Changes between two versions
What changed between the draft committee report and the plenary report
From · draft committee report· 6 Jun 2025
on the institutional consequences of the EU enlargement negotiations
To · plenary report· 2 Oct 2025
on the institutional consequences of the EU enlargement negotiations
AI:What changed, in short
The report shifts emphasis from general geopolitical benefits to merit-based accession and economic convergence, adding detailed recitals on GDP growth and convergence.2 It drops calls for intergovernmental cooperation outside the Treaties and instead stresses Treaty-based reforms, including QMV and Article 7 changes.361218 It adds new paragraphs on MFF governance, own resources, and the role of accession countries' parliaments, while removing some previous calls.1416 It rephrases several paragraphs on institutional composition and decision-making, adding references to recent resolutions and Treaty articles.891011 The other changes are formal or wording: minor rephrasing and updates to align with new positions.1457
11 changes of substance · 0 formal · 11 of wording only
Written by AI from the two texts only · read the changes before relying on it · 4 Sept 2026 · Report a problem
+46 added · −23 removed · 12 changed paragraphs, packaging included.
Part 3 of 3: EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
Change 22
Added:EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
Added:The report sets forward Parliament’s position on the reforms of the institutional framework of the Union and a pathway towards the future functioning of an enlarged EU.
Added:The point of departure of the report is to create a more powerful, efficient, competitive and democratic Union based on the principle of FREE POLITICAL choice, deepening EU’s integration in order to benefit for the challenges of the 21st century. The institutional framework of the Union requires modification to be fit to response to challenges of institutional and political nature, and the future enlargements are the catalyst for this change.
Added:The first part of the report shows how the cost of “no reforms” – in the institutional architecture and decision-making for the enlarged Union of more than 30 Member States – is too high and risky. Therefore, the question is not whether to enlarge or not, but rather how to make the Union and its Member States benefit the most from the next enlargement. The challenges are known and well documented, the need for reform rather consensual, which makes this imperative all the more urgent.
Added:The second part of the report explores ways – within and outside the Treaty framework – to help the enlarged Union:
Added:• be more efficient (by reforming the composition and functioning of the main EU institutions: the Parliament, the Council and the Commission)
Added:• act faster in its decision-making (due to lifting of vetoes)
Added:• be more powerful (by creating a European defence system and boost investments)
Added:• and be more democratic and accountable (by further empowering the Parliament as the only directly elected EU institutions, as well as by reforming of the European electoral law).
Added:The last part of the report offers reflections about the possible ways of implementing the pre-enlargement institutional reforms. These consist of the following:
Added:• flexibilities offered by the current Treaties: passerelle clauses, enhanced cooperation, constructive abstentions, permanent structured cooperation and opt-out mechanisms
Added:• targeted key Treaty amendments, in line with proposals for institutional reforms outlined in the Parliament resolution of 22 November 2023 on proposals of the European Parliament for the amendment of the Treaties.
Added:The report provides a timely contribution to the long-awaited Commission’s pre-enlargement policy reviews, to the Council Presidency progress report on the future of Europe as well as to the conclusions of the European Council on the same subject.