Committee on Budgetary Control Ordinary meeting CONT Committee meeting
No chapters available yet
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
CONT European Parliament
Follow its sittingsGerben-Jan Gerbrandy
And therefore, I welcome the changes in the financial regulation that authorize the authority for political parties and foundations, which were present during one of the hearings as well, to also control individual member parties. Then chair on the security element, and that is both digital security and real-life security. We've seen this week again how quickly the world is changing, and former safe options are not secure anymore. And, unfortunately, we have to deal with that. So, business as usual may no longer be sufficient.
And therefore, I call upon the Parliament Services to hold political groups to the same standards, as our data storage systems are often chosen freely per group and are mostly non-European. And that is really something we should be concerned about. Also, the internal auditor clearly stated that cybersecurity threats were identified as the most common risk point. So, we have to really future-proof our internal systems. These threats include, unfortunately, the rise in foreign influence cases over the past year.
In addition to that, the internal spying scandal involving a former diplomat turned commissioner is really one of our great concerns. At the moment, there is an internal commission's work group in which parliament is not at all involved. I think that is a mistake. And I call upon the bureau to more actively inform this committee of further developments and also to work more closely together with the commission on this case. This goes much further than just an internal commission's investigation.
Then finally, a point on efficiency in this house and also attempts to try to cut costs. Too often, we sit in empty rooms where translators outnumber members or spend more time traveling than debating. So I call upon parliament services and the bureau to engage actively with other parliaments, bringing best practices that can revive and strengthen our own debate. Of course, also always taking into account that even in an empty room, a large public might be listening, and that our citizens have every right to follow very transparently what we are doing here. This report, Chairman, is an ongoing process.
This is just a draft. There are more amendments to come and, of course, the other groups as well. And I'm very much looking forward to working together with the shadows and, in the end, coming up with a very constructive and strong final report. Thank you.
Niclas Herbst
Thank you very much. Being the EPP shadow myself, I would like to, of course, thank you for your very balanced draft. As you said, it's an ongoing process, but I think the tone you mentioned is a very good one. Also, bearing in mind that last year, we did not manage to come to a conclusion. Jointly, I think it is very good that you maintain a very neutral tone and that you address all the issues that we need to stick to and that are actually really relevant to Poland's discharge.
I would especially like to seize the opportunity and stress that it's indeed important that you raise all the security issues, which are not only, but especially, cybersecurity issues. And also, I like the idea of best practices with other parliaments a lot. And I hope we managed to successfully approve a report concentrating on these issues in the end. I also welcome the references to the need to maintain institutional integrity and avoid undue influence, as we have seen in the past that exactly this was happening from both state and non-state actors in previous years. So, I believe that we should be ambitious in relation to the transparency register and also its financing in the end.
Since it is understaffed and cannot adequately fulfill its role in this context, we would need the register to be linked with the financial transparency systems. That was an issue that we have discussed quite a lot in this committee already. So on the 400,000,000 budget, I think we should be clear and realistic about what it's possible to do and not raise expectations. Too high. We all want transparency and accountability, particularly when fraud irregularities take place, but all actions, of course, must be in line with the rules. I also see that there are some hints related to ethical governance and interinstitutional cooperation in the draft.
And I hope we managed to avoid highly controversial issues in this report and concentrated on what we can do together here. So, again, thank you very much. I think, maybe also as a last point, raising the issue of the general expenditure allowance. For my political group, I have to stress that we should take into account the fact that this GA is a lump sum. And in this context, of course, they must not change in the future and must not bring additional administrative burdens because, for us as MEPs, they are already pretty high.
So, we will come up with some amendments. But again, I would like to thank you for the tone and the approach. I think it's a very balanced draft, and I'm confident and optimistic that we can find a common solution in a joint position here. Thank you. So, we will continue with the S and D group.
Mr. Lupo, you will take the place.
Giuseppe Lupo
Best wishes for our work in 2026. On behalf of the S&D Group, I'd like to thank Roberta of the Renew Group for an excellent job in preparing the draft report on the discharge 2024 of the European Parliament. The test, to a very large extent, is one that we can support very much in line with our political priorities, in particular when it comes to institutional integrity, transparency, the fight against disinformation. The absence of any reference to NNG in the text, I think, is good because it would transcend the semantics of the report. We agree with the emphasis placed on foreign interference and the protection of the democratic process, as well as the role of artificial intelligence in fighting disinformation. We have a positive assessment of the attention to the security of our information system, in particular the role of DGCOM and EPLO, which we believe is important when it comes to strengthening links between the EU and citizens.
To conclude the text, we believe it is a good working basis. It can be further improved through targeted amendments, given the timetable when it comes to ethical issues and improper use of funds, but we are prepared to take up these issues. And we will be entering into negotiations with the other political groups with a view to coming up with an excellent tax to be put to the plenary for adoption.
Julien Sanchez
We need to look at this attentively. If we look at the total credits, that's a 6.5% increase compared to 2023. If we look at the budgetary context, I think we do need to look at this quite carefully. European citizens are being told they have to make significant efforts.
Niclas Herbst
Provinces and interpretations? [REPRESENTATIVE:] No Romanian interpretation. We'll stop the clock. Don't worry. And now, it works.
Julien Sanchez
Thank you for the discharge work. The speaker also kindly thanks the interpreters. So, if we look at the figures, we need to look at them quite carefully. If we look at the overall commitments, we have 201,000,000. That's a 6.5% increase when we look at 2023.
If we look at the very tight budgetary context, we do need to look at this quite carefully because citizens are being called on to make quite serious efforts. So we also need to look at the buildings policy and the renovation of the SPEC building. This is a significant project, around 455,000,000, and it could get up to 500,000,000 when we look at the ancillary costs as well. We have this historic level of investment, so we really need to look at our current budgetary priorities. There's a lack of meeting rooms, pressure on existing infrastructure, organizational issues, difficulties with personnel, and all of this could be exacerbated by the renovation of the SPAC Building.
So, it's hard to consider this plan fully operational. I have a clear reserve as well when it comes to paragraphs 102 and 103 regarding the ID and PFE groups. These paragraphs say that the information requested was not transmitted, but this is not correct. The information was transmitted based on the demands. This creates a misleading impression, I think, in the report.
You say, Mister Reporter, that you want to have the same system for everyone, but I think it is biased in the report. Now you're raising an issue of funds, but the report doesn't sufficiently touch on the equal treatment of political groups. It seems only certain groups are subject to these more in-depth checks. What about other groups? Have they had similar checks, and if not, why?
So, if you're not properly checking a group, of course there are no problems. So, I think that is a real issue. So, in terms of budgetary control and audits, there has to be full transparency for all of the political groups and free access to documents. The report says that an accredited external auditor was designated. It would be interesting to know what other group was audited, because if they haven't done their work well for one group, then we need to check the other groups that might have had this external audit.
So, for all of these reasons, even though I respect the work that's been done, there are some concerns that we have. We will table amendments and two final points on the general expenses. I am not opposed to there being rules. I think things should be more transparent. And then finally, some issues with the lack of functionality for the e-portal.
It seems a bit problematic if, in one month, it's really quite shameful that you can't get these IT problems solved. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ericsson.
Dick Erixon
Thank you, Sharon. Thank you for the draft report, Raptor. The Court of Auditors found that our administrative spending was not materially misstated. This is a decent result, but we must set higher goals, ensuring citizens receive maximum value for every euro spent by the Parliament. I welcome the transparency requirements in this report.
However, a critical gap remains in Strasbourg costs. In 2020, reduced travel saved €33,000,000. Parliaments invested in virtual participation technology, yet we still lack a comprehensive accounting of total Stassberg expenditure. We needed to know what has been done, what the results are, what can still be done, and through what concrete steps. Yes, treaties constrain us, but something can be done. We saw it during the pandemic.
Let us go further and use our power to be careful about the money spent by the parliament. Thank you.
Thank you, Jonas.
Jonas Sjöstedt
Thank you so much, Nicolas. I would like to thank the Rapporteur for a very solid and well-balanced draft. I think it covers most of the important areas in a good way, and we have very few. I mean, we agree on almost everything that is written in the report. We, I think, should put extra emphasis on the transparency issues, which are well covered in the report, but maybe even more can be done there. I think we really do need a reform of the system with general allowances.
It's widely criticized for attributing money to members without them having to prove what they use the money for, and I think it really harms our credibility as members of parliament. We have to address this. When it comes to the scandal with the ID group and the ongoing investigations about systematic embezzlements of the parliament funds, of course, it's also now an issue for the courts, but it has to be addressed in the report. And I think it's very important that it is. I think it's also of particular importance that we make clear that we view the group, the Patriots for Europe, as the successor of the ID group. They have to take full responsibility for what happened during these years.
I also think it's important that we keep up the pressure when it comes to the voluntary pension scheme. It's not totally in our hands, but we have to make our point very clear that this was never a sustainable solution for the pensions of the members. Having said that, and since we have no major objections to what's written in the report, we'll make a limited number of amendments. They will focus, for example, on the need for the parliament to be a good employer, also for services like catering, cleaning, and others, and that they should have the right to protected workers' rights and to internalize some of the services to be able to ensure good working conditions. I think even more can be done when it comes to transparency regarding the working conditions for the assistance.
I mean, there have been some major reforms made through the years, but there are still some things to be done when it comes to the rights of assistance. And I think that even though it's not.
Arno Bausemer
One political group to another. So, I think we do need to be clear. Are we talking about a technical issue or, as the left says, actual criminal conduct? So I think it is important that all the groups are checked in the same way and that we're not simply targeting certain political factions here. Thank you.
Maria Grapini
Okay. Thank you very much. I'll be speaking for the remaining time. Let me thank the rapporteur. First of all, I think it's a very balanced text.
I was previously a rapporteur for the parliament's budget, and it is not easy to analyze each chapter, but it is important to do this thoroughly and in an objective and honest way. I welcome this report and the comments from the colleagues, but there is one point that I want to highlight. I've been here for 3 terms already, and we have tried to reduce the travel costs for Strasbourg. Of course, the treaty means that we have to go to Strasbourg, but maybe we don't need so many staff to go to Strasbourg every month. Perhaps we can find other solutions when it comes to transport and have all of these vehicles traveling between Brussels and Strasbourg.
