51 Amendments of Luke Ming FLANAGAN related to 2023/2122(INI)
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Underlines that areas of social policy, environmental policy and development assistanceconsidering this role, NGOs require public support beyond private donations;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights that volunteer and civil society organisations deserve the utmost respect and gratitude for the daily work they do in helping others in our society, particularly if they are supporting, for example,in all sectors including but not only social work, cultural engagement, sports education, emergency aidnd humanitarian aid, poverty eradication, human rights and gender equality; recognises the millions of hours of unpaid volunteer work done by thousands of volunteers across Europe as well as other civil society organisations on a daily basis and affirms that these volunteer NGOs deserve the highest praise and support;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out in particular the crucial role that aid agencies play in saving and improving lives on a daily basis, for example the work of the Red Cross, Search and rescue organisations, volunteer firefighter organisations, emergency management organisations, humanitarian aid organisations, social welfare organisations, and emphasises the importance of meeting the financial and other needs of these organisations;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that laws and the legislative process often neglect the voices of local, regional and national NGOs, while favouring the priorities of large NGOs, that the priorities and needs of smaller local and regional NGOs are often ignored orconsiders that often small and local NGOs do not have laccess attention paid to them, despite the fact that these smaller and regional groups often do the majority of the workto EU funds because of the already quite cumbersome administrative procedures and obligations imposed on them; emphasises that the work of small and regional organisations is to be paid the highest respect, as they represent the true diversity and variety of volunteer work performedan important element that reinforces diversity and variety across Europe;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Commends the crucial role of NGOs in the EU and elsewhere in defending the rule of law and promoting respect for human rights and democracy; reiterates that in countries with authoritarian or non-democratic regimes, NGOs often represent the last line of defence of democracy that authoritarian regimes worldwide try to silence also through fatally restrictive requirements and obligations; insists on the importance of adequate EU funding and protection for NGOs active in these fields;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Is convinced that public transparency is vital for NGOs to showcase their valuable work, be recognised and build their credibility; reminds that transparency and accountability should not be used to curtail the space for independent civil society and to silence critical voices, and that all requirements and obligations imposed should always comply with international and human rights law, in particular regarding the exercise of civic freedoms, remaining strictly necessary and proportionate to the specific aims pursued
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Reiterates the fundamental significance of public trust and support for NGOs; acknowledges that the terms used to describe these organisations are subject to different legal and public interpretations; that hugely varies among Member states
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises that the term NGO is a broad umbrella term embracing many different kinds of organisation: from large international organisations to small regional or local ones, from organisations run mostly by professionals to those consisting mostly of volunteers; highlights that the subject matter covered by NGOs and the covering very diverse subject matters and using different methods of implementation can also vary substantially, for instance, some NGOs may do work that is highly theoretical (for example the work of some think-tanks), or political (for example politically affiliated NGOs) whereas others may be very hands-on (for example the daily work that firefighting NGOs engage in across Europe); emphasises, therefore, that different types of NGOs should be differentiated when analysing levels of transparency and efficiency, and that a better definition of NGOs should be established at; understands that this diversity makes it difficult to have a common definition of NGOs within the EU level;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Reiterates the call for a common definition of an NGO made in the recommendations from the 2021 Commission discharge resolution13 ;Despite this complexity reiterates the calls for a common definition of an NGO at EU level, in particular for NGOs receiving EU funding; is of the opinion that this definition should provide minimum common conditions for defining an NGO; considers that such minimum conditions must include the form of an organisation, the objectives it pursues, its level of formal or institutional existenceNGOs that should provide minimum common conditions for defining an NGO such as the form of an organisation, the accountability of its structures to its members or donors, its level of independence from government, other public authorities, political parties or commercial organisations, and the commercial or professional objectives it pursues on behalf of its members; _________________ 13 Texts adopted, P9_TA(2023)0137.
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Highlights the advantages of establishing a common definition for EU engagement with NGOs, encompassing direct deliberative, political and financial interactions; acknowledges the advantage of enabling a common understanding of what these partners are in relation to the EU and its bodies in different contexts, beyond the question of financial support; believes that the added value of a common EU-wide definitionwhose added value lies in increased transparency, accountability and predictability for EU institutions, the Member States, NGOs and EU taxpayers;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes that the spectrum of NGOs receiving EU funding covers a wide range of structures, ways of fuCommission uses the terms NGOs and NFPOs without a clear distinction ing, sources of financing and focus areas, which translate the FTS; regrets that this results into a variety of projects that are financed with taxpayers’ money; notes that the Commission uses the terms NGOs and NFPOs without a clear definition in the FTS; regrets that this results in a lack of public transparency in the allocationsort of confusion in the allocation and monitoring of EU funds; notes that the FTS FAQ provides a definition for NGOs whose non profit- status is an essential element and is subject to validation. regrets that the this non clear distinctions is possible because up to now no common definition of NGOs was applied and monitoring of EU funds and might lead to a lack of public trust;ly self classification of entities are used for the FTS which are based only on rules which may vary among Member States
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. In this context of complexity and diversity welcomes even more the Commission proposal to include a common definition of NGOs in the recast to the Financial Regulation, as well as the EP mandate which further clarifies the conditions for transparency and accountability;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Is concerned about cases of fraud and irregularities, notably in situations where NGOs that are members of different international networks or platforms that receive EU funding are at risk of conflicts of interest, double funding, corruption or money laundering; is concerned about the lack of publicly available data on the fraud cases involving NGOs; calls on the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) to compile and provide such data to Parliament and the ECA and to draw up a list of NGOs that have broken the lawConsiders that fraud, conflicts of interest, double funding, corruption or money laundering should be avoided in all situations and for all the recipeints irrespective of their nature;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Reminds that NGOs as all other entities applying to EU funding are subjects to quite strict rules; underlines that EDES is an important instrument to protect the Union’s financial interests, ensuring a multi level protection through the early detection of persons or entities representing risks threatening the Union's financial interests; the possible exclusion of persons or entities from participating in award procedures or from being selected for implementing Union funds; the imposition of a financial penalty and finally the publication, in the most severe cases, on the Commission's internet site of information related to the exclusion and where applicable the financial penalty, in order to reinforce their deterrent effect; highlights that the Commission proposal for the Financial Regulation recast included the extension of application of EDES to include incitement to discrimination, hatred or violence;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Is concerned that public transparency requirements can be circumvented, especially wheHighlights that the FTS provides information monely is passed along a chain and used to fulfil the purposes of other donors; highlights that the FTS does not provide any information about how EU funding sub-granted under indirect and shared management is distributed among NGOs, on what basis or for what purpose; considers this highly problematic, as large amounts of funding aabout grants under direct management, but no details on how EU funding sub-granted under indirect and shared management is distributed; recalls that the EU, as the biggest donor to NGOs, imposes strict legal requirements to their financial re committed through indirect and shared management; calls on the Commission to verify the re-allocation of funds and their use by the final beneficiary by imposing appropriate reporting and publication requirements in line with annual reporting by the Member States and the Commission on the implementation of the European structural and investment fundsrds which sum up with the other donors requests for audited reports, as well as with the national financial accountabilities requirements creating a multi-layered system of reporting;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Considers that indirect managements is an important instrument to provide support to often small but important projects the Commission would not be able to handle directly; takes notes that the European Court of Auditors reported that the Commission generally reported data on humanitarian and development aid in accordance with international transparency standards
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Regrets that a lack of transparency makes it possible for powerful actors to establish, fund and/or co-opt EU-funded NGOs in multiple Member States to promote false narratives, including through disinformation, apparently in order to influence EU policy through different actors, as happened in Qatargate; underlines that the EU budget must not be used to lobby againstin Qatargate NGOs have been misused by corrupt actors to influence the decision making process within the EU; rejects all mystification of NGOs because of this misuse, and recalls that the vast majority of NGOs already work in view of achieving the EU’s democratic principles and values; reiterates that foreign influence on EU policymaking may be possible through NGOdifferent instruments; calls on the Commission to require NGOs inall receiptients of EU grants to publish details of any funding received from other sources in relation to projects co-financed by the EU over a five-year period14 ; _________________ 14 See: transparency and accountability study, recommendation 2.
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls for national lobby registry laws to also require the disclosure of donors and their international financial chains; for all lobby organisations regardless of their nature
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on national authorities to take legal and administrative measures that facilitate action at EU level and make it easier and quicker for the Commission to include such organisations in the Early Detection and Exclusion System (EDES) and exclude them from EU funding; recalls for such a requirement for Member States to be included in the proposthat EDES rules are included into the Financial Regulation and only its provisions can determine decisions of exclusion, which should not be driven by any political for an NGO regulationuthoritarian reasoning;
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21 a. Is of the opinion that no margins of appreciation should be left for Member States to subject NGOs to fatally restrictive requirements and obligations; recalls that that the Commission started an infringement procedure against Hungary when it introduced a foreign interference law in 2017 and that in its Judgement of 18 June 2020, European Commission v Hungary, the European Court of Justice stated that the right to freedom of association and thus EU law is violated if systematic obligations on Civil Society Organisations are rendering significantly more difficult the action and the operation of the organisations subject to them;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Regrets that public transparency is negatively impacted by the publication of data in the FTS with a delay of between 6 and 18 months; calls on the Commission to publish information about EU grants awarded to NGOs no later than 6 months after the date on which the grant was awarded15 , including funding received from other sources, such as foundations; while maintaining the principle of confidentiality in particular in case of NGOs or beneficiaries facing serious threats of reprisal; calls on the Commission to develop and integrate data validation tools so that the FTS data validation process is automatic and continuous, is quicker and consumes fewer resources16 ; _________________ 15 See: transparency and accountability study, recommendation 5. 16 See: transparency and accountability study, recommendation 7.
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. Is worried about any attempt about possible restrictions on NGOs that could further restrict the civic space and impose disproportionate burdens for NGOs, violating the Venice Commission/OSCE Guidelines on Freedom of Association, which establish that the right to freedom of association is based on the principle to seek, receive and use resources from different sources, to pursue their activities; reminds that any reporting or transparency obligations imposed on organisations, or any restrictions upon the right to seek resources, must be based on an assessment on whether the interference in the exercise of the right to freedom of association constitutes the least intrusive measure of all means that could have been adopted;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23 b. Recalls that transparency and accountability measures must serve only the purpose of ensuring legitimate public scrutiny; stresses that reporting and disclosure requirements must be accompanied by a specific analysis of a risk posed by certain organisations that would justify such a measure, aimed at clarifying whether such measures are necessary to avert a real, and not only a hypothetical danger;
Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Regrets that the Commission’s systems are not very transparent and that their data differ, making it difficult to reconcile information from different publicly accessible Commission portals and databases, because they use different conventions to identify beneficiaries of projects and grants; recommends that the Commission establish as much as possible harmonised rules and standardise the layout and functionalities of programme- specific databases taking into consideration the diverse environments and areas of actions in which NGOs operate and without creating additional unnecessary burden on NGOs, which should be able to work effectively and maximise their results on the grounds;
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24 b. Invites the Commission to assists NGOs in their reporting and monitoring obligations, by also reducing the administrative burden in particular on small NGOs; calls on the Commission to simplify the grant application and selection procedures and to increase the ceiling for administrative expenses in line with donors best practices;
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the Commission to use a common unique entity, such as a unique participant identification code, and project identification keys across all portals and databases, including on beneficiaries’ websites, while maintaining the principle of confidentiality in particular in case of NGOs or beneficiaries facing serious threats of reprisal, in order to facilitate the reconciliation of publicly available information provided by different systems and websites; calls on the Commission to provide all NGO grant beneficiaries with code that extracts five years of funding data directly from the FTS and includes links to the corresponding project entries in the Commission’s programme databases17 ; _________________ 17 See: transparency and accountability study, recommendation 19.
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Notes that, although the mainstreaming of the eGrants system as a common grants management tool and applicant registration system across Commission services has improved the quality and completeness of FTS data, more effort needs to be made to improve the reliability of such data; is concerned that there are still continuing shortcomings in terms of consistency in existing Commission transparency portals and systems; further calls for a more user- friendly FTS that is linked to the Transparency Register and compatible with specific programmes’ databases, and highlights that it should include final payments and a clear definition of NGOs, making it possible to identify beneficiaries by category; requests that the Commission prepare a proposal for further administrative action by 1 June 2024;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to set up, based on Article 36 of the Financial Regulation, a single, interoperable IT system for data mining and risk scoring to improve the efficiency of the internal control of budget implementation; underlines that this system must not only include recipients’ data, but also the data of beneficial owners in accordance with Directive (EU) 2015/84919 ; and while maintaining the principle of confidentiality in particular in case of NGOs or beneficiaries facing serious threats of reprisal; calls for this system to include risk indicators based on data from the EDES under all management modes; _________________ 19 Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC, OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p. 73.
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Demands that the guidelines for contracting external expertise, including by the political groups, better emphasise that only organisations that work based on verifiable facts aror entities whose goals are in line with the fundamental rights and values of the Union enshrined in the Treaties can be eligible for funding; demands that the recipients enter into a corresponding voluntary commitment prior to funding and that the Commission and the ECA carry out corresponding random checks; rejects any funding of organisations that have demonstrably spread false information and/or whose goals are directed against the fundamental values and recognised principles of the EU’s social market economy;
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 232 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Notes that the coexistence of reporting obligations and accounting practices at the national and EU levels may lead to a disproportionate administrative burden for NGOs; calls on the Commission to ensure that reporting obligations at the EU and national levels are consistent in order to guarantee easier monitoring of the fulfilment of obligations, especially for smaller NGOs; calls on the Commission to develop a common and harmonised monitoring system toaimed at reducing the red tape, improving efficiency and identifying final beneficiaries, as is already the case in regional policy; recommends that such a system should be bwhile maintaining the principle of confidentiality in particular in cased on the monitoring principles under shared management that apply to EU Member States;f NGOs or beneficiaries facing serious threats of reprisal
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Calls on the Commission to ensure that all applicants or beneficiaries of EU funding, including NGOs, are required to publish annually the number of lobbying contacts they have, along with their nature and their monetary value; calls on the relevant EU institutions and bodies to provide the tools necessary for the publication of such meetings; reiterates in this context the need for a comprehensive financial pre-screening of these entities before they are listed in the EU transparency register; calls for a transparency officer to be placed in all committee secretariats and relevant administrative units; recalls that, according to the transparency register guidelines, changes in the data provided should be communicated as soon as they occur and, in any case, within three months; insists that any changes in the board or leadership of EU-funded NGOs should also be recorded in the transparency register;
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls for strict enforcement of the rules for access to Parliament and for invitations to parliamentary committees, which are conditional on the registration of each organisation in the transparency register by the new transparency officer who will be placed in each committee secretariat;
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
Amendment 260 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Recalls the recommendations from the 2021 Parliament discharge resolution22 calling for a revision of the EU transparency register and its guidelines to require the disclosure of details on all funding sources from registered organisations, including the shares held in other companies, and to allow EU funds to be traced from the direct recipient to the final beneficiary when funds are passed along a chain, including when funds from one NGO or stakeholder are transferred to another; while maintaining the principle of confidentiality in particular in case of NGOs or beneficiaries facing serious threats of reprisal; _________________ 22 Texts adopted, P9_TA(2023)0138, paragraph 74.
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 a (new)
Paragraph 39 a (new)
39 a. Consider the adoption of an NGO regulation as a discriminatory measure that targets NGOs but not all other EU recipients; is of the opinion that issues such as revolving doors, transparency in financing and donations, the fight against money laundering, limiting foreign interference , independence from political and economic influence, whistleblowing are of importance for all entities receiving EU funds, and should not be used to limit the space of action of the NGOs;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5
Subheading 5
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
Amendment 292 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42 a (new)
Paragraph 42 a (new)
42 a. Expresses concerns about threats and attacks on NGOs, including in the form of the creation of public black list of NGOs, when the EDES system is already a valuable instrument of early detection and exclusion, and which scope has been broadened with the Commission proposals on the Financial Regulation to include incitement to discrimination, hatred or violence;
Amendment 297 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Calls on the ECA to draw up a special report following up on its 2018 findings with a view to investigating the internal democratic structures of NGOs, the direct and indirect inflows and outflows of EU and other funds and to the extent to which these are in line with democratic and human rights and EU values, calls on the ECA to additionally conduct a comprehensive analysis of the visibility- and transparency-related provisions of the current legal framework for the EU transparency register and the Financial Regulation and to make further recommendations to and analyse the final beneficiary and first financial sponsor transparency and further recommendations to enhance it; expects the ECA to deliver this report by 1 December 2024 and calls on it to adapt its existing work plan if necessary;special report
Amendment 301 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Calls on the Commission and the ECA to systematically submit to Parliament, as the discharge authority, the information from the risk-based on-site reviews of NGOs that it conducts; calls on the Commission to go beyond the minimum requirements and increase the number of NGOprojects it subjects to reviews; insists that such information be made publicly available;, while still maintaining the principle of confidentiality in case of risk of reprisal
Amendment 303 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
Amendment 308 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Paragraph 45 a (new)
45 a. Reminds that NGOS are submitted to the same level of control and investigations like any other EU recipients funds covering all expenditure side, within the respective mandate of both OLAF and EPPO;