What changed between the draft committee report and the plenary report

Changed:2. Shares the Commission’s view that fraud prevention and detection and the monitoring of the return mechanisms for misappropriated funds must rely on further digitalisation and the use of cutting-edge technology based on machine learning in order to increase the accessibilityaccessibility, andinteroperability, use and management of data;data relating to potential fraud; points out that efficient anti-fraud governance and effective result-oriented processes and adequately equipped structures must be in place to ensure cooperation and coordination between all the components of the anti-fraud architecture and the relevant actors; believes that, to this end, the necessary digital and procedural knowledge must be provided to the officials responsible for the various components of the anti-fraud architecture;

Added:3. Recalls that in order to ensure a high level of protection to the EU's financial interests, solid cooperation between the authorities conducting administrative investigations and those conducting criminal investigations at both EU and Member State levels is essential;

Changed:4.5. Appreciates the improved overall coherence of the anti-fraud legislation across the EU, following the actions undertaken by Member States to transpose the EU rules into national systems correctly; observesexpresses concerns that, in some respects, the situation is still sub-optimal, in particular as regards the detection and reporting of suspected fraud and irregularities and their follow-up, for which the differences between Member States are still very notable;

Added:6. Stresses that prevention and communication are key to combat fraud and corruption, and that the Commission should support the Member States in implementing effective measures in these areas;

Changed:6.8. Regrets the fact that in many Member States national authorities do not always follow up on the Commission’s and OLAF’s recommendations, report exhaustively or adopt acknowledged good practices in a timely manner; points out that in many Member States, the percentage of irregularities that are still classified as suspected fraud many years after they were initially reported is extremely high, even in relation to cases indicated as closed; believes that such situations might suggest a lack of adequate follow-up, insufficient or inadequately trained resources, communication gaps or inefficient reporting channels, weak cooperation and coordination, or even the unjustified postponement of reclassifying irregularities as fraudulent in order to adjust the statistical reporting;

Removed:7. Notes that the number of cases of fraud and irregularities reported by the competent EU and national authorities – 12 455 in total – slightly increased in 2022 compared to 2021; observes that the affected financing related to these cases in 2022 decreased to EUR 1.77 billion (from EUR 3.24 in 2021);

Added:9. Highlights that in such cases, the Commission should support the Member States in the debureaucratisation of the fraud detection, follow-up and reporting process;

Added:10. Suggests that both the EU and national authorities should enhance cooperation and promote greater utilisation of digital tools to combat fraud;

Added:11. Notes that the number of cases of fraud and irregularities reported by the competent EU and national authorities – 12 455 in total – slightly increased in 2022 compared to 2021; observes that the affected financing related to these cases in 2022 decreased to EUR 1.77 billion (from EUR 2.05 billion in 2021); believes that these numbers are still extremely high and represent a significant loss for the EU budget;

Removed:9. Believes that involvement of civil society and the private sector in the efforts to combat fraud would enhance prevention and detection, and that this implies support to confidential channels and/or whistleblowers and investigative journalists, and that the latter can be effective insofar as access is given to information on projects, beneficiaries and payments;

Added:13. Believes that involvement of civil society in tackling fraud is crucial to enhance prevention and detection, and that this implies support to investigative journalism which can be effective insofar as it is given easy and adequate access to information on projects, beneficiaries and payments; stresses, in particular, the important role played by the media and investigative journalists in the fight against corruption; reiterates that enhanced and consistent levels of protection for journalists and whistleblowers across the Union helps to counter the spread of a subculture of impunity, silence and conspiracy; notes, having regard to media pluralism and media freedom, that the most recent results of the Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM 2022) registered a slight deterioration of the indicator relating to the protection of journalists and that news media concentration retains a very high risk level across the continent; takes the view that safeguarding the media from political pressure and influence, as well as guaranteeing the right of access to information held by public authorities, are essential to protect the media’s independence, its role of the watchdog of democracy and the sound management of resources;

Changed:10.14. Welcomes the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 3 May 2023 on the fight against corruption (JOIN(2023)0012), acknowledging the seriousness of corruption, as it undermines the efficiency of public spending, the effectiveness of the single market and the sustainability of economic growth; points out that the fight against corruption is one of the most important commitments of the Union, on a par with transparency and integrity; stresses that the phenomenon of nepotism with regard to state-owned entities and procurement for EU funds also poses a great risk to sound management and the EU’s financial interests; welcomes, therefore, the new proposal for a directive on combating corruption;

Removed:12. Maintains that the lack of efficient transposition of national legislation in many Member States offers opportunities to organised crime for a number of illegal cross-border activities in areas affecting the Union’s financial interests; reiterates, therefore, its previous calls for the revision of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA on the fight against organised crime;

Added:16. Highlights the importance of an impact assessment which evaluates the economic and social impact of fraud on the EU’s financial interests and on its citizens; calls for an analysis of how the resources allocated for fraud prevention compare to the potential losses prevented;

Removed:13. Observes that the EU Strategy to tackle Organised Crime 2021-2025 aims to set out the tools and measures to disrupt the business models and structures of criminal organisations across borders, both online and offline; calls on the Member States to contribute on the Commission’s efforts and to establish regional cooperation networks for sharing information on cases and strategies to combat fraud perpetrated by organised criminals; recalls, in this regard, the importance of the proposed new Directive on Asset Recovery and Confiscation whose effective implementation would provide authorities with better tools to deprive organised crime groups of the financial means to carry out further criminal activities;

Added:17. Maintains that the lack of efficient transposition of national legislation in many Member States and the lack of harmonisation of national legislation offer opportunities to organised crime for a number of illegal cross-border activities in areas affecting the Union’s financial interests; reiterates, therefore, its previous calls for the revision of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA on the fight against organised crime and for the introduction of a new common definition of organised crime, taking into account, in particular, the use of corruption, violence, threats or intimidation to obtain control of economic activities or procurement;

Removed:16. Welcomes the fact that the Commission has included a specific section on anti-corruption in its report on the rule of law in order to provide an in-depth comparative analysis of the approaches, procedures and tools used by the Member States in their fight against corruption and to help to assess which areas are most at risk;

Added:21. Is concerned about the reports that OLAF’s investigation into corruption and conflicts of interest concerning Member of the European Parliament has been obstructed by the lack of access to their offices and work devices; calls on its President to grant OLAF access to the premises and all of the necessary information required for the sake of investigations;

Removed:17. Observes that, via IMS, in the period 2018-2022, 375 cases related to conflicts of interest were reported, which is often detected in environments similar to those where corrupt practices occur; underlines that the large majority of reported cases of conflicts of interest are linked to the implementation of cohesion policies (86 % compared to 9 % for agriculture and 5 % for pre-accession), involving almost EUR 117 million overall for this period; underlines that the reported conflicts of interest mainly point to relations between recipients of the funds and their contractors and sub-contractors, while only 7 % of cases refer to conflicts of interest during the stage of awarding and/or evaluating projects, thereby involving members of evaluation committees;

Added:22. Points out that the EPPO has an ongoing investigation into the acquisition of COVID-19 vaccines by the Commission;

Changed:20.33. Observes that, in 2022, the overall number of fraudulent and not fraudulent irregularities related to Traditional Own Resources (TOR) (4 661) was 7.6 % higher compared to the five-year average (2018-2022); notes with concern that the overall amounts affected by such irregularities, as estimated and established by Member States, also noticeably increased (by 47 %, reaching EUR 783 million); highlights, on the same issue, that the overall recovery rate in 2022 for both fraudulent and non-fraudulent cases was only 48 % (compared with 54 % in 2021) and that the figure for fraudulent cases was only 25 %, which was distributed across Member States very heterogeneously; asks the Commission to put greater efforts into the swift recovery of abused funds;

Added:36. Welcomes OLAF’s role in detecting and investigating fraud against the EU’s TOR; takes note of a slight decrease in the number of open investigations in the field of own resources in 2022 and calls on the Commission to ensure that OLAF is provided with adequate resources to fully and effectively exercise its mandate;

Added:41. Underlines that effective cooperation between OLAF and the EPPO is a prerequisite for the sound management and protection of the financial interests of the EU budget, both on the expenditure and the revenue side; considers, in this context, that such strengthened cooperation can lead, on the revenue side, to an increase in the collection of revenue to the EU budget, thereby decreasing the GNI-based contribution of Member States, and on the expenditure side, to ensure that taxpayers’ money is adequately spent;

Added:42. Stresses the importance that OLAF and the EPPO should maintain operational independence;

Added:43. Welcomes the statement of the President of the Commission Ursula von der Leyen that the EU needs to safeguard money being spent according to the purpose intended for it and in line with the rule of law principles, and to ensure that funds are protected;

Changed:28.45. Remarks that even if in 2022 the fraudulent irregularities reported under support to agriculture increased in comparison with 2021, the detection rates for rural development were noticeably higher than for support to agriculture; notes that within support to agriculture, the highest level of fraud was reported forby marketthe measuresMember andStates thatfor market measures; several complex cases related to the promotion of agricultural products were also investigated by OLAF;

Changed:29.46. Regrets that during the period 2018-2022, in both rural development and direct payments, the contributions to the detection of fraudulent cases provided by risk analysis, whistleblowers, informants and investigative journalists has been very limited; is also concerned about the length of the administrative procedures opened to deal with the fraudulent cases reported, which, on average and during 2014-2022, required nearly four years from the start of the irregularity to arrive at a suspicion of fraudulent activity, and nearly three more years to close the case after reporting it to the Commission; points out that, for cohesion, it took about a year and a half to arrive at a suspicion that a fraudulent irregularity had been committed and more than two years to close the fraudulent case after reporting it to the Commission; asks the Commission to provide recommendations and to follow-up more frequently with the Member States’ authorities to reduce the length of administrative procedures;

Removed:34. Notes that, in 2022, the recovery items registered for irregularities were 770 (compared to 879 in 2021), of which 37 were for fraudulent cases (compared to 54 reported as fraudulent in 2021) amounting to EUR 61.28 million (of which EUR 5.67 million were for fraud, compared to EUR 7.04 million in 2021);

Added:51. Notes with concern the findings of the ECA 2022 annual report on the implementation of the EU budget for the 2022 financial year, which show that despite improvements, audit authorities continue to address the risk of fraud insufficiently, and that Member State authorities do not report suspected fraud cases in the IMS as required; calls on these issues to be urgently addressed by the Commission;

Added:52. Notes that, in 2022, the recovery items registered for irregularities in direct management were 770 (compared to 879 in 2021), of which 37 were for fraudulent cases (compared to 54 reported as fraudulent in 2021) amounting to EUR 61.28 million (of which EUR 5.67 million were for fraud, compared to EUR 7.04 million in 2021);

Changed:36.54. NotesIs concerned that, between 2018 and 2022, average recovery remainslevels atwere positivestill levels,low, with an average recovery rate of 56 % (resulting from 34 % for ‘irregularities reported as fraudulent’ and 59 % for ‘irregularities not reported as fraudulent’); asks the Commission to put greater efforts into the swift recovery of abused funds;

Added:55. Reiterates once more its call on the Commission to submit a legislative proposal on mutual administrative assistance in the areas of EU funds spending that do not provide for this practice so far, in order to ensure a cross-cutting approach to the protection of the Union’s financial interests;

Changed:37.56. IsRecalls awarethat, thatowing to the implementationspecific design of the RRFRRF, isMember reachingStates itstogether peakwith andthe Commission should ensure that the regulation governingfinancial itsinterests deploymentof requiresthe MemberUnion Statesare toeffectively putprotected, in placeline effectivewith andtheir efficientrespective controlresponsibilities; systems,underlines withthat athe viewMember toStates’ protectingcontrol thesystems Union’smust financialensure intereststhat andRRF-funded ensuringinvestment complianceprojects comply with EU and national rules; pointsrecalls outthat that,the inCommission particular,and the counteringMember ofStates fraud,must corruption,prevent conflictsany ofaccountability interestgap (definedat asEU ‘seriouslevel irregularities’)and, andif doublenecessary, fundingput shouldin receiveplace appropriateadditional resourcessafeguards andto attention;address this issue, in line with the relevant recommendations of the ECA;

Added:57. Is aware that the implementation of the RRF is reaching its peak and that the regulation governing its deployment requires Member States to put in place effective and efficient control systems, with a view to protecting the Union’s financial interests and ensuring compliance with EU and national rules;

Removed:39. Remarks that the Commission’s audit work has confirmed variations in the internal control systems across the implementing and coordinating bodies, identifying good practices in some of the procedures in place to verify and prevent fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest and double funding;

Added:59. Is concerned that the ECA identified weaknesses in the Member States’ reporting and control systems, some of which were not fully functional at the presentation of the recovery plans, posing a risk to the regularity of RRF expenditure and to the protection of the EU’s financial interests leading to the adoption of ‘control milestones’;

Removed:40. Reiterates that the effective prevention, detection and investigation of illegal activities threatening the implementation of the NGEU depend on the effective collection and sharing of data, including the rapid handling of access requests from investigative services within a Member State, as well as from other countries or at EU level, by OLAF and the EPPO to whom access is to be granted;

Added:60. Remarks that the Commission’s audit work has also confirmed variations in the internal control systems across the implementing and coordinating bodies, identifying good practices in some of the procedures in place to verify and prevent fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest and double funding; invites the Member States to share their best procedures in order to facilitate more coordinated and fraud-proof processing of the funds;

Changed:42.68. Welcomes the Ombudsman’s strategic initiative, launched in February 2022, conducted to examine the transparency of the national recovery and resilience plans, public information and communication strategies on the RRF, and on how the funds are supervised; emphasises the importance of this initiative, given that the ECA annual report for 2022 contained a higher estimated level of error for that year; welcomes Ombudsman’s efforts to improve transparency standards in the RRF;

Added:69. Recalls the ‘NextGenerationEU - Law Enforcement Forum’ (NGEU-LEF), a joint initiative co-led by Europol and Italy, bringing together Europol, the EPPO, OLAF, Eurojust, the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training and national authorities by providing a forum for intelligence sharing and the coordination of operations to tackle the infiltration of organised crime into the legal economy, and to protect the NGEU stimulus package, with a specific focus on corruption, tax evasion, embezzlement and money laundering; welcomes the fact that the NGEU-LEF initiative won the European Ombudsman Award for Good Administration 2023 in the category ‘most popular with the public’;

Added:70. Is concerned that many issues still exist, mainly because of a lack of sufficient supervision by coordinating bodies, incomplete anti-fraud strategies, missing elements in fraud risk assessments, a need for improvement of the ex ante controls aimed at preventing conflicts of interest, low participation in training activities intended to raise awareness of fraud, and deficiencies in the reporting of irregularities to OLAF for possible investigation; asks the Commission to inform Parliament about the issues identified, the recommendations addressed to the Member States and the follow-up given to resolve the issues;

Added:71. Highlights that enhanced transparency plays a vital role in exposing fraudulent schemes and discouraging fraudulent actions; calls on new transparency initiatives and policies introduced to promote accountability;

Changed:44.73. Is aware that the efforts made by the Commission and other implementing bodies to digitalise the EU budget have to overcome many obstacles in order to enhance compatibility between the IT systems used by the many entities involved; appreciates, in this regard, the consistency of the communication to the Commission of 30 June 2022 entitled ‘European Commission digital strategy – Next generation digital Commission’ (C(2022)4388); points out that digitalisation has been a strategic priority of the Commission for many years; believes that streamlining the management of EU funds requires further simplification of the IT landscape and reiterates that interoperability should be mainstreamed in EU policies in order to enhance compatibility between the IT systems used by the many entities involved;

Added:74. Highlights the necessity of enhancing the level of interoperability of data systems and the harmonisation of reporting, monitoring and auditing in the EU; reiterates, to this end, its call on the Commission to harmonise definitions in order to obtain comparable data across the EU;

Removed:46. Notes that among the available options, Arachne was by far the most widely-used IT system (by 21 Member States), in support of the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) and the RRF; observes that many Member States used their own dedicated anti-fraud IT tools, often in conjunction with EU tools, although those tools were rarely interoperable;

Added:76. Reiterates its strong support for the obligatory use of the single integrated IT system for data-mining and risk-scoring, Arachne, envisaged by the Financial Regulation recast, which should ensure better protection of the Union’s financial interests, alongside and complementing the IT tools developed at national level by the Member States;

Removed:47. Reiterates its support for the single integrated IT system for data-mining and risk-scoring envisaged by the Financial Regulation recast, which should ensure better protection of the Union’s financial interests;

Added:77. Notes that among the available options, Arachne was by far the most widely-used IT system (by 21 Member States), in support of the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) and the RRF; observes with concern that many Member States used their own dedicated anti-fraud IT tools, often in conjunction with EU tools, although both types of tools were rarely interoperable and therefore hampered the detection and reporting of fraud to the Commission;

Changed:49.85. Welcomes the actions launched by the Commission in 2022 to enhance the level of protection of the EU’s financial interests;interests but calls for further vigilance and complementary actions in this field;

Added:86. Recalls its previous resolutions underlining that countering fraud against the EU budget can only be effective if approached holistically, covering all the stages of the anti-fraud cycle and drawing on a multitude of stakeholders, processes and actions; points out that the four stages of this cycle (prevention; detection; investigation and prosecution; recovery and sanction) require risk analyses, reporting processes and cooperation to be pursued by harmonised interventions at legislative, administrative, organisational and operational levels; recalls the observation by the ECA in its Special report on the EU’s financial landscape pointing out that the complexity of the galaxy of funds and instruments complementing the EU budget brings an increasing risk of serious gaps in the system of audit and control and a lack of accountability; believes that this complexity requires an equally comprehensive and focused approach for the protection of the financial interests involved, in order to tackle irregularities and fraud which could occur by taking advantage of the overall opacity of the financial landscape; recalls that the current fragmentation of the accessible data calls for standardised measures to collect, compare and aggregate information and figures, in particular on the final recipients and beneficiaries of Union funding, for the purposes of audit and control, including investigations;

Changed:54.91. RemarksRegrets the fact that the participation of Member States in the EPPO is not obligatory; remarks that, in 2022, only 22 Member States already participated in the EPPO, with the same five countries as in 2021 abstaining; insists that Member States which havedo not yet participated,participate, must do so without delay; calls on the Commission to incentivise participation in the EPPO through positive measures;

Changed:56.93. Calls on the Commission to engage in a constructive dialogue with the EPPO, with a view to strengthening the Office’s capacity to tackle the constantly increasing challenges in the anti-fraud landscape;landscape, including, where appropriate, by addressing the shortcomings identified in the EPPO Regulation; stresses, at the same time, the need to ensure the fundamental principle and rules laid out in the EPPO Regulation, namely that the office must be independent and must be granted an autonomous budget in order to act in the interests of the Union as a whole and in line with the Conditionality Regulation;

Added:94. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the efficiency and efficacy of OLAF’s work in corruption and fraud detection is maintained and that, therefore, the reduction of OLAF’s annual budget envisaged for full-time employees must be considered in line with the true business needs of OLAF, as reflected in its annual report;

Removed:63. Observes that in 2022 the exclusion proceedings launched by the EIB following IG/IN investigations resulted in the exclusion of four economic operators from participating in any EIB-financed projects or activities; calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of making more uniform the exclusion criteria used by the EIB and the EIF in respect of those used in the Early Detection and Exclusion System (EDES), considering that the Financial and Administrative Framework Agreements with the EIB and the EIF cover only five of the seven EDES exclusion situations;

Added:101. Stresses the added value that EU bodies bring to the protection of the financial interests of the Union and the fight against fraud, especially when it comes to cross-border crime, as shown by the operational results from the EPPO and OLAF also in 2022; reiterates its call to ensure that all relevant EU actors involved in the fight against fraud have adequate resources and, in this regard, reminds the Commission and the Council that every euro spent on investigation and anti-fraud actions returns to the EU budget;

Added:102. Observes that in 2022 the exclusion proceedings launched by the EIB following IG/IN investigations resulted in the exclusion of four economic operators from participating in any EIB-financed projects or activities; calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of making more uniform the exclusion criteria used by the EIB and the EIF in respect of those used in the EDES, considering that the Financial and Administrative Framework Agreements with the EIB and the EIF cover only five of the seven EDES exclusion situations;

Added:105. Highlights the significant differences between Member States that can still be seen in the detection, reporting and follow-up of suspected fraud; encourages, therefore, the Member States to take a proactive approach to protecting the Union’s financial interests, to enhance the exchange of information between their national authorities and with EU bodies and agencies, also in order to identify and address emerging risks and fraud trends in a timely manner;

Changed:67.107. Remarks that the NAFS need to be adopted or updated by as many Member States,States as possible, and reiterates that the need for such revisions stems from the new anti-fraud landscape, with the EPPO now fully operational, and from the opportunity to reflectidentify new significant risks in the increasingly complex fraud landscape;

Changed:68.108. Reiterates its appreciation for the Commission’s encouragement to Member States to adopt NAFS, which has so far resulted in an increase in the number of NAFS adopted;adopted, whereby 15 Member States had adopted NAFS by the end of 2022, nine of which were cross-cutting and therefore covered the EU’s financial interests fully;

Changed:69.109. Notes with concern that, by the end of 2022, only three Member States (Finland, Ireland and Poland) still indicated that they had not adopted any strategy for protecting the EU’s financial interestsinterests; andnotes that five Member States (Belgium, Spain, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Romania) indicated that they were in the process of establishing one,one; whileurges the other Member States haveto alternativeadopt strategiesa atNAFS national,to regionalshow orthat sectoralthey leveltake or,the inprotection someof cases,EU combinefunds them;seriously;

Changed:72.112. Takes note of the Council decision of 16 December 2022 to suspend the disbursement of EUR 6.3 billion of EU funds to Hungary; expects the Commission and the Council to lift the adopted measures only where evidence is collected that the remedial measures adopted by the Hungarian Government have proven effective in practice and, in particular, that no regression has been detected on already adopted measures; regrets that thus far the Hungarian Government has shown little willingness to fulfil the requirements of the conditionality mechanism; reiterates, however, its opinion that the 17 measures alone, as negotiated by the Commission and the Hungarian Government, are not sufficient to address the existing systemic risk to the EU’s financial interests and regrets that the Commission did not request sufficient substantial changes and safeguards to restore the independence of the judiciary and reduce the level of corruption; is very concerned about the media reports affirming that the Commission is planning to lift the suspension measures in Hungary in exchange for the government’s endorsement of aid for Ukraine; believes that the Commission should never give in to blackmail, particularly when it endangers the protection of the EU’s financial interests;

Changed:73.113. CallsRegrets that the Commission is not transparent enough about the relevant developments; calls, therefore, on the Commission to inform Parliament and the Council swiftly and regularly aboutof anythe relevantongoing developmentsnegotiations and reminds the Commission, in particular, of its legal obligations set out in Article 25(2) of the RRF Regulation and Article 8 of the Conditionality Regulation;

Changed:74.114. Is concerned by the findings of the Third Rule of Law Report on the critical situation in Poland, in particular as regards the serious shortcomings in the judiciary and the media sector; recalls that Poland’s non-compliance with the rulings of the Court of Justice of the European UnionCJEU has resulted in the payment of EUR 360 million in fines since 2021 and strongly encourages the Commission to keep withholdingrelease paymentsfunds from the RRF untilonly once all the conditions for a fullmilestones integrationrelating ofto the rule of law have been fullyfulfilled satisfied;in their entirety;

Added:115. Calls on the Commission to update the fraud reporting system for funds spent in non-EU countries; notes that the new system should take into account the specific issues that the EU faces when spending money outside EU territory;

Added:117. Reiterates that although the EU currently stands as an observer within GRECO, it is strongly advised that it become a fully operating member, therefore i) participating in the monitoring of the implementation of widely recognised international law and standards; ii) horizontally communicating with other GRECO members on anti-fraud policies and tools; iii) sharing experiences at international level to help with the recognition of potential deficiencies of the EU’s internal mechanisms to identify corruption; and iv) optimally combat fraud by the timely activation of prevention and detection measures; requests the Council to provide a clear position on the EU joining GRECO, clarifying if there is any specific opposition to this and, if so, by which Member State;

Changed:77.119. Believes that funds under the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe (NDICI-Global Europe) for assistance in non-EU countries and the resources allocated for Europe’s response to the war in Ukraine are not adequately monitored and controlled; calls on the Commission to put appropriate measures in place, including the carrying out of more thorough checks, to ensure that EU funds sent to neighbouring countries end up benefiting those that are most in need;

Added:120. Underlines that in the context of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, it is envisaged that the EU budget will contribute significantly to the proposals for longer-term structural solutions to Ukraine’s funding needs; stresses, in this context, the need to protect the rule of law and the financial interests of the Union and to prevent, detect and correct fraud, corruption, conflicts of interest and irregularities in the use of Union funds in Ukraine, which should be based on the principles of transparency and accountability; considers that any related financing instruments should contain stringent provisions and safeguards in order to attain these objectives;

Removed:79. Reaffirms its strong belief that only by strengthening the EU anti-fraud architecture can the protection of the EU’s financial interests be effectively and efficiently pursued and enhanced, overcoming the inherent limits of the national systems which are not sufficient to counter the increasingly transnational attacks against the Union’s financial interests;

Added:122. Recommends the suspension of budgetary support in non-EU countries, including candidate countries, where the authorities manifestly fail to take genuine action against widespread corruption, while ensuring that the assistance reaches the civil population through alternative channels; calls for greater priority to be given to the fight against corruption in pre-accession negotiations, with a focus on capacity building, such as via specialised anti-corruption bodies; calls on the Commission to send clear signals to candidate countries that a backlash against rule of law standards will jeopardise or delay accession to the EU; regrets the fact that, according to ECA Special report No 01/2022, EUR 700 million in financial support for the improvement of the rule of law in the Western Balkans provided by the EU between 2014 and 2020 had little impact on fundamental reforms;

Added:123. Calls for international collaboration with international organisations and neighbouring countries in preventing cross-border fraud; reiterates the importance of the exchange of best practices in this context;

Added:124. Reaffirms its strong belief that only by strengthening the EU anti-fraud architecture can the protection of the EU’s financial interests be effectively and efficiently pursued and enhanced, by encouraging interoperability and adjustment to a unified anti-fraud strategy framework for the Member States within the EU opting for more inflows in terms of quantitative and qualitative data analysis, so as to overcome the inherent limits of the national systems which are not sufficient to counter the increasingly transnational attacks against the Union’s financial interests;

Added:Under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (Art 325(5)), the Commission is required to produce an Annual Report on the Protection of the EU’s Financial Interests (known as PIF Report), detailing the measures taken at European and national level to counter fraud affecting the EU budget. The report is based on information reported by the Member States, the analysis of this information allows assessing which areas are most at risk, thereby helping to better target action at both EU and national level for protecting the financial interests of the Union.

Added:The European Parliament pays particular attention to the results reported in the PIF Report and to the analysis carried out, on this basis, by the Commission. Moreover, with the establishment of the Anti-Fraud Architecture, the European Parliament’s INI Report on the protection of the Union's financial interests has become more comprehensive and it includes more data and information, originating also from the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and from OLAF Supervisory Committee Annual Reports, from the European Public Prosecutor's Office Annual Report, from Europol and the other components of the Anti-Fraud Architecture, encompassing the implementing actions of the Conditionality Regulation, the transposition of the Directives on Anti-Money Laundering and Whistleblowers, the Strategy to counter Organised Crime and the dedicated provisions of the Financial Regulation.

Added:The INI Report reaffirms that only by strengthening the EU Anti-Fraud Architecture can the protection of the EU’s financial interests be effectively and efficiently pursued, overcoming the national systems’ inherent limits which are not sufficient to counter the increasingly transnational aggressions to the Union’s financial interests. The Rapporteur stresses that fraud prevention and detection must rely on fraud risk analysis and on further digitalisation and interoperability of databases, and that efficient anti-fraud governance and effective result-oriented processes implemented by adequately equipped structures must be in place, to ensure cooperation and coordination among all the components of the anti-fraud architecture.