On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Global Europe for the period 2028 to 2034

I. whereas the so-called ‘steering mechanism’ can in no way be a substitute for Parliament’s legislative and budgetary powers and cannot be conceived without a sound governance architecture that ensures the exercise of such powers;

J. whereas robust mechanisms for accountability, transparency, oversight and financial supervision are required to ensure the proper use and traceability of EU funds in third countries;

K. whereas, pursuant to Article 322 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, on 12 March 2026, the Court of Auditors published its opinion 07/2026 concerning the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Global Europe, which included a series of recommendations for the legislators to consider;

1.Considers that the programme envelope should be increased from EUR 200 309 000 000 to EUR 225 000 000 000 in current prices (EUR 198 627 925 000 in 2025 constant prices) to enable the EU to live up to its role as a global actor and reliable partner in an increasingly complex geopolitical environment; expresses concern, however, that the level of funding remains insufficient given the scale of global challenges;

2.Stresses that continued financial support for Ukraine is vital for it to defend itself against Russian aggression, advance on its EU accession path and support recovery and reconstruction; calls for support for Ukraine to remain coherent, transparent and effective while clearly distinguishing between pre-accession assistance and reconstruction needs; welcomes the Ukraine Support Loan; expresses concern, however, that the award of a borrowing cost subsidy to Ukraine could significantly reduce amounts available for other types of support, especially as this was not taken into consideration when the Commission made the initial proposal; insists, therefore, that debt service costs must be placed entirely over and above the multiannual financial framework (MFF) ceilings and outside of the funding already provided for under the Ukraine Reserve;

3.Regrets the limited and indicative budgetary breakdown; considers that simplification and flexibility must not come at the expense of transparency and oversight by the budgetary authority, as both are required in order to ensure transparent and regular monitoring; recommends, therefore, setting guaranteed minimum allocations for essential policy objectives such as humanitarian aid, development, human development, including global health and education, as well as pre-accession support; stresses the need to introduce dedicated thematic pillars, in particular for human rights and democracy, civil society organisations, stability and peace, as well as a spending target for least developed countries;

4.Calls for grants to be used to foster human development, as well as for climate and biodiversity and actions aimed at advancing mitigation of and adaptation to climate change; recalls that grants are more appropriate than guarantees in the context of fragile countries and least developed countries; underlines that no borrowing cost subsidies should count towards the 90 % Official Development Assistance (ODA) target;

5.Stresses the need for a more detailed budgetary nomenclature to strengthen control by the budgetary authority over the actual allocation of funds; recommends that the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Development amend the proposal to include an annex defining the nomenclature of the programme; insists that the budgetary nomenclature forms an integral part of Parliament’s negotiating position and must be discussed in interinstitutional negotiations; considers, in this regard, that the revised Legislative Financial and Digital Statement must be part of the final political agreement; recalls that the budgetary nomenclature must comply with Article 47(2) of the Financial Regulation, which provides that ‘each title shall correspond to a policy area and each chapter, as a rule, to a programme or an activity’, in line with the principles of specification, sound financial management and transparency; recommends, therefore, the creation of dedicated thematic and country-specific budget lines across Global Europe pillars, in particular for the enlargement and pre-accession countries, the Eastern Neighbourhood, the Middle East and Northern Africa; is strongly opposed to the creation of EU trust funds, which operate outside of the EU budget and evade parliamentary oversight;

6.Welcomes that any mobilisation of the emerging challenges and priorities cushion, as well as transfers between pillars exceeding 10 % of the annual appropriations require the approval of the budgetary authority; insists that, before announcing any financial pledges in support of third countries, Parliament must be meaningfully consulted and provided with information on budgetary implications, and that its views be fully taken into account; for any such case, insists that the Commission must provide detailed and comprehensive information, including information on the source of financing for financial commitments, on whether current resources are being redirected or new resources are to be mobilised, including when loans are involved, or on any use of flexibilities, cushions or otherwise unallocated amounts;

