Committee on Budgetary Control Ordinary meeting Joint meeting Committee on Budgets Joint meeting with BUDG
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
Offset
Transcript offset
Export
Live capture
Versions of this video
Transcripts may differ slightly from one version to another.
CONT European Parliament
Follow its sittingsMonika Hohlmeier
These tools are used together to help protect both the EU budget against rule of law breaches and the EU financial interests in Member States. Since the entry into force of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation in 2021, BUDG and CONT have attached great importance to the democratic scrutiny of its implementation and have organized several exchanges of views with the Commission on this topic, mostly to take stock of new developments in relation to Hungary, which is the only Member State against which measures have been adopted under the legislation so far. We discussed at several occasions the state of play of the Hungarian frozen funds, last time on 26th of January this year. As you are all aware, since the Hungarian elections took place on the 12th of April 2026, bringing changes to the Hungarian political scene. On 29 May, European media reported that Commission President von der Leyen struck a political deal to free up 16.4 billion of frozen funds as long as Budapest completes key reforms and investments.
Under the deal, 10.4 billion would be freed up to the RRF, 4.2 billion would be recovered from cohesion funds suspended under the Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism.
Another 2.2 billion would be deblocked under the CPR horizontal enabling condition on the Charter of Fundamental Rights to restore academic freedom. Hungary submitted a revised recovery and resilience plan to the Commission on the 10th of June. This revised plan, which aims at fully reaching the 27 super milestones, includes measures to reinforce the anti-corruption framework and the protection of the EU financial interests. Following its positive assessment of the new RRP on the 19th June, the Commission made a proposal for a Council implementing decision amending Council implementing decision of the 15th of December 2022 in the form of 6.5 billion grant and 3.5 billion loan. On 10th of July, the revised plan was approved by the Council.
We are therefore happy to hear the Commission today about these developments in Hungary.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Monika. I think we are now having got a quite a good setting of the scene of our exchange.
And therefore also from the perspective of the Budgetary Control Committee, it's important that we make sure that what money is going out to countries like Hungary is afterwards being controlled by the European Parliament. We know all together that we have some concerns in the context of the RRF payments how this can be secured and therefore we are looking now forward with great attention to the interventions of the European Commission. We are very grateful that you have been sending three commissioners today. We would like to make sure that we have an active exchange, so I would give the floor first to Executive Vice-President Raffaele Fitto and then in the row to Budget Commissioner Piotr Serafin and to Michael McGrath at the end and then we will start our exchange. Raffaele, over to you.
Raffaele Fitto
Thank you for this opportunity to discuss the state of play of EU funds for Hungary and with Commissioner Serafin and Commissioner McGrath we are here to address any questions you may have. As you are aware, on 29th of May 2026, President von der Leyen and Prime Minister Magyar agreed on a robust architecture to ensure that Hungary addresses the issues that will enable the unlocking of a large part of the Union funding that is currently blocked under different procedures.
Out of the 18 billion euro in blocked EU funds, Hungary committed to the reforms necessary to unlock in total 16.4 billion euro. 10 billion from the new Hungarian Recovery and Resilience Plan by delivering the super milestones and milestones. 4.2 billion euro under cohesion policy programs by addressing the rule of law breaches identified under the conditionality regulation. 2.2 billion which are currently suspended due to the non-fulfillment of the horizontal enabling condition on the Charter of Fundamental Rights concerning academic freedom. Allow me to explain the different procedures one by one.
Let's start with the RRP, as it accounts for the largest share of the funds currently blocked. The Hungarian RRP and the procedures under the conditionality regulation have been closely interlinked since the beginning. In December 2022, the Council adopted both the decision setting measures to protect the Union budget from breaches of the principles of the rule of law in Hungary under the conditionality regulation and Hungary's Recovery and Resilience Plan in which Hungary committed to implement super milestones to ensure the protection of the Union's financial interests and to strengthen judicial independence.
Since the adoption of the RRP, Hungary had made some progress but has not met all the super milestones. Without doing so, Hungary had not yet been able to submit any payment request to the Commission. However, the new Hungarian government on 9th of June submitted a request to replace its RRP in order to streamline it and ensure maximum absorption of the funds by meeting all the super milestones as well as implementing new anti-corruption reforms. All other member states have also revised their plans so there is no special treatment for Hungary. Hungary has six weeks left to fully deliver on its plan, like all other member states until 31st of August.
In fact, Hungary's new RRP demonstrates a higher level of ambition in protecting the EU's financial interests and strengthening the rule of law by committing to several steps beyond what was previously discussed with the Commission, including strengthening its anti-corruption framework, improving its public procurement law, joining the European Public Prosecutor's Office.
Accordingly, on 19th of June, the Commission adopted a positive assessment of the new RRRP and the Council approved it last week. The Commission shared the new RRRP with you so you could also assess it and I trust that you have come to the same conclusion. In any case, work remains to be done and Hungary must now deliver the reforms and investment it has committed to and then submit its payment request in September. At that point, the Commission will assess the fulfillment of the super milestones and will proceed with the payment once all of them have been fulfilled. I hope this clarifies the procedures regarding the RRRP and the super milestones.
As regards funds currently blocked under the rule of law conditionality procedures, Commissioner Serafin will provide further details. I would only stress that the general regime of conditionality and the rule of law super milestones under the RRRP push the common objective of protecting the Union's financial interests.
Thus, by delivering on the RRP milestones, Hungary will also deliver the reforms needed for the lifting of measures under the conditionality regulation, unblocking 4.2 billion in cohesion programs, policy programs. The third issue covered by the agreement of 29th of May concerns the unfulfilled horizontal enabling condition on the Charter of Fundamental Rights regarding academic freedom. In agreement with EVP Minzatu, who is responsible for the assessment of this horizontal enabling condition, I would like to update you on where we stand at this moment in time. We all know what the heart of the problem is. 21 university were taken out of public hands and put under the public interest trusts, and in the process the academic senates, the voice of professor and students, lost their power.
The solution is simple, even if it took some time to get there. Give the senates their rights back, similar to the state-owned universities. Hungary's parliament made this change to the public interest trust law on the 23rd of June. Now the 21 universities have until the end of October to actually put it in practice, and then we can officially assess the fulfillment of the horizontal enabling condition.
A positive decision on our side would lead to unblocking 2.2 billion euro of EU funding for two cohesion policy programs: economic development and digital renewal. Ladies and gentlemen, the agreement reached between the Commission and the Hungarian government on the 29th of May fully respects the conditionality linked to rule of law and the horizontal enabling condition on the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Accordingly, no blocked funds have been released to Hungary since we last met in January and the Commission will rigorously assess the fulfillment of each and every condition to unblock any funding. Looking forward, I would like to stress two points. First, the Commission will continue to act strictly within the legal framework, rigorously assessing Hungary's compliance with the conditions and milestones and making a positive decision only if all commitments are addressed.
Second, that we have worked in full respect for the Parliament's scrutiny and we remain fully committed to open and transparent cooperation with this house on this important and sensitive issues. Thank you.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you very much, Executive Vice-President Fitto, for your intervention and we are very happy to hear that you act fully in the line of the rule of law and we will give the floor now to Commissioner Serafin on the budget.
Over to you.
Piotr Serafin
Thank you, Mr. Chair, thanks for the invitation to today's exchange. I will focus on the relevant developments in the context of the conditionality regulation. We have the conditionality regulation in place to protect the financial interests of the Union, to protect the European taxpayer's money, because it is the European taxpayer who is funding the EU budget, against corruption, fraud and conflict of interests. The conditionality regulation was activated so far only once, in December 2022, and it was activated precisely because the Commission and the Council at that time had justified concerns that the European taxpayer's money could not be sufficiently protected anymore in Hungary against corruption, fraud and conflict of interest. Since this decision was adopted, we have been all awaiting actions of the Hungarian government to address the concerns as specified in the in the Council implementing decision.
We expected that in the interest of the European taxpayers, but also in the interest of legitimate beneficiaries of the EU funds in Hungary. Today, as stated by Executive Vice-President Fito, we can clearly see that the newly elected Hungarian government aims to address these concerns and unblock the EU funds. All the concerns identified under the conditionality regulation are in substance covered also by the so-called milestones and super milestones under the Hungarian recovery and resilience plan, as described by Executive Vice-President Fito. That's why by delivering on the RRF super milestones, Hungary will also deliver on the reforms needed to the lifting of the measures under the conditionality regulation. I can assure you that the requirements for lifting those measures under the conditionality regulations have not changed and they will not change.
What has changed is the willingness of the Hungarian government to address those issues and demonstrate that it remedied the situation that led to the adoption of measures. Therefore, we expect confidently that Hungary will submit a notification to the Commission in the coming months, together with evidence that the concerns under the conditionality regulation have been addressed. And then we will apply regular procedure.
There is a month for the Commission to assess the submission of the Hungarian government, and there is also the Council that will finally decide on the basis of qualified majority voting. A total of 4.2 billion of EU funding from cohesion programs can still be unblocked under this process. The key date to retain here is the end of 2026. To avoid decommitment of another 1 billion euro, actions have to be taken timely to allow the Council to lift the measures by that date. Hungary also intends to address as a priority risks of conflict of interest on the part of the board members running public interest trusts during the period of phasing out of these organizations.
We want the students from these universities to take part in Erasmus Plus mobility projects during the next academic year. Under the supervision of Executive Vice-President Mincatou, our teams are already coordinating with the Hungarian Erasmus Plus National Agency in Hungary so that we can restart as soon as everything is clear. For this to happen, Hungary needs to notify legislative changes in order to solve issues under the rule of law conditionality procedure. Let me conclude by a more general comment going beyond Hungary.
In the next MFF, respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights will remain a prerequisite for receiving support from the Union budget. We have therefore proposed strong safeguards to ensure that the Union budget continues to be well protected, as it is already the case today, including in the context of the RRF and the cohesion funds and in all Member States. In addition, the conditionality regulation will continue to apply to all EU funds. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you very much, Commissioner Serafin, also being at the end a bit larger because you know that there are some concerns on the MFF in relation to the RRF. Thank you very much for these comments. And now we give the floor to Commissioner McGrath on the rule of law in general. Over to you.
Michael McGrath
Dear Chairs, honorable members, thank you very much for the invitation to be here with you today. I'm delighted to join my colleagues, EVP Fito and Commissioner Serafin. On the 2nd of June, I visited Hungary shortly after the elections. I notably met with several ministers and chairs of key parliamentary committees. The visit provided a valuable opportunity to take stock of the political situation and to engage constructively with the new authorities.
My interlocutors emphasized their commitment to restoring the rule of law by the means of the rule of law, underlining that on some aspects this process will take time.
On the 16th of June, I gave an update in the General Affairs Council under the Article 7 procedure. Member States welcomed that developments in Hungary were moving in the right direction while underlining the importance of the effective implementation of the planned reforms and keeping the momentum. Since Hungary's new government took office two months ago, significant progress has already been made in this short period towards bringing Hungary closer into line with the values of Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union. Pressure on independent media and civil society organizations has been alleviated. Concretely, the draft law on the transparency of foreign-funded civil society and media organizations influencing the public discourse tabled under the former parliament was removed from the legislative agenda when the new parliament was formed.
On the 30th of June, the National Assembly abolished the Sovereignty Protection Office, which is the object of an ongoing infringement procedure launched by the Commission and is pending before the Court of Justice. The Commission is analyzing this and will assess how to proceed on this basis.
The state of danger that allowed the government to override acts of Parliament through emergency measures expired on the 13th of May. On the 29th of May, Hungary and the Commission reached a political agreement on the necessary reforms to significantly strengthen its anti-corruption and integrity framework by the end of August this year. The Hungarian Omnibus Law prepared in consultation with the Commission has entered into force already. On the 10th of July, the Commission adopted the decision confirming Hungary's participation in the European Public Prosecutor's Office following Hungary's request in May. This marks an important step in strengthening the protection of EU funds and the rule of law in Hungary.
Once operational, the EPPO will be granted jurisdiction over crimes committed after the 1st of June 2021. Legislation adopted on the 23rd of June amended the Media Act to introduce reforms to the rules governing the National Media Regulator, for example in relation to its competences, tasks and roles, its Media Council, its president, vice-presidents and its office. The law establishes new criteria for the nomination, appointment and dismissal of all relevant office holders within these structures. Hungary also introduced new rules on the governance and funding of public service broadcasting.
The media situation in Hungary has been a concern for many years and we welcome these developments. Let me also note that the annual Budapest Pride march took place on the 27th of June with the assistance of the Hungarian authorities and that criminal charges brought against the organizers of the 2025 Pride march under the previous government have been dropped. This is another welcome development. The Commission has always stood on the side of the LGBTQI+ community in Hungary. It's also important that Hungary implements the ruling of the European Court of Justice of the 21st of April.
We trust that the Hungarian government will address all measures that were found to be in violation of EU law. On the 22nd of June, Prime Minister Magyar announced the 17th amendment to the fundamental law. Parliament adopted this yesterday. These legislative changes would address issues that go beyond the requirements of the RRP super milestones, such as for example giving the judiciary a stronger role in the appointment and removal of the President of the Kúria and the President of the National Office for the Judiciary. A National Asset Recovery and Protection Office with public prosecution functions would be established.
It would be tasked with recovering the proceeds of crimes related to the disbursement of public funds. The Commission will continue following closely the developments in Hungary. The Rule of Law report, which the College will adopt later this week, will provide a more detailed assessment of the developments in Hungary in four key areas for the rule of law: justice, anti-corruption, media pluralism, and institutional checks and balances. There is a clear change of direction in Hungary. Authorities are making important reform efforts and concrete progress has already been made.
Looking ahead, we will continue to engage in close dialogue with Hungary and to support the country on its reform path. Thank you.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you very much, Commissioner McGrath, for your final intervention on behalf of the European Commission. This has been all very helpful and we start now our exchange and the first speaker from the side of the European Parliament is our colleague Jean-Marc Germain.
Jean-Marc Germain
Thank you, Chair, I'm going to speak in French.
D'abord merci aux commissaires pour leur présence tous les trois et studieuse puisque beaucoup d'informations nous ont été dispensées et et merci aussi pour le travail qui est fait. Je voudrais commencer par un commentaire positif pour souligner que finalement c'est pas un hasard si les questions liées à l'état de droit sont l'objet de l'article 2 des traités et que c'est la raison pour laquelle cette réunion que nous avons, ces outils qui ont été mis en place par l'Union européenne sont éminemment fondamentaux et le fait que nous ici aujourd'hui ayons cette réunion pour regarder comment la situation évolue en Hongrie est très est très important. Me féliciter aussi de cette vague de réformes qui est en cours en Hongrie, c'est assez spectaculaire et ça montre qu'au fond on a raison de croire dans nos instruments, ça montre leur force et ça montre aussi notre vigilance que le prochain MFF ne vienne pas affaiblir ces outils.
Je voudrais poser faire trois commentaires qui sont aussi des questions. D'abord peut-être avoir un peu plus de précisions sur le calendrier des réformes à faire qui manquent. Je pense notamment aux questions liées à l'asile et l'immigration. Je pense aux questions liées au respect des personnes LGBTQI+ et aux autres progrès à faire notamment en matière de respect des droits de la famille dans toutes ses formes, de l'indépendance de la justice et du respect des sociétés civiles. Deuxième remarque question qui est une demande d'avoir plus de détails sur la façon dont les services de la Commission vont non seulement veiller à ce que les lois soient passées mais aussi leur application mise en œuvre et d'ailleurs au-delà même des lois toutes les règlements, les circulaires prises pour respecter et mettre en œuvre tous les changements nécessaires au respect de l'État de droit.
Et enfin, troisième commentaire et question, comment on peut s'assurer du maintien dans la durée de ces réformes et que se passerait-il et de quelle manière si certaines d'entre elles venaient à observer un retour en arrière ? Enfin, dernière question qui a déjà été abordée mais qui mérite un peu plus de détails, notamment le commissaire Serafin a évoqué les fonds qui sont encore gelés au titre de la CPR, la date limite de 2026. Mais ma question plus précise est que d'autant pour la RRF, les milestones sont définis en commun avec les institutions européennes, autant pour la CPR, c'est un tout qui permet ou pas de débloquer ces fonds et que donc l'ensemble des réformes nécessaires devront être accomplies. Donc question sur les perspectives ou pas que ces 6 milliards et quelques restants soient débloqués. Je vous remercie.
Andreas Schwab
Merci cher collègue, c'est le bon moment de faire en sorte que chacun puisse prendre temps de la parole parce qu'il faut qu'on organise ça à temps et la prochaine collègue qui parle, c'est Monika Hohlmeier.
Monika Hohlmeier
Merci bien Andreas. Ich wechsle zunächst in die deutsche Sprache.
Als Erstes ich sehe es als bemerkenswert an, was die neue ungarische Regierung innerhalb kürzester Zeit auf den Weg geschickt hat, denn man muss bedenken, in welcher Kürze der Zeit das Ganze passiert ist. Ob das die Integritätsbehörde ist, ob das die Verschärfung der Vermögenserklärungen sind, dann die Wiederherstellung der Hochschulautonomie, dann die finanzielle Transparenz als auch weitergehende Transparenzmaßnahmen in Bezug auf Interessenskonflikte und das öffentliche Datenregister und klare Regeln für den Erhalt öffentlicher Fördermittel. Das ist in der Kürze der Zeit in der Tat wirklich beeindruckend. Mich beschäftigen vor allem noch zwei Fragen. Die eine Frage, die aufgetaucht ist, und ich würde die Kommissarin bitten, ob sie uns da vielleicht einen Einblick geben könnten, weil eine Frage existiert tatsächlich schon länger.
Das ist das Thema, dass chinesische Unternehmen in Ungarn aufgrund dessen, dass China sehr weit verschuldet ist, bei China Unternehmen investieren, wie beispielsweise BYD, und sehr deutliche Hinweise gegeben wurden, dass die Arbeitsschutzgesetze und die normalen Arbeitnehmerregeln nicht eingehalten werden dort und dies zu einem sozusagen Verstoß gegen die Binnenmarktsregeln führt und zu Ungunsten ungarischer Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer letztendlich steht, weil wenn man unter völlig anderen Bedingungen sieben Tage in der Woche bis zu 16 Stunden am Tag an Arbeitnehmer sozusagen Arbeitsstunden verpflichtet, währenddessen die Arbeitsschutzgesetze Europas etwas völlig anderes vorsehen und die ungarischen Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer das darin gar nicht involviert sind, weil es chinesische Wanderarbeiter sind, dann ist das eine problematische Situation, die zu einem Ungleichgewicht innerhalb der Europäischen Union führen und auch für die ungarischen Bürgerinnen und Bürger schlecht sind oder egal wer in Ungarn arbeitet.
Als zweites das Thema Binnenmarktsregeln. Mich würde sehr interessieren, inwieweit nachdem das derzeit nicht im Fokus stand, die sämtlichen Verordnungen, die zu einer Enteignung von Unternehmen teilweise geführt haben bzw. derzeit immer noch führen, inwieweit die jetzt kurzfristig abgeschafft werden, ob das spezielle Gebühren, Strafzölle, Strafsteuern, gesondert auf Sektoren, Produktionsvorschriften, wie viel man produzieren muss und gleichzeitig den Preis festzulegen und so weiter und so fort. Da gibt's eine Menge an Maßnahmen, die in einzelnen Decrees festgehalten sind, die zum Teil über Nacht entstanden ist, entstanden sind. Da würde mich interessieren, inwieweit diese dann sozusagen auch abgestellt werden. Danke sehr.
Andreas Schwab
Vielen Dank, Kollegin Hohlmeier. The floor is now again to the Commission with precise and short replies, starting with Commissioner Fitto.
Raffaele Fitto
Yes, the new Hungarian government is committed to implementing existing audit and control requirements, but also added further commitments that were neither foreseen in the original plan nor in remedial measures discussed under the conditionality procedures. In particular, the Hungarian authorities are committed to strengthening the integrity authority to detect and fight corruption and conflict of interest, revising the public procurement law to curb fraud and protect taxpayers' money, facilitate competition and increase transparency, addressing concerns with the lack of transparency of beneficial owners of certain investment funds, dismantling structures that presented high risk of state capture, concretely the public interest trusts will be phased out, reforming the governance of its national development bank and join the European Public Prosecutor's Office, which is an important contribution to safeguard European funds. Thank you.
Piotr Serafin
Thank you, thank you, Chair. There was a question related to the timeline, the prospect of unblocking the funds.
I can speak, of course, from the perspective of the conditionality regulation. Of course, the timeline is clear when it comes to the RRF, this is the end of August. But the notification that is going to take place in the context of the RRF regulation is not going to automatically activate the procedure under the conditionality regulation. So we would need to get from the Hungarian government another notification in the context of the conditionality regulation. Now, it is in the hands of the Hungarian government when they would like to do it.
What I have said, and I can repeat, that of course there is a tight timeline as well, because we know that if the procedure is not closed under the conditionality regulation by the end of the year, another one billion euro could be decommitted. So the Commission is ready to work together with the Hungarian government to make sure that this decommitment by the end of the year is not going to take place.
And according to the procedures, the Commission has one month and the Council has one month to make the assessment, the Commission assessment of the submission by the Hungarian government and the Council to proceed the Council implementing decision. There is also a question of the Erasmus Plus program and access to that program by the Hungarian students from the universities which are right now governed by PITS. Here again, the sooner it is going to take place the better because I think that it is in the interest of Hungarian students, universities all around Europe to have Hungarian students from those universities which are governed by the PITS as soon as possible back.
