Committee on Budgets Ordinary meeting
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.
BUDG European Parliament
Follow its sittingsLenka Filipkova
So and then we we adjust what we are proposing for the draft budget. So there is a small small increase of the needs of about 115 million, but there's also a bigger increase in availabilities by 196 million, therefore overall we are saving some voted budget, so the margin of heading 3 is increasing by about 81 million. We are also updating the fisheries agreement where there will be a an fisheries agreement concluded with Seychelles and Mauritius, so we can place the amount of 6 and a half million from the operational reserve to the operational line in in the amending letter. Then we are proposing some changes in heading 1 programs. So first of all, we have assessed all the requests for Member States to to support them in the outbreaks of the animal diseases and we have discovered that we do not have enough in this MFF to cover all the all the outbreaks until 2025.
We were missing 125 million euros under heading 1 under the single market program for the food and feed measures.
So we are proposing to actually use the full margin in 2026 under heading one, and I will present it in the Draft Amending Budget 3 of 47 million. And the remaining amount, 78 million, we are proposing to increase in the Amending Letter from the margin of heading one. Then we have also got an updated information about the implementation of the European Institute for Innovation and Technology, EIT, where one of these Knowledge and Innovation Communities cannot implement 138 million. And therefore we propose to redeploy this amount within Horizon Europe to the European Innovation Council, so it's budgetary neutral. Finally, we have recovered in 2026, 87 million to the predecessor of the Chips Joint Undertaking, Chips Joint Undertaking.
And therefore we will, with the recoveries in 2026 of 87 million, we will reach the targeted amount of support of this Joint Undertaking. And therefore we do not need the fresh appropriations in 2027. And therefore we propose to cut this amount in the 2027 budget and increase the margin of heading one. We are proposing other smaller adjustments in other headings.
Lenka Filipkova
So in heading one, we are also proposing to to follow the the political agreement reached on Agile and redeploy 115 million in commitments and 30 million in payments from the reserve to the operational line. We have also present I have presented it to you earlier the the Chernobyl pledge, which also requires some adjustment budgetary neutral between between operational lines from provisioning to the nuclear nuclear safety cooperation instrument, which is included as well. Then we have impact of the salary adjustment for 2026. When we have presented the 2027 draft budget, we have assumed or the the 2027 budget was built on the assumption that that we received from from Ecofin from our colleagues in the in the economic forecast in actually November, December 2025. And at that time we have assumed that we will come close to the 2% inflation in 2026 and 2027.
Unfortunately, since the spring, you know that the inflation is going up again. So the final final inflation then really has a has a immediate impact on the salary adjustment.
And the latest number that we got, it is still a forecast from Eurostat for the 26th adjustment is 4.1% compared to the 2.2 that we that we assumed when preparing the DB 27. We will again, the final final number will be only confirmed at the end of October, but we believe this is already a very robust assessment which we need to use to update the the salary and pension expenditure of all institutions. Therefore, we need to increase the heading 7 administration for both salaries and and pensions for about 206, 207 million euros. We have also this has also impact on the salary adjustment has other impact on on agencies, on the decentralized agencies, which also obviously their salaries need to be updated with the salary adjustment. So we took very targeted approach, we looked agency by agency, whether they had surpluses, whether it's a new agency, whether they have implemented their budget, whether they still have some some room for redeployment, and then we proposed reinforcements for for those who couldn't really do without without the salary adjustment.
There are few additional elements in heading 7.
Lenka Filipkova
First of all, we have taken into account the the Parliament's amendment, which we understand is a legal obligation for the pensions fund for the previous MEPs of 10 million. We have also accepted the request by the Council to reinforce slightly their budget to start preparing for the enlargement of Montenegro. And we have also proposed a small reinforcement for the Commission linguistic services so that we can start translating into Montenegrin. On the other hand, we have in the draft budget proposed a contribution to the translation center of 8.5 million, and we have now received an updated information that they have managed their budget a bit better, will receive more more contributions. So therefore, the we can cut the contribution by 5.5 million to only 3 million in the budget.
And there are some other technical adjustment to some agencies that are linked to the adoption of legal basis or not. So I won't go through it in in the detail, but can come back to it if if interested.
Thank you very much.
Johan Van Overtveldt
Thank you. I give the floor now to Mr. Ušakovs, the budget 27 general rapporteur. Please.
Nils Ušakovs
So, the first question is about a set of questions is about EURI line, if I may. First of all, I see there is no update on the EURI line, and it shows that the Council's decrease of the amount on this line in their reading was far too strong and doesn't testify of a prudent budgeting approach. In any case, obviously it's positive that the final figure remains the one estimated in the draft budget. However, since we know that the interest costs are increasing, could you provide more information on the breakdown of 9.9 billion euro of borrowing costs? And in particular, what is the amount of liquidity management costs compared to the 350 million in the draft budget 2027?
On Ukraine support loan. There are more availabilities due to amounts disbursed lower than forecasted. Could the Commission explain why only half of the amounts are disbursed? How does this match with the joint statement of the Commission and Ukraine adopted on the 1st of October, agreeing to move forward swiftly with the allocation of 45 billion euro under the Ukraine support loan, subject to the established conditions, and to begin to work on identifying additional budgetary and defense needs? Could you also please provide more details on how the assumption taken to estimate it now at 500 million euro?
In particular, how much do the liquidity management costs represent out of the 500 million euro? Can we also rely in this circumstances on the current estimate ahead of the conciliation? Finally, I would like to remind that the Parliament calls for the full mobilization of the Ukraine support loan instrument. And let me also stress again that we expect to be informed ahead of the conciliation in case of any potential impact on the 2027 budget, should the situation and discussions with Ukraine evolve. Horizon.
Could you please explain why 87 million euro were not used by the Chips Joint Undertaking? Single Market Programme. Can the Commission explain the reasons why the commitments appropriations needed to cover the 2024 and 2025 outbreak are known only now, more than one year later, and should we expect further impact in the budget 2027? On EPPO. It is welcome development that Hungary joined the EPPO in August this year.
On which basis, I would like to ask, did the Commission allocate 16 posts, 10 European delegated prosecutors and two SNEs to EPPO?
Is this in line with their own request? And finally on pledges, we see that you included the impact of the pledge for Chernobyl, and I would like to ask the status of the planned EU pledge to support Armenia-Azerbaijan peace and regional connectivity, for which the Commission announced end of June that up to 100 million could be mobilized in 2027. And also the Commission announced additional pledges during the UN General Assembly. Is there any impact for this year budget? Could you please also provide this information?
And thank you for your attention and clarifications. Thank you, Chair.
Johan Van Overtveldt
Thank you. Next is Mr. Lewandowski replacing Mr. Hadjipantela for the other sections. Please.
Janusz Lewandowski
Thank you. Good afternoon. Yes, I am to replace Michalis on this occasion. After so many questions by Mr. Usakovs to Madame Filipkova, I am to read now the statement by Mr. Hadjipantela. Colleagues, or even dear colleagues, I am very pleased with the outcome of our work on the 2027 budget.
The compromise reached in the Budget Committee was adopted last Monday with a clear and strong majority, demonstrating our shared commitment to a balanced and responsible budget. Today, we move forward with the vote on the resolution, which reflects the figures agreed in the compromise. In this context, I also welcome the Commission's amending letter for 2027 budget, which incorporates the updated needs of the institutions, including the additional requirements related to salary adjustment, the European Parliament's voluntary pension scheme, and the preparation for Montenegro accession to the Union. I particularly welcome the fact that these technical adjustments have been incorporated into the amending letter. Similarly, the approach taken in the draft amending budget number 3/2026, whereby institutions are expected to accommodate the additional salary costs for 2026 through internal redeployments, also avoids the need for additional payments in the 2026 budget.
Overall, these developments are positive and should help facilitate the conciliation process by allowing us to concentrate on the key issues that matter most. I would therefore like to thank all the colleagues for their constructive engagement and support. Looking forward to today's vote. My personal comment additional is that it happens from time to time that annual procedure goes parallelly with multiannual procedure, and I know that the state of play it is not very positive, but my impression is that people of Europe are not interested in our inter-institutional struggles, they don't understand, they want us to deliver, and this is our duty. I think our chair shares my opinion on this.
Speaker 10
Thank you. Let's go to the shadow rapporteurs, first on section 3, Monsieur Sanchez.
Julien Sanchez
Oui, merci Monsieur le Président, mes chers collègues, Madame Filipkova. Donc cette lettre rectificative met en évidence plusieurs problèmes concernant la fiabilité des prévisions budgétaires de la Commission, la maîtrise des dépenses et la protection des contribuables européens. Premièrement, concernant le prêt de soutien à l'Ukraine, la Commission réduit de 500 millions d'euros les besoins de financement pour 2027.
Au 30 septembre 2026, 14,9 milliards d'euros avaient été décaissés contre 30,5 initialement prévus. Comment expliquez-vous un écart aussi considérable entre vos prévisions et l'exécution réelle ? Quelles garanties pouvez-vous apporter sur la fiabilité des prochaines estimations, notamment concernant les charges d'intérêt supportées par les contribuables européens ? Concernant les dépenses administratives, vous proposez une augmentation de 208,7 millions d'euros au titre de la rubrique 7, dont 127,7 millions liés à la révision des dépenses salariales. L'ajustement salarial estimé atteint 4,1 % contre 2,2 initialement prévu.
Pourquoi la Commission privilégie-t-elle systématiquement des crédits supplémentaires plutôt qu'une véritable rationalisation des dépenses administratives ? Est-ce que vous avez pu identifier des économies structurelles ? L'agriculture, les besoins du FEAGA augmentent de 816 millions d'euros mais les crédits budgétaires demandés diminuent de 81,1 millions grâce notamment à des recettes affectées et des reports plus importants. Est-ce que vous pouvez garantir que cette diminution ne compromettra ni les paiements aux agriculteurs ni la capacité de réaction aux crises agricoles ? Enfin, malgré la réduction des besoins liés au prêt ukrainien, la Commission maintient le recours à l'instrument de flexibilité pour financer d'autres dépenses et augmente la mobilisation de l'instrument de marge unique pour l'administration.
On peut donc se demander où est l'effort réel de discipline budgétaire.
En conclusion, pour notre groupe, les priorités sont claires : protéger l'agriculture, préserver les marges budgétaires et mettre fin aux dépenses européennes nuisibles. Les contribuables ne doivent pas être systématiquement la variable d'ajustement de vos choix budgétaires via les ressources propres futures ou via l'augmentation des contributions sur le RNB. Je vous remercie.
Johan Van Overtveldt
Thank you. Any other, any other shadow wanting to take the floor? No, then for the other sections, are there shadow rapporteurs that want to take the floor? No catch the eye either. Then we go back to Mrs. Filipkova for the quest for answers on the questions raised.
Lenka Filipkova
Thank you very much for the question. So I'll try to address them all, starting from the rapporteur as regards the EURI cost 9.9 billion. Within that, at the moment, as you assume, about 500 million for the liquidity cost. Out of it, 340 million, it's only on the part of grants and not loans, that's obviously paid by the beneficiaries of the loans.
So 340 million has already been realized and an additional 150 we assume will be still needed for the impact of the cost and refinancing operation by the end of the year. For the Ukraine support loan, so we still assume that full 45 billion will be paid in 2026. So out of the 90 billion the assumption was that 45 will be paid in 26, 45 in 27, that remains the case. We assume that 15 billion will be paid every quarter, so 30 billion in the first six month. Again, we still plan and expect that the full 45 billion will be paid in 2026.
What has happened is due to some small delays on the defense project line, on some information on the fulfillment of targets and reforms from Ukraine, some payment slipped a bit between September.
So for example on the Ukraine facility there was a payment done at the end of last week on the 2nd of October which part of it was covered by the Ukraine support loan. But because of the methodology that we are using to establish the cost for 27 budget we only take into account the disbursement by the end of September so the fact that some of these payments slipped from September into October doesn't have an impact for Ukraine, they will still receive the full support but it does impact in which budget we taking the cost into consideration. Again out of the amount that is now included in for the Ukraine support loan cost about 31 million is assumed for the liquidity management. On the EPPO and I'm sorry I forgot to mention it in my presentation indeed we are including the reinforcement for EPPO to take into account the fact that Hungary will become the next participating member. For the request itself we have indeed looked at the previous enlargement for Poland and Sweden the last ones, the request from EPPO and also the assessment of our colleagues in DG Justice and we have proposed this specific reinforcement both in the number of support staff in EPPO for the delegated prosecutors and the prosecutors.
Just to be clear this amount for 2027 is for six months because the participation will take the formalization of all the steps will take some time so we assume that all this will be fully running for the second half of the year.
Lenka Filipkova
As regards the Chernobyl pledge and other pledges, so for the Ukraine pledge, most, so the amount that was announced for the humanitarian aid or citizens for people, that basically covers actions that were already planned plus the actions that were included in the mobilization of the emergency aid reserve. But we are very happy to send you more information in detail in writing. On the Azerbaijan-Armenia, the hundreds million that were still promised and we know will need to be delivered, for that we will need to come early in 2027 when we see implementation of some programs that might be delayed, but we don't have the full information now. On the reinforcement of the food and feed, the problem with the program started already at the beginning of this MFF where there was a relatively high level of co-financing and the outbreaks were much more frequent and had heavier impact than planned in the MFF. So we actually already had to mobilize additional appropriations at the beginning of the MFF.
And now we have, with our colleagues in DG SANTE responsible for the programs, we realize that basically there is a delay in reimbursing these measures, that we don't have enough for the outbreaks in 2025, which need to be paid until end of 2027. But that also means that the outbreaks in 26 and 27 will have to be covered from the next MFF. And we also take it into account when we are considering the next MFF.
Lenka Filipkova
But at least all that we know until end of 2025 will be covered if both the reinforcement in the in the amending budget draft amending budget 3 and in this amending letter will be will be approved. As regards the agri update, indeed there is no impact for the farmers, but we are because we first look at the updated needs, which indeed were were increased, and then we looked at all the availabilities, including the additional assigned revenue. We do yet another update at the end of October when we get all the information on at the end of the agriculture year to be 100% sure that that we have we have got it right. Also for the agri reserve, all the crisis measures that we already adopted and the the reinforcement that we propose in the amending budget 2, not all of it will be paid still this year, so the full amount will be carried over to 2027 so that all the measures can be implemented and the full new 450 million for new emergencies are included in 27 budget. And with that, I think we can't for the impact of the salaries, I will soon present the amending budget 3 and then the transfer 20 to show how we dealt with the impact of the salary adjustment in 2026.
However, it's too soon now for 27 to propose redeployment before we know what the effective implementation in 2027 will be. So we have assumed both for pensions and for all institutions that we need to just update the parameters and then we will see in the second half of 2027 whether more or less needs to be done. Thank you.
Thomas Geisel
Yes, ich sag's in Deutsch. Frau Filipova, ich habe eines nicht ganz verstanden. Es geht um die Höhe des Finanzierungsaufwandes für den Ukraine Support Loan in 2027, der ist nahezu halb so hoch wie ursprünglich veranschlagt. Jetzt sagen Sie, die Ursache dafür sei, dass eine Zahlung von Ende September auf Anfang Oktober verlegt wurde. Es erschließt sich mir nicht, wie daraus eine nahezu Halbierung der Finanzierungskosten entstehen kann.
Können Sie mir das erklären?
Lenka Filipkova
Yes, indeed. So as I explained, we for the inclusion of the cost of the financing both for EURI and the Ukraine Support Loan, we take into account the cost of all disbursements made until end of September 2026. And we have assumed that the for the Ukraine Support Loan, out of the 45 billion planned for 2026 to be disbursed, we assumed 15 billion will be disbursed in each quarter and we started in May, June, so we assumed two quarters, 30 billion.
However, effectively, there was a bit of a shift, a delay. So instead of paying 15 billion every quarter, we have paid 15 billion until end of September, and we will pay 30 billion another 30 billion until the end of the year. So for our calculation for the cost, basically, the disbursement goes from 30 billion to 15, so also the cost go go to half of the amount planned.
Johan Van Overtveldt
Thank you. Let's switch to point number five, which we will take together with point number six, so on the draft amending budget number three and then also on the on the section three, DEC 18, 19 and 20. Again, I first pass the floor to Ms. Filipkova. Busy afternoon.
Lenka Filipkova
Indeed, thank you. Thank you very much, and sorry for for speaking too much. So, maybe I'll start in the in the in the context. So what we do every year at the at the end of summer, so end of August, beginning of September, is that we look at all our expenditure and we assess whether we have enough or whether we have too much in this framework of the global transfer exercise.
So it's DEC 18 and I will come back to it in a moment. And there we ask all our DGs and services whether they have enough money, whether they can return. This, and this is purely in principle in payments to make sure that we, that we really implement all the money. If we have too much, we return it to Member States. If we don't have enough, we ask for additional.
But we also look at commitments. Therefore we have some additional transfers proposed and you'll see in the, in the DEC 19 and 20. So, after we have done the, the global transfer exercise where we have concluded that we can reshuffle the payments between the programs that we have for about 1.1 billion euros. And I will go to the detail in a moment. We have then also concluded that we cannot cover all our needs in payments by redeployments.
And therefore the main element of the draft amending budget 3 is a significant increase in payments of 4.2 billion euros, mainly for cohesion, 2 billion for the regional development programs and 2 billion for the social, European Social Fund programs. Plus we are again also reinforcing the rural development.
There is partly already reinforcement in the global transfer and an additional 200 million in the, in the amending budget. With that, you will remember that already with the previous amending budget, we wanted to make sure that the, the backlog that, that was created at the end of 25 of about 18 billion euros, where we got a huge amount of payment claims at the end of the year and we used 26 appropriations that we can make sure that all these claims are paid and that we don't repeat and increase the backlog. So with the amending budget 2, we stabilized the backlog and with this, we believe that we can go a bit lower at the end of 2026 to something which is a normal level of backlog and which also we assume we will get a big amount of payments at the end of the year, so even if we did have the money, we wouldn't be able to pay, pay in time. Therefore, there is a net reinforcement of the, of the payments of 4.2 billion. Also, you've obviously all followed the situation in Hungary, the fact that the, the Commission proposed to, to lift the suspension.
The Council will decide imminently, in principle tomorrow, formally to lift the suspension of, of, of the cohesion funds that, that were not, not, the 55% of the commitments for the last two years, which couldn't be implemented.
We will be able to implement them now. So what we are proposing is the 24 and 25 commitments to reinstate them so that they can be implemented after the measures have been lifted. It's about 2.2 billion euros, which will, again, it's overall budgetary neutral. We lower the ceilings in 24 and 25 and increase by 2 billion the ceilings and the expenditure in cohesion and in heading 3 to allow Hungary to implement the programs fully for the last two tranches. Obviously the two tranches of 22 and 23 cannot be reconstituted anymore because there is N+2 deadline for these amounts and they already lapsed.
We are also proposing to update the fisheries agreements. Unfortunately, the agreements with Morocco and Mauritania won't be concluded in time to be still able to implement the appropriation in this year's budget. Therefore we propose to cut about 108 million euros from the reserve and increase the margin of heading 3.
We are also again looking at the implementation in Member States of the European Agriculture Guarantee Fund, where we want to make sure and we understand that there might be still after the reinforcement in the amending budget two by 140 million, there might be another 40 million missing. So to make sure that we really can pay everything that's due this year, we are proposing to reinforce the EAGF by another 40 million in commitments and payments this year. There is the reinforcement that I already mentioned with the amending letter of the food chain strand of the Single Market Programme by 47 million, that basically exhausts the margin in heading one in 2026, and with the 78 million in the amending letter, we would reach the 125 million to cover the outbreaks. Again here, we are proposing to adjust some amounts for agencies, mainly linked to the late adoption of legal basis or mandates. So it concerns the Chemicals Agency, the Medicines Agency, the Customs Authority, the Railways Agency, and the Maritime Safety Agency.
There for the Maritime Safety Agency, it's a small change of the establishment plan, which is also budgetary neutral.
Lenka Filipkova
There, we actually did not need to adjust the administrative expenditure, even if the salary adjustment is a bit higher. But for the budget 2024, we assumed that the salary adjustment would be 3.4%. Eventually, it is 4.1%. But all the institution, the Commission and all the other institutions were able to actually find this small impact of six months of the higher salary adjustment than planned within their sections of the budget. Moreover, we have looked in the Commission section budget, and you see that in DEC 20, we have also found enough room to accommodate the actually increases for the pensions, which requires about 52 million, and for European schools.
So in DEC 20, we are proposing to you to redeploy within the Commission section budget from salary and non-salary expenditure to cover the increased cost of pensions and European schools. Maybe before I get to the other two transfers, let me also update you on the revenue side of the Amending Budget 3. So not only do we in September look at everything that we do on the expenditure side, we also adjust the revenue side with all new information. So you also all heard about the fact that we have cashed the Google fine in July of about 4.6 billion, which can be included as other revenue in Amending Budget 3.
And we have also, based on the collection of the customs duties in September, discovered that we actually have collected more than, than we hoped for. So we also increase the customs duties by another 1.1 billion. Therefore, the full increase on the expenditure side is actually more than, uh, than balanced by the additional, additional revenue. Now let me quickly cover the, the global transfer. As I said, it is basically a shift of payments between, between programs to make sure that we use the payments in the most efficient way.
It is, uh, in size 1.1 billion, is slightly bigger than in the previous year, but again, we have also proposed, as I explained, 4.2 billion in payments in the amending budget. There we, we also did in parallel lots of autonomous transfers within, within the headings where it was possible. And then we are proposing bigger transfers of payments with, so for, let me just mention a few. In heading one, it is mainly from the Connecting Europe Facility and Digital Europe program and from InvestEU, Customs program and Fiscalis, where the implementation is slightly delayed. However, we are increasing using most of these in the Horizon, Horizon Europe program, where we increase by 264 million and also in the Space program.
In heading 2A we are increasing the connecting Europe facility by 86 million. In 2B we are increasing Erasmus+ by 183 million. Also we increase the payments for Solidarity Corps and the Justice Rights and Values programs. In heading three as I said we have increased significantly rural development already in amending budget two and now we are putting 200 million in in the global transfer and also in the in the amending budget. In heading four we are reinforcing Frontex and eu-LISA in payments and in parallel I will present you in just a minute the transfer number 19 we are also reinforcing these two agencies in commitments.
In heading five we are reinforcing the European Defence Fund by about 108 million and we are actually shifting some payments from EDIP to 2027 so there is a small decrease in payments for EDIP.
And we also propose some shifts in payments in heading six for humanitarian aid in payments only, the commitments we are taking now, but some of the payments will be done only at the beginning of next year, also some macro-financial assistance linked to the transfers we have presented earlier. Then let me now conclude with the one transfer, DEC 19, which I haven't mentioned yet. Yeah, DEC 20 I assume DEC 20 I have covered by in the presentation on the salary expenditure, so that's covered. For DEC 19, it is a transfer to reinforce, as I said, in commitment appropriation Frontex and eu-LISA. For Frontex, also given the latest or summer incidents, we have concluded that Frontex needs reinforcement of 50 million mainly to for some return operations.
This is proposed to be done partly in this transfer and partly from autonomous transfers. So we include 35 million from the European Union Asylum Agency, which as you know was significantly reinforced in the mid-term revision of the MFF and could not yet implement the full amount. And the remaining amount has been covered by the autonomous transfer from the border management and visa instrument.
Also the eu-LISA is reinforced by 12.5 million euros in commitment appropriation, which is mainly to make sure that they can deliver on all the IT tools like the Schengen Information System and the interoperability. This is financed mainly by transfers from AMIF, from the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund. But both for the transfers from BMVI and AMIF, this was only possible because we had additional recoveries to those funds. So we still will deliver on the full amount for AMIF and BMVI, and we have some space for new voted appropriations for the two agencies. And the parallel transfers in payments are included in the global transfer.
So DEC 18 is the global transfer, 1.1 billion in payments. DEC 19 is the reinforcement of Frontex and eu-LISA. And DEC 20 is the transfer of about 54 million in Heading 7 to finance the pensions and European schools. Thank you.
Johan Van Overtveldt
Thank you. We now go to Ms. Benjumea, who is replacing Mr. Halicki. Please.
Isabel Benjumea Benjumea
Thank you, Chair. Dear colleagues, Mr. Halicki could not be present for this point today, so I will speak on his behalf. First of all, thanks to the Commission for the presentation.
Concerning DAB 3 and transfer DEC 20, we have only received the documents last Friday and therefore have not had time to study them in detail. Nevertheless, there are some points and questions to be raised. Under DAB 3, let me first take note of the particularly high amount of definitive fines and penalty payments, especially competition fines, which increase the revenue and make it possible to increase expenditure according to latest forecasts and at the same time to decrease the GNI contribution. The rapporteur also notes positively the significant increase in payment forecasts for an amount of 4.2 billion euros for the cohesion and rural development funds, complementing the reinforcement of 5.36 billion euros already included under DAB 2. This follows a positive trend of accelerating implementation of projects, which will result in decreasing the backlog at the end of 2026.
Can the Commission already provide estimates of the possible backlog at the end of this year? Concerning the proposal of reintroducing suspended commitments for Hungary, the rapporteur takes note that this is conditional to the Council decision on this matter, and knowing that the funds relate to the years 2024 and 2025, he would like to ask the Commission if the Commission has assessed how implementation and absorption can be optimally planned, especially at this late stage of the MFF. Concerning the global transfer, the rapporteur noted in particular the under-implementation under CEF Digital, leading to a decrease of 223.8 million Euros. Could the Commission explain the reason for the cancel actions and delays in this program? Finally, regarding the DAP 3, the rapporteur takes note that this transfer makes it possible to cover additional needs without any reinforcement of DAP 3.
Could the Commission clarify how the trend on slower than expected recruitment is expected to evolve and if any risk to optimal implementation of programs can be avoided? Again, thank you on behalf of Mr. Halicki.
Johan Van Overtveldt
Thank you. Any of the shadow rapporteurs wanting to take the floor? Monsieur Sanchez.
Julien Sanchez
Merci Monsieur le Président, chers collègues. Donc ce troisième projet de budget rectificatif prévoit une augmentation de 4,16 milliards d'euros en crédits de paiement et de 2,18 milliards en crédits d'engagement. Plusieurs points appellent des explications précises de la Commission. Premièrement, concernant la politique de cohésion, vous demandez 4 milliards d'euros supplémentaires en crédits de paiement alors qu'un renforcement de 5,36 milliards avait déjà été accordé dans le budget rectificatif précédent. Vous reconnaissez également que les demandes de paiement en attente atteignaient 18 milliards fin 2025.
Comment expliquez-vous que des besoins aussi importants n'aient pas été suffisamment anticipés ? Quel sera précisément le montant des demandes de paiement restant en attente à la fin de 2026 après ces nouveaux crédits ? Concernant les recettes, vous annoncez 4,76 milliards d'euros supplémentaires provenant des amendes et sanctions, auxquels s'ajoutent 1,1 milliard d'euros de ressources propres traditionnelles. Pourtant, la diminution des contributions nationales fondées sur le RNB n'atteint que 1,70 milliard d'euros.
Pourquoi cette amélioration considérable des recettes ne se traduit-elle pas par une réduction plus importante de la contribution des États membres ? Enfin, concernant l'agriculture, vous sollicitez 40 millions d'euros supplémentaires pour le secteur des fruits et légumes, tandis que les besoins de financement des mesures sanitaires d'urgence atteignent 125 millions d'euros sur 2026 et 2027. Comment garantissez-vous que les agriculteurs et les États membres recevront les remboursements attendus dans les délais sans nouveau report de charge sur 2027 ? Concernant la Hongrie, la Commission propose de réinscrire 2,2 milliards d'euros de crédits d'engagement précédemment suspendus. Aujourd'hui, après le changement de majorité à Budapest, la Commission considère que les conditions seraient réunies pour lever ces mesures alors que pendant des années, il y a eu cette conditionnalité budgétaire utilisée comme un moyen de pression politique.
Quelles garanties objectives pouvez-vous apporter que cette décision repose exclusivement sur des critères juridiques et budgétaires et non sur l'orientation politique du gouvernement en place ? Je vous remercie.
Nils Ušakovs
Yeah, thank you, Chair. We received this DAB 3/2025 the same time as Mr. Halicki, so probably also some short comments. First of all, from the perspective of the budget 2027, that is on increase in the level of payment appropriations for the European Regional Development Fund, for the European Social Fund Plus, and for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development. It's good to notice that the implementation is improving and that obviously will ease payments pressure for 2027. From the perspective of the MFF, I would like to notice that about the reintroduction in the budget of the budgetary commitments under three Hungarian operational programs in cohesion policy, which were previously suspended in the budget.
It's important to remind that immediately after the Council's decision, the Commission will need to adopt a technical adjustment of the MFF to increase the MFF ceilings in order to allow the above reinstatement to occur. And about, if I may, on adjustment of the EU contribution to several decentralized agencies, namely Capital Agency, Medicines Agency, and Customs Authority. These adjustments to the agencies' budgets are due to delays either in the adoption of legislation or setting up of the agency, which is obviously not a positive sign.
But in general, we would love to wish our rapporteur good luck in providing the report, and we will consider our amendments. Thank you.
Johan Van Overtveldt
Thank you. Any other shadow or MEP wanting to intervene? If not, Ms. Filipkova, you have the floor again.
Lenka Filipkova
Thank you very much, and indeed it's true that you've only received all the documents on on Friday. Unfortunately, we couldn't adopt them faster because we had to wait until end of October, until end of September to get the most up-to-date information. But we will have in the meeting, in the trilogue on Wednesday and the meeting on payments, we will we can have a more more detailed discussions on on the implementation. So as regards the the question on the backlog at the end of 2026, so we believe that the backlog will be around 14 billion euros, which is comparable with the amount of the claims that we received in the last two weeks last year, which were also about 13 billion euros. So even if we increase the budget by another 14 billion euros, we probably wouldn't be able to pay because if we receive the claims from the member states in the last week, it's just too late to for us to pay.
So we don't also want to budget more than we are able to use. So again, the amount will be paid in in January once confirmed that is all the claims are correct.
On the detail on the CEF Digital, indeed, it is true that there is a quite a significant delay in payments. It is mainly as a result of a cancelled action of 165 million and also some lower and delayed cost claims, but we can also, if need be, send you an information in writing if interested. On DG 20, it is true that we have had some savings on non-salary expenditure that allowed us to pay the increases in the pensions, but also we had savings on the salaries line. And one of the reasons was slower than expected recruitment, which is also partly linked to the fact that we are trying to implement measures for a better geographical balance, and then the selection procedures take a bit longer. On the fines, indeed, it is true that this is an extraordinary amount that we received thanks to the court case on and the amount cashed from Google.
But it is again, as I said, what we do is that we first, as the budget is expenditure-driven, we first very carefully assess what we need to pay and what we can pay so that we don't ask more or less from the member states and then we update the revenue side. So again, which is a good news for the member states, especially at the end of the year, that they do not actually need to pay more as they all have to implement their own national budget. So indeed, overall the GNI contribution will be lowered by 1.7 billion after we had made sure that all the claims that we receive by the end of the year we will be able to pay. And indeed it is true that we will now that the Council tomorrow will formally adopt the, the Council decision on lifting the suspension, we also need to make sure that the ceilings are increased. So either on Wednesday or Thursday we will update the technical adjustment of the MFF, which is, which is a communication and therefore we couldn't propose it at the time of the DAB because we need to first make sure that the Council adopts the decision, while for the amending budget we wanted to include it already because before you will be able to adopt the amending budget all the other steps will have been taken.
Johan Van Overtveldt
Thank you. The rapporteur will present his draft report on DAB 3 in due course, with a view to consideration of amendments and adoption on November 19th, and we will vote on the DEC's on November the 4th and the 5th. We now move to point number 7 of our agenda on the other sections, where we have quite a few speakers, so I ask every speaker to strictly limit his intervention to one minute. First of all, Mr. Juan Carlos Jiménez Marín, Director General for Logistics and Interpretation for Conferences, Mr. Nikolaos Tziorkas, Director of the Directorate for Members' Financial and Social Entitlements. On the EESC, Mr. Federico Rossi, Deputy Director.
For the European Committee of the Regions, we have Monsieur François Filipek, Deputy Director for Human Resources. And for the European Ombudsman, we have Ms. Véronique Van Daele, Head of Budget and Finance, Accounting Officer. I pass the floor, sorry, I pass the floor now first to Mr. Jiménez Marín.
Juan Carlos Jiménez Marín
Dear members, by means of this transfer proposal, DG LINC is requesting a reinforcement of 1.5 million euro to proceed with developments for Pericles, which are required in relation to the SPAAK renovation. Let me briefly recall that Pericles is the IT backbone for managing the full life cycle from the moment of the request until the moment of implementation of official meetings, events, and exhibitions in the European Parliament, including room management, interpretation, technical, and usher service. It supports approximately 5,000 users, including MEPs, political groups, Parliament administration, and other EU institutions. These developments that are described in the transfer request are mainly related to functionalities and adaptations that are necessary to ensure that meetings and their interpretation operate smoothly during the SPAAK renovation. Only throughout 2026, and as the practical implications of the SPAAK renovation became clearer, were these operational arrangements progressively developed and refined, and this is why this amount had not been foreseen earlier on.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, dear members.
Once implemented, these developments are also foreseen to be sustainable in the future and the long term because the new technological requirements will be compatible with the modernized version of the current Pericles when it becomes Pericles 3.0. Thank you.
Nikolaos TZIORKAS
Yes, thank you, Chair. We would like to ask for a transfer of 239,000 euro among budget lines which are both managed by DG FINS, the reason being to be able to allow us to implement the Bureau decision concerning the installation of a biometric registration system for the attestation of members' attendance for the purpose of the payment of the daily subsistence allowance. At the time of the preparation of the budget estimates for the current year, the final cost of the project had not been known yet, the reason being that a previous contract with a private company which will install and run the system had run out and in the meantime also following exchanges with the European Data Protection Supervisor, the system had to be adapted in several aspects and therefore we had to do a new call for tender to find a new company and in order to be able to do so and to prepare the technical specifications correctly and the cost estimates.
And therefore, we had to do a new call for tender to find a new company. And in order to be able to do so and to prepare the technical specifications correctly and the cost estimate, another company was hired. And until this company finalized its work, as I said, we had provisionally foreseen only a representative amount of 100,000 in the budget for this year. In the meantime, the call for tender has taken place, the company that will implement the project has been found, and for this year already the cost estimate is 318,000. Considering that 21,000 has already paid for the expert company that prepared the call for tender, we are requiring already for this year another 239,000.
Johan Van Overtveldt
This is I don't know how many times I have already asked for everybody to keep to his limit. We receive these texts, we read them, so please, if you have extra explanation to give, we allow you, but keep to the one minute. I'm really gonna be become very brutal if you don't if you guys don't stick to the rule. I hope I made myself clear. Mr. Rossi.
Rossi
Thank you for the opportunity. I'm presenting three transfers for a total amount of 1,62 million euros and they tend to reallocate valuable resources to priority needs that we identified during the budget preparation and during implementation. The donor lines are mainly staff expenditure and external translation and they come from a prudent reassessment of end-of-year expenditure, including also salary indexation that is factored in. Briefly on the three transfers: INF 4 ensures the continuity of document management systems and also covers the increased staff mission costs. INF 5 is a transfer to guarantee essential maintenance works in Jacques Delors and Van Maerlant building to ensure compliance with legal and safety requirements.
Thank you, Chair.
And the third transfer, INF 6, supports the replacement of aging laptops and deployment of video conferencing systems. We have received a number of questions from this committee and we have provided written replies and I remain at your disposal for any questions you might have. Thank you.
François Filipek
Good afternoon and thank you very much.
In complement of what my colleague just said, as you know we are sharing three directorates and we have very similar requests. First transfer regards three budget lines, the first one is for staff missions. Then we have also to comply with our part of the mandatory safety requirements of our buildings and cleaning and maintenance of technical installations for two buildings that we share for a total amount for these three items for 962,000 euros. And then the second transfer that we request today is also linked to updating our IT equipment and video conferencing room systems plus IT related projects linked to digital transformation, multilingual translation and ongoing work program linked to document management, cloud and innovation for a total amount of 371,000 euros. Both requests are covered mainly on savings that we've made on the budget lines for salary, which is the main donor line for these projects.
Van Daele
Merci Monsieur le Président. La proposition de virement que nous soumettons vise à renforcer deux lignes budgétaires. En ce qui concerne la première ligne dédiée à l'informatique, le renforcement proposé permettra de couvrir le surcoût lié à l'augmentation du prix des licences.
Cette hausse nous ayant été communiquée après la soumission en mars 2025 de notre projet de budget 2026. Nous avions d'ailleurs déjà dû procéder à un virement budgétaire en juillet de l'année dernière afin d'en couvrir aussi l'impact sur le budget 2025. S'agissant de la seconde ligne budgétaire, la ligne support aux activités, les crédits supplémentaires serviront à couvrir les coûts liés à la mise en œuvre de deux modules d'e-procurement. En effet, leur utilisation deviendra obligatoire dans le cadre du déploiement de SUMMA, notre nouveau système financier à partir du 1er janvier 2027. Ce transfert est rendu possible grâce aux crédits disponibles sur la ligne des salaires, notamment à la suite de plusieurs départs dont certains postes restent vacants dans le contexte de la réorganisation de l'Office du Médiateur.
Johan Van Overtveldt
Merci bien. Oui, pass now to Monsieur Germain who replaces Mr. Nemec. Please.
Germain
Thank you, Chair. I'm going to speak as quick as I can on behalf of Mr. Nemec, rapporteur for the section.
Mr. Nemec wants to confirm that we have analyzed the transfers requests from the European Parliament as well as the replies to our follow-up questions. As per the SPAK renovation, the rapporteur wishes to stress the importance of sound financial planning, as the European Parliament has warned already in 2026 estimates that out of the 36 millions foreseen costs of the preparatory work in 2026, 32 million has not been budgeted. Second, while we understand the specific nature of the works on this project, the expectation about the transparency and responsible use of the public funds remain high. As for both requests from the Parliament, the rapporteur's recommendation to the BUDG is a positive one, and still we ask, for that reason, we ask the committee to support it. Second, on EESC request, on behalf of the rapporteur, I also wish to confirm that we have also analyzed the request and the corresponding replies from the European Economic Social Committee and consider them well-justified.
I can confirm that the recommendation from the rapporteur to Budg Committee is to support three requests as proposed. Last, for Committee of Regions, Mr. Nemec wish to confirm on behalf of the rapporteur that we have also well analyzed the request and the corresponding replies, and Mr. Nemec considers them as well justified. At the same time, he wish to encourage all institutions to make more efforts in reducing the vacancy rates.
Johan Van Overtveldt
Thank you very much. Any of the shadow rapporteurs wanting to take the floor? If not, then I think there were no questions for the representatives here. So we can move on to point number eight, building policy, where there are no requests. And then we have the voting.
It seems that we have the quorum. Let's first test the machinery. I open the vote. I close the vote, and it apparently works. So the first vote is on the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022, the draft report, compromise one.
Who's against? Who abstains? Adopted. And then immediately the final vote, roll call vote. We, I, I open the vote.
Who's in favor?
I close the vote and it is adopted, 24 in favor, 8 against, 2 abstentions. Point number 10, the vote on the mobilization of the European Globalization Adjustment Fund for displaced workers in Finland, compromise one. Who's in favor? Who's against? Who abstains?
Adopted. Final vote, roll call please. I open the vote. I close the vote. Adopted, 31 in favor, 2 against, 1 abstention.
We have point number 11, the mobilization of the European Union Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Malta and Italy regarding storm H- H- Harry and to Portugal and Spain following the storms in January and February, compromise one. Who's in favor?
Who's against? Who abstains? Adopted. The final vote, a roll call vote, the vote is open. I close the vote.
There is one EPP too much voting. Please behave. Who, who will we throw out of the room? We do the vote again because the, okay, we do the vote again. Okay, I reopen the vote.
Just a minute. The vote is open. The vote is closed. Adopted, only plus votes, so it's quite simple. Bravo.
Point number 12, section three, we first vote by roll call on DEC 15, the vote is open. The vote is closed, no, not yet, now I close the vote. It is adopted 31 in favor, two against, one abstention. DEC 16, the vote is open. The vote is closed.
Adopted, 34 in favor, no minuses and no abstentions. DEC 17, vote is open. Vote is closed. 26 in favor and 8 abstentions. Then we go to the vote on the other sections where we vote per unit.
First, European Parliament, which means C7 and C8. The vote is open, it's a roll call vote. Vote is closed. It is adopted, 29 in favor, 8 against, no abstentions. The European Economic and Social Committee, INF 4, 5 and 6.
The vote is open. The vote is closed. Adopted, 31 in favor, 6 against, no abstentions. Then the European Committee of the Regions, INF 5 and INF 6. Roll call vote, the vote is open.
The vote is closed. Adopted, 31 in favor, 6 against. And finally, the European Ombudsman number 2. Vote is open.
Vote is closed. 29 in favor, 5 against, 2 abstentions, adopted. Thank you all.