I think it would be a good way to reduce costs. Of course, as long as there's the treaty, we have to have our meetings there. Now, with regard to costs, there is an issue with delays in payments. We're saying 30 days for the member states, and now we want to change that. But the parliament doesn't reimburse members within 30 days.
In some offices, such as mine, an assistant made a mistake when she went on sick leave, and I had to get 21,000 back for transport from the person's domicile to the parliament. Now, I don't think that's normal. Maybe there isn't enough staff in the reimbursements department, but I think a deadline of 30 days for reimbursement of costs should be in place when we have the right documents. And thirdly, one colleague was talking about the rights of assistance. For 36 years, I was an employer in Romania, and I have never seen more workers with rights than our assistance. I never know when my assistant is going to be there, if they're going to ask for sick leave, or how long they are going to be on sick leave.
I just don't understand. I don't think assistants need any more rights. Yes. They're part of our team. We work with them, but it's the image of the member that is at stake here.
I think we need to do this properly. It is quite popular to say "more rights for assistance," but the responsibility of the member is to work within a team. However, we need to have some ways to exert influence on our assistance. If someone doesn't show up to work, I'm not even informed. And we're given, I mean, there are huge amounts of money being paid out for sick leave. I have assistants who are on sick leave for five or six months.
And then, apparently, they also have the right to annual leave even if they only worked five months. It just doesn't seem acceptable. I think we need to really look into this and manage money properly. Thank you.
Niclas Herbst
Thank you. Any more colleagues want to take the floor under the KPI process? That's not the case. So, Mr. Gabbardy, S.
Rapporteur, some closing remarks from your side, please.
Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy
Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. And I do not have a lot to add. Let me start by thanking colleagues for their compliments on the draft and their mostly constructive comments.
Yes, I'm also strongly in favor of treating every political group equally. But if certain irregularities are found, that doesn't automatically mean that the controls were not equal. So, I'm fully in line with that, but we shouldn't shy away from the results that have been found during these controls. On the general expenditure allowance, I know very well the sensitivities and the different political backgrounds of member states. Nevertheless, I think it's really worthwhile to try to find an agreement on greater transparency.
In 2019, it was a European Ombudsman who even talked about maladministration, and that is something that we simply cannot afford as a public institution, as a parliament, that an Ombudsman comes with these kinds of qualifications. That doesn't mean that we have to completely change the system. But I think with some smart measures, we can make it more transparent and easier to control without adding a lot of additional administrative complications. So, I'm very much looking forward to working together with you, and hopefully, we can make this a smooth process in the coming weeks. Thank you.
Niclas Herbst
Thank you very much. So please note that the deadline for tabling amendments is January 26 at 2, and the vote is foreseen in the meeting on Monday, March 2. So, with that, we can close this item. Unfortunately, for our next item, item number 412, that is the discharge on the general budget of the other institutions. The rapporteur is not here yet.
It was about to start at 11:00. So, we have a 10-minute break. And see you then in exactly 10 minutes. So, colleagues, we'll start with our next item: the general budget concerning the other institutions. We have with us our rapporteur, Mr.
Pascuale Tridico. And I would like to thank him for his work. He was the secretariat for these nine very comprehensive draft reports. Of course, as always, the rapporteur will first give a presentation covering all reports, and then we will have a round of interventions from the different shadow rapporteurs. Some elements of this year's discharge are very familiar to us.
I'm thinking here, in the first place, about the unfortunate situation with the council, which has once again chosen not to cooperate with parliament on the discharge. But I would also like to highlight that this year, for the first time, the EPO, which started its operational activities in 2021, will be given discharge by the Parliament within the other institutions package, even if it is handled as an agency by the European Court of Auditors. So, I will now give the floor to Mr. Trilico. You have twelve minutes for your presentations. The floor is now yours.
Pasquale Tridico
Thank you, Mr. President. I will try to be brief and effective. First of all, let me say happy New Year to everybody. In particular, let me also say thank you to the staff of the secretary who worked with me, especially Marius and Diego.
And as well to my assistant, to my staff, and to Elisa who worked very hard during the past month on these reports. Now, concerning the reports, as anticipated already in November, I decided to have the key horizontal priority for all the files, such as the ethical framework, staff matters including training and well-being, work organization, but also accessibility and sustainability. So these things will go horizontally to all the reports, the agency, and the institution. Finally, I took a closer look at the use of new technology and how it may improve efficiency if submitted to clear human control under clear guidelines. Now, starting with the council.
As usual, this is the elephant in the room again, with the lack of cooperation in particular. As you may have noted in my draft report, I tried to stick to the previous content and language. Since this file, there has always been a general agreement on that. What I try to do is keep insisting on the lack of cooperation of the council. This has been confirmed as well this year, despite some general premises by the Polish presidency last year. But in the end, we did not have a concrete action to materialize cooperation with the Council.
Then, moving to our main partner, the Court of Auditors. The report states that, considering its role as auditor of the Union budget, the Court is expected to abide by the highest possible standards of transparency and accountability. In this regard, the report regrets the latest development concerning the APPO investigation of the former president of the Court of Auditors, with the appeal to the Court of Justice following the court's decision to deny a staff member the right to testify in the ongoing criminal investigation. We expect the highest level of cooperation between the EPO and the AECA, and it is difficult to accept that AECA refuses authorization to its staff to testify, particularly when it comes to EPO investigations. Concerning the Court of Justice in 2024, it was important here, with the reform and training force.
The justice report welcomed all steps taken by the court to make this reform effective and smooth, but also its engagement in fostering the trust of citizens and ensuring transparency and accessibility. I would also like to praise the court for its engagement in integrating artificial intelligence and modern technology into its work, in full respect of the independence of the procedure, but also with ethical principles. Now, let's go to the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. They have improved cooperation among themselves, and this is good, particularly when we speak about efficiency and the economy of scale in using spaces and technology. Specific to the ask, I would like to mention that the report welcomed the engagement of the new general secretary, generally to increase the efficiency and relevance of the committee.
The report welcomed all actions taken to amplify the voice of all civil society groups and cities represented by the committee. Also, the report regrets that the budget initially allocated to operate major cybersecurity upgrades in 2026 was ultimately not delivered, rendering the important target of cybersecurity unachievable. Obviously, we also made sure that the Olaf case sent to the EPO on fraud allegations involving a service provider is mentioned in the report with the relevant follow-up. For the regions, for the Committee of the Regions, the report reiterates the important role played by the committee by ensuring the involvement of local authorities in Union decision-making and welcomes the action taken by the committee to modernize the administration, becoming a front runner in testing innovation, a new practice which may benefit the whole European Union administration. The reports also continue to regret that no comprehensive anti-fraud strategy is in place despite some steps which were taken in 2025.
Now, for the European Data Protection Supervisor, some members have expressed concern about travel to the country of origin by high-ranking officials in the EDPS. The report provides the most updated detailed data for traveling in 2024. The draft reports also note the revision of the mandate of the European Data Protection Supervisor with the entry into force of the Artificial Intelligence Act. And there is a personal issue which I have to underline, which is the impossibility to meet the European Data Protection Supervisor or Secretary generally during this time, never neither at bilateral level nor in the official meeting here in the committee. So I hope we can meet, as we had a strong cooperation with the supervisor of the ADPS.
There is another small institution, but a key institution for Europe, for the European Union. The report reflects the importance of the houseman and housewoman in promoting good administration and, even more, in raising concerns about any perceived favoritism or conflict of interest in the appointing of a new secretary general. This is an issue, which was with the previous secretary general of the cabinet of the new Alpswoman. Legal arguments are presented to substantiate the criticism towards the presence of the Secretary General in the selection board, but also against the decision not to provide the relevant document for the selection procedure when it was requested. After consultation with the legal service of the European Parliament, we got some answers and some agreement as well that the document should have been sent to the rapporteur.
I would like to reiterate that any perception of favoritism towards any institution, and even more so from the [missing word], is to be avoided since it risks undermining the institution's mission and integrity. This is an institution which has exactly the role of safeguarding world integrity and ethical issues among the European institutions. So we cannot allow that some suspects around the house are basically raised. Considering the element, I would like to discuss with the shadow the possibility of postponing the discharge of the houseman. I would like now to discuss the European Public Prosecutor's Office.
The file is very large because the work of the app increased a lot in the last two months and year. But also, the role in the anti-fraud architecture increased. I would like to mention that the report continues to express full support to the EPO, also in relation to the human and financial resource requests, and in view of its added value against organized crime and international investigation. The specific challenges addressed by EPO in 2024 are also mentioned in detail throughout the report. Let me conclude that the whole anti-fraud architecture is there to protect the Union's financial interests.
Therefore, we need a prompt and effective recovery following the investigation. All efforts should be made to improve the amounts seized, confiscated, and eventually recovered, and this reporting should be more effective and structured. Last but not least, the European External Action Service. Certainly, the international context affects all the institutions, but the EAS in particular, and all the challenges are reflected in the report. So we really appreciate the work and the effort of the EAS.
I would like to mention that the respect of international law implies that whoever causes the match should pay for it. This is relevant in particular for our discharge procedure, as well as when EU funds are involved, and as explicitly mentioned by the High Representative in a hearing in November. In some contexts, European funds are involved in some damage which was destroyed during aggressions. I will table some amendments on topics that have been at the center of last year's conflict among political groups, despite not being part of the ES budget, hoping to find a final and valid compromise. The report takes into consideration all the views, and in particular the complexity of last year.
So I understand all the complexity and as well the relevance of our high representative and the service that he does for Europe. Concerning the recently opened investigation by the EPO into a corruption case around the European Union diplomatic agency, which has nothing to do with the current High Representative. The report includes the most recent facts available at the moment of drafting in order to give full transparency to all colleagues and to the public. We have been clear in our request for full transparency and cooperation with the EPO, and the need to reinforce the anti-fraud framework to avoid any such cases being repeated. As you all know, a new deadline for follow-up questions was opened, and we've had good cooperation as well on the side of the yes.
