AGRI opinion
"The impact of organised crime on own resources of the EU and on the
misuse of EU funds"
Rapporteur for opinion: Adrián Vázquez Lázara
Draft Compromise amendments
CA n°1 - paragraph 1
In: 2 (EPP), 4 (EPP), 33 (ECR)
Covered:
To be voted separately: 6 (ECR), 7 (Greens)
Fall: 3 (The Left), 5 (ID)
Text proposed by the Rapporteur
Amendments
1.
Highlights that CAP is the largest
1.
Highlights that CAP is the largest
item in the EU budget, representing
item in the EU budget, representing
31% of the total budgetary
31% of the total budgetary
expenditure for the 2021-2027
expenditure for the 2021-2027
period. Stresses the
key role of a
period. Stresses
that it is vital for the
well-functioning CAP in protecting
CAP’s control systems at EU and
the financial interests of the EU and
national level to work properly to
its citizens against any misuse of EU
ensure that [4] the financial interests
funds that can degrade the public
of the EU and its citizens
are
image of such a strategic policy;
effectively protected against any
misuse of EU funds that can be
detrimental
to farmers and [4] to the
public image of such a strategic
policy;
underlines, that general
Union legislation on protection of
the Union financial interests and
avoidance of conflict of interest
must be respected by the all Member
States [2] notes that transparency
and the control of agricultural
funding are essential for the
construction of a functional
agricultural system [33];
CA n°2 - paragraph 2
In: 1 (EPP), 8 (EPP), 15 (S&D), 36 (EPP) 37 (Renew), 64 (S&D),
Covered: 17 (Greens)
To be voted separately: 16, 18, 19 (Greens)
Fall: 10 (The Left), 11 (S&D), 12 (ECR), 13 (ID), 14 (EPP)
Text proposed by the Rapporteur
Amendments
2.
Points out that the concentration of
2.
Points out that the concentration of
agricultural income support is mainly
agricultural income support is mainly
driven by area-based direct
driven by area-based direct
payments. Underlines the need for a
payments. Underlines the need for a
more targeted support and a better
more targeted support and a better
balance between large and small
balance between large and small
beneficiaries at Member State level;
beneficiaries at Member State level;
Regrets that for the new CAP,
capping remains voluntary; calls on
the Member States to use the
different redistributive tools within
the new CAP as a measure against
the misuse and for the fairer
distribution of the agricultural
funds [1][8]; criticises the fact that,
in the Special European Council of
July 2020, Member States
unilaterally decided not to introduce
maximum amounts for natural
persons under the first or second
pillars, pre-empting a decision in
the trilogue negotiations on the
reform of the Common Agricultural
Policy [64];
2a (new) Emphasises that existing
statistical tools at EU level, such as
the Farm Accountancy Data
Network (FADN), the Eurostat
Farm Structure Survey and the
Integrated Administration and
Control System (IACS) gather data
on different aspects of land tenure;
underlines that comprehensive, up-
to-date, transparent and high-
quality data on land tenure,
property structures, leasing
structures, and price and volume
movements on land markets at
European level, have so far been
lacking and, in some Member
States, are collected and published
only incompletely [15]
2b (new) Calls on the Commission to
collect information on all subsidies
received from the first and second
pillars of the CAP and aggregate
the total amount that a natural
person receives either directly
through direct payments or
indirectly as beneficial owner of
legal persons that are beneficiaries
of CAP payments (direct payments
and payments from rural
development)[36];
2c (new) Highlights that land grabbing
and land concentration are practices
that negatively affect economic and
social welfare of local
communities and generational
renewal by forcing many farms out
of business, particularly small-scale
farms, to the detriment of a vibrant
countryside (17) and biodiversity
and calls on the EC to address these
issues at EU level [37];
EN
CA n°3 - paragraph 3
In: 20 (EPP) 21 (EPP), 23 (EPP) 24 (S&D)
Covered: 32 (EPP)
To be voted separately: 28 (ECR), 29 (S&D), 30 (ECR)
Fall: : 22 (The Left), 25 (Greens), 26 (EPP), 27 (ID)
Text proposed by the Rapporteur
Amendments
3.
Highlights that the Member States
3.
Highlights that the Member States
are responsible for the EU
are responsible for the EU
agricultural funds under shared
agricultural funds under shared
management with the Commission;
management with the Commission;
considers the new delivery model
considers
that [23] the new delivery
and the new National Strategic Plans
model and the new National
to be a great opportunity to reinforce
Strategic Plans
can be an [21]
Member States’ and the
opportunity to reinforce Member
Commission’s controls pertaining to
States’ and the Commission’s
the distribution and management of
controls pertaining to the distribution
funds;
and management of funds,
provided
that Member States have effective
management and control systems in
place [21], and to raise awareness
among the authorities responsible
for awarding grants of the
opportunities for fraud; emphasises
that the principle of the single audit
should help relieve the pressure on
farmers [23] and that that controls
should not bring unnecessary or
additional administrative burden for
small and medium farmers, [20]
[21]; stresses, in this context, the
importance of exchanges between
European law enforcement actors
and funding release authorities in
order to ensure the highest possible
level of prior awareness of possible
fraud [24];
CA n°4 - paragraph 4
In: 9 (Renew), 31 (EPP), 34 (ECR), 43 (Greens)
Covered: 24
To be voted separately: 38, 39, 40, 41, 42 (The Left)
Fall: 35 (ID)
Text proposed by the Rapporteur
Amendments
4.
Stresses the need for a specifically
4.
Stresses the need for a specifically
tailored fraud prevention system to
tailored fraud prevention system to
prevent any misuse of EU agricultural
prevent any misuse of EU agricultural
funds;
takes the view that anti-fraud
funds;
Points out that although over
measures should retain their high
the last years the number of frauds
priority for the EU and the Member
has been reduced considerably [9]
States; underlines that EU funds must
anti-fraud measures should retain their
be recovered in a timely manner and
high priority for the EU and the
that proportionate sanctions be put in
Member States; underlines that EU
place as effective deterrents;
funds must be recovered in a timely
manner and
welcomes the provisions
laid down in the CAP horizontal
regulation on proportionate penalties
[34] as effective deterrents;
points out
the importance of a comprehensive
real-time information and monitoring
system, including but not limited to
existing tools, such as Arachne, to
allow a precise overview of the
distribution and fair allocation of the
EU funds and to have the possibility to
track and aggregate the distributed
financial means; this system should
include information on the
interconnections between companies
and beneficial owners [31];
4a (new) Notes that OLAF is responsible for
combating fraud in CAP payments,
and that open cases are based on
information from Member States or
reports from members of the public
who have been affected and who may
then face retaliation; emphasises,
furthermore, that OLAF cases are
highly confidential and are not widely
publicised when they are concluded;
therefore calls for whistleblowers to be
protected, and for fraud investigation
authorities in the Member States to
share best practices in the area [43];
CA n°5 - paragraph 5
In: 44 (EPP), 45 (Greens), 47 (EPP), 49 (Renew), 53 (Greens), 63 (S&D)
Covered: 46 (ECR)
To be voted separately: 51 (Greens), 52 (S&D)
Fall: 48 (ID)
Text proposed by the Rapporteur
Amendments
5.
Underlines the importance of
5.
Underlines the importance of
transparency for the early detection of
transparency for the early detection of fraud,
fraud, conflicts of interest or other
conflicts of interest or other irregularities;
irregularities; stresses
the importance
stresses that it is important
of EU-wide database interoperability,
to have unique identifiers within reporting
common rules and data exchange,
systems and databases to make it clear who
cross border cooperation and better
the final beneficiaries are and to have
use of IT tools;
shared databases to ensure [45] EU-wide
database interoperability, common rules and
data exchange
between governments and
stakeholders, [47] cross border cooperation
and better use of IT tools;
Reiterates the
transparency requirements for the CAP
and cohesion policy, which require the
competent authorities to maintain a
publicly accessible list of final
beneficiaries; urges the Member States to
publish this data in a single, machine
readable format and to ensure the
interoperability of information; calls on the
Commission to collect and aggregate the
data and to publish the lists of the largest
beneficiaries of each fund in each
Member State [63]; highlights the
importance of adherence to the Financial
Regulation of the EU, and in particular the
implementation of Article 61 on Conflict of
interests by all the EU member states and
its application on all EU funds payments
[44];
5a (new) Recalls that under the Recovery
and Resilience Facility (RRF), the EU is
strengthening its support to managing
authorities in their administrative controls
and management checks of the European
funds notably through the use of the
Arachne platform [49 first part];
points out that Arachne has far only been
used to audit projects involving cohesion
funding; takes note of Parliament’s calls to
extend the data-mining and transparency
approach currently only in use for CAP
investment funding to all audits on area
payments in the first and second pillars;
[53]; underlines therefore, the importance
of the Arachne platform becoming
mandatoryfor Member States in particular
in the context of managing agricultural
funds [49 second part ];
CA n°6 - paragraph 6
In: 54 (Renew), 55 (EPP), 56 (The Left), 57 (S&D), 59 (Renew), 61, 62, 68 (S&D)
Covered: 50 (Left)
To be voted separately: 60 (The Left), 65, 66, 67, 69, 70, 71(S&D)
Fall: 58 (ID)
Text proposed by the Rapporteur
6.
Insists on greater resources for
6.
Insists on greater resources for
investigation, as well as on stronger
investigation, as well as on stronger
coordination between the Member
coordination between the Member
States and EU bodies, to ensure that
States and EU bodies,
(OLAF, ECA,
the fight against fraud in agricultural
Eurojust [57] and EPPO)[54] and
funds is effective; emphasises the
increased awareness among the
need for a comprehensive fraud
competent national authorities [61]
strategy with a robust fraud risk
to ensure that the fight against fraud
analysis.
in agricultural funds is effective;
Underlines in this context that the
budget allocated to Eurojust under
the Multiannual Financial
Framework 2021-2027 was frozen
at the 2019 level, whereas the
workload of cases increased [57];
emphasises the need for a
comprehensive fraud strategy with a
robust fraud risk analysis
while
ensuring new checks and
documentation requirements do not
place an increasing burden on
farmers [56]; using information
from different systems such as
EDES and ARACHNE in order to
safeguard the Union’s financial
interests; [55]
stresses the need to
create a continuous EU training
programme for employees of paying
agencies to improve fraud detection
and exchange best practices [54];
6a(new) Deplores the fact that not all
Member States choose to coordinate
and initiate supranational
prosecutions under Eurojust and
that as a result many cases of
organised crime at European level
cannot be resolved [62]; Underlines
the need for Member States, which
remain responsible for operational
measures in the field of police and
judicial cooperation, to make
greater use of cross-border and EU-
wide cooperation, as organised
crime has become increasingly
interconnected, international and
digital[68];
6b (new) Highlights the need to better
tackle environmental crimes of
cross-border dimension which affect
biodiversity and natural resources,
such as illegal trade in plants and
animals, illegal logging and timber
trafficking, illegal waste trafficking;
calls on the Commission to initiate
the extension of the EPPO’s
mandate in order to cover cross-
border environmental crimes[59];
