Discharge 2024: General budget of the EU - European Parliament

Wording as published by the EP, in English.

1. Amendment 13 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

   Paragraph 123

   Tabled by Carla Tavares · S&D

   Removed: 123. Calls on the Court to specifically examine media funding; Added: deleted

2. Amendment 14 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

   Paragraph 75

   Tabled by Maria Ohisalo, Cristina Guarda, Estelle Ceulemans +38 · Members

   75. Stresses that Removed: quality Added: the quality and continuity of childcare services provided to the Members and staff are crucial Removed: measures Added: for the well-being of children and to ensure the effective implementation of the work-life balance policy; Added: raises concerns that the current contract was awarded to a newly established company, created shortly after the publication of the tender and reportedly linked to the previous provider, Esedra, whose contract had been terminated by Parliament due to issues with its execution; is concerned about ongoing challenges relating to staff shortages, high staff absenteeism and turnover, which may affect the continuity and quality of the services provided at the Wayenberg facility; calls for an independent external audit of the tender procedure and the implementation of the current contract to verify compliance with Parliament’s procurement rules and high-quality standards, as well as an independent assessment of working conditions and staff well-being; draws attention to the fact that quality of the services provided by … frequent change of service provider since 2020; calls in this respect to Removed: consider the need to adopt high-quality standards; Added: reconsider the current outsourcing model, including by carrying out a cost-benefit analysis of implementing a progressive internalisation of staff for pre-school childcare services, and to ensure that any future arrangement guarantees long-term high-quality standards, decent working conditions for childcare staff, and meaningful involvement of parents' and staff representatives;

3. Amendment 15 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

   Paragraph 44

   Tabled by Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy · Renew

   … interinstitutional cooperation and dialogue on integrity and transparency, within the Union institutions; Added: recalls the Agreement establishing an interinstitutional body for ethical standards for members of institutions and advisory bodies referred to in Article 13 of the Treaty on European Union, and insists on its swift and effective implementation across all Union institutions;

4. Amendment 22 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

   Paragraph 138

   Tabled by Daniel Freund · Verts/ALE

   … 2024; notes that Parliament’s administration has requested clarification from the PfE Group; Removed: notes that the discharge authority has not yet been informed Added: regrets that the audit report of the Patriots for Europe (PfE) Group for the second half of 2024 remains outstanding, but expects to be informed without delay of any further developments and of the outcome of the administrative follow-up in this matter; Added: calls on the Bureau to apply the same standards of accountability and recovery as those applied to the former Identity & Democracy Group; expects the administration to refer any evidence of irregular expenditure to OLAF and the EPPO without delay and to inform the discharge authority accordingly;

5. Amendment 26 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

   Paragraph 122

   Tabled by Dick Erixon, Cristian Terheş · ECR

   … interinstitutional media transparency and to disclose all media outlets receiving Union funds; Added: stresses that such funding risks creating structural financial dependency between media organisations that should serve as independent watchdogs and the institutions they cover; calls for the creation of a unified inter-institutional media transparency portal that discloses all media outlets and sub-grantees receiving Union funds from any Union institution, ensuring that citizens can identify the ultimate beneficiaries of public media funding;

6. Amendment 27 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

   Paragraph 1 a (new)

   Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

   Added: 1 a. Considers that this 6.05% increase in one year is unreasonable and contrary to the principle of sound financial management;

7. Amendment 29 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

   Paragraph 7 a (new)

   Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

   Added: 7 a. Recalls that the European Court of Auditors does not express an opinion on the appropriateness of expenditure; considers that it would recommend a rationalisation of many expenditures, in particular those related to buildings and equipment;

8. Amendment 31 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

   Paragraph 11

   Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

   … in the list of audit firms selected to audit the political groups’ Removed: accounts, regretting Added: accounts; notes that on September 4, 2025, the Committee on Budgetary Control adopted an opinion on the 2024 accounts questioning the work performed by one of the external auditors and proposing that the Bureau of the European Parliament consider taking action against that auditor; emphasises that, following this challenge, DG FINS did not conduct an audit of the 2024 accounts of all political groups, nor, moreover, of the groups audited by the same external auditor, in order to ensure that they were not affected by the same issues; recalls that the total budget allocated to all political groups amounts to nearly 65 million euros for the year 2024; consequently questions the accuracy of the accounts approved by Parliament in light of the recent calls into question regarding the quality of the work performed by external auditors selected by Parliament for the political groups; regrets the limited choice Added: of external auditors that was available; calls on the Directorate-General for Finance (DG FINS) to strive to … the direction and guidance already provided to external auditors and encourages DG Removed: FINS Added: FINS, in the interest of all, to ensure quality of the external audits that certify the accounts of …

9. Amendment 32 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

   Paragraph 12

   Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

   … with the aim of guiding their knowledge and capacity on financial management; Added: recalls that the ECA’s 2024 Annual Report highlighted various shortcomings identified in its audit sample, such as weaknesses in public procurement procedures conducted by Parliament (notably an IT contract whose duration was insufficiently justified), others concerning a political group that awarded three high-value contracts that did not always comply with Parliament’s regulations by failing to seek a sufficient number of bids, errors in declared VAT, and the use of a lump-sum amount higher than the actual costs for the reimbursement of staff members’ travel expenses; points out that the Court regularly identifies such issues (notably as early as the 2022 annual report) regarding the political groups and is surprised that, despite this, all political groups received an unqualified opinion on their accounts from the external auditors selected by Parliament, calling into question the criteria for their selection and oversight by Parliament, this also implies that political groups which relied on the opinions of the external auditors appointed by Parliament, who validated their accounts, could in good faith have considered their accounts to be compliant; calls on Parliament to fully comply with the financial rules applicable to it; is surprised that this information has not led to any action by Parliament; questions Parliament’s equal treatment of political groups and its apparent intention to exercise less control over some than others, in disregard of the principle of fairness; further questions why only dissolved groups are subject to thorough scrutiny; wonders when non-dissolved groups will be subject to the same level of control and transparency;

10. Amendment 35 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 29

    Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

    29. Removed: Notes that the Commission has acknowledged Added: Is deeply concerned about allegations regarding the use of Union funds for advocacy activities targeting Parliament Removed: by several entities but has stated that such activities fall within the scope of the applicable regulation; recognises, however, that this might have nonetheless entailed reputational risks; Added: ; deplores that Union funds under the LIFE programme have been allocated by the European Commission and its agency CINEA to NGOs and civil society entities engaged in direct lobbying activities towards the institutions of the Union, including Parliament, contradicting the principles of sound financial management, transparency and separation of powers;

11. Amendment 38 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 31 a (new)

    Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

    Added: 31 a. Deplores that the EU finances NGOs identified as having attempted to influence the votes of Members of the European Parliament3a; 3a https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.lepoint.fr/monde/la-commission-europeenne-a-paye-des-ong-pour-faire-son-lobbying-sur-le-pacte-vert-23-01-2025-2580637_24.php&ved=2ahUKEwjWl-XUoPWTAxX5QvEDHfykFswQFnoECB0QAQ&usg=AOvVaