On the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the ‘AgoraEU’ programme for the period 2028 to 2034, and repealing Regulations (EU) 2021/692 and (EU) 2021/818

6.Insists that sufficiently detailed and sound legislation, with an appropriate level of governance, is a condition for proper budgetary decision-making and adequate parliamentary oversight during budget implementation; recommends introducing provisions to strengthen control over how the budget is mobilised and spent and underlines the importance of regular evaluations; considers that 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 effective exercise of such powers;

7.Underlines that increased flexibility in the implementation of the programme must not result in a de facto centralisation of budget implementation at Commission level nor weaken the prerogatives of the budgetary authority; stresses that simplification and flexibility must not come at the expense of transparency and oversight by the budgetary authority; recommends, therefore, that the overall envelope be broken down to reflect the specific strands of AgoraEU; underlines that transparency should be ensured with regard to the allocation of resources to cross-cutting activities; recommends that, should the lead committees decide to set up more strands compared to the Commission proposal, these should also have indicative sub-envelopes defined;

8.Highlights that the composing elements of the AgoraEU Programme have different objectives, are confronted with different realities and are structured differently, and that the sectors they are aimed at have different missions and business models, which should be taken duly into account in the shaping of the proposed Regulation; deplores the lack of a sufficiently detailed indicative budgetary nomenclature proposed in the legislative financial and digital statement (LFDS) and considers that this will hamper oversight and the budgetary authority’s ability to accurately steer policy priorities in the annual budgetary procedure; notes, in addition, that this would give the Commission great latitude to shift and decide on spending priorities during implementation; expresses concerns that the overly aggregated budgetary architecture would dramatically increase the Commission’s discretion in transferring and reallocating resources without a decision from the budgetary authority and would severely limit parliamentary oversight; recommends, therefore, a more detailed nomenclature that properly reflects the programme’s objectives and structure and enhances transparency, accountability and parliamentary control;

9.Recalls that the budgetary nomenclature must be established in line with Article 47(2) of the Financial Regulation, which provides that each title must 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 that the Committee on Culture and Education and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs 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 LFDS must be part of the final political agreement;

10.Recalls that the proposal includes the possibility of using a budgetary guarantee; stresses that the budgetary implications of borrowing and lending operations under AgoraEU must be clearly identified, transparently presented and carefully monitored throughout the MFF period; underlines in particular that their potential impact on other guarantees must be fully assessed and duly taken into account as well as the impact on the availability of grants under the programme; insists that all decisions related to such operations must fully respect the powers of the co-legislators and the prerogatives of the budgetary authority; underlines that such instruments should be used strategically to maximise the impact, efficiency and sustainability of EU funding, while ensuring full transparency and sound risk management;

11.Insists that the use of financial instruments alongside AgoraEU funding will be appropriately set out and that, where applicable, the overall amount reserved for blending operations as well as other financial instruments will be specified in the annual budgetary procedure; urges that amounts mobilised using blending operations be fiscally responsible with reasonable interest rates;

12.Recalls that the proposal provides a possibility to reallocate resources to and from shared management programmes but underlines that such synergies should foster policy implementation; echoes the European Court of Auditor’s recommendation that any reallocation should be duly justified in each case and carried out in coordination between the Commission and the Member States; underlines the need to ensure full traceability of the reallocated amounts;

13.Stresses the need to define the end of the eligibility period and the ceiling on technical and administrative expenditure as well as to provide further clarity on audit rights for the European Court of Auditors, including with regard to beneficiaries in ‘third countries’, i.e. outside the EU legal framework;

14.Considers that reflows from financial instruments should remain available within the AgoraEU Programme;

15.Takes note of the suggested complementarity between AgoraEU and other Union programmes, funds and initiatives such as the European Democracy Shield, the Justice Programme, Erasmus+, Global Europe, the European Competitiveness Fund, Horizon Europe and the shared management funds under the national and regional partnership plans; stresses that enhanced complementarity between instruments must not come at the expense of traceability of expenditure or the prerogatives of the budgetary authority; underlines that the contribution of AgoraEU to operations financed jointly with other instruments must be explicitly identifiable at all stages of the budgetary cycle; stresses, in this regard, that any such contribution must be duly reflected in the programme performance statement for the AgoraEU Programme; insists that the budgetary authority retain full control over how resources are combined across instruments and over the effective contribution of each programme to EU priorities, specifically through detailed budgetary nomenclature; stresses that enhanced complementarity between programmes must not lead to disproportionate complexity for beneficiaries; calls for EU funding to be clearer, more accessible and more coherent in order to facilitate uptake and maximise the impact of investments;

16.Stresses that the use of external assigned revenue under AgoraEU must be clearly circumscribed, fully transparent and subject to effective parliamentary scrutiny; takes note, in that regard, of the provisions relating to additional financial contributions by any participating third country and other donors to the programme; recalls the importance of ensuring the traceability of external assigned revenue; underlines that, should the lead committees consider amending the 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; recognises that contributions by third parties, including from the private sector, can be beneficial to the programme; emphasises that such contributions must be implemented in accordance with the Financial Regulation, in particular with regard to independence and impartiality;

17.Emphasises that the participation of organisations from third countries, which should be clearly specified and duly justified in a transparent manner in each annual work programme, irrespective of whether those countries are associated or not, should be carried out in compliance with the principles of transparency, financial reciprocity and regulatory alignment; stresses that, in this regard, third countries should provide an adequate financial contribution to the programme; underlines that such participation should be conditional upon a sufficient degree of regulatory alignment, in particular with the provisions of Directive 2010/13/EU on audiovisual media services, notably in the context of audiovisual cooperation; highlights the need to ensure clear safeguards in the event of a failure by a third country to comply with the commitments undertaken in the Association Agreement, or where serious and persistent deficiencies risk affecting sound financial management and the protection of the Union’s financial interests;

18.Believes that all substantive policy choices such as programme objectives, spending priorities, financial allocations, funding rates, eligibility, selection and award criteria, conditions, definitions and calculation methods must be determined in the relevant basic act legislation, with full respect for Parliament’s prerogatives as a co-legislator and one arm of the EU’s budgetary authority, and that any supplementing and non-essential elements entailing policy choices that are not included in the basic act must be adopted exclusively through delegated acts, including work programmes;

19.Recalls the proposal for a regulation on establishing a budget expenditure tracking and performance framework and other horizontal rules for the Union programmes and activities (the performance regulation), which establishes a single streamlined list for performance indicators and monitoring and evaluation provisions, some of which are relevant for AgoraEU; underlines that any change to the architecture, objectives and eligible actions under the programme will need to be appropriately reflected in the relevant provisions under Annex I to the performance regulation, as part of the process of amending and negotiating that regulation; points out that, while sectoral legislation can supplement the performance regulation, for instance as regards programme evaluations, it should remain consistent with the provisions of that regulation; expresses concerns that the heterogeneous activities funded under AgoraEU will affect the reliability of the performance indicators, and calls for clearer identification of strand-specific results, greater emphasis on results rather than outputs, and harmonised data-quality requirements;

20.Stresses that all funding must be in line with the Commission Guidance on funding for activities related to the development, implementation, monitoring and enforcement of Union legislation and policy;

21.Considers that safeguarding the financial interests of the Union and protecting the Union budget are essential in all phases of the implementation of the Union budget; underlines that the use of financing not linked to costs or other simplified cost options should not affect the audit or investigation rights of the Commission, the European Anti-Fraud Office, the European Court of Auditors and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office respectively; highlights the importance of both ex ante and ex post checks to prevent double funding and to ensure sound award procedures, traceability across programmes and transparency in implementation;

22.Recalls that under Article 6(2) of the Financial Regulation, the establishment and implementation of the budget must comply with a general regime of conditionality in case of breaches of the rule of law; underlines, furthermore, that Article 6(3) of the same regulation requires the Member States and the Commission, in the implementation of the budget, to ensure compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and respect the values on which the Union is founded, as enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union;

23.Insists that in the event of a breach of the rule of law by national governments and without prejudice to the application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092, the Commission should explore ways of ensuring that potential final beneficiaries and recipients can continue to benefit from Union funding; stresses that this principle lies at the core of a smart conditionality approach;

24.Recalls that, pursuant to the Financial Regulation, programmes and activities should, where feasible and appropriate, in accordance with relevant sector-specific rules, be implemented to achieve their set objectives, while respecting working and employment conditions under applicable national law, Union law, International Labour Organization conventions and collective agreements as well as taking into account the principles of gender equality and do no significant harm; recalls, in this regard, the commitments in the joint interinstitutional declaration ‘Europe for Culture - Culture for Europe’, namely that everyone has the right to fair, just, healthy and safe working conditions, including artists and cultural professionals who are at the heart of our cultural and creative sectors and industries; recalls, furthermore, that fair remuneration and adequate working conditions are fundamental to artistic freedom and cultural diversity.