On the proposal for a Council Decision on establishing the research and training programme of the European Atomic Energy Community for the period 2028-2032, complementing Horizon Europe, the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, and providing for the Community’s contribution to the ITER project, and repealing Regulation (Euratom) 2025/1304

for the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy on the proposal for on the proposal for a Council Decision on establishing the research and training programme of the European Atomic Energy Community for the period 2028-2032, complementing Horizon Europe, the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, and providing for the Community’s contribution to the ITER project, and repealing Regulation (Euratom) 2025/1304

(COM (2025)0594 – C100217/2025 – 2025/0594(NLE))

The Committee on Budgets has carried out a budgetary assessment of the proposal under Rule 58 of the Rules of Procedure and has reached the following conclusions:

The Committee on Budgets,

A.whereas the Draghi report identifies Research and Innovation as one of the main drivers behind productivity and people’s well-being, able to generate positive externalities and supporting EU strategic autonomy and social model; whereas the report supports nuclear energy an essential part of Europe’s energy mix to drive decarbonization, enhance energy security, and maintain cost efficiency;

B.whereas the ex-ante evaluation of the Euratom Research and Training programme recalls the energy security challenges the EU is facing, while meeting its decarbonisation targets; whereas the evaluation calls for a reinforced Euratom programme in terms of budget and measures to enhance innovation and skills in the field of nuclear science and technology for both power and non-power applications;

C.whereas the Fusion for Energy (F4E) joint undertaking delivers the EU contribution to the ITER project; whereas the F4E evaluation found a positive impacts a generated by the ITER as a catalyst for research, technological upgrading and cross- sector innovation in high-tech industry, also in terms of additional gross value added, jobs created across the EU member states and Switzerland, and publications, while patenting remains still limited;

D.whereas the Union’s nuclear research and safety community benefits from long-standing expertise and established cooperation in several Member States; whereas the Euratom Programme should ensure that such expertise can be shared and scaled across the Union while supporting the internal geographical diversity by being effectively accessible and providing equal opportunities, including for Member States starting nuclear programmes, through targeted capacity-building measures such as training, knowledge transfer, expert mobility and exchanges and facilitated access to collaborative networks, while addressing disproportionate administrative barriers for less experienced and smaller ecosystems;

1.Considers that the programme envelope should be increased from EUR 9,784 billion to EUR [number from the interim report, in current and 2025 prices] in order to provide appropriate resources towards nuclear fission safety objectives, support towards research and innovation in the fusion sector and continue the effort towards the ITER project;

2.Considers that sufficient human resources must be available from the outset and throughout the entire programming period of the next MFF to ensure an effective implementation of the Euratom and ITER programme, including tailored capacity-building support for Member States starting of expanding their nuclear programmes to endues high safety standards across the Union;

3.Regrets that Article 5 does not include any indicative breakdown of the budget across objectives. Believes that indicative amounts should be provided in order to give beneficiaries a clear indication of the budget foreseen to the different pillars of the programme;

4.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; considers that a poorly constructed ‘steering mechanism’ cannot compensate for any loss of Parliament’s legislative or budgetary powers;