And we will wait for the answer, and then inform all of you. Finally, I will just mention that there are some small types of mistakes that will be corrected with some amendments in the final draft. I will now be happy to hear my colleagues' views on this draft reporting a view of constructive work. And thank you all for the cooperation. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Niclas Herbst
Thank you very much. And now I'll give the floor to Andri Kova, Chair for APP.
Andrey Kovatchev
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. And from my side, also Happy New Year to all of you, and thank you to the staff for the good cooperation. But for sure, I would like to thank Pascal for his work and for this openness and cooperation on the discharge procedures for the Council, the Committee of the Region, the European Economic and Social Committee, and the European External Election Service. This is also my responsibility.
As a shadow reporter of the EPP, overall, the proposed tax provides a solid base and reflects well the funding of the European Court of Auditors. The 2024 discharge once again highlights challenges in the sound implementation of the EU budget. I fully recognize the significant budgetary constraints and difficulties caused by the rising inflation and the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. As regards the European Council, I regret, as also the rapporteur mentioned, its continuous refusal to engage in the discharge procedure, including participating in hearings and replying to Parliament's questionnaire. The discharge procedure is not merely a technical exercise.
It is crucial for ensuring transparency and democratic accountability. Looking ahead, I believe that constructive dialogue remains the only valuable way forward from the EPP perspective. My amendments will aim to better reflect the urgent need to resume meaningful and structured engagement with the Council. Now turning to the Committee of the Regions. The draft report provides a solid assessment of its budgetary and administrative performance.
More attention should be given to performance results, measurable impact, and value for money. This is also a need for a stronger focus on simplification and the reduction of administrative burdens. I welcome very much the committee's digital innovation strategy and progress towards a paperless working environment. I also appreciate the good institutional and interinstitutional cooperation that has led to cost savings, and I thank the committee for allowing the Parliament to use the building during the SPAC renovation here in the European Parliament. Regarding the European Economic and Social Committee, I welcome the strict budgetary discipline demonstrated by the 99.2% budget implementation rate, as well as the savings achieved through interinstitutional cooperation.
I also welcome the formalization of the anti-fraud strategy in 2024, following repeated calls from the parliament, which introduces concrete measures on prevention, detection, and investigation. At the same time, further efforts are needed to strengthen cybersecurity and internal control systems, and our amendments will reflect these priorities. And, finally, from my field of responsibility regarding the European External Action Service, I welcome the improved cooperation this year in the discharge procedure, as well as the engagement and availability of the High Representative's callers. On the other hand, I'm concerned about the recent allegations concerning the misuse of public funds and tender procedures by the previous leadership. We're very clear that this was the previous leadership.
And I expect the EPPO investigations to run their course and EES to ensure the full and effective implementation of the existing anti-fraud framework. I would also like to underline that positive initiatives, such as this diplomatic academy, should not be undermined by the actions of, or maybe the actions of some individuals. Similarly, I believe we should not impose unnecessary new rules and administrative burdens, but rather ensure full compliance with existing rules. In my amendments, I intend to address the persistent challenges and constraints faced by the European External Action Service and its delegations, with a view to strengthening safeguards and preventing any misuse of EU funding. I look forward to constructive cooperation with the rapporteur and other shadow rapporteurs to deliver a balanced text to improve sound financial management of the respective institutions.
Thank you very much.
Niclas Herbst
Thank you. And now my task is to give the floor first to one of the two S&D rapporteurs. If I count correctly, Mr. Cipella has five institutions, and you are only four, sir. Mollin.
Mr. Cipella, Mr. Chair first.
Andrey Kovatchev
Oh, Mr. Chair. Sure. From the EPP side, we also have the statement of madam. She's not here, and she asked me to read it. I don't know if it's later or now.
Andrey Kovatchev
Shadow reporters from the EPP, I took the task to also read the statement of my colleague. I would like to, again, thank Mr. Trucido for drafting and presenting those reports in relation to the discharge of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the European Court of Auditors, the European Public Prosecutor's Office, the European Data Protection Supervisor, and the European Ombudsman. Also during the year 2024, those institutions continue to carry out their tasks and functions, each making a specific contribution within the scope of its own mandate to the protection of the Union's financial interests, to legal certainty, to the safeguarding of fundamental rights, and to good administration. And they made this contribution while facing old and new challenges, from difficulties in staff recruitment to cybersecurity and the use of artificial intelligence tools, or the impact of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, to give a few examples. And despite this, in some cases, there were budgetary constraints and resources that were not always adequate.
I shall limit myself to citing the important work carried out by the European Court of Auditors in auditing the EU budget, both the traditional funds and the RRF, the constant increase in the number and financial impact of the investigations concerning the EPPO, and the entry into force and implementation of the reforms regarding the allocation of primary ruling judiciary between the Court of Justice and the General Court. This regards the draft report presented today. Overall, I agree with the rapporteur's approach focusing on sound budgetary and financial management, internal audit and controls, staff well-being, energy efficiency, enhancement, digitalization and cybersecurity, ethics, and transparency. It is my intention to contribute to our common work on those files through amendments aimed at integrating the draft reports, and I'm confident that together with the rapporteur and other shadow reporters, we will manage to have well-grounded, balanced, and truthful decisions and resolutions on the discharge of those institutions. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
José Cepeda
Thank you very much indeed. Let me start with my first institution. But before that, I'd like to wish you all a very happy New Year. I hope that 2026 will prove to be a better year than 2025. Of course, the shadow of war is always hovering behind us, but let's be optimistic.
