Niclas HERBST

Policy topics Niclas HERBST is active on

What Niclas HERBST has said (75)

• 2026-07-15 “(10:59:40 - 11:00:53): Thank you. The MFF has been mentioned a couple of times. And of course, we are absolutely in this committee in favor of a sufficient and also strictly ring fenced budget, as you've heard. But I want to also refer to some concrete issues concerning the MFF. We want some key articles transferred from the overarching NRPP regulation back to the sectoral regulation where they practically and also legally belong. And I know that your counsel has been outspoken on this as well. So we do count on your support, and we need results on this. And also when it comes to, you know, trying to prevent that this position is circumvented, for example, when it comes to legislation concerning the do no significant harm principle, You know that the guidance for, for instance, on DNSH needs to be, you know, watched very closely in this regard. And we count and count to support this, and we will support you and the Irish presidency in demonstrating the same commitment to structural convenience and also, financial guarantees.”
  EU policy on sustainability criteria in public funding · Size of EU budget
• 2025-09-28 “E-003758/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission published its assessment on the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) in February 2025 1 . Despite progress in some areas, the report acknowledges slow overall progress towards meeting the objectives of the WFD and calls on Member States to accelerate action, including as regards tackling hydromorphological pressure and improve river continuity. The country-specific assessment for Germany 2 lists hydropower as a pressure with impacts on the ecological status, including migratory fish and recommends Germany, among others, to step up efforts to improve river continuity and increase fish protection. The Commission will launch structured dialogues with Member States to follow-up on its recommendation and accelerate and scale up implementation of the EU water acquis and to establish implementation priorities of the WFD. The start of the dialogue with Germany is envisaged before the end of 2025. Germany is also obliged to ensure river continuity for fish species listed in Annex II of the Habitats Directive 3 in designated protected areas by establishing the necessary conservation measures pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Directive. Deficits in complying with the Directive are addressed in the Environmental Implementation Report or in dedicated meetings with the national authorities. The Commission also initiated infringement procedures to address general implementation problems. For instance, in case C-116/22 4 Germany was found in breach of its obligations to establish conservation measures pursuant to Article 6(1) for all Natura 2000 sites. The Commission is not planning to revise the existing guidelines on the requirements for hydropower in relation to EU nature legislation 5 . 1 Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) and the Floods Directive (2007/60/EC) (Third River Basin Management Plans and Second Flood Risk Management Plans), https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/water/waterframework-directive/implementation-reports_en. 2 Third River Basin Management Plans Second Flood Hazard and Risk Maps and Second Flood Risk Management Plans Member State: Germany Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) and the Floods Directive (2007/60/EC) Third River Basin Management Plans Second Flood Risk Management Plans https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52025SC0025. 3 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206 22.7.1992, p. 7. 4 https://curia.europa.eu/juris/documents.jsf?nat=or&mat=or&pcs=Oor&jur=C%2CT%2CF&num=C116%252F22&for=&jge=&dates=&language=en&pro=&cit=none%252CC%252CCJ%252CR%252C2008E%2 52C%252C%252C%252C%252C%252C%252C%252C%252C%252Ctrue%252Cfalse%252Cfalse&oqp=&td= %3BALL&avg=&lgrec=en&page=1&lg=&cid=5937125. 5 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/b0279310-a5b4-11e8-99ee-01aa75ed71a1/.”
  EU policy on water management · Nature protection and restoration in the EU
• 2024-12-21 “E-003080/2024 Answer given by Mr Serafin on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission does not have the data on the number of FTEs (full-time equivalents) working on mainstreaming climate, biodiversity, digital, sustainable development and gender equality. At the moment, the information recorded in the human resources systems, does not cover mainstreaming as a heading or possibility to quantify in terms of jobs, staff or FTEs. Therefore, it is impossible to quantify or even estimate the number of FTEs currently working on mainstreaming the subjects you mention. 2. The Commission does not have the necessary data to reply to the question.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-10-11 “E-002022/2024 Answer given by Ms Šuica on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has currently two ongoing grant contracts with the European Feminist Initiative. The Commission is currently verifying all the elements reported in the quoted article and provided by NGO Monitor. After a complete review of these allegations, the Commission will act in line with contractual provisions and the EU Financial Regulation 1 . The Commission is bound to ensure that no persons or entities receive EU funding if they are involved in criminal or unethical practices, terrorist financing and terrorist offences. EU restrictive measures are applicable to any of the Commission grant beneficiaries all over the world. The EU is also strictly opposed to incitement of violence and hatred. Specific clauses have been introduced in all grant contracts with beneficiaries managing EU funds in the occupied Palestinian territories and in Israel. Pursuant to these clauses, these grant beneficiaries shall not engage in activities as defined by the Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law 2 , which include incitement to violence or hatred. This prohibition is without prejudice to the respect of fundamental rights as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on EU 3 (TEU) including the right of freedom of expression and information and the right of freedom of assembly and association as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 4 . Moreover, a new provision has been inserted into the EU Financial Regulation which provides that grant beneficiaries and contractors shall be excluded from future EU funding in case of ‘incitement to discrimination, hatred and violence against a group of persons or a member of a group, or similar activities that are contrary to the values on which the Union is founded enshrined in Article 2 TEU, where such misconduct has an impact on the person or entity’s integrity which negatively affects or concretely risks affecting the performance of the legal commitment’ 5 . 1 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (recast), OJ L, 2024/2509, 26.9.2024. 2 OJ L 328, 6.12.2008, p. 55–58. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:12016M/TXT 4 https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/Convention_ENG 5 Article 138(1)(c)(vi) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509.”
  EU engagement with civil society · Regulation of NGOs in Europe · Jewish culture and antisemitism
• “Thank you very much for ECR. Mr. Vice Chairman. **Cristian TERHEȘ: Thank you. I have a few questions for both commissioners. Um, it's more about the future based on the experience that we acknowledged so far. First, it's about the military mobility. We have a big problem right now moving military equipment from west part of Europe to east part of Europe. And considering the the past experience, what do you see or what do you think can be done in the upcoming MFF and any other, uh, financial instruments that we have to make sure that we, you know, in a few years we finalize this, uh, interconnectivity between east part of or west part of Europe and east part and north and south. Uh, the second question is about, uh, Green Deal and many other connected issues. And is it related to the chemicals and the chemistry industry in Europe in order to manufacture in Europe gunpowder or explosives, we need many chemicals. The problem is that those chemicals are costing a lot, uh, right now. So in order to have a strong, uh, defense, uh, system, I would say in Europe, we need to make sure that we, we manufacture these, uh, these things in inside of Europe, and we don't import them. So what can be done, for example, to, uh, to make sure that, uh, this chemicals are, are made here and not overseas? Uh, research and development. Uh, there was a lot of talk about drones. Uh, I also talked to many people in Ukraine, some of them that are even fighting there. They explain me the tactics that they use in the battle. And the tactics are evolving, you know, day by day. **Cristian TERHEȘ: So if you have a project right now on developing certain drones. Not in two years, in a matter of weeks. Situation is changing because each side is it's adapting. So this is also an issue that the touching base on the on the procurement because you, uh, you put a bid out for, uh, certain, uh, contracts. You have an idea about how these drones, uh, you want to look based on the requirements that you have today, but by tomorrow, they are obsolete. So we need adaptation here. So what exactly can, uh, we do from your perspective in order for, uh, on one side, you know, European companies to have access to capital, but at the same time, to make sure that we, that we, uh, stay on top of things because we if we develop something three years from now, it might be good now, but in three years, the technology will be obsolete. Last but not least, the physical barriers with the borders with Russia. Uh, we saw what happened in Ukraine. There are many incursions. Even if they if they don't use right now big, uh, military equipment, they can easily use bicycles or motorcycles to, uh, to sneak in a country. Uh, and I was, you know, I want to ask and raise this issue, you know, what can be done from your perspective to actually build a physical barrier to make sure that, uh, we will not have, uh, similar incursions in, uh, in the European Union from the Russian side. Thank you.”
  Defence spending
• “9.3 I have to correct myself. It is clear that the Commission needs to take further action to ensure that EU funds are implemented with fewer errors. Secondly. Second priority. Simplification. Simplification could help decrease the error rate and also ease the administrative burden of beneficiaries, especially SMEs. I welcome the steps Commission has already taken, but it's not enough. The Commission needs to get serious on simplification for the current funds as well as for the new MFF. Further simplification, if done well and in a way that does not decrease the transparency of EU funding, could help the Union increase the competitiveness in a geopolitical situation that is increasingly difficult for the European Union. But I also want to stress that we need to have a common understanding with the with the Commission what simplification really means. And we are talking, of course, about the simplification of programmes. Third priority rule of law. Parliament has always been very clear. No money for member States where the rule of law is not respected in the in that light. December 2023 was a sensitive month with money under the RAF and cohesion funds made available despite concerns for the rule of law. When the rule of law, a fundamental value of our union is not respected, the Commission should use all tools available in the Rule of Law toolbox to protect the financial interests of the EU in a coherent and transparent manner.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Dear colleagues, now we are swiftly moving to our next item on our agenda. I am pleased to welcome Mr. Lachaise, the director of the European Joint Undertaking for Iter and the development of fusion energy, as well as Mr. Jensen, the executive director of the European High Performance Computing Joint Undertaking. So real excellence here to welcome your two joint undertakings have been selected by the rapporteur, Mr. Witzig, to be heard in our committee and we are looking forward to a fruitful exchange. I have to say sorry for the delay, but we are having hearings for the whole day now and things like this can happen. But I'm quite optimistic that we can finish on time. And I'm also happy to welcome Mr.. Mrs. Gall-pelcz, the reporting member of the Court of Auditors, which will kick start this hearing with the presentation of the annual report on the joint undertakings. Before starting, I am also glad to note that Mrs. Vittori, the Executive Executive Executive Director of the Smart Networks and Service Joint Undertakings, as well as Mr. Makanga. There you are. I am the executive director of the Global Health Edctp three joint undertaking are attending this hearing solely as observers. I take this opportunity to congratulate you on reaching your financial autonomy during the year 2023 and welcome you to your first discharge procedure and to the Committee. I also would like to welcome the Commission representatives, of course, attending this hearing. And now I will give the floor to Mrs. Gal Pelcz from the Court of Auditors for a presentation of the annual report. The floor is yours.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “I understand that the RAF has always been very beneficial to some member States and very helpful during the, um, during the pandemic. But of course, we need to look how are we how are we going to solve problems that might occur in the future? I'm, of course, thinking about the ongoing defence debate and how to finance maybe on EU level. And therefore it's extremely important that we look not only at the effects of the RAF, but also, um, how could how good it could have been if it was better, if it had been better designed and therefore, um, I repeat my criticism on the RF. I think it has serious flaws. And looking at the future and how we're going to address issues in the future, of course, with the next MFF, I'm very clear that the RF cannot be a blueprint whatsoever for the upcoming Multiannual Financial Framework, and I hope that we can distinguish these two things. Have it been? Has it been beneficial for Member states? I know, especially Italy and Spain, uh, really welcomed this instrument. But on the other hand, we have to look at the future and there are serious, uh, errors that have been made with the design of the RF. Having said this, I open the floor for a catch the eye. And the first one was Thomas Zdechovsky.”
  Conditions to access EU budget
• “Dear colleagues, I hope you had. All of you had a nice and relaxing summer break, and I would like to welcome you to this joint budget meeting, which I will co-chair together with the Vice Chair, Monika Hohlmeier. As you might have heard us, the budget chair, Mr. Van Overveld, had a pretty serious accident. So he will not be able to be here today with us. But I think we can all agree to wish him very well and hope to see him back as soon as possible. And nevertheless, of course, that is why we have vice chairs. One of the reasons why we do have vice chairs. And Monika and I, we have done this before, so we will do this together today as well. Today's meeting is dedicated to the consideration of the draft implementation report on the rule of law. Conditionality. Conditionality regime. Since the regulation started to apply at the beginning of 2021. The European Parliament as a whole, and our two committees in particular, have closely followed its implementation. In addition to several plenary resolutions as well, we have held various meetings with the Commission to discuss relevant developments. And in the spring of this year, our committees furthermore organised two public hearings, one on the implementation of the conditionality regulation and another one together with Libra on smart conditionality. Almost five years into the implementation of the rule of law, conditionality regulation is a good moment for us as a Parliament to take stock on its implementation and to take recommendations for the future. With that, I will pass to Monica, who is wearing the double hat hit, of course. As I said, vice chair, but also as a co-rapporteur on the implementation report for today, you can decide which hat you're wearing. The floor is yours.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Thank you. I'd like to give the possibility to answer right away for the Commission. Council? Council. Sorry. The council, of course. Getting know. Maybe you can ask right away. We do the vis a vis the ping pong system, as we call it.”
  EU political integration
• “Thank you very much. I would now like to give the commission first the response, the possibility to respond, and then Mr. Hessler for the Court of Auditors, also for for seizing the opportunity for some final remarks, or has there been are there any other colleagues wanting to take the floor? It's not the case. So, Mr. Berkowitz. No. Mr. Sanchez. Please, Mr. Sanchez first, and then we'll get back to commission and court.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Of course, this year the rapporteur is Eric Marquart from the Greens. Mr. Marquart has drafted a comprehensive horizontal report on the 33 agencies under consideration for consideration for discharge. As usual, we will begin with a presentation by the rapporteur, followed by the views of the shadow rapporteur. But I don't see the rapporteur yet. So maybe we can have a short two minute break and I will say goodbye to our guests and then we'll see who's holding the presentation here. So two minute break. Please stay seated.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “So, colleagues, we continue our commission discharge for the financial year 2024 with a hearing on Mf3. The heading is natural resources and environment. As you know, we've already held a hearing for this MFF heading on the 20th of November, focusing on the implementation of the Common Agricultural Policy from the European Commission. We have with us today Teresa Ribera, the Executive Vice President of the Commission for clean, Just and Competitive Transition. Everyone, welcome to our committee and the Commissioner for climate net zero and clean Growth. First of all, I would also like to thank you and your team for the written answers to our questionnaire. That was very helpful. Thank you very much. For that to you and your whole team who was participating I believe for both of you, it's the first time participating in a hearing for the discharge. So thank you for being here. And welcome to our committee again. I would also like to thank you and your services again, like I did for preparing this. Very well. So the European Court of Auditors is represented by Klaus Heinlein. And as he just told me for the last time, he will be a guest of our committee. I mean, you can always come back in private if you like. That's that is at least possible. So thank you very much for your service. And you will present us to the court's relevant findings concerning the MFF heading number three. Welcome to the committee, dear. I should also mention that we will apply the back and forth method in this hearing, which implies that I will give the floor to the Commission or the Court of Auditors, and immediately after the questions, in order to have a more interactive dialogue, you are asked to answer the questions. We will start, as always, by hearing the Court of Auditors. And without further ado, Klaus, you have the floor for seven minutes. Thank you very much, chair. The.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Yes. Thank you chair. Thank you Commissioner. Thank you also, most of all to the Court of Auditors. Um, I think that, uh, this opinion on the proposed regulation is, uh, extremely important. Uh, there's it's highly relevant to our legislative work. And, uh, also, I think that the court offers effective guidance. So that is precisely what we expect from the European Court of Auditors. So the court rightly identifies several substantive weaknesses of the Commission proposal and asked the right question would also address some questions. So, uh, what is your opinion of the Court of Auditors on the overlaps with the financial regulation that the Performance Framework Regulation proposes, particularly as regards the horizontal principles? Um, since these principles are already enshrined in the financial regulation as well. So what does the European Court of Auditors also think of the flexibility left to the member states, um, in selecting the indicators for each intervention field? How can we ensure, let's say, comparability, if every member state will choose different indicators for the same intervention field? And the Commission also claims that the reduction of indicators is a positive thing. And um, and in theory it probably is, but we are already receiving input from colleagues from specialised committees that, uh, compared compared to the current programming period, um, some important indicators are missing. So would you say that this lower number of indicators might lead to a situation in which we will not actually capture the performance of the union financing instruments? And in terms of the governance of the regulation, the Commission proposes guidelines for the do no significant harm principle.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you very much. And of course, I will also give the opportunity to the Court of Auditors to respond. And you can also seize the opportunity and have some closing and final remarks for today's debate, Mr. Hyzler.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “So it's adopted. Thank you very much for that. And we can move on to item number eight. It's the discharge of the general budget of the EU, the commission discharge. Uh, and I will take the floor. Um, as the rapporteur for this file, um, I will stay brief. We only have 45 minutes on this important topic at issue. But, uh, first of all, I would like to thank especially the Court of Auditors. It was was a clear. It was clear. Clear enough. Thank you. And I would like to thank again the Court of Auditors for their very important work and their contribution, but also the Commission for their cooperation. The hearings we held in autumn were quite intensive. The Commission replies prepared, uh, so for the written questions and of course, the findings of the Court of Auditors, again, were the key elements for preparing the draft report, uh, to kickstart the consideration of the draft report. Let me summarize the political priorities that I identified during the 2023 commission discharge. First of all, and there was a reoccurring issue for us, the error rate. Um, the court's estimate for error rate has been on the rise since 2020. The 2023 figure is alarmingly high, 5.6%. In addition, for some headings, the error rate is even higher. Notably for the cohesion. You remember that the error rate is almost double digit 9.6%.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Yes. Thank you chair. Thank you Commissioner. Thank you also, most of all to the Court of Auditors. Um, I think that, uh, this opinion on the proposed regulation is, uh, extremely important. Uh, there's it's highly relevant to our legislative work. And, uh, also, I think that the court offers effective guidance. So that is precisely what we expect from the European Court of Auditors. So the court rightly identifies several substantive weaknesses of the Commission proposal and asked the right question would also address some questions. So, uh, what is your opinion of the Court of Auditors on the overlaps with the financial regulation that the Performance Framework Regulation proposes, particularly as regards the horizontal principles? Um, since these principles are already enshrined in the financial regulation as well. So what does the European Court of Auditors also think of the flexibility left to the member states, um, in selecting the indicators for each intervention field? How can we ensure, let's say, comparability, if every member state will choose different indicators for the same intervention field? And the Commission also claims that the reduction of indicators is a positive thing. And um, and in theory it probably is, but we are already receiving input from colleagues from specialised committees that, uh, compared compared to the current programming period, um, some important indicators are missing. So would you say that this lower number of indicators might lead to a situation in which we will not actually capture the performance of the union financing instruments? And in terms of the governance of the regulation, the Commission proposes guidelines for the do no significant harm principle.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Then, of course, the RAF. The court has indicated that there were significant issues with the legality and regularity of the RAF and its expenditure in 2023, and therefore issued a qualified opinion for RAF spendings in 2023. This is very worrying for us. Um, for the billions of RAF funds that remain to be spent, and also because of the plans leaked to the press and already communicated by the Commission itself, which suggests that the Commission is considering using the RAF as a blueprint, as a role model for the next MFF. The deficiencies of the RAF, which the Commission itself has also acknowledged during our hearings. It's important to stress that in exchange with our committee, um, such as the lack of adequate involvement of the regional and local authorities, cross-border cooperation, for example, and other issues. Insufficient flexibility make it clear that, um, while the RAF is innovative, it can be um cannot be used as a template for the next era without the fixing these issues. And this is an extremely important issue for our Parliament in the upcoming MFF negotiations, because this also affects our role and the role of the institutions in general.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Dear colleagues, dear guests, welcome to our today's meeting of our committee. First of all, we have to start with the adoption of the agenda. As always, if there are no objections, the agenda can be adopted without modifications. This seems to be the case so we can continue with the chair's announcements. First of all, of course interpretation as always. It was requested in the languages set out in the news. The media will be web streamed and can be followed live via the web page and the summary of coordinators. Recommendations of the meetings of January 28th this year was circulated to members on the 3rd of February. If you do not raise any objections, these recommendations will be deemed to be approved by the end of this meeting. So please, I would also like to remind you to bring your voting cards with you tomorrow for the vote at 9:00 on the opinion to budge on guidelines to the 2026 budget. Um, item number three, the approval of minutes of meetings, um, from the 27th of 28th, um, of January. Are there any objections? Does not seem to be the case. So we can proceed with our item number four, the discharge 2023, the presentation of the council recommendations by the Polish presidency. Um, we come now to exactly this point, and on behalf of the Polish presidency of the Council, I welcome the Deputy State Secretary of the Ministry of Finance, Mr. Pavel Carbonic. A very warm welcome to our committee. He will present to us the recommendations of the Council to the 2023 discharge procedure, and the presentation will be followed by possible comments and questions from the political groups. Uh, just a reminder, the council is under the legal obligation to issue recommendations to the European Parliament on discharge, and Parliament is under the legal obligation to consider the Council's recommendations once they have been communicated. For this reason, we always aim to have the Council council's recommendations presented before we vote in committee. So this is the case. Having said this, Mr. Nick, you have the floor.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “End of this item. I think a lot of questions remain open for the, you know, for us to, to, to work on, especially the question on the real impact, because besides of the semantic discussion on what is a reform or not, or the bureaucratic checking of some steps are taken, we need to have some scientific research. And, uh, on what is the real impact on all this money that has been spent. And that was basically the question of Jonas. And, uh, we will need to find answers on this, uh, because, uh, also bearing in mind that a quite a big chunk of the money is not disbursed yet, and, uh, we will have, you know, time till the 30th of September to check on, uh, what's going to happen in the future. Uh, and again, um, what we did here, um, was done before, you know, a change in geopolitical situation occurred. So, uh, the problem could be that we're addressing problems that we thought in, you know, in 2021 or 2022, we would have in 2026. Uh, and that is a general issue. But thank you very much, uh, for both of you, Mrs.. Madam Mayor, and not only to the two of you, but also the teams behind you, um, who are working. And thank you very much for this interesting discussion. And we'll have a short break and a change of seat with the for the next topic at issue, please don't leave the room. This only goes out to the MEPs, of course. Uh, you are allowed to leave the room. Thank you very much for being here. ***Discharge 2024: General budget of the EU - Commission (Hearing on Migration and border management with Commissioner M. Brunner)”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much. And I would like to start with a question on behalf of the rapporteur. And he ask about and he reminds that DG press carries out the responsibility for interinstitutional relations and that therefore, you also play a role through the Directorate for Legislative Acts on the management of parliamentary questions and a process that, from his point of view, has in the recent years and he gives an example of one of his questions taking one month to be validated by the Parliament services. Yeah, there needs to be no better processes. So and he thinks that they have this process has become more bureaucratic and slow, and therefore he asks, and what is the average time for translation and the number of linguistic corrections made by the Parliament Secretariat in this process? What is the average time of an answer from the Commission? And how do you assess the reminder system, in this regard. And also an interesting question. What is the longest time that a question has been holed up within the Parliament's secretariat, and maybe also by the Commission? Because if you if you are ready to answer right now, that would be great.”
  Multilingualism in EU institutions
• “90s. For changing seats and inviting our guests for the next for the next topic at issue, but of course not. Without thanking the commission also for participating starting with the written answers to our questionnaire and being ready to answer answering our questions here. Thank you very much to the executive vice president and also Mr. Hoekstra. So, colleagues, we are moving to the last agenda item on this afternoon, which is Which is the hearing of the joint undertakings. Today I'm pleased to welcome Mr. Mark lashes. I haven't seen you. There you are. He's the director of the European Joint Undertaking for Iter and the development of fusion energy, as well as Mr. Jensen, the executive director of the European High Performance Computing Joint Undertaking. You your two joint undertakings have been selected by the rapporteur to be heard in our committee and we are looking forward to a very fruitful exchange with you. Thank you very much for being here. I'm also happy to welcome Mr. Hans Lindblad, the reporting member of the Court of Auditors, who will kick start this hearing with a presentation. And he said it will be a short presentation of the annual report on the joint undertakings. Mr. Lindblad. The floor is yours.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Finally, budgetary and financial management, the high liquidity, outstanding debts, high interest rates and related risks for the EU budget need to be addressed. It is urgent to find solutions because if the amounts needed to pay back the union's debts because of next generation Europe, if they increase as a consequence, These funds, um, the funds available to finance our political priorities, of course, decrease. Simple as that. Without new own resources, we will therefore not be able to finance our priorities such as competitiveness, innovation, security. And of course, these days, most of all defence. This is a problem for today. But the current MFF and and the year under discharge and for tomorrow for the ongoing discussions for the next MFF is even more important and the next MFF will be decisive. I mean, we talk about defence, we talk about competitiveness. We need to make this happen in the budget as well. Therefore, this remains a very urgent and important political priority. Budgetary and financial management have to become better in the future. So I look forward for, uh, to hearing your views. I would like to give the floor to the shadow rapporteurs. The group has three minutes. We will start with Mr. Cepeda. The floor is yours.”
  Own EU resources
• “Dear colleagues, I'm sorry. Dear colleagues, good afternoon. We start this afternoon with a this afternoon session with our hearings for the EU decentralised agencies in the context of our discharge procedure for the year 2023. Let me start by welcoming the Echa reporting member, Mr. Monsieur Francois Roger Cazalla, who will report on the findings from the court's annual reports on the EU agencies for the financial year 2023. I am also pleased to welcome the representatives of the invited agencies as follows. Mr. Martin Kern, director of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology, in his capacity as the chair of the EU agency's network. Welcome Mr. Kern and Mrs. Marilyn Menig, the executive Director ad interim of the European Agency for the Operational Management of Large Scale IT systems, EU Lisa and Mrs. Emma Cook, the executive director of the European Medicines Agency, the EMA and Mrs. Nina Gregory, executive director of the European Union Agency for asylum. Mr. Johann Ebner, deputy executive director of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation, Europol. And last but not least, Mr. Yuko Sakano. I hope that my finish is not that good. I'm sorry for that. The Deputy executive director for information management and processes at the European border and Coast guard agency, Frontex. Last but not least, I would like to welcome the commission representative, Mr. Christophe Galland, head of unit batch A3. That's internal policy. Internal policies. And Mr. Mario Pletikosa, the program manager. Home E1 the funds coordination to whom I might give the floor for short and technical complimentary remarks if necessary. So thank you again. We will start. Um, Mr. Kaczala, you have the floor for ten minutes.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much. Um, there's a lot to say, especially from the control point of view. The commission pretends to still act under shared management. Um, but the responsibility is shifting completely to the member states under the financing not linked to cost model. And I'm specifically concerned that the proposal will be a step back in terms of protection of EU financial interests, especially when I see as so far only leaked regulation in article 52.4. You state that the audit authority now, quote, the audit authority is not expected to verify the underlying costs of the operations for the purpose of it audits of its audit work. That would mean that your proposal means that EU funds will be less strictly audited than the national funds. And I don't think that the taxpayer should be less be protected on European level than on national level. And really, I have to say that the discharge right And the control right of a European Parliament is something that we really fought for, and we should not give it away that easy.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Just to stress this last point, just a few days ago, we received a communication by the Commission to Parliament and Council, and you hardly find the word Parliament in it. Just on Just on the last sentence of these last page of these, I think 15 or 15 pages, there are five paragraphs about the next steps to be taken. The first one is about, you know, unity of the commission. Second one about the member States. The third one then is about stakeholders and everything else related to it. European citizens panel and so on. And in the fourth paragraph you find the Parliament and Commission says, well, it's an important player, together with the Committee of Regions and the European Committee for Social Economic Affairs. But at least and that's a good point. They mention that they are looking forward to the upcoming report. So that shows that at least this is in their heads that we will come up with this report. But I strongly support that. We should have a strong position as Parliament here, not only because we should defend Parliament's rights, but this is about European democracy and the rule of institutions. And therefore, For having said this. This strengthens the importance. Dirk, do you want to have some closing remarks on this?”
  EU political integration
• “Um, I think, uh, we need an interdisciplinary approach here. And you touched two times the subject of the anti-fraud architecture. And maybe you can elaborate a bit on this, um, where we where we need changes here and where we can, uh, make our anti-fraud architecture better. Of course, I know some of the issues, and we talked about that, um, already, but, um, this is also a topic for the co-legislators. And, um, to Where should we intervene to counter and prevent more or better this kind of crime specifically for, for us as lawmakers? And then maybe one last remark. It's very I mean, it's very impressive how you explained what kind of misbehaviour is investigated. And it's very clear that VAT fraud is for the internal market, for the legal economy, for the security of our also for the competition. The national budgets is a big threat. And but when it comes to the union's budget, um, we know that just a minimal part of the VAT collected by the member state goes to the Union budget. But it's in the big picture. Even this 0.15, or 0.3% of the VAT collected is supposed to. The Union budget is very important and absolutely meaningful for us and even in the long run, nothing gets back to the. Nothing comes back to the union's budget. As I explained earlier, um, so I would be interested in knowing your views on this matter, because I know that you are also trying to get, you know, as many returns as possible for our European Union.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Yes. Thank you chair. Thank you Commissioner. Thank you also, most of all to the Court of Auditors. Um, I think that, uh, this opinion on the proposed regulation is, uh, extremely important. Uh, there's it's highly relevant to our legislative work. And, uh, also, I think that the court offers effective guidance. So that is precisely what we expect from the European Court of Auditors. So the court rightly identifies several substantive weaknesses of the Commission proposal and asked the right question would also address some questions. So, uh, what is your opinion of the Court of Auditors on the overlaps with the financial regulation that the Performance Framework Regulation proposes, particularly as regards the horizontal principles? Um, since these principles are already enshrined in the financial regulation as well. So what does the European Court of Auditors also think of the flexibility left to the member states, um, in selecting the indicators for each intervention field? How can we ensure, let's say, comparability, if every member state will choose different indicators for the same intervention field? And the Commission also claims that the reduction of indicators is a positive thing. And um, and in theory it probably is, but we are already receiving input from colleagues from specialised committees that, uh, compared compared to the current programming period, um, some important indicators are missing. So would you say that this lower number of indicators might lead to a situation in which we will not actually capture the performance of the union financing instruments? And in terms of the governance of the regulation, the Commission proposes guidelines for the do no significant harm principle.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “This you are released for now. I think we will follow up on some of the issues and we are looking forward on the discharge report by our rapporteur. Thank you very much. We will continue with our general budget of the EU discharge procedure. We already welcomed our Vice-Chair, Vice President, Zerbini. We also welcome our Vice President, Javy Lopez. Both are responsible for the budget.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “All right. Um, then we can proceed, uh, giving the floor for some closing remarks to the commission, if you like. I mean, you had to answer quite a lot of questions. And thank you for all the questions, especially those who were somehow connected to the discharge process. Um, the commissioner, if you have closing remarks, I would like to give the floor now.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Dear colleagues, we will continue our today's meeting with a hearing on the RAF with the Executive Vice President, Mr. Raffaele Fitto. A very warm welcome to our committee and Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis. Also to you. A very warm welcome. Also present is, of course, as almost always our member for the annual report. Jan Gregoor. Jan. Um, good to have you here again. Dear colleagues, we start with the agenda with this hearing for our discharge procedure. And I would like to start by thanking both commissioners for answering our questionnaire. That was very important for us. Thank you very much for that. And for you, Mr. Fitto. This is the first time you are participating in a hearing, uh, for the annual discharge. And Mr. Dobrovsky is Welcome back. You know the procedure already very well. We will start off by hearing from the Court of Auditors about the audit results for the financial year 2024, but before Jan Gregor will take the floor. I would also like to seize the opportunity and welcome a group of Mr.. Our colleague Daniel Freund. They are present in the room the regional working group of the Greens in Brandenburg on european issues the Europa Brandenburg. Having said this, very welcome here in the budgetary control Committee. Dear Jan, the floor is yours. My letter says. Or my preparation says for eight minutes.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “I'm not referring to NGOs in general or whatever, and even the commission said in our hearings, yes, there is a reputational risk and we want to change and we want to, you know, want to adjust here so that this reputational risk will not be given in the future. That's the point. And I have seen some of Some of the wordings, and I repeat, they give the impression that the Commission somehow said how to lobby other parts of the commission and even Parliament. And that is the point I'm addressing to. So let's all together work on reducing this reputational risk and stick to the issue. I know there's an ongoing discussion about NGOs, and there might be different points of view. And yes, there might be a general, you know, skepticism towards some NGOs, but there's also some defense of defense of NGOs, regardless of anything. So yes, it has become ideological. I want to tone it down. I'm not you know, I'm not trying to make this a bigger issue than it is. But nevertheless, it needs to be addressed because we as Parliament are also affected. And I'm looking not at NGOs, actually, I'm looking at the commission and the way grant agreements have been designed. That's the issue. And I think this is what I try to write down in my report. Last point RAF. Um, I think we have a common understanding that there are there are in the design of the RAF there there are some flaws, serious flaws.”
  Regulation of NGOs in Europe
• “Indeed, a meeting on the discharge with the council would not be complete without this question. You're right. And of course, I would like to give you the answer, the possibility to answer on this. The floor is yours.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much. Um, and you know the choreography already. We'll start with the rapporteur, um, on the discharge, Mr. Daniel Freund. Thank you. Chair. I have to mention again for our guests, we we, uh, implemented to use this ping pong system. So you get a question, and you can answer right away. We're not collecting questions.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you. Maybe Mr. Can can also answer the question on the gender pay gap for the network. And then I think the other questions were clear. Who was addressed. Are there any more questions? Yes, madam.”
  Gender pay transparency
• “Yes. Uh, I'm looking forward. Maybe if I get an invitation for the opening of the office in Berlin, I will. I will gladly go there because I think it's a very good development. Uh, you will probably have a same opinion, just very briefly, because, the role of the discharge is also to. To learn lessons for the future. And looking at 2024 and 2025, where you also had to build up a administration for these new tasks or a bigger task. Still, the budget in this year and last year was just a tiny portion. If you look at the defense fund and military mobility of the overall budget, this will hopefully change. That's a good part of the MFF proposal of the commission. Um, what does it mean in terms of administrative capacities, staff and everything that's related to it? Because, I mean, to have traceability, accountability, also scrutiny on on this hopefully increasing numbers in the next budget. That will be a big task for you. Can you elaborate on what this means? Um, bearing in mind your first, uh, you know, lessons learned from building up a new administration here, maybe we'll start with Mr. Kubilius and the.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “You and others. You praised the work of the Secretariat and of course I do this as well, and I would like to seize the opportunity. And welcome back Ana Maria Noguera, who we had to miss you. Unfortunately, for a couple of months. You're back. Back on this file, actually, and that's very good. It's good to have you back here. So, um, I would like to also remind you on the next steps in the process. The deadline for tabling amendment is Monday, February 16th at 2:00. Shadow meetings are planned to take place in weeks ten and 11. And finally, we will vote in committee. Uh, most likely during the March meeting in on the 24th of March. So that is how we will proceed. And now we can turn to the next item. We are a bit ahead of our time schedule, so we could have a five minute break. But I know what happens if we have a five minute break. Uh, so I would rather carry on, uh, even though not all shadows are present yet. So the next item, uh, will be the discharge 2024, the general budget of the EU Commission. And, uh, let me also, uh, use this opportunity to thank again the Court of Auditors, also the Commission for their excellent cooperation. Uh, the hearings were held in the autumn with the commissioners. The replies, uh, the commission prepared, uh, for the written questions and, of course, the findings of the Court of Auditors, which are key elements in our discharge process. We will kick off the debate by giving the floor to the commission discharge rapporteur, Mr. Daniel Freund. You have roughly ten minutes to present your report, and if you're ready, we could start right now. Daniel, the floor is yours.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Dear president, dear Commissioner, the minister who already had to leave said status quo is not an option. And that is true. We all agree more of the same is not the answer. We do agree, but we should not make the same mistakes that we already made. And during the RAF we did a lot of mistakes and we witnessed a lot of mistakes. And I know that you are eager to say the MFF is not RF to zero. That might be true, but on the other hand, we replicate a lot of principles from the RF. That is the findings not linked to cost principle. That is the target and milestones principle. And it leads to less traceability, less parliamentary scrutiny. And we know that not because it's our own opinion. We did a you know, we did it during the discharge process. We took a very close look at it, but we also heard it from the European Court of Auditors. We hear it from Apple. We hear it from Olaf. So we are very sure we should not make the same mistakes again. So yes, status quo is not an option, but this status quo from the RF is also not an option for us as a Parliament, and we will follow that very closely. Thank you very much.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “So what is your opinion of ECA? You you mentioned it, but maybe you can elaborate. What is your opinion on this? Would it be better to enshrine, for example, this principle, significant provisions in the Basic Act or have a delegated act? And according to our understanding, the reporting on the single gateway will be done based on implementation of commitment appropriations and not on payments. In this case, what actual relevance will the reporting have? As long as we do not know how much funds actually reached the final beneficiaries and final beneficiaries is very important to the. Budgetary control committee. As you know. So how do you evaluate some inconsistencies between the proposal and other proposals? Um, from the MFF package. For example, the NPS regulation, more precisely the climate spending target is included in this regulation. Also as regards the NPS, while other spending targets such as social spending are included in the NPS regulation. So would you say that for the sake of, uh, legal certainty, such targets should have been included in the sectoral regulations? So these are some of my questions and I'm happy to hear the answers.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “So, dear colleagues, we'll continue not only with our two vice presidents, but also with our secretary general, Mr. Alessandro Giachetti, as well as Francis Clergue, the parliament's internal auditor, and Pascal Chouinard, the director for the authority for European Political Parties and Political Foundations. Our friend Jan Gregoor from the Court of Auditors was not available to participate in this meeting, but we have a representative from the Court of Auditors in case there are any specific questions addressed to them. Dear colleagues. I would also like to warmly thank the Parliament's services for the written replies to the questionnaire on the Parliament's discharge count had 61 questions this year, and I am aware that responding to this number of questions was tough work and even smaller than in the past, it has required a lot of time. Thank you very much for that. And I would like to recall the structure of our hearing. Given our tight time schedule that we've lost a lot of time during the previous meeting, we will start with our vice presidents, who will be followed by the Secretary general, the internal auditor, and finally the director of the authority. And then we'll go on with the rapporteurs and the shadows. We will start with our Vice president, Sabina. Farhan. Sabina. You have the floor.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much. It's always good to be optimistic. And we are indeed as well. Thank you very much also for being here and answering our questions. I think especially your remarks on the RF are very important because you also see that Council and Parliament might have something here in common when it comes to the programming of the next MFF, which will be extremely important. And just bear in mind the current discussion on the future of defence spending, which is, I understood, very important to the Polish presidency. I think we need to have to take a very close look at what we did in the past and how we financed things, and you're right, the programming is decisive here. So thank you very much for being here. Uh, I see no further questions so we can move on to the next point, but not without, uh, saying goodbye to our guests from the council. Thank you very much for being here again. So then, my dear colleagues, um, we are now moving to the next agenda item for this afternoon, which is the consideration of the draft report on the discharge of decentralised agency and the budgetary year 2023. As you are all aware, this year marks an important transition to a new era as we move from producing individual reports here in the committee to each for each agency to a single consolidated report, which highlights the main issues and challenges faced by the agencies in 2023 from a budgetary control perspective.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much and also for adjusting your pace. I know you have a lot of things to tell. Sorry for interrupting you. And you mentioned the two missions of this committee. Uh, they gave us very valuable insights. And it also shows that enlargement is extremely important to us and everything around it concerning transparency, scrutiny and, uh, also the anti-fraud work that is conducted on the ground there. Having said this, international partnerships are also very important to this committee. Of course, Mr. Ziegler. The floor is yours.”
  EU enlargement
• “Thank you chair. Um, so our work in the budget framework has only just begun yesterday with a presentation. So this marks our starting point, and I very much look forward to receiving the views and opinions of all committees involved in this process. So the proposed performance framework does, at least to some extent, introduce a degree of simplification, which of course is a welcome development. Uh, I do welcome the intention of the commission to simplify the reporting requirements, particularly the reducing of indicators from 5000 in the current multiannual Financial framework to, I would say, less than 1000. Yesterday, The Commissioner Séraphin used the number 900. So the specialized committees, as you and I agree, will have to look at those in detail. However, I think that significant challenges remain. In particular, there are still serious problems with indicators that do not genuinely reflect results and therefore will fail to provide a clear picture of performance. So on the indicators, it is very good that we have, as we have heard, that we are having two categories of indicators output and indicators. However, I think that many of the result ones are still output ones.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Dear colleagues, please take a seat. Thank you very much. Now that everybody has found a seat, I would like to continue with our hearing on the commission discharge for the financial year 2024 with a hearing on MFF heading one, which is single market innovation in digital and MFF heading five security and defense. And I welcome our distinguished guests from the European Commission, Mrs. Henna Virkkunen, the Executive Vice President for tax sovereignty, Security and democracy. And Mr. Andrius Kubilius, Commissioner for Defence and Space. A very warm welcome to our committee today. I believe this is the first time for you, uh, both of you to participate in a discharge hearing. Uh, welcome to our meeting. So, uh, of course, I also welcome, uh, our counterparts from the our colleagues, I would say from the European Court of Auditors, which is Mr. Kozlov and Mr. Marek, we already welcomed you for the first hearing. Um, they're here to present us the main findings of the Echa concerning heading one and heading five for the year 2024. And we will start by hearing from the Court of Auditors and without any further ado, Mr. Kozlov. Mr.. The euros yours for a combined 14 minutes my paper purposes.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “So let's continue with our today's meeting. Dear friends. Uh, we are working on the discharge for 2023. Of course, as you all know, uh, and also tomorrow, um, on the budget for 2026. So this all relates to the MFF process, of course. Uh, but the preparation for the next MFF as well. Um, so it's already on our way, and it's plays a big role in our political work already, and it deserves our utmost attention. I think we all agree on this. The Parliament contributes to the discussion with an own initiative report on a and I quote, um, revamped long term EU budget, which is being prepared in the Budget Committee. Uh, our committee contributes to the report, uh, with an With an opinion and we have a rapporteur chosen and that is Dirk Goetinck. He is with us today. And on January 31st, the Budget Committee presented its draft report and two days later tabled his draft opinion on the budgetary report. We are curious to hear from you, Dirk, what your main observations are and which elements you think should be better reflected in the draft report. Again, uh, I think it's very, very important to stress the importance of this whole process. The good thing you have the floor. Please go ahead.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you professor. Thank you, dear chairs. Um, I think on a day like today, four years after the full scale invasion of Ukraine and the start of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, there's no need to emphasize how important this issue is. And there's no need to remind you of the geopolitical situation, but it's far more important to think about how to effectively counter the current threats. And we need a strong European response based on a solid defence industrial base. We need to build a true European Defence Union with interoperable defence capabilities, and that requires a fundamental change in approach. We need to consolidate military demand, and the concept of a European Defence Union remains open for interpretation, as we all know. So it is not clearly defined in the treaties. The current treaty framework was designed primarily for coordination and intergovernmental cooperation in defence, rather than for collective defence, with clear operational responsibilities at EU level. So article 42 provides a political objective by referring to the progressive framing of a common defence, but it leaves its realization subject to a unanimous decision of the European Council, which raises questions about feasibility and also timing. So the reliance on unanimity, unanimity, sorry, unanimity and voluntary participation continues to limit predictability, speed and also effectiveness in crisis situations. So to build a true European Defence Union, we need to recognise the limits of the current current treaty framework, while the treaties allow for closer cooperation and they were not designed to ensure clear, predictable and operational Uh, mutual defense at EU level. So, as highlighted by the Parliament in recently adopted annual report on the implementation of the CSDp, there is a need to strengthen the practical functioning of mutual assistance. Clear procedures in case it is triggered, and improved coordination between Member States and EU structures, of course always in full coherence with NATO. So addressing these gaps may require targeted adaptions of the treaties. That's the important institutional question. So that cooperation in defence can more can move beyond coordination and can be more, can become more effective in practice. And I'm really looking forward to our work here.”
  EU competences on defence
• “And see you next year. As commissioner rightfully said at the latest. And thank you very much for being here and supporting us. And this goes out not only to the two of you, but also for the whole team behind you and everybody in the commission and also at the Court of Auditors who contributed to this valuable information. Thank you very much for that. We will continue in a in a minute. We'll change seats now with the discharge on the general budget of the European Parliament with Mr. Winckler.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “So, colleagues, let us continue with the commission discharge on the heading number four, which is, of course, migration and border management. Therefore, I have the honor to welcome Mr. Magnus Brunner, the Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration. I think it's the first time for you to participate in this kind of hearing in the committee. I would also like to thank you and your services for the replies you have already provided us with in the written procedure. That is very helpful. Thank you very much. From the European Court of Auditors. We have with us Mrs. Kinga Wisniewska Danek, the head of the cabinet of the European Court of Auditors, reporting member, Mr. Marek Opiola. Unfortunately, Marek. Could not attend today due to a sudden illness. Of course we wish him all the best and a swift recovery. Please give him our regards. And I'm very thankful that you could jump in on short notice. Thank you very much for that. Um, we usually start with a court of auditors, and this is what we'll do right now. Mrs. Wisniewski. Um, the floor is yours for seven minutes. Thank you very much for being here again.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much. Um, Alessandro, I just personal remark from my side. I was a rapporteur for the heading seven for 2025 just recently, and I've done that before in recent years. And I think this time it was easier to come to terms with the council because of your approach and being frugal where possible on our side does not mean that we get less. For example, we came to terms with the Luxembourg Housing allowance. So I just a personal remark. I think this is a good example that it it became easier to to to negotiate on heading seven. And now I give the floor to the internal auditor, Francis Gallagher. Floor's yours.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “But as always, I agree to 100% what you said, John. I think it's extremely important now that we're entering the MFF and the new phases of the MFF negotiations to to to see the lessons learned. And, um, it's that's very crucial. And we see here that future financing needs to build on, on past practice and has to respect essential budgetary control as well. So, um, thank you very much to everyone who contributed, uh, especially, of course, the Court of Auditors, our friend of terrorists, and everybody else who was involved. I know it's a big team behind that. Thank you very much. And as always, we have a very close relationship with the Court of Auditors. We really rely on your input. And, uh, thank you very much and have a safe trip home to Luxembourg. And also, thank you very much to everybody else who contributed.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you very much for your presentation and your findings. I think it's fair to say that a lot of our concerns in the budgetary control committees seem to be, um, uh, you know, may come real with a new MFF and we have with us also Mrs. Tavares. She is one of the two co-rapporteurs on our initiative report on the next MFF, and I think a lot of these findings are very important to us and need to be need to be addressed. Maybe you start, um, with a question or a remark on this. Um, I mean, can be very open here. Maybe you start. Um, I also have some questions concerning your, your your findings and in your, in your report, but maybe you will start first because you have a very important position for Parliament here.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much. And it's very good that we work on an ambitious MFF, and that we contribute to this and make it very clear that our Parliament has an important role here. I mean, not because the Commission gives it us because but because it is our role. We are the co-legislator. But we also have to bear in mind if we talk about the next MFF, we're talking about 2028 and the following years. So there's still a gap. You had you used very strong words and I was thankful for that. On economy and war in war times. And that we need to think new, but we need to think new now. And I think the Munich Security Conference is we can show this very, very, very clearly. So that makes it even more complicated to think about the current situation. Nevertheless, um, we also need to think about the future. And if you bear in mind, for example, what we are, what's what's in it in the current MFF for defence spending, I think if people would know. How tiny this this our efforts are in this area, they would be even more worried. So we need to do both. We need to look at the future. We need to work on the MFF, but we need to find a swift solutions for the current challenges as well. Having said this, I thank you very much for this very good discussion and I think we have the feeling that our our opinion to this report is in good hands. Thank you very much. We will meet tomorrow at 9:00. Again, I would like to remind you to bring your voting cards with you, because we will start with our voting session and then see you tomorrow.”
  Defence spending
• “Europol and Frontex have also been mentioned. Colleagues Um, I see you looking at the at the clock. Um, every, uh, shadow will, of course, have the chance to to ask a question. We will collect the questions here, and we will have some overtime. I think it's okay that we give some privileges to the rapporteur here on the questions, but we need to be a bit on time here. Therefore, I ask you for a swift and sharp and precise answers to the question that the rapporteur asked Mr. Hübner, who has the floor.”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• “So, dear colleagues, welcome to this afternoon's joint budget meeting. Um, which I have the pleasure to chair together with Johan van Overveld, uh, for Buch and, of course, Madam Laluk for econ. Uh, we will be diving into the very pertinent special report number seven this year from the Court of Auditors on the European Fund for Strategic Investments. And as you know, Efsi was launched in 2015 by the Commission and the EIB. Uh, its objective was to address investment shortfall within the EU after the financial crisis by mobilising 500 billion of additional investments by 2022 through different types of debt and equity instruments. The initiative was supported by a 26 billion EU budgetary guarantee and 7.5 billion in EIB resources. In the analysis, the court concludes that Efsi contributed to addressing the EU investment gap but did not fully reach the target, with an estimated overstatement of mobilised investments by 26%, which is worth €131 billion. With the upcoming discussion on the next MFF and the ongoing revision of the Investeu programme, exploring the management of EU budgetary guarantees and their impact on investments can provide valuable insights into how we can enhance the effectiveness of these financial instruments. We will now have the chance here today for the European Court of Auditors to share its findings and discuss with our members from the Committee on Budgets, budgetary Control and Economic and Monetary Affairs.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “So this brings us to this part of the hearing. But of course I would also like to. Say thank you to the Court of Auditors, the whole team. And again, I know that it's a difficult situation for you to jump in on such a short notice, but thank you very much. And again, please give our best regards to Mark and we wish him all the best and a swift recovery. We will continue with the hearing with Callas in five minutes. So we have a couple of minutes to change seats and the next Commissioner and the High Representative and vice president of the commission is going to be here in a few minutes, and we will continue then. ***Discharge 2024: General budget of the EU - European External Action Service (Hearing with Kaja Kallas)”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much. And I it's my job to have a concluding remark by the chair, but I can assure you I will not restart the whole discussion. Uh, but I would at least, uh, seize the opportunity and remind you that we in the end, uh, first of all, the, uh, commission discharge, as the name tells you, was a discharge on the commission, not on NGOs. And, uh, we found a way to find a compromise that was broadly supported in the end, in the plenary by a broad majority. So, yes, it's true. There is sometimes, you know, people wanted to find, as you said, the smoking gun. Uh, and sometimes it was used to try to scandalize work of NGOs. Um, but I also experienced, you know, from the other side, so to speak, because the center was also mentioned. And I have to defend myself here, not as a chair, but as a former rapporteur. Um, I experienced also as soon as you wanted to address these issues, that was also, I mean, for example, the reputational risk mentioned by the commission you were accused of, you know, wanting to destroy civil society. And I can assure you that was not the case. And actually, we didn't do that. So in the end, um, it's always best to really read those special reports, uh, and to comment on what's in it and not on what we expect. Um, nothing more, nothing less. And we will have to find a way, also in this committee, uh, to agree on how we proceed on this general issues. I will not call it NGO issue. It's about all entities that receive those grants, and we will continue to work on that. And I hope we will do this in the spirit, as we did today in this discussion, focused on the issues that we are facing in this regard. It's very helpful that, Mrs. Andrikiene, you presented this report and that you did this report and nothing more, nothing less. Thank you very much. We will continue here at 3:00. Um, looking forward to see you this afternoon.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “And again, you see, after being reelected, the work starts right away. That's the way we do it here in the committee. Um, I would also like to welcome Mrs. Maria Teresa Fabregas Fernandez, the director, Recovery and resilience in the Energy Reform. Well, everyone, welcome to our committee meeting. This report covers the court's assessment whether the labour market reforms contributed effectively to addressing the member states labour market challenges identified during the European Semester. As set out, the in the country specific recommendations. This is an important piece of work by the court. However, we will probably not hear much in relation to the usual findings of the Court of Auditors, namely if the spending of EU funds complies with the applicable rules. Next to getting reassurance that the reforms achieved the intended effects, it would, incidentally also be interesting to hear about the to what effect the EU money given to member States for these reforms was actually disbursed. Um, has the money actually been used for the labour market reforms, or was this just budget support for the member states? Um. Mrs. Malik, again, congratulations for your re-election here. And the floor is yours.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “So what is your opinion of ECA? You you mentioned it, but maybe you can elaborate. What is your opinion on this? Would it be better to enshrine, for example, this principle, significant provisions in the Basic Act or have a delegated act? And according to our understanding, the reporting on the single gateway will be done based on implementation of commitment appropriations and not on payments. In this case, what actual relevance will the reporting have? As long as we do not know how much funds actually reached the final beneficiaries and final beneficiaries is very important to the. Budgetary control committee. As you know. So how do you evaluate some inconsistencies between the proposal and other proposals? Um, from the MFF package. For example, the NPS regulation, more precisely the climate spending target is included in this regulation. Also as regards the NPS, while other spending targets such as social spending are included in the NPS regulation. So would you say that for the sake of, uh, legal certainty, such targets should have been included in the sectoral regulations? So these are some of my questions and I'm happy to hear the answers.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “And then there is even an college decision on the response to this question. So this is not to defend the duration of the answers, but the explanation why it takes so long on the on the commission side, on the concrete figures, on the longest ever not answered question there. I have to say we have to get back in writing because I have no, no, no memory to give you the exact example. Yeah. I can also respond in a letter to Mr. Gerbrandy about the the overall number of questions, the average duration. So that here are some data for for his future considerations. Thank you.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “My next question, Mr. Winkler, would regard the functioning of the Secretariat of the Transparency Register. If I understood correctly, it consists of a staff of 11 members. And bearing in mind the new tasks, especially those relating to the registration of interest representatives, do you consider that the staff at the disposal of the secretariat is enough to cope with this likely increased workload. And does the current staff and financing allow for the enforcement of the new rules? Is this sufficient? And if not, what would be an adequate budget and staffing also numbers to ensure that the Secretariat can adequately perform its tasks. And are you considering interlinking the transparency Register with the Financial Transparency System or the Financial Transparency system in order to provide a better overview of the interest representatives, which are financed by the EU and in particular, how does the Secretariat check if the information provided by interest representatives is consistent with the data from the financial transparency system?”
  Transparency requirements for interest groups
• “Next point I would like to mention as a priority is the transparency. Transparency of final beneficiaries. Members from across Parliament have been calling for the list of all recipients of RF funding for three years now, three years. We see improvements in new instruments, such as the Reform and Growth Facility for the Western Balkans and in the recast of the financial regulation, which will improve tracking union funds, uh, through digital tools and interoperability, which will bolster the protection of the EU financial interest. But we should address the question of transparency. Also, for the billions of euros involved in the RF final beneficiaries remains a big issue for us. We need to address this very, very clearly. Um, then the transparency of EU funding, including NGOs. I know that this has become a very political topic. I would like to stay focused on the issues that we addressed during our hearings as well. The Commission can, of course, finance NGOs in order to contribute to a pluralistic civil society. But the Commission must not use EU funds to lobby members of Parliament or other commission services. As you know, Conte has requested additional documents because of that from the commission. So we can better analyse to which extent there is really a problem. And again, I would like to focus on this issue and not on the general issues on question of financing of NGOs.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “So, dear colleague, for the next and final item on this nine hour of agenda, we have the presentation by Echa member Mr. Georg Christian Petrovic of the Echa Special Report on the Transparency Register. I would like to highlight the particularly opportune timing of this report, given that the upcoming review of the Interinstitutional Agreement agreement that establishes a framework and operating principles of the Transparency Register signed between the Parliament, the Council and the Commission, is scheduled to take place in July 2025. And we are in heated discussions. I can say about this already, given that the Parliament, the Council and the Commission jointly operate the Transparency Register on the basis of the institutional agreement adopted in 2021. We invited the three institutions to participate in this presentation. Unfortunately, the Council has declined our invitation and will not be represented here today. Having said this, I will start welcoming Mr. Guillaume McLaughlin. There you are, Director of Interinstitutional of Institutional Affairs and Legislative Coordination from the Parliament. And I would like to welcome from the Commission Tanya Verrier. A very warm welcome. And please join me in welcoming Mrs. Monika Hohlmeier, rapporteur in this special report. Good afternoon. I haven't seen you in a while, so almost an hour or so. And now, without more delays. I give the floor to Mr. Petrovic to present the main findings of this audit. You have the floor for about ten minutes.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “Thank you very much. And I understood that this is a day of straightforward messages. Nevertheless, I would like to thank you for setting up this meeting. And obviously, this is also a very big issue for the budgetary control committee. I think it's important to remind ourselves that VAT is also an important revenue for the union's budget and a VAT based own resources accounts for around 10% of the EU own resources revenue. So when it comes to the discharge and also the protection of the financial interests, this is extremely important also also for us. So we should work together on this also because the criminals are working together. You already explained that to us. But I would also like to give you the opportunity to elaborate a bit on the question of how homogeneous and consistently and harmonised the regulation at EU level is in this regard, and if there is any deterrent effect. I think you already answered, um, when it comes to the investigation. Um, your action brings the seizing of assets and of the freezing of bank accounts. And after the trials, uh, if the indicated parties are guilty, there is confiscation. And then it comes to the transfer to the state treasury, and that is to the national budget. Of course, this is also a political issue here, but maybe you can give us your thoughts about this and about the rules that allow Eurofisc and EPO and the other actors to work together to establish an efficient system. And I think also on the lawmakers side, there is room for improvement.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Yes, thank you very much. And, um, as I said, the process is ongoing. We know from the MFA, you know. You know the past. Mff said it can also take longer than, uh, actually scheduled. I expect this to be this the case as well? Uh, for the next MFF. Nevertheless, it will be extremely important. And, um, um, there's a danger that our issues of budgetary control might be overshadowed by other issues because, you know, it's very pressing and urgent, uh, geopolitical situation, I would say. But from my point of view, that makes it so important that we have budgetary control, uh, also in the future. And I thank you very much for your presentation here. Uh, we are looking forward to, uh, more findings here and your support here. And I would like to thank you very much. But again, um, we already had a lot of concerns, um, about the commission's cause, I would say, and, uh, I think, uh, Um, your presentation made made clear that we are, that we're on the right track, that we need to follow that and that our position here needs to be very strong. And also, I would like to say in this round, united as a Parliament as much as possible. Thank you very much for your input. So that brings us to the end of our today's committee meeting. Is there any other business that's not the case. So our next meeting will be on the 17th and 18th of March here in Brussels. Thank you very much for participating.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you. I would like to strongly underline that, because this was basically the same discussion we had in last year's discharge. And I can tell you, because I was a rapporteur, we would really like to see things going forward here. Having said this, I would also like to express my gratitude to both of you and your teams, um, for answering our questions and also in the written form. Um, I think you will not be surprised, or you were not surprised to to see that we have as a Parliament, we have a generally different perception on the RF, uh, of course, starting with a legal basis, but also with all the issues that have been mentioned today. Um, and we need to bear in mind these, you know, very different perspectives also when it comes to the, to the MFF, because, uh, obviously the Commission is very eager to say that the next MFF is not a RF 2.0. Nevertheless, we see a lot of uh parts of the RF materializing in the proposal on the next MFF. And that gives us some kind of headache. Um, also a big thank you to Jan Grego and his team. Um, also for your input. It's very valuable for us. And that brings us to the end. Uh, again, by saying thank you to, uh, both commissioners to the end of this item and the end of today's part of the meeting. We will continue tomorrow at 9:00, um, again with discharge hearings, uh, with three commissioners. Uh, see you then at 9:00.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “So we will proceed with our today's meeting and, uh, with our next item on our agenda. And that is, uh, the European Court of Auditors special report number 11, 2025. This report examines transparency of EU funding granted to NGOs. Um, the rapporteur is Thomas Czajkowski, but today he will be replaced by his colleague from EPP. Uh, of course we welcome, um, Mrs. Laima Andrikiene and commission representative Mikhail Ehrhart. He's a director of Dutch Central Financial Service. And of course, uh, again, our rapporteur. This is, as I already said today, Mr. Götting, Voting. The special report was eagerly awaited by many. I don't think I have to elaborate on this issue, since we have discussed it a couple of times. For example, during the discharge procedure. So without any further ado, I invite Mrs. Andy Kenny to start a presentation on the special report because obviously it's much better to listen or to read what's really in the report instead of just commenting on it. The floor is yours, Mrs. Andrikiene.”
  Regulation of NGOs in Europe
• “We can also, of course, give the Commission the possibility to comment on the findings of the special report. And therefore, I would like to give you the floor now.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “So, dear colleagues, we continue with the commission discharge for the financial year 2024. With the hearing MFF heading three Natural Resources and Environment and from the European Commission. We have with us today Commissioner for Agriculture and Food, Mr. Christophe Hansen, a very warm welcome to you, Christophe. This is the first time you participate in a discharge hearing. But of course, you know, as a former colleague that we are nice people here in this committee. The European Court of Auditors is represented by Klaus Heinlein. Who will present us the main findings of the court concerning heading three. And also welcome back, Klaus. I should also mention that we apply the back and forth method in this hearing, which implies that I will would give the floor to the Commissioner or the representative. Immediately after the question, in order to have a more interactive dialogue, we will start by hearing from the Court of Auditors. And without further ado, the floor is yours. Thank you very much.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “So what is your opinion of ECA? You you mentioned it, but maybe you can elaborate. What is your opinion on this? Would it be better to enshrine, for example, this principle, significant provisions in the Basic Act or have a delegated act? And according to our understanding, the reporting on the single gateway will be done based on implementation of commitment appropriations and not on payments. In this case, what actual relevance will the reporting have? As long as we do not know how much funds actually reached the final beneficiaries and final beneficiaries is very important to the. Budgetary control committee. As you know. So how do you evaluate some inconsistencies between the proposal and other proposals? Um, from the MFF package. For example, the NPS regulation, more precisely the climate spending target is included in this regulation. Also as regards the NPS, while other spending targets such as social spending are included in the NPS regulation. So would you say that for the sake of, uh, legal certainty, such targets should have been included in the sectoral regulations? So these are some of my questions and I'm happy to hear the answers.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you very much. Now we can start the discussion. I would like to start by asking you to elaborate a bit on the how the council looks at the error rate. This has been a very big issue here for us and obviously also with the Commission. Um, there has been an increase in the error rate found by the Court of Auditors and as a. Increasing divergence, I would say, between the Acas error rate and the Commission's risk at payment, which is remarkably stable over the last few years. The difference is the error rate is 5.6%. From the point of view, the risk is payment from the Commission is 1.9%. And maybe you can elaborate on this, how the council looks at this issue. And also what is the council's opinion on the errors found by the court in the payment request approved by the council for the ref? You just just mentioned this issue. Is the council going to increase its scrutiny on these particular payments, payment requests and the Commission's assessment? Maybe we can start with these two questions. And I would like to give the floor to the groups following the order.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have the honor of replacing Carlo. Therefore, I would like to read out his opinion and the amendments tabled under technical discussions, as I understood, are well underway. And hopefully, um, we can reach a strong consensus with constructive cooperation among political groups. That's the main message of Carlo. He. If he was here, he would thank you, especially the shadow rapporteurs and the teams, for their valuable input and commitment during the negotiations, as well as the technical services for their tireless support. As I can read out here, this opinion builds on the key messages of the draft report, obviously, and the need for a bold and coordinated response to Europe's declining competitiveness. Um, we Carlo maintained a clear budgetary focus respecting the The boundaries of the badge competencies, and he deliberately avoided overlapping with econ topics or preempting the debate on the future MFS. Mf, which are addressed in separate resolutions on the content of the report. He highlights that public investments is a catalyst for private capital, but he also stresses the limitations of a sub €200 billion EU budget in addressing a 750 or 800 billion annual investment gap. The priority has been to scale up investeu, leverage its open architecture and ensure alignment between national and EU priorities, particularly through higher risk, higher impact investments. The report underlines the need of making EU capital markets more integrated, liquid and attractive, especially for startups and SMEs, and it calls for a simpler, rule based regulatory approach and reducing fragmentation.”
  Size of EU budget
• “So, colleagues, let's continue. With the general budget of the EU discharge this time, European Parliament I welcome two director generals of the European Parliament, Mr. Markus Winkler from DJ press and from DJ Witek, Mr. Lorenzo Mannelli. Everyone, welcome to this committee. And please, Mr. Winkler, tell the the president that we are working on on Thursday afternoons, which is not regularly the case with committees. Everyone, welcome to both of you and thank you for for taking the time. Earlier today we started the exchange of views with the three DGS. And for I hope that we have kept some relevant questions. I'm sure we have kept some relevant, relevant questions for this afternoon. So for this exchange of views, we follow the back and forth exchange again like we did this morning. The rapporteur puts his question, and this question will immediately, immediately be answered by the two DGS. And then of course, we will switch to the shadows. And after this housekeeping rules, I would now like to give the floor to the DGS for their opening statements. You may decide who starts first. Maybe, Mr. Winkler, if you like. And you have the floor.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much and congratulations. Before we move on with the next point, we give the colleagues who want to leave the room. Uh, two minutes to do this. Yeah. All right, then, let's proceed with our next item, which is the general budget of the EU agencies. Um, the consideration of the draft report on the discharge of the decentralised agencies. Our this year's rapporteur is Monica Hohlmeier. Monica, you have prepared a detailed report covering the 33 agencies under consideration for discharge as usual. Of course. We will begin with you as rapporteur, followed by the views of the shadow rapporteurs, representing representatives from the opinion giving committees and, if necessary, also a catch the eye session. We have invited the opinion giving committees to participate in this debate. Um, but first of all, of course it's your, uh your turn. Monica, the floor is yours.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Dear colleagues, welcome to our two days committee meeting. Please have a seat. We will start with, as usual, with the adoption of our agenda. If there are no objections, the agenda can be adopted without modifications. I don't see any objections. So for the chair's announcement, I have to tell you that the interpretations provided in the languages set out in the continuous and web streaming will be, or can be followed live via the web page. We'll continue with our item number four on the discharge the general budget of the EU Parliament. Um, dear colleagues, our first item will be also presented by our guest today. We have agreed on it on our coordinators meeting on the 30th of September. And it's a continuation, a continuation of our similar exchange we had with other directors general back on the 4th of November. We have with us today, Mr. Markus Winkler, the deputy secretary general and director general for the presidency, and Monsieur Didier Clichy, the director general for finance. A warm, a very warm welcome. Of course, as always to both of you. And thank you for taking the time and speaking with us. Um, Monika, if you like to take the floor for a quick statement first, uh, we can do this right now. So I'll give the floor to our rapporteur, Monika Hohlmeier.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Yeah, thank you very much. Um, I would like to respond to some of your remarks. First of all, the case of Mr. Reynders has been mentioned. Um, this, of course, was discovered later, and so far as, at least as far as I know, there are no signs that EU funds have been involved in this case. That doesn't make it right, but at least it's not in scope. It was not in scope of my, um, draft report. Um, the same with the vaccines and the commission president and messages. That was in, I think, 2021 and 2022 journalists have requested that messages. Um, and commissioners has, uh, replied and repeatedly told us that these are the regular procedures. I know that Apple is on the case. So that is why, uh, it's not involved in my report. And same with, uh, DG move uh, issue. Um, that happened in did not happen in In 2023, and I think it was also mentioned in last year's discharge report, if I remember correctly. So this is the reasons why it was not involved. Then of course NGO is a big issue. It has become ideological. But please remember this is the report on the commission discharge. So I'm not addressing lobbying in general or what NGOs are doing or not doing. I'm referring to the way the Commission has designed grant agreements and the impression that has been given by the way these grant agreements are written. That's the issue.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies