica Nicolai, Gilles Pargneaux, Helmut Scholz, Igor Šoltes, Bodil Valero, Marie-Christine Vergiat, Željana Zovko
Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote	Ivan Štefanec

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

35	+
ALDE	Petras Auštrevičius, Javier Nart, Norica Nicolai, Jozo Radoš, Ivo Vajgl
ECR	Charles Tannock
EFDD	Fabio Massimo Castaldo
PPE	Michèle Alliot-Marie, Lorenzo Cesa, Andrzej Grzyb, Manolis Kefalogiannis, Tunne Kelam, Andrey Kovatchev, Eduard Kukan, David McAllister, Ramona Nicole Mănescu, Cristian Dan Preda, Ivan Štefanec, Dubravka Šuica, László Tőkés, Željana Zovko
S&D	Francisco Assis, Goffredo Maria Bettini, Victor Boştinaru, Andi Cristea, Knut Fleckenstein, Eugen Freund, Ana Gomes, Wajid Khan, Arne Lietz, Clare Moody, Pier Antonio Panzeri, Gilles Pargneaux, Ioan Mircea Paşcu, Tonino Picula

4	-
ECR	Anders Primdahl Vistisen
ENF	Jean-Luc Schaffhauser
NI	Georgios Epitideios, Dobromir Sośnierz

11	0
GUE/NGL	Javier Couso Permuy, Sabine Lösing, Sofia Sakorafa, Helmut Scholz, Marie-Christine Vergiat
VERTS/ALE	Klaus Buchner, Barbara Lochbihler, Michel Reimon, Jordi Solé, Igor Šoltes, Bodil Valero

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

OPINION of the Committee on Development (17.10.2018)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the interim report on MFF 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
(2018/0166R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Željana Zovko

PA_Consent_Interim

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Development calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its report:

1.  Recalls Article 208 TFEU, under which Union policy in the field of development cooperation shall be conducted within the framework of the principles and objectives of the Union’s external action, with its primary objective being the reduction and, in the long term, the eradication of poverty; stresses that the Union’s development cooperation policy and that of the Member States complement and reinforce each other; recalls that Article 21(2) TEU states that development cooperation policy contributes to the objectives of the EU’s external action; calls for full respect of the TFEU and TEU legal commitments and for a development-oriented external instrument in the coming MFF 2021-2027;

2.  Recalls the need for an increase on the current levels of EU official development assistance (ODA) in the future external heading of the MFF, and welcomes the modest increase (in 2018 prices) proposed by the Commission;

3.  Notes that the proposal for a Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) reflects a new approach to foreign and development policy, which is not in line with Article 208 TFEU; underlines that poverty eradication must be the ultimate purpose of the EU’s development policies and that poverty eradication, as well as sustainable human, environmental and economic development, tackling inequality, injustice and exclusion, good governance and peace and security must be the primary objectives of the EU’s external financial instruments in the next MFF, alongside its commitments in relation to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) pursuant to TFEU Article 208(2);

4.  Recalls that the EU’s commitment to the implementation of the SDGs, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda on financing for development and the Paris climate agreement must guide its development policy; considers that the EU’s support for such implementation in developing countries must retain the rights-based approach and a focus on long-term objectives such as poverty eradication, tackling inequality, injustice and exclusion, and promoting democratic governance, human rights and gender equality, including by promoting civil society space and enhancing sustainable and inclusive development, particularly in the least developed countries (LDCs);

5.  Underlines that the next MFF must ensure that the external instruments are policy- driven, serving in the most effective way possible the pursuit of the objectives of the relevant policies, as laid down in the Treaties; recalls that the EU’s domestic interests should not drive its neighbourhood, development, humanitarian and international cooperation agenda; underlines its opposition to the instrumentalisation of aid;

6.  Notes that the new financing needs resulting from the deterioration of security conditions in the European Union’s neighbourhood and the increase in migration flows to the Union require increased funding in the next MFF; notes that the new challenges must be tackled together with the SDGs; considers that creating the NDICI risks exacerbating the problems highlighted in the mid-term review of the external financial instruments, namely that increasing demands from other policy fields have moved EU development policies away from poverty alleviation; points out that although budgetisation of the EDF is highly desirable, it cannot be interpreted as an increase in development funding;

7.  Recalls that country aid allocations within the EUs international cooperation programmes should complement foreign policy, while ensuring that development funding is used only for development-related objectives and purposes and not to cover expenses related to the achievement of different objectives, such as border controls or anti-migration policies;

8.  Notes that the design of the cooperation instrument should leave sufficient flexibility for tailoring programmes to the specific needs of third countries; reiterates that a substantial share of EU aid should be allocated to Least Developed Countries (LDCs), as the primary target of ODA; stresses that ensuring efficiency, effectiveness, visibility and policy coherence for development during implementation, ensuring the participation of civil society organisations (CSOs), and implementing the rights-based approach to development cooperation, as well as introducing a benchmark of 20 % of funds for basic social services, are key development aspects that must be maintained and improved in the next MFF cycle;

9.  Stresses that gender equality and women’s and girls’ rights and empowerment must be a significant objective across all programmes, geographic and thematic; considers that the EU budget should be gender-sensitive and conflict-sensitive;

10.  Notes that the proposed NDICI contains several flexibility mechanisms such as reserves, cushions and rapid response frameworks; stresses that the effects of increased flexibility on the predictability of ODA should be duly taken into account; calls for increased parliamentary scrutiny and a clearer elaboration regarding its governance and structures; notes with concern the lack of explicit reference in the objectives to poverty eradication, sustainable development, SDGs and combating inequality; underlines that these priorities must be reflected explicitly in the objectives of the proposed instrument in order to deliver on the Consensus for Development;

11.  Draws attention to the EU’s unfulfilled international commitments to increase its ODA to 0.7 % of gross national income (GNI), with 20 % of this for human development and social inclusion, and 0.2 % of GNI for LDCs by 2030, as well as to provide new and additional funding for climate action in developing countries; asserts that these commitments must be properly reflected in the 2021-2027 MFF;

12.  Welcomes and calls for the maintenance of the proposed 92 % ODA eligibility for the instrument; calls for the ring-fencing of at least 20 % ODA, across all programmes, geographic and thematic, annually and over the duration of the NDICI for social inclusion and human development, in order to support and strengthen the provision of basic social services, such as health (including nutrition), education and social protection, particularly to the most marginalised including women and children; calls for at least 85 % of ODA to be dedicated to actions that have gender equality and women’s and girls’ rights and empowerment as a principal or significant objective, across all programmes, geographic and thematic, annually and over the duration of its actions; affirms that in addition 20 % of these actions should have gender equality and women’s and girls’ rights and empowerment as a principal objective; calls for 50 % of the overall instrument to be devoted to contributing to climate- and environment-related objectives and actions;

13.  Considers that the EU budget should be gender-sensitive and conflict-sensitive, and calls on the Commission to implement gender budgeting;

14.  Recalls that country aid allocations should not be dependent on migration deals with the EU, and that there should be no diversion of finance from poor countries and regions to migrants’ countries of origin or of transit to Europe on the sole basis that these lie on the migration route;

15.  Reiterates its support for the integration of the European Development Fund (EDF) into the EU budget, with provision also being made for the total additionality of the funds thus transferred;

16.  Welcomes the establishment of an instrument devoted to cooperation with the overseas countries and territories (OCTs) with the aim of achieving their sustainable development and promoting the values and standards of the Union around the world; stresses, however, the need to endow this instrument with adequate financial resources, with a breakdown which is better adapted to needs and more balanced among the various OCTs;

17.  Acknowledges the significant efforts made by the Commission to increase the allocation to the humanitarian aid budget line in the next MFF; notes, however, that this increase does not respond yet to the level of needs, which have more than doubled since 2011;

18.  Stresses that it is vital that the next MFF in its entirety complies with the principle of policy coherence for development, as affirmed in Article 208 TFEU, and contributes to the achievement of the SDGs;

19.  Recalls that gender equality is enshrined in the EU Treaties and should be incorporated in all EU activities so as to deliver equality in practice; stresses that gender budgeting must become an integral part of the MFF, through the inclusion of a clear commitment in the MFF Regulation;

20.  Welcomes the extended scope and increased allocation for the Emergency Aid Reserve, with a view to responding also to internal crises; recalls the need to guarantee priority for sudden-onset humanitarian crises outside the EU;

21.  Stresses the need to seize the opportunity of the next MFF to financially support operations under the concept of Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development (LRRD); underlines that implementing the humanitarian-development nexus requires ensuring complementarity of development and humanitarian activities, and a culture shift away from stress on the EU as a donor and towards more operational flexibility and risk-taking, with a view to supporting LRRD, resilience of individuals and communities and early recovery and reconstruction; calls for more multi-year planning and funding in EU humanitarian activities, and for the systematic introduction of crisis modifiers in EU development activities in order to enable the EU´s partners to effectively contribute to the nexus implementation;

22.  Underlines that the MFF 2021-2027 must preserve and improve Parliament’s oversight over and scrutiny of the use of funds, with a clear mechanism and decision-making process for the disbursement of unallocated funds, ensuring Parliament’s impact on the programming and implementation phase of the external financial instruments; reiterates that any proposal for increased flexibility must be balanced by an improvement in transparency and accountability.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
References	2018/0166R(APP)
Committee responsible	BUDG
Opinion by  Date announced in plenary	DEVE 13.9.2018
Rapporteur  Date appointed	Željana Zovko 11.7.2018
Previous rapporteur	Frank Engel
Discussed in committee	30.8.2018
Date adopted	9.10.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	21 1 3
Members present for the final vote	Beatriz Becerra Basterrechea, Ignazio Corrao, Mireille D’Ornano, Nirj Deva, Enrique Guerrero Salom, Maria Heubuch, Teresa Jiménez-Becerril Barrio, Stelios Kouloglou, Linda McAvan, Norbert Neuser, Vincent Peillon, Lola Sánchez Caldentey, Eleni Theocharous, Mirja Vehkaperä, Bogdan Brunon Wenta, Joachim Zeller, Željana Zovko, Anna Záborská
Substitutes present for the final vote	Thierry Cornillet, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Ádám Kósa, Florent Marcellesi, Paul Rübig, Kathleen Van Brempt
Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote	Kati Piri

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

21	+
ALDE	Beatriz Becerra Basterrechea, Thierry Cornillet, Mirja Vehkaperä
ECR	Nirj Deva, Eleni Theocharous
EFDD	Ignazio Corrao
GUE/NGL	Stelios Kouloglou, Lola Sánchez Caldentey
PPE	Teresa Jiménez-Becerril Barrio, Ádám Kósa, Bogdan Brunon Wenta, Anna Záborská, Joachim Zeller, Željana Zovko
S&D	Enrique Guerrero Salom, Cécile Kashetu Kyenge, Linda McAvan, Norbert Neuser, Vincent Peillon, Kati Piri, Kathleen Van Brempt

1	-
EFDD	Mireille D’Ornano

3	0
PPE	Paul Rübig
VERTS/ALE	Maria Heubuch, Florent Marcellesi

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

OPINION of the Committee on International Trade (15.10.2018)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the interim report on MFF 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position in view of an agreement
(COM(2018)0322 – 2018/0166R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Helmut Scholz

PA_Consent_Interim

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on International Trade calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its report:

Recommendations

1.  Provided that a new and comprehensive external action instrument is agreed by the co-legislators, its title should explicitly mention ‘Trade’ and read for instance ‘Neighbourhood, Development, Trade and International Cooperation Instrument’;

2.  Welcomes increased appropriations for actions under heading six, ‘Neighbourhood and the World’, in the Commission’s proposal for the 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework (MFF) and calls for the proportionate increase (of 30 %) of the resources dedicated to international trade within that section and for these appropriations to be earmarked specifically for trade;

3.  Emphasises that the purpose of the MFF is to implement policy; welcomes, in this context, the fact that the ambitious Trade for All strategy outlined a values-based trade policy approach for the Union, including fair and ethical trade principles, and calls for an MFF 2021-2027 that provides sufficient funding, and for the political and administrative support for the further development of the Union’s trade policy in support of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), by means of coherent strategies; is concerned by the lack of a clear and visible commitment to that end in the MFF proposals; stresses that proper account must be taken of the objectives of the SDGs in order to create sustainable economic growth and stability, employment and the sustainable development of the European Union and of third countries, particularly in the developing world; recalls that the implementation of the SDGs concerns the EU’s internal and external policies; requests, therefore, the mainstreaming of the SDGs into all EU policies, including trade policy, and initiatives of the next MFF; emphasises that the contribution to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda must be used as the benchmark for policy success; whereas special attention should be paid to the provision of sufficient good-quality food and clean water and the building of additional wastewater disposal facilities in order to deliver on SDGs 2 and 6; draws attention, furthermore, to the scale and implications of energy poverty in developing countries and demands additional action to reduce energy poverty in line with SDG 7, in particular in remote rural areas in off-grid energy regions; stresses that funding for Aid for Trade initiatives should be increased;

4.  Emphasises the need to maintain in the future external financial instruments architecture the flexibility applied in existing instruments, such as the Partnership Instrument, for the financing of trade-related tasks such as Domestic Advisory Groups (DAGs), and calls for an increase in the amounts available for such flanking measures; notes that one of the objectives of the Union’s external instruments is public diplomacy in order to build trust and understanding in non-EU countries with regard to EU policies; stresses that civil society engagement is of the utmost importance, and recognises the importance of DAGs as powerful tools for the correct implementation of trade partnership agreements; nevertheless notes with concern that they are under-budgeted and suffer from a lack of capacity, in particular in third countries, and calls, therefore, for higher allocations to support the participation of civil society organisations in partner countries in their respective DAGs;

5.  Reiterates its call for sufficient resources to conduct ex-ante, interim and ex-post assessments of trade agreements and to review the methodology used, including regarding cumulative effects, the impact on achieving the SDGs, and that on implementing the Paris Agreement; considers that the European Union should take the social, health and environmental impact of its trade relations and agreements into account more strongly when evaluating current and future scenarios, and stresses also the need for gender-disaggregated data; calls on the Commission to cooperate closely with the scientific departments of the UNCTAD and the OECD;

6.  Notes that the conclusion of each new trade agreement can mean substantial revenue losses for the Union’s own-resources budget; calls on the Commission to accurately measure these losses and to provide Parliament with the respective figures for each agreement concluded; notes that the Member States retain 20 % of customs duties on imports from outside the Union as collection costs; supports the proposal of reducing this share to 10 % for the MFF period 2021-2027, to the benefit of the Union’s own resources budget; calls on the Commission and the Member States to increase their efforts against customs fraud;

7.  Draws attention to the fact that the customs union is one of the most important sources of the European Union’s financial capacity; calls, therefore, for a stricter and more homogenous implementation of the Union’s Customs Code; reiterates its concern caused by a 2017 OLAF report[1] which suggests that importers in the United Kingdom evaded large amounts of customs duties by using fictitious and false invoices and incorrect customs value declarations at importation; acknowledges that further Commission inspections brought to light a significant increase in the scale of that undervaluation fraud scheme operating through the hub in the United Kingdom; recalls that despite having been informed of the risks of fraud relating to the importation of textiles and footwear originating in the People’s Republic of China since 2007, and despite having been asked to take appropriate risk control measures, the United Kingdom failed to take action to prevent the fraud; notes with concern the OLAF conclusions that ‘UK customs’ continuous negligence’ deprived the European Union of EUR 1.987 billion in revenues as a result of lost duties and calls on the United Kingdom to pay the EUR 2.7 billion fine as requested by the Commission;

8.  Reiterates that trade policy and development policies are complementary elements of the Union’s external policies, forming an integral part of the European Consensus on Development, and that aid effectiveness principles must also be applied to Aid for Trade; recalls the unfulfilled commitment by the Union and most of the Member States to increase their official development assistance (ODA) to 0.7 % of gross national income (GNI) by 2030, including allocating 20 % of the EU’s ODA to actions for social inclusion and human development and 0.2 % of the Union’s GNI to ODA for least developed countries;

