In its conclusions of 17-21 July, the Council called upon the Commission to present further measures to protect the EU budget and Next Generation EU against fraud and irregularities. Although the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) should play an important role in achieving that objective, the European Chief Prosecutor has pointed out that financial difficulties and staff shortages need to be addressed.

1. Considering that in 2018, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) had 389 staff and carried out 1 259 preliminary analyses, based on which it opened 219 administrative investigations, how many criminal investigations (in full respect of the criminal procedural laws of the participating Member States) does the Commission expect the EPPO to handle with 140 European delegated prosecutors, and does this match its expected workload?

2. In 2021, will the Commission organise, together with the budgetary authority, a proper review of the EPPO’s requirements for 2022 and beyond, and can it guarantee sufficient resources in the headings margin, given that the Council does not envisage a midterm review of the multiannual financial framework (MFF)?

3. Why has the Commission chosen not to move the EPPO under Heading 7 of the MFF, given that the EU budget must finance its administration adequately?