Debašu stenogramma

Otrdiena, 2023. gada 9. maijs - Strasbūra

14. 2021. finanšu gada budžeta izpildes apstiprināšana (debašu turpinājums)

  Presidente. – La seduta è ripresa.

L'ordine del giorno reca il proseguimento della discussione congiunta "Discarico 2021" sulle seguenti relazioni:

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio generale dell'Unione europea per l'esercizio 2021, sezione III – Commissione e agenzie esecutive [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0227/2022- 2022/2081(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatori: Jeroen Lenaers e Monika Hohlmeier (A9-0101/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio generale dell'Unione europea per l'esercizio 2021, sezione I – Parlamento europeo [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0228/2022- 2022/2082(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Isabel García Muñoz (A9-0086/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio generale dell'Unione europea per l'esercizio 2021, sezione II – Consiglio europeo e Consiglio [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0229/2022- 2022/2083(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Mikuláš Peksa (A9-0085/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio generale dell'Unione europea per l'esercizio 2021, sezione IV – Corte di giustizia dell'Unione europea [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0230/2022- 2022/2084(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Mikuláš Peksa (A9-0073/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio generale dell'Unione europea per l'esercizio 2021, sezione V – Corte dei conti [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0231/2022- 2022/2085(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Mikuláš Peksa (A9-0081/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio generale dell'Unione europea per l'esercizio 2021, sezione VI – Comitato economico e sociale europeo [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0232/2022- 2022/2086(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Mikuláš Peksa (A9-0074/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio generale dell'Unione europea per l'esercizio 2021, sezione VII – Comitato delle regioni [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0233/2022- 2022/2087(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Mikuláš Peksa (A9-0080/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio generale dell'Unione europea per l'esercizio 2021, sezione VIII – Mediatore europeo [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0234/2022- 2022/2088(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Mikuláš Peksa (A9-0067/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio generale dell'Unione europea per l'esercizio 2021, sezione IX – Garante europeo della protezione dei dati [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0235/2022- 2022/2089(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Mikuláš Peksa (A9-0070/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio generale dell'Unione europea per l'esercizio 2021, sezione X – Servizio europeo per l'azione esterna [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0236/2022- 2022/2090(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Mikuláš Peksa (A9-0088/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio della Procura europea per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0237/2022 - 2022/2091(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Mikuláš Peksa (A9-0079/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio del Centro europeo per lo sviluppo della formazione professionale (Cedefop) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0241/2022- 2022/2095(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Olivier Chastel (A9-0125/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio della Fondazione europea per il miglioramento delle condizioni di vita e di lavoro (Eurofound) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0265/2022- 2022/2119(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Olivier Chastel (A9-0109/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia dell'Unione europea per i diritti fondamentali per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0269/2022- 2022/2123(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Ramona Strugariu (A9-0141/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Osservatorio europeo delle droghe e delle tossicodipendenze per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0256/2022- 2022/2110(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Ramona Strugariu (A9-0107/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia europea dell'ambiente per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0248/2022- 2022/2102(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Katalin Cseh (A9-0143/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia europea per la sicurezza e la salute sul lavoro (EU-OSHA) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0264/2022- 2022/2118(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Alin Mituța (A9-0132/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio del Centro di traduzione degli organismi dell'Unione europea per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0240/2022- 2022/2094(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Olivier Chastel (A9-0104/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia europea per i medicinali per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0255/2022- 2022/2109(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Katalin Cseh (A9-0106/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia dell'Unione europea per la cooperazione giudiziaria penale (Eurojust) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0266/2022- 2022/2120(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Ramona Strugariu (A9-0122/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio della Fondazione europea per la formazione per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0262/2022- 2022/2116(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Alin Mituța (A9-0135/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia europea per la sicurezza marittima per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0257/2022- 2022/2111(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Ilana Cicurel (A9-0113/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia dell'Unione europea per la sicurezza aerea per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0243/2022- 2022/2097(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Olivier Chastel (A9-0098/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Autorità europea per la sicurezza alimentare per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0250/2022- 2022/2104(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Katalin Cseh (A9-0131/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio del Centro europeo per la prevenzione e il controllo delle malattie per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0246/2022- 2022/2100(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Katalin Cseh (A9-0146/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'ENISA (Agenzia dell'Unione europea per la cibersicurezza) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0258/2022- 2022/2112(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Katalin Cseh (A9-0115/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia dell'Unione europea per le ferrovie per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0259/2022- 2022/2113(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Olivier Chastel (A9-0100/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia dell'Unione europea per la formazione delle autorità di contrasto (CEPOL) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0242/2022- 2022/2096(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Ramona Strugariu (A9-0102/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia europea della guardia di frontiera e costiera per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0270/2022- 2022/2124(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Ramona Strugariu (A9-0142/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia dell'Unione europea per il programma spaziale (prima del 12 maggio 2021: Agenzia del GNSS europeo) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0268/2022- 2022/2122(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Katalin Cseh (A9-0116/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia europea di controllo della pesca per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0249/2022- 2022/2103(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Ilana Cicurel (A9-0112/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia europea per le sostanze chimiche per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0247/2022- 2022/2101(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Katalin Cseh (A9-0133/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia di approvvigionamento dell'Euratom per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0260/2022- 2022/2114(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Katalin Cseh (A9-0126/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia dell'Unione europea per la cooperazione nell'attività di contrasto (Europol) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0267/2022- 2022/2121(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Ramona Strugariu (A9-0138/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Istituto europeo per l'uguaglianza di genere per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0251/2022- 2022/2105(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Olivier Chastel (A9-0121/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Autorità bancaria europea per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0245/2022- 2022/2099(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Alin Mituța (A9-0110/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Autorità europea delle assicurazioni e delle pensioni aziendali e professionali per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0252/2022- 2022/2106(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Gilles Boyer (A9-0103/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Autorità europea degli strumenti finanziari e dei mercati per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0261/2022- 2022/2115(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Gilles Boyer (A9-0137/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia dell'Unione europea per la cooperazione fra i regolatori nazionali dell'energia (ACER) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0238/2022- 2022/2092(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Katalin Cseh (A9-0111/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia di sostegno al BEREC (Ufficio BEREC) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0239/2022- 2022/2093(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Katalin Cseh (A9-0129/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Istituto europeo di innovazione e tecnologia (EIT) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0253/2022- 2022/2107(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Katalin Cseh (A9-0130/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Ufficio europeo di sostegno per l'asilo (attualmente Agenzia dell'Unione europea per l'asilo) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0244/2022- 2022/2098(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Ramona Strugariu (A9-0123/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Agenzia dell'Unione europea per la gestione operativa dei sistemi IT su larga scala nello spazio di libertà, sicurezza e giustizia (eu-LISA) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0263/2022- 2022/2117(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatrice: Ramona Strugariu (A9-0105/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'impresa comune europea per ITER e lo sviluppo dell'energia da fusione per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0275/2022- 2022/2129(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Ryszard Czarnecki (A9-0092/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'impresa comune «Ricerca ATM nel cielo unico europeo 3» (prima del 30.11.2021: impresa comune SESAR) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0278/2022- 2022/2132(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Ryszard Czarnecki (A9-0118/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'impresa comune "Aviazione pulita" (prima del 30.11.2021: impresa comune Clean Sky 2) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0272/2022- 2022/2126(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (A9-0078/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'impresa comune "Europa biocircolare" (prima del 30.11.2021: impresa comune Bioindustrie) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0271/2022- 2022/2125(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (A9-0093/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'impresa comune "Iniziativa per l'innovazione nel settore della salute" (prima del 30.11.2021: impresa comune "Iniziativa in materia di medicinali innovativi 2") per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0277/2022- 2022/2131(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Ryszard Czarnecki (A9-0069/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'impresa comune Idrogeno pulito (prima del 30.11.2021 l'impresa comune Celle a combustibile e idrogeno 2) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0276/2022- 2022/2130(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Ryszard Czarnecki (A9-0083/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'impresa comune "Ferrovie europee" (prima del 30.11.2021: impresa comune Shift2Rail) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0279/2022- 2022/2133(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Ryszard Czarnecki (A9-0090/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'impresa comune "Tecnologie digitali fondamentali" (prima del 30.11.2021 impresa comune ECSEL) per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0273/2022- 2022/2127(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Ryszard Czarnecki (A9-0082/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'impresa comune per il calcolo ad alte prestazioni europeo per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0274/2022- 2022/2128(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Ryszard Czarnecki (A9-0089/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'ottavo, nono, decimo e undicesimo Fondo europeo di sviluppo per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0321 - C9-0281/2022- 2022/2135(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: José Manuel Fernandes (A9-0114/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio delle agenzie dell'Unione europea per l'esercizio 2021: prestazioni, gestione finanziaria e controllo [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0280/2022- 2022/2134(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Olivier Chastel (A9-0144/2023)

- Relazione sul discarico per l'esecuzione del bilancio dell'Autorità europea del lavoro per l'esercizio 2021 [COM(2022)0323 - C9-0254/2022- 2022/2108(DEC)] - Commissione per il controllo dei bilanci. Relatore: Alin Mituța (A9-0117/2023)

  Olivier Chastel, rapporteur. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Président de la Cour des comptes, très chers collègues, demain, le Parlement se prononcera donc en plénière pour accorder ou non la décharge pour 2021 à 55 institutions européennes. C’est évidemment tous les ans un acte politique majeur que le Parlement réalise, en lien avec la Cour des comptes, dont je veux encore une fois saluer le travail et la rigueur. Ces votes nous permettront donc de valider la gestion des fonds, la transparence, mais aussi de sanctionner les abus, les politiques inefficaces et le mauvais usage de l’argent public.

Cette année, pour la décharge de la Commission, nous avons inauguré un nouveau type de démarche en deux parties: la première, consacrée au cadre budgétaire classique, et la seconde à la facilité pour la reprise et la résilience. Et je veux saluer et remercier nos deux rapporteurs pour leur efficace travail en la matière.

Comme j’ai eu l’occasion déjà de le dire, j’ai un certain nombre d’inquiétudes concernant l’exécution du budget de l’Union. Un taux d’erreur qui reste très significatif dans les domaines de la compétitivité, de la cohésion, mais aussi pour les dépenses à hauts risques. Un reste à liquider toujours plus élevé, et la nécessité de respecter l’état de droit si on veut bénéficier des fonds européens, mais aussi la capacité d’absorption des États qui reste problématique, ainsi qu’un retard dans la digitalisation des procédures d’audit et de contrôle.

Oui, nous devons généraliser l’utilisation du «data mining» et systématiser le recours aux nouvelles technologies pour organiser les contrôles, développer une base de données reprenant tous les bénéficiaires des fonds européens afin de mieux lutter contre la fraude. En ce qui concerne la FRR, cet outil a été mis en place pour répondre de manière urgente à la crise économique post-Covid que nous avons traversée. Il est loin d’être parfait, on le sait, mais il a le mérite d’exister, de fonctionner. De meilleurs contrôles sur les projets, en ce compris sur les jalons et leurs performances économiques doivent être envisagés. Les recommandations politiques faites dans la décharge permettront de l’améliorer lors de son éventuelle révision en 2024.

Nous ne pourrons être pleinement efficaces qu’avec des comptes en ordre et une gestion optimale des fonds. Chaque euro doit être utilisé de manière performante et efficace dans des projets porteurs, des politiques ayant de vrais effets importants. De nos actions dépendront donc notre crédibilité, mais aussi celle du projet européen. Pour conclure, je souhaiterais évoquer la décharge des 33 agences, puisque Renew était le rapporteur cette année, et je veux d’abord remercier les agences pour leur engagement dans le processus de la décharge, et leur transparence vis-à-vis des demandes de la commission du contrôle budgétaire.

Nous avons mis en avant un certain nombre de priorités pour nos agences. Une meilleure politique de ressources humaines comme l’équilibre des genres, l’équilibre vie privée, professionnelle, l’équilibre géographique, mais aussi la prévention, la gestion des conflits d’intérêts, l’importance de la transparence, la lutte contre la corruption, les règles de marchés publics claires, la cyberprotection, le développement des meilleures pratiques, et enfin des synergies entre les agences elles-mêmes. Le rôle des agences est essentiel à l’implémentation des politiques européennes, et je suis heureux que cette année nous recommandions d’accorder la décharge à toutes les agences.

  Ramona Strugariu, rapporteur. – Madam President, our European decentralised agencies are an essential part of the European framework for justice and home affairs. Whether we talk about police training, judicial or police cooperation, support for asylum, border and coast guards, protection of fundamental rights, management of large—scale IT projects or the fight against drug trafficking, their results stand proof of the added value that working together brings to our lives as European citizens.

In spite of the pandemic still affecting their work in 2021, the European justice and home affairs agencies have shown great adaptability and resilience, ensuring continuity of operations and in many cases surpassing their initial goals: eu-LISA maintained the availability of its systems in over 99% of the time, the Fundamental Rights Agency surpassed its targets for delivered publications, while CEPOL successfully moved some of its activities online, engaging even more people in its trainings.

Our agencies must set an example of transparency, accountability, responsibility and good governance. While we continue to ask our agencies to optimise their work, we also need to provide them with the adequate funding and human resources that they need. Such resources should not be allocated only to the goal of implementing their operational mandate, but also great attention should be paid to how we allocate resources on the administrative side.

Procurement still represents the area that generates the largest volume of irregularities. Agencies need good procurement officers hired on the appropriate grade, reflecting their responsibilities.

Now about a few sensitive issues. Frontex, the largest of the EU decentralised agencies, which is unique in its mandate as to the operations of its standing corps. The agency has been going through a very difficult period caused by serious mismanagement at its very top last year. The report published by OLAF concerning the managerial activity of the previous executive director increased the shock wave initially created by journalists’ reports of violations of human rights and mismanagement in the agency.

Nevertheless, after its resignation, its valuable and consistent presence mattered a lot in support during the war at our borders, and I would like to commend that. Frontex has now a new executive director who has a lot to deliver. The mandate of the agency is clear and sets out a strong framework to be used for the protection of our external borders. We emphasised this when we gave him our support and we shall offer this support towards the clean implementation of this mandate.

The new director has a task to continue the good work of the interim management to fundamentally challenge and change the previous organisational culture in the agency, to respect and show commitment to upholding fundamental rights and to fully regain citizens’ trust in the agency. This will take time, but it is worth a fresh start.

As for the EUAA, our asylum support agency, we keep a close eye on the developments concerning the OLAF investigation and shall analyse its results once it becomes available.

All recruitment, especially that in case of senior staff, must be conducted with utmost responsibility and in full compliance with EU rules. Through the discharge reports that I am rapporteur for in this cycle, the aim was to acknowledge effort and good results while also clearly stating areas of improvement. We need to further strengthen our coordinated European response to the main challenges we are faced with.

Our agencies, together with the other institutions, are our business card for Europe. Pandemic, war, economic hardship, energy crisis, climate emergency – we are stronger if we can face them all better and united. Long live European Union.

  Alin Mituța, Raportor. – Doamna președintă, dragi colegi, în primul rând, mă bucur că avem această dezbatere despre cum performează instituțiile europene chiar de Ziua Europei și cred că ar trebui să începem prin a spune că, în general, instituțiile noastre funcționează bine, așa cum reiese din majoritatea rapoartelor pe care le discutăm astăzi. Uniunea Europeană livrează rezultate, livrează pace și livrează bunăstare și oferă în continuare speranța și visul european la care aspiră țări ca Ucraina sau ca Republica Moldova.

Cred că este datoria noastră să spunem astăzi „Mulțumim, Europa, și mulțumim tuturor celor care cred și lucrează zi de zi pentru Uniunea Europeană!”. Tot astăzi trebuie să spunem clar și răspicat că proiectul european trebuie întărit. Europa este țapul ispășitor al celor incapabili să-și asume propriile greșeli, Europa este ținta preferată a extremiștilor și a populiștilor și Europa este de multe ori subiectul principal al știrilor false.

Cei care ținem la Europa trebuie să fim mult mai vocali și să spunem astăzi mai mult decât oricând că Europa este viitorul și că Europa trebuie să fie pregătită pentru viitor. Trebuie să democratizăm Uniunea, oferind drept de inițiativă legislativă acestui Parlament. Trebuie să renunțăm la unanimitatea din Consiliu, care duce la confiscarea deciziilor de către populiști. Trebuie să dăm curs vocii cetățenilor pe care i-am auzit în Conferința pentru viitorul Europei: competențe în sănătate, mai multă democrație participativă sunt doar câteva dintre cerințele lor cheie. Nu în ultimul rând, trebuie să pornim o convenție de modificare a tratatelor care să adapteze Uniunea la transformările prin care trecem. Mulțumesc și la mulți ani, Europa!

  Ilana Cicurel, rapporteure. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, bonne fête de l’Europe à toutes et tous. Je voulais ici tout d’abord réaffirmer l’attachement profond de mon groupe, Renew Europe, au financement par la Commission des organisations non gouvernementales. Si nous sommes si attachés à ce financement, c’est que, vous le savez, nous sommes très engagés dans la Conférence sur l’avenir de l’Europe qui doit pour nous devenir une nouvelle manière d’écrire les politiques européennes. Main dans la main avec les citoyens, main dans la main avec les organisations non gouvernementales qui en sont les porte-voix.

Mais c’est précisément parce que nous sommes tellement attachés à ce financement des organisations non gouvernementales qui travaillent pour faire prévaloir les valeurs qui nous rassemblent, que nous demandons aujourd’hui à la Commission une plus grande transparence et une plus grande vigilance dans l’examen des demandes en amont de l’attribution des fonds. Car nous voulons nous assurer précisément que ces fonds ne soient pas captés par des organisations non gouvernementales qui, sous couvert de défendre nos valeurs, en réalité les affaibliraient.

Je pense à l’égalité entre les femmes et les hommes. Je pense aussi à la liberté de conscience qui est le fondement de notre pacte européen, qui est reconnue par l’article neuf de la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme, et qui permet à tout citoyen européen de croire ou de ne pas croire, de ne plus croire, de changer de religion, de pratiquer la religion comme il ou elle l’entend. Et nous devons donc nous assurer que tout homme, toute femme qui rejoindrait le sol européen, pour fuir parfois précisément des pressions dans son pays d’origine qui ne le laissait pas librement pratiquer sa religion, puisse jouir de cette liberté d’expression.

Or, certaines organisations non gouvernementales ne s’inscrivent pas dans ce respect de la liberté d’expression, et nous devons avoir le courage de reconnaître que toute organisation non gouvernementale qui s’inscrirait dans une forme d’intégrisme religieux n’aurait pas une légitimité à toucher des fonds européens. Nous le devons en réalité à toutes ces femmes et ces hommes qui viennent vers le sol européen comme une terre de liberté.

Je pense en particulier, bien sûr, à nos sœurs d’Iran qui aujourd’hui subissent le joug d’un régime qui impose le port du voile. Comment pourrait-on imaginer que des jeunes femmes ou des femmes moins âgées qui rejoignent le sol européen puissent, d’une manière ou d’une autre subir ce genre de pression? Cette pression, elle ne viendra pas, bien sûr, de l’État, mais elle viendrait d’organisations, de composants de la société civile, qui s’inscrivent dans l’islamisme, par exemple, et qui ne respectent pas cette liberté de conscience qui est pour nous fondamentale.

Et quand je dis ça, je suis animée par ma volonté de protéger d’abord et avant tout nos concitoyens qui sont de culture ou de religion musulmane, et qui peuvent subir ici ou là dans nos territoires, ces pressions qui sont pour moi insupportables parce qu’elles sont contraires à nos valeurs fondamentales. Donc voilà ce que je voulais vous dire ici, en réaffirmant, comme je l’ai fait en commençant, notre attachement à toutes les organisations non gouvernementales qui travaillent pour la promotion des valeurs qui nous sont chères. Et c’est pour moi important et émouvant de le signifier aujourd’hui devant vous en cette Journée de l’Europe.

  Gilles Boyer, rapporteur. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, Monsieur le Président de la Cour des comptes européenne, chaque année, l’octroi des décharges n’est pas, contrairement à ce que l’on pourrait croire, un sujet purement technique. C’est au contraire un sujet éminemment politique. Les citoyens européens sont en droit d’attendre de nous la vérification, la certification de la bonne gestion ou non du budget de l’Union. Et cette évaluation n’est pas qu’une simple étude comptable. Vous savez que notre commission du contrôle budgétaire, avec l’aide de la Cour des comptes, y œuvre avec la plus grande rigueur et la plus grande vigilance.

Alors, chaque année, j’ai deux regrets, toujours les mêmes. Le premier, c’est que notre débat ait lieu 18 mois après la clôture de l’exercice concerné, en l’occurrence l’exercice 2021. Je pense que nous pourrions tous collectivement tenter d’aller plus rapidement pour coller davantage à l’actualité. Et je regrette aussi, c’est mon deuxième regret, que l’essentiel de notre énergie lors de cette plénière soit consacré à l’examen d’amendements qui n’ont précisément rien à voir avec l’exercice 2021, mais qui sont des amendements qui ont pour objectif de tenter de modifier nos règles de fonctionnement dans une procédure qui ne s’y prête pas.

Néanmoins, pour ce qui est de la décharge de notre Parlement, pour l’exercice 2021, nous avons mis un triste focus sur les questions d’éthique et de transparence à la lumière du Qatargate et des dérives qui ont pu se produire au sein même de notre Parlement, ce que, évidemment, nous regrettons et condamnons avec la plus grande fermeté. Nous nous félicitons d’avoir su réagir avec détermination, avec force, avec rapidité, tout en étant conscients qu’aucune procédure, aucun formulaire nouveau n’empêchera un corrompu de l’être.

Les propositions de notre Présidente Metsola, adoptées en Conférence des présidents et au sein de notre Bureau, sont actuellement à l’ordre du jour des différentes commissions et comités chargés de leur mise en œuvre. Certaines mesures sont d’ailleurs déjà instaurées, par exemple la période de carence de six mois pour les anciens membres, ainsi que la révision des conditions d’accès des anciens membres et des représentants d’intérêts au Parlement européen. Nous devons aller plus loin.

Les représentants d’intérêts doivent impérativement, nous le rappelons, être soumis aux mêmes règles et aux mêmes exigences de transparence, quelles qu’elles soient, tous ceux qui, d’une certaine manière, souhaitent exercer une influence sur nos débats, influence qui est légitime, à condition que nous sachions collectivement à qui nous avons à faire. Et les organisations non gouvernementales sont concernées au même titre que les autres entités, les entreprises privées notamment.

Enfin, mes chers collègues, nous appelons une fois encore la Commission à nous soumettre le plus rapidement possible une proposition ambitieuse et à la hauteur des enjeux pour la création d’un organe d’éthique européen institutionnel indépendant. Vous savez que notre Parlement a adopté cette position il y a maintenant 18 mois. L’actualité le rend plus urgent encore et nous souhaitons vivement que cet organe puisse être établi et opérationnel d’ici à la fin de notre mandature.

  Ryszard Czarnecki, sprawozdawca. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Półtora roku temu Rada Unii Europejskiej zatwierdziła rozporządzenie w sprawie utworzenia dziewięciu wspólnych przedsięwzięć w ramach programu „Horyzont Europa”. To ma sens, ponieważ Unia wspólnie z państwami członkowskimi, z sektorem prywatnym ma prowadzić badania naukowe, innowacje w ramach tych europejskich partnerstw. Ważny jest zakres horyzontalny: koniec roku 2031, za osiem lat, a także budżet – 10 mld euro do roku 2027. Oczywiście budżet unijny plus podobna kwota od państw członkowskich.

To następujące dziewięć przedsięwzięć: Wspólne Przedsięwzięcie w celu Badań z zakresu Zarządzania Ruchem Lotniczym w Jednolitej Europejskiej Przestrzeni Powietrznej 3 (SESAR 3), a więc ruch lotniczy, Wspólne Przedsięwzięcie na rzecz Ekologicznego Lotnictwa, IHI, czyli Wspólne Przedsięwzięcie na rzecz Inicjatywy w dziedzinie Innowacji w Ochronie Zdrowia, Wspólne Przedsięwzięcie na rzecz Czystego Wodoru (Clean H2), Wspólne Przedsięwzięcie na rzecz Kluczowych Technologii Cyfrowych (KDT), Wspólne Przedsięwzięcie na rzecz Biotechnologicznej Europy Opartej na Obiegu Zamkniętym, Wspólne Europejskie Przedsięwzięcie Kolejowe (EURail), wreszcie Wspólne Przedsięwzięcie w dziedzinie Europejskich Obliczeń Wielkiej Skali (EuroHPC) i Europejskie Wspólne Przedsięwzięcie na rzecz Realizacji Projektu ITER i Rozwoju Energii Termojądrowej (F4E).

W tych sprawozdaniach została powtórzona opinia Trybunału Obrachunkowego w odniesieniu do zarówno pozytywnych wniosków, jak i pewnych uchybień, które zostały znalezione w czasie kontroli wewnętrznej.

Omówię poszczególne zagadnienia, które są zawarte w moich sprawozdaniach. A więc kwestia ITER i rozwoju energii termojądrowej. Pamiętamy strajk w listopadzie 2021 roku. Powodami było pogorszenie warunków pracy, niedociągnięcia na wyższym szczeblu kierowniczym, zaburzenia w procesie podejmowania decyzji, brak dialogu społecznego, problemy z przejrzystością i korzystanie na dużą skalę z pracowników zewnętrznych.

W odpowiedzi na tę sytuację wspólne przedsięwzięcie podjęło szereg działań mających na celu poprawę środowiska pracy i dobrostanu pracowników. Niepokojące jest to, że Rosja, która jest członkiem ITER, jest zobowiązana do dostarczenia do miejsca montażu ITER we Francji, w Cadarache, kilku komponentów na potrzeby projektów ITER, co stwarza ryzyko dalszych opóźnień i wzrostu kosztów projektów ITER.

Gdy chodzi o przedsięwzięcie na rzecz innowacji w ochronie zdrowia są problemy z audytem ex post. W jednym przypadku kontrolerzy wykryli błąd systemowy związany z kosztami osobowymi, który wynikał z wykorzystania nieprawidłowych stawek godzinowych.

I wreszcie ostatnie – wspólne przedsięwzięcie w sprawie obliczeń wielkiej skali. Dwie kwestie: wkład członków prywatnych w kwocie 420 mln euro nie zostanie osiągnięty do końca realizacji projektu finansowanego z dotacji. A po drugie, wspólne przedsięwzięcie nie posiada również wiarygodnych procedur poświadczania i zatwierdzania wkładów niepieniężnych. Jest jedynym wspólnym przedsięwzięciem, które nie posiada strategicznego planu realizacji w celu uzyskania wkładu innych członków.

  Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, sprawozdawca. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! W dniu 15 listopada 2022 roku Trybunał Obrachunkowy opublikował swoje specjalne sprawozdanie roczne dotyczące wspólnych przedsięwzięć w formie jednego skonsolidowanego sprawozdania dotyczącego wszystkich wspólnych przedsięwzięć. Trybunał zatwierdził sprawozdanie finansowe za 2021 rok wszystkich wspólnych przedsięwzięć Unii Europejskiej i potwierdził pozytywne wyniki zgłoszone w poprzednich latach. Powtarzam opinię Europejskiego Trybunału Obrachunkowego dotyczącą pozytywnych wyników i uchybień w kontroli wewnętrznej: w trakcie pracy nad sprawozdaniami napotkaliśmy między innymi problemy związane z brakiem jasnych przepisów dotyczących składek na unijny system emerytalny, dużą rotacją personelu oraz brakiem rzetelnych procedur poświadczenia i zatwierdzania wkładów niepieniężnych na rzecz niektórych wspólnych przedsięwzięć.

Sprawozdania opierają się na następującym zestawie dokumentów: sprawozdanie roczne 2021 dotyczące wspólnych przedsięwzięć Unii Europejskiej za rok budżetowy 2021, Europejski Trybunał Obrachunkowy, sprawozdanie indywidualne odnośnie do wspólnych przedsięwzięć z zarządzania budżetem i finansami, indywidualne roczne sprawozdania z działalności wspólnych przedsięwzięć czy indywidualne roczne sprawozdanie finansowe wspólnych przedsięwzięć. Chciałbym omówić teraz Wspólne Przedsięwzięcie na rzecz Biotechnologicznej Europy Opartej na Obiegu Zamkniętym (do 30 listopada 2021 r. Wspólne Przedsięwzięcie na rzecz Bioprzemysłu) za rok budżetowy 2021. W ramach programu „Horyzont 2020” wskaźnik wykonania płatności wyniósł 71%, co było spowodowane opóźnieniami w realizacji projektów z powodu pandemii COVID–19.

W 2021 roku brakowało środków na zobowiązania operacyjne, ponieważ zaproszenie do składania wniosków zamknięto już w 2020 roku. Uproszczenia wprowadzone w programie „Horyzont 2020” oraz doświadczenie beneficjentów pozytywnie wpłynęły na redukcję błędów. Niemniej jednak podczas procedury udzielania absolutorium za rok 2020 zwrócono uwagę na utrzymujące się błędy systemowe w kosztach osobowych deklarowanych przez beneficjentów. Dlatego wspólne przedsięwzięcie nadal pracuje nad poprawą swoich strategii kontroli wydatków i uczestniczy we wspólnych działaniach, aby poprawić wykorzystanie funduszy Unii Europejskiej, szczególnie dla określonych kategorii beneficjentów w ramach zarządzania programem „Horyzont 2020” i „Horyzont Europa”.

Pod koniec roku 2021 w rejestrze ryzyka zostało wskazanych i opisanych łącznie 11 rodzajów ryzyka o różnym stopniu istotności, konwergencji i współzależności. Analiza przeprowadzona w 2021 roku potwierdziła tendencje z poprzednich lat, a dzięki skuteczności kontroli wewnętrznych oraz doświadczeniu z działań głównych, takich jak planowanie dotacji oraz procedury i systemy w programie „Horyzont 2020”, niektóre dodatkowe ryzyka zostały usunięte lub ograniczone. W związku z uwagami dotyczącymi procedury udzielenia absolutorium za 2020 rok w rocznym sprawozdaniu z działalności za 2021 rok wspólne przedsięwzięcie informuje organ udzielający absolutorium o zarządzaniu ryzykiem nadużyć finansowych. Potwierdza również, że w dalszym ciągu wdrażało zalecenia i informowało OLAF o skutecznym realizowaniu zaleceń z poprzednich lat.

Teraz przedstawię Wspólne Przedsięwzięcie na rzecz Ekologicznego Lotnictwa (do 30 listopada 2021 roku Wspólne Przedsięwzięcie „Czyste Niebo”) za rok budżetowy 2021. Przede wszystkim został wykryty i obliczony błąd systemowy, który polegał na niepoprawnym naliczaniu stawek godzinowych w przypadku kosztów osobowych. Ponadto w roku 2021 ważne dokumenty, takie jak sprawozdania o ocenie zamówień, procedur rekrutacyjnych oraz decyzji o przyznawaniu zamówień i umów o pracę, zostały zatwierdzone poprzez wklejenie obrazka podpisu właściwego urzędnika do dokumentu w programie Word, a następnie przekształcenie pliku w format PDF. Taka praktyka wiąże się z ryzykiem prawnym, gdyż osoba, która została odrzucona w procesie rekrutacyjnym, może kwestionować prawidłowość dokumentów z wynikami oceny. Wspólne przedsięwzięcie przeprowadziło analizę ryzyka i ustanowiło specjalną próbę kontroli ex post, aby objąć nią część projektów zawartych w umowie o dotację dla partnerów wspólnego przedsięwzięcia, co wskazuje na pewne narażenie na ograniczenie związane z pandemią COVID–19 opisane przez Trybunał Obrachunkowy, takie jak niedociągnięcia finansowe, opóźnienie operacyjne oraz wysokie koszty osobowe w porównaniu ze średnią.

  José Manuel Fernandes, Relator. – Senhora Presidente, Caras e Caros Colegas, um cumprimento ao Senhor Comissário, cumprimento também ao Conselho.

A União Europeia é o maior doador mundial, é também quem mais ajuda ao desenvolvimento. No entanto, não há esta perceção. É necessário dar visibilidade àquilo que a União Europeia faz em termos de ajuda humanitária, em termos de ajuda ao desenvolvimento. É uma questão de justiça, mas é também para termos uma União Europeia geopolítica, como nós almejamos.

O Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento era intergovernamental. A União Europeia tinha este fundo fora do orçamento da União, o Parlamento dava, no entanto, a quitação. E essa é uma das razões pelas quais, em 2021, só fizemos pagamentos com o Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento e não houve nenhuma autorização.

A partir de 2021, com o novo quadro financeiro plurianual, – felizmente e sempre o defendemos – o Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento passou a estar integrado no Quadro Financeiro Plurianual.

A África é uma das mais beneficiadas deste fundo. É o maior destinatário do apoio orçamental da União Europeia, seguida da vizinhança europeia, da Ásia e da América Latina. O Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento e o Instrumento de Vizinhança, de Cooperação para o Desenvolvimento e de Cooperação Internacional, que tem cerca de 80 mil milhões de euros e onde este fundo está integrado, devem estar ligados a uma estratégia para a África. Devem estar ligados também a uma estratégia para a América Latina. E, neste domínio, o acordo do Mercosul é um acordo que seria muito importante.

O Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento e o Instrumento de Vizinhança, de Cooperação para o Desenvolvimento e de Cooperação Internacional devem também procurar defender valores como a democracia, a paz, a proteção da vida e da dignidade humana, a liberdade, o Estado de direito. No entanto, no relacionamento com estes países, nós devemos usar como palavra—chave a palavra cooperação. Não vamos dar lições a ninguém. Vamos procurar cooperar.

Para conseguirmos uma boa cooperação, deveríamos também e devemos exigir planeamento. Sou daqueles que entende, para o futuro, que deveríamos pedir aos países planos plurianuais, planos de investimento que correspondessem ao Quadro Financeiro Plurianual 2021—2027 para procurarmos sinergias, projetos que deveriam ser transfronteiriços, projetos que poderiam e deveriam ser também importantes para a União Europeia e alinhados com os objetivos das alterações climáticas e do digital.

A educação é fundamental, a formação profissional, a melhoria das competências. Nós temos que dar qualidade de vida aos jovens daquele espaço e, por isso, a aposta na educação é absolutamente essencial.

Com a atração de pequenas e médias empresas, com investimento privado, nós conseguiremos também o objetivo de combater a pobreza. E, daí e neste sentido, era essencial e importante que as subvenções se pudessem ligar também aos empréstimos, que o Fundo Europeu para Desenvolvimento Sustentável pudesse estar a trabalhar em conjunto com o Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento para conseguirmos a articulação entre empréstimos e subvenções, de forma a podermos ter projetos onde os privados também entrem, de forma a conseguirmos criar riqueza, para diminuirmos a pobreza que, infelizmente, existe no nosso planeta. São mais de 1200 milhões de pessoas que vivem numa situação de extrema pobreza e os nossos fundos também têm este objetivo: o de reduzir a pobreza à escala global.

  Jessika Roswall, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, honourable Members, Commissioner, President of the European Court of Auditors, I am glad to have the possibility to represent the Council in this important debate on the implementation of the Budget 2021. Let me begin by thanking you all for your comprehensive work on this discharge and also for your first intervention here today.

As you know, on March 14th, the Council adopted its recommendation that discharge be given to the Commission. It was not a decision taken lightly. Member States’ representatives had quite similar concerns to those expressed in the European Parliament’s report. As one can read in the recommendation, the Council was concerned that for the third year in a row, the Court of Auditors opinion on expenditure was unfavourable. Also, the overall error continues to be above the materiality threshold.

However, a clear majority of the Member States still consider it appropriate to grant discharge to the Commission for 2021, thus recognising the efforts of the management and control authorities, both at the Commission and the Member States level.

The Council stresses the achieved reduction in error rates and ensure the effective management of EU funds. We need simpler, more transparent and more predictable legislation and implementation measures should remain a top priority.

However, this should not mean lowering the standards needed for accountability. Also, the assessment of the EU budget’s performance remains a priority because it is measured on the true value delivered by the EU and its citizens.

Last but not least, what makes this year’s annual report special is the first audit of the expenditure related to the Recovery and Resilience Facility. This is just a taste of things to come as it covers the only RRF payment made in 2021. We are looking forward to the reporting from the Court.

Let me end my intervention by stressing that the Council attaches great importance to this discharge exercise. It is important that the EU funds are used in accurate way with the rules that the expenditure respects the principle of sound financial management. And as I said before, that the EU citizens know that the EU money makes a difference. Thank you so very much for the attention. I am looking forward to the following debate.

  Johannes Hahn, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, dear President Murphy, dear Minister, dear Jan Gregor, honourable Members, first, I would like to thank for this perfect timing having a plenary debate on the discharge 21 at the Europe Day 23. Second, I would like to thank, on behalf of the Commission, the European Parliament for the highly valuable and constructive exchanges throughout this discharge procedure, and indeed it was a procedure. I would like to thank, in particular the Committee on Budgetary Control and the discharge rapporteurs Madam Hohlmeier and Mr Lenaers for preparing the discharge report.

2021 was a remarkable year for the Union budget. The European Funds played a critical role to help citizens, companies, regions and Member States to overcome the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences, in this, also, the European budget is only 1% of the European GDP. In 2021, we started borrowing operations to finance NextGenerationEU, to create a claim and with record demand.

Major progress was also made in 2021 in setting up the Recovery and Resilience Facility. Despite the very challenging environment and the flexibility introduced in the management of some programmes, the Commission was able to deliver on its policy objectives and respond to multiple challenges.

In this context, let me briefly outline the Commission’s actions on some of the key political priorities of the discharge report. 2021 was, as I said, that the first year of implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility for the Member States and the Commission. A robust control framework was set up to protect the Union’s financial interests. It was tailored to the unique nature of the facility as a performance-based instrument. We will take adequate actions to improve the control systems where necessary and to increase transparency on beneficiaries of the funds in line with the regulatory framework and the recent agreement reached on REPowerEU.

Moving on to the rule of law situation in the Member States, the Commission continues to monitor information from all relevant sources to identify possible relevant breaches of the principles of the rule of law. The ongoing conditionality procedure against Hungary shows that the Commission is assuming its responsibilities. Our objective with the general regime of conditionality is that the Union budget is no longer at risk in cases when breaches of the rule of law principles affect or risk affecting the Union’s financial interests. We hope to achieve this as soon as possible through adequate reforms in Hungary.

Turning now to the digitalisation of systems for monitoring, reporting and the audit of European Union funding. As you know, the Commission has proposed in the revision of the Financial Regulation to improve the interoperability of data on recipients and beneficial owners of companies benefiting from Union funding. If adopted by the co-legislators, this should contribute to more transparency on recipients and increase the efficiency and quality of our controls and audits because if you have it tools in place, the traceability of actions is, as you know, much better and more effective and efficient.

Furthermore, the Commission has proposed to extend the scope of the early detection and exclusion system to funds under shared management and under the Recovery and Resilience Facility.

Finally, I would also like to highlight our actions to mainstream horizontal priorities such climate, biodiversity or gender equality in the Union budget. The Commission attaches utmost importance to this work. Important progress was been has been achieved fully in line with and even exceeding the timelines and milestones agreed by the co-legislators in the interinstitutional agreement.

Ladies and gentlemen, to conclude, I would like to emphasise that the Commission upholds the highest standards of transparency and accountability. The Commission remains committed to ensuring that the European Union budget and NextGenerationEU are spent in line with the applicable rules and deliver results on the ground.

  Tony Murphy, President of the Court of Auditors. – Madam President, honourable Members, Minister, Commissioner Hahn, it’s an honour and a pleasure to be here today on this special day. Every year on 9 May, we celebrate Europe Day and while the creation of the EU has provided peace and unity for its citizens for a long time, it’s almost unimaginable that the war of aggression in Ukraine continues today on our continent.

In March of this year, my colleague Marek Opiola represented the European Court of Auditors as a member of a delegation that visited the Ukraine, together with Commissioner Hahn and Ville Itälä, the Director-General of OLAF. They met with representatives of the Ukrainian parliament, the government, as well as the Ukrainian Supreme Audit Office. The purpose of the visit was aimed at boosting fraud prevention and budgetary protection, but fundamentally to show our continued solidarity with Ukraine.

During the visit, we reassured colleagues of our continued efforts to support them through various actions, including the current secondment of five Ukrainian auditors to the European Court from the Ukrainian Supreme Audit Office.

The annual report is the court’s main product, and it contributes to combating challenges to the EU budget and plays an important role in improving accountability across EU policy areas. It covers the reliability of the Commission accounts and also the legality and regularity of EU revenue and expenditure.

As we have previously presented the main findings of this report at the plenary session in October last year, today I would just like to give you a very brief overview of our key messages and offer you a forward-looking perspective on the EU budget landscape.

Today, I am supported by my colleague, Jan Gregor, who was the Court’s Member for the Annual Report for 2022 onwards. So, as in previous years for the EU accounts, we have adopted a clean opinion. For revenue, as for previous years, we concluded that the overall error was not material. This time for the first time – and I think it was alluded to by the Minister earlier – we had two separate opinions, one on MFF and one on the RRF spending.

So, for EU budget spending, we found that the overall level of irregularities increased significantly from last year, reaching 3 % in 2021, and we estimated that it is 4.7 % for high-risk spending, which makes up a clear majority of 63 % of our audit population. So, given the widespread nature of the problems that we uncovered – basically, the pervasiveness of the errors – we gave an adverse opinion for the third year in a row.

If we zoom in for a moment, we estimate that the level of error in ‘Cohesion’ is 3.6 %, and our upcoming 2022 annual report will include for the first time the impact of cohesion payments made to Member States during the COVID-19 period.

The RRF represents the EU’s main financial response to the challenge of the COVID-19 pandemic. Its spending was covered by our statement of assurance for the first time. As you know, the fundamental difference between budget spending under MFF and the RRF is that in the latter the EU makes payments to Member States after it assesses that they have fulfilled the objectives – the milestones and targets – agreed up front in their national recovery plans.

Unlike for other EU funding programmes, investment projects’ compliance with EU and national rules is not a condition for payment under the RRF. We have looked at the RRF at the early stages in its life cycle. For 2021, there was only one payment under the facility, being EUR 11.5 billion to Spain for 52 reform milestones, and we were able to examine this payment in full.

We concluded that overall the impact of the one milestone, which was not satisfactorily fulfilled, was not material so we were able to give a clean opinion based on the assessment of the Commission, but with the caveat that the respect of national and EU rules still had to be checked later on. So as I said, this continues to be a key element of our work and probably will be for the next months and years.

In March of this year, we published a special report on the Commission’s control system for the RRF, which built on the work of our 2021 annual report. We found that the Commission has limited verified information as to whether RRF projects comply with EU and national rules. This is of particular concern for us, as in our 2021 annual report, we provide an error rate of 4.1 % in ‘Cohesion’, which funds similar projects as the investment element of the RRF. We therefore highlight and bring to the attention of the discharge authorities an assurance and accountability gap in protecting the EU’s financial interests.

In terms of the facility itself, to date, EUR 153 billion has been paid out to Member States, a total of EUR 106 billion in grants and EUR 47 billion in loans, of which almost EUR 57 billion represents pre-financing. So while we are almost halfway through the eligibility period for projects under the facility, this represents just around one-fifth of the overall funds available for disbursement.

Furthermore, to date, five Member States have yet to receive any payment and another six Member States have only received pre-financing.

We should, however, be mindful of the capacity of Member States and their ability to spend EU financial resources efficiently and effectively. In this context, we note that EUR 127 billion from the Structural Funds for the period 2014–2020 are still to be used and absorption for the 2021–2027 budget is yet to start in a meaningful way.

Looking forward, I can inform you that our annual report for 2022 will have somewhat of a different face to it. Firstly, again as the Minister mentioned, it will provide a greater overview of the RRF as we have 13 payments for EUR 47 billion which have been made to 11 Member States in 2022 in our sample. In addition, as we move from the close of one programming period to the beginning of the next, we will have a clearer picture about how the 2014–2020 MFF has performed.

So, as we come to the end of this onerous but very important discharge procedure, I look forward to the continued excellent cooperation between the ECA and the Budgetary Control Committee and the various rapporteurs and also our respectful working relationship with the European Commission.

  Carina Ohlsson, föredragande av yttrande från AFET-utskottet. – Fru talman! Tyvärr är demokratin på tillbakagång i världen. De senaste 32 årens demokratiska framsteg är utraderade enligt flera stora institutioner som genomför globala demokratimätningar. När demokratin backar skapas ett vakuum som fylls av populism och extremism. När demokratin minskar ökar också motståndet mot jämställdhet. Inskränkningar mot kvinnors rättigheter sker först. Tidigare segrar går då förlorade, såsom trygg abort, tillgång till utbildning, eller förutsättningar för att ha en egen inkomst.

Vi vet att kvinnorörelsen är en avgörande kraft för fred, samtidigt utestängs kvinnor från fredsförhandlingar och utrikespolitiken, trots att kvinnor och barn drabbas hårdast av krig och konflikter. Borde inte det istället vara ett skäl för att stärka den kvinnliga representationen på alla nivåer? EU borde i alla relevanta sammanhang driva en feministisk utrikespolitik, en politik som arbetar för att stärka flickors och kvinnors rättigheter, representation och resurser. Det har varit, och kommer alltid att vara, en utav mina självklara prioriteringar.

Vi måste stoppa den tillbakagång för kvinnor och flickors rättigheter som sker just nu. Där spelar EU:s agerande en mycket avgörande roll. Jämställdhet är ett självklart mål i sig, men också en förutsättning för fred och demokrati.

  Romeo Franz, Verfasser der Stellungnahme des mitberatenden Ausschusses für Kultur und Bildung. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Das Erasmus+-Programm zusammen mit einigen anderen Programmen, welche den kulturellen Austausch fördern, sind für viele Menschen in der EU am bekanntesten. Es ist wichtig, dass diese Programme noch mehr Menschen erreichen und sich mehr auf die Themen Vielfalt und Inklusion fokussieren. Die EU muss alle Menschen mitnehmen, insbesondere marginalisierte Gruppen und unsere Jugend. Doch mit der viel zu kurzfristigen Ankündigung des Jahres der Jugend konnte man nur wenig auf die Beine stellen. Deswegen sollte die Kommission aus diesen Fehlern lernen und auch weiterhin mehr in die europäische Jugend investieren.

  Saskia Bricmont, rapporteur pour avis de la commission des libertés civiles, de la justice et des affaires intérieures. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, cette année encore, la commission LIBE a rendu des avis pour les différents organes œuvrant dans le champ de la justice et des affaires intérieures. Les agences qui sont examinées dans le cadre de l’exercice budgétaire des décharges remplissent des missions clés dans différents domaines comme la sécurité, la migration, la protection des droits fondamentaux. Ces domaines ont évidemment des impacts importants sur la vie de nos concitoyens, notamment les plus vulnérables.

Donc, loin d’être un exercice technique, le processus de décharge budgétaire révèle une importance politique majeure dans le contrôle du bon usage de l’argent public européen. Le travail des agences et des organes européens se doit donc d’être exemplaire, de respecter les missions qui leur sont assignées ainsi que les valeurs de l’Union européenne. Notre rôle en tant que Parlement, colégislateur, est d’assurer un contrôle strict visant au meilleur fonctionnement dans le respect du droit.

Je ne peux donc que vous exhorter, chers collègues, à faire preuve de sérieux et d’exigence quand vous voterez le rapport sur l’agence Frontex. La rapporteure a mentionné les nombreux dysfonctionnements qui sont encore légion au sein de cette agence, malgré le changement de direction. C’est l’agence la plus dotée de l’Union européenne, avec un budget toujours en hausse, et les dysfonctionnements en matière de mauvaise gestion humaine et financière, mais aussi de non-respect des droits fondamentaux aux frontières, ne peuvent nous laisser indifférents.

  Monika Vana, rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality. – Madam President, Commission, Council, as rapporteur for FEMM Opinion on the discharge 2021 for the EU general budget, section three, I would like to thank the rapporteurs for including the concerns of the FEMM Committee into the resolution.

The application of gender mainstreaming in the EU budgetary procedure is still weak and there is a lack of gender equality spending targets and indicators in the Union’s programmes. We are far away from real gender budgeting, although we of course acknowledge the efforts of the Commission. We need concrete improvements of gender mainstreaming objectives and gender-disaggregated data if we want to achieve a gender equal budget. And still we need more means for the Daphne programme against gender-based violence.

Regarding the discharge 2021 of the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE), I strongly support the assessment to grant the Director of the EIGE the discharge and the explicit recommendation in our resolution to allocate more staff to the institute because EIGE plays a key role in the promotion of gender equality in the European Union.

  Petri Sarvamaa, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, dear Commissioner, Members, the most important thing I think has already been said about the importance of the Commission and RRF discharge, so I will concentrate on the agencies.

I am really hopeful that in the future we can further enhance the effectiveness of the discharge and make it an even more binding tool. This applies, of course, for all discharges. Ultimately, it always concerns the safeguarding of taxpayers’ money.

Regarding the discharge of EU agencies in 2021, the agencies have paid close attention to proper financial management, staff policies, prevention of conflicts of interest and improvement of transparency. The year 2021 was not an easy one for EU agencies due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It forced them to learn and adapt to a changed world. However, they did succeed well, which in my opinion demonstrates good resilience, which is truly needed in today’s world.

But in the future, we should continue to benefit from good practices such as investments made to facilitate digital work. As we have learned, new working methods can also bring savings to the EU budget and to the agencies. And in this regard, it is also crucial to continually improve the monitoring of agencies’ own efficiency with key performance indicators, the so-called KPIs, that are playing a very important role.

  Maria Grapini, în numele grupului S&D. – Doamna președintă, domnilor comisari, doamna ministră, dezbatem descărcarea de gestiune și trebuie să spun că sunt dezamăgită de forma finală a raportului privind descărcarea de gestiune a Comisiei. Vreau să mulțumesc Curții de Conturi pentru că întotdeauna a prezentat în Comisia CONT extrem de corect toate lucrurile care nu sunt bune și trebuie să le recunoaștem atunci când nu sunt bune. De ce sunt dezamăgită? Pentru că la negocierile făcute pentru compromisuri a fost foarte dificil să ajungem la un text care să fie cât mai aproape de realitate. Foarte mult subiectivism din partea PPE. Știți dublul limbaj: „criticăm Comisia, criticăm președinția Comisiei, dar când să trecem, hai să trecem”.

Din punctul meu de vedere, Comisia trebuia să rămână corigentă. Personal, am vrut o amânare a descărcării de gestiune, pentru că trebuie odată să fim fermi. Înțeleg că 2021 a fost un an complicat pentru toată lumea, dar lipsa de transparență și faptul că Președinta Comisiei nu a răspuns la niciuna din întrebările noastre, nu a venit la comisie legat de contractele de achiziție, a lăsat o impresie în toată Uniunea Europeană cu extrem, extrem de multă neîncredere în Comisie. De asemenea, nu a răspuns Ombudsmanului, iar Ombudsmanul a făcut un raport negativ. Și atunci, de ce trebuie să ne grăbim să facem descărcare de gestiune?

Sunt tristă că este așa și cred că nu trebuie să facem formal descărcările de gestiune și cred că trebuie să învățăm de aici. Comisia Europeană trebuie să înțeleagă că toate instrumentele și toate proiectele, programele, măsurile pe care le aduce... da, e bine să fim inovativi. Cheltuirea banilor publici trebuie să treacă sub controlul Curții de Conturi. Am spus asta și în Comisia CONT și o repet: banii nu sunt ai Comisiei Europene și trebuie să avem un control și noi, Parlamentul European, pentru că reprezentăm cetățenii și cetățenii se întreabă, din momentul în care a fost pandemia (în toate țările, nu numai în țara mea), cred că se întreabă cine a făcut contractele, de ce le-a făcut cu acele prețuri, de ce nu există transparență, de ce nu ni s-au dat contractele. De aceea, tristă spun că acest raport merita amânat.

Legat de Fondul de Dezvoltare European, am fost și aici raportoare din partea grupului meu și vreau să mulțumesc de data aceasta modului de colaborare și compromisurilor la care am ajuns. Evident că eu am pus accent aici pe dezvoltarea zonelor sărace, pe susținerea fermierilor mici, pentru că avem această sarcină principală să asigurăm coeziune în piața Uniunii Europene, în piața internă. Cu regret spun și închei cu asta: autoritatea este extrem de erodată dacă nu avem transparență și dacă nu avem comunicare. Autoritatea Comisiei este importantă pentru proiectul european. Nu putem să răspundem cetățenilor și atunci sigur că pierdem credibilitate.

  Daniel Freund, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Was haben Le Pen, Panzeri und Nigel Farage gemeinsam? Alle drei sind im sogenannten freiwilligen Pensionsfonds des Europäischen Parlaments. Da wurde mit quasi krimineller Energie in den 90er Jahren ein Pyramidenschema geschaffen: wenige Beitragsjahre, üppige Renten, das Ganze zusätzlich zu den bestehenden Ansprüchen aus den regulären Pensionen für Abgeordnete. Das Schlimme ist: Es wurde auch dann nicht geändert oder abgeschafft, als 2019 eine einheitliche EU-Pension eingeführt wurde, und diese Pension hat man dann noch nicht mal wenigstens verrechnet.

Wenn man sich jetzt die Liste der 900 Ehemaligen anschaut, die noch in diesem Fonds sind, dann ist das relativ ungemütlich. Da stehen, Herr Hahn, z. B. vier Ihrer aktuellen Kommissarskollegen, da stehen noch 21 Abgeordnete aus diesem Haus, eine Reihe britischer Lords und eben auch Farage, Le Pen und Panzeri. Und die Europäische Union, dieses Parlament soll jetzt also ausgerechnet ihren Feinden und denen, die die EU nicht schnell genug verlassen konnten, zu ihrer regulären Pension noch eine Luxussonderrente bezahlen.

Chère Madame Le Pen, vous avez cotisé pendant cinq ans, vous recevez pour cela plus de 1 400 euros par mois en plus de votre pension, et cela à vie. Pour votre père, c’est plus de 7 000 euros par mois en plus de sa pension. Il faut vraiment mesurer ces chiffres. La pension moyenne en France est de 1 272 euros. Pour cela, les Françaises et les Français ont travaillé toute leur vie. Et vous, Madame Le Pen, vous comptez sur une retraite complémentaire pour cinq ans de travail au Parlement européen, payé avec l’argent qui était prévu pour le bureau de circonscription. Votre auto-proclamation en tant qu’avocate des petites gens est une blague.

Eine Politikerin, die keine Gelegenheit auslässt, die Europäische Union anzugreifen, und deren Menschen, also Abgeordnete hier im Parlament, die EU kaputt machen wollen, wollen also jetzt, dass das Parlament mit 300 Millionen Euro der Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler diesen Fonds vor der Pleite bewahrt. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen, das dürfen wir nicht zulassen. Wir müssen dafür sorgen, dass jeder Einzelfall jetzt geprüft wird, und da, wo die Abgeordneten schon ausreichende öffentliche Pensionsansprüche haben, sollte kein weiterer Euro der Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler in diesen Pensionsfonds fließen.

  Cristian Terheş, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, dear colleagues, dear Commission, the European Parliament has, according to the Treaty of the European Union, the duty to exercise the budgetary control over all the EU institutions.

In the case of the European Commission’s discharge, we are asked to vote in blind because even to this date, after two years, nobody in the European Parliament has seen the full and unredacted versions of the contracts signed by Ursula von der Leyen with Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech. Here is how the contract with Moderna was disclosed to us, to the public and to the media.

(The speaker held up a collection of papers)

This is simply unacceptable!

The EU Court of Auditors reported that through these contracts, Ursula von der Leyen has committed to purchase 4.6 billion doses of injections for a total cost of EUR 71 billion. Ursula von der Leyen could have given EUR 150 for every person in the EU to help recover after the pandemic and it would have been more effective than purchasing worthless injections. Ursula von der Leyen knew from the beginning that these injections are ineffective since she committed to purchase over ten doses of injections for every person in the EU, while she claimed that, with one such injection, a person will receive immunity from COVID.

In any private company, a leading manager who signed such an abusive contract would have been fired effective immediately without seeing the full and unredacted versions of these contracts, no responsible MEP who cares about the people and their money can vote for the discharge of the European Commission. For this reason, I am asking all of you to vote against.

  Presidente. – Onorevole, le ricordo che mostrare immagini o documenti in Aula è contrario al regolamento.

  Joachim Kuhs, im Namen der ID-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar Hahn, sehr geehrter Herr Präsident Murphy, werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Heute erfüllen wir wie jedes Jahr eine unserer nobelsten Aufgaben: Wir debattieren über die haushalterische Entlastung der inzwischen über 50 Einrichtungen der EU für das Haushaltsjahr 2021.

Ist Ihnen übrigens schon einmal aufgefallen, dass wir jedes Jahr mehr Institutionen haben, für die wir diesen Entlastungsprozess durchführen müssen? Ich finde diese Entwicklung sehr bedenklich; aber das ist ja heute nicht das Thema.

Heute geht es um die Entlastung dieser Einrichtungen, und der Haushaltskontrollausschuss hat die Aufgabe, die Wirtschaftlichkeit und Sparsamkeit der Haushaltsführung sowie die ordnungsgemäße Erfüllung der Aufgaben dieser Einrichtungen zu prüfen und je nach Ergebnis die Entlastung zu empfehlen bzw. zu versagen. Vielen Dank an den Rechnungshof, dass er uns dabei unterstützt.

Wir diskutieren allerdings nicht darüber, ob diese Einrichtungen unsere jeweilige politische Agenda umgesetzt haben oder nicht. Zumindest sind wir im Haushaltskontrollausschuss der Auffassung, dass wir in diesem Verfahren keine politisch aufgeladenen Diskussionen über die Ziele der EU führen, sondern uns auf die retrospektive Haushaltskontrolle beschränken.

Noch vor zwei Jahren habe ich im damaligen Entlastungsverfahren diese Einsicht bei der Debatte über die Entlastung der Grenzschutzagentur Frontex schmerzlich vermisst. Offensichtlich haben Sie, werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen, dazugelernt, denn heute schlagen Sie die Entlastung von Frontex vor. Und ich kann zustimmen. Denn die von Frontex versuchen doch nur, ihre Arbeit zu machen. Dann sollten wir sie auch nicht dafür kritisieren und sanktionieren. Das gilt übrigens auch für andere Einrichtungen wie Rechnungshof und Ombudsmann. Nur weil die die Unstimmigkeiten bei der Impfstoffbeschaffung in Verbindung mit der Kommissionspräsidentin aufgedeckt haben, was mein Kollege gerade gesagt hat, das, was ja zu einem Verfahren bei der Europäischen Staatsanwaltschaft geführt hat, dürfen diese Einrichtungen nicht schärfer geprüft werden als andere, die mehr auf der politischen Linie liegen mögen.

Ich habe es in diesem Haus bereits gesagt, und ich wiederhole es gerne: Wenn wir den Rechnungshof und den Ombudsmann nicht hätten, wir müssten sie erfinden, denn wir brauchen diese Einrichtungen.

  Luke Ming Flanagan, on behalf of The Left Group. – Madam President, first off, I want to thank the Secretariat and The Left staff for all the work they’ve done on these files. I know it’s not easy, so thank you very much. I won’t be supporting discharge on the following institutions and agencies.

In relation to the Commission, the ECA issued again an adverse opinion to the Commission, which is parallel to the long-term negative evaluation of The Left group of the way the Commission implements and manages the EU budget. So I can’t support that.

In relation to the Council, as you know, the refusal of cooperation in the discharge procedure has led Parliament to refuse discharge to the Council for many years. The decision to postpone the discharge was unanimous in CONT. Numerous media outlets reported the increase in the budget of the President of the European Council, and in particular its travel budget, which exploded compared to its predecessors, showing a preference for expensive and polluting means of transport. My group has tabled an amendment on this, which I hope you’ll support.

In relation to the eu-LISA agency, because of the ECA’s qualified opinion based on several payments which were non-compliant, I can’t support the discharge.

In relation to the EASO, now the EUAA: because of serious claims of misconduct on recruitment by the agency’s new hierarchy, which led to the opening of an OLAF investigation.

On the IHI Joint Undertaking: because of recurrent governance and transparency issues.

In relation to F4E and ITER Joint Undertaking: because of regular concerns about delays and increase of costs in the ITER project, which points to serious problems in the governance of the joint undertakings.

Concerning Frontex – despite the big group being in favour of the discharge – I, along with my group, will continue our strong criticism of the agency, which, despite some changes, needs deep reform to tackle its structural reforms. It should be noted that one OLAF report was closed last year revealing serious misconduct and mismanagement taking place in 2021, exactly the financial year the discharge will be voted on. I cannot support discharge of this agency.

  Tamás Deutsch (NI). – Elnök Asszony! A tavalyi esztendő végén robbant ki a brüsszeli korrupció legsúlyosabb botránya. Az Európai Parlament baloldali alelnöke előzetes letartóztatásba került. Házkutatás az Európai Parlament irodáiban, több százezer eurónyi korrupciós pénz lefoglalása, további baloldali európai parlamenti képviselők mentelmi jogának a felfüggesztése, majd előzetes letartóztatásba helyezése. Európai parlamenti képviselők családtagjai eurótízezrekkel zsúfolt bőröndökkel szaladgáltak Brüsszel utcáin az őket letartóztatni akaró rendőrök elől. Majd utána az Európai Bizottság háza táján derültek ki újabb korrupciós ügyek. Különböző igazgatóságok munkatársai fogadtak el méregdrága repülőjegyeket éppen azoktól, akiket ellenőrizniük kellett.

Korrupció, korrupció és korrupció. 2021-ben történtek ezek az esetek. Jelenleg az asztalukon fekvő előterjesztések a 2021-es uniós gazdálkodásról szólnak. Egy árva szó nem szerepel ezekben a dokumentumokban a brüsszeli korrupcióról.

Tisztelt Hölgyeim és Uraim! Az Európai Parlament bolondnak nézi az európai polgárokat, elhallgatja és letagadja a brüsszeli korrupció felháborodást keltő eseteit. Ilyen előterjesztéseket jó érzéssel nem lehet támogatni.

  Siegfried Mureşan (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, I would like to say a few words on the discharge of the Recovery and Resilience Facility, which is part of the discharge of 2021. And it is for the first time that this happens, because in 2021, the largest package of economic support that we ever created at European Union level, entered into force. And because it is so large, you have to make sure that money is well spent, that the money really reaches the beneficiaries that it is intended for and that the expected results are being achieved.

The Recovery and Resilience Facility is a new element in terms of set-up, in terms of functioning, in terms of financing, and it’s performance-based and money is being paid based on the achievement of milestones and targets. This is why it is so important that adequate control mechanisms are being put in place.

It was following the pressure of the European Parliament that the Commission has finally put forward a methodology to evaluate milestones and targets and to make partial payments. And this is important because the one single payment that we saw in the year 2021, the European Court of Auditors has told us that one milestone and target for the one single payment made in 2021 for Spain, one milestone and target was not sufficiently met. And let me say very clearly, based on the current methodology, the Spanish Government should not have received that payment in full. It is good that we have this methodology now.

I also welcome the recommendations of the report asking the Commission to further develop this methodology, and I call on the Commission to apply a strict approach and particularly equal standards to all Member States.

And, last point from my side, Madam President, the biggest 100 beneficiaries in each Member State have to be published, but we are calling for Parliament to be given access to all lists of beneficiaries from the Recovery and Resilience Facility.

  Ilan De Basso (S&D). – Fru talman! EU:s utvecklingsarbete är viktigt både för oss, och för våra partner ute i världen. Samarbetet har bidragit till att fler får förutsättningar att resa sig ur fattigdom och förbättra sina livsvillkor. Men för att behålla ledartröjan måste vi leva upp till våra löften och använda de medel som har beslutats. Det är en fråga om legitimitet och trovärdighet.

Jag är starkt oroad över att många organisationer nu får strypta anslag. Jag ser det inte minst i Sverige, där högerregeringen kraftigt har skurit ner på biståndet och stödet till civilsamhället. Högern attackerar ideella organisationer i en tid då vi behöver dem som mest – detta är helt oacceptabelt! Därför måste EU fortsätta driva på för ett utvecklingsarbete med fokus på jämlikhet, utbildning och klimatomställning. Utan samarbete med ideella organisationer, kommer EU:s utvecklingsarbete att tappa kraft.

  Viola von Cramon-Taubadel (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, Commissioner, colleagues, President of the European Court of Auditors, the 2021 Commission discharge was a special one, as we start looking for the first time at how one EU Member State spends its Recovery and Resilience Fund.

Despite the volume of the discharge, as we look at the spending of EUR 170 billion, it is more a dialogue of the deaf rather than a constructive exchange. Error rate is still above the 2% target, and for the 27th time the Court of Auditors is unable to grant a positive statement to the implementation of the EU budget.

The financial sustainability is at risk. The outstanding budgetary commitments are now more than EUR 340 billion. Yet not everything is in the numbers; key issues for us are transparency and rule of law. That is what we owe to our taxpayers. It is the Commission’s primary task as the guardian of the Treaties to protect these norms and values. To put it simply: no EU money if no EU standards.

The Commission never seriously used its tool to uphold the rule of law across the Union. If we compromise on the fundamentals, then the whole European House will fall apart. The first step against Hungary must not become the fig leaf for inaction excuses, but a booster that will strongly show our determination. No EU money if no EU standards.

Then we have another crucial occurring challenge: the list of all final beneficiary. The Commission needs to set up a system that allows to see the complete list: who gets how much and how often. That is how to find conflict of interests, land grabbing, misuse of agri and cohesion funds as we witness the growing oligarch structures abusing EU funds in some of the Member States. It is not in the interest of either us here in the European Parliament or taxpayers’ interest to create the next oligarch generation with the NextGenerationEU money.

  Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR). – Voorzitter, geachte commissaris, beste collega’s, opnieuw zijn we erin geslaagd in het kwijtingsverslag over de Commissie een duidelijke aanbeveling op te nemen over de Palestijnse schoolboeken. We vragen kritisch te kijken naar de Europese uitgaven voor deze schoolboeken, omdat die vol staan met antisemitisme.

Opnieuw hebben we echter ook te maken met de S&D, de Groenen en The Left, die met een amendement proberen de antisemitische feiten te verdoezelen. En opnieuw staan we tegenover een Commissie die op dit punt vooralsnog geen enkele bereidheid toont om in beweging te komen, terwijl de EU toch de pretentie heeft een bijdrage te leveren aan het vredesproces. Een lovenswaardig streven, maar laten we dan hier beginnen, ervoor zorgen dat het onderwijs deugt, dat kinderen leren de ander te respecteren in plaats van te haten, dat kinderen niet langer wiskunde moeten leren door slachtoffers te tellen die je kunt maken met een terroristische zelfmoordactie.

Daarom ook vandaag mijn oproep aan de Europese Commissie: zorg ervoor dat de Europese geldstroom richting de Palestijnse gebieden niet langer wordt gebruikt voor het betalen van foute schoolboeken. En voor wat betreft de algemene begroting, de jaarrekeningen over 2021, is het foutenpercentage wat ons betreft nog steeds duidelijk te hoog. 3 %, dat is meer dan 1 % boven de grens. Nu kwijting verlenen is wat ons betreft dan ook niet terecht.

  Jordan Bardella (ID). – Madame la Présidente, à l’occasion du vote de la décharge budgétaire de Frontex, permettez-moi de dire ce que j’ai vu à Menton, à la frontière entre la France et l’Italie. Ce que j’ai vu à Menton, c’est une double faillite: celle du gouvernement français d’abord, et celle de l’Union européenne ensuite, qui a vidé Frontex de son rôle initial de lutte contre l’immigration clandestine.

À Menton, les habitants et les pouvoirs publics sont confrontés à un afflux massif de migrants qui pénètrent chez nous sans aucun contrôle, et pour s’y installer contre la volonté du peuple français. En faisant de Frontex une agence de voyages pour migrants, en envoyant le signal désastreux que l’on peut venir en Europe sans y avoir été invité, vous avez transformé nos frontières en passoire et nos pays en hôtels. Les contribuables européens ne veulent pas que vous utilisiez leur argent pour les submerger, mais pour les protéger. Face au défi migratoire, la naïveté n’est plus possible. Le temps est venu d’une action ferme et d’une action déterminée pour protéger les peuples d’Europe. Je vous appelle à en protéger les frontières.

  Marc Botenga (The Left). – Voorzitter, collega’s, een pensioen van 13 700 EUR per maand, 13 700 EUR per maand in de pocket. Na slechts twintig jaar carrière. Dat is wat een speciaal pensioenfonds hier aan ongeveer 900 Europese parlementsleden garandeert. Zo’n beetje tien keer meer dan wat een gewone Europese werknemer krijgt na zo’n veertig jaar carrière, pure graaipensioenen en betaald natuurlijk door de belastingbetaler. En bij die graaiers, die pensioengraaiers, zowat alle fracties, ook extreemrechtse, hé collega De Man van de Fractie ID, Vlaams Belang. Uw voormalige voorzitter Frank Vanhecke: blijkbaar een van de pensioengraaiers. Ongelooflijk. Altijd tegen Europa, behalve als het is om uw eigen zakken te vullen blijkbaar. En wat is nu de kwestie? De kwestie is nu dat dat pensioenfonds failliet is, een gat van 313 miljoen EUR. En dan wordt er hier serieus gedebatteerd over de vraag of de gewone belastingbetaler dat moet bijvullen. Nee, dat moet de belastingbetaler niet. Dat fonds moet geschrapt worden. Stop met graaien.

  Ivan Vilibor Sinčić (NI). – Poštovana predsjedavajuća, danas govorimo o razrješnici za proračun.

Prvo ste u proljeće 2020. na COVID odgovorili kontraproduktivnim i neznanstvenim lockdownom. Uništili ste cijele ekonomske grane i uzrokovali neviđenu ekonomsku krizu, investirali ste proračune države, građana i poduzeća, a onda ste da bi pokrpali barem neke od tih rupa u ljeto 2020. iznijeli plan NextGenerationEU što nije ništa drugo nego zaduženje za 750 milijardi eura do 2058.

Onda je predsjednica Komisije osobno dogovorila kupnju 5 milijardi doza cjepiva ili jedanaest za svakog stanovnika vrijednih 70 milijardi eura. Lagali ste o njihovoj sigurnosti i učinkovitosti, što znamo iz rada odbora COVI i Revizorskog suda. Znali ste barem od prosinca 2020. da ne sprječava širenje bolesti.

Ta cjepiva sada više nitko ne želi i ona se moraju uništiti. Imamo tisuću milijardi eura štete zbog lošeg koruptivnog upravljanja.

Cijelo jutro se ovdje raspravljalo kako zakrpati tu financijsku COVID rupu i najviše se pričalo o uvođenju novih zajedničkih poreza, pored ovog za plastiku kojeg imamo. I nakon što ste tako savjesno i stručno upravljali proračunskim novcem ovdje imate hrabrosti tražiti razrješnice za proračun za 2021. godinu da svojim glasom potvrdimo da je sve bilo u redu. Nije bilo u redu i od mene sigurno nećete dobiti tu razrješnicu.

Glasat ću protiv za sve točke.

  Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE). – Paní předsedající, vážený pane komisaři, dámy a pánové, jako stínový zpravodaj pro absolutorium agentur jsem nesmírně šťastný z jedné věci, že se nám podařilo napříč politickým spektrem najít shodu zejména ohledně agentury Frontex. Frontex je jednou z největších a nejdůležitějších agentur a dobré fungování Frontexu znamená bezpečí našich občanů. Není čas hrát s Frontexem nějaké ideologické hry. V tomto chci poděkovat především socialistům a i zástupcům levice, komunistům, za to, že podpořili udělení discharge Frontexu. Nové vedení odvádí perfektní práci a jsem jednoznačně přesvědčen, že většina problémů se dá přisoudit bývalému vedení v čele s panem Leggerim. O tom jsem pevně přesvědčen. A Frontex dělá dneska dobrou práci. Nenechme ho na holičkách a podpořme ho.

Ohledně ostatních agentur jsem velice spokojený, že všechny výrazným způsobem přispívají k tomu, co mají za svůj cíl, a vedou dobrou rozpočtovou politiku. Ve spoustě agentur vidím velikánský potenciál pro zlepšení, popřípadě slučování, nicméně do rozpočtové politiky tam nevidím žádný problém. Takže vám všem děkuji za vaši práci na agenturách a pevně si přeji, abychom je všechny podpořili v zítřejším hlasování.

  Evin Incir (S&D). – Madam President, colleagues, it’s essential that we ensure that all our finances are used in a correct way. No single cent should go where it shouldn’t go to and every single cent should go to the purpose. All our efforts should therefore go to ensuring this.

However, I am amazed how some people in this Parliament has made it their purpose in life to spread disinformation and year after year bring the same issues up; every year, the same issues related to UNRWA and the Palestinian authorities are put on the table. Even when they have received an EU-funded independent report as the one by Georg Eckert Institute that clearly contradicts their claims, they don’t give up. I seriously wonder if they really want to see a peaceful two-state solution or they are trying to undermine it through weakening the Palestinian authorities, through freezing the support.

There is, of course, a lot we should demand from the Palestinian side as well as from the Israeli side, but to weaken the Palestinian Authority will for sure not lead to a peaceful two-state solution.

Colleagues, I hope we are more people in this Parliament that want to see a peaceful two—state solution than those struggling for polarisation.

  Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, I’m here to discuss the discharge of our agencies, and I have to say that most of our agencies are delivering a terribly good job – also quite often with a very low number of staff working for those agencies. And every time we’re piling up more priorities and more issues and more tasks to our agencies, but without giving them more staff, and this is probably still something for the Council to debate and certainly the Swedish presidency, by the way.

However, there are two agencies that that we still have issues with. One that has been mentioned a couple of times already is Frontex, and indeed a lot has happened and a lot has improved. We have a new Executive Director, which is a good thing and to be very honest, it’s always funny to hear the EPP ‘let’s not play’, but that’s what they also said with the former Executive Director, of course, and now he’s gone, they say ‘ah, good, we solved the issues because he’s gone’. Well, you were not in favour of that either, so there is never any idea for action there, but we are happy that we acted on it.

But this is important towards the Commission as well. Structural problems remain and need to be investigated on participation in pushbacks and all that, and that is something that we need to be very vigilant on, and for that we cannot grant discharge still. The same goes for the EU Agency for Asylum: as long as an OLAF investigation is ongoing, we cannot grant discharge. For all the other agencies, we will grant discharge.

  Filip De Man (ID). – Voorzitter, collega’s, ik wil het hebben over Frontex, onze Europese grenswacht. Het jaarlijks budget stijgt naar 1 miljard EUR. Het personeelsbestand klimt in de komende jaren van 2 000 naar 10 000. Die agenten beschikken over drones, over satellietbeelden, over terreinwagens en patrouillevliegtuigen. En men zou dus denken: “Oké, het gaat de goede richting uit.”

En toch werkt het niet. Er zitten in onze landen al zo’n 5 à 6 miljoen illegale vreemdelingen en jaarlijks komen er nog vele honderdduizenden mensen zonder papieren bij in de Europese Unie. En waarom? Frontex wordt op alle mogelijke manieren tegengewerkt door de linkse partijen in dit halfrond, die constant met mensenrechten zwaaien om het terugdrijven van illegalen te bemoeilijken, en door linkse, door u gesubsidieerde ngo’s, die proces na proces inspannen tegen Frontex.

Zo gaat het niet verder. Wij pleiten voor veralgemeende pushbacks en voor de opvang van vluchtelingen in hun eigen regio. Europa vangt nu al miljoenen Oekraïense vluchtelingen op. Wij kunnen niet ook nog eens alle gelukzoekers uit andere continenten hier onderhouden. Wij zijn niet het Openbaar centrum voor maatschappelijk welzijn van de hele wereld.

(De spreker stemt ermee in om te antwoorden op een “blauwe kaart”-vraag)

  Marc Botenga (The Left), “blauwe kaart”-vraag. – Collega De Man van de ID/Vlaams Belang-fractie, u fietst wel langs de kwestie heen.

Dus jarenlang zegt u dat Europa te duur is, te veel geld uitgeeft en dat u ervoor gaat zorgen dat er wordt bespaard. En dan lekt er een lijst uit van mensen die geprofiteerd hebben van graaipensioenen op kosten van de belastingbetaler, en uw voormalige voorzitter staat op die lijst.

Hoe legt u dat uit? Is dat dan pure demagogie, alleen maar voor het theater, terwijl u als u hier komt zelf uw zakken vult? Is dat de bedoeling? Kunt u daar alstublieft eens op antwoorden?

  Filip De Man (ID), “blauwe kaart”-antwoord. – Collega Botenga, ten eerste, die regelingen zijn niet door het Vlaams Belang in het leven geroepen. Ten tweede, de wedde die u verdient is net zo groot als de mijne en ik denk ook niet dat u dat geld weigert. Dus uw opmerkingen slaan eigenlijk nergens op.

  Andrey Novakov (PPE). – Madam President, dear Commissioner, Members of the Court of Auditors, dear colleagues, I know it feels like a very long time ago, but 2021 was not that far in our calendar. I’m sure that you all remember how tough it was, and probably it is quite easy from the distance at the time to judge what is wrong and what is right.

But the truth is that all European institutions, including the European Parliament, were facing a lot of challenges. I think all those who were taking decisions in that difficult period deserve our respect and our applauses. This is why I have a pledge towards you to keep the discharge focused solely on procedure and in mind proportionally with the situation of 2021.

Of course, I understand why some political groups were tabling amendments for the events of December 2022 related to Qatargate. I stand strongly to all our efforts to recover the trust of the European Parliament and the European institutions and work for more transparency. I am proud that the EPP is supporting our President of fighting to recover the good image of the European Parliament.

As a Bulgarian, but also as a European, I’m here to work for a more transparent parliament, leading a modern democracy to represent the views of all EU citizens, and I sincerely believe that this is what this Parliament is standing for.

Finally, I think during that crisis, that tough period for all of us, the Parliament managed successfully to maintain the representation of people, and we did it good and served as a good example.

  Pedro Silva Pereira (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, participo neste debate sobre a execução do orçamento de 2021 também na minha qualidade de vice—presidente do Parlamento, responsável pelo orçamento do Parlamento Europeu.

E quero começar por recordar que o ano de 2021 foi ainda um ano marcado pelos constrangimentos da pandemia, em que o Parlamento teve de continuar a mobilizar recursos extraordinários para fazer face a uma situação extraordinária. E, por isso, continuámos o investimento em ferramentas e equipamentos tecnológicos de informação e comunicação, para que o Parlamento pudesse cumprir as suas funções, ao mesmo tempo que reforçámos o investimento na cibersegurança.

Mas queria sobretudo sublinhar que o orçamento do Parlamento de 2021 foi também um investimento na democracia europeia, em que apoiámos a Conferência sobre o Futuro da Europa – uma conferência em que os cidadãos nos pediram uma Europa mais próxima e mais participada, com mais informação sobre a Europa e os valores europeus.

E, por isso, é tão importante que o orçamento do Parlamento para 2021 tenha permitido aprofundar o projeto «Europa Experience», um programa do Parlamento Europeu que visa instalar em cada capital europeia um centro de informação inovador, interativo e pedagógico, para que os cidadãos conheçam melhor o Parlamento Europeu.

Nove desses centros já abriram, tiveram mais de 2 milhões de visitantes e, por isso, podemos dizer que o projeto «Europa Experience» é já uma fórmula de sucesso para uma democracia mais participada e mais forte.

  Virginie Joron (ID). – Madame la Présidente, mes chers collègues, vous avez vu ce reportage de France Télévisions où la présidente de la Commission et Albert Bourla, de Pfizer, rasent les murs à Davos et à Strasbourg? Et pourtant, aujourd’hui, vous donnez un satisfecit à la Commission pour 2021, l’année de tous les records: 71 milliards d’euros de contrats aux «Big Pharma».

Donc bravo à la Commission d’avoir commandé dix doses par personne. Bravo d’avoir caché les contrats, les SMS et les prix. Bravo d’avoir acheté les doses presque 20 euros alors qu’elles coûtent 80 centimes à Pfizer-BioNTech. Bravo d’indemniser Pfizer pour les doses qu’ils ne produiront pas. Bravo d’acheter des doses aussi jusqu’en 2026. Bravo d’avoir déchargé Pfizer-BioNTech des indemnisations en cas d’effets secondaires.

L’expertise de cette Commission, c’est comme les 95 % d’efficacité de Pfizer: qui peut encore y croire? Parlons de votre emprunt jusqu’en 2058, à taux variable. Combien de milliards perdus au profit des banques? À taux variable, quelle prescience!

  Angelika Winzig (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Vertreterin des Rates, Herr Kommissar, Herr Präsident! Am Ende des Entlastungszyklus für das Jahr 2021 ist es wichtig, dass wir die Bedeutung der parlamentarischen Haushaltskontrolle hervorheben. Für uns als Mitglied des Haushaltskontrollausschusses hat der Schutz des Haushalts oberste Priorität. Und es stimmt mich zuversichtlich, dass wir mit dem effektiven Einsatz der Rechtsstaatlichkeits-Konditionalität ein weiteres Werkzeug haben, um der missbräuchlichen Verwendung von Steuergeld Einhalt zu gebieten. Danke dafür auch an Kommissar Hahn.

Als Schattenberichterstatterin für die gemeinsamen Unternehmen kann ich berichten, dass die Haushaltsmittel nach den Grundsätzen der Wirtschaftlichkeit, der Effizienz und der Wirksamkeit ausgegeben wurden. Besonders hervorheben möchte ich auch die gute Arbeit bei Frontex. Das neue Management leistet hervorragende Arbeit, und es muss uns allen in diesem Haus klar sein, dass wir nur mit einem effektiven Außengrenzschutz auch unsere Freiheit innerhalb Europas bewahren können.

Für unsere Zukunft ist es wichtig, eine effektive Kontrolle der Aufbau- und Resilienzfazilität im Rahmen von NextGenerationEU sicherzustellen. In dieser Hinsicht ist unsere Partnerschaft mit der Europäischen Kommission, dem Europäischen Rechnungshof, OLAF und EUStA von entscheidender Bedeutung und dafür danke für die gute Zusammenarbeit.

  Lara Wolters (S&D). – Madam President, thank you to the Commission and to the ECA for being here. I’ve got one minute and a half; there’s too much to talk about, but we do absolutely need to talk about Parliament’s own voluntary pension scheme. Closed now, but financed from allowances that were meant for office supplies and reportedly investing in the arms, tobacco, mining and fossil fuel industries. ‘What’s not to like?’, you could say.

Why do we need to talk about that right now? Well, because it’s situation is dramatic financially. We’re talking about a EUR 310 million gap. So, for the translators, yes, I said 310 million. And because the leadership of this Parliament is set to take a decision on the scheme’s future soon, the Parliament’s Budgetary Control Committee has repeatedly called on Parliament's bureau to find a feasible, legal and fair solution to the problem that we have here.

Now, the study on this that I commissioned concluded that while Parliament can’t completely get rid of the fund from one day to the next, what it can do is take steps that prioritise taxpayers over scheme members. And that’s what the Bureau needs to do now: stand up to the scheme members, some of them extremely active and vocal behind the scenes. Some of them, ironically, called Nigel Farage and Marine Le Pen.

Now, at the end of the day, we’re talking here about a supplementary extra pension scheme for all of its beneficiaries. Let’s be honest, it’s 2023, and most people in Europe don’t even dare to dream of a steady income when they retire, let alone at the levels that this fund currently guarantees.

   Patricia Chagnon (ID). – Madame la Présidente, l’Union européenne trahit l’esprit de l’agence Frontex. Initialement, cette agence intervenait pour aider les États membres à protéger leurs frontières extérieures. Mais avec le nouveau pacte migration, la commissaire Johansson dévoile son funeste projet de submersion migratoire de l’Europe et de transformation de l’agence Frontex.

L’UE avait annoncé vouloir réduire l’immigration clandestine alors qu’en réalité, le pacte migration, c’est la légalisation de l’immigration clandestine. Le pacte élargit la notion de regroupement familial. Le pacte sanctuarise les ONG. Le pacte simplifie les demandes d’asile. Et le pacte rend obligatoire la relocalisation des migrants dans les États membres.

L’Agence Frontex, elle aussi, a commencé sa transformation. Avec le pacte migration, c’est la mise sous tutelle par les immigrationnistes bruxellois, qui en font une agence de contrôle des États membres et une agence de voyage pour migrants. Une triste fin pour cette agence que, demain, nous ferons renaître de ses cendres.

  Markus Pieper (PPE). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar! Zum Aufbaufonds – Kommissionsentlastung. Für mich ist die Bilanz dieses Fonds eine einzige Enttäuschung. Eine Enttäuschung deshalb, weil ich die Bilanz weder beurteilen noch kontrollieren kann. Uns wurde von der Kommission versprochen, dass die gleichen Maßstäbe angelegt werden wie bei den Strukturfondsverordnungen, sprich die Veröffentlichung der Fördermittelempfänger. Dies ist bis auf die ganz Großen eben nicht geschehen. Stattdessen verlassen wir uns auf ein Berichtswesen der Kommission, das wiederum nur auf die Angaben aus den Mitgliedstaaten angewiesen ist.

Wie aber sollen wir die wohlklingenden Milestones und Überschriften kontrollieren, wenn wir nicht in die Bücher schauen dürfen? Und auch der Rechnungshof ist total überfordert. Einer Verdopplung des EU-Haushaltes soll er mit den gleichen Kapazitäten begegnen. Es tut mir leid, aber so besteht die Gefahr von Willkür und Betrug. Das kann aus Sicht der Haushaltskontrolle nur eine Konsequenz haben: keine Fortführung dieser unkontrollierbaren Form der europäischen Schuldenaufnahme, zumal die Finanzierung durch Eigenmittel unklarer ist denn je.

Für die Zukunft heißt das: erst Eigenmittel rechtssicher vereinbaren, dann Finanzierung angehen. Das heißt auch, viel mehr privates Kapital einbinden für die Aufgaben der Zukunft und diese dann mit EU-Geldern hebeln. Ja, und die anstehenden Aufgaben, die sind in der Tat gewaltig, sie sind aber auch attraktiv – von Energienetzen und Wasserstoffprojekten bis zur Erschließung neuer Rohstoffquellen, ja sogar bis zum Wiederaufbau der Ukraine. Wenn wir das solide und mit der Wirtschaft angehen, können wir die Aufgaben der Zukunft nachhaltig finanzieren.

Puhetta johti HEIDI HAUTALA
varapuhemies

  Margarida Marques (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Ministra, Senhor Comissário, neste dia em que celebramos o Dia da Europa, não podemos deixar de valorizar a criação daquele que é o instrumento fundamental da resposta europeia à pandemia – o NextGenerationEU.

Com o NextGenerationEU, a Europa não está a atravessar uma recessão, como se chegou a prever. As economias começam a crescer, o investimento público reforça—se. O PRR tem sido fundamental para tornar as economias e sociedades europeias mais sustentáveis, resilientes e mais bem preparadas para os desafios e oportunidades das transições ecológica e digital.

Nunca é demais lembrar que o PRR é um programa distinto de todos os outros até hoje criados, e não só pelo modelo de financiamento. O PRR é um mecanismo baseado em resultados. Os pagamentos são feitos mediante comprovação de resultados traduzidos em reformas e investimento, marcos e metas. Gestão centralizada pela Comissão, mas a Comissão – fique claro – está a gerir dentro do quadro aprovado pelo Conselho. Ao Parlamento Europeu cabe, e temo—lo feito, garantir que há transparência e integridade na gestão do dinheiro europeu.

E, como em todos os programas novos e diferentes, há uma adaptação necessária que a Comissão Europeia tem cumprido. Um bom exemplo é a metodologia de incumprimento parcial por parte de um Estado, publicada em fevereiro.

O PRR, temos de o reconhecer, funcionou, em 2021, graças ao esforço de todos.

  Dolors Montserrat (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, la aprobación de los fondos europeos por esta Cámara ha sido un éxito. Algo que no podemos decir de la ejecución en nuestro país, en España. Las regiones españolas denuncian falta de cogobernanza. Los autónomos, pymes y trabajadores denuncian que no les llegan los fondos. Y, por tanto, algo falla. Falla el Gobierno. Ya que el Gobierno de España solo acierta cuando copia al Partido Popular —lo hizo con la bajada del IVA, de la luz y del gas, el IVA de los alimentos y ahora con el aval para la vivienda de los jóvenes—, pues que copie también la cogobernanza que pedimos en los fondos europeos, una rápida ejecución y que se endurezcan las penas por malversación, para que nadie robe ni un solo euro de dinero público. Nunca es tarde si la medida copiada es buena. Por tanto, tomen nota los señores socialistas.

El Gobierno de España ha rebajado el delito de malversación porque uno de sus socios parlamentarios, con condenados entre sus filas, se lo ha pedido. Algo que sobrepasa cualquier límite político y más que político. Y esto no lo digo yo, sino un líder regional del Partido Socialista Obrero Español en España, el señor García-Page. Mientras Bruselas pide endurecer las penas por malversación, Sánchez las rebaja. Por tanto, rectifiquen, señores socialistas, escuchen a Europa y dejen de mentir a los españoles, pero también a este Parlamento.

Así que menos lecciones de lucha contra la corrupción. Más hechos. Que de lo primero andan sobrados y de lo segundo, escasos.

  Anna-Michelle Asimakopoulou (PPE). – Madam President, Commissioner, year after year, a number of us in this House have called for partial conditionality of funding to the Palestinian Authority in order to secure the removal of anti-Semitic content from the school textbooks. Year after year, a majority in this House refuses to do so.

The EU—commissioned Georg Eckert Institute study was very clear that Palestinian textbooks contain anti-Semitic references and incitement to hatred based on international standards, and the EU is very clear that we have a zero tolerance approach to anti-Semitism. So now is the time to join the dots. Zero tolerance means anti-Semitic rhetoric must be removed from the textbooks used by the Palestinian Authority. So the amendment tabled by the S&D to not only delete the reference in the discharge report, but to do so in a way that wilfully misrepresents the results of the Georg Eckert study must be opposed.

In authorising the discharge of EU funds, dear colleagues, as parliamentarians, we are asked to judge their effectiveness. Partial conditionality to ensure the removal of anti-Semitic content in Palestinian textbooks – it’s not just about effectiveness, it is about morality. So please let us do the right thing.

  Isabel Benjumea Benjumea (PPE). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, el éxito de los fondos de recuperación no se puede medir en solicitudes de pago o en las transferencias hechas por parte de la Comisión. Y tampoco se puede hacer por la calidad estética de las presentaciones de PowerPoint en las que los distintos Estados miembros están presentando sus planes nacionales. Un arte, el de la propaganda, en el que, por cierto, el Gobierno del señor Sánchez es absolutamente un genio.

Ahora bien, el éxito del MRR, el éxito de los fondos de recuperación se va a medir en el éxito del impacto de las reformas que creen más oportunidades para pymes, para empresarios, para aquellos que están buscando trabajo, y también en que los fondos lleguen a los destinatarios finales, en que los fondos lleguen a aquellos proyectos para los que están previstos.

Y para poder medir este éxito necesitamos que haya transparencia, que haya una transparencia absoluta. Y es responsabilidad de la Comisión garantizar que haya esa transparencia. Una transparencia que nos permita saber, como en el caso de España, exactamente cuántos pagos se han hecho con cargo a los fondos Next Generation y que podamos conocer finalmente un dato oficial —un dato oficial que no tenemos desde agosto del año 2021— sobre la ejecución de los fondos de recuperación.

Y para que los fondos Next Generation sean un éxito, estos fondos, estas medidas, estas reformas, estas inversiones tienen que ser unas reformas pactadas: pactadas con las regiones, pactadas con las entidades locales, pactadas con empresarios, pactadas con la sociedad civil. Y a día de hoy no se ha hecho así. Y apelo a la Comisión a que tenga exigencia máxima con España en la preparación de la adenda que está elaborando el Gobierno español para la solicitud de los préstamos. Solo si es un verdadero plan nacional será un éxito. Y, desde luego, si vuelve a ser un plan de Sánchez, lo que estará abocado es al fracaso, como el actual plan nacional.

Pyynnöstä myönnettävät puheenvuorot

  Mick Wallace (The Left). – Madam President, there are a number of EU institutions and bodies not covered by the Parliament’s discharge process. However, what’s particularly concerning, but not surprising, is that the three agencies related to defence – the European Defence Agency, the European Union’s Institute for Security Studies and the European Union Satellite Centre – are not covered.

These agencies are audited by independent external auditors and do not depend on the European Parliament’s discharge procedure. In their 2014 report, the Court of Auditors noted ‘although their source of revenue is not the EU budget, the revenue of these entities arises from the exercise of public authority at the EU level and their use of resources has the same public nature as other EU funds’.

There is therefore no compelling reason for this different treatment. Yet, nine years on, the different treatment continues. And at a time when defence spend is going off the Richter scale in Europe and promoting war has become a lot more fashionable than promoting peace, it’s about time that these were brought under the remit of the Parliament and the Court of Auditors.

(Pyynnöstä myönnettävät puheenvuorot päättyvät)

  Tony Murphy, President of the Court of Auditors. – Madam President, just a few short words. First of all, on the last point by Mr Wallace, I think we issued a report very recently on budget galaxy, which is basically about the whole financial landscape of the EU; it’s not just these three bodies, but there are a plethora of other bodies where there are different accountability and transparency arrangements in place. So I would advise that as food for thought or something to read in your spare time.

I think what has emanated from the debate here today is that it’s important to acknowledge the challenges which were apparent in 2021. It was a very difficult time, as we all know, and it made it difficult in a way for Member States to use all the funding sources which were available to them. They had the MFF, they had the RRF, they had the SURE instrument and we had other different instruments. I think we have to take into account the context.

Nonetheless, our role is to make sure that there is proper oversight and accountability for EU funds. I am happy to see the interest of parliamentarians in this process, in the discharge procedure, by the number of interventions, and I think it shows clearly that we all have our own specific roles to play in ensuring the proper financial management of the budget. In that context, I think we are a key component of the institutional framework of the EU. We’ve a role to ensure proper oversight.

As the EU’s independent external auditor, our core values are independence, integrity and objectivity. We work based on these values with the aim of improving accountability, transparency and financial management with the objective – and this is the key objective – of enhancing citizens’ trust and also providing assurance to you as legislators so that better informed decisions can be made.

  Johannes Hahn, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you to all of you for this final exchange of views before they vote on discharge tomorrow. The discharge process allows us to learn from the past in order to improve for the future, not least thanks to the thorough exchanges of views organised by the Committee on Budgetary Control and its Chair.

Clear and simple rules remain the best way to guarantee the sound financial management of European Union spending. As we know, 75 % of the errors usually detected are related to different views about what is eligible and what is not eligible.

The Commission has therefore continued its efforts to simplify rules and raise knowledge of beneficiaries with communication campaigns, workshops and guidance. And I expect this is shared by everybody inside and outside the room.

The Commission will also continue working together with its partners, especially Member States and national authorities, on the shared management to address the weaknesses identified and take preventive measures such as sharing good practices, providing guidance and training to the management, control and audit structures in Member States. Whenever necessary, of course, the Commission will not hesitate to have recourse to corrective mechanisms.

Concerning the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility in 2021, the Commission will continue to promote a better understanding of this new instrument. It’s a different one in nature and legislation than the traditional ones, such as cohesion policy, and therefore uncharted water still for many. That is why I believe it is too premature to speculate already today about the discharge outcome of 2022.

Moving forward, we will continue to involve all relevant stakeholders and we will also maintain close engagement with the European Parliament and the Council for a successful implementation of the facility. I would like to reassure you of the Commission’s continuous commitment to work together with the European Parliament in ensuring adequate protection of the European Union’s financial interests and values.

So I am grateful for the cooperative, constructive and positive spirit between the institutions involved in the discharge debate. Having said this, this year, I would like to use the opportunity to thank the President of the European Court of Auditors, Tony Murphy, for supporting our engagement with Ukraine in the area of budgetary protection and sound financial management. He was already referring to a joint mission organised by us and accompanied by a member of the court, and I think it was an extremely useful mission also for our joint work in the future because I think we should have every interest to support Ukraine in the future, but also to keep this high level of solidarity we can see still amongst the Member states and their citizens. But for this it is important to reassure them that the financial interests of European taxpayers are also protected in Ukraine, of course, acknowledging the different circumstances they are just living in.

  Jessika Roswall, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, honourable Members, Commissioner, President of the European Court of Auditors, allow me to conclude once again by thanking you for your thorough work on the discharge.

This is a very important exercise. It is about transparency, democratic legitimacy, and being accountable to our citizens. It gives the true measures on the way the European funds are implemented and managed. I will also take this opportunity to thank the Commission, the Court of Auditors and all the management and audit authorities at the national level for their efforts in this sense.

Moreover, I would like to highlight some of Parliament’s and the Council’s common views in this field. First, Parliament and the Council both call on the Court and the Commission to continue the assessment of the EU budget’s performance, which is a measure of the true value delivered to EU citizens.

Second, Parliament and the Council also share the view that complex rules may lead to more errors. Therefore, we support further efforts to identify and simplify burdensome rules and procedures. But of course we cannot lower standards and requirements needed for accountability. Our common goal is to make sure that the EU budget provides added value for our citizens and that EU money is well spent.

Again, I would like to underline, just like many of you have stated today, that this point is vital to maintain the trust and confidence of our citizens for the European project, and especially on this special day, we cannot emphasise this enough.

  Jeroen Lenaers, rapporteur. – Madam President, thank you to all the colleagues for a very long but very interesting debate. Listening to everybody, I can only draw one conclusion really, and that is that we all share a very shared commitment: a commitment to the EU budget, to making sure that the European budget is spent in an appropriate way and making sure that we have the best added value with European funding.

I think also the discharge of the Commission that we will vote on tomorrow needs to be read in that light. There are many suggestions, many recommendations; it is our job to scrutinise what the Commission is doing in order to make sure that we end up in that shared commitment to protect the European budget.

And I welcome Commissioner Hahn’s commitment to also, as he expressed today, everything the Commission is doing to bring down the error rate, to simplify rules in order to avoid risks. We, as a European Parliament, will continue to support you in that procedure and to make sure that we can make improvements together.

When it comes to the future, there is one thing that I would like to highlight as well, and I would mention the recast of the financial regulation and the negotiating position adopted in this House. And I hope and I count on the Council to also negotiate with us in a constructive spirit to better protect the EU budget, particularly through increased transparency. It really needs to happen now.

Now the discharge will be voted tomorrow and then it will be concluded. But the process of scrutiny, of course, continues also far beyond that. And I would like to thank once again also President Murphy and everybody at the European Court of Auditors for their very important role and the support to our work here in the European Parliament. It has been much appreciated. I would just like to echo the words that, President Murphy, you concluded your last intervention with, and that is that it is all about improving accountability, transparency and financial management – this is the commitment of everybody I have heard speaking here today and let’s put that into practice also for the upcoming years.

  Monika Hohlmeier, Berichterstatterin. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, lieber Herr Präsident, liebe Frau Ministerin! Jetzt habe ich dann alle Seiten, denn vorhin habe ich die Frau Ministerin dreistermaßen nicht mit erwähnt. Vielen herzlichen Dank, dass Sie da sind, es ist nämlich auch nicht immer üblich, dass gleich Ministerinnen bei uns da sind. Liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Zunächst einmal würde ich gerne noch zum Thema Corona-Wiederaufbaufonds zwei, drei Bemerkungen machen.

Erstens: Lieber Herr Kommissar, wir werden auch die Thematik für zukünftige, von der Kommission geplante, ähnlich gelagerte Finanzierungsinstrumente, das Thema time gap ansprechen müssen. Wir werden deutlich machen müssen, dass es nicht sein kann, dass man Gelder für irgendeine Reform bekommt und die dann in seinem Haushalt im Mitgliedstaat vorübergehend erst einmal fünf Jahre liegen lässt, um dann, vielleicht fünf Jahre später, irgendwann einmal eine Investition zu tätigen. So war das nicht gedacht, vor allem dann nicht, wenn wir Schulden machen müssen dafür, denn wir müssen dafür anschließend im Haushalt die Zinsen bezahlen.

Als Zweites: Wenn man Notfallinstrumente macht, dann werden die Mitgliedstaaten aber auch diese Gelder konsequent ausgeben müssen. Unsere Erfahrungen in Spanien zeigen leider, dass von 41 Milliarden, die dort inzwischen angekommen sind, gerade mal vielleicht irgendwie 4—5 Milliarden im Maximum tatsächlich überhaupt bei den Unternehmen, bei den betroffenen Regionen tatsächlich angekommen sind. Das ist etwas, was die Zeitverzögerung klarmacht. Gleichzeitig haben wir in den Kohäsionsfonds mittlerweile derartig große Verzögerungen, wie wir sie noch nie vorher hatten. Darum werden wir uns darüber schon noch einmal intensiv verständigen müssen. Manchmal habe ich bei diesen Meilensteinen und Targets und Zielwerten auch den Eindruck, dass sie eher wandernden Sanddünen gleichen, als dass sie tatsächlich festgelegte Stationen sind.

Ein ganz persönliches Wort noch zu dem, was der Kollege Freund hier gegenüber einfach den Kolleginnen und Kollegen betrieben hat. Einfach nur Frau Le Pen und Herrn Farage zu nennen, ist schlicht und einfach nicht gerechtfertigt. Wir werden bei dem sogenannten Pensionsfonds, der für die Jahre gilt, in denen es noch keinerlei Pensionsberechtigung für Abgeordnete gegeben hat, auf Recht und Gesetz achten und nicht auf Populismus. Das heißt, das Präsidium muss nach Recht und Gesetz handeln und nicht nach dem, wie wir populistisch am besten vorwärtskommen. Ich glaube, so sachlich sollte man das Ganze auch handhaben.

  Isabel García Muñoz, ponente. – Señora presidenta, señora ministra, después de escuchar sobre todo las últimas intervenciones, me gustaría puntualizar un par de cosas.

Señora Montserrat, desde el aprecio y el respeto que le tengo, mezcla churras con merinas. Lo único que falla en la gestión de España es la oposición que tiene el Gobierno de España. Mire, la aprobación de la gestión de 2021 es el primero en el que estamos examinando el Mecanismo de Recuperación y Resiliencia y es de vital importancia que nuestro informe establezca una base sólida, objetiva y veraz para su análisis y que no proporcione información incorrecta o sesgada para la ciudadanía. En 2021 solo España recibió un pago, y ustedes deberían estar orgullosas de su país por esto, compañeras del Partido Popular. Y por ser el primero es el que mayor escrutinio está teniendo.

La Comisión Europea ha reiterado en innumerables ocasiones que España había cumplido exhaustivamente todos y cada uno de los hitos y objetivos, como ha ocurrido en las posteriores solicitudes de pago. Señora Montserrat, usted no tuvo la suerte de venir a Madrid con la Comisión de Control Presupuestario, pero como se desprende de las conclusiones de la misión y como pudimos comprobar en persona, el Gobierno de España está realizando un gran trabajo de gestión de los fondos, y tras un gran esfuerzo ha desarrollado unos sistemas de control pioneros para evitar tanto los conflictos de interés como el mal uso de los fondos, algo que es lo que ocupa y preocupa a nuestra Comisión de Control Presupuestario.

Toda la información sobre el uso de los fondos, convocatorias, proyectos aprobados está accesible para todo el público de forma transparente. Señora Benjumea, usted solo quiere un dato. Yo creo que con un dato no se ve el efecto de las reformas. Si usted busca esos datos en las páginas web seguro que los encuentra, pero hay que buscarlos. Así que, por favor, no intenten politizar este informe y ofrezcamos entre todos información veraz, como corresponde a nuestra responsabilidad institucional.

  Mikuláš Peksa, rapporteur. – Madam President, dear colleagues, thank you all for your contributions in this debate. I am glad to hear that we mostly share the same goal to ensure the sound management of the EU institutions. We strive to make them more accountable and transparent to the public.

As said earlier, 2021 remained a challenging year where the pandemic was still requiring crisis responses and adaptations of working conditions. I am glad to note that all of the so-called nine other institutions managed to achieve high budget implementation, maintain and ensure full business continuity, switch to digital solutions, secure their networks, improve remote working conditions and carry on recruitments.

Therefore, I encourage the shadow rapporteurs to adopt the discharges of all the other institutions, except for the Council and the European Council who refuses to participate in the discharge process.

For the year to come, I would like to encourage our newest institution, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, to continue its important work on investigating, prosecuting and bringing to judgment crimes against the EU budget in order to protect EU’s financial interests and recover defrauded funds. I believe this new institution is crucial and should be entrusted with larger resources to fulfil a broader mandate, especially in the light of the current Russian invasion of Ukraine.

  Ryszard Czarnecki, sprawozdawca. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Przedstawiciele Komisji Europejskiej! Podsumowując tę debatę, chciałbym powiedzieć, że po pierwsze – mówiąc wprost – jest szereg zagadnień, które się w ogóle nie powinny znaleźć w sprawozdaniu dotyczącym absolutorium i sprawozdaniu, oczywiście odnośnie Komisji Europejskiej. Chodzi o kwestię mechanizmu warunkowości, bo ma charakter bardzo mocno polityczny Myślę, że w sprawozdaniach dotyczących kwestii czysto finansowych wtykanie takich politycznych kwiatków to nie jest dobry pomysł, bo to obniża jakość merytoryczną.

Po drugie, idąc w ślad za sprawozdawcą, za opinią Trybunału Obrachunkowego, trzeba powiedzieć, że w kwestii kontroli prowadzonych przez Komisję Europejską w kilku obszarach wyraźnie brakuje przejrzystości. Po pierwsze są to wydatki związane z Covidem – ja już nie chcę mówić o perypetiach Pani Przewodniczącej Von der Leyen, wiadomo jakich. Po drugie jest to finansowanie organizacji pozarządowych (NGOs). Wreszcie po trzecie korzystanie z usług konsultantów zewnętrznych. To są olbrzymie pieniądze. Jest też kwestia opóźnienia w realizacji zobowiązań i uruchamianiu nowych programów, a także chaotyczne wdrażanie RRF. Tutaj chodzi o duże obciążenie administracyjne po stronie państw członkowskich – to się oczywiście podobać nie może – a także nieczytelna i niekonsekwentna metodyka weryfikacji osiągnięcia kamieni milowych. Są zastrzeżenia co do prawidłowej realizacji jedynej skontrolowanej przez Trybunał płatności. Brakuje też – uwaga, to może szczególnie interesuje naszych podatników i wyborców – dokładnej analizy wpływu wydatków klimatycznych Unii Europejskiej. Mam wrażenie, że Komisja jednak nie do końca – przy całym szacunku dla Państwa, którzy tutaj są –skutecznie chroni interesy finansowych Unii Europejskiej.

  Joachim Stanisław Brudziński, Rapporteur. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Szanowni Państwo! To była bardzo ciekawa debata i mam nadzieję wyciągnąć z niej konstruktywne wnioski. Najbardziej konstruktywnym wnioskiem – odwołam się tutaj do mojego przedmówcy – byłoby uznanie, że takie wrzutki stricte polityczne do merytorycznych, finansowych debat nie są zbyt sensowne. Przechodząc do szczegółów, w sprawozdaniu absolutoryjnym dla Komisji Europejskiej naganne są w mojej ocenie zarzuty rzekomego wykorzystania funduszy unijnych do działań antydemokratycznych i do umacniania autorytaryzmu oraz stosowanie do tych domniemanych zarzutów mechanizmu warunkowości, praworządności.

Również w absolutorium dla Komisji znajdują się zapisy, z którymi nie możemy się zgodzić. Jest to m.in. wniosek o rozszerzenie obszarów, w których stosuje się EDES (system wczesnego wykrywania i wykluczenia), poza zarządzanie bezpośrednie i apel do Komisji o stosowanie go w odniesieniu do wszystkich funduszy unijnych, w tym funduszy zarządzania dzielonego. Kwestia uczestnictwa, a raczej braku uczestnictwa Rady Europejskiej w rocznej procedurze absolutoryjnej, która się ciągnie od lat. Rada Europejska i Rada nie uczestniczą w rocznej procedurze absolutoryjnej, nie odpowiada na zadawane przez Parlament pytania. Jej przedstawiciele nie stawiają się na posiedzeniach Komisji CONT. Zgodnie z artykułem 319 Traktatu o funkcjonowaniu Unii Europejskiej Parlament Europejski samodzielnie decyduje o udzieleniu absolutorium z wykonania budżetu ogólnego Unii, a budżet Rady Europejskiej i Rady jest sekcją budżetu Unii.

  José Manuel Fernandes, Relator. – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Ministra, Caro Comissário, face ao debate, ao relatório e ao trabalho que fizemos relativamente ao Fundo Europeu para o Desenvolvimento, eu peço para dar quitação pela execução do orçamento do oitavo, nono, décimo e décimo primeiro fundos do Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento.

Relativamente às etapas futuras, reforço o pedido para que haja um maior planeamento, para que haja uma maior visibilidade deste fundo e a procura de resultados que sejam ainda mais positivos. Estes fundos exigem planos plurianuais que podem dar previsibilidade e estabilidade. Para além disso, exigem uma outra palavra: envolvimento. Envolvimento dos beneficiários, daqueles que vão também executar os fundos das autoridades locais e regionais.

Neste sentido, é também importante, e insisto, que se envolvam os privados, para que possamos ter não só subvenções, mas também empréstimos no objetivo do desenvolvimento. A União Europeia, que é o maior doador mundial, que é quem mais ajuda ao desenvolvimento, deve manter esta prioridade em relação às economias que mais precisam, com a pretensão também de reduzir a pobreza.

E congratulo—me com o facto de o Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento estar a ser cada vez mais usado para a educação e a formação profissional. É dessa forma que podemos dar esperanças à juventude e, nomeadamente, à juventude do continente africano. Neste momento, em África, temos 1250 milhões de pessoas. Em 2050 serão o dobro, 2500 milhões. A média de idades será de cerca de 21 anos, uma população muito jovem. Temos a obrigação de lhes dar esperança e de possibilitar que possam viver no seu território, na terra que amam.

  Puhemies. – Keskustelu on päättynyt.

Äänestys tomitetaan huomenna.