9.  Stresses that the next MFF must provide for macro-financial assistance (MFA) under strict economic and social progress conditionality;

10.  Stresses that the vital role of SMEs for the Union’s economy should be reflected in a comprehensive and consistent strategy which provides European SMEs with a business-friendly environment and fosters their international trade and investment opportunities; reiterates its call on the Commission to assess and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the various initiatives supporting SME internationalisation, including under the Partnership Instrument, in relation to private and Member State initiatives as well as other Union funding instruments supporting SMEs such as COSME, with a view to ensuring complementarity and European value added; calls on the Commission to further finance SME internationalisation programmes and to endeavour to provide a rules of origin calculator tailored to SMEs that should specifically enable them to use the preferences available under existing agreements with a view to increasing the preference utilisation rate; observes that SMEs’ access to external financing instruments should be improved through less complex and more user-friendly regulation, which can facilitate more agile use of funds available, and at the same time help SMEs acquire international experience; underlines the need to improve information and awareness among SMEs about existing instruments, in particular at national level;

11.  Recommends the creation of solid and consistent monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, including those required to fulfil obligations under trade and sustainable development chapters (TSD), within the future financial instruments architecture in order to ensure better accountability, transparency, democratic oversight by Parliament and improved targeting of expenditure; calls for higher and sufficient budgetary resources to be secured under the future financial instruments architecture and for personnel to be assigned to the Commission’s Directorate-General for Trade to carry out its increasing number of tasks, for the monitoring of the implementation of trade agreements and the deployment of trade defence instruments, in particular to defend and promote multilateralism in the development of global trade rules and regulations, for the reform the WTO and for the better integration of trade policy and rule-making in the framework of the United Nations system; demands additional Union support for the parliamentary dimension of the WTO, including increased financial and personal support for the responsible secretariat; stresses the importance of providing adequate financial resources to allow for regular and efficient monitoring of obligations arising from TSD chapters by international organisations such as International Labour Organisation missions, and surveillance and fact-finding work by other UN organisations;

12.  Calls on the Commission to earmark sufficient funds through the external financing instruments for cooperation and technical assistance with third countries, especially developing countries, for the necessary accompanying measures for trade-related legislation such as the regulation laying down supply chain due diligence obligations for Union importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas, the Kimberley Process, as well as the Commission’s flagship initiative on the garment sector and similar initiatives, and the UN Global Compact;

13.  Considers the European Guarantee Fund for external actions to be an efficient and effective mechanism for provisioning for risks related to Union lending operations in third countries; urges that more lending be made available to support SMEs and the development of social and economic infrastructure in the regions most affected by the migration and refugee crisis;

14.  Points out that support for trade facilitation in partner countries must remain a significant task in the MFF, while recommending placing stronger emphasis on time-to-market reduction in local and regional markets, increasing support for storage facilities for fish and agricultural products, and increasing incentives for fair and ethical trade with the Union.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
References	2018/0166R(APP)
Committee responsible	BUDG
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	INTA 13.9.2018
Rapporteur        Date appointed	Helmut Scholz 23.8.2018
Discussed in committee	30.8.2018
Date adopted	11.10.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	28 8 1
Members present for the final vote	Laima Liucija Andrikienė, Maria Arena, Tiziana Beghin, Daniel Caspary, Salvatore Cicu, Christofer Fjellner, Eleonora Forenza, Karoline Graswander-Hainz, Christophe Hansen, Heidi Hautala, Yannick Jadot, France Jamet, Elsi Katainen, Jude Kirton-Darling, Danilo Oscar Lancini, Bernd Lange, David Martin, Anne-Marie Mineur, Franck Proust, Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl, Inmaculada Rodríguez-Piñero Fernández, Tokia Saïfi, Helmut Scholz, Joachim Schuster, Adam Szejnfeld, William (The Earl of) Dartmouth, Jan Zahradil
Substitutes present for the final vote	Goffredo Maria Bettini, Sander Loones, Fernando Ruas, Paul Rübig, José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra
Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote	Beatriz Becerra Basterrechea, Czesław Hoc, Stanisław Ożóg, Jozo Radoš, Anders Sellström

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

28	+
ALDE	Beatriz Becerra Basterrechea, Elsi Katainen, Jozo Radoš
GUE/NGL	Eleonora Forenza, Helmut Scholz
PPE	Laima Liucija Andrikienė, Daniel Caspary, Salvatore Cicu, Christofer Fjellner, Christophe Hansen, Franck Proust, Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl, Fernando Ruas, Paul Rübig, Tokia Saïfi, José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, Anders Sellström, Adam Szejnfeld
S&D	Maria Arena, Goffredo Maria Bettini, Karoline Graswander-Hainz, Jude Kirton-Darling, Bernd Lange, David Martin, Inmaculada Rodríguez-Piñero Fernández, Joachim Schuster
VERTS/ALE	Heidi Hautala, Yannick Jadot

8	-
ECR	Czesław Hoc, Sander Loones, Stanisław Ożóg, Jan Zahradil
EFDD	Tiziana Beghin, William (The Earl of) Dartmouth
ENF	France Jamet, Danilo Oscar Lancini

1	0
GUE/NGL	Anne-Marie Mineur

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

• [1]  European Anti-Fraud Office, ‘The OLAF Report 2016 – Seventeenth Report of the European Anti-Fraud Office, 1 January to 31 December 2016’, 2017.

OPINION of the Committee on Budgetary Control (11.10.2018)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the Interim report on the MFF 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position in view of an agreement
(COM(2018)0322 –2018/0166R(APP))

Co-rapporteurs for opinion: Inés Ayala Sender, Gerben‑Jan Gerbrandy

PA_Consent_Interim

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Budgetary Control calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its interim report regarding the Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 and on the Council decision on the system of own resources of the European Union.

MFF proposal

1.  Recalls the European budgetary principles of unity, budgetary accuracy, annuality, equilibrium, universality, specification, performance, sound financial management and transparency, which must be respected when the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) is established;

2.  Stresses that the MFF 2021-2027 should facilitate a true European added value budget with sufficient funding to achieve its ambitions, and a strengthened focus on stability and simplicity, performance and results, leading to better and more effective spending, low operating costs, efficient allocations of resources, equity, and increased accountability and transparency in relation to the Union’s funds, making it understandable to a European citizen;

Numbers[1]

3.  Notes that, according to the European Court of Auditors (ECA), the Commission’s proposal for MFF 2021-2027 represents an 18 % increase in current prices on the MFF 2014-2020: from EUR 1087 to 1279 billion; stresses, however, that after taking inflation, the amounts attributable to UK beneficiaries during the MFF 2014-2020 and the incorporation of the European Development Fund (EDF) into the budget into account, the real increase is 5 %; points out that, as a proportion of Gross National Income (GNI), the Commission estimates that, when applying the same comparable basis, there is actually a decrease from 1.16 % to 1.08 %, and of 11 % when integrating the EDF;

4.  Notes that the Commission proposes to reduce funding by 16 % for the MFF heading ‘Natural Resources and Environment’, which means in particular:

–  a 15 % cut in the CAP as a whole (an 11 % cut in direct payments and a 27 % cut in the rural development programmes),

–  according to Parliament figures, a 38 % increase for the Programme for the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE), which will remain a small part of the heading ‘Natural Resources and Environment’: 2 %;

5.  Notes that the spending proposed for the heading ‘Cohesion and Values’ is set to increase by 1 %, but that there are major changes at programme level as, when taken together, the three funds that currently make up cohesion, namely the European Regional Development Fund (ERFD), the Cohesion Fund (CF) and the European Social Fund (ESF), are to be cut by 10 %, which means:

–  an increase by 2 % in the ERFD,

–  a 45 % cut in the Cohesion Fund,

–  a 7 % cut in the ESF, in spite of its enlarged scope and the integration of the Youth Employment Initiative;

6.  Notes with concern the fact that in the Common Provisions Regulation, the Commission presented the national allocations for cohesion policy without detailed distribution among the ERFD, the CF and the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+);

7.  Notes that other programmes will be included under the heading ‘Cohesion and Values’, such as Erasmus+, for which the Commission plans a 77 % increase in funding (amounting to 7 % of the new heading ‘Cohesion and Values’);

8.  Notes that, overall, the Commission proposes to increase funding for the other MFF Headings by EUR 115 billion, which corresponds to 11 % of the current MFF;

9.  Notes that the Commission’s proposed reprioritisation focuses on the headings ‘Migration and Border Management’ and ‘Security and Defence’ that will rise to make up nearly 5 % of the budget as a whole, from the current level of 1 %, and that spending under ‘Single Market, Innovation and Digital’ will rise to 15 % from the current level of 11 %;

Strategic planning

10.  Notes that the Commission intends to bring the structure and the programmes of the EU budget fully into line with the Union’s post-2020 positive agenda, as agreed in Bratislava and Rome[2]; notes that the declarations and roadmap adopted in Bratislava and Rome may not be considered as a long term strategic vision with objectives and indicators covering all the policy fields of the Union;

11.  Reiterates its call on the Commission to introduce a long-term vision on the position of the European Union in the globalised world underpinned by correctly applied policies based on long-term political objectives, thus enabling the EU to address the current and future challenges it faces; notes that failing to do so might potentially undermine the added value of the MFF proposal;

12.  Points out that the Europe 2020 strategy will end before the start of the new MFF period, and that no new set of strategic EU goals has been decided on yet; stresses the need for further strategic policy planning on the Commission’s side and reiterates that public budgets are to be determined after the setting of long-term political objectives and the designing of policies in line with an overall vision for the EU, and therefore regrets that the new MFF proposal does not fully reflect this demand;

13.  Stresses that the Member States and the Commission should firstly present well-justified needs for Union funding and define the strategic aims and the intended results to be achieved before any spending is planned with the corresponding indicators to be measured;

Political priorities and presentation of the EU Budget

14.  Welcomes the fact that the new programmes will be grouped in policy clusters, which will be reflected in the titles of the annual budget; expresses its hope that this will provide greater clarity on how they will contribute to policy goals;

15.  Welcomes the overall modernisation and simplification of the budget and the ambition to achieve increased streamlining, flexibility and transparency;

16.  Welcomes the fact that the Commission intends, as of 2021, to align the concept of policy areas with the programme clusters, and that this alignment will allow for an easier reconciliation between the annual budget and the headings of the MFF;

17.  Recalls that the Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT) asked the Commission on many occasions to present the Union budget in accordance with the political objectives of the MFF as adopted by Parliament; is of the opinion that this will allow the budgetary authority to scrutinise and follow up the preparation and implementation of the budget more easily;

18.  Recalls that the funding for policies and projects should be in line with climate and energy objectives and the commitments made under the Paris Agreement; recalls, therefore, that at least 30 % of the EU’s expenditure should contribute to the climate objectives and agrees that this is best done by mainstreaming climate spending across all EU programmes; reiterates its call on the Commission to ensure that this is applied in a coherent and comprehensive manner in accordance with strategic planning;

19.  Points out that there is a lack of clear investments in relation to the goals of the EU Pillar of Social Rights adopted by the three institutions;

20.  Regrets the lack of alignment of the proposed MFF with the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for 2030 supporting the progressive transformation towards a sustainable European society;

21.  Invites the Commission to continuously demonstrate sufficient leadership and commitment in the strategic areas, and calls on the Commission to ensure an increase in the overall visibility of the funding to the general public;

Simplification and performance

22.  Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to reduce the number of spending programmes by a third and to make the rules more coherent; stresses that in order to actually achieve simplification for beneficiaries, all unnecessary rules, requirements and procedures should be eliminated;

23.  Wonders why the Commission uses two sets of objectives and indicators to measure the performance of financial management: on the one hand, the Commission’s Directors-General evaluate the achievement of the objectives defined in their management plan in their annual activity reports (AAR), and, on the other, the Commission measures the performance of spending programmes via the programme statements of operational expenditure annexed to the draft budget;

24.  Recalls that the current performance framework of the programmes reported in the programme statements includes 716 indicators of different types measuring the performance against 61 general and 228 specific objectives;

25.  Asks the Commission to:

(a)  streamline performance reporting by:

–  further reducing the number of objectives and indicators it uses for its various performance reports and focusing on those which best measure the performance of the Union budget in the interests of simplification, transparency and better control;

–  extending a qualitative approach and including environmental and social indicators in order to be able to measure the impact of EU policy on environmental and social policies;

–  presenting financial information in a manner that makes it comparable with performance information so that the link between spending and performance is clear;

(b)  better balance performance reporting by clearly presenting information on the main EU challenges still to be achieved;

(c)  provide a declaration on the quality of the reported performance data;

Spending review accompanying the MFF Proposal

26.  Regrets the fact that the Commission has only carried out a spending review instead of analysing all major programmes under the current MFF through a zero-based budget approach; notes that the Commission’s limited review, however, aimed to combine:

–  a strategic review (focused on giving priority to programmes according to their value added and coherence with EU objectives) with

–  an efficiency review (seeking means of improving the delivery of existing programmes);

27.  Regrets that the above‑mentioned spending review has not provided a comprehensive evaluation aimed at demonstrating the real added value of the programmes;

28.  Recalls that, in order to allow Parliament to draw up the political framework for each of the following five years, the programming of the budget should be aligned with the legislative cycles; considers the MFF 2021-2017 to be a transitional period from a seven-year budget to a new formula that both aligns to the five‑year legislative periods and does not jeopardise the policies for which long‑term programming is needed;

29.  Welcomes the fact that the Commission recognises the need to align the MFF to political and institutional cycles, and considers that the organisation of a mid-term review at the end of 2023 at the latest represents a step forward along the way towards progressively synchronising the duration of the MFF with the five‑year political cycle of the EU Institutions;

EU added value

30.  Recalls that in the Reflection Paper on the Future of EU finances[3], the Commission proposed a list of seven criteria for the assessment of EU value added and spelled out the fact that EU financial support for programmes should depend on the results of that assessment[4]; is concerned that a transparent definition of EU value added is missing and is not expected imminently;

31.  Notes that, according to the reflection paper, only programmes with very high EU value added should receive full EU financing, that for those with medium to high EU value added, financing should be limited, and that there should be no financing for programmes whose EU value added was low;

32.  Regrets that the published Spending Review provides neither a systematic assessment of programmes based on the criteria that the Commission defined for EU value added, nor clear overall conclusions on each programme’s EU value added; asks the Commission to develop and apply a robust and clarifying concept of EU value added on the basis of the seven criteria set out in the reflection paper;

33.  Notes that, given that the strategic objectives for the post‑2020 period have yet to be set, the Commission was not in a position to adequately asses coherence with the EU’s objectives for the 2021-2027, making it difficult to indicate and monitor the EU value added, which in any case must continue to demonstrate improvements, particularly in terms of the economic, social and territorial cohesion of the EU;

34.  Recalls that the European budget has an obligation to respond adequately to the demands and ambitions of the European policies, and be of added value to the Union;

Flexibility and Accountability

35.  Welcomes the Commission’s proposals to improve the EU budget’s capacity to respond to changing circumstances by increasing overall flexibility and ensuring sufficient appropriations to cover unforeseen events without hampering monitoring and control; welcomes, in particular, the proposals to raise the own resources ceiling, reduce the difference between total payment appropriations and total commitment appropriations, remove the limits placed on the Global Margin for Payments, increase the size and scope of special instruments outside the MFF (Flexibility Instrument, Emergency Aid Reserve, European Union Solidarity Fund and European Globalisation Adjustment Fund), to extend the scope of the Emergency Aid reserve to operations inside the EU, and to widen the Global Margin for Commitments and rename it the Union reserve;

36.  Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to incorporate the EDF into the EU Budget and to make it subject to the same principles and rules as those applicable to other programmes financed from the EU budget, but stresses that a consistent level of accountability and transparency should be ensured in relation to the funds spent to achieve EU objectives through the EU Budget and those that will continue to be spent outside it;

