On Wednesday, plenary signed off the budgetary management by the European Commission, responsible for the majority of EU expenditure, with 389 votes to 255, with three abstentions. In a series of separate votes, Parliament also granted discharge to all EU bodies except the Council, because of its unwillingness to cooperate with MEPs.
Call for rule of law action
In the resolution accompanying the discharge decision on the Commission (adopted by 418 votes in favour, 207 against and 14 abstentions), MEPs point to ongoing rule of law backsliding, systemic corruption and attacks on fundamental rights in several member states that have a direct impact on the sound management of EU funds. To address these risks, MEPs want the Commission to move beyond monitoring and make full use of the instruments at its disposal, including the full suspension of EU funds.
No all-clear despite lower error rate
Welcoming a reduced error rate (the share of payments that was not made in full compliance with the applicable EU rules) – dropping from 5.6% in 2023 to 3.6% in 2024 – MEPs warn this decline does not necessarily reflect improved financial management. The improvement, they say, could also be traced to factors like the end of COVID-19 emergency spending and a comparatively low level of budgetary implementation in 2024. They also point to the still-worrying error level affecting cohesion spending (5.7%, down from 9.3% in 2023).
Recovery and Resilience Facility: transparency and traceability are missing
In line with previous warnings, MEPs are concerned about the lack of reliable and complete information on final recipients of the Recovery and Resilience Facility’s (RRF) funding. They say the Commission’s interpretation of the concept of “final recipient” contradicts the existing legislation and want the Commission to publish the list of final recipients and contractors across all instruments in a harmonised, machine-readable format. MEPs warn that all appropriate measures within the EP’s power – including legal action – would be considered should the Commission fail to provide access to this information.
Quote
Rapporteur for the Commission discharge Daniel Freund (Greens/EFA, DE) said: „Today, the European Parliament sent a clear and unequivocal message on accountability and the rule of law through its decision on the European Commission’s 2024 budget discharge. On RRF, we made it clear that ongoing transparency failures are unacceptable. The Commission must provide a complete list of final recipients by 31 December – or face legal action. We also secured a significant step forward in addressing rule of law concerns in Slovakia. Parliament calls on the Commission to trigger the rule of law conditionality mechanism to safeguard EU funds from misuse.
Regarding the EU-Qatar aviation agreement, Parliament has expressed deep concern over serious allegations of corruption involving a senior Commission official. The agreement, negotiated under questionable circumstances, must be urgently evaluated – and suspended if necessary. Parliament has also raised serious concerns about Commissioner Varhelyi’s record, including management failures in DG NEAR and the provision of inaccurate information. These decisions underline our firm commitment to upholding EU values and protecting taxpayers’ money.“
Discharge for the Council postponed, again
MEPs postponed the Council’s discharge − as has been the case every year since 2009, due to a lack of cooperation by it with Parliament. Postponed decisions are revisited later in the year, when discharge is either granted or ultimately denied. Voting results of all the discharge decisions will be available online.
Background
The EU’s “discharge procedure” is a key mechanism through which Parliament exercises democratic oversight over the EU budget’s implementation. It serves to hold the European Commission and other EU institutions accountable for the management of EU funds.
On the basis of reports from the Commission and the European Court of Auditors (ECA), the Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control reviews the implementation of the EU budget in a given financial year and holds hearings with the relevant officials. The committee then recommends whether to grant or refuse budgetary “discharge” and provides observations and recommendations in the form of a resolution. The plenary votes to approve or reject these decisions. Refusal of discharge can result in remedial action, stricter financial controls, or political consequences.
Discussion about this post