Changes from adopted text to adopted text

RemovedP9_TA(2024)0288

AddedP10_TA(2024)0026

ChangedDischarge 2022: EU general budget -– European Council and Council

Committee on Budgetary Control

RemovedPE753.479

AddedPE761.252

Changed1. European Parliament decision of 2322 AprilOctober 2024 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022, Section II – European Council and Council (2023/2131(DEC))

▸6 unchanged paragraphs

The European Parliament,

– having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022,

– having regard to the consolidated annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2022 (COM(2023)0391 – C90250/2023),

– having regard to the Council’s annual report to the discharge authority on internal audits carried out in 2022,

– having regard to the Court of Auditors’ annual report on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2022, together with the institutions’ replies,

– having regard to the statement of assurance as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2022, pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Added– having regard to its decision of 23 April 2024 postponing the discharge decision for the financial year 2022, and the accompanying resolution,

– having regard to Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012, and in particular Articles 59, 118, 260, 261 and 262 thereof,

Removed– having regard to Rule 100 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

Added– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union, and in particular Articles 59, 118, 266, 267 and 268 thereof,

Removed– having regard to letter from the Committee on Constitutional Affairs,

Added– having regard to Rule 102 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

Changed– having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0071/2024),(A10-0003/2024),

Change 1

Changed1. Postpones its decisionRefuses onto grantinggrant the Secretary-General of the Council discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Council and of the Council for the financial year 2022;

2. Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

3. Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution forming an integral part of it to the European Council, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

Change 2

Changed2. European Parliament resolution of 2322 AprilOctober 2024 with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022, Section II – European Council and Council (2023/2131(DEC))

The European Parliament,

– having regard to its decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2022, Section II – European Council and Council,

Changed– having regard to Rule 100102 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

Changed– having regard to letterthe fromsecond report of the Committee on ConstitutionalBudgetary Affairs,Control (A10-0003/2024),

Removed– having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0071/2024),

A. whereas in the context of the discharge procedure, the discharge authority wishes to stress the particular importance of further strengthening the democratic legitimacy of the Union institutions by improving transparency and accountability, and implementing the concept of performance-based budgeting and good governance of human resources;

B. whereas, under Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Parliament has the sole responsibility of granting discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the Union, and whereas the budget of the European Council and of the Council is a section of the Union budget;

Change 3

ChangedC. whereas, pursuant to Article 15(1) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU),Union, the European Council is not to exercise legislative functions;

D. whereas, under Article 317 TFEU, the Commission is to implement the Union budget on its own responsibility, having regard to the principles of sound financial management, and whereas, under the framework in place, the Commission is to confer on the other Union institutions the requisite powers for the implementation of the sections of the budget relating to them;

E. whereas, under Articles 235(4) and 240(2) TFEU, the European Council and the Council (the ‘Council’) are assisted by the General Secretariat of the Council, and whereas the Secretary-General of the Council is wholly responsible for the sound management of the appropriations entered in Section II of the Union budget;

F. whereas, over the course of almost twenty years, Parliament has been implementing the well-established and respected practice of granting discharge to all Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, and whereas the Commission supports that the practice of giving discharge to each Union institution, body, office and agency for its administrative expenditure should continue to be pursued;

Change 4

ChangedG. whereas, according to Article 59(1) of the Financial Regulation, the Commission shall confer on the other Union institutionsInstitutions the requisite powers for the implementation of the sections of the budget relating to them;

▸4 unchanged paragraphs

H. whereas, since 2009, the Council’s lack of cooperation in the discharge procedure has compelled Parliament to refuse to grant discharge to the Secretary-General of the Council;

I. whereas the European Council and the Council, as Union institutions and as recipients of the general budget of the Union, should be transparent and democratically accountable to the citizens of the Union and subject to democratic scrutiny of the spending of public funds;

J. whereas the recommendation of the European Ombudsman (the ‘Ombudsman’) in strategic inquiry OI/2/2017/TE on the transparency of the Council legislative process indicated that the Council’s practice with regard to transparency in the legislative process constituted maladministration and should be addressed in order to enable citizens to follow the Union legislative process;

K. whereas the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union confirms the right of taxpayers and of the public to be kept informed about the use of public revenue and that the General Court in in its judgment of 25 January 2023 in Case T-163/21, De Capitani v Council, stated on transparency within the Union legislative process that documents produced by the Council in its working groups are not of technical nature but legislative and are therefore subject to access to documents requests;

Change 5

Removed1. Notes that the budget of the Council falls under MFF heading 7, ‘European public administration’, which amounted to EUR 11,6 billion in 2022 (representing 5,9 % of the total Union budget); notes that the Council’s budget of approximately EUR 0,6 billion represents approximately 5,3 % of the total administrative expenditure of the Union;

Added1. Deeply regrets that since 2009, and again for the financial year 2022, Council continues to refuse to cooperate with Parliament on the discharge procedure, preventing Parliament from taking an informed decision based on a serious and thorough scrutiny of the implementation of the Council’s budget and thereby compelling Parliament to refuse discharge;

Removed2. Notes that the Court of Auditors (the ‘Court’), in its annual report for the financial year 2022 examined a sample of 60 transactions under Administration, the same number as were examined in 2021; further notes that the Court writes that administrative expenditure comprises expenditure on human resources including expenditure on pensions, which in 2022 accounted for about 70 % of the total administrative expenditure, and expenditure on buildings, equipment, energy, communications and information technology, and that its work over many years indicates that, overall, this spending is low risk;

Added2. Notes that on 28 September 2023 the relevant Parliament services, on behalf of the rapporteur for the discharge procedure, forwarded a questionnaire to the Secretariat of the Council containing 74 important questions from Parliament in order to enable a thorough scrutiny of the implementation of the Council budget and of the management of the Council; further notes that similar questionnaires were sent to all other institutions, all of which have provided Parliament with thorough answers to all questions;

Removed3. Notes that 14 (23 %) of the 60 transactions contained errors but that the Court, based on the five errors which were quantified, estimates the level of error to be below the materiality threshold;

Added3. Regrets that, on 12 October 2023, the General Secretariat of the Council informed Parliament once again that it would not be answering Parliament’s questionnaire and that the Council would not be participating in the hearing which was arranged for 25 October 2023 as part of the discharge procedure and in which all other invited institutions participated;

Removed4. Notes with satisfaction that the Court, in its Annual Report for the financial year 2022, states that it did not identify any specific issues concerning the Council;

Added4. Emphasises Parliament’s prerogative to grant discharge pursuant to Article 319 TFEU, as well as the applicable provisions of the Financial Regulation and Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, in line with current interpretation and practice, namely the power to grant discharge in order to maintain transparency and to ensure democratic accountability towards Union taxpayers;

RemovedState of play of the discharge procedure

Added5. Underlines that Article 59(1) of the Financial Regulation states that the Commission shall confer the requisite powers on the other Union Institutions for the implementation of the sections of the budget relating to them and, therefore, finds it incomprehensible that the Council believes it appropriate that discharge should be granted to the Commission for the implementation of the Council budget;

Removed5. Deeply regrets that since 2009 and again for the financial year 2021 Parliament had to refuse discharge to the Council because the Council continues to refuse to cooperate with Parliament on the discharge procedure, preventing Parliament from taking an informed decision based on a serious and thorough scrutiny of the implementation of the Council’s budget;

Removed6. Notes that the relevant Parliament services, on behalf of the rapporteur for the discharge procedure, on 28 September 2023 forwarded a questionnaire to the Secretariat of the Council containing 74 important questions from Parliament in order to enable a thorough scrutiny of the implementation of the Council budget and of the management of the Council; further notes that similar questionnaires were sent to all other institutions, all of which have provided Parliament with thorough answers to all questions;

Removed7. Regrets that, on 12 October 2023, the General Secretariat of the Council informed Parliament once again that it would not be answering Parliament’s questionnaire and that the Council would not be participating in the hearing which was arranged for 25 October 2023 as part of the discharge process and in which all other invited institutions participated;

Removed8. Emphasises Parliament’s prerogative to grant discharge pursuant to Article 319 TFEU as well as the applicable provisions of the Financial Regulation and Parliament’s Rules of Procedure in line with current interpretation and practice, namely the power to grant discharge in order to maintain transparency and to ensure democratic accountability towards Union taxpayers;

Removed9. Underlines that Article 59(1) of the Financial Regulation states that the Commission shall confer on the other Union Institutions the requisite powers for the implementation of the sections of the budget relating to them and, therefore, finds it incomprehensible that the Council believes it appropriate that discharge should be granted to the Commission for the implementation of the Council budget;

6. Stresses the well-established and respected practice followed by Parliament over the course of almost twenty years of granting discharge to all Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies; recalls that the Commission has declared its inability to oversee the implementation of the budgets of the other Union institutions; stresses the reiterated view of the Commission that the practice of giving discharge to each Union institution for their administrative expenditure should continue to be pursued by Parliament;

Change 6

Changed11.7. Stresses that the current situation allows the Parliament to check only the reports of the Court of Auditors and of the Ombudsman as well as the publicly available information on the Council’s website, because the Council continues its malpractice of non-cooperation with the Parliament which makes it impossible for Parliament to carry out its duties properly and make an informed decision on granting discharge;

8. Deplores that the Council, for more than a decade, has shown that it does not have any political willingness to collaborate with Parliament in the context of the annual discharge procedure; underlines that this attitude has had a lasting negative effect on both institutions, has discredited the management and democratic scrutiny of the Union budget and has damaged the trust of citizens in the Union as a transparent entity;

Change 7

Added9. Reaffirms its deep frustration regarding the Council's attitude towards the discharge procedure, which conveys an inappropriate message to Union citizens at a time when greater transparency is essential; underlines that the Council must adhere to the same standards of accountability it expects from other Union institutions;