15 Amendments of Angelika WINZIG related to 2021/2251(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. Reiterates that the RRF was designed during extraordinary circumstances and is not a political instrument, but an unprecedented and unique opportunity for the EU; stresses that this unprecedented measure, which was exceptionally agreed upon, needs to prove a success not only for EU citizens and businesses but also for the EU’s reputation as a whole;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that by mid-February 2022, all Member States but one had submitted national recovery and resilience plans (NRRPs), requesting in total EUR 337.5 billion in grants and EUR 166 billion in loans; welcomes that by mid-March 2022 EUR 54.05 billion in grants and EUR 19.91 billion in loans were disbursed1a; _________________ 1a European Commission, retrieved 16/03/2022, https://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/rec overy-and-resilience- scoreboard/disbursements.html?lang=en.
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Recalls that the acceptance rate of loans by the Member States is so far and will remain low for the foreseeable future; stresses the need for an independent energy supply for the EU and corresponding investments in cross- border networks, interconnectors and hydrogen projects; calls on the Commission to make the full amount of loans available for Member States interested in investing into cross-border projects that are focused on energy- independence and transforming the energy-grid in the EU; calls on the Commission for a proposal on the revision of the Recovery and Resilience Facility Regulation to amend Art 14.5 of the RRF Regulation to allow Member States who are interested to request a loan higher than 6,8% GNI; calls on the Council to support the Commission in putting forward the proposal;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is concerned about the fact that all Member States have received a B-rating for the criteria evaluating whether the estimated total costs of the NRRPs are reasonable; calls on the Commission to develop criteria which enable evaluations across the entire spectrum available in the future;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to report on the implementation of the milestones pertaining to the missing elements in the plans on the structures in place to monitor, implement and control the funds allocated and the extent to which these missing elements have affected the timely absorption of the funds; stresses that swift implementation of NRRPs is a prerequisite not only for economic recovery but also to stimulate growth and therefore achieve its intended purpose;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Observes, that by the nature of the instruments, the control focuses on the achievement of results instead of verifications of costs; notes that this approach can simplify the implementation and contribute to the achievement of the desired outcome; nevertheless, is worried that it also makes the detection of abuse of EU funds more difficult;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3 b. Notes that democratic control and parliamentary scrutiny over the implementation of the RRF is only possible with the full involvement of Parliament and the consideration of all its recommendations in all stages, and highlights that the European Parliament will continue to scrutinise the implementation of the RRF; recalls that Article 25 of the RRF Regulation requests the Commission to transmit relevant documents and information simultaneously and on equal terms to the European Parliament and to the Council; notes that, despite the slow start of the proper process of a document flow, appropriate communication procedures were put in practice;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard that provides an overview of the progress made in the implementation of the NRRPs and thereby fosters the transparency, public scrutiny and accountability of the Facility; reiterates the importance of the Commission undertaking a continuous, including ex-post, monitoring of the Facility's expenditure; believes that full transparency is needed from the Member States, regarding implementation and management data, in order to analyse the results of the Facility and identify possible shortcomings;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that irregularities may lead to the reduction of financial contributions or the recovery of funds by the Commission; calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to the evaluation of the fulfilment of Country Specific Recommendations (CSRs) in the NRRPs in the disbursement phase of the Facility and to consider refraining from making payments if agreed or already completed milestones and targets related to challenges in the relevant CSRs are not adequately met; furthermore calls on the Commission to make full use of the provisions of the Regulation, allowing it to recover grants or ask for early repayment of loans in case of breach of the obligations of Member States under the financing agreements, including in relation to the implementation of CSRs;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses thatCalls on the Commission, the European Anti-Fraud Office ( to ensure that adequate control capacities are in place and that the Commission, OLAF), the Court of Auditors and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) maywhere applicable the EPPO are granted full access by Member States to information to exerciset their rights laid down in Article 129(1) of the Financial Regulation with regard to the Facility; asks the Commission to provide information about the measures ensuring the early detection of the abuse of EUaccording to the Financial Regulation and the RRF Regulation; Calls on the Court of Auditors, OLAF and EPPO to make full use of their role under the RRF Regulation and scrutinise thoroughly all RRF spending, in order to prevent, detect, correct and investigate fraud, corruption, conflict of interests and where applicable to impose administrative penalties, as well as to avoid double fundsing;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes with satisfaction from the Commission’s assessments of NRRPs that Member States’ prevention of double funding, arrangements to correct serious irregularities and recovery of funds are in general quite well developed; underlines that sufficient resources and capacities need to be directed towards the thorough scrutiny of the plans and the fulfilment of the milestones and targets by all institutions including identifying synergies to achieve the best possible outcome; warns against transforming this evaluation into a mere box-ticking exercise;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to encourage Member States to use ARACHNE and, in the meantime, to make sure that the alternative measures to risk- score the entities and individuals involved in implementation of the Facility are equivalent to ARACHNE; calls on the Commission to make sure that, in addition to the information on the beneficiaries of the programme, data on beneficial owners is also collected by the Member States; calls on all Member States to collect and record data on final recipients and beneficiaries of Union funding in an electronic standardised and interoperable format and to use the single datamining tool provided by the Commission; furthermore, reiterates the importance of digitalising all reporting, monitoring and audit;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Reminds the Commission that the Facility is subject to the Rule of Law conditionality regime and calls on refraining from approving NRRPs in case of concerns regarding the observance of rule of law and the sound financial management of EU funds, prevention, detection and fight against fraud, conflict of interests and corruption; furthermore, recalls that the observance of rule of law and the sound financial management of EU funds are to be evaluated continuously throughout the lifecycle of the Facility and that the Commission shall refrain to disburse funding and, where applicable, recover funds, in case such conditions are no longer fulfilled;
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Reaffirms Parliament’s role in scrutinising the implementation of the Facility, also through the annual discharge procedure.; Reminds that in the framework of the discharge procedure to the Commission, in accordance with Article 319 TFEU, the Facility shall be subject to reporting under the integrated financial and accountability reporting referred to in Article 247 of the Financial Regulation, and, in particular, separately in the Annual Management and Performance Report;
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Reaffirms Parliament’s role in scrutinising the implementation of the Facility, also through the annual discharge procedure.; notes that the involvement of the European Parliament and Council is crucial to ensure the democratic oversight; signals that the discharge can be postponed if the cooperation with both Institutions is hampered and transparent access to the documents is denied or delayed by the Commission;