Michael McGrath
Thank you very much, Chair. If I can just pick up on a number of the points in relation to the reforms concerning asylum issues and LGBTQ+ persons in addition to the charter horizontal enabling condition dimension of that. Of course, we have court rulings from the Court of Justice of the European Union and I would point to the importance of those rulings being respected and being responded to in the appropriate way.
And of course we always remain available to support Hungary and to support other member states when it comes to full compliance with judgments of the Court of Justice. In relation to the functioning of the single market and related internal market issues, as you know, as part of the rule of law report process, last year we introduced for the first time a single market dimension to the annual rule of law report, and I can confirm that that will continue again in the report that will be considered and I expect adopted by the Commission later on this week. And on the question of employment standards and employment law within Hungary or in any other member state, the question here is one of where the work is done in general determines is determined by determines the place of employment, which then has an impact on the jurisdiction of the employment laws that apply. So where national laws and EU-wide employment laws are relevant, then they should be applied in the context of of where the work is done, because that is what determines the place of employment. And we monitor these issues in terms of the functioning of the internal market, and as you know, in the past the Commission has taken action against Hungary under internal market issues.
Thank you.
Kinga Kollár
And I will continue in Hungarian. Történelmi változások zajlanak Magyarországon, és nagyon örülök, hogy ez ma az Európai Parlamentben is téma. Ahogy a Tisza Párt dolgozik, napról napra válik egyre inkább egyértelművé, hogy az Orbán-kormány célja egy ponton túl nem volt más, mint az állami forrásból való dőzsölés, az állami vagyon átjátszása magánzsebekbe, és ameddig lehetett, az uniós források megsarcolása is. Magyarországon a korrupciót legfelső szintről, rendszerszinten irányították, óriási károkat okozva az országnak. Az Integritás Hatóság becslése szerint 60 ezer milliárd forintba került az orbáni korrupció a magyaroknak, ez 170 milliárd euró.
Az Orbán-kormány leváltásával azt gondolom, hogy maga a korrupció forrása is megszűnt, hiszen most már nem azok és nem olyan logika szerint hozzák a döntéseket, mint korábban.
Nincs például olyan, mint ami még a választások előtti héten is megtörtént, hogy a Fidesz beruházási és építési minisztere egy döntéssel 50 százalékkal növelte meg egy híd építésének költségét, és 98 százalékos előlegkifizetését engedélyezte. 98 százalék, kollégák, jól hallották. A Tisza-kormány első 50 napja megmutatta, hogy megtesszük, amit megígértünk. Helyreállítjuk a jogállamiságot Magyarországon, és egy olyan garanciákkal teli rendszert építünk fel, ahol a közpénzekkel való ilyen szintű visszaélés soha többé nem történhet meg. Ezért egy olyan antikorrupciós intézményrendszer kiépítése zajlik, aminek párja talán csak Szingapúrban van.
A biztos urak már elmondták, hogy megerősítettük az Integritás Hatóságot, csatlakozunk az Európai Ügyészséghez, és elfogadtuk az összes szupermérföldkőben lévő antikorrupciós intézkedést. De ami a legnagyobb garancia arra, hogy az elszámoltatás valóban meg fog történni a múlt bűneiért, az a Nemzeti Vagyonvisszaszerzési és Védelmi Hivatal, melynek jogszabályi kereteit már tárgyalja az Országgyűlés. Ez egy olyan szupernyomozó és vádemelési hatóság lesz, ami teljesen független lesz a kormánytól, és rendkívül erős jogkörei lesznek az állami vagyon védelmében.
Én azt gondolom, hogy nem lehet kérdés abban, hogy az uniós források védelme Magyarországon szintet lépett, és talán mondhatom, hogy a legerősebb lesz egész Európában. Kedves kollégák, az új Tisza-kormány társadalmi támogatottsága az elmúlt két hónapban 73 százalékra növekedett. 73. Az emberek érzik és látják, hogy a dolgok jó irányba mennek. Szeretném, ha önök is átéreznék a változások pozitív erejét, és támogatnák a magyarországi változásokat.
Rendkívüli esemény az, amikor egy nép békésen ledob magáról egy illegitim rendszert. Kérem, ezt sose felejtsék el. Köszönöm.
Tomáš Zdechovský
Thank you very much. Now I would like Thomas, if it's possible that everybody sticks a little bit to the time.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you for the word. I would like thank you for your presentation, dear commissioners, and I'm very happy that you come here. Also thank you very much, Mr. Fitto, for your openness. But my question after your presentation is: what's lesson have the Commission learned to make the decision-making procedure under the Rule of Law Conditionality Mechanism more transparent and understandable for the public, while ensuring the future decisions are based on objective evidence, applied equally to all Member States and supported by strong safeguards? Thank you very much.
Carla Tavares
Muito obrigada, senhora presidente, irei falar em português. Em primeiro lugar, naturalmente agradecer a presença dos senhores comissários e a partilha que aqui nos trouxeram, num momento particularmente importante que estamos a preparar-nos para o próximo quadro financeiro plurianual e, portanto, este debate é muitíssimo importante e oportuno. Só deixar duas ou três questões. Naturalmente saudamos os avanços que têm sido feitos pelo governo húngaro e que naturalmente, tal como os colegas, entendemos como muito positivos.
Mas queria perguntar aos senhores comissários se apesar deste esforço se conseguimos ter a perceção, a certeza que nenhum fundo é libertado apenas com base nas promessas legislativas e parece-nos que isso é muito relevante neste momento. Se também se atendendo à fragilidade dos mecanismos de controlo e equilíbrio e elevada concentração do poder político, que condições temos ou condições existem por parte da Comissão para avaliar se as reformas são sustentáveis e irreversíveis. Isto parece-nos também muito importante e muito relevante neste momento que estamos a trabalhar como já disse o quadro financeiro. E depois uma outra questão que enquanto Parlamento nos parece a nós ser de particularmente importante que é a possibilidade do Parlamento ser informado antes de serem tomadas decisões sobre libertação de fundos, incluindo através da partilha da avaliação pormenorizada da Comissão sobre se as condições relevantes para a libertação dos fundos foram ou não efetivamente cumpridas. Muito obrigada.
Monika Hohlmeier
Thanks a lot Carla. Now the replies of the Commission. First Commissioner Fitto.
Raffaele Fitto
Yes, I want to be clear also about the approach that we have to have on these issues.
Our approach is to avoid any evaluation on the merits of the political position. The position of the European Commission is the same and we want to verify also about the effort that the current government, Hungarian government is doing to verify the results. And Hungary will have to demonstrate that it can effectively protect EU's financial interest. In this regards, the new Hungarian government committed to implement existing audit and control requirements and for these issues I think that it will be very important to verify, to continue to verify this approach. Together with Commissioner Serafin and Commissioner McGrath, we are working also to verify this process.
The Hungarian governments took a clear commitment with the European Commission, not only in the meetings with the President von der Leyen and Prime Minister, but also in the procedures that they have to verify and we want to verify this.
And the approach for us, it will be the same also for the next steps. And I can say clearly that the transparency of beneficial owners of certain investment, it will be fundamental also with the integrity authority that we want to be a credible authority also in the to fight the corruption and the conflict of interest. This is the approach that we are doing and I can confirm this position of the European Commission. Thank you.
Piotr Serafin
Honorable Member Zdzisław Krasnodębski asked a question what lessons we could learn from the experience of application of the conditionality regulation in Hungary. I can at this point, I think this is a very political question and the question that also inspires reflection that I will share with you. I believe that the strongest point of the conditionality regulation is the fact that it puts clearly emphasis on corruption, fraud, and conflict of interest.
When we have a conversation about these topics, then I believe also as the European Commission we are on a very solid grounds and we can also have sent powerful messages to the countries in which we are afraid those bad things are taking place. So, I think it will be also important in the future when we apply, hopefully not, but if we would need to apply the conditionality regulation to be very much clear. It is not about different political visions, it is about of the majority in the European Parliament or of the European Commission, but it is clearly about our concerns about corruption, fraud, and conflict of interest. Question of honorable member Tavares about what guarantees there will be for the implementation. I'm pretty sure it will be assessed by the Commission services, both in the context of the RRF, but also in the context of the conditionality regulation.
But I also have again a more general remark.
In every democratic system, the strongest guarantees that the law is being obeyed is also a strong system of checks and balances. And when I think, for example, about what is going on right now in Hungary, I think about Integrity Authority, which we wanted to be in place, we wanted to have an independent body in place to observe whether corruption, fraud, conflict of interest is taking place or not. This institution was put in place, but it was officially declared by the government at the time in power, yes, there will be Integrity Authority, but it will be deprived of the competences, it will be castrated, I quote. And now we see that this independent body is going to, according to the new law adopted in Hungary, is going to get strong powers to oversee those in power. From my perspective, application and the decision of the Hungarian government to join European EPPO, Public Prosecutor's Office, is another guarantee from this category of checks and balances.
There will be another independent institutions overseeing the way in which the EU funds are being spent in Hungary.
But I can also say about other measures which are not covered by the conditionality regulation that will ensure that there is a strong system of checks and balances in place to control those in power. I talk about the we can talk about the free media. We can talk about all other elements which we know from our democratic countries. Thank you.
Commissioner McGrath.
Michael McGrath
Eh thank you very much chair. I'd like to add some brief remarks in relation to the question concerning corruption. And we recognize the commitment of the new government to fight corruption. Under the revised recovery and resilience plan we do see important reforms in this area. They have been explained already by EVP Fito.
And as you know in the context of the annual rule of law report the measures in place to tackle corruption is one of the key pillars of that annual report which is not just at a point in time because there is a whole of year cycle in the context of our rule of law permanent monitoring mechanism. So it's not just a once off assessment that is done. I would also point to the political agreement that has been reached on the anti-corruption directive. I look forward to seeing that being transposed in a timely fashion by all of the member states of the European Union which now for the first time provides for harmonized definitions of certain corruption offenses and also a harmonized approach in relation to penalties. And later on this year we will bring forward an EU-wide anti-corruption strategy.
I would also point to the reasoned opinion that provides the basis of Article 7 as triggered by the European Parliament. That has enabled considerable debate and examination of the question of corruption in Hungary over the course of the various debates that we have had on that Article 7 procedure at the General Affairs Council. And more broadly, I would say in relation to the different reforms, the focus of the Commission will continue to be on implementation. The Commission has demonstrated a willingness to act in the past. That will continue to be the case.
We are satisfied that there are appropriate safeguards in place within the current budgetary architecture, and it will be for all of the institutions now to agree strong and appropriate safeguards within the context of the architecture of the upcoming MFF. Thank you, Chair.
Tamás Deutsch
Kedves kollégák, nézzük, hogy az eddig elhangzottakkal szemben mi történik a valóságban Magyarországon. A Tisza-kormány Európában példátlan módon leváltotta a hivatalban lévő köztársasági elnököt személyre szabott jogalkotás keretében egy egymondatos jogszabálymódosítással. Lefejezte a magyar Alkotmánybíróságot, ugyancsak személyre szabott jogalkotás keretében visszaható hatályú jogszabálymódosítással. Korlátozta a magyar polgárok választójogát, és bírósági jogorvoslat lehetősége nélkül működő politikai rendőrséget kíván létrehozni. Ebben a helyzetben az Európai Bizottság, amelyik a korábbi években oly gyakran nyilvánított véleményt a magyarországi jogállamiság helyzetéről, mélyen hallgat.
Önkényes döntések születnek, olyan döntéseket hoz a tiszás parlamenti többség, amelyik a hatalom kizárólagos gyakorlására irányuló törekvés. A kérdésem tehát pofonegyszerű, itt a lehetőség, hogy az Európai Bizottság képviselői megszakítsák ezt a mély hallgatást. Rendben van-e így, rendben vannak-e ezek a döntések?
Az európai demokratikus és alkotmányos rendelkezéseknek megfelelőek-e ezek a statáriális jogszabályi döntések?
Csaba Dömötör
Ne haragudjon, de egészen elképesztőnek tartom, hogy három biztos beszélt a jogállamiságról és a magyar demokrácia állapotáról, de egyikük sem azokról a lépésekről, amelyek valóban korlátozzák a magyar demokráciát. Tegnap megszavaztak egy alkotmánymódosítást, Magrath biztos úr beszámolójából valahogy kimaradt a lényeg. Visszamenőleges hatállyal megakadályozzák, hogy az ellenzék vezetője újra miniszterelnök-jelölt lehessen. Egyetlen sorral eltávolítják a köztársasági elnököt. Az Alkotmánybíróság fejét eltávolítják.
Ezentúl tizenkét évben korlátozzák a képviselői mandátum hosszát, ezzel az ismert ellenzéki politikusok jelentős részét egészen egyszerűen kiírják a politikai életből. Hogyha lenne itt ebben a házban ilyen szabály, akkor százhatvannégy európai parlamenti képviselő nem indulhatna újra.
Nem indulhatna Manfred Weber, a Zöldek és a Szocialisták frakcióvezetője, Freund úr nem indulhatna újra, az itt ülő levezető elnökök sem, akiknek külön mondanám, hogyha Németországban lenne ilyen szabály, akkor a CDU-s képviselők 60 százaléka nem indulhatna újra a következő választáson. De hasonló szabályok esetén nem lehetne újra képviselő az olasz miniszterelnök és a német kancellár. Nem lehetne újra jelölt a spanyol miniszterelnök és Donald Tusk sem. Magrath úrhoz egyszerű a kérdésem: rendben van ez így? Ön szerint rendben van, hogy az ellenzéki képviselők jelentős része nem indulhat el a következő választáson?
Rendben van ez így? Sokan várjuk a válaszát.
Bogdan Rzońca
Okej, bardzo dziękuję. Ja mam tylko taką formalną raczej uwagę, dlatego że no niech ci Węgrzy już dostaną te pieniądze, czekają na nie. Nie będę komentował tego, co tam się wydarzyło. Natomiast uważam, że powinniśmy jako komisja, że tracimy czas w tej chwili. Powinniśmy się zająć jako Komisja Budżetowa dewastacją rynku europejskiego, rynku Unii Europejskiej przez firmy chińskie, a nie rozmawiać kolejny raz o Węgrzech, bo to nie przynosi wielkich, właściwie żadnych efektów.
Firmy chińskie przejmują w tej chwili firmy europejskie, firmy z Unii uciekają, ludzie tracą pracę, a my dyskutujemy kolejny raz o Węgrzech.
Straty z tego tytułu, co Chiny robią w Unii Europejskiej, są dużo, dużo, dużo większe niż to, co dzieje się na Węgrzech. Dziękuję bardzo.
Dick Erixon
Thank you. From the ECR, we have for a long time criticized the conditionality mechanism. It grows the Commission's power at the expense of the Member States, and the money meant for citizens can be held back on vague criteria. So my questions to the Commissioners are: on what criteria exactly are those funds being released? Are those criteria objective?
Are they published? And will the same standards apply to every Member State, whichever party is in government? That's important questions, so we can see that different... can see different handling of countries depending on which parties are in power.
This undermines the process. Thank you.
Moritz Körner
Vielen Dank, ich werde auf Deutsch sprechen. Ich will an einer Stelle kurz dem Kollegen der ECR widersprechen, der dargestellt hat, dass der Konditionalitätsmechanismus die Macht der Kommission verstärkt im Vergleich zu den Mitgliedstaaten. Da muss man einfach noch mal darauf hinweisen, die Mitgliedstaaten müssen den Konditionalitätsmechanismus mit qualifizierter Mehrheit beschließen. Und sie müssen auch, das hat der Kommissar ja eben auch noch mal dargestellt, auch die Aufhebung des Konditionalitätsmechanismus mit qualifizierter Mehrheit beschließen. Man kann ja Kritik am Konditionalitätsmechanismus haben, aber dass die Mitgliedstaaten dort im Vergleich zur Kommission an Macht verlieren, das ist nun wirklich an der Stelle tatsächlich Unsinn.
Ich habe zwei Fragen an die Kommissare. Zum einen an Kommissar Serafin. Er hatte darauf hingewiesen, dass bei Erasmus noch einige legislative Änderungen notifiziert werden müssen.
Vielleicht könnte er uns noch mal wirklich konkret darstellen, welche legislativen Änderungen noch notwendig sind, damit das Erasmus-Programm wieder freigegeben werden kann, weil ich glaube, das ist ein ganz ganz wichtiger Schritt für die europäische Zukunft, dass eben Ungarinnen und Ungarn, Studierende auch wieder teilnehmen können. Und zum anderen habe ich eine Frage an alle Kommissare, wie die Kommission die das mögliche Urteil des Europäischen Gerichtshof einschätzt, das wir ja erwarten, was das Europäische Parlament gegen die Kommission angestrengt hat, denn es sind ja schon einmal 10 Milliarden Euro freigegeben worden, damals aus unserer Sicht mit unzureichenden Reformen. Wie schätzt die Kommission den Ausgang dieses Verfahrens ein? Der Generalanwalt hat ja bereits in seiner Stellungnahme eher dem Parlament Recht gegeben und wie wird auch sich möglicherweise dieses Urteil auf die Auszahlung der Gelder gegenüber Ungarn auswirken und möglicherweise müssten diese 10 Milliarden Euro, die aus unserer Sicht des Parlamentes fälschlicherweise damals ausgezahlt wurden, die zurückgezahlt werden.
Raffaele Fitto
Yes, very briefly I can say that we have the same standard for all member states.
I can speak on my side from the RRF and cohesion in particular, and I can say that the Commission will assess the reform when the Hungarian authorities will present the report. And the Commission will assess rigorously if Hungary is meeting the super-milestones and milestones also for the next steps. And I think that it will be very important to confirm this approach, to have the same position with all Member States and also with Hungary. I can say that we don't have any different position. We will verify in the coming months the position and also we can say the clear solution if the national government will present and will achieve the results that they present.
Thank you.
Piotr Serafin
Thank you. Honorable Member Eriksson, there was a question about the transparency of the process related to the conditionality regulation and whether the criteria are clearly defined.
Yes, they are very clearly defined and they have been defined in the context of the Council implementing decision adopted in December 2022. That decision is not only available publicly, but then within the context of the RRF super milestones, there was even a way in which a precise process to go forward could be defined in the context of the RRF. And then in the context of the conditionality regulation for which I'm responsible, we also have a debate about the PITs, Public Interest Trusts, and that is exactly the issue which relates also to Erasmus, where we very specifically, we adopted a decision in December 2023 and we very specifically said what are the concerns, why we are afraid that there are no sufficient safeguards in the way in which Public Interest Trusts operate for the European public funds. According to the still the Council implementing decision in place, the Commission is not allowed to enter into contractual obligations with Public Interest Trusts. We know that the the law is being changed right now in Hungary.
We know that ultimately public interest trusts will be dismantled. We also know that when it comes to the public interest trusts that are in charge of the universities, they will be still for a year in place. But in the meantime, when it comes to the measures that have to be communicated in the Commission, they refer to the question of changes in structures that will ensure that will ensure that there is an adherence to the rules on anti-corruption conflict of interests in order to protect the financial interest of the EU. There are more I think this law is being right now maybe even adopted. I think it is part of omnibus legislation.
But still what needs to happen, it has to be communicated to us in the context of the Council in the context of the conditionality regulation. And then you know it is you know the academic year is approaching, the next academic year, so the sooner it is going to take place I would say it's the better. Thank you.
Michael McGrath
Thank you very much, Chair. I'd just like to pick up the point that was made about consistency of approach by the European Commission, because it was raised on a number of occasions. And I can speak from direct experience as Commissioner over the last year and a half or so, and I can testify to the rigor that is applied to our approach in the preparation of the annual Rule of Law Report. So, for example, the methodology on the use of sources that we use as the basis of the Rule of Law Report every year, that methodology is published, sources are referenced clearly in footnotes in the report itself, and also listed in a dedicated annex. And I see the painstaking efforts that are made by all of my colleagues in the Commission to make sure that there is full accuracy in the Rule of Law Report and that it is fair and balanced and that a consistent approach is taken.
In relation to the amendments to the fundamental law that have been raised by colleagues, the 16th amendment and indeed the 17th amendment, we are aware of the constitutional amendment adopted by the Hungarian National Assembly on yesterday. We understand that the constitutional amendment will only enter into force after promulgation, and the Commission will continue to monitor developments on an ongoing basis.
Monika Hohlmeier
Thanks a lot. Now we come to Rasmus Nordqvist. You have the floor, Rasmus.
Rasmus Nordqvist
Thank you, Chair. And thank you to the Commissioners for coming here and answering questions, sharing insights. I mean, we can all be very thrilled about the strength of the Hungarian people and the change of regime. I mean, but it's still, there's still questions to be raised, especially on how the Commission is assessing and working with the new Hungarian government. Especially when we see it, look at any democracy, I mean, for to have a proper democracy, you need a strong civil society, you need the checks and balances.
It's not just within the state, it's also with the stakeholders around a given government. And therefore I'm a bit concerned when we saw the positive assessments of the recovery and resilience plans, because we know that it has to be, there has to be conducted stakeholder consultation. But as best to my knowledge, there has not been the proper stakeholder consultation on the, on the revised recovery and resilience plans. So how can it still have a positive assessment from the Commission? Because we need the proper rules to be followed all the way through.
Daniel Freund
Thanks Chair and thanks to to the three commissioners. I mean I I very much applaud how engaged the Commission has been in helping the new Hungarian government in in this change, the restoration of rule of law, democracy and and the respect of of fundamental values in Hungary. I would have really cherished this as well if if the engagement would have been equally strong to keep us as parliamentarians in the loop. I mean there have been exchanges already before the new government was even voted into office. And well now it's it's mid-July and this is the first time now that we that we get some info on on what's going on.
And I think going forward when when these important dates now come, end of August and and then the full assessment of the Commission, it it would really be good to keep us as legislators fully fully informed on this. You said Mr. Serafin that there had been no changes to to the RRF plan.
But my understanding is that we have gone from about 318 pages to 135. Can you clarify for me what exactly the changes are and what we have lost in substance and and also when the deadline comes end of August what has to be actually implemented and and on which elements is there just promises. And the biggest the biggest reform that we have is joining EPPO. And well the notification is there I I very I cherish this quite a lot. But when does EPPO actually start operating in Hungary because I hear maybe mid-27 but when I speak to Laura Kövesi she says 1st of January is very much possible and we could possibly go earlier.
And I think given the amount of money that we're taking talking about to to unfreeze for Hungary I think making sure that EPPO starts working fully equipped fully funded as soon as possible should should really be a key priority. Second question I have is on the so-called child protection law. This has been found by the ECJ as a clear violation of Article 2 and so far I haven't heard from the government that we're going to fix that and fully respect Article 2. Has any one of the commissioners heard that this law will be fixed.
And the last one, since as far as I understand the question of my colleague Körner hasn't been answered yet. Does the Commission still see that the judicial reforms, the judicial independence question is fully resolved, and does that not pose Hungary at risk that when the ECJ rules now that the Parliament was right and that the assessment that the Commission made was an issue, well then 10 billion euros are on the line again? So I would like to see an answer on this part. Thank you very much.
Jonas Sjöstedt
Thank you so much, dear Chairman. Thank you for bringing some good news to the committee from the Commission today. My question is about the RRF, and it looks like Hungary is now on the path to receive substantial amounts in very short time. We have been discussing the weaknesses and flaws of the RRF multiple times with the Commission and the Court of Auditors, being the lack of traceability and us not knowing the final recipients of the funds. This brings a very special responsibility to the national audit systems.
If they don't work properly, we don't really know what's happening with the RRF money. And in the Hungarian case, the State Audit Office, the ASZ, has been heavily criticized for being politically biased, being loyal to the previous government, and also not being transparent. And now reforms are happening, but is it possible to reform a structure like that quick enough to be able to assure that all this money will be spent properly? What is your estimate of the functioning of the national audit system in Hungary? What more needs to be done to assure that the European taxpayers' money will be spent in the right way?
If they work properly, there will be some auditing done.
Thank you.
Tineke Strik
Thank you. Thank you very much, chairs, but also Commissioner, for for putting so much efforts in making sure that Hungary is going to fulfill all the conditions. I have also a few questions which are I think not sufficiently addressed yet. And this is about Mr. Seraphim clearly mentioned the need for having checks and balances, and indeed integrity authority is one of them, but also active engagement of civil society in the decision making.
And in I think that still a lot of improvement is needed there. And I also wonder because public consultation is also an important requirement from the Commission of course that we have a good quality of legislation, but there's also a good consultation by experts and civil society. How do you see that being involved right now and what are the benchmarks exactly regarding this? And on judicial independence, my colleague Daniel Freund already asked a question about possibly reassessing the previous decision to unfreeze the money regarding judicial independence. Do you see also the need to do that, also to look how the National Judicial Council will be strengthened or not?
And also given the the concerns of many actors that the the proposal to remove the presidents of the Curia and the Constitutional Court do not solve all the problems regarding judicial independence or maybe even deepen the crisis which we see right now. So what are you going to do regarding the independence of judiciary things?
Raúl de la Hoz Quintano
Thank you very much, I will speak in Spanish. Como estamos viendo en esta comparecencia, que agradezco por supuesto, proteger el presupuesto europeo significa evitar responsabilidades e irregularidades, pero también en garantizar que cada euro público se utiliza para el fin para el que fue aprobado. Los fondos Next Generation EU nacieron para transformar en teoría nuestras economías, para impulsar reformas, inversión, productividad, en general para generar competitividad. En ningún caso se crearon ni nacieron ni está previsto que se desarrollen para aliviar las cuentas ordinarias de ningún gobierno. Por eso nos resulta extraordinariamente sorprendente que algunos gobiernos, como el gobierno por ejemplo de España, haya utilizado el mecanismo de recuperación para sencillamente pagar las pensiones de sus ciudadanos.
Se trata de una burda práctica contable. Es evidente que los gastos corrientes se deberían de cubrir con ingresos procedentes de los presupuestos generales de cada estado. Pero claro, España lleva cuatro años sin presupuestos y se ve obligada a acudir a esta contabilidad creativa por no llamarla directamente contabilidad fraudulenta. Por eso, señor Serafín, me gustaría plantearle dos preguntas, dos preguntas muy concretas.
La primera, si considera que la Comisión que es compatible con los objetivos de Next Generation utilizar estos fondos para financiar el gasto corriente de ningún Estado. Y la segunda, de cara al próximo marco financiero plurianual, qué garantías reales tiene previsto establecer la Comisión para evitar estas prácticas fraudulentas, es decir, para impedir que los futuros fondos comunitarios se puedan convertir en una caja adicional de algunos gobiernos irresponsables. Nada más.
Monika Hohlmeier
Now we take the colleague Jungbluth. Sorry, but you did raise the floor, this is why...
Alexander Jungbluth
Oh, that's fine, thank you very much, Chair. I will speak German. Also es ist natürlich heute interessant und erwartbar, was passiert ist, nämlich niemand hätte damit gerechnet, dass eine eingesetzte Regierung, die sich hier so viele gewünscht haben, dass dann am Ende die Mittel nicht ausgezahlt werden. Ich glaube, dass man hier ist ja vom Wording ja auch schon ganz interessant, wenn man hört Supermeilensteine. Supermeilensteine ist so ein Wort, das klingt so ein bisschen wie aus dem schlechten No-Budget-Film und das ist glaube ich auch die Referenz, die hier sehr gut passt.
Das heißt, man hat ganz explizit irgendwelche Pseudomechanismen gefunden, die dann dazu geführt haben, dass wir hurra jetzt diese Auszahlungen vornehmen können. Und wenn man mal zwischen den Zeilen hört, was beispielsweise Herr Serafin gesagt hat, dann sagt er, ja, wir haben eine positive Erwartungshaltung. Wir glauben daran, dass das irgendwie klappt. Das heißt, es ist zwischen den Zeilen schon hörbar, dass man eben noch gar nicht vollkommen überzeugt ist, dass diese Mechanismen dann am Ende überhaupt eingehalten werden. Und Herr Serafin, ich bleibe dann auch gerade mal bei Ihnen, weil Sie haben jetzt viel über Konditionalität gesprochen.
Es wurde viel über den RRF gesprochen. Und beim RRF, wir wissen das aus der letzten Sitzung, wissen wir zum großen Teil nicht mal, wer der Endempfänger gewesen ist. Ja, also wir sprechen also davon, dass Ihre Behörde schon dabei versagt, herauszufinden, wer das Geld bekommen hat. Und dann frage ich mich, wie soll wie kann man dann überhaupt im großen Maße über Konditionalität sprechen, wenn man eigentlich bei diesem ersten Schritt schon so fundamental scheitert. Und dann würde ich gerne noch Herrn McGrayce befragen.
Nämlich bei Herrn McGrayce habe ich immer das Gefühl, er beantwortet die Fragen, die er gerne hören möchte. Aber es gibt eine ganze Reihe Fragen zur Rechtsstaatlichkeit, die in Ungarn gerade stattfinden. Und da würde ich Sie jetzt abermals dazu auffordern, dass Sie das bitte beantworten. Nämlich wir haben eine ganze Reihe von spezifischen Gesetzen, die eben absolut nicht rechtsstaatlich sind. Es gibt eine Lex Orbán, es gibt eine Lex Fidesz, beispielsweise mit dieser Limitierung von 12 Jahren bei der Amtszeit.
Das sind alles Maßnahmen, die explizit auf bestimmte Gruppen in Ungarn ausgerichtet sind und damit explizit keine rechtsstaatlichen Maßnahmen sind. Wir schaffen gerade ein höchst abhängiges Verfassungsgericht in Ungarn. Wir haben, viele haben darüber positiv berichtet, diese Integritätsbehörde, eine Behörde, die tatsächlich dazu dient, ja, eine politische Verfolgung am Ende aufzunehmen. Auch das ist rechtsstaatlich höchst fragwürdig. Insofern würde ich Sie bitten: Gibt es eine Prüfung Ihrerseits all dieser Behörden, all dieser rechtlichen Maßnahmen?
Wie wird das verfolgt? Ich würde Sie bitten, dazu abermals eine Antwort zu geben.
Monika Hohlmeier
Vielen Dank. Dann der Kollege Krzysztof Śmiszek von der S&D LIBE.
Krzysztof Śmiszek
Thank you, Madam Chair. On behalf of S&D LIBE and also on behalf of myself, since I'm a shadow rapporteur on Article 7, we consider that the Hungarian government has taken already important steps to restore the rule of law in this country. We welcome progress on anti-corruption, judicial reforms, academic freedom, and cooperation with the European Public Prosecutor's Office. These are very positive developments.
However, for S&D group, we consider that the reforms must not only be adopted, they must be durable. Key Article 2 concerns remain unresolved, particularly regarding fundamental rights, media pluralism, civic space, judicial independence and the rights of LGBTQI+ people. Before any further EU funds are released, these reforms must be fully implemented and made irreversible. The credibility of the rule of law conditionality mechanism depends on it. So I've got two questions, one for Commissioner McGrath: what concrete institutional safeguards will convince the Commission and you, Commissioner, that these reforms are genuinely irreversible and cannot be simply dismantled by a future government?
And second question to Commissioner Serafin: is the Commission considering a permanent reversibility mechanism that would automatically suspend EU funding if rule of law benchmarks are breached instead of requiring a new conditionality procedure every time democratic backsliding occurs? Thank you so much.
Thank you, Chair.
András László
Today, my most of my fellow MEPs and all three commissioners avoided carefully to talk about the public threat against and the removal of heads of independent institutions in Hungary. I mean, how convenient. The new Prime Minister publicly threatened the President of Hungary and has already enacted the removal yesterday. He has threatened the head of the Constitutional Court and several members of the Constitutional Court with early forceful retirement. Same thing goes to the head of the Kúria, the head of the Audit Office, the head of the media watchdog, the the Prosecutor General, all independent institutions elected by Parliament now removed from the system of checks of balances.
We've heard Commissioner Serafin talk lengthily about checks and balances. Yet, he avoided all of these issues. We've heard Commissioner McGrath talk about rule of law, yet avoided to talk about any of these.
So, is a 12-year limit on sitting MPs how democracy works according to European values, retroactively enacted? Is banning your main competitor from running again as Prime Minister with a ban, again retroactively? Is this what European values and democracy looks like? Everyone in Hungary, and in fact beyond Hungary, who has common sense fully understand that...
Finalize, yeah.
No, please finalize.
Okay, I will finalize.
András László
In Hungary, even left-wing experts now publicly admit that this is problematic and will lead to a constitutional crisis. I ask the Commissioners, if the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing, where are the good men? And Mr. McGrath, you mentioned that there will be a rule of law report on Wednesday, will any of this feature in this? These are my two questions. Thank you very much.
Monika Hohlmeier
Thank you very much. Now perhaps now directly Commissioner Szerep because most of the questions were for you. And then Commissioner McGrath as next one. And to finalize, the Vice-President of the Commission.
Piotr Serafin
Well, no, I don't think most questions were to me, but I will, I will react, I will react to some of them. First, when it comes to the question of honorable member Freund, I was referring to the conditionality regulation.
So I was not commenting on the milestones in the RRF plan. I was referring to the Council implementing decision from December 2022, which has not changed and is not going to be changed. So it has to be implemented in the way in which it was formulated in December 2022. On the court case, you know that this is a position of the Commission not to comment on the ongoing court cases. So that is the first comment which I will make.
But I can also add that we are convinced that the decision of the Commission taken at that time was a correct one. There were also some questions that refer to the future. The question on the guarantees that the money that come from the EU budget are used properly within the budgetary cycle and also the question on how the conditionality regulation is going to look like.
So on the first point, I should say that we do believe that already in the current RRF system, there are sufficient measures in place to make sure that the resources are spent on the intended purposes. But when it comes to the future, we are aware that there is a need to strengthen one dimension, i.e. cost and investments, to be have more reassurances in place from the Member States that the money that they get, they will get in the NRPP were actually spent on the intended investments. In the current system, in the RRF system, we got reassurances only once at the beginning when the program is being agreed. In the MFF proposal, we have suggested that on top of that, there is also a cost verification in the middle of implementation and at the end. I want to attract your attention to the fact that the Council have eliminated the cost verification at the middle of the implementation process.
So that I believe could be also an issue for some further exchanges between legislative authorities. And then there was the question on the future model for the conditionality regulation. That is not going to be changed.
But what we are going to, what we proposed in the context of the MFF, in the context of the NRPP regulation, we did propose a possibility which doesn't exist in the DRRF, that in case the partial payment took place but milestone ultimately was not met, we can ask the money back. And we can also ask the money back in case there was the implementation of the milestone target, but then there was a reversal. So we can also in such a situation ask for money back to the European Union budget. And on the question of EPPO, I also want to say that within the remit of my competencies, and this is the annual budget, I stay also in contact with the European Public Prosecutor Office and we are reflecting already about how to finance the accession of Hungary to the EPPO as of 2027. Thank you.
Michael McGrath
Thank you, Chair, and thanks to all of the honorable members for their additional questions that complement my colleague Commissioner Serafin and his reply in relation to the EPPO. Under the regulation, of course, there are some practical steps that need to be taken, including the appointment of the European prosecutor and delegated prosecutors.
We would like the work to be completed as soon as possible and to have the EPPO operational in Hungary, certainly in the coming months, and I would agree with the assessment of Commissioner Szerefen in that regard. In relation to the court judgment concerning Article 2 and the child protection law, it is, as with other judgments from the Court of Justice, a binding judgment, and we expect all judgments of the Court of Justice to be fully complied with. In that regard, I would also highlight that to unfreeze the suspended 500 million euro in cohesion policy funds under the Charter HEC, there is a need to repeal the provisions of the so-called child protection law, as well as any other related legal provision or amendments introduced as a result of this act, which have an impact on fundamental rights in the implementation of EU funds, as indicated in the Commission's decision. On the question of judicial independence, I can point to the rule of law recommendations that we currently have, and we will support Hungary in addressing outstanding issues relating to judicial independence.
For example, we have highlighted issues concerning judicial salaries and also case allocation matters in the lower courts. On the question of whether reforms are irreversible and what level of assurance we can give on that point, we continue to monitor the situation in Hungary and in every member state. We have a well-developed toolbox, thanks in part to the work of the members of this house, and I think we have demonstrated a willingness and a capacity to act in the past, including in the case of Hungary, through not least the application of the conditionality mechanism that Commissioner Fitto has covered already. In relation to the upcoming rule of law report, I anticipate it will be adopted by the Commission on Friday of this week. It will set out the Commission's assessment of the rule of law environment in the 27 member states, including Hungary and four of the candidate countries as well, and it will take account of recent developments that are relevant.
Thank you, Chair.
Commissioner Fitto.
Raffaele Fitto
Yes, thank you.
Only one point on the RRF method, because it is very important to underline that we are following the same method of the other Member States, following the guidelines that we approved last year, last June, to adapt the all RRF plans for all Member States. And we want to follow this approach. We want also to maintain the overall ambition of the plan, and the Commission positively assessed that the new plan addresses a significant subset of the relevant country-specific recommendation for Hungary, as well as all of the other assessment criteria provided by the RRF regulation. Another important point is that the new plan includes important reforms and investments addressing social challenges, in particular education, innovation, labour market, social policy and healthcare. To conclude, I would like to thank you for the constructive and substantive discussion, and we have carefully noted the concerns and the questions raised today, which will inform our continued work.
Thank you very much.
Monika Hohlmeier
So thank you very much, dear Commission. As I see that some questions of Daniel or some questions of Rasmus were not answered, as well as of some Hungarian colleagues on constitutional issues. But calm, colleagues, but calm.
Dear colleagues, could you please calm down, because the others are not reacting as you are. Commission did not have so much time either, and on the Spanish question of the colleague Raul, there was no answer at the same time. So perhaps we could have answers in written, because on constitutional affairs, perhaps it's even better not to give an answer here, because I even don't have... There are Member States who have these kind of rules, or on certain ministers or whatever. But to clarify this in the legal way, I think Tineke had this question in the other way round.
So perhaps we ask our legal service either to give us an impression about the legal situation, and the Commission either about this legal situation, how to give an analysis about this, because I think it's very complicated to do this for a Commissioner in one minute here in the committee. So thank you very much to be with us. Perhaps we clarify the questions that we would like to see answered. The colleagues can give it to us and we give it to the Commission. So I hope that everybody agrees with this type of procedure, and then we could finalize this meeting today.
Thank you very much, the Commission.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you very much, colleague Hohlmeier. Thank you very much, colleagues, for your presence and your input.
We will adjourn the meeting of the CONT committee at 11:30. And we allow the commissioners now to leave and colleagues as foreseen. Thank you very much for the meeting.
So sorry for this, we have to adjourn at 11:00.
Andreas Schwab
So, colleagues, I am very happy that we can now continue our work with agenda item six, evaluating the success achieved and lessons learned from the EU enlargements since 2004. There is a draft report and I would like to give the floor immediately to our rapporteur Tomáš Zdechovský on his report.
Tomáš Zdechovský
Yes, Chair, dear colleagues, allow me first to express my sincere thanks to the committee secretariat and policy department to their excellent support through the preparation of this report. Their expertise, research and constructive cooperation have been invaluable in producing a report that is firmly based on evidence and practice experience. It's absolutely clear.
The purpose of this report is not simple to look back at the enlargement of 2004, 2007 and 2013. It's to ensure that we learn from this experience as we prepare both for the future enlargements and for the next multi-annual financial framework after 2027. The central conclusion of the report is clear. The success of the EU spending does not primarily depend on whether a country has centralized, decentralized or multi-level governance model. What matter most is the quality of institutions responsible for managing EU funds.
For this reason, this report shows that strong administrative capacity, institutional stability, qualified staff, effective audit system and modern digital tools are the real determinants of the sound financial management and the protection of the EU budget.
One of the most important lesson is that administrative capacity remains the biggest challenge. Even where the legal framework is sound, programs cannot deliver their objectives if managing authorities lack experienced staff, suffer from high turnover or do not have sufficient resources. Investing in people is therefore just as important as investment in infrastructure, digitalization or project. The report also highlights the importance of digitalization. Digital monitoring system, interconnected databases, modern risk analysis tools improve transparency, strengthen controls, reduce burdens and help prevent corruption and fraud.
Another important topic is large administrative complexity. In particular, the report points to the continued problems so-called gold plating, where additional national requirements create unnecessary burdens for recipients without delivering better protection of the EU budget. We should ask for effective controls, but not more bureaucracy, and I think it's a very clear message. Looking ahead, these lessons are especially relevant in the context of future enlargements. Candidate countries should not only transpose the law, but also demonstrate that they have the administrative capacity, well-trained effective procurement systems, and robust audit structure and digital capacities necessary to manage EU funds responsibly from day one.
And this is what we were talking about with our Ukraine friends today. The report therefore calls on the Commission to place greater emphasis on administrative preparedness before accession, whilst strengthened cooperation between the institutions responsible for protecting the Union's financial interests, including audit and anti-fraud bodies. Ultimately, the report is about ensuring that every euro from the EU budget delivers results while being properly protected. Strong institutions, well-prepared administration, and effective control systems are the best guarantee for achievement that objective. I hope that this report will provide a useful contribution to our broader discussion on enlargement, budgetary control, and the future architecture of Union's finance.
Finally, I very much look forward to working constructively with all political groups during the upcoming stages of this report. I hope that we can build wide support around this recommendation and reach a balanced final text that improve the protection and effective implementation of the EU budget in enlarged Union. Thank you very much for your attention.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you very much, Tomáš Zdechovský. For the S&D group, it's Csaba Molnár, but I see Carla Tavares who will replace him.
Carla Tavares
Thank you, thank you, Chair. I will speak in the name of my colleague Csaba Molnár, who cannot be with us today, and I will speak in Portuguese. Em primeiro lugar, gostaria naturalmente de agradecer ao relator o seu trabalho de elaboração deste projeto de relatório sobre este importante tema. Do ponto de vista do S&D, os alargamentos desde 2004 têm sido um grande sucesso para a União Europeia, contribuíram não só para a convergência económica e o desenvolvimento de infraestruturas, mas também para o progresso social, a melhoria do nível de vida e maiores oportunidades para milhões de cidadãos europeus. É por esta razão que consideramos que o atual projeto de relatório deve ser significativamente reforçado em vários domínios.
Em especial, consideramos que o êxito da execução do orçamento da União não pode ser medido apenas pelas taxas de absorção.
O financiamento da União deve também ser avaliado com base no seu impacto real na vida das pessoas, na coesão social e territorial, na convergência ascendente, na redução das desigualdades, na criação de empregos de qualidade e no reforço dos serviços públicos. As nossas alterações colocarão também maior ênfase no Estado de direito e na proteção dos interesses financeiros da União. O futuro alargamento deve ser acompanhado de uma forte capacidade administrativa, de sistemas eficazes de acompanhamento e controlo e de salvaguardas credíveis contra a fraude, a corrupção e os conflitos de interesses. O grupo S&D apresentará, por conseguinte, um número substancial de alterações destinadas a melhorar o relatório e a assegurar que o mesmo tira as devidas ilações dos alargamentos desde 2004. Aguardamos com expectativa a oportunidade de trabalhar de forma construtiva com o relator e os outros grupos políticos para reforçar o texto final e assegurar que os futuros alargamentos contribuam para uma União Europeia mais forte, mais coesa e mais democrática.
Portanto, esta é a mensagem do meu colega Csaba Molnár. Muito obrigado.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you very much, colleague Tavares, for replacing Mr. Molnár. And before giving the floor to Mr. Knotek, I would like to ask if you agree that we give the floor quickly to the Commission that should have had the floor at the very beginning. It's Mr. Hugo Sobral, Deputy Director-General from the Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy, who is with us today, and we would like to give you the floor for your intervention so that we can have a broader debate at the end. Please, over to you.
Hugo Sobral
Thank you very much, Chair, and good morning to all.
And thanks for the opportunity to speak here before the committee. So, over the past decade, cohesion policy promoted economic, social, and territorial convergence across the Union and demonstrated its value, particularly since the 2004 enlargement. Citizens in the Member States that joined since 2004 have experienced remarkable economic and social progress. Unemployment has fallen from around 13% to just 4%, while GDP per capita has increased from 52% to almost 80% of the EU average by 2023. These achievements show that cohesion policy remains a cornerstone of the European project.
I therefore welcome the rapporteur's draft report. It comes at a particular important moment as we prepare for future enlargement and shape the next multiannual financial framework. While cohesion policy has delivered significant results, convergence across the Union has not been uniform. Among the factors explaining these differences, the quality of administrative capacity stands out as particularly important, as mentioned in the report, together with effective management and control systems and strong safeguards against fraud.
Our own analysis confirmed that investment in administrative capacity is one of the decisive factors behind the successful implementation of cohesion policy. Before accession, pre-accession assistance has played a crucial role in helping candidate countries establish the institutions, procedures, and administrative systems needed to manage EU funds effectively. After accession, continued investment in administrative capacity has enabled managing authorities to mature, address institutional challenges, and strengthen their performance and improve program delivery over successive programming periods. Throughout this process, the Commission has actively supported Member States through technical assistance, practical guidance, peer learning, networking, and dedicated capacity-building initiatives. We therefore share the conclusion that investing early in institutions, people, and administrative systems is indispensable for effective program implementation and sound financial management, and the Commission stands ready to continue supporting both current and future Member States in this endeavor.
Successful implementation on the ground must go hand in hand with robust monitoring control systems. The primary responsibility rests with Member States. They must establish effective management and control systems to prevent, detect, and correct irregularities, including fraud. At the same time, the Commission continuously supports them through capacity building, common methodologies, practical guidance, and systematic feedback on identified errors. We are also promoting simpler and less error-prone reimbursement methods, including simplified cost options and financing not linked to costs, while maintaining strong assurance over the regularity of the expenditure.
Our auditors also identify cases of unnecessary administrative complexity or gold-plating and make recommendations to simplify procedures wherever possible. Digitalization, as also mentioned in the report, is becoming an increasingly important element of assurance and control. We are promoting the use of artificial intelligence and machine learning across audit and control activities. Turning to the recommendations, we welcome them and agree that remaining gaps in administrative capacity, digital readiness, and human capital must be addressed before accession. These issues are systematically covered through accession negotiations and the corresponding closing benchmarks.
The Commission has adopted a proactive approach to preparing candidate countries for future cohesion policy.
Beyond cohesion policy itself, the Commission supports candidate countries in public administration reform and public financial management. We also assess candidates' preparedness regarding internal financial control, internal audit, risk management, and external audit systems to ensure the sound management of future EU funds. Overall, compared with previous enlargement rounds, the Commission has significantly reinforced its focus on robust public administration and sound public financial management throughout the accession process. Candidate countries also gain practical experience through participation in Interreg programs, where they already perform certain management and control functions, including management verifications. So, looking at the future, the Commission's proposal for the National Regional and Partnership Fund introduces a dedicated specific objective on improving the quality of public administration and administrative capacity.
This objective should support reforms and investments aimed at increasing the effectiveness, efficiency, and institutional capacity of public authorities and stakeholders at national, regional, and local levels. So, to conclude, we continue to modernize cohesion policy so that it can deliver even more effectively on its treaty objective, promoting harmonious development across all European regions and reducing economic, social, and territorial disparities.
So I'd like to thank this committee for its constructive dialogue with the Commission. Your work and your scrutiny helps us to continuously improve the design and implementation of our policies to the benefit of all Europeans. Thank you.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you very much for your intervention. Now our colleague Mr. Knotek has the floor.
Ondřej Knotek
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank to the rapporteur, my fellow Czech colleague Tomáš Zdechovský, for his work on this important report. I welcome the balanced approach taken in drawing lessons from more than 20 years of EU enlargement and the management of the EU budget. The central message is clear: successful management depends on strong national institutions, competent public administrations, experienced staff, effective controls and modern digital tools. Professional civil servants, independent auditors and stable institutions remain among the strongest guarantees for the sound financial management of the Union budget and the protection of European taxpayers' money.
Protecting the EU budget means ensuring that every euro provides some real value. Strong financial control should protect citizens against fraud and ineffective spending.
These lessons are particularly important for future enlargements. Before accession, candidate countries must develop professional administrations, reliable audit systems, transparent procurement procedures, and interoperable digital tools. As we prepare the EU budget, the next EU budget, we should be even more ambitious in three areas. First, we need simplification and substantial reduction of unnecessary administrative burdens. Second, the future budget should place greater emphasis on the quality and real impact of investments.
And third, we must continue to respect the principle of subsidiarity by giving member states the sufficient flexibility to organize their management and control systems. In conclusion, membership of my country in the EU has opened new opportunities for citizens and businesses, strengthened our position in Europe, and supported the modernization of our economy and infrastructure. But successful membership also requires responsibility. The lessons of the past 20 years is that using the EU funds must go hand in hand with sound management, national accountability, and respect for taxpayers.
Thank you very much.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you very much, Mr. Knotek. We have now to make sure that we limit the speaking time to one minute because we have to come to the hearing of the European Court of Auditors candidate. Next speaker is Mr. Sturza.
Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza
Stimați colegi, la rândul meu doresc să mulțumesc domnului raportor Giekowski pentru acest draft de raport. Eu reprezint România și experiența României de la aderare și până astăzi ne arată că fondurile europene pot schimba profund o țară doar atunci când există voință politică de a le accesa și de a implementa reformele și proiectele europene de modernizare aferente. Aici este problema de fapt. Cheltuirea banului european nu ar trebui să depindă de politicienii de la București, de la centru. Am observat că banii europeni nu ajung mereu la oamenii și comunitățile care au cel mai mult nevoie de aceștia, ci la cei care sunt suficient de puternici politic astfel încât să aibă cale liberă pentru accesarea banilor europeni.
Așadar, prima lecție este descentralizarea. Este nevoie de reguli care să aibă criterii clare, care să protejeze fondurile europene de politicieni și de ego-urile lor.
A doua lecție este simplificarea. De ani de zile vorbim despre ea, dar pentru mulți procedurile rămân prea complicate, prea complexe și astfel accesarea fondurilor europene rămâne un miraj. Spunem că vrem să aducem Europa mai aproape de cetățeni, dar cetățenii nu pot fi mai aproape de ea dacă nu înțeleg cum pot beneficia de fondurile Uniunii Europene. Iar Europa riscă să se încadreze și să se îndepărteze de cetățeni din cauza birocrației sale. Bineînțeles că trebuie să putem urmări banii europeni, iar cel mai simplu putem face acest lucru printr-un control bugetar inteligent și digitalizat, nu prin ziduri de birocrație.
Și termin. Statele candidate pot învăța din experiența noastră pentru a maximiza impactul european. Este nevoie de administrații stabile, de personal bine pregătit, de sisteme digitalizate și interconectate și de indicatori clari legați de rezultate clare. Aceste capacități trebuie construite înainte de aderare și nu după. Doar așa vom deveni cu toții mai puternici împreună.
Vă mulțumesc.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you, Mr. Strutzar. I will be now more precise. Renew doesn't want to intervene because Mr. Voiculescu is not here. The Greens, also neither. Mr. Sjöstedt, you would like?
Please, over to you.
Jonas Sjöstedt
Thank you, Chair. I'll be short. Thank you so much, Thomas Stechovsky, for this draft. I think it's a very good start for the discussion and we agree on most of the points in this draft report.
We just had a discussion about Hungary here and I think that's a very important and interesting example. 1990, Hungary was well ahead of Poland, for example, when it came to GDP per capita. Now they are well below Poland and part of the explanation, I think, is actually spelled out in this report: the lack of good administration, corruption, misuse of EU funds, lack of clear structures for investments, etc. So I think this is really crucial. But we also have to look at the long-term goals of the enlargement itself.
I mean, it's one of them is to lift countries out of low economical standard and have social development. The next enlargement will have the poorest countries in Europe joining European Union and the differences are will be larger than ever in the European Union when it comes to economy. And that will be a challenge and this has to be a tool to improve social conditions and environmental standards in those countries. Even though we see a lot of merit in the draft, we will also make a couple of amendments. They will focus on rule of law.
They will focus on transparency. They will focus on the importance of strong public administration in the in the applicant states to to be efficient to use the possibilities that comes with EU membership. Thank you.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you very much, Mr. Sjöstedt. I don't see any other colleagues asking for the floor, therefore a short conclusion from Tomáš Zdechovský as rapporteur.
Tomáš Zdechovský
Thank you, Chairman. First, thanks to all of you who really have very good remarks. I think first time we can have it some report where everyone is in favor because I took the remarks and everything what you said. I will start with Mrs. Tavares about real effect, quality jobs, rule of law. I totally agree.
Mr. Knotek really mentioned many things what are in reports also. I think that when I heard him, I had it sometimes feeling that he's part of EPP much more as in Patriots.
But no, I would like say that the remarks are absolutely great and I hope so that we will continue with this respect and with this really concrete remarks. Mr. Šturza spoke about implementation reforms, I think it's very good point. Without reforms, you will not have it really quality, quality staff and quality preparation for the European funds. And last but not least, Mr. Szostak, your really remarks about rule of law, what was mentioned by socialists and about transparency, are very welcome. Also I am looking forward for cooperation with you and Commission.
I was very surprised that you had it so very clear and very tough statement. Also thank you very much and I am looking forward that all the things what are in report and what will be included in report thanks to our shadow rapporteur will be strong support to European Commission to take pressure for enlargement, but effective enlargement. Also thank you very much and I am looking forward for very great cooperation especially in this very good committee.
Andreas Schwab
Very, very good, Mr. Zdechovský, also for your kind words on your colleagues here in this committee. We are looking forward for the respect of the deadlines which are next for tabling amendments on Thursday, 16th of July, so quite soon already at 2:00. And like that we can close item number six and we come then to item number seven, which is the partial renewal of members of the Court of Auditors. There is an Austrian nominee. Our rapporteur for the nomination is Paulo Cunha.
And I think we would as usual start by giving the candidate time for an introductory remark. And then we will proceed. Yeah, yeah, I know, I know he will have to sit down but I explain the procedure and I can do that already now. We will give as usual the candidate time for an introductory statement and then we will proceed with questions and comments from our members, starting with the rapporteur, Mr. Cunha from the EPP group, and then making an exchange about the statement of the colleague. And like that, Mr. Loacker, you are the candidate proposed by Austria.
You have now eight minutes for your introductory statement and I kindly want to invite you to start with your presentation. Over to you.
Bitte, Herr Loacker.
Gerald Loacker
Danke sehr, Herr Vorsitzender. Sehr geehrter Vorsitzender, geschätzte Mitglieder des Europäischen Parlaments, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren des Kont. Ich danke Ihnen sehr herzlich für die Einladung zu dieser Anhörung. Die österreichische Bundesregierung, bestehend aus Volkspartei, Sozialdemokraten und Neos, hat mich einstimmig als Kandidaten für das Amt eines Mitglieds des Europäischen Rechnungshofs nominiert. Ich fühle mich durch diese Nominierung sehr geehrt und bin mir der Verantwortung, die mit diesem hohen Amt verbunden ist, voll bewusst.
Der Europäische Rechnungshof ist eine unabhängige Institution. Seine Arbeit ist wesentlich für das Vertrauen in die Europäische Union, für demokratische Rechenschaft und für den verantwortungsvollen Umgang mit öffentlichen Mitteln. Daher nehme ich auch diese Anhörung besonders ernst. In meinem Eingangsstatement möchte ich auf drei Punkte eingehen: erstens auf meine berufliche Erfahrung, die ich in den Rechnungshof einbringen würde, zweitens auf mein Verständnis von Unabhängigkeit und drittens darauf, wo ich zur Arbeit des Europäischen Rechnungshofs beitragen kann. Ich bin in Vorarlberg geboren und aufgewachsen, in der ländlich geprägten Vier-Länder-Region am Bodensee, die von europäischer Integration im grenzüberschreitenden Leben und Arbeiten jeden Tag konkret profitiert.
Ich habe Rechtswissenschaften studiert, weil Rechtsstaatlichkeit, Fairness und klare Regeln für mich immer wichtig waren. Später habe ich in der Privatwirtschaft gearbeitet, zunächst in internationalen Industrieunternehmen und danach in einer Regionalbank als Personaldirektor. Insbesondere in der Bank habe ich intensiv mit regulatorischen Rahmenwerken, Dokumentation, internen Kontrollen, Compliance gearbeitet und gleichzeitig darauf geachtet, die Effizienz zu steigern und die Arbeitsbedingungen zu verbessern. Diese Erfahrung ist auch in meiner heutigen Tätigkeit als Berater relevant. Diese Tätigkeit hat durchaus Ähnlichkeit mit Prüfungen, ich komme regelmäßig in neue Organisationen, ich muss rasch verstehen, wie sie funktionieren, wie die Verantwortlichkeiten verteilt sind, muss Daten sammeln und strukturieren, interne und externe Vergleichbarkeit herstellen und daraus konkrete Handlungsempfehlungen ableiten.
Ich bin daher von Jugend an ein überzeugter Europäer.
Zusätzlich arbeite ich als Sachverständiger für Gerichte. In dieser Rolle sind Unabhängigkeit und Unparteilichkeit und evidenzbasierte Begründung wesentlich. Ich bin es gewohnt, Sachverhalte objektiv zu beurteilen, meine Feststellungen zu dokumentieren und sie nachvollziehbar und schlüssig so zu erklären, dass sie von anderen überprüft werden können. Mehr als elf Jahre war ich außerdem Mitglied des österreichischen Parlaments.
Ein zentraler Teil meiner Arbeit war die Budgetüberwachung und Finanzkontrolle. Ich habe mich mit elf nationalen Budgets befasst, mit öffentlichen Ausgaben von mehr als 100 Milliarden Euro pro Jahr. Ich habe an Fragen der langfristigen Tragfähigkeit öffentlicher Finanzen, der Wirksamkeit öffentlicher Ausgaben und der Transparenz öffentlicher Institutionen gearbeitet. Aus der Arbeit mit Berichten des österreichischen Rechnungshofs habe ich gesehen, wie wichtig unabhängige Rechnungshöfe für demokratische Rechenschaft sind. Ein konkretes Beispiel war meine Arbeit zur Transparenz der gesetzlichen Kammern in Österreich.
Die Herausforderung dabei war weniger politischer als vielmehr methodischer Natur: Daten überhaupt zu erhalten, Finanzkennzahlen vergleichbar zu machen, Transparenzlücken sichtbar zu machen und die Ergebnisse so darzustellen, dass öffentliche Debatte und Kontrolle möglich werden. Lassen Sie mich nun zur Unabhängigkeit kommen. Ich war Politiker, das ist Teil meiner Erfahrung, aber für mich ist völlig klar, dass die Rolle eines Mitglieds des Europäischen Rechnungshofs keine parteiische Rolle ist und sein darf. Sie verlangt Unabhängigkeit, Unparteilichkeit und die Bereitschaft, ausschließlich auf Grundlage von Recht, Fakten und Evidenz zu arbeiten.
Ich habe meine aktive politische Laufbahn in Österreich beendet. Seit Oktober 2024 bin ich nicht mehr Mitglied des Parlaments und seither habe ich mich für kein politisches Amt und keine Wahl mehr zur Verfügung gestellt und ich habe das auch nicht vor. Für mich ist Unabhängigkeit nicht nur eine formale Voraussetzung, Unabhängigkeit ist eine Arbeitsweise. Sie bedeutet Themen sorgfältig zu prüfen, Fakten festzustellen, Regeln konsequent anzuwenden und Ergebnisse auch dann auszusprechen, wenn sie unbequem sind, und zwar egal für wen. Meine Loyalität gilt in einer solchen Funktion nicht einer Regierung, einer politischen Partei oder einem nationalen Interesse, meine Loyalität gilt den Verträgen, dem Europäischen Rechnungshof und den europäischen Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahlern.
Abschließend möchte ich darlegen, in welchen Bereichen ich zur Arbeit des Rechnungshofs beitragen kann. Erstens messe ich Wirtschaftlichkeitsprüfungen große Bedeutung bei, hier kann ich meine verschiedenen Erfahrungen einbringen. Bürgerinnen und Bürger fragen nicht nur, ob Geld formal korrekt ausgegeben wurde, sie fragen auch, ob es Wirkung erzielt hat, wurden die Ziele effizient erreicht, hätte es einfachere oder kostengünstigere Wege gegeben, dieselben Ergebnisse zu erreichen.
Diese Fragen sind mit der Aufbau- und Resilienzfazilität, dem vorgeschlagenen mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen und möglichen neuen nationalen Plänen noch wichtiger geworden. Gerade bei leistungsorientierten Budgetinstrumenten sind Wirtschaftlichkeitsprüfungen wichtig, um die Effizienz und den Mehrwert zu messen, Schwächen zu erkennen und Programme zu verbessern. Zweitens verstehe ich die Bedürfnisse der parlamentarischen Budgetkontrolle. Der Rechnungshof ist unabhängig, aber dieser Ausschuss ist einer der wichtigsten Nutzer seiner Arbeit. Als ehemaliges Mitglied eines Budgetausschusses kenne ich den Wert von Prüfberichten, wenn sie klar, relevant, zeitgerecht und verständlich sind.
Deswegen liegt mir auch die enge Zusammenarbeit des ECA mit diesem Ausschuss sehr am Herzen und ich werde Ihnen stets zur Verfügung stehen. Drittens möchte ich meine Erfahrung in Organisation, Daten, Prozessen und Modernisierung einbringen. Digitale Werkzeuge können Prüfungsarbeit unterstützen und öffentlichen Institutionen helfen, effizienter zu arbeiten. Sie dürfen aber professionelles Urteil, Sorgfalt und Verantwortung niemals ersetzen und ihre Nutzung muss von unseren europäischen Regeln und Werten geleitet sein. Außerdem wird der vorgeschlagene mehrjährige Finanzrahmen ab 2028 eine Reform des ECA erfordern.
Diese würde ich mit meiner Erfahrung mitgestalten, gerade auch um eine klare Aufgabenverteilung und gute interne Koordinierung sicherzustellen.
Ich würde dem Europäischen Rechnungshof mit großem Respekt vor seiner Expertise, seinen Methoden und seinen Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern beitreten. Ich behaupte nicht, von außen alles besser zu wissen, aber ich bringe eine zusätzliche Perspektive mit, die Kombination aus juristischer Ausbildung, Erfahrung aus der Privatwirtschaft und parlamentarischer Budgetkontrolle. Und ich bin überzeugt, dem Europäischen Rechnungshof damit von Nutzen zu sein und den europäischen Bürgerinnen und Bürgern bestmöglich zu dienen. Gerade weil ich aus einer ländlichen Region komme, ist mir wichtig, dass europäische Kontrolle für alle Bürgerinnen und Bürger verständlich und wirksam ist, für Menschen in Städten ebenso wie für Menschen in kleineren Gemeinden und ländlichen Regionen. Ihnen allen fühle ich mich gleichermaßen verpflichtet.
Transparenz, nachhaltige Haushaltsführung und Rechenschaft waren mir dabei immer wichtig. Wenn ich Sie heute überzeugen kann, wäre es mir eine Ehre, dem Rechnungshof mit Unabhängigkeit, Sorgfalt und Loyalität gegenüber seinen ethischen Grundsätzen zu dienen und zur Prüfungsarbeit beizutragen, die dem Parlament hilft, Steuerzahlerinnen und Steuerzahler schützt und das Vertrauen in die Europäische Union stärkt. Ich danke Ihnen für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit und stehe Ihnen nun gerne für Ihre Fragen zur Verfügung.
Andreas Schwab
Ja, vielen Dank, Herr Loacker, für Ihre Vorstellung hier im Ausschuss für Haushaltskontrolle. I would like now give the floor to our rapporteur, Mr. Paulo Cunha.
Paulo Cunha
Thank you, Chairman. I want to start saying how I appreciate all the information that was given, especially these introductory remarks from the candidate, Mr. Loacker. It only remains two questions that I want to address to the candidate. The first one is, looking ahead to the post-2027 multiannual financial framework, including possible future enlargement and growing use of new funding instruments, what do you see as the main risks to the sound financial management for the EU budget, and how should the European Court of Auditors adapt its work to address them? And second one, knowing the impact of the European Court of Auditors ultimately depends on whether its recommendations are implemented, in your view, what more can the Court do to encourage the Commission and the member states to act?
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.