Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA

Member of the European Parliament · Spain · EPP · Partido Popular

What Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA has said (37)

2026-02-06 “E-000493/2026 Answer given by Mr Dombrovskis on behalf of the European Commission In line with the previous answers to written parliamentary questions E- P-2326/22 1 and E004476/2025 2 , the Commission emphasises that it has no information indicating that the professional independence of the Spanish National Statistical Institute (INE) was affected – neither in relation to the Spanish gross domestic product (GDP) data as revised in 2024, nor in relation to the decision by the President of INE to resign in 2022. The Commission has taken and will continue to take active steps to ensure full compliance with EU statistical law in all Member States, including continuing to safeguard the professional independence of statistical authorities. At the same time, it is worth recalling that the legal framework on European statistics 3 contains dedicated mechanisms such as statistical quality assessments 4 , which provide further reassurance on the integrity of national statistics. In addition, the European Statistical Governance Advisory Board provides an independent overview of the European Statistical System as regards the implementation of the European Statistics Code of Practice. Peer reviews are also regularly carried out within the European Statistical System and are publicised to facilitate public scrutiny 5 . 1 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-9-2022-002326-ASW_EN.html. 2 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/-ASW_EN.html. 3 Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009 on European statistics and repealing Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1101/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transmission of data subject to statistical confidentiality to the Statistical Office of the European Communities, Council Regulation (EC) No 322/97 on Community Statistics, and Council Decision 89/382/EEC, Euratom establishing a Committee on the Statistical Programmes of the European Communities, OJ L 87, 31.3.2009, p. 164; ELI: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/223/2024-12-26. 4 See https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/quality/european-quality-standards and in particular https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/4031688/8717565/KS-02-17-428-ES-N.pdf/36a448bd-c76d-46b9-85f835e0e3ae1473?t=1520260462000. 5 See https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/quality/peer-reviews/third-round.”
Rule of law in Spain
2025-09-29 “E-003778/2025 Answer given by President von der Leyen on behalf of the European Commission Under Article 25a of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) Regulation 1 Member States have an obligation to maintain a public portal and publish, twice a year, data on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amounts of RRF funding. As of 20 October 2025, 19 Member States have published a second update of their list of final recipients this year. The Commission is currently following up with the Member States who have not updated their reporting yet. Spain is among the countries, who reported only once this year. These lists per Member State are available on the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard 2 . The RRF is a result-based instrument where Member States provide data on implementation at the time of the requests for payments. Accordingly, the final implementation data will only be received by the end of the implementation period, at the end of 2026. This is applicable to all Member States, as they all follow the same procedure. At this point in time, Spain has received five disbursements amounting to EUR 71 bn (incl. EUR 10.49 bn of pre-financing), corresponding to the fulfilment of 262 milestones and targets out of a total of 602. The Commission released the fourth RRF Annual report 3 on 8 October 2025, where it lays out the estimated economic impact of the RRF. In the case of Spain, estimated GDP positive effects of EUR 142.7 billion (9.5% of current GDP) are expected in total over the period 2020-2030. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility, available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj/eng. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/recovery-and-resiliencescoreboard/disbursements.html?table=finalRecipientByCountry. 3 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/81dd7c71-7b75-4b2a-8323fb7b4326fa16_en?filename=COM_2025_637_1_EN_ACT_part1_v4.pdf.”
Accounting and auditing of EU budget
2025-09-29 “E-003779/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission Under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), while the Commission assesses completion of the milestones and targets contained in the Council Implementing Decision of the Spanish Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP) 1 , the Spanish authorities are responsible for the implementation of the Spanish RRP. More detailed data regarding the implementation of all RRPs can be found on the RRF’s scoreboard 2 . In the Communication of 4 June 2025 NextGenerationEU - The road to 2026 3 , the Commission recalled the 31 August 2026 deadline and called on all Member States to comprehensively review their RRPs as soon as possible to ensure all milestones and targets can be implemented by the deadline. In the Commission’s report on RRF implementation 4 , Spain was one of the Member States whose milestones and targets were between 85% and 50% fulfilled and was thus recommended to increase its implementation pace. Member States are encouraged to explore all available options to simplify their plans and safeguard their allocation without reducing their level of ambition. The Commission is in constant contact with the Spanish authorities to ensure a successful implementation of the RRP until August 2026 and accelerate the rhythm of implementation of all measures. 1 Council Implementing Decision on the approval of the assessment of the recovery and resilience plan for Spain, adopted by Council on 6 July 2021: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-10150-2021INIT/en/pdf. 2 RRF Scoreboard: https://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/recovery-and-resiliencescoreboard/disbursements.html?table=finalRecipientByCountry and Spain’s recovery and resilience plan: https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/spains-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en#documents. 3 COM(2025) 310 final. 4 COM(2025) 637 final.”
Conditions to access EU budget
2025-09-29 “E-003773/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Council Implementing Decision on the Spanish recovery and resilience plan (RRP) was adopted in July 2021 1 . The plan was revised in October 2023 to add a loan envelope and a chapter on REPowerEU 2 . Subsequent targeted amendments to the Spanish plan have taken place in 2024 and 2025 3 . All Member States may ask to revise their RRPs, if needed, due to objective circumstances that affect the implementation of the original plan. All information on the amendments to the Spanish RRP is published on a dedicated website 4 . In view of the 2026 implementation deadlines for the recovery and resilience facility, the Commission has asked Member States to engage in a comprehensive revision of their plans and published a Communication to this effect 5 . As stated in the Communication, these revisions should aim at streamlining the plans and preparing the final payment requests. Member States are also encouraged to explore all available options to safeguard their allocation. The Commission services are in constant contact with the Spanish authorities to ensure a successful implementation of the RRP measures until 31 August 2026. 1 Council Implementing Decision on the approval of the assessment of the recovery and resilience plan for Spain, adopted by the Council on 6 July 2021: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-10150-2021INIT/en/pdf. 2 Regulation (EU) 2023/435 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/241as regards REPowerEU chapters in recovery and resilience plans and amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) 2021/1060 and (EU) 2021/1755, and Directive 2003/87/EC. 3 COM(2025) 556 final. 4 Spain’s recovery and resilience plan: https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economicrecovery/recovery-and-resilience-facility/country-pages/spains-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en#documents. 5 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council NextGenerationEU - The road to 2026 COM(2025) 310 final: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025DC0310.”
Conditions to access EU budget
2025-09-29 “E-003777/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Council Implementing Decision on the Spanish recovery and resilience plan (RRP) was adopted in July 2021. Pursuant to Article 18(4)(i) of Regulation (EU) 2021/241 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) 1 , all milestones and targets (M/Ts) included in the Spanish RRP must be fully implemented by 31 August 2026 at the latest. The more detailed timing provided in the RRP reflects the foreseen sequencing of every measure but remains indicative. In accordance with Article 24(2) of the RRF Regulation, Member States may submit no more than two payment requests per calendar year. This requires a distribution of milestones and targets over time to ensure their timely verification and inclusion in the relevant payment requests. The payment request of a Member State may cover several instalments. Member States may ask to revise their RRPs, if needed, due to objective circumstances, as envisaged by Article 21(1) of the RRF Regulation. The plan was revised in October 2023 to add a loan envelope and a chapter on REPowerEU 2 . Subsequent targeted amendments to the RRP have taken place in 2024 and 2025 and are published on a dedicated website 3 . In view of the strict implementation deadlines for the RRF, the Commission has asked Member States to engage in a comprehensive revision of their plans and published a Communication to this effect in June 2025 4 . Commission services are in constant contact with the Spanish authorities to assist them to that end. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj/eng. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/435/oj/eng. 3 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/spains-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en#documents. 4 NextGenerationEU – The road to 2026, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025DC0310.”
Conditions to access EU budget · EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets
2025-09-29 “E-003776/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Council Implementing Decision on the Spanish Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP) was adopted in July 2021. The plan was revised in October 2023 to add a loan envelope and to add a chapter on REPowerEU 1 . Subsequent targeted amendments to the Spanish plan have taken place in 2024 and 2025. All Member States may ask to revise their RRPs, if needed, due to objective circumstances that affect the implementation of the original plan, as envisaged by article 21 of the Regulation establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF). All information on the amendments to the Spanish RRP is published on a dedicated website 2 . In view of the 2026 strict implementation deadlines for the Recovery and Resilience Facility, the Commission has asked Member States to engage in a comprehensive revision of their plans and published a Communication to this effect (NextGenerationEU - The road to 2026) 3 . As stated in the Communication, these revisions should aim at streamlining the plans and preparing the final payment requests. Member States are also encouraged to explore all available options to safeguard their allocation of both grants and loans. Members States can decide to scale down the loan envelope in their plans. The Commission services are in constant contact with the Spanish authorities to ensure a successful implementation of the RRP measures until 31 August 2026. 1 Regulation (EU) 2023/435 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/241: https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/435/oj/eng. 2 Spain’s recovery and resilience plan: https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economicrecovery/recovery-and-resilience-facility/country-pages/spains-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en#documents. 3 NextGenerationEU - The road to 2026, COM/2025/310 final: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025DC0310.”
Conditions to access EU budget
2025-07-23 “E-003046/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission Under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) Regulation 1 , final recipients are understood as the last entity receiving funds that is not a contractor or a sub-contractor. This definition stems directly from Article 22(2)(d) of the Regulation. The European Parliament and Council adopted the REPowerEU Regulation 2 , which amended the RRF Regulation and, among others, created the obligation for Member States to report data on the 100 final recipients receiving the highest amount of funding from the RRF, including the amount received by each recipient. The data is updated and published by the Member States twice a year and the Commission centralises it on the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard 3 . In the last reporting round for April 2025, 25 Member States updated the data on their 100 largest final recipients. The Commission contacted the two Member States that did not yet comply with their legal obligation to ensure they provide this data as soon as possible. The Commission is monitoring that Member States adhere to the reporting requirements set out by the RRF Regulation regarding funds reaching the final recipients and is working closely with the Member States to maximise the absorption of funds. An analysis of the data related to the 100 largest final recipients across all Member States under the RRF was included in the Commission’s annual report on the RRF published in October 2024 4 . An updated analysis will be included in the forthcoming annual report. Under the RRF Regulation, the Commission disburses funds to Member States upon satisfactory fulfilment of milestones and targets. In case of incomplete implementation of measures in recovery and resilience plans, Member States will not receive the full RRF allocation they were entitled to. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/241. 2 Regulation (EU) 2023/435. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/recovery-and-resilience-scoreboard/index.html. 4 https://commission.europa.eu/publications/recovery-and-resilience-facility-annual-report-2024_en.”
Conditions to access EU budget · Accounting and auditing of EU budget
2025-07-23 “E-003044/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) was established as a temporary instrument with a clear end date in 2026. In line with the legal deadlines, the Commission must make the final payments by 31 December 2026. The pace of disbursements under the RRF was swift overall. However, as set out in the Commission Communication ‘NextGenerationEU - The road to 2026’ 1 , delays in implementation have increased over time. By the end of August 2025, 49% of the loans requested by Member States were disbursed, amounting to more than EUR 141 billion. Between September and the end of 2025, the Commission expects to disburse more than EUR 16 billion of loans to Member States, bringing the share of disbursed loans to 54%. In the Communication, the Commission set a clear path forward guiding Member States to ensure a smooth implementation of the RRF until 2026 and maximise the absorption of funds. Currently, Member States are revising their plans to address implementation challenges. In this context, measures funded by grants that are no longer implementable by August 2026 can be removed and replaced by measures that are currently funded by loans. If necessary, the loan support can be reduced by an RRP amendment and the amount decommitted accordingly. With the RRP revision for Czechia in June 2025, the loan support made available initially in October 2023 was reduced since the amount of estimated costs of the RRP loan support was lower than the financial amount made available. Many RRF investments financed by loans are demand-based and may not meet as much demand as expected and could be downscaled. The last moment for Member States to submit a payment request is 30 September 2026 and all efforts are geared to work towards this deadline. 1 COM(2025) 310 final/2.”
Conditions to access EU budget · Size of EU budget
2025-07-23 “E-003043/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) was established as a temporary instrument with a clear end date in 2026. In line with the legal deadlines and the temporary nature of the Facility, the Commission must make the final payments by 31 December 2026. The pace of disbursements under the RRF has been swift overall. However, as set out in the Commission Communication ‘NextGenerationEU - The road to 2026’ 1 , delays in implementation have increased over time. By the end of August 2025, close to 56% of all funds were disbursed, for a total amount of EUR 362 billion. Between September and the end of 2025, the Commission expects to disburse more than 34 billion EUR, which would bring the share of disbursements to 61%. In the above-mentioned Communication, the Commission has set a clear path forward guiding Member States to take all the necessary actions to ensure a smooth implementation of the RRF in its final months. Member States are revising their plans in order to address implementation challenges and to fully reap the benefits of the RRF. Borrowing of funds under NextGenerationEU is based on expected funding needs and the use of funds borrowed is strictly limited to NextGenerationEU-related spending. Therefore, the total amount of net borrowing under NextGenerationEU will match the disbursements to be made to Member States under the RRF. 1 COM(2025) 310 final/2.”
Size of EU budget · Conditions to access EU budget
2025-07-23 “E-003047/2025 Answer given by Mr Dombrovskis on behalf of the European Commission Following the latest disbursement of EUR 23.1 billion to Spain on 8 August 2025, representing the fifth payment under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) 1 , the total funds paid out to Spain under the RRF now stand at EUR 71 billion, which is 44% of the total allocation. In view of the 2026 implementation deadline, the Commission published a Communication (‘NextGenerationEU - The road to 2026’, 4 June 2025) providing guidance to Member States to review their recovery and resilience plans and prepare their final payment requests in 2026. Member States are invited to review their plans to include only measures achievable by 31 August 2026 and explore alternative measures to use their remaining financial allocations. The Commission is in constant contact with the Spanish authorities to prepare for the end of the RRF in 2026. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resilience-facility_en.”
Conditions to access EU budget
2025-07-23 “E-003045/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) was established as a temporary instrument with a clear end date in 2026. In line with the legal deadlines and the temporary nature of the Facility, Member States must meet all milestones and targets by 31 August 2026. According to the RRF Regulation 1 , Member States must report twice a year in the context of the European Semester on the progress made in the implementation of their recovery and resilience plan. The Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2106 2 further specifies this obligation, setting the deadlines for the bi-annual reporting at no later than by 30 April and 15 October. Member States report their progress in achieving their milestones and targets due in the past and due twelve months ahead. The bi-annual reporting data is self-reported by the Member States. Out of the 4 454 milestones and targets that were due by the second quarter of 2025 based on the indicative timelines in the Council Implementing Decisions, 84% (3 761) were either assessed as satisfactorily fulfilled (2 586) or were reported by Member States as completed (1 175). The latest available figures regarding the progress on implementation on milestones and targets by Member States are published on the Scoreboard 3 . In the Communication ‘NextGenerationEU - The road to 2026’ 4 , the Commission has set a clear path forward guiding Member States to take all the necessary actions to ensure a smooth implementation of the RRF in its final months. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj/eng. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2021/2106/oj/eng. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/recovery-and-resilience-scoreboard/milestones_and_targets.html. 4 COM(2025) 310 final/2.”