37.  Insists that public audit mandates should be established for all types of financing of EU policies at EU and national level, and that the ECA should be appointed as the auditor of bodies set up to implement EU policies, including EU bodies such as the European Defence Agency and the proposed European Monetary Fund and bodies created through agreements outside the EU legal order such as the European Stability Mechanism and the European Investment Bank in relation to its non-EU budget operations;

Cuts in the CAP and cohesion

38.  Notes the cuts proposed by the Commission in the CAP and cohesion and considers them a necessary step towards more effective and target-focused spending;

39.  Fears that the cuts in the CAP will affect the capacity of a large number of farmers to maintain their professional activity; believes that increasing the effectiveness of CAP support is an absolute necessity in order to limit these negative effects;

40.  Recalls the ECA’s recommendations on the Commission’s communication on the future of the CAP, namely that the new delivery model should deliver both ambitious and relevant performance targets that are based on statistical and scientific evidence, aligned with EU objectives, characterised by a solid accountability and audit chain and based on increased performance monitoring and assessing policy performance and a robust evaluation framework;

41.  Stresses that the CAP financing schemes should particularly benefit small farm businesses, ecologically and geographically challenging areas and sparsely populated regions in accordance with the strategic goals of the EU;

42.  Notes that the Commission’s proposal to design the new CAP on the basis of strategic plans to be drawn up by the Member States might oblige them to assume more responsibility on agricultural policy and budgeting; notes, furthermore, that this may increase the risk of creating more diversity and complexity in CAP financial management and making the legitimate controls more difficult;

43.  Notes the cuts in the rural development programmes, namely 27 % overall, with 45 % in the Cohesion and 10 % in the European Social Fund; invites the Commission, however, to ensure its ability to successfully tackle the disparities and sharp divisions between urban and rural areas, to reverse the processes of deepening divergences and to overcome fragmentation;

Own Resources

44.  Welcomes the three new categories of own resources that include a share of the common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB), a 20 % share of the revenue generated by the emissions trading scheme and a national contribution calculated on the amount of non-recycled plastic packaging waste in each Member State; recalls in this context that the proposed own resources system should not increase the overall fiscal burden for the EU taxpayers and that it should lead to a proportional reduction of the Member States’ contribution to the EU budget;

45.  Encourages the Commission to make additional proposals for new own resources in order to achieve a self-sustaining EU budget in the medium term; is of the opinion that the share of new genuine own resources must play a significant role in the revenue side of the EU budget;

46.  Reiterates that the current system of corrections and rebates needs to be abolished, and supports the Commission’s proposal to phase out all rebates by 2025, which will lead to a simpler and more transparent structure;

47.  Supports the Commission’s proposal to reduce the percentage of customs duties retained by Member States as ‘collection costs’ to 10 %;

48.  Calls for keeping VAT as an EU own resource while implementing a genuine simplification of it;

49.  Believes that the financing of the EU should be more stable, sustainable, predictable, transparent and understandable to EU citizens;

50.  Notes that the overarching objective of conditionality in the EU is to foster integration and cohesion among Member States; believes that sound logical conditionality must involve setting incentives in such a way that it leads to further engagement of the Member States in the European project, contributes to the intended outcome and prevents the misuse of EU funds;

51.  Asks the Commission to clarify the calculation of the national contribution based on the amount of non-recycled plastic packaging waste in Member States and how it will be collected; calls on the Commission to put in place a set of monitoring tools that will support Member States in establishing a common methodology for collection and calculation of contribution;

52.  Notes with concern that the legislative proposal on the CCCTB has still not been adopted and that there is no time estimate for when it will be agreed on in the Council; is of the opinion that the CCCTB cannot be considered as a true own resource for the next programming period for that reason; urges the Council to reach an agreement in this context, given the importance of the CCCTB in tackling the problem of tax avoidance by multinationals;

53.  Welcomes the principle that future revenues from EU policies should flow into the EU budget, as they constitute a genuine EU income source;

54.  Reiterates its call on the Commission and Member States to ensure a strengthening of the existing systems of control and the prevention of fraud and irregularities harming the EU’s financial interests;

55.  Stresses, in this context, the need to erase the disparities in custom controls across the EU that constitute a massive risk to the EU’s financial interests, and calls on the Commission to harmonise customs management across the EU in order to effectively combat the smuggling of goods and tax-fraud.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
References	2018/0166R(APP)
Committee responsible	BUDG
Opinion by Date announced in plenary	CONT 13.9.2018
Date adopted	10.10.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	16 2 1
Members present for the final vote	Nedzhmi Ali, Inés Ayala Sender, Jonathan Bullock, Tamás Deutsch, Luke Ming Flanagan, Ingeborg Gräßle, Jean-François Jalkh, Arndt Kohn, Gilles Pargneaux, Georgi Pirinski, José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, Petri Sarvamaa, Derek Vaughan, Tomáš Zdechovský, Joachim Zeller
Substitutes present for the final vote	Iris Hoffmann, Andrey Novakov, Julia Pitera, Miroslav Poche

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

16	+
ALDE	Nedzhmi Ali
PPE	Tamás Deutsch, Ingeborg Gräßle, Andrey Novakov, Julia Pitera, José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, Petri Sarvamaa, Tomáš Zdechovský, Joachim Zeller
S&D	Inés Ayala Sender, Iris Hoffmann, Arndt Kohn, Gilles Pargneaux, Georgi Pirinski, Miroslav Poche, Derek Vaughan

2	-
EFDD	Jonathan Bullock
ENF	Jean-François Jalkh

1	0
GUE/NGL	Luke Ming Flanagan

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

15.10.2018

POSITION IN THE FORM OF AMENDMENTS

of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs

for the Committee on Budgets

on the interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement

(2018/0166R(APP))

On behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs: Marita Ulvskog (Chair)

Position

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs presents the following amendments to the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible:

Amendment    1 on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social AffairsMotion for a resolution Recital E a (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	Ea.  whereas a link is established between the programming of the Union funds and the European Semester and the relevant country-specific recommendations; whereas the Union funds are meant to achieve the objectives set out in Article 174 TFEU in order to strengthen the Union’s economic, social and territorial cohesion and reduce disparities between the levels of development of the various regions;
Amendment    2 on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social AffairsMotion for a resolution Paragraph 5
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
5.  Underlines, furthermore, the importance of the horizontal principles that should underpin the MFF and all related EU policies; reaffirms, in this context, its position that the EU must deliver on its commitment to be a frontrunner in implementing the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and deplores the lack of a clear and visible commitment to that end in the MFF proposals; requests, therefore, the mainstreaming of the SDGs into all EU policies and initiatives of the next MFF; further emphasises that the elimination of discrimination is vital to fulfil the EU’s commitments towards an inclusive Europe and deplores the lack of gender mainstreaming and gender equality commitments in EU policies, as presented in the MFF proposals; underlines also its position that, following the Paris Agreement, climate-related spending should be significantly increased in comparison with the current MFF and reach 30 % as soon as possible and at the latest by 2027;	5.  Underlines, furthermore, the importance of the horizontal principles that should underpin the MFF and all related EU policies; reaffirms, in this context, its position that the EU must deliver on its commitment to be a frontrunner in implementing the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and deplores the lack of a clear and visible commitment to that end in the MFF proposals; requests, therefore, the mainstreaming of the SDGs into all EU policies and initiatives of the next MFF; further emphasises the importance of delivering on the European Pillar of Social Rights to create a resilient social Europe and that the elimination of discrimination is vital to fulfil the EU’s commitments towards an inclusive Europe, and deplores the lack of gender mainstreaming and gender equality commitments in EU policies, as presented in the MFF proposals; underlines also its position that, following the Paris Agreement, climate-related spending should be significantly increased in comparison with the current MFF and reach 30 % as soon as possible and at the latest by 2027;
Amendment    3 on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social AffairsMotion for a resolution Paragraph 4
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
4.  Declares, moreover, its opposition to any reduction in the level of key EU policies, such as the EU cohesion policy and the common agricultural policy (CAP); is particularly opposed to any radical cuts that will adversely impact on the very nature and objectives of these policies, such as the cuts proposed for the Cohesion Fund or for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development; opposes, in this context, the proposal to reduce the European Social Fund despite its enlarged scope and the integration of the Youth Employment Initiative;	4.  Declares, moreover, its opposition to any reduction in the level of key EU policies, such as the EU cohesion policy and the common agricultural policy (CAP); is particularly opposed to any radical cuts that will adversely impact on the very nature and objectives of these policies, such as the cuts proposed for the Cohesion Fund or for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development; opposes, in this context, the proposal to reduce the European Social Fund Plus despite its enlarged scope and the integration of the Youth Employment Initiative, the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived, the Programme for Employment and Social Innovation and the Health Programme;
Amendment    4 on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social AffairsMotion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	5a.  Stresses that the proposed link between the programming of the Structural Funds, their policy objectives and the European Semester, in particular the country-specific recommendations, should be clarified and should take into account the local and regional dimension; calls for the establishment of effective programming mechanisms for the EU funds, in particular the ESF+, which would put the principles and rights of the European Pillar of Social Rights into practice, including by ensuring ambitious financial resources, as well as the necessary synergies among the Union funds;
Amendment    5 on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social AffairsMotion for a resolution Paragraph 14 vi
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
14 vi.  Double the resources for tackling youth unemployment (under the current Youth Employment Initiative programme);	14 vi.  Double the resources for tackling youth unemployment under the ESF+ (under the current Youth Employment Initiative programme), while ensuring the scheme’s effectiveness and added value;
Amendment    6 on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social AffairsMotion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	15a.  Insists on the need to step up the fight against youth unemployment; is, however, concerned that the integration of the Youth Employment Initiative into the ESF+ could reduce the levels of commitment of Member States and the level of resources targeting young people directly;
Amendment    7 on behalf of the Committee on Employment and Social AffairsMotion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	16a.  Stresses the need to improve the Union instruments to address the social inclusion and labour market integration of third-country nationals; calls, to this end, for better synergies among the Union funds and adequate resources; stresses the importance of tackling the specific urban and local challenges of migration, also by facilitating access to funding for cities, local and regional authorities, social partners, socio-economic actors and civil society organisations developing and implementing projects in this field;

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Date adopted	9.10.2018

• [1]  The Commission’s proposal for the 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework, ECA Briefing Paper, July 2018.
• [2]  Bratislava Declaration of 16 September 2016; Rome Declaration of 25 March 2017.
• [3]  Reflection Paper on the Future of EU finances, 28 June 2017, COM(2017)0358.
• [4]  The criteria comprised: Treaty objectives and obligations, public goods with a European dimension, economies of scale, spillover effects, subsidiarity, benefits of EU integration and European values: peace, democracy, rule of law.

OPINION of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (18.10.2018)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the interim report on the MFF 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position in view of an agreement
(COM(2018)0322 – 2018/0166R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Ivo Belet

PA_Consent_Interim

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its report:

1.  Stresses the importance of, and the Union’s role in, preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the environment, and tackling climate change, the degradation of ecosystems and biodiversity loss; points out that the Union must deliver on its commitment to be a front runner in implementing the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which provide a global roadmap for more sustainable, equitable and prosperous societies within planetary boundaries; recalls the Union’s obligations under the Paris Agreement, and the urgent need to make the transition to a low-carbon, sustainable circular economy;

2.  Believes that negotiations on own resources and the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2021-2027, also in the context of Brexit, provide an opportunity to make the income side of the Union budget more sustainable and transparent, to make the Union more autonomous and, ultimately, to make better use of the Union budget’s transformative power; calls for a fundamental reform of the own resources system, for all rebates to be scrapped and for new funding sources that are fully in line with the Union’s policies on, inter alia, the environment, health and the climate, to be introduced;

3.  Underlines that LIFE is the main programme supporting the implementation of Union legislation on the environment and climate action; notes that a significant share of the proposed budget increase for the LIFE Programme for 2021-2027 is directed towards the new Clean Energy Transition sub-programme; supports the establishment of a comprehensive programme for a clean energy transition, but considers that this should not be to the detriment of funding for nature and biodiversity, the circular economy, and climate adaptation and mitigation; reiterates its call for the financial resources for the LIFE Programme to be at least doubled to EUR 6.442 billion in constant (2018) prices, and calls for the establishment of dedicated envelopes for biodiversity and the management of the Natura 2000 network;

4.  Welcomes the proposed increase in the budget earmarked for Horizon Europe and, in particular, the dedicated envelopes for research and innovation in Health (EUR 6.83 billion), Climate, Energy and Mobility (EUR 13.31 billion), and Food and Natural Resources (EUR 8.87 billion); reiterates, however, its call for the 9th Framework Programme to be financed more heavily with a budget of at least EUR 116.895 billion, while maintaining the share of the Climate, Energy and Mobility cluster (15.94 %) and the Food and Natural Resources cluster (10.63 %), and increasing the share of the Health cluster to at least 9.7 % in line with the 8th Framework Programme; calls, furthermore, for significant funding to be allocated to fundamental research in these fields;

5.  Welcomes the substantial increase for the Connecting Europe Facility – Energy to EUR 7.675 billion in constant (2018) prices for 2021-2027; 

6.  Expresses serious concern over the proposed reduction in funding for the health programme; reiterates its call for the health programme to be restored as a robust stand-alone programme with increased funding in the next MFF 2021-2027, in order to implement the SDGs on public health, health systems and environment-related problems, and ensure an ambitious health policy with a focus on cross-border challenges, including, in particular, a thorough increase in common Union efforts in the fight against cancer, the prevention of chronic diseases, combating anti-microbial resistance and ensuring easier access to cross-border healthcare;

7.  Regrets that there is a risk of falling short of the current climate-related spending target and notes, in this context, the proposed increase of this target to at least 25 % of the Union’s budget for 2021-2027; calls, however, for a more ambitious climate-related spending target of 30 % of the Union’s budget for 2021-2027 in order to achieve and implement the objectives of the Paris Agreement, as well as to reflect the increased importance and urgency of climate action and the need for further climate diplomacy actions, and calls for the development of a reliable and transparent tracking method; calls, furthermore, for measures to ensure that the structure and execution of the Union’s budget does not run contrary to achieving the climate and energy targets of the Union;

8.  Insists that the MFF 2021-2027 should exclude any direct or indirect support for fossil fuels;

9.  Is concerned about the proposed 5 % decrease in financial resources for the decentralised agencies under the remit of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), the European Environment Agency (EEA), the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA)); calls for the decentralised agencies to be allocated more financial and human resources, at least at the level of 2014-2020 in real terms, where appropriate and based on their individual needs, in particular if new tasks are allocated, such as in the case of the ECHA and EEA; highlights the importance of sufficient funding for these agencies to strengthen science-based regulation and improve public confidence in Union policy-making;

10.  Reiterates that the mission of the EEA is to help the Union and the Member States make informed decisions about protecting and improving the environment, integrating environmental considerations into economic policies and moving towards sustainability; underlines that the Commission has allocated additional tasks to the EEA, including, but not limited to, monitoring new legislation and policy developments on the low carbon economy, the circular economy agenda and the implementation of the SDGs, and stresses that this should be appropriately reflected by the financial envelope of the agency, which should at least be categorised as stable in real terms in the budget for 2021-2027;

11.  Welcomes the proposal for an own resource based on non-recycled plastic packaging waste; underlines that its steering effect must give priority to the prevention of waste generation in line with the waste hierarchy, and calls on the Commission to look into the possibilities of directing its revenues towards achieving the packaging waste recycling targets; calls for effective registration and control mechanisms and a clarification of the calculation method;

12.  Calls for a significant share of the increasing emissions trading system (ETS) auctioning revenue, from phase 4 (2021) onwards, to be considered as a Union own resource and to be gradually directed towards Union projects for cross-border electricity infrastructure that are in line with the Union’s climate and energy goals, renewable energy and storage, as well as investments in breakthrough low-carbon innovation in industry; considers that this should be a gradual exercise, in order to avoid putting pressure on national budgets dedicated to climate and energy policy (as 50 % of revenues are earmarked for this purpose in the ETS Directive (Directive 2003/87/EC));

13.  Calls, in parallel, for the exploration of a possible carbon border adjustment mechanism as a new own resource for the Union’s budget, which would also have the effect of ensuring a level playing field in international trade and reducing the offshoring of production, while internalising the costs of climate change into the prices of imported goods;

14.  Believes that, in the absence of harmonised international measures for kerosene taxation, a carbon content-based aviation levy should be explored at Union level to provide further incentives for research, development and investment in more efficient, low-carbon aircraft and fuels, and in order to curb growing emissions in aviation, while ensuring a level playing field in the transport sector;

15.  Encourages ongoing efforts to establish a financial transaction tax (FTT) and believes that a share of a common FTT should be used as a future own resource;

16.  Calls for 25 % of the budget of the Structural Reform Support Programme (SRSP) to be transferred to the Structural Funds to enable it to be channelled towards additional support for carbon-dependent regions affected by the necessary structural transition to a low-carbon economy; considers that these regions should have access to this additional support to help them achieve the PO2 objectives of the Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund, in order to facilitate a just transition; notes that the aim is to support such regions, in particular those which are not already eligible for support in the framework of the Modernisation Fund under Directive 2003/87/EC, by promoting the redeployment, re-skilling and up-skilling of workers, education, active labour market policies as well as development of new jobs, for example through start-ups, in close dialogue and coordination with the social partners;

17.  Underlines that the expenditure and revenue side of the next MFF should be treated as a single package, and that no agreement can be reached with Parliament on the MFF without an agreement on own resources.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
References	2018/0166R(APP)
Committee responsible	BUDG
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	ENVI 5.7.2018
Rapporteur        Date appointed	Ivo Belet 10.7.2018
Discussed in committee	10.9.2018
Date adopted	18.10.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	44 6 2
Members present for the final vote	Marco Affronte, Pilar Ayuso, Zoltán Balczó, Ivo Belet, Paul Brannen, Soledad Cabezón Ruiz, Nessa Childers, Miriam Dalli, Angélique Delahaye, Mark Demesmaeker, Stefan Eck, Bas Eickhout, José Inácio Faria, Karl-Heinz Florenz, Francesc Gambús, Arne Gericke, Jens Gieseke, Andrzej Grzyb, Jytte Guteland, Urszula Krupa, Giovanni La Via, Jo Leinen, Peter Liese, Susanne Melior, Rory Palmer, Gilles Pargneaux, Piernicola Pedicini, Bolesław G. Piecha, Pavel Poc, John Procter, Julia Reid, Frédérique Ries, Annie Schreijer-Pierik, Davor Škrlec, Renate Sommer, Nils Torvalds, Adina-Ioana Vălean, Damiano Zoffoli
Substitutes present for the final vote	Giorgos Grammatikakis, Rebecca Harms, Martin Häusling, Anja Hazekamp, Jan Huitema, Merja Kyllönen, Carolina Punset, Christel Schaldemose, Keith Taylor, Tiemo Wölken, Carlos Zorrinho
Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote	Sophia in ‘t Veld, Kati Piri, Mirja Vehkaperä

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

44	+
ALDE	Carolina Punset, Frédérique Ries, Nils Torvalds, Mirja Vehkaperä, Sophia in ’t Veld
EFDD	Piernicola Pedicini
GUE/NGL	Stefan Eck, Anja Hazekamp, Merja Kyllönen
PPE	Pilar Ayuso, Ivo Belet, Angélique Delahaye, José Inácio Faria, Karl‑Heinz Florenz, Francesc Gambús, Jens Gieseke, Andrzej Grzyb, Giovanni La Via, Peter Liese, Annie Schreijer‑Pierik, Renate Sommer, Adina‑Ioana Vălean
S&D	Paul Brannen, Soledad Cabezón Ruiz, Nessa Childers, Miriam Dalli, Giorgos Grammatikakis, Jytte Guteland, Jo Leinen, Susanne Melior, Rory Palmer, Gilles Pargneaux, Kati Piri, Pavel Poc, Christel Schaldemose, Tiemo Wölken, Damiano Zoffoli, Carlos Zorrinho
VERTS/ALE	Marco Affronte, Bas Eickhout, Rebecca Harms, Martin Häusling, Keith Taylor, Davor Škrlec

6	-
ECR	Mark Demesmaeker, Arne Gericke, Urszula Krupa, Bolesław G. Piecha, John Procter,
EFDD	Julia Reid

2	0
ALDE	Jan Huitema
NI	Zoltán Balczó

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

OPINION of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (10.10.2018)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the Interim report on MFF 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position in view of an agreement
(COM(2018)0322 – 2018/0166R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Jerzy Buzek

PA_Consent_Interim

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its report:

1.  Stresses that the 2021-27 MFF should not decrease in volume from 2020 levels, even in case of Brexit, and that new EU initiatives must be matched with new and adequate financial resources and be dealt with under the co-decision procedure; underlines that especially the long-term political priorities of the European Union, such as boosting jobs and growth, achieving a future-oriented and competitive European industry and fighting climate change through the transition to a low-carbon economy, need to be supported with sufficient resources and should remain the focal areas of the new MFF programme;

2.  Emphasises that full respect for the rule of law is an essential precondition for sound financial management and effective EU funding; supports, therefore, the new mechanism that would allow the Commission to avail itself of effective and appropriate measures in cases of risk of financial loss caused by generalised deficiencies with respect to the rule of law in a Member State, with special regard to tackling grand corruption;

3.  Calls for a clear methodology for the presentation of figures on the basis of constant prices;

4.  Recalls that funding policies and projects should be in line with climate and energy objectives and the commitments made under the Paris Agreement; calls for an increase in the commitments to climate objectives to 30 % climate-related spending for the next MFF 2021-2027 period in order to facilitate and ensure the transition to a net-zero carbon economy in 2050;

5.  Reiterates Parliament’s call for an increased overall budget of at least EUR 120 billion in constant prices for Horizon Europe in order to be able to react appropriately to societal challenges, to secure Europe’s global competiveness, people’s well-being and scientific and industrial leadership, and to help achieve the objectives set out in the Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement; underlines the necessity that Horizon Europe investment be focused on researching, developing and bringing to society technological and non-technological solutions that address pressing societal challenges, such as fighting climate change and the transition to sustainable and renewable energy, an energy- and resource-efficient, toxic-free circular economy, sustainable food and farming practices, and affordable healthcare and medicine; welcomes the possibility of transferring financial allocations for programmes from one fund to another introduced by the Common Provisions Regulation and encourages all territories to develop their research potential; believes that appropriate conditions and mechanisms for such transfers should be further elaborated to ensure compatibility with the structural funds and to avoid double auditing; underlines that financial support from Horizon Europe should be made accessible to beneficiaries through a fast, bottom-up and less administrative process, and by providing technical assistance services guiding beneficiaries to the most suitable funds; believes furthermore that synergies with other programmes and funding instruments should be encouraged while seeking maximum administrative simplification;

6.  Believes that, particularly given the level of ambition to make Horizon Europe more flexible, the spending priorities of each programme should be determined in the Framework Programme legislation, not in the agreement on the MFF;

7.  Supports the EUR 3.5 billion budget dedicated to InvestEU; underlines strongly, however, that this budget should not be taken from the Horizon Programme funding, but should be additional to it; believes that the InvestEU research, innovation and digitisation window should use the same rules as the successful InnovFin instrument, apply all underlying criteria and cover the highest risk tranche;

8.  Welcomes the amount allocated to the energy and digital components of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) which aims at closing the missing links in Europe’s energy and digital backbone by supporting the development of high-performance, sustainable and efficiently interconnected trans-European networks in the fields of energy and digital services, fully in line with the long-term EU energy and climate objectives; believes that CEF should be more ambitious on the issue of synergies, as indicated in its mid-term review, in particular to better exploit the synergies between transport, digital and energy infrastructures; recalls that the transition to a low-carbon system is the focal point of CEF;

9.  Points up the effectiveness of the centralised governance structure laid down by the CEF Regulation; notes that transferring part of Cohesion Fund funding to the CEF has been a great success and that the degree of satisfaction of the Member States concerned opens up the prospect of that mechanism being extended under the next MFF; proposes accordingly an allocation of EUR 20 billion from the European Regional Development Fund to the CEF, with the same management rules to be laid down as for the transfer of management responsibility for Cohesion Fund funding for the CEF; considers that, in view of the big difference between available funding and what is needed, that move would ensure that TEN-E projects in Europe made significant headway;

10.  Welcomes in general the Commission proposal to allocate EUR 16 billion to the new European Space Programme; calls, however, for a moderate increase in the overall budget of the programme; stresses, with regard to the programme’s components, the need for more ambitious envelopes dedicated to SSA and GOVSATCOM, while maintaining or moderately increasing the budget earmarked for the Copernicus and Galileo components; stresses that it is extremely important to guarantee the continuity of the two flagship components, Galileo and Copernicus, and to ensure the functioning of the two new initiatives, GOVSATCOM and SSA, that deal with the increasing problem of the safety of space infrastructure and the security of satellite communication;

11.  Welcomes the fact that at least EUR 9.194 billion are earmarked for the Digital Europe Programme that will build the Union’s digital capacities, especially for Artificial Intelligence, Cybersecurity and High Performance Computing, while strengthening the digital transformation of the economy and society by supporting digital skills; emphasises the importance of close coordination with Horizon Europe, the CEF and the ESIF;

12.  Insists on the need to adequately finance a programme for EU actions improving the competitiveness of enterprises, with a special emphasis on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs); notes that an SME-focused programme should complement other EU programmes and should also be built on the solid experience obtained from the predecessor programme (COSME) by aiming at enhancing access to markets inside and outside the Union, improving framework conditions for businesses and the competitiveness of enterprises, and promoting entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial culture;

13.  Believes that in the energy sector, emphasis should be placed on energy security, energy efficiency, the enhanced use of renewable energies, sector coupling, smart and modern infrastructure, consumer empowerment, and a functioning energy market with more cross-border trade and cooperation; considers it essential to reach at least a 15 % interconnectivity target by 2030; stresses that the next MFF should focus on accomplishing the goals of the Energy Union; stresses that the next MFF should focus on ensuring the decarbonisation of the European economy in order to accomplish the goals of the Energy Union, the EU climate goals and the sustainable development goals to benefit the EU and all its citizens and, in particular, to support vulnerable, low-income households at risk of energy poverty in becoming energy-efficient;

14.  Underlines the importance of nuclear safety and emphasises the need to increase the amount allocated to the nuclear decommissioning assistance programme for the Ignalina nuclear power plant in Lithuania from EUR 552 million to EUR 780 million in order to adequately assist Lithuania in meeting the technological challenge of dismantling Chernobyl-type graphite reactor cores, as well as to prevent radiological risks and further reduce the hazard for EU citizens;

15.  Deeply regrets that its call for the creation of a just transition fund for coal- and carbon-intensive regions under the new multiannual financial framework (MFF) was not reflected in the new MFF proposal; reiterates its appeal to create a Just Energy Transition Fund at Union level with a total budget of EUR 5 billion to support regions with a high share of workers in coal- and carbon-dependent sectors and communities adversely affected by this transition; further stresses that under this fund sufficient resources should be ensured for the development of inclusive, local and just transition strategies and for addressing societal, socio-economic and environmental impacts, along with the reconversion of sites and the creation of decent and sustainable jobs, together with re-skilling and up-skilling in clean processes and technologies based on renewables or energy-efficiency solutions;

16.  Underline the need to maintain the adequate and clear budget of 13 billion for the European Defence Fund in order to boost the growth and competitiveness of European defence industries;

17.  Calls for appropriate funding for agencies under ITRE’s remit to ensure their capacity to fulfil their increasing number of tasks adequately;

18.  Calls for a timely adoption of the MFF and the related legal bases to ensure a frictionless transition from one programme to another and to avoid implementation delays;

19.  Underlines the need for a legally binding and compulsory MFF mid-term revision; believes that Parliament’s involvement should be ensured in any revision of the MFF;

20.  Notes that the mid-term review/revision of the MFF 2021-2027 is a key point in the management of EU spending, in order to assess how investment programmes are performing against stipulated targets and objectives, and if they present adequate absorption capacity and generate EU added value; underlines that the mid-term review/revision is an opportunity for further simplification throughout the overall implementation cycle;

21.  Notes that the next MFF will need to consider the UK’s departure from the EU and its implications for the EU budget; expresses the wish that EU programmes under ITRE’s remit can continue unimpeded; welcomes, in this respect, the Commission’s proposals regarding the modernisation of existing own resources and the implementation of new ones, as well as the elimination of rebates and the increase in the own resources ceiling.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
References	2018/0166R(APP)
Committee responsible	BUDG
Opinion by Date announced in plenary	ITRE 13.9.2018
Rapporteur Date appointed	Jerzy Buzek 16.7.2018
Discussed in committee	10.9.2018
Date adopted	9.10.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	40 4 10
Members present for the final vote	Zigmantas Balčytis, Bendt Bendtsen, Jonathan Bullock, Jerzy Buzek, Reinhard Bütikofer, Angelo Ciocca, Edward Czesak, Jakop Dalunde, Christian Ehler, Fredrick Federley, Ashley Fox, Theresa Griffin, Igor Gräzin, András Gyürk, Hans-Olaf Henkel, Eva Kaili, Barbara Kappel, Krišjānis Kariņš, Seán Kelly, Jeppe Kofod, Jaromír Kohlíček, Peter Kouroumbashev, Zdzisław Krasnodębski, Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Christelle Lechevalier, Tilly Metz, Csaba Molnár, Nadine Morano, Dan Nica, Morten Helveg Petersen, Miroslav Poche, Carolina Punset, Julia Reda, Paul Rübig, Sven Schulze, Dario Tamburrano, Patrizia Toia, Vladimir Urutchev, Kathleen Van Brempt, Martina Werner, Lieve Wierinck, Hermann Winkler, Flavio Zanonato, Carlos Zorrinho, Anna Záborská, Pilar del Castillo Vera
Substitutes present for the final vote	Pilar Ayuso, Pervenche Berès, Tamás Deutsch, Jens Geier, Françoise Grossetête, Benedek Jávor, Werner Langen, Sofia Sakorafa

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

40	+
ALDE	Fredrick Federley, Igor Gräzin, Morten Helveg Petersen, Carolina Punset, Lieve Wierinck
ECR	Edward Czesak, Hans-Olaf Henkel, Zdzisław Krasnodębski
PPE	Pilar Ayuso, Bendt Bendtsen, Jerzy Buzek, Pilar del Castillo Vera, Tamás Deutsch, Françoise Grossetête, András Gyürk, Krišjānis Kariņš, Seán Kelly, Werner Langen, Nadine Morano, Paul Rübig, Sven Schulze, Vladimir Urutchev, Hermann Winkler, Anna Záborská
S&D	Zigmantas Balčytis, Pervenche Berès, Jens Geier, Theresa Griffin, Eva Kaili, Jeppe Kofod, Peter Kouroumbashev, Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Csaba Molnár, Dan Nica, Miroslav Poche, Patrizia Toia, Kathleen Van Brempt, Martina Werner, Flavio Zanonato, Carlos Zorrinho

4	-
EFDD	Jonathan Bullock
ENF	Angelo Ciocca, Christelle Lechevalier
PPE	Christian Ehler

10	0
ECR	Ashley Fox
EFDD	Dario Tamburrano
ENF	Barbara Kappel
GUE/NGL	Jaromír Kohlíček, Sofia Sakorafa
VERTS/ALE	Reinhard Bütikofer, Jakop Dalunde, Benedek Jávor, Tilly Metz, Julia Reda

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

OPINION of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (10.10.2018)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the interim report on MFF 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position in view of an agreement
(COM(2018)0322 – 2018/0166R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Dominique Riquet

PA_Consent_Interim

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Transport and Tourism calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its report:

Introduction

1.  Insists on the strategic importance of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for sectors relying on long-term investment such as the transport sector; highlights that transport infrastructure is the backbone of the single market, the basis for growth and job creation, and crucial to ensuring the four fundamental freedoms pertaining to persons, capital, goods and services; points to the key issues and general constraints in connection with the next MFF, given the increase in the volume of transport and the increasing number of challenges, in particular environmental challenges posed by increases in carbon, fine-particulate and gaseous-pollutant emissions, in spite of ambitious climate and environment protection objectives in line with the Paris Agreement, and research and innovation needs for the development of connected and autonomous vehicles; recalls also the delays in investment in new infrastructure for improving connectivity, and especially in maintaining existing infrastructure;

MFF

2.  Points to the success of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) under the current MFF and to the fact that its calls for proposals are oversubscribed threefold; welcomes the fact that it is to be extended under the new MFF; deplores, however, the 12 % cut in constant prices in the allocation for CEF Transport and the 13 % cut in the Cohesion Fund contribution; takes the view that the budget for the CEF cannot be allocated to other programmes that are unrelated to its specific objectives; calls for the CEF Transport allocation of EUR 17.746 billion in constant prices and the Cohesion Fund contribution of EUR 10 billion in constant prices to be reinstated, taking into account their positive impact on economic development;

3.  Underlines the effectiveness of the centralised governance structure laid down by the CEF Regulation; notes that transferring part of Cohesion Fund funding to the CEF has been a great success and that the degree of satisfaction of the Member States concerned confirms that this mechanism will be continued under the next MFF and be sufficient to complete the currently ongoing projects funded through the Cohesion Fund contribution; accordingly proposes an allocation of EUR 20 billion from the European Regional Development Fund to the CEF, to be managed under similar rules to those which apply to Cohesion Fund funding for the CEF, albeit accessible for all Member States; believes that, in view of the big difference between available funding and what is needed, more attention needs to be paid to solutions with extensive EU added value such as missing cross-border links, for example rail links, and that this transfer would ensure that TEN-T projects in Europe make significant headway;

4.  Stresses that an updated and more effective CEF programme, under the next MFF 2021-2027, should cover all modes of transport, encourage a modal shift, encourage Member States to invest in smart, sustainable and integrated public transport, prioritise greater links between comprehensive networks, enhance interoperability through the European Railway Traffic Management System and the full use of the Single European Sky initiative, and contribute to meeting EU road safety targets;

5.  Points out that the CEF is a grant facility and welcomes the Commission proposal to make that clear by incorporating the CEF financial instrument into the new InvestEU programme; considers that the share of the CEF transport envelope implemented in the form of a financial instrument should not exceed 5 % of the total for that envelope; deplores the fact that, in spite of the regrettable transfer of funds benefiting the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) at the expense of CEF, the share of transport investments generated by the EFSI is, quantitatively, nowhere near the 30 % target figure and, in qualitative terms, falls far short of meeting the criteria for what constitutes EU added value; strongly underlines, in this sense, that no transfer of funds should be allowed from the Horizon Europe Programme in favour of InvestEU; stresses how important it is that, under the next MFF, the InvestEU programme should benefit projects with genuine EU added value, and congratulates the Commission for having proposed that one of the four areas of investment identified should be sustainable infrastructure;

6.  Points out the important need to set up a budget heading for sustainable tourism, given the importance of the sector within the EU economy, accounting for 5 % of GDP in 2016, and the EU’s responsibilities under Article 195 TFEU, with a view to moving towards a genuine EU tourism policy that can solve the current problems of fragmentation and of access to funds, promote Europe as a tourist destination and boost the tourist industry, thus contributing to growth and job creation;

7.  Notes that minimising external costs needs to be integrated as a guiding principle into the MFF as a cost-effective measure to reduce the burden on future public budgets;

Agencies

8.  Welcomes the host of new competences given to the EU’s transport-related agencies, in particular the European Aviation Safety Agency, the European Maritime Safety Agency and the European Union Agency for Railways; highlights the importance of ensuring that all transport agencies have sufficient resources, which are stable in real terms, to fulfil their duties and new responsibilities;

9.  Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to establish the European Labour Authority; stresses the importance of ensuring that this new authority has sufficient means to perform its duties in the transport sector;

Research

10.  Recalls that support for transport and mobility research and development is of crucial importance, given the challenges represented by increases in carbon, fine-particulate and gaseous-pollutant emissions as a result of increased traffic and congestion, the need for energy transition and increased transport safety, and the development of connected and autonomous vehicles; stresses, therefore, the importance of maintaining a direct link between Horizon Europe and the deployment at EU level of transport solutions developed through research and development activities; points to the successes of the common undertakings, such as SESAR, Shift2Rail and CleanSky; considers it important to continue to provide significant support and appropriate funding for those undertakings under the Horizon Europe programme; stresses that, in supporting research and development, the principle of technological neutrality should be applied in the field of transport;

Own resources

11.  Notes that all Member States collect significant volumes of tax and parafiscal revenue that is directly related to transport and tourism and that transferring even a minimal proportion of that revenue to the EU as own resources would put it in a better position to meet the new challenges it has to cope with; considers that moving back to the more significant level of own resources that was planned when the European Community was established would bolster the EU’s capacity for political and budgetary action.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
References	2018/0166R(APP)
Committee responsible	BUDG
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	TRAN 13.9.2018
Rapporteur        Date appointed	Dominique Riquet 27.6.2018
Discussed in committee	8.10.2018
Date adopted	9.10.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	35 4 8
Members present for the final vote	Daniela Aiuto, Marie-Christine Arnautu, Inés Ayala Sender, Georges Bach, Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, Deirdre Clune, Michael Cramer, Andor Deli, Nicola Danti, Michael Detjen, Ismail Ertug, Jacqueline Foster, Tania González Peñas, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch, Merja Kyllönen, Innocenzo Leontini, Peter Lundgren, Georg Mayer, Gesine Meissner, Renaud Muselier, Markus Pieper, Gabriele Preuß, Christine Revault d’Allonnes Bonnefoy, Dominique Riquet, Massimiliano Salini, Claudia Schmidt, Jill Seymour, Keith Taylor, Pavel Telička, Marie-Pierre Vieu, Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, Kosma Złotowski, Luis de Grandes Pascual, Peter van Dalen, Wim van de Camp, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Claudia Țapardel
Substitutes present for the final vote	Francisco Assis, Jill Evans, Maria Grapini, Karoline Graswander-Hainz, Ryszard Antoni Legutko, Marek Plura, Henna Virkkunen
Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote	Angel Dzhambazki, John Howarth, Wajid Khan

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

35	+
ALDE	Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, Gesine Meissner, Dominique Riquet, Pavel Telička
GUE/NGL	Merja Kyllönen
PPE	Georges Bach, Wim van de Camp, Deirdre Clune, Andor Deli, Luis de Grandes Pascual, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch, Innocenzo Leontini, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Renaud Muselier, Markus Pieper, Marek Plura, Massimiliano Salini, Claudia Schmidt, Henna Virkkunen, Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi
S&D	Francisco Assis, Inés Ayala Sender, Nicola Danti, Michael Detjen, Ismail Ertug, Maria Grapini, Karoline Graswander-Hainz, John Howarth, Wajid Khan, Gabriele Preuß, Christine Revault d’Allonnes Bonnefoy, Claudia Țapardel
VERTS/ALE	Michael Cramer, Jill Evans, Keith Taylor

4	-
ECR	Peter van Dalen
EFDD	Jill Seymour
GUE/NGL	Tania González Peñas, Marie-Pierre Vieu

8	0
ECR	Angel Dzhambazki, Jacqueline Foster, Ryszard Antoni Legutko, Peter Lundgren, Kosma Złotowski
EFDD	Daniela Aiuto
ENF	Marie-Christine Arnautu, Georg Mayer

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

OPINION of the Committee on Regional Development (10.10.2018)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the Interim report on MFF 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position in view of an agreement
(COM(2018)0322 – 2018/0166R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Derek Vaughan

PA_Consent_Interim

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Regional Development calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its report:

A.  whereas cohesion policy has a proven record of achieving good results in terms of jobs, growth and competitiveness, as shown in the 7th Cohesion Report, and generates 2.74 euros of additional GDP for each euro of taxpayers’ money invested;

B.  whereas, in its proposal for the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for the years 2021-2027, the Commission has proposed a budget for cohesion policy of EUR 330.6 billion in 2018 prices; whereas this level of funding means a reduction of 10 % compared to the current MFF;

C.  whereas, at the same time, the emergence of new challenges and the assertion of new priorities that need to be addressed by the European Union mean that the share of cohesion policy in the overall EU budget has also been significantly reduced, from 34 % to 29 %;

D.  whereas, in the Commission’s proposal, the Cohesion Fund’s budget will be reduced in its 2021-2027 envelope by 45 %;

1.  Regrets that the Commission’s proposal for the 2021-2027 MFF is not ambitious enough; insists that the EU budget for 2021-2027, in order to maintain traditional policies with a positive track record while ensuring the EU’s ability to respond to new challenges, needs to be set at 1.3 % of GNI in order to provide adequate additional funding;

2.  Considers the proposed cut of 10 % to the allocations for cohesion policy unacceptable; reiterates its position that the 2021-2027 MFF needs to secure at least the same level of funding for cohesion policy, in constant prices, as under the current MFF;

3.  Notes that the split between the various cohesion policy funds is the result of the allocation method defined in the draft Common Provisions Regulation, which provides for a balanced distribution with 61.6 % of the funds for the least developed regions, 14.3 % for regions in transition, 10.8 % for the most developed regions, 12.8 % for the Member States benefiting from the Cohesion Fund, and 0.4 % as additional funding for the outermost regions;

4.  Deplores the severe reduction in the Cohesion Fund’s budget; stresses the importance of investments under the Cohesion Fund in terms of reducing territorial disparities and progressing towards greater territorial cohesion in the EU; recommends that adequate funding for the Cohesion Fund be maintained without prejudice to the envelopes and share foreseen in the cohesion policy for the other ESI Funds, which also respond to essential European priorities; stresses the need to further explore and optimise the synergies and complementarities between the cohesion policy funds, InvestEU and the other financial instruments and centrally managed EU programmes and initiatives;

5.  Calls for a sufficient envelope for the ERDF and Cohesion Fund in 2021-2027 of at least EUR 272 411 million, in 2018 prices – i.e. EUR 226 078 million for the ERDF and EUR 46 333 million for the Cohesion Fund (12.8 % of the allocation under the Investment for Jobs and Growth goal); calls for at least EUR 100 861 million, in 2018 prices, for the European Social Fund Plus (ESF +);

6.  Questions the reduction in the Cohesion Fund’s budget through its contribution of EUR 10 billion, in 2018 prices, to the Connecting Europe Facility;

7.  Welcomes the fact that the cohesion policy proposed for 2021-2027 remains, under the Commission’s proposals, a policy for all regions, and calls for the territorial reforms enacted between 2016 and 2018 to be taken into account when formulating it; underlines the important territorial dimension of the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and its contribution to cohesion, in particular in rural areas; strongly condemns, therefore, the Commission proposal to separate EAFRD spending from cohesion policy, when a stronger link would have been necessary for more integrated and complementary funding at regional and local level to bridge the rural-urban divide, and to simplify matters for beneficiaries;

8.  Stresses that cohesion policy can generate positive externalities in other regions of the Union, but that these effects vary considerably from one territory to another depending on the geographical proximity and structure of the Member States’ economies;

9.  Recalls that the 7th Cohesion Report highlighted the difficulties faced by middle-income regions and the importance of ensuring adequate financial support and co-financing rates for them; welcomes the Commission’s proposal to maintain the category of ‘regions in transition’ and to broaden its scope;

10.  Reiterates its consistently held view of the importance of cross-border initiatives for sustainable growth, prosperity in border regions and balanced development; takes into account the fact that cross-border cooperation programmes are among the EU’s most successful funding instruments; notes with regret that the Commission’s proposals provide for a significant reduction in the financing of Interreg, with its share of the structural funds down from 2.75 % to 2.5 %, and calls instead for a 3 % share; considers that a level of funding equal at the very least to the 2014-2020 envelope, in constant prices, needs to be programmed under the 2021-2027 MFF, in order to ensure sufficient funding for existing programmes and for the new ‘Interregional Innovative Investments’ initiative inside Interreg;

11.  Calls for a substantial part of the proposed financial allocation for the Reform Delivery Tool of the Reform Support Programme to be used instead, in order to increase the financial allocation for cohesion policy with its objective of social, territorial and economic cohesion, and the Interreg envelope within it; calls for part of this amount to be used to increase the budget of the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) programme;

12.  Notes that lower EU co-financing rates will make it more difficult for beneficiaries in particular regions and smaller or less developed Member States to secure co-financing for EU investments, that the ESI funds may become less attractive – particularly where EU co-financing rates are lowest – and that lower rates might result in difficulties for the public budgets of those Member States bound by the Stability and Growth Pact, especially in those regions which the new MFF proposes moving to a higher level of development than the current MFF does; calls therefore for a co-financing rate of 85 % for less developed regions, 60 % for transition regions, 50 % for more developed regions, 85 % for the Cohesion Fund and 85 % for European Territorial Cooperation/Interreg;

13.  Indicates that the provisions should ensure an appropriate balance between national funding levels or, as an alternative, an option for extending the scope of the fund where appropriate;

14.  Welcomes the strengthening of the link between the MFF and EU budget with the European Semester process and in particular with the sound economic governance and structural reforms in Member States carried out in line with the Country Specific Recommendations; points out, in this regard, the importance of the Reform Support Programme in providing adequate support tailored to the specificities of the respective Member States in order to boost their economic and investment environment;

15.  Welcomes the proposed introduction of the rule of law mechanism as contained in the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the Union’s budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States (COM(2018)0324);

16.  Stresses that simplification of procedures at both EU and national level is a must in order to comply with the new de‑commitment rules, so as to ensure effective budgetary implementation;

17.  Believes that the new investments and provisions on thematic concentration should be aligned to local and regional needs in the Member States, taking into account different stages of development of territories at both NUTS 2 and NUTS 3 level and their inherent particularities or geographical handicaps, promoting genuine economic, social and territorial cohesion;

18.  Stresses the significant mobilisation of the EU Solidarity Fund in cases of natural disasters with important budgetary consequences;

19.  Considers that, following the Paris Agreement, climate-related spending should be significantly increased; welcomes the Commission’s proposal to increase the share of EU spending contributing to climate objectives to 25 % and calls for further efforts to increase it to 30 % as soon as possible.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
References	2018/0166R(APP)
Committee responsible	BUDG
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	REGI 5.7.2018
Rapporteur        Date appointed	Derek Vaughan 20.6.2018
Discussed in committee	3.9.2018
Date adopted	9.10.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	30 2 1
Members present for the final vote	Pascal Arimont, Franc Bogovič, Rosa D’Amato, Tamás Deutsch, John Flack, Iratxe García Pérez, Michela Giuffrida, Krzysztof Hetman, Ivan Jakovčić, Marc Joulaud, Constanze Krehl, Sławomir Kłosowski, Martina Michels, Iskra Mihaylova, Andrey Novakov, Paul Nuttall, Younous Omarjee, Mirosław Piotrowski, Monika Smolková, Ramón Luis Valcárcel Siso, Derek Vaughan, Kerstin Westphal, Joachim Zeller, Lambert van Nistelrooij
Substitutes present for the final vote	Daniel Buda, John Howarth, Elsi Katainen, Ivana Maletić, Laurenţiu Rebega, Bronis Ropė, Julie Ward, Maria Gabriela Zoană, Damiano Zoffoli

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

30	+
ALDE	Ivan Jakovčić
ECR	John Flack, Sławomir Kłosowski, Mirosław Piotrowski, Laurenţiu Rebega
EFDD	Rosa D’Amato
GUE/NGL	Martina Michels, Younous Omarjee
PPE	Pascal Arimont, Franc Bogovič, Daniel Buda, Tamás Deutsch, Krzysztof Hetman, Marc Joulaud, Ivana Maletić, Lambert van Nistelrooij, Andrey Novakov, Ramón Luis Valcárcel Siso, Joachim Zeller
S&D	Iratxe García Pérez, Michela Giuffrida, John Howarth, Constanze Krehl, Monika Smolková, Derek Vaughan, Julie Ward, Kerstin Westphal, Maria Gabriela Zoană, Damiano Zoffoli
VERTS/ALE	Bronis Ropė

2	-
ALDE	Elsi Katainen
EFDD	Paul Nuttall

1	0
ALDE	Iskra Mihaylova

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

OPINION of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (10.10.2018)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the Interim report on MFF 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position in view of an agreement
(COM(2018)0322 – 2018/0166R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Peter Jahr

PA_Consent_Interim

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its report:

1.  Emphasises that a modernised and well-funded common agricultural policy (CAP), one of the most integrated EU policies, plays a crucial role in delivering key EU objectives including food security, by providing consumers with high-quality, safe food at affordable prices, preserving landscapes and the natural environment and ensuring a fair standard of living for farmers; points out that the number of rules governing food, health and environmental protection with which farmers must comply has greatly increased, while the relative share of the CAP in the EU budget keeps declining; underlines the need to support farmers in the transition towards environmentally friendly farming practices and to reward the delivery of environmental goods;

2.  Points out that a possible reduction of the CAP budget will have disastrous effects, on the one hand removing incentives to ensure that the highest agricultural standards are met and, on the other, jeopardising food security and safety in the Union; stresses that farmers cannot be required to meet even more conditions without adequate support that simultaneously takes into account the specific needs of each Member State, particularly following investment and other efforts to support and protect the environment and provide public services while safeguarding biodiversity and food security and safety;

3.  Reiterates its call for the CAP budget to be maintained in the 2021-2027 MFF at least at the level of the 2014-2020 budget for the EU-27 in real terms, given the fundamental role of the CAP in ensuring the economic, social and environmental sustainability of European agriculture and the development of dynamic rural areas; stresses that an EU agricultural sector that is resilient, sustainable, competitive and that safeguards farmers’ income requires a stable and well-funded CAP budget; reaffirms its firm view that agriculture must not suffer any financial disadvantage as a result of political decisions such as the conclusion of free trade agreements impacting on agriculture or political conflicts with international agricultural trading partners, the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU or the funding of new European policies; highlights the need to increase the contributions of the Member States to the EU budget to 1.3% of their GNI;

4.  Strongly opposes the Commission’s proposal for the next MFF, which would entail substantial cuts to the CAP, including the Programme of Options Specifically Relating to Remoteness and Insularity (POSEI programme) for the outermost regions; stresses that these cuts would endanger the achievement of the objectives of the CAP; highlights that challenges faced by farmers such as unfair trading practices, increased market concentration and free trade agreements, in addition to ongoing climate and weather-related problems, may require instead an increase in the CAP budget; highlights the fact that the extent of the cuts varies according to the parameters used for comparison; calls on the Commission, for the sake of improved comparability, from now on to present the MFF only at current prices;

5.  Asks for an increase in the budgetary allocations in the 2021 – 2027 MFF for POSEI programmes to benefit the outermost regions, which are still strongly affected by the crisis and exposed to the structural disadvantages referred to in Article 349 TFEU, including remoteness, insularity, small size, difficult topography and climate and economic dependence on a few products;

6.  Calls on the Commission to provide in the new MFF for the financial resources necessary to fulfil EU first-pillar CAP commitments, as set out in Croatia’s Accession Treaty[1], concerning the transitional period ending in 2022;

7.  Welcomes the memorandum of 31 May 2018 entitled ‘Future MFF – CAP’, signed by the ministers of agriculture of Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Spain, which raises concerns about the Commission’s proposed cuts to the CAP budget in the MFF 2021-2027;

8.  Stresses the importance of maintaining the existing financial allocations both for direct payments, as an income safety net that reflects the long-term aim of a transition to a more sustainable model of European agriculture that increases competitiveness, and second-pillar funds for farmers and rural populations; points out that any cuts to direct payments have a direct impact on farmers’ income; deplores in particular the severe cuts envisaged for the second pillar of the CAP, which makes a significant contribution to investment and employment, as well as accessibility and territorial attractiveness, environmental care and climate action in rural areas, notably through funding for bottom-up approaches to local development such as the LEADER programme and community-led local development; calls on the Commission to establish for the outermost regions fully autonomous and independent programmes of rural development under the second pillar, similar to the POSEI measures under the first pillar; recalls, that the main objective of this Commission is to maintain and create jobs in the EU; firmly rejects, therefore, the Commission’s plans to seriously cut the EU budget for rural development and insists on a properly funded European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD); stresses that it cannot be taken for granted that national co-funding under the second pillar will fill the budget gap;

9.  Reiterates that the total funding available to the EARDF and European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) for the coming period should be EUR 382 855 000 000 in constant prices to correspond to that allocated for the period 2014-2020;

10.  Stresses that the expectation that 40 % of CAP funding will be spent on climate action can only be achieved if the funds for environmental and climate schemes are not subject to the reduction of payments outlined in Article 15 of the proposal establishing rules on strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States under the CAP (COM(2018)0392);

11.  Notes that reductions to Pillar II are hampering economic development in rural areas, the transition to a low-carbon economy, resistance to climate change, the development of new innovative agricultural technologies and sustainable forest management, as well as measures to promote social inclusion, poverty reduction and economic development in rural areas;

12.  Takes note of the Commission’s proposal with regard to external convergence of the levels of direct payments between Member States; stresses that such increased convergence can only be achieved if the CAP budget is at least maintained in real terms;

13.  Calls for greater use to be made of cohesion policy instruments and funding for sustainable development of rural areas in order to counteract development delays and depopulation in those areas;

14.  Recalls the Commission’s commitments to maintain the budget of the POSEI programme at its current level;

15.  Reiterates its call for a reform of the EU’s own-resources system; stresses the need to safeguard duties on agricultural products as a source of revenue for the EU budget; notes the decrease in revenues from duties over recent years, as decreases in average tariffs have overshot increases in trade volumes; notes the inconsistency of the focus on export-oriented agriculture, which may expose sensitive sectors to increased competition while, in reducing tariffs, eroding the foundation needed to maintain the same sectors for the public goods they provide;

16.  Underlines the need for a legally binding and compulsory MFF mid-term review;

17.  Stresses that an indirect boost to income, particularly of small and medium-sized farmers, can also be achieved through a real reduction in red tape for farmers in the CAP, increased flexibility in controls and a better and more transparent functioning of the food supply chain; emphasises the importance of advisory services in providing farmers with independent advice on adapting and improving their practices, including climate action and practices to reduce dependence on inputs;

18.  Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to review the functioning of the crisis reserve, in particular the possibility of carrying over the unused funds of the new agricultural reserve from one year to another; disagrees with and is concerned by the fact that the initial sums to be used to constitute the fund will not be sourced from outside the CAP budget but will instead be taken from direct payments in 2020 and will not be paid back to farmers; calls therefore for an independent agricultural crisis reserve established outside the CAP budget;

19.  Considers that the Commission’s proposal to extend financial discipline to all beneficiaries of direct payments will not serve the objective of achieving a better balance in the distribution of payments between farms of different sizes, and therefore expects the current exemption from the financial discipline mechanism for farmers receiving up to EUR 2 000 in direct payments to be maintained;

20.  Advocates maintaining the school fruit, vegetables and milk scheme budget at least at the same level, as it plays an important role in promoting healthy eating and in shaping positive eating habits among children and young people;

21.  Recognises the risk that reducing support for CAP and cohesion policy measures would entail in limiting the scope for providing support for entrepreneurship in rural areas and support for territorial development in terms of infrastructure;

22.  Calls for a better balance between environmental and climate objectives and CAP funding, as the Commission’s proposed increase in ambition in this area (40 % of the entire CAP budget for climate goals, and 30 % of Pillar II funding for the environment), together with significant cuts in funding, mean that the ability of the policy to meet the objectives of modernising and restructuring the agri-food sector and rural development will be severely reduced;

23.  Stresses the importance of intensifying customs control for imports of agricultural and food products into the EU, establishing a specific budget line under Heading IV (11) ‘Border management’ to fully realise the potential of the customs union and prevent illegal trade and fraud;

24.  Considers that expenditure on market measures such as public intervention and private storage aid should have a dedicated budget line and should not rely solely on agricultural reserve funds; stresses that agricultural reserve funds should primarily be used to cope rapidly with severe circumstances that go beyond normal market developments and impact agricultural production, processing and distribution in the EU;

25.  Points out that in the period covered by the 2021-2027 MFF, the convergence process must be fully completed in order both to achieve fair competition among Member States and to establish the principles of equality on an EU-wide basis, and that the European Council decision contained in the Presidency conclusions of 24-25 October 2002 has to be completely implemented;

26.  Stresses that one of the main problems is generational renewal, and hence considers that besides receiving aid for setting up in farming, young people should also receive specific aid in the first few years of their farming activity;

27.  Notes that epidemics and adverse weather conditions have seriously affected livestock and arable farming in most Member States and calls for increased financial support to cover farmers’ losses;

28.  Welcomes the proposal of the Commission to devote EUR 10 billion to the Food and Natural Resources cluster of Horizon Europe in order to develop and promote innovation and research in the area of agriculture and food; urges the EU institutions to maintain this level of budgetary ambition throughout the MFF approval process, especially considering the cuts foreseen in the second pillar;

29.  Highlights the fact that in order to regain support for a well-funded CAP, reforms for the next funding period must deliver better value for money, as demonstrated by a greater redirection of funds to lower-income farmers.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
References	2018/0166R(APP)
Committee responsible	BUDG
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	AGRI 5.7.2018
Rapporteur        Date appointed	Peter Jahr 4.7.2018
Date adopted	9.10.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	30 5 3
Members present for the final vote	John Stuart Agnew, Clara Eugenia Aguilera García, José Bové, Daniel Buda, Nicola Caputo, Michel Dantin, Paolo De Castro, Albert Deß, Jørn Dohrmann, Herbert Dorfmann, Norbert Erdős, Luke Ming Flanagan, Karine Gloanec Maurin, Esther Herranz García, Jan Huitema, Martin Häusling, Peter Jahr, Ivan Jakovčić, Jarosław Kalinowski, Zbigniew Kuźmiuk, Norbert Lins, Philippe Loiseau, Mairead McGuinness, Giulia Moi, Ulrike Müller, Maria Noichl, Marijana Petir, Laurenţiu Rebega, Bronis Ropė, Maria Lidia Senra Rodríguez, Czesław Adam Siekierski, Maria Gabriela Zoană, Marco Zullo
Substitutes present for the final vote	Stefan Eck, Elsi Katainen, Susanne Melior, Momchil Nekov, Annie Schreijer-Pierik, Ramón Luis Valcárcel Siso, Thomas Waitz
Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote	Stanisław Ożóg

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

30	+
ALDE	Ivan Jakovčić, Ulrike Müller
ECR	Jørn Dohrmann, Zbigniew Kuźmiuk, Stanisław Ożóg, Laurenţiu Rebega
EFDD	Giulia Moi, Marco Zullo
ENF	Philippe Loiseau
PPE	Daniel Buda, Michel Dantin, Albert Deß, Herbert Dorfmann, Norbert Erdős, Esther Herranz García, Peter Jahr, Jarosław Kalinowski, Norbert Lins, Mairead McGuinness, Marijana Petir, Czesław Adam Siekierski
S&D	Clara Eugenia Aguilera García, Nicola Caputo, Paolo De Castro, Karine Gloanec Maurin, Susanne Melior, Momchil Nekov, Maria Noichl, Maria Gabriela Zoană
Verts/ALE	José Bové

5	-
ALDE	Jan Huitema, Elsi Katainen
EFDD	John Stuart Agnew
GUE/NGL	Stefan Eck
Verts/ALE	Martin Häusling

3	0
GUE/NGL	Luke Ming Flanagan, Maria Lidia Senra Rodríguez
Verts/ALE	Bronis Ropė

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

• [1]  OJ L 112, 24.4.2012, p. 10.

OPINION of the Committee on Culture and Education (10.10.2018)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the Interim report on MFF 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position in view of an agreement
(COM(2018)0322 – 2018/0166R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Petra Kammerevert

PA_Consent_Interim

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Culture and Education calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its report:

1.  Regrets the fact that while the Commission sees investing in people as an overarching EU policy priority[1], less than 11 % of the EU budget for the 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework (MFF) is earmarked for the ‘Investing in People’ sub-heading; calls for priorities to be backed up by funding commitments;

2.  Underlines the enduring popularity and added value for EU citizens of the Erasmus+ programme, which is among the most successful programmes carried out within the EU budget; recalls that, for the 2014-2020 programming period, Erasmus+ was persistently unable to finance high-quality projects owing to a shortage of financial means; supports, as a long-term ambition, the aim of achieving a tenfold increase in its budget;

3.  Reiterates Parliament’s position, as articulated in its 30 May 2018 resolution on the MFF and own resources[2], that it will base its calculations of MFF figures on constant prices, taking into account the UK’s withdrawal; insists, therefore, that the next Erasmus programme has a budget of at least EUR 41.1 billion in the next MFF (a real-terms tripling vis-à-vis the 2014-2020 MFF) and recalls that even this level of increase falls well below the aspirations expressed by the Commission President, some Member States and civil society; is bitterly disappointed with the increase put forward in the MFF proposal and its presentation, which makes it appear higher than it is in relative terms and frustrates transparent comparisons;

4.   Stresses the value of cultural and citizenship programmes and calls for spending on both to be scaled up over the next MFF, particularly given the chronic under-funding evidenced in the current MFF and the importance of supporting citizenship education; insists on a doubling of the funding available under Creative Europe (EUR 2.806 billion in constant prices for 2021-2027), in addition to overall cross-programme spending on culture of at least 1 % over the next programming period; considers that cultural and creative industries should be a cross-cutting priority of EU programmes; demands that the ‘Europe for Citizens’ strand of the Justice, Rights and Values Fund is allocated a budget of at least EUR 1 per citizen;

5.  Recalls that freedom of speech and media pluralism are fundamental values of the Union and reiterates the importance of efforts to enhance media literacy, digital literacy, cyber hygiene and safe online behaviour; considers that encouraging people to engage critically and honestly with the EU’s work requires media literacy and citizenship education, which also help foster the acquisition of transferable skills; welcomes the fact that the new Creative Europe programme proposal makes provision for supporting media pluralism and freedom and media literacy under the cross-sectoral strand, which should enable the expansion of already successful Pilot Projects and Preparatory Actions; notes, moreover, the excellent work done by the Safer Internet Centres, currently supported through the Connecting Europe Facility’s Trans-European Telecommunications Network strand, to foster safe online behaviour among children; insists that the scheme be continued under the next MFF and that its current funding level of around EUR 12 million per year be at least matched in relative terms;

6.  Supports the increased funding available for digital skills across the next generation of MFF programmes, notably the ESF+ (basic digital skills) and Digital Europe (advanced digital skills); insists on the need to develop a coordinated policy approach to digital skills and to maximise the effectiveness of funding for digital skills development across programmes;

7.  Considers that a key aim of the next MFF should be to restore people’s trust in the European project; underlines that getting people to engage critically and honestly with the EU’s work requires clear, vibrant, high-quality and independent media coverage of European affairs; points to the role of the ‘multimedia actions’ budget line in supporting clear communication on the EU and securing an adequate mix of media channels, including radio, television and online; recalls, in that regard, its request for the Commission to conduct a full-scale review – to be provided to Parliament – of all activities under the ‘multimedia actions’ line in the current MFF to ensure that they have delivered on their core aims and that the next MFF strikes the right funding balance across actions; reiterates, moreover, that the cuts to the line in the 2014-2020 MFF severely hampered the effectiveness of cross-channel support, meaning notably that no long-term financing arrangement was put in place to support the excellent work of the pan-European radio network Euranet Plus; insists that the ‘multimedia actions’ line be reinforced in the 2021-2027 MFF;