Well, turning to the issue at stake. Thank you very much indeed to the rapporteur and the technical team. These are well-researched, well-drafted, and coherent reports, and they're pretty complete from a budgetary control point of view. I think they are a great starting point for our work. Now, what am I responsible for?
The ombudsman, to start with. Well, in 2024, looking at the ombudsman, I think it's been prudent to have a solid basis, well audited, because there are no cases which are particularly relevant here. No issues of fraud. No serious issues. I'd also like to highlight, as a particular positive point, the strategic usage made of AI tools internally.
If you look at the agreement you had with the European Parliament and the specialized training provided to people on these issues, I really think this is a good example of responsible digital tools. Now, there are some investigations. There were about 168 days taken. I mean, if the cases are very complicated, that may well be a factor in such a delay. But I think it would be better to focus resources on fewer, but more strategic, investigations.
And that could also be an example for other institutions. I also wanted to say that we have seen some controversies with some jobs in EU institutions. Now, far from seeing this as a serious problem, I think what we all have to bear in mind is that we should be able to look at how we can improve the process when it comes to appointing new staff members and perhaps some new measures which might allow us to be more responsible. Then the EAS, I think they have shown good management of their budget. They've been subject to considerable pressure, especially now, with 145 different delegations.
The discharge should be an opportunity to tackle the urgent question of what is, for me, quite a dramatic issue, and that is the budgetary overshoot by the EEAS, especially at the current time. I think this should be food for thought for all of us. I know they can't do more with few resources. And what we've seen is that they have more and more issues to deal with: security, disinformation, foreign interference, and geopolitical crises. I think it's undeniable that there's an increase in physical presence and online work in the delegation. So, I think a discharge is the right opportunity to raise this issue.
Another key point is the work that has been done by the EEAS and the services. We have incentives. And I think that coordinating intelligence services for the 27 member states in the current context really warrants a bigger budget because we certainly need to build capacity in this area. We are aware of security and defense at this stage. But if you have an institution which is responsible for security and defense, a considerable part of security, veterans, and intelligence services, we really should ensure that they have the appropriate budget.
So I think strengthening the work done by the intelligence service coordination unit is crucial. Then, the European Data Protection Supervisor, the rapporteur, mentioned this briefly. I think in 2024, the prosecutor or the supervisor had considerable new responsibilities, including AI. This goes beyond the original mandate. The report has shown that the budget has been managed correctly.
These additional responsibilities have gone hand in hand with appropriate additional budgets. And I think this reflects another positive point, which is interinstitutional cooperation. This has proven effective on technological matters. But, on the other hand, there has been increasing dependence on new technology provided externally, and I think this is something worth looking at from a security point of view. Perhaps budgetary planning needs to be more predictable and stable here in order to avoid new risks and ensure the operational capacity of the supervisor.
And then the CGU, I think they have proven themselves to be very responsible when it comes to managing their budget in 2024. There is considerable institutional reform carried out in 2024. This is very well managed, and we'll have to see what the real impact of these reforms is on the length of trials and cases. But I think we've looked at housing in our buildings, sorry, in Luxembourg as well. They've taken a cautious but proactive approach to the use of AI in internal structure, the innovation lab, and training staff members.
So by way of conclusion, I think that these ICT projects are carried out correctly. And I think we are looking forward to working closely together with the shadow rapporteurs and the rapporteurs, and I hope we can carry out our job here in ordering these budgets. Thank you.
Csaba Molnár
Thank you, Chair. I'll speak Hungarian this time.
Colleagues. Let me wish you a very happy New Year as well. As a shadow reporter for the S&D, I was responsible for the discharge for the Committee of the Regions, the ESC, the ECA, and the Council. I think we have here a great starting point for our work together. It's a very detailed, in-depth report.
You've covered all the important points. This is a great starting point. Congratulations to the reporter for their hard work here. Now, when it comes to transparency, account keeping, democratic control, gender equality, and the well-being of workers, sustainability, these are all important points and important for all institutions. Now, if you look at institutional cooperation, I think that we've looked at gender equality here, which could be strengthened.
And for the Committee of the Regions, we've got the second Human President of the Committee of the Regions. I think that's a good sign. Now I'll go through our suggestions for the council. We don't want anti-European governments to drain the decision-making process within the Council of its power, such as the Austrian government by using their right to veto us. We have made a number of suggestions on these points.
And we'd also like to underscore that we need to remind the Eurosceptic governments that they run the risk of losing access to European funds. We were making suggestions along these lines. But once again, the work done here is excellent. The work done by the rapporteur is appreciated. I think we will be tabling some amendments just to make minor corrections. But I think we are working towards the same objective here.
We want to improve the work done by the institutions. We want to improve transparency. And so, I'm looking forward to working on these issues together. We're very optimistic about our future work together.