Conditions to access EU budget
2025-02-07 “E-000571/2025 E-000570/2025 E-000572/2025 E-000573/2025 Answer given by President von der Leyen on behalf of the European Commission The Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is a performance-based programme. Member States put forward a Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP), which includes a set of national reforms and investments and accompanying milestones and targets. The assessment of these national recovery and resilience plans by the Commission is carried out in line with the criteria outlined in the Recovery and Resilience Facility Regulation 1 . In the context of payment requests, the Commission verifies the satisfactory fulfilment of the milestones and targets. Disbursements are made only if the milestones and targets established in the Annex of the Council Implementing Decision approving the plan are fulfilled. Based on public information available to the Commission, Radiotelevisión Española (RTVE) has received funding from Spain within the framework of the implementation of Target 292: Digital training for employment of the Council Implementing Decision approving the RRP. The objective of this measure is to strengthen the digital skills of the employed (notably in the administration) and of the unemployed. The target consists in providing training on digital skills of at least 150 hours to 300 000 people. The target falls under the ninth payment request. This payment request is expected to be submitted by Spain in 2026. The Commission will assess the completion of the target at that time. 1 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-10150-2021-ADD-1-REV-1/en/pdf”
EU policy on employment subcontracting · Conditions to access EU budget
2024-11-18 “E-002571/2024 Answer given by Mr Dombrovskis on behalf of the European Commission With regards to the preparation and implementation of the recovery and resilience plans, the Commission encourages Member States to engage in a timely and meaningful way with local and regional authorities – which is of course of particular importance in Spain given the high level of administrative and political decentralisation, as well as in this particular instance given the regional dimension of the intended future addendum – , social partners, civil society organisations, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders with regard to the amendment of recovery and resilience plans. The outcome of this consultation and how the input received from the stakeholders is reflected has to be explained in the amended plan. The Spanish authorities have communicated their intention to amend their plan in order to include measures to support the recovery of the regions affected by the DANA (Depresión Aislada en Niveles Altos – isolated depression at high levels). Article 21 of Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility 1 provides that Member States may require an amendment of their recovery and resilience plans in light of objective circumstances making a measure no longer achievable. It has to be noted that only milestones and targets that have not been assessed by the Commission can be amended. The Commission is already actively engaging with the Spanish authorities to support the preparation and eventual official submission of such request in order to ensure that such request and the amended recovery and resilience plan remain in line with the requirements of the Recovery and Resilience Facility Regulation. The Commission takes this occasion to reiterate its solidarity with the people and businesses affected by these catastrophic floods, and to reiterate its sincere condolences for the loss of lives. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R0241”
Cohesion and rural funding · Conditions to access EU budget
“Thank you. Chair. I will speak in in Spanish. Thank you very much, Commissioner, for joining us here today and for holding this regular dialogue with the committee, which I think is of key importance. Having heard from the rest of my colleagues, I'm sure that you will understand that this Parliament is awaiting a correction on the part of the Commission. We do not support the proposal for the national plans. We do not support the budget cuts to the cap, to fisheries or cohesion. We understand that this is all about simplification and flexibility, but that doesn't mean that you can set to one side the role of this Parliament. Now, you talked about the new design of the Parliament and of the budget, and how that will strengthen the role of the Parliament. And turning now to the idea of the trilogue, before we really get into things in the negotiations, really the feeling we have is that that's not the way things are going. When you talk about simplification and flexibility, the commission will have the last word. Perhaps you want to have an impact on what's going to happen during that preliminary trilogue. You want to impact the role that the Parliament might have in deciding on the budget at the end of the day. Thank you.”
Conditions to access EU budget
“So I have a number of questions that we have been repeating over the years. And we have been waiting for answers. And then there's still another year until August 2026. Because once that deadline is met, there are going to be transfers to the member states, and we're going to be find ourselves in the same situation of a lack of transparency. So the Court of Auditors has repeatedly. Raised a question commission. What changes or actual measures have you taken in order to avoid us finding ourselves in a serious situation, and that we're going to find ourselves in again in August 2026? We have measures you can't just delegate to the member states. So how is the Commission going to ensure that the European Union's financial interests are preserved? Are we going to have to repay some of the money? Is that going to come out of our taxes? Isn't there have been all sorts of delays which have been raised by Spain. Now, I have to say that this this report and last week's report indicate that Spain has experienced a lot of delays in terms of digital transformation and the RF. So I'm just wondering what is being done to avoid those delays. Now Spain, as I said, is the second largest beneficiary and there's just less than 18 months to the end. So thank you very much for your rigour and your diligence. I think we now need to look critically at the RR and work out what needs to be in national plans and work out where the shortcomings have been so that we can improve it for next time.”
Accounting and auditing of EU budget
“We need to really make sure that there is reference to common debt issuance, because we think that distorts markets. And through our amendments, we have stated our opposition to fiscal harmonization because we believe that that is incumbent upon member states to do that. We also highlighted the need, and we really think this is important, to have the European Deposit Guarantee Fund to strengthen the banking system, to ensure financial stability and to make sure there is an efficient single market that is That's key. It won't just protect savers, but it'll also create a safer, predictable environment for investment, which is key for economic growth and the competitiveness of the European Union. Last but not least, we are worried about too much intervention in banking management. We think that distorts competition and fragments the single market. And we also highlight the number of the amount of red tape that we feel just simply slows down procedures or is too much of a burden for financial institutions. Lastly, thank you once again to the rapporteur for the text to the colleagues for their amendments. The EPP seeks to work further on this to ensure that we have broad support for this text, which will give us a leading role in this very ambitious project that we want to see come true, which is the Savings and Investments Union.”
European Deposit Insurance Scheme
“Thank you Chair. I will speak in Spanish. Thank you Very much madam Minister and welcome. I'd like to add to all the voices that spoke out about Parliament's concerns about the blockage in Council on the Capital Markets Union and the Savings Investments Union, as it's now known. Now, having heard the opening comments on excessive regulatory burden, lack of ambition, and the need to make progress, my question would be then: what are the proposals we can expect from the Commission that have the best prospects of being successful? How can we unblock things, as my colleague Marcus Faber said? Very quick question. Secondly, on the banking sector and how to make it more competitive regarding the ECOFIN meeting of last Friday, there was a discussion of simplification and financial regulation there. So my question is: how can we improve the competitiveness of our financial sector? Thank you.”
Financial regulation
“Commissioner. Making things easier for SMEs as well as families, as well as making our economies more competitive, are the fundamental objectives that we can achieve if we manage to simplify the management of European programs as well as cutting red tape and administration. But the reply or response cannot be to merge programs and to center everything on national plans, and particularly increasing taxes and having more centralization to the detriment of our regions. Our experience should show us that we have to make sure that we have transparency over the funds, because thus far we have not exactly been successful, and it's really irrational to insist on continuing things which have not proven successful in the past. So the EU cannot be the sum of national interests, rather a strategic shared vision. It really would be counter to the very point of Europe to do otherwise. So cap cohesion fisheries policies cannot be sacrificed because.”
Conditions to access EU budget
“Thank you, thank you chair. I will speak in Spanish. Thank you very much indeed for convening this meeting. We are, of course, moving towards the present period of the RRF, and I have a number of questions, and I've got three that I'd like you to answer in a little more detail. First has to do with all the modifications that are being made to national plans. If we compare the exact number of modifications that are taking place, perhaps you could detail some of them for us, not now of course, but perhaps later in writing, and tell us precisely what those modifications involve. Some, of course, might just have to do with a certain budget line for an investment, but I suspect that in some cases you might be paying from the next funding something that would have fallen within the national budgets of a member state. Secondly, we would like to have some more rigorous detail about the kinds of modifications that are currently under negotiation and the direction that those are going in because what we have seen is that member states are unable not to receive payments but to disburse these funds, and that is the problem. So we want some real granular detail as to how the money has been spent. If we just take the case of Spain, which is the second biggest beneficiary and we are fairly far advanced when it comes to disbursing these funds, we need to look at the different implementation methods. Spain apparently will have to forego some of these loans which amount to sixty-six billion euros. So I was wondering whether that is something that you are negotiating, whether other countries find themselves in similar difficulties, and whether you have any idea exactly how many payment requests will now be discontinued, will not be made. If that is the case, what kind of grounds are member states advancing for their failure to execute or to implement those funds? And if, as part of the financial framework, we do preserve those national plans, then of course we will have greater transparency. That is the problem we have had thus far. We have not had sufficient transparency when it comes to the next generation fund, and this is something that Parliament has been asking for for an awful long time. Thank you.”
Accounting and auditing of EU budget
“Thank you very much. Madam president, Commissioner, Council Europe saves a lot, but doesn't invest much. And this is corroborated by the fact that there are billions in savings accounts in Europe. Capital is here, but it's not being put. It's not being invested. And Europe does not have the investments to face its challenges. And often companies need to go abroad to get funding. An action plan was launched by the commission to mobilise savings. That's five and five years later, as rapporteur in this parliament, I warned that Europe needed much more ambition on this, and therefore it's good that that the Commission has decided to take on this ambition. But we expect the same ambition from the Council, and I will continue. Mentioning that the Savings and Investments Union is designed for savers. For SMEs and so people can get the most the biggest yield from their savings. An idea can be converted into work. Technology can also see our citizens lives improved and in the Capital Markets union, in my view. We need five urgent changes. Firstly, we need to eliminate national barriers. These penalise our companies, especially those that want to grow. Secondly, we need more regulatory clarity and we also need to boost financial education. Fourthly, we need to adopt tax incentives for investment. And fifthly, we must improve the investment ecosystem so that we can mobilise private capital. We've lost a lot of time and we don't have much time left. So I call on the council to be ambitious and provide a proper plan. Thank you.”
EU Single Market harmonisation
“Thank you. Chair. I will speak in Spanish. Thank you very much for being here Today as Amla chair. I think the fact that you're here shows that the Parliament's level of ambition has borne fruit. It's my honor to participate in those negotiations, and I'd like to make the most of your presence here today to ask you about the status of high risk third countries for money laundering, and what your opinion is of the role that Amla could play in producing a list of such third countries in the Commission's business. It appears that we are entirely dependent on an intergovernmental body, where such cases as Russia have proved that the Fatf has very little, uh, potential, uh, margin to act as proved toothless with Russia. There is a thorough review and there is an independent delegated act to include it on the list, but having another list, which is not the Fatf list, which is independent, would show how credible the EU is. It would be of great symbolic importance. So could you imagine that Amla could produce its own list of countries? And if you do, do you think this could lead to a situation where the commission is no longer entirely dependent on the Fatf list, but rather has a truly European list which has been drawn up by an EU body? Thank you.”
Anti-money laundering regulation
“Thank you very much. The report from the European Court of Auditors, speaks of all the different weaknesses of the next generation funds, a model which right now they are hoping to impose throughout the next, promoting European programs based on reforms of investments that the national governments would have to fulfill if they want to receive the transfers, does not implement, or does not facilitate the receiving of those funds. If we look at past experience, we can see that actually the opposite is to be expected. Unless we wanted to just deceive ourselves and bury our heads in the sand, believing that this transfer between the state and administration is actually the final implementation step. And that's the great weakness that the Court of Auditors is pointing out, the difficulty in assessing to which assent the reforms have actually been carried out, and the impact thereof, and the transfer of funds, something this proposal of the MFF does not actually solve, because management once again depends on the arbitrary nature of each member state. The risk of being that there would be a lack of transparency in European funds management, as well as complexity in traceability of those funds, as well as an inability to be able to analyze the results. Isn't the commission going to change, is it? They're not going to change this.”
Accounting and auditing of EU budget
“Thank you very much. President. Commissioner. The complexity and tax fragmentation is something that penalises competitiveness and performance of European businesses. Let me give you an example. Spain is the country which has has seen the second highest increase in corporation tax over the last decade, with catastrophic results. Spanish businesses are 9.6% less profitable on average than the European ones, and we are leading in terms of unemployment in a global market. Tax simplification is a clear competitive advantage. It reduces administrative burdens, it provides predictability and certainty, attracts investment and promotes development of enterprises and jobs. So it's absolutely incomprehensible that the European Commission has decided to create a new tax on European business, which runs absolutely counter to the need to enhance competitiveness, which the Commission has set as one of its goals. What's needed is simple regulation, free tax competition amongst states and incentives that promote competition. Thank you very much and congratulations to the rapporteur.”
Priorities of taxation policy in the EU
“Thank you. Chair. I will speak in Spanish. I would like to start by congratulating my colleagues for the draft, and especially to Maria Teresa Valdini, for the good cooperation and understanding. This is a very good proposal. Small midcaps are one of the drivers of European growth. These are innovative companies that create, work and compete on global markets. If we want a competitive Europe, we need a regulatory framework that does not put up barriers to them but allows them to grow. The Parliament proposes to extend the definition of small mid-caps with a positive impact for them. This is not a technical issue. This is a strategic bet for European competitiveness, and I want to be very clear that this new definition cannot and should not affect the scope of application and finance financing financing for SMEs. We have to take away obstacles so that more companies can capture private financing and finance from banks. There is a review clause for every five years because in a dynamic market, definitions cannot remain frozen. If we want dynamic companies, we also need dynamic rules. Regulatory rigidity and lack of flexibility can cannot be done. This is a reform for a Europe that needs more innovation and more investment for businesses. A competitive EU needs this and companies that can finance themselves stay sustainable. Thank you.”
Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
“Thank you very much, chair. Commissioner, as you know, this Parliament strongly defends cohesion policy. It is a successful policy. And I know what I'm talking about as a Spaniard, from the perspective of the budgetary control committee, we welcome reforms from the Commission, which are aimed at creating a more efficient cohesion policy. So we support this necessary simplification of programmes, eliminating unnecessary administrative burden or duplication and getting rid of any unnecessary bureaucracy. We are doing this really to support the final beneficiaries, whether they be families, companies, businesses, if we want to simplify and to gain efficiency, we cannot do this at the cost of diluting our Cohesion policy. We don't want to decentralize cohesion and replace regional and local authorities in their role. It is important, uh, when we look at the MFF, uh, that we do not take away from the cohesion policy. We do want to have simplifications, but not if it means cuts or recentralization. This is key for the future of cohesion policy. Thank you very much.”
Cohesion and rural funding
“I'll be I'll be brief thank you chair I'll in in Spanish. Thank you very much just a comment and I'm saying this because we are behind closed doors now when we have to explain to our respective countries the MFF we are having to explain to people we've got European policies like the CAP the cohesion policy and we've got to explain to them that those are going to experience significant cuts and we've got to explain to them that amongst other things it's because we need to repay the debts of the Next Generation funds and obviously the EU needs to be serious and it has to repay those debts that it incurred. However we mustn't forget that we are telling them that they'll have less CAP less cohesion policy and that in addition we are also tabling a proposal that envisages a tax on European companies that is going to give a heavier tax burden for European citizens. Now I'm saying this because this is something that the the chair said to date we don't have official data of the real impact on the EU economy of the Next Generation EU program. We do not know the impact of the reforms or of the investments but we do know the impact of the repayment of the debt and what it will have on coming up with the next MFF and programs that affect the daily lives of European citizens like the CAP or the cohesion policy. And so this could serve as fuel for people questioning the European project and people questioning European policies and so I think that we need to be very careful in how we explain these things and so that is why the Parliament is petitioning well it hasn't happened yet but we want total transparency when it comes to the Next Generation EU funds. That's just a comment that I wanted to make behind closed doors but I just want to say it's very dangerous what could happen in the future.”
Own EU resources
“Thank you. Thank you. President. Commissioner. The pressure brought to bear by this Parliament seems to be producing effects. And I celebrate the fact that the Commission is accepting that it needs to amend its original proposal. It is a good first step, but manifestly it is insufficient. We continue to reject the nationalisation of European policies, the nationalisation of the cap or cohesion, and we reject the cuts being proposed for cap fisheries and cohesion. And of course, we reject the tax on European companies, particularly when you are supporting a competitiveness by creating a fund for competitiveness and going for simplification in order to create jobs. So please continue to amend the proposal so that together we can end up with a good financial framework for Europe.”
Size of EU budget
“Thank you very much. The report from the European Court of Auditors, speaks of all the different weaknesses of the next generation funds, a model which right now they are hoping to impose throughout the next, promoting European programs based on reforms of investments that the national governments would have to fulfill if they want to receive the transfers, does not implement, or does not facilitate the receiving of those funds. If we look at past experience, we can see that actually the opposite is to be expected. Unless we wanted to just deceive ourselves and bury our heads in the sand, believing that this transfer between the state and administration is actually the final implementation step. And that's the great weakness that the Court of Auditors is pointing out, the difficulty in assessing to which assent the reforms have actually been carried out, and the impact thereof, and the transfer of funds, something this proposal of the MFF does not actually solve, because management once again depends on the arbitrary nature of each member state. The risk of being that there would be a lack of transparency in European funds management, as well as complexity in traceability of those funds, as well as an inability to be able to analyze the results. Isn't the commission going to change, is it? They're not going to change this.”