8.  Highlights the importance of the Commission’s corporate communication activities in helping to get people engaged with European affairs and fostering citizens’ informed commitment to the European project; stresses that these activities require a more joined-up communication strategy with a precise offer, including improved efforts to deliver true multilingualism;

9.   Considers that citizens’ trust in the EU project needs to be revived, while knowledge of the European integration process and awareness of European culture and values need to be disseminated to the widest possible audience; calls, therefore, for a dedicated action – possibly in the form of a prize for projects that engage the public with the European integration process and elicit a collective, grassroots reflection on the future of Europe – to be provided for in the next MFF;

10.  Is sceptical as to whether a minimal increase in the European Social Fund is sufficient to meet the social and labour market objectives it pursues, in particular with regard to the fight against youth unemployment and the integration of migrants;

11.  Insists on adequate flexibility across the EU budget and within the MFF programmes so as to adapt to new policy priorities and external developments; calls, in this regard, for the MFF and all programmes to contain a binding and meaningful mid-term review and revision clause to enable a re-focusing of spending and policy priorities as required; recalls that policy priority-setting falls within the exclusive purview of the legislator and that the much-needed flexibility must therefore go hand-in-hand with parliamentary oversight, meaning that implementing acts may only ever be used for implementation and never for political choices;

12.  Welcomes the Commission’s efforts to structure and present the new MFF in a more transparent and readable way; welcomes the co-location of education, culture and citizenship programmes under a single heading;

13.  Insists that cross-programme synergies must always be understood as a means to deliver efficiency gains and simplification and do not amount to carte blanche for the Commission to redeploy funds from one programme to another or to make budgetary cuts; welcomes the Commission’s overall political message with respect to synergies, but considers that the provisions as currently drafted within MFF programmes make it impossible for the legislator to understand how such synergies are to be achieved and for programme beneficiaries to understand what these synergies might mean for them; insists on more specific and transparent mechanisms, clearly laid down in the legal base, for achieving synergies;

14.  Underlines that the EU budget must deliver demonstrable European added value so as to ensure effective and appropriate use of EU funding; calls for further development of the principle, introduced by the last MFF, that projects are only eligible for EU funding if their European added value is properly substantiated in the project application; believes that a focus on European added value requires a proper set of action-specific and measurable quantitative and qualitative indicators; emphasises, with respect to initiatives in the field of education and culture, that non-tangible benefits, such as the social impacts achieved by such initiatives, are just as important as material achievements; insists that programmes that fund education and culture projects, such as the ESF+ and the Structural Funds, require appropriate indicators to measure effectiveness, feed into the mid-term review and ultimately inform the next generation of programmes;

15.  Recalls that programme implementation was initially slow in the current MFF, increasing the likelihood of payment obligations spilling over into the next MFF and needing to be settled under the new payment ceilings; stresses the need to avoid a repeat of the payments crisis that occurred at the end of the 2007-2013 MFF, since the beneficiaries of education and culture programme are often individuals and small organisations that can ill afford payment delays; points out that payment delays severely undermine the benefits of the programme and ultimately erode trust in the European project;

16.  Commits to granting consent to the approval of the MFF Regulation by the Council only as a package agreement, including a credible proposal for reform of the Own Resources System.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
References	2018/0166R(APP)
Committee responsible	BUDG
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	CULT 13.9.2018
Rapporteur        Date appointed	Petra Kammerevert 16.5.2018
Date adopted	10.10.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	25 0 4
Members present for the final vote	Isabella Adinolfi, Dominique Bilde, Nikolaos Chountis, Silvia Costa, Mircea Diaconu, Damian Drăghici, Angel Dzhambazki, Jill Evans, María Teresa Giménez Barbat, Giorgos Grammatikakis, Petra Kammerevert, Svetoslav Hristov Malinov, Rupert Matthews, Morten Messerschmidt, Luigi Morgano, Momchil Nekov, Helga Trüpel, Sabine Verheyen, Julie Ward, Bogdan Brunon Wenta, Theodoros Zagorakis, Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski, Milan Zver, Krystyna Łybacka, Michaela Šojdrová
Substitutes present for the final vote	Norbert Erdős, Martina Michels, Remo Sernagiotto, Francis Zammit Dimech

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

25	+
ALDE	Mircea Diaconu, María Teresa Giménez Barbat
EFDD	Isabella Adinolfi
ENF	Dominique Bilde
GUE/NGL	Nikolaos Chountis, Martina Michels
PPE	Norbert Erdős, Svetoslav Hristov Malinov, Michaela Šojdrová, Sabine Verheyen, Bogdan Brunon Wenta, Theodoros Zagorakis, Francis Zammit Dimech, Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski, Milan Zver
S&D	Silvia Costa, Damian Draghici, Giorgos Grammatikakis, Petra Kammerevert, Krystyna Łybacka, Luigi Morgano, Momchil Nekov, Julie Ward
VERTS/ALE	Jill Evans, Helga Trüpel

0	-

4	0
ECR	Angel Dzhambazki, Rupert Matthews, Morten Messerschmidt, Remo Sernagiotto

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

• [1]  Reflection Paper on the Future of EU Finances, June 2017.
• [2]  Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0226.

OPINION of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs (11.10.2018)

for the Committee on Budgets

on the Interim report on the MFF 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position in view of an agreement
(2018/0166R(APP))

Rapporteur for opinion: Fabio Massimo Castaldo

PA_Consent_InterimMod

SUGGESTIONS

The Committee on Constitutional Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its report:

A.  whereas under Article 8 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) the EU is committed to promoting equality between men and women and ensuring gender mainstreaming in all of its actions;

1.  Considers that reform of the revenue side should go hand in hand with reform of expenditure and of rebates and corrections, in order to increase the European added value of EU expenditure by ensuring a visible link between expenditure and EU policies and priorities, and by supporting EU policies in the key areas of EU competence which demonstrate high potential for European added value, such as protection of fundamental rights, the single market, migration and asylum policies, regional and social cohesion policy, the common agricultural policy, environmental protection and climate action, energy union, common security and defence policy, the promotion of gender equality, research, technological development and the reduction of fiscal heterogeneity in the single market, as recommended in the Monti report[1];

Multiannual Financial Framework

2.  Recalls that EU spending should be given the appropriate flexibility and be the subject of proper democratic scrutiny and accountability, which necessitates the full involvement of Parliament in every phase of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) Regulation decision-making process in respect of its prerogatives as co-legislator; given that the sectoral legislation sets up the vast majority of EU programmes, calls for a move to qualified majority voting in the Council and for closer dialogue between the Council and Parliament when negotiating the next MFF before the Council formally submits for Parliament’s consent its proposal for the MFF Regulation, and warns against the European Council’s usual top-down approach of setting the overall ceilings per heading rather than assessing the actual needs of the programmes first;

3.  Underlines the fact that any revision of the MFF should ensure the full involvement of Parliament and safeguard its prerogatives as an equal arm of the budgetary authority; welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a mid-term review to be presented before 1 January 2024, but regrets the fact that it did not propose a legally-binding and compulsory mid-term revision, with a specific procedure including a binding calendar ensuring Parliament’s full involvement; insists that fully-fledged negotiations between Parliament and the Council will need to take place in view of the MFF mid-term revision;

4.  Recalls the fact that it has, on several occasions, called for the alignment of the future MFFs with the duration of its legislative term and the mandate of the Commission; regrets the fact that the Commission has not drawn up a clear proposal setting out the methods for the practical implementation of a 5+5 financial framework in the future;

5.  Stresses that the next MFF provides an opportunity for the Union to demonstrate that it stands together and is able to address political developments such as Brexit, the rise of populist and nationalist movements and changes in global leadership; underlines that divisions in the EU are not an answer to global challenges and to citizens’ concerns; considers that the Brexit negotiations, in particular, show that the benefits of being a Union member greatly outweigh the cost of contributing to its budget;

6.  Considers that the unanimity requirement for the adoption of the MFF Regulation represents a true impediment to the process; calls on the European Council, in this regard, to activate the passerelle clause provided for in Article 312(2) TFEU so as to allow for the adoption of the MFF Regulation by qualified majority; recalls, moreover, that the general passerelle clause set out in Article 48(7) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) can also be deployed, in order to apply the ordinary legislative procedure; stresses that a shift towards qualified majority voting for the adoption of the MFF Regulation would be in line with the decision-making process for the adoption of virtually all EU multiannual programmes, as well as with the annual procedure for adopting the EU budget;

7.  Welcomes the potential inherent in the Commission’s approach to linking payments from the EU budget to compliance with the rule of law as a fundamental value of the European Union, considers that suspending EU spending in a Member State should only happen as a last resort measure, and reiterates its intention to closely examine all elements of the proposal concerning the rule of law conditionality clause and to introduce the necessary provisions to guarantee that the final beneficiaries of the Union budget can in no way be affected by breaches of rules for which they are not responsible;

8.  Recalls that gender equality is enshrined in the Treaties and should be included in all EU activities so as to deliver equality in practice; stresses that gender budgeting must become an integral part of the MFF by including a clear commitment in the MFF Regulation;

9.  Stresses that the next MFF should take full account of the commitments made by the EU in the context of COP 21;

10.  Invites the Commission to explore the possibility of drawing up a conditionality clause linking the suspension of budgetary commitments and payments concerning Union funds to Member States’ failure to meet obligations under EU law based on the principle of solidarity among Member States in the field of the European asylum policy and on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; requests that the necessary provisions be introduced to guarantee that the direct beneficiaries of the Union budget can in no way be affected by breaches of the rules for which they are not responsible;

Own resources

11.  Recalls that while the third subparagraph of Article 311 of the TFEU requires that Parliament only needs to be consulted for a decision on the Union’s system of own resources to be adopted, the procedure for adopting the implementing measures for this system, as stated in the fourth subparagraph, requires that it give its consent; calls on the Council to closely involve Parliament in all stages of the procedure for the adoption of own resources;

12.  Recalls that Article 311 TFEU states that: ‘The Union shall provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies. Without prejudice to other revenue, the budget shall be financed wholly from own resources’; stresses, therefore, that the legal requirement to provide the EU budget with genuine own resources derives directly from the Treaty;

13.  Welcomes the fact that the Commission’s proposed new own resources categories are linked to policies with a high European added value, with the aim not of increasing the overall tax burden for citizens, but of reducing the burden on national treasuries and generating an awareness, among citizens, of an autonomous EU budget which demonstrates the added value of European integration; regrets the lack of ambition of these proposals, leading to the impossibility of reaching the stated objective of increasing the share of genuine own resources, and calls on the Commission to complete its proposals by introducing different own resources in fields such as tax justice and the fight against tax avoidance;

14.  Following the conclusions of the High-Level Group on Own Resources, recalls that, when the UK withdraws from the EU, the UK correction will become obsolete; recalls that, consequently, all corrections linked to the financing of the UK correction should be immediately terminated after the UK’s withdrawal from the EU;

15.  Considers that the context of Brexit is also an occasion to consider the suppression of all other correction mechanisms granted to some Member States, which are no longer justified, and believes that this will allow perfect equality of treatment of Member States to be restored with regard to their contribution to the Union’s budget.

Modifications

Modification    1 Proposal for a Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 Recital 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(1)  Taking into account the need for an adequate level of predictability for preparing and implementing medium-term investments, the duration of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) should be set at seven years starting on 1 January 2021.	(1)  Taking into account the need for an adequate level of predictability for preparing and implementing medium-term investments, the duration of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) should be set at seven years starting on 1 January 2021; whereas the Commission should draw up in due course a clear proposal setting out the methods for the practical implementation of a 5+5 financial framework in the future.
Modification    2 Proposal for a Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 Recital 9 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	(9a)  Article 8 TFEU lays down the principle of gender mainstreaming in all EU activities, which requires the allocation of adequate resources and transparency in the budget allocations dedicated to promoting gender equality and to combating gender discrimination.
Modification    3 Proposal for a regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 Recital 10 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	(10a)  No later than 1 January 2023, the Commission should present an assessment of the implementation of the MFF, accompanied by proposals for a compulsory revision, with a specific procedure that includes a binding calendar ensuring Parliament’s full involvement.
Modification    4 Proposal for a regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 Recital 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
(14)  It is necessary to provide for general rules on interinstitutional cooperation in the budgetary procedure.	(14)  It is necessary to provide for general rules on interinstitutional cooperation in the budgetary procedure, respecting the budgetary powers of the institutions as laid down in the Treaties.
Modification    5 Proposal for a regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 Article 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	Article 3a (new)Gender budgeting   The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission shall incorporate a gender perspective at levels of the budgetary procedure for each year concerned and restructure revenues and expenditures in order to promote gender equality.
Modification    6 Proposal for a regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 Article 16
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
Article 16Mid-term review of the MFF Before 1 January 2024, the Commission shall present a review of the functioning of the MFF. This review shall, as appropriate, be accompanied by relevant proposals.	Article 16Mid-term revision of the MFF No later than 1 January 2023, the Commission shall present an assessment of the implementation of the MFF, accompanied by proposals for a compulsory revision.   The Council, acting in accordance with the legislative procedure laid down in Article 312 TFEU and after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, shall revise this Regulation.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
References	2018/0166R(APP)
Committee responsible	BUDG
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	AFCO 13.9.2018
Rapporteur        Date appointed	Fabio Massimo Castaldo 20.6.2018
Discussed in committee	3.9.2018
Date adopted	10.10.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	20 3 0
Members present for the final vote	Gerolf Annemans, Mercedes Bresso, Elmar Brok, Fabio Massimo Castaldo, Richard Corbett, Pascal Durand, Danuta Maria Hübner, Diane James, Ramón Jáuregui Atondo, Alain Lamassoure, Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz, Paulo Rangel, Helmut Scholz, György Schöpflin, Claudia Țapardel, Josep-Maria Terricabras, Kazimierz Michał Ujazdowski
Substitutes present for the final vote	Enrique Guerrero Salom, Jérôme Lavrilleux, Jasenko Selimovic
Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote	John Howarth, Sven Schulze, Adam Szejnfeld

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

20	+
ALDE	Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz, Jasenko Selimovic
EFDD	Fabio Massimo Castaldo
GUE/NGL	Helmut Scholz
NI	Kazimierz Michał Ujazdowski
PPE	Elmar Brok, Danuta Maria Hübner, Alain Lamassoure, Jérôme Lavrilleux, Paulo Rangel, Sven Schulze, Adam Szejnfeld
S&D	Mercedes Bresso, Richard Corbett, Enrique Guerrero Salom, John Howarth, Ramón Jáuregui Atondo, Claudia Țapardel
VERTS/ALE	Pascal Durand, Josep Maria Terricabras

3	-
ENF	Gerolf Annemans
NI	Diane James
PPE	György Schöpflin

0	0

Key to symbols:

+  20  in favour

-  :3  against

0  :0  abstention

15.10.2018

POSITION IN THE FORM OF AMENDMENTS

of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality

for the Committee on Budget

on the Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement

(2018/0166R(APP))

On behalf of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality: Iratxe García Pérez (rapporteur)

Position

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality presents the following amendments to the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible:

Amendment    1 Motion for a resolution Recital E a (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(Ea) whereas mainstreaming gender ‘in all its activities’, including budgeting, remains a legal obligation of the Union stemming directly from Article 8 of the TFEU;
Amendment    2 Motion for a resolution Recital E b (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(Eb) whereas this cross-cutting perspective not only has often led to lower support for gender-specific actions, not to mention the lack of gender indicators,  but also makes it almost impossible to estimate the amounts that are allocated to gender issues;
Amendment    3 Motion for a resolution Recital E c (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(Ec) whereas for the 2014-2020 MFF the attached joint declaration of November 2013 of Parliament, the Council and the Commission embodied the agreement that the annual budgetary procedures applying to the MFF would, as appropriate, integrate gender-responsive elements, taking into account the ways in which the overall financial framework of the Union contributes to greater gender equality and ensures gender mainstreaming;
Amendment    4 Motion for a resolution Recital E d (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(Ed) whereas the Commission communication of 14 September 2016 on the MFF mid-term review makes no reference to the implementation of gender mainstreaming; whereas the Commission’s Strategic Engagement to Gender Equality 2016-2019 highlights the key role of EU funding in support for gender equality and states that gender budgeting ‘is not applied systematically to the EU general budget’; whereas the 2018 impact assessment of the external instrument states that mainstreaming of human rights, including gender equality, ‘was considered as work-in-progress, with partner governments sometimes showing a lack of interest or resistance to these areas’; whereas no EU institution has consistently implemented gender budgeting;
Amendment    5 Motion for a resolution Recital E e (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(Ee) whereas it is crucial to keep specific lines in the EU budget to guarantee the proper implementation of our projects;
Amendment    6 Motion for a resolution Recital E f (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(Ef) whereas in the current climate of erosion of the EU’s values, which has brought out a surprisingly strong anti-gender backlash in the EU, a strong commitment from all three institutions that gender equality will be upheld is required more than ever and must be reflected in the funding policy;
Amendment    7 Motion for a resolution Recital E g (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(Eg) whereas equality between women and men is a precondition for women’s participation in the labour market, in leading positions and in science and research, and thus for gender equality, with an impact on the economy of the Member States;
Amendment    8 Motion for a resolution Recital E h (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(Eh ) whereas the goal of gender equality in Europe is still far from being achieved, and further efforts are therefore needed;
Amendment    9 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
4. Declares, moreover, its opposition to any reduction in the level of key EU policies, such as the EU cohesion policy and the common agricultural policy (CAP); is particularly opposed to any radical cuts that will adversely impact on the very nature and objectives of these policies, such as the cuts proposed for the Cohesion Fund or for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development; opposes, in this context, the proposal to reduce the European Social Fund despite its enlarged scope and the integration of the Youth Employment Initiative;	(4) Declares, moreover, its opposition to any reduction in the level of key EU policies, such as the EU cohesion policy and the common agricultural policy (CAP); is particularly opposed to any radical cuts that will adversely impact on the very nature and objectives of these policies, such as the cuts proposed for the Cohesion Fund or for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development; opposes, in this context, the proposal to reduce the European Social Fund despite its enlarged scope, the need to improve gender equality in the labour market and the integration of the Youth Employment Initiative; highlights the importance of the structural funds, and the European Social Fund in particular, for sustaining women’s empowerment through the creation of jobs and improvement of services, as well as the horizon funds for promoting women’s participation in the STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) sector.
Amendment    10 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
5. Underlines, furthermore, the importance of the horizontal principles that should underpin the MFF and all related EU policies; reaffirms, in this context, its position that the EU must deliver on its commitment to be a frontrunner in implementing the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and deplores the lack of a clear and visible commitment to that end in the MFF proposals; requests, therefore, the mainstreaming of the SDGs into all EU policies and initiatives of the next MFF; further emphasises that the elimination of discrimination is vital to fulfil the EU’s commitments towards an inclusive Europe and deplores the lack of gender mainstreaming and gender equality commitments in EU policies, as presented in the MFF proposals; underlines also its position that, following the Paris Agreement, climate-related spending should be significantly increased in comparison with the current MFF and reach 30 % as soon as possible and at the latest by 2027;Employment Initiative;	(5) Underlines, furthermore, the importance of the horizontal principles that should underpin the MFF and all related EU policies; reaffirms, in this context, its position that the EU must deliver on its commitment to be a frontrunner in implementing the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and deplores the lack of a clear and visible commitment to that end in the MFF proposals; requests, therefore, the mainstreaming of the SDGs into all EU policies and initiatives of the next MFF; further emphasises that the elimination of discrimination, as well as gender inequality and gender-based violence, is vital to fulfil the EU’s commitments towards an inclusive Europe and deplores the lack of gender mainstreaming and gender equality commitments in EU policies, as presented in the MFF proposals; supports a reinforced and specific budgetary dimension in combating all instances of discrimination, giving particular attention to the gender dimension within migration and asylum policies and external EU policies; underlines also its position that, following the Paris Agreement, climate-related spending should be significantly increased in comparison with the current MFF and reach 30 % as soon as possible and at the latest by 2027;
Amendment    11 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(5a) Calls for the MFF to be revised with a view to including concrete measures and allocating increased financial resources to combat violence against women and girls and ensure the protection of migrant and refugee women, as well as undocumented women, from violence; insists on targeted investments to ensure women’s rights and safety throughout the whole asylum procedure;
Amendment    12 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 b (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(5b) Deplores the fact that there is no individual programme to fight violence against women any more, as it is only integrated into the general ‘citizens and rights’ programme, and calls for more funds to prevent, fight and eradicate violence against women, the most widespread form of violation of human rights and a clear reflection of the inequality between women and men; highlights that the EU should always support the fight against gender-based violence and sexual harassment, especially by giving the Member States the support they need to implement the Istanbul Convention;
Amendment    13 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 c (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(5c) Supports strongly the commitments arising from Article 9 TFEU for the delivery of a social Europe and the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights based on the sustainable growth of a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress and promoting equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child as enshrined in the Treaty;
Amendment    14 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 d (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(5d) Stresses the need to ensure that women have access to sexual and reproductive services and that special attention be paid to the specific needs of vulnerable persons, including minors and other groups, such as the LGBTI community;
Amendment    15 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 e (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(5e) Strongly condemns the reinstatement and expansion by the Trump administration of the Global Gag Rule and its detrimental impact on women’s and girls’ global healthcare and rights and reiterates its call for the EU and its Member States, as part of the MFF, to fill the financing gap left by the US in the area of sexual and reproductive health and rights, using both national and EU development funding;
Amendment    16 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 f (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(5f) Insists that the future of structural funds and cohesion policies must include gender targets and monitoring mechanisms to increase funding for actions that underpin and generate greater gender equality, such as investing in public care services for children and elderly people;
Amendment    17 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 g (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(5g) Reiterates that the next MFF needs to earmark adequate budgetary commitments to step up the efforts to eradicate trafficking in women and girls for sexual exploitation across the Union and increasingly invest in victim’s rights and protection, as well as actions decreasing the demand for trafficked women and girls;
Amendment    18 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 h (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(5h) Repeats its call for gender equality to be mainstreamed in the next MFF with a view to counteracting the shrinking space for civil society, and calls in particular for the EU and the Member States to increase both their political and financial support to women’s rights organisations, women’s shelters/houses and women’s human rights defenders both within the Union and worldwide;
Amendment    19 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(6a) Recommends setting up an internal European Democracy Fund for strengthening support to civil society and NGOs working in the fields of democracy and human rights, including women’s rights and the fight against gender-based violence, to be managed by the Commission.
Amendment    20 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(11a) Reiterates its regret that, despite the joint declaration on gender mainstreaming annexed to the MFF, there has been no significant progress in this area under the MFF 2014-2020;
Amendment    21 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(11b) Deeply regrets that gender mainstreaming has been completely side-lined in the Commission’s proposal and that not only has the situation not improved but the proposals are a step backwards; points to the fact that existing goals dedicated to gender equality have been merged with other policy goals, such us in the Rights and Values programme, and that gender equality requirements, such as the gender equality ex ante conditionality in the ESI funds, have been eliminated in the Commission’s new proposals;
Amendment    22 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 c (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(11c)  Deplores the fact that several programmes include gender equality only as a cross-cutting objective, which leads to lower support for gender-specific actions;
Amendment    23 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 d (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(11d)  Repeats its call for the expression of a renewed commitment by Parliament, the Council and the Commission to gender equality in the next MFF, by means of a joint declaration attached to the MFF, including an unequivocal commitment to implementing gender budgeting; repeats its call for the effective monitoring of implementation of the declaration in the annual budgetary procedures through the inclusion of a provision in a review clause in the new MFF regulation;
Amendment    24 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 e (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(11e)  Invites the partner institutions to display leadership by accepting gender equality as a horizontal objective and to identify and put in place an effective mechanism for systematically applying gender budgeting across the MFF instruments and programmes, as well as an annual budgetary procedure;
Amendment    25 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 f (new)
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	(11f)  Calls for clear targets and dedicated resources to be established in EU programmes such as the European Social Fund (ESF), the Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme 2014-2020 (REC), Horizon 2020, the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance II (IPA II), the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) and the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) in order to allow for systematic implementation and monitoring and to avoid mere references to general principles of gender equality without asking for specific action such as in the case of the EU Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI), the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived (FEAD), the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF);
Amendment    26 Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 – subparagraph i
Motion for a resolution	Amendment
i. compulsory and legally binding mid -term revision, following a review of the functioning of the MFF;	(18i) compulsory and legally binding mid-term revision, following a gender-mainstreamed review of the functioning of the MFF;
Amendment    27 Paragraph 38 Modification 8 a (new) – Recital 9 a
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	(9a) Article 8 TFEU lays down the principle of gender mainstreaming in all EU activities, which requires the allocation of adequate resources and transparency in the budget allocations dedicated to promoting gender equality and combating gender discrimination.
Amendment    28 Paragraph 38 Modification 16 a (new) Chapter 1 – Article 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
	Article 3a (new) Gender budgeting The European Parliament, the Council and the Commission shall incorporate a gender perspective at various levels of the budgetary procedure for each year concerned and restructure revenues and expenditures in order to promote gender equality.
Amendment    29 Paragraph 38 Modification 35 – Chapter 4 - Article 16
Text proposed by the Commission	Modification
Article 16Mid-term review of the MFF Before 1 January 2024, the Commission shall present a review of the functioning of the MFF. This review shall, as appropriate, be accompanied by relevant proposals.	Article 16Mid-term revision of the MFF Before 1 January 2024, the Commission shall revise the MFF. This revision shall introduce gender mainstreaming and include a specific chapter on gender equality and, as appropriate, be accompanied by relevant proposals.   The Council, acting in accordance with the legislative procedure laid down in Article 312 TFEU and after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, shall revise this regulation.

• [1]  Final report and recommendations of the High-Level Group on Own Resources on the future financing of the EU, adopted in December 2016.

LETTER FROM THE COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIBERTIES, JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS

IPOL-COM-LIBE  D(2018)37918

Mr Jean ARTHUIS

Chair of the Committee on Budgets

ASP 09G205

Brussels

Subject:  “MFF Interim Report” - feedback of the LIBE committee concerning the financial amounts proposed by the Commission for the sectorial programs and Justice & Home Affairs agencies falling in the LIBE remit

Dear Chair,

Following the request of the BUDG Committee during their meeting of 13 September and the outcome of the Conference of Presidents of 14 September, I am writing to you in relation to the financing of the LIBE MFF Sectorial Programme Funds falling in the LIBE remit.

LIBE has set up a coordination group (MFF Contact Group) composed of the six rapporteurs for the funds for

•  Asylum and Migration

•  Internal Security

•  Border Management and Visa Instrument

•  Pericles IV

•  Rights and Values, and

•  Justice.

The MFF Contact Group has provided recommendations to this letter, which have been considered by the LIBE coordinators. They endorsed the figures included in the table below in a written procedure.

The table summarises LIBE’s feedback and recommendations to be taken into account in the MFF Interim Report. On the one hand, it refers to the European Parliament resolution of 14 March 2018 on the next MFF: “Preparing the Parliament’s position on the MFF post-2020 (2017/2052(INI))” as well as, on the other hand, the need for a reinforced European Justice, Rights and Values Fund. Consequently, we are proposing the following:

	Proposed by the EC	Suggestion of LIBE	Justification
Funds/Sectorial Programmes	(Million euros - constant prices)	(Million euros - constant prices)
AMIF	9205	No change
ISF	2210	No change
IBM	8237	No change
Pericles IV	7	No change
Rights and Values	841	1.974,457 (current prices)	Given the changed political landscape in the Union and raising challenges to European values that the EU is currently facing, the rapporteur considers that the proposed seven-year budget of 642 million EUR (divided into 409 million EUR for the “Equality and Rights and Daphné” and 233 million EUR for the “Citizens engagement and participation” strand) is insufficient and cannot respond to the needs of EU citizens to strengthen and protect EU values, as part of a pluralist, democratic, open and inclusive society. Having regard to the repeated calls by civil society organisations for an increase in the budget of existing programmes as well as the extended scope proposed, including the new strand dedicated to Union values, the rapporteur is putting forward the following budget allocation based on the Parliament resolution from April 2018; in total 1.974.457 million EUR in current prices, divided as follows, 1 billion EUR for the new Union values strand 474,457 for the „”Equality and Rights and Daphne” strand and, 500 million EUR for the “Citizens engagement and participation” strand.
Justice		tbc	No proposal can be put forward as the joint committee procedure between JURI and LIBE has just started.

There is broad agreement between political groups in LIBE that the Rights and Values programme should be reinforced. I therefore count on your support to have the increased budget for this fund included in the MFF Interim Report as basis for the negotiations with the Council.

Yours sincerely,

Claude MORAES

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Title	Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 – Parliament’s position with a view to an agreement
References	2018/0166R(APP)
Date of consultation / request for consent	12.6.2018
Committee responsible        Date announced in plenary	BUDG 5.7.2018
Committees asked for opinions        Date announced in plenary	AFET 13.9.2018	DEVE 13.9.2018	INTA 13.9.2018	CONT 13.9.2018
	EMPL 4.10.2018	ENVI 5.7.2018	ITRE 13.9.2018	TRAN 13.9.2018
	REGI 5.7.2018	AGRI 5.7.2018	CULT 13.9.2018	AFCO 13.9.2018
	FEMM 13.9.2018
Rapporteurs        Date appointed	Isabelle Thomas 12.6.2018	Jan Olbrycht 12.6.2018	Janusz Lewandowski 12.6.2018	Gérard Deprez 12.6.2018
Discussed in committee	8.10.2018	9.10.2018
Date adopted	5.11.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	25 5 0
Members present for the final vote	Jean Arthuis, Reimer Böge, Lefteris Christoforou, Gérard Deprez, André Elissen, José Manuel Fernandes, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Ingeborg Gräßle, Monika Hohlmeier, John Howarth, Bernd Kölmel, Zbigniew Kuźmiuk, Vladimír Maňka, Jan Olbrycht, Paul Rübig, Eleftherios Synadinos, Indrek Tarand, Isabelle Thomas, Inese Vaidere, Daniele Viotti, Tiemo Wölken, Marco Zanni
Substitutes present for the final vote	Karine Gloanec Maurin, Alain Lamassoure, Janusz Lewandowski, Ivana Maletić, Andrey Novakov, Marco Valli
Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote	Michael Detjen, Stefan Gehrold
Date tabled	7.11.2018

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

25	+
ALDE	Jean Arthuis, Gérard Deprez
ECR	Zbigniew Kuźmiuk
PPE	Reimer Böge, Lefteris Christoforou, José Manuel Fernandes, Stefan Gehrold, Ingeborg Gräßle, Monika Hohlmeier, Alain Lamassoure, Janusz Lewandowski, Ivana Maletić, Andrey Novakov, Jan Olbrycht, Paul Rübig, Inese Vaidere
S&D	Michael Detjen, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial, Karine Gloanec Maurin, John Howarth, Vladimír Maňka, Isabelle Thomas, Daniele Viotti, Tiemo Wölken
VERTS/ALE	Indrek Tarand

5	-
ECR	Bernd Kölmel
EFDD	Marco Valli
ENF	André Elissen, Marco Zanni
NI	Eleftherios Synadinos

0	0

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention