22 Amendments of Olivier CHASTEL related to 2020/2126(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 a (new)
Citation 16 a (new)
– having regard to the Advocate General’s Opinion in Case C-156/21 and C157/21 Hungary v Parliament and Council; Poland v Parliament and Council,
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the budgetary authorities adopted the MFF 2021-2027 package, which together with the NextGenerationEU recovery instrument amounts to an unprecedented EUR 1.8 trillion in total of funding over the coming years to support recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and the EU’s long- term priorities across different policy areas;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the implementation of all of those funds is de jure subject to full and unlimited scrutiny by ParliamentEuropean scrutiny, including scrutiny by the European Parliament; however the de facto capacity of the EU institutions to control the EU funds is unfortunately rather limited without the effective and meaningful cooperation of the national authorities;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the protection of the EU’s financial interests is a key element of the EU policy agenda to strengthen and increase the confidence of the public and ensure that taxpayer money is used properly; whereas the implementation of the MFF 2021-2027 budgetary package must be in line with the general principles enshrined in the Treaties, in particular the European Values set out in Article 2 of the TEU and the principle of sound financial management set out in Article 310 of the TFEU and in the Financial Regulation;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that, in today’s society, ‘oligarchy’ refers to any small, cohesive class or group that is in a position to make decisions or command others in either political or non-political contexts or rule a political community in its own interest, without regard for democracy; notes that in an oligarchy, political elites misdirect public funds from the EU or national budgets to serve their private interest and often rely on businessmen who act on their behalf in a structure where real beneficiaries and beneficial owners are usually concealed; notes that the extreme concentration of political and financial elites leads to state capture;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes, with particular concern, that the occurrence of such oligarchic groups, which sometimes do not refrain from using government tools or criminal practices, has reached an unprecedented magnitude in the past several years; notes, with extreme concern, that politically connected oligarch networks can capture the national media market and interfere with the workings of democratic public spheres;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that ensuring the effective functioning of the rule of law, promoting competition, enhancing transparency and assuring functional implementation of public procurement rules and free access to markets is fundamental to prevent oligarchs from seizing control of the economy and financial market, which would result in them self-reinforcing; insists that the EU promotes transparency in the spending of EU and national funds, strengthen the rules of transparency, especially on final beneficiaries and beneficial owners and closely monitor and enforce the proper implementation of such rules;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Asks the Commission nevertheless to amend Article 167(1)(c) of the Financial Regulation to include a more explicit definition of ‘professional conflict of interest’, so as to ensure that EU institutions are able to take mitigating measures in the case of bidders with a financial interest in a policy-related service contract; calls on the Commission to do its utmost for ensuring uniform interpretation of the definition of conflict of interest in all Member States of the EU;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Points out that conflicts of interest do not only occur in relation to corruption, fraud and criminal conduct; stresses nevertheless that the consequent detection and disclosure of conflicts of interest is paramount to identifying possible risks of misuse, bias, fraud and corruption in fund management, as well as preventing reputational harm;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Reiterates, however, that even the best legal framework cannot compensate for an insufficient implementation mechanism; calls therefore for an improvement of the capacities of the EU bodies for better enabling them to monitor and investigate conflict of interest cases;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Emphasises that as far as cohesion policy is concerned, the most frequently detected types of fraudulent irregularities for projects financed under the programming period 2014-2020 for European structural and investment funds concern overpricing, incorrect, missing and false or falsified supporting documents, infringement of contract provisions, single biding public procurements, eligibility and infringement of public procurement rules, and breaches in relation to ethics and integrity including conflict of interest and corruption;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that in agricultural spending, there is also there are established common practices at the misuse of CAP funds, such as a risk of falsification of documents and of the creation of artificial conditions , such as by splitting agricultural holdings to avoid EU agricultural payment cap and requesting aid through several linked companies, or through incomplete implementation of the action; highlights that with regard to market measures, high financial amounts were recorded in several cases of conflict of interest combined with other breaches linked to promotion and are being investigated by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF);
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Points out that in several countries conflict of interest and revolving doors constitute serious problems; highlights that with regard to market measures, high financial amounts were recorded in several cases of conflict of interest combined with other breaches linked to promotion and are being investigated by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF);
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Points out that the study on the implementation of the CAP funds revealed that the disbursement of EU agriculture funds is a highly problematic issue in at least five Member States and that there is a clear inequality between fund allocations for big and small farmers, with systemic advantages for the big farms, whose managers sometimesbeneficiaries often have close ties to the ruling political parties in their countries; calls for more equal allocation of CAP funds;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Points out that although there is a certain level of transparency required by the EU, its implementation is often impeded, so public access to data regarding the allocation of subsidies is highly problematic issue in the EU;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Deplores the fact that there are 292 reporting systems disclosing beneficiary information of CAP and Cohesion Policy which makes it de facto impossible to identify the ultimate final beneficiaries of EU funds, and to compare the data collected in the Member States; it also makes it more difficult to properly investigate misuses of EU funds; urges the Commission to establish a more unified reporting system which is capable of the comparison of the data provided by the Member States;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Appreciates OLAFʼs long-term intensive investigative activity covering many politically controversial and complex cases; regrets that the indictment rate following recommendations by OLAF to Member States decreased from 53 % in the 2007-2014 period to 37 % in the 2016- 2020 period; further notes that the extent to which financial amounts recommended for recovery are actually recovered has not been assessed in recent years, and that the most recent assessment covering the years 2009 to 2016 indicates a recovery rate of 21 %; calls on OLAF and the Commission to investigate the underlying reasons and calls on the Member States; reiterates its calls on OLAF to regularly follow up on its recommendations and the measures the Member States take and add it to its yearly reports and calls on the Member States’ authorities to do their utmost to improve the indictment rate and to cooperate closely with EU bodies to ensure that funds misused by organised crime and oligarchs are recovered;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Commends the invaluable work carried out by OLAF, the EPPO and Europol in combating financial crimes such as corruption, fraud, money laundering and tax evasion, and stresses that these institutions are chronically understaffed and lacking financial resources due to the unwillingness of the Council as one of the budgetary authorities to authorise sufficient human and financial resources during the annual budgetary procedure; callreminds that every euro spent on monitoring and investigation returns to the EU budget; urges therefore on the Council to review its position and allow for increased financing of human resources for these agencies and offices, enabling them to carry out their important mission in an appropriate and effective way and calls on the Commission to continuously present supporting draft budgets to the budget authorities;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls for the use of the Early Detection and Exclusion System (EDES) to be made compulsory under shared management and create a transparent EU wide blacklist; further notes that the EDES does not distinguish between subsidiaries of larger corporations; calls for the mandatory use of the ArachneRACHNE data mining and data enrichment tool by Member States in order to achieve more transparency on the beneficiaries of CAP funds; is of the opinion that the European investigative bodies shall have full and direct access to the ARACHNE;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Deplores that since 1 January 2021, the Commission has been unable to take any appropriate action to apply the Conditionality Regulation, which entered into force on that day; strongly regrets that after months of debating, Parliament has been forced to take legal action against the Commission under Article 265 TFEU for failure to apply the Conditionality Regulation; is of the opinion that the informal letters sent out to Hungary and Poland are insufficient in terms of applying the regulation; insist again that the Commission should start the application of regulation immediately and initiate procedures against all affected Member States without any discrimination immediately;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Underlines the important role of investigative journalists in the fight against corruption, fraud and illegal activities that negatively impact the EU budget; reiterates in this regard the need to protect investigative journalism from strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs), as well as personal harassment, intimidation and threats to life;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Calls on the Commission to insist on a strict and rigorous implementation of the applicable rules, to use all available sources and to employ efficient management and control systems to address risks of corruption, fraud and conflict of interest, and to better monitor the situation of agriculture paying agencies and their formal and informal independence; is of the view that substantive auditing and controls both on the national and European level are key conditions for the protection of the EU funds; finds it worrying that the new CAP proposal does not strengthen the role of controlling systems at European level;