Accounting and auditing of EU budget
“Thank you I will speak in Spanish thank you two questions to end the debate. First I agree with the concern expressed by the Court of Auditors on the difficulty of auditing funds within next generation and the concern that this is being changed by the financial regulation. I don't know if you have worked out some sort of impact study on this system of national envelopes where we're seeing serious problems with transparency and auditing and this is something that we Parliament have been looking for a long constantly that it's not that we're not the government is proposing we'd be losing supervisory capacity and we'll also be losing transparency. And the second question which I think is important do you have any study on the possible improvements that the financial framework could have in terms of the efficiency of the budget? Thank you.”
Accounting and auditing of EU budget
“(12:08:27 – 12:08:29): Thank you, chair. I'll be speaking in Spanish. Today, we're talking about 1 of the most important regulations, and it looks at how we manage funds in the next MFF. And it's really about the DNA of European policy. And what we're saying is that we do not like at all the proposal that's come from the commission. And I think it's worth emphasizing that this is a poor proposal, and that's because this is proposal, is response to the failure of the next generation funds. We have to pay off the debt of those funds, and therefore, they've had to put in place cuts. And as a result of that, they are transferring to member states those cuts and those responsibilities and giving them the suite, which is the national budget. And we are absolutely opposed to that approach. I agree with the proposals that have been put forward today by the rapporteurs, and there are 3 ideas I want to emphasize. Firstly, how are we going to put together these plans? What is going to be the role of autonomous communities and regions? And very importantly, the role of this parliament? We cannot repeat the mistakes of the next generation funds. Thanks.”
EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets
“(14:16:26 – 14:19:06): you very much to the commissioner for being here in the budget committee, and thank you for presenting the commission proposal for the next annual budget 2027. As you've said, that's the last budget of the current MFF. My group has closely analyzed in detail, the figures in this proposal as we did with the councils so that we could try to come up with a proposal that would receive majority support from the various political groups. We hope that we'll be able to reach a final agreement between the 3 institutions next autumn and that we'll all be able to have, budgets that we need approved on time. The budget at, the very origin of the parliament, and so I would like to, welcome the, agreement that we have, here on the budget, which is something that, unfortunately, we don't have in my country, Spain. As, the person responsible for this on behalf of the EPP, I would just like to remind you of some of the principles and priorities that we have, defended and will continue to defend in this annual budget. And these are all in the resolution passed in April referred to before. So to ensure competitiveness for our businesses and SMEs through simplification, cutting red tape and increasingly efficient management. Key role for key programs such as CAP, Erasmus plus, and fisheries policy. Families have to be a priority of the, social pillar, increase investment in defense as well as enhancing border security and fighting illegal immigration, human trafficking, and crime. Clear support for Ukraine, defending the, rule of law through the conditionality mechanism, enhancing control mechanisms for 8 to 3rd countries, fighting terrorism, and ensuring respect for European values, and finally, ensuring protection for religious communities, particularly Christians being persecuted around the world. I would also like to say that this budget is going to be limited, as you've said, because of, interest, payments on the next generation debt, and so similarly be the case for the, next generation. However, interest, can't be used as a response to all, challenges facing the union.”
Defence spending
“Thank you, chair, and thank you for welcoming in in this hearing. I will speak in Spanish. Thank you. I'd like to start my comments by highlighting the rigour and the autonomy and the diligence of the court in all of its reports on the RF. In most of the reports published by the European Court of Auditors, they have identified problems in the design of the RR m and they are serious shortcomings. And so this was really evident last week in all of the evaluations that have been presented by the Court of Auditors, there is an emphasis on the difficulty that they experience when looking at investments and reforms, so they don't have enough information. And so the response that we keep having is from the commission is that this is the responsibility of Member States, but we don't know what is happening and therefore this is a serious transparency issue. If we look at the objectives that have been evaluated, we can see that they have been approved and they have been green lighted by the commission. But we can see that the objectives and outcomes are not actually meeting the original aims, which is what is apparent from this report. So we're not meeting expectations because there hasn't been sufficient strategic assessment of what we're trying to achieve through the reforms. And then that responsibility is delegated to governments who have to come up with plans and measures. But it ends up with no one actually being responsible for the. Measures or for the reforms. And then. There has been a very slow implementation phase which has made it very difficult to obtain information. So Spain, which is the second beneficiary of second largest beneficiary of this. So we're we're struggling when we apply for funds.”
Accounting and auditing of EU budget
“(17:25:54 – 17:28:10): European Commission tabled a new model for the MFF based on simplification of programs and the elimination of administrative barriers as well as unnecessary bureaucracy, all of this with a view to strengthening our competitive capacity. These are matters that the EPP supports and has defended for a long time now. However, we think the solution does not involve emitting the next generation funds and national plans. Firstly, because that model has given rise to many problems, it hasn't made implementation more agile. It hasn't had the expected economic impact, and reforms that member states are being required to do haven't actually delivered the results expected. Second point, there have been serious problems when it comes to transparency and traceability of the funds as well as the real assessment of the impact of reforms. Thirdly, nationalizing EU programs and giving national governments full power is a serious mistake. We cannot nationalize European policies nor can we lose sight of the strategic aims. We cannot lose EU programs and put their success at the behest of national governments. The ECA court of auditors has borne out these points in its reports, and we have therefore tabled a number of ECON amendments to address these problems. We've also included the need for delegated acts to defend parliament's position as well as an obligation for national governments to consult with their national parliaments and, of course, the importance of tying reforms to CSRs country specific recommendations. Finally, we defend budgetary efficiency and simplification, but we must protect the European character of your EU money, and we need to ensure monitoring and assessment of resources used. I'd like to sincerely thank the rapporteur for the work done and for his willingness to cooperate. I think we are heading down the right avenue, and we hope to continue working together to incorporate these different in the final text. Thank you.”
EU political integration
“Chair. I will be speaking in Spanish. Muchisimas. Gracias. Thank you very much. Now, the most important task and responsibility of Parliament is the preparation of a budget. Indeed, the budget is the or and the reason for being of parliaments in general. So our task is to organize and allocate limited resources to a series of needs and objectives that we need to prioritize and organize. Therefore, our responsibility is focused on taking these limited resources from taxpayers. Pockets be allocated properly. Now, responsible and efficient organization of the budget needs to be the task of the European institutions. We cannot believe that the budget can grow infinitely, because that would only lead us to continue burdening citizens, pocketbooks, businesses and our productive capacity. So we need to begin with detailed assessments of each program and the budget line, so that we can ensure that each euro spent is a euro well invested. The EPP is clear that in the EU we need to strengthen our competitiveness and therefore we need to have programmes, avoid overlap and develop administrative capabilities towards budgetary efficiency. We also believe that we must invest in the security of our borders, our defence, as well as innovation, research and educational excellence. Ensure equal opportunities and create a framework which is sufficiently attractive to attract investments. And our businesses, especially SMEs, who are the ones that most create employment and opportunity. And therefore we want to continue investing in cohesion in the primary sector and the important role played by our regions. But to be able to do this and to continue financing programs, which are the pillars of the European Union, means that this is something which is very difficult. We have debt and we have interests that we need to face when it comes to next generation EU funds, year after year. This has limited our yearly budgets. Our debt significantly limits our ability to invest under the next financial framework. Major public spending programs are exceptional solutions for exceptional situations because they are commitments that need to be kept to, and they have consequences. And we need to bear this in mind in future. And if you, especially if you take into account the impact of next funds on our economy. Now I'd like to conclude by saying thank you to the rapporteur for this text, which is an excellent point of departure, and make it clear that the EPP is happy to work together with you so that we can have a good agreement, a good budget which responds to the needs of citizens. So thank you very much for your text.”
Size of EU budget
“Thank you chair. I will speak in Spanish. I'd like to thank both rapporteurs and particularly Vivaldi, for the excellent cooperation and good working spirit. Small midcaps are one of the drivers of growth in the EU. They're highly innovative. They create jobs and they're competitive on global markets. If we want a competitive Europe, we need a regulatory framework which does not create barriers but rather allows such companies to grow. There's a proposal here to broaden the definition of small mid-caps and that will have a positive impact upon them. It's not a technical issue. It's a strategic choice for the sake of competitiveness. In Europe, we have been very clear this new definition should and could not affect the overall scope or financing of the specific measures for SMEs. The aim is to eliminate obstacles, rather for companies to be able to access capital markets and private sector investment without over regulation of the banking sector. Reviews every five years a dynamic market so will need updating on the new MiFID proposal in econ. We've kept the market capitalisation proposal from the Commission, as Council did, to conclude this is a reform which is looking towards a Europe which has more innovation and companies which are able to grow. Thank you.”
Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
“I'm going to speak in Spanish. Thank you very much, chair. Thank you. Rapporteur. The Savings and Investment Union is one of the main priorities for this legislation. And I really welcome that. And that's what we see through the 649 amendments that have been tabled by the various groups. I really think that the success of the negotiations will really depend on us being ambitious and putting real pressure on the council to move things forward. Broadly, the amendments that I tabled on behalf of my group, the EPP, set out liberalisation of Market and better regulation, more simple, more specific, and focused on fostering private investment through capital markets. I've highlighted the need for private investment, which should go hand in hand with public investment, but should really be the main player because we believe that public financing is not enough, we don't want to replace it, but we do want to make private investment the real main player. We think member states should focus on structural reforms that allow for growth, that create a fiscal space without increasing costs, and that reduce regulatory risks. We're also asking in these amendments for more support for R&D investment. That should include tax incentives that would remove cross border barriers and help SMEs to harness integration in the market. We also think it's key to ensure access to transparent markets and to promote financial education, to ensure active participation of minority retail investors.”
EU approach to sustainability criteria in private investments
“Thank you chair. I will speak in Spanish. Thank you. Commissioner. Thank you very much. Well, every time we talk about the most important part of a budget, the income, or when we talk about creating new own resources, as is the case here, we're talking about customs duties, about new taxes. Obviously that is going to affect taxpayers and their pockets. So we need to make sure that we are responsible and careful in how we tread here. We all agree we need to comply with our obligations. We need to pay back the loans that came out as part of next generation EU, but that can't be at the cost of decimating the competitiveness of European businesses, especially when the whole point of the omnibus regulation is to make things easier, is to simplify, is to cut back on red tape. And if you look at the proposal, well, we feel that these new own resources that have been put forward and core more specifically, is going to be an additional hurdle on the European market. You have put this forward as a package, but there is a way to get rid of core and not do away with the whole package.”
Own EU resources

See Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA's full profile and positions on Atlas →