Ondřej Knotek
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, colleagues, and also Happy New Year. The discharge procedure allows us not only to verify financial management but also to reflect on how the EU institutions can work more efficiently, transparently, and in line with the EU treaties, of course. In the report, there is so much that deserves recognition, and I would, at this stage, really like to thank Mr. Reporter for his excellent work.
At the same time, there are areas where further clarification, balance, and proportionality would strengthen both public trust and institutional credibility. So, let's begin with the EAS. We all agree that the European Union faces an increasingly complex international environment, and effective coordination and professionalism are therefore essential. At the same time, citizens are facing high prices and pressure on public finances. Against this background, it is reasonable to ask that more human resources and related financial needs must be carefully justified and clearly linked to efficient gains.
EEAS should closely cooperate with the diplomatic capacity of member states, which, while fully respecting that foreign policy remains a core national competence under the treaties. Also, the ongoing investigation concerning the European Diplomatic Academy highlights the importance of robust governance and transparency. A cautious and prudent approach to funding would help safeguard confidence in EU spending. Now, the Council and the European Council. It is important to maintain a balanced and treaty-based approach in this report.
Compared to our socialist colleague's shadow report, we believe that unanimity remains a legitimate safeguard in this sensitive policy area. Likewise, the European Council plays a strategic role defined by the treaties, and accountability mechanisms should always be respected to uphold this mandate. On EPPO, there is broad support for its role in protecting the EU's financial interests, particularly in the fight against VAT fraud. To maximize its effectiveness, it may be useful to ensure that transparency, social, and training policies are clearly linked to operational needs, such as analytical capacity, digital expertise, and investigative resilience, while preserving prosecutorial independence, confidentiality, and discretion. With regard to the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee, their consultative role adds valuable perspectives to EU policymaking.
At the same time, the proposed discharge text should reaffirm more clearly its advisory nature regarding the opinions of these institutions, as clearly stated in the treaties. This helps to preserve the given institutional balance and clarity of roles. Questions around allowances, including remote participation, also merit careful reflection. Ensuring transparency and proportionality is important for maintaining public understanding and trust. To the European Ombudsman, the institution plays a vital role in promoting good administration.
For that reason, issues related to appointment procedures underline the importance of clear safeguards and transparent rules, which can only strengthen confidence in the ombudsman's work. Regarding the EDPS, cooperation with national authorities is essential. Further emphasis on translating coordination structures into consistent and effective outcomes across member states would enhance legal certainty for citizens and public authorities alike. The Court of Justice's well-being policies and flexible working arrangements should explicitly be connected to greater efficiency, better workload distribution, and reduction of backlogs and delays. And finally, on the Court of Auditors, the performance-based nature of instruments such as the RRF has undeniably increased the complexity and workload.
Auditing milestones and reforms will require significant expertise and careful judgment, and the Court of Auditors should be ready for such challenges in the next MFF. Once again, mister reporter, thank you for your well-written draft report. I am looking forward to the cooperation with you and the other shadows. Thank you.
Mister Ericsson, please.
Dick Erixon
Thank you. Our shadow rapporteur, Mr. Stuhlsa, couldn't be here, and sorry for that. And I will read one of his comments on another topic, the Court of Auditors. He writes that the draft report and all of our discussion in the committee have confirmed once again that ICA is doing tremendous good work. However, it is clear that the RF scale, speed, and political sensitivity still stretch the current audit capacity of the institution.
Therefore, we must focus on the importance of equipping the ICA properly, especially from a staff standpoint. Finally, the court can also be effective. It can't be effective if it doesn't have full and timely access to all relevant data. We must emphasize the need for more transparency from the Commission so that proper budgetary control is possible. Thank you.
Niclas Herbst
Thank you very much. And again, I have the duty to decide who is going to take the floor. First, for Mr. Boyer, it's you.
Gilles Boyer
Thank you, Chair. It's a dilemma, I recognize it. Thank you, Chair. Thank you also to our reporter, Pasquale, for those clear and thorough reports and for all the work that has been done this year. Maybe a few comments on two specific institutions from our side. First, about the EPO.
The 2024 discharge report shows that the EPO is now fully operational. There are more investigations, prosecutions, and convictions, and higher amounts are involved, especially in cases linked to the RRF. But this progress comes with increasing pressure. The workload is growing faster than the resources, and choices regarding staffing and digital tools are starting to affect the work of the office. The EPO works well, but it needs proper support.
We will, therefore, support the discharge report and table amendments to align the EPO's mandate, resources, and governance so that it can continue to fulfill its important mission. A few words about the CGU. The report confirms good budget management and shows that Parliament's requests from the 2023 discharge have been taken into consideration. At the same time, 2024 highlights new challenges, especially the practical implementation of the reforms, the length of proceedings, cybersecurity, and other ongoing issues. In this context, we support the report's approach, and we will table amendments to strengthen the institution's performance, monitoring, and resilience in line with the Parliament's positions.
Thank you.
Niclas Herbst
This brings us to the end of this item, but not without giving the operator the possibility to have some final remarks and reactions to what has just been said.
Pasquale Tridico
Thank you, Mr. Chen. Not really much to add because actually, we feel that there is a strong convergence, and so we will work together. Just to say, we are also going to have a small talk on the ombudsman regarding this specific case, and then I think that there are no major disagreements, but there is basically strong convergence on the report. And all the amendments that will come will be very welcome in improving the report.
Thank you very much, again.
Niclas Herbst
Thank you very much for this work. And we are moving now to the last agenda item today, which is the consideration of the draft report on the discharge of joint undertakings for the financial year 2024. This year, the rapporteur is Mr. Molnar from S&D. You have prepared a thorough draft report on the 12 joint undertakings considered for the granting of discharge.
I will first give you the floor for a presentation of your work of up to 10 minutes. And then, of course, I will give the floor to the shadow rapporteurs to present their views. This time, it's very clear you're the first to take the floor. So, I think we should be even, Mister Molnar. The floor is yours.
Csaba Molnár
Thank you very much. Given we're working against a geopolitical backdrop where the EU is fighting for its own autonomy. Now, when we talk about joint undertakings, we have to look at building new structures before we look at 100 odd different reports. But today, I'm going to try to cover all 12 joint undertakings together. We've worked hard on these both in the reports and in the other meetings we've had.
We've tried to ensure that we have a very readable text. Now, in the current process, we've set out a number of priorities. Looking at strengthening the strategic autonomy of the EU, focusing on the well-being of workers, increasing transparency, and ensuring agenda balance and geographical balance as well. We have a new chapter as well, which looks at other issues of concern. That's the title of the chapter because we believe there are areas which we haven't dealt with under other chapters, but they shouldn't be ignored and perhaps could be looked at in greater detail in this chapter.
For example, Eater falls under this chapter, as do other joint undertakings such as the high-speed systems. Then one of the main problems is private participants, private members, who are not being correctly audited. They receive ever-increasing sums of funds from EU member states. But we're looking at a process which will be concluded only in 2029, and that's too far in the future. So we need to pay attention to what happens when we're working together with third-country businesses, for example, excluding participants from Russia.
And then we have to take a political approach to our formulation here to ensure that European capacity cannot be used in joint undertakings with aggressive partners such as Russia, in order to ensure the security of the whole EU. So, I think we have a good text that encourages innovation, strategic investment, and at the same time allows for better overall control. I'm very grateful to my colleagues, the shadow reporters, and I'm very much looking forward to seeing more Hungarian reporters among us, and I think we can deal with this topic well together. Thank you.
Kinga Kollár
So, in that sense, I'm going to continue in Hungarian. Let me start by saying thank you for the report on the joint undertakings. I think there are certainly challenges, and I think it's important for us to strengthen research and innovation because if we don't do that, we're really going to fall behind compared to the USA and China. China has really moved forward in fusion energy. They have reached a new milestone.
I think the European Eater project hasn't really led to any tangible results yet, so we need to make it more efficient, faster, and have a more effective organization. I think we need to strengthen public-private partnerships. We need to involve the private sector more, with more financial involvement as well. We need a good system of controls and audits for the joint undertakings.
Michal Wiezik
Yeah. From a neighboring country. Happy to continue in this friendly line. Nevertheless, I'll be a little critical. I will only speak about the ETER.
Finally, after years, we arrived at the revised baseline. Currently, it is estimated that the budget contribution will rise by €4,200,000,000, arising from the 2024 revision of the Ether baselines. I do not see this estimation to be anywhere near the final cost, considering the 17 years' postponement of the end of the assembly phase, as well as the insufficient reflection of material human resource implications in the risk management system and the completeness of information in the IT risk management. Nevertheless, the concern is even more relevant, politically speaking, considering the widening competition in fusion energy research that we see throughout third countries and the risk of losing key leadership momentum in this regard. To maintain it, actually, we need, and I call in my amendments, rapid formalization of the revised ITER baselines, reinforced risk management, and clearer accountability between the JUs, the ITER organization, and the EU budgetary authority.
It's the Commission that should strengthen independent performance oversight and address legal uncertainties early through binding commitments on the post-2042 framework. If we want to make this EU success story, strategic governance is truly important. Therefore, we need a sustainable long-term financing model and benchmarking. All.
Niclas Herbst
Right. Mr. Tillico and Mr. Kenneth, are you going to take the floor for that? That's not the case. All right.
That's good because that leaves us a few more minutes for a catch-up, which is probably also not needed. Nevertheless, Mr. Molnar, some closing remarks.
Csaba Molnár
Well, just very briefly, Chair. Thank you very much for the constructive comments on the amendments. I think we've had some similar thoughts on this project. I have some concerns with ITER. This is something that is very important.
It is important, but it seems the timeline is getting longer and longer. The costs get higher and higher, and it is becoming unacceptable. And I think trust is being eroded. I think we'll be able to work well with the amendment. So, thank you.
Niclas Herbst
Before closing this item, let me remind you that the deadline to table amendments is January 26 at 02:00, and I don't have any items under any other business. So the final thing to do today is to remind you that the next meeting will be in January. Looking forward to seeing you again. The meeting is closed.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.