On the proposal for a Council decision on establishing the Specific Programme implementing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and… Innovation for the period 2028-2034, laying down the rules for participation and dissemination under that Programme, and repealing Decision (EU) 2021/764

for the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy on the proposal for a Council decision on establishing the Specific Programme implementing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation for the period 2028-2034, laying down the rules for participation and dissemination under that Programme, and repealing Decision (EU) 2021/764

(COM(2025)0544 – C100218/2025 – 2025/0544(CNS))

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, generating positive externalities while supporting the Union’s strategic autonomy and welfare systems; whereas the report highlights the insufficient focus on breakthrough innovation in the Union’s current innovation system; whereas the report supports the design of a reformed and simpler programme focused on selected priorities, with an increased budget of EUR 200 billion; whereas this is the only Union programme for which the Draghi report mentions a concrete budget, underpinning the centrality of the framework programme to the implementation of the recommendations of the Draghi report;

B.whereas the interim evaluation of Horizon Europe confirms the high European added value, relevance and effectiveness of the programme; whereas the evaluation highlights that despite the increase in the average proposal success rate from 12 % in Horizon 2020 to 16.4 % in Horizon Europe (from 9 % to 14 % in Widening Countries), only 30 % of high-quality proposals were able to be financed and an additional EUR 81.8 billion would have been needed to fund them all;

C.whereas the Budapest Declaration restates the importance of dedicating 3 % of GDP to research and development (R&D) by 2030; whereas in the 26 years since the Barcelona Declaration, only a few Member States have achieved this target; whereas the Horizon Europe framework programme can support the achievement of such a target and leverage additional funds from public and private entities;

D.whereas the Letta report proposes introducing a new ‘5th Freedom to enhance research, innovation, and education in the Single Market’, which requires a reinforced and fully operational European Research Area;

1.Considers that the programme envelope should be increased from EUR 154 billion to EUR 200 billion in current prices (EUR 177 billion in 2025 prices) in order to provide the EU economy with the needed innovation boost in strategic sectors, with a view to supporting not only the objective of dedicating 3 % of GDP to R&D expenditure by 2030, but also European research as a whole;

2.Considers that sufficient resources, including human, technical and IT resources, must be available from the outset and throughout the entire programming period of the 2028-2034 multiannual financial framework to ensure an effective implementation of the Horizon Europe specific programme; notes that a clear and predictable allocation of resources for the different parts of the programme is therefore necessary to ensure that the different implementing structures, such as the European Research Council (ERC) and the European Innovation Council (EIC), have stable human resources;

3.Recalls the importance of reducing the administrative burden for beneficiaries and of further simplifying financial rules, in particular those related to personnel costs, while streamlining reporting requirements;

4.Notes that the specific programme is far less detailed than previous framework programmes; considers this a legitimate aspect of the increased flexibility of the multiannual financial framework as proposed by the Commission; highlights, however, that this also entails that decisions on prioritisation are relegated to implementation decisions by the Commission under comitology; strongly believes that work programmes cannot be the only vehicle through which financial resources are allocated across specific policy areas, and that this is not a proper safeguard for Parliament’s prerogatives as a co-legislator and one arm of the EU’s budgetary authority; considers, therefore, that all work programmes in which significant decisions on budget allocation are taken must be adopted as delegated acts rather than implementing acts; strongly calls for detailed budget lines for the programme so as to enable true oversight and steering from the budgetary authority;

5.Considers that allocations under Horizon Europe should remain clearly identifiable and traceable throughout implementation, including where actions are programmed alongside other Union instruments or policy windows, allowing for support to third parties through cascade funding; stresses that Horizon Europe must maintain its autonomous character, fostering high-quality research in Europe as a policy objective in itself; highlights the existing synergies across the different pillars of the programme; takes note of the proposed synergies between Horizon Europe and the European Competitiveness Fund;

6.Stresses that Parliament should receive timely information on the adoption of work programmes, including calls provided for in those work programmes, the financial allocation per action and the consistency of those allocations with the objectives laid down in the basic act;

7.Stresses that collaborative research is the backbone of the framework programme and an important driver of a strong European Research Area, enabling the pooling of excellence, resources and knowledge across the Union, strengthening cross-border cooperation, and addressing shared societal, industrial, technological and environmental challenges that require joint European action;

8.Supports the use of European partnerships as implementing bodies, together with relevant public and private entities; calls for partnerships to pursue true European added value, transparency and openness in their creation and in the pursuit of their mission-oriented objectives; believes that a clear and predictable budget needs to be indicated for this instrument, together with transparent reporting on Union and partner contributions, performance and achievement of the objectives;

9.Recalls that the ERC is a key institution for basic research – focusing on blue-sky research with a bottom-up approach – recognised for its pursuit of excellence; notes with disappointment the lack of a specific budget for the ERC and calls for clear, predictable and sufficiently ambitious funding for the ERC;

10.Acknowledges the growing importance of the EIC as a key instrument for delivering competitiveness in the EU; calls for a clear budget for the Council to continue pursuing its mission of funding disruptive innovation;

11.Highlights that the independence of the ERC and the EIC is a necessary condition for their operations; believes that guaranteeing their functional autonomy and institutional independence is critical, as it directly impacts the transparent and excellence-based allocation of Union funds; strongly calls for a clear budget nomenclature to ensure the budgetary authority’s decision-making and scrutiny powers;

12.Highlights with concern the persistent structural gap in research and innovation between Member States and calls for strengthened efforts to bridge this gap within the Union;

13.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 the Horizon Europe specific programme; underlines that any change to the architecture, objectives and eligible actions under the programme will need to be appropriately reflected in Annex I of 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;

14.Recalls that, in line with Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 and Articles 6(2) and 6(3) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 (the ‘Financial Regulation’), a general regime of conditionality applies to the establishment and implementation of the budget in cases of breaches of the rule of law, and that Member States and the Commission must, in the implementation of the budget, ensure compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular Article 13 on the freedom of scientific research and academic freedom, and respect the values on which the EU is founded, as enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union; calls, in this regard, for a comprehensive ex ante screening in the award procedure process under the programme.

As part of its budgetary assessment, the Committee on Budgets also submits the following amendments to the draft proposal:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a decision

Recital 7 a (new)

Amendment 2

Proposal for a decision

Recital 8 a (new)

Amendment 3

Proposal for a decision

Article 3 – paragraph 1

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for budgetary assessment declares that he included in his budgetary assessment input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that he received, in the preparation of the budgetary assessment, prior to the adoption thereof in committee, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that he submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.