7.Considers that financial instruments must be aligned with the EU’s strategic interests and priorities; insists that budgetary guarantees, blending and loans are complementary instruments, and should not be pursued at the expense of other types of support, especially in highly fragile contexts, fully taking into account the budgetary efficiency and the effectiveness of the selected instrument, in particular the relevant financing constraints; recommends, therefore, setting a ceiling for blended finance operations, as well as conducting ex ante assessments on the choice of financing methods while stressing the need for parliamentary involvement and oversight throughout the whole process; underlines that any investment operations must respect the additionality principle, and that any private entity involved in investment operations must comply with the highest standards of due diligence, transparency and accountability; insists that the provision that allows for the management of budgetary guarantees to be entrusted to private entities must only be used where necessary and duly justified; considers it essential to ensure dedicated funding for technical assistance and advisory support;

8.Stresses that the budgetary implications of borrowing and lending operations must be clearly identified, transparently presented to the budgetary authority and carefully monitored; underlines, in particular, that their potential impact on the headroom or other guarantees must be fully assessed and duly taken into account; insists that all decisions related to such operations must fully respect the powers of the co-legislators and the prerogatives of the budgetary authority;

9.Considers that decommitments and amounts carried over from unspent funds should be made available again to the budget line of origin; takes the view that reflows and surpluses stemming from budgetary guarantees should remain within the same Global Europe chapter;

10. Believes that all substantive policy choices must be determined in the basic act, with full respect for Parliament’s prerogatives as co-legislator and budgetary authority, and that any non-essential elements entailing policy choices not included in the basic act must be adopted through delegated acts, in particular, the conditions for implementing Global Europe for Enlargement and Eastern Neighbourhood partner countries, in particular in relation to the performance-based plans under the Europe pillar; insists, furthermore, that the role of the budgetary authority in policy-based lending must be reinforced; underlines the importance of including clear and transparent rules and conditions for the use of this instrument in the legislative framework;

11.Insists that the use of external assigned revenue must be clearly regulated, fully transparent and subject to effective parliamentary scrutiny, including through the publication of detailed public reports; considers that the programme should provide for additional contributions from Member States and third countries, as well as for the possible use of immobilised Russian assets for the purpose of supporting Ukraine, including for its reconstruction and recovery; encourages the promotion of the programme throughout the private sector, fostering its financial participation, while ensuring its independence and impartiality in line with the Financial Regulation; underlines that, should the lead committees consider amending provisions relating to external assigned revenue, this should be done in coordination with the Committee on Budgets and the other committees in order to ensure a consistent approach;

12. Considers that appropriate measures must be taken to ensure the EU’s financial interests are protected, including preventive measures against fraud, corruption and any other illegal activities, effective controls, the recovery of the amounts wrongly paid, as well as effective, proportionate and dissuasive administrative and financial penalties; stresses the need for any person or entity receiving EU funds under the proposed Global Europe regulation to fully cooperate and fully respect the rights and prerogatives of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), the European Court of Auditors (ECA) and, as appropriate, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO);

13.Stresses the need for regular and detailed reporting on the implementation of the Global Europe programme and for ensuring the traceability of funds; underlines that any change in the architecture, objectives and eligible actions under the Global Europe programme needs to be appropriately reflected, ensuring that data is of high quality, complete and up to date, including for guarantees and financial instruments, under Annex I of the performance regulation with due regard to the specificities of external action, including the ODA, as well as the appropriateness of output, impact and result indicators for the specific actions, as part of the process of amending and negotiating that regulation; points out that, while sectoral legislation can supplement the performance regulation, for example, as regards programme evaluations, it should remain consistent with its provisions;

14.Takes note of the proposed complementarity between Global Europe and other financing instruments while stressing that enhanced complementarity must not come at the expense of traceability of expenditure or the prerogatives of the budgetary authority;