Skip to content

Text · Comparison of two versions

Changes from plenary report to adopted text

A-10-2026-0022 → TA-10-2026-0122

From
A-10-2026-0022 Plenary report of 12 Feb 2026
To
TA-10-2026-0122 Adopted text of 28 Apr 2026
Changes
1 change to the text
Paragraphs
+4 added · −8 removed · 14 changed
More facts (3)
Title (from)
on control, transparency and traceability of performance-based instruments
Title (to)
Control, transparency and traceability of performance-based instruments
AI: What changed, in short Written by AI from the official text — check the source · deepseek-v4-flash · 4 Sept 2026

The versions differ only in formal points: the decimal separator in a monetary amount is updated.1

The notes class 0 changes as substance, 1 as formal, 0 as wording only.

Read the changes · Report a problem

Every difference

The full paragraph comparison, packaging included; long runs of unchanged paragraphs are folded. One part of the text per page.

Part 3 of 3: EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

RemovedEXPLANATORY STATEMENT

RemovedPerformance-based instruments are reshaping the way the European Union finances its policies. By linking payments to the achievement of milestones and targets, rather than to the reimbursement of eligible costs, they promise to accelerate reforms and strengthen the focus on results. The Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) was the first large-scale application of this model, and the Commission has proposed to embed it more widely through National and Regional Partnership Plans in the next Multiannual Financial Framework.

RemovedThis shift has undeniable advantages: it simplifies procedures, emphasises outputs, and can increase political ownership of reforms. Yet it also introduces significant risks for control, transparency and accountability. The European Court of Auditors has already identified weaknesses in the design of the RRF control system, including incomplete audit trails, heavy reliance on national authorities and variability in control quality across Member States. The European Parliamentary Research Service has highlighted shortcomings in national reporting and the limits of transparency tools such as the RRF Scoreboard and expert groups. The recent European Parliament’s study on performance and mainstreaming framework for the EU budget for the Committee on Budgets has further underlined gaps in data systems, monitoring weaknesses, and the limits of the European Parliament’s engagement.

RemovedThese lessons must be taken seriously. Without access to data on actual costs of EU-funded interventions, it is difficult to demonstrate value for money. Without clear thresholds for corrective action, enforcement risks becoming inconsistent or arbitrary. Without transparent methodologies for assessing milestones and targets, there is a danger of unequal treatment between Member States. And without stronger parliamentary involvement, democratic accountability is weakened.

RemovedThis report therefore calls for a stronger framework of control and transparency for performance-based instruments: harmonised methodologies, interoperable data systems, robust audit trails, and clear criteria for corrections. It urges the Commission to expand transparency tools, to ensure full traceability of beneficiaries and final recipients and to strengthen safeguards for financial instruments. Most importantly, it insists on a greater role for Parliament in the governance of performance-based instruments.

RemovedThe European Commission is proposing to channel hundreds of billions of euros through this model in the coming years. If designed well, performance-based instruments can deliver reforms effectively and can reinforce trust in the EU. If not, they risk eroding accountability and weakening the link between EU financing and sound financial management. This own-initiative report aims to ensure that the lessons from the RRF are fully incorporated into the next generation of instruments, so that performance is matched by integrity, transparency and democratic oversight.

Sources & citation

Where the facts on this page come from, and how to cite it.

Data source
Licensed CC BY 4.0.
Retrieved
29 September 2026

Cite as

European Parliament (2026). “Changes between A-10-2026-0022 and TA-10-2026-0122”. Text, 28 April 2026. from A-10-2026-0022, to TA-10-2026-0122, reference 2025/2032(INI). EU Parl Watch Research. https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/A-10-2026-0022/compare/TA-10-2026-0122?all=1&part=3 (retrieved 29 September 2026). Data: European Parliament Open Data, https://data.europarl.europa.eu/ (CC BY 4.0).
BibTeX
@misc{epw-text-2026-04-28,
  author = {{European Parliament}},
  title = {{Changes between A-10-2026-0022 and TA-10-2026-0122}},
  year = {2026},
  date = {2026-04-28},
  howpublished = {\url{https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/A-10-2026-0022/compare/TA-10-2026-0122?all=1&part=3}},
  url = {https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/A-10-2026-0022/compare/TA-10-2026-0122?all=1&part=3},
  urldate = {2026-09-29},
  publisher = {EU Parl Watch Research},
  note = {Text. from A-10-2026-0022, to TA-10-2026-0122, reference 2025/2032(INI). Data: European Parliament Open Data (CC BY 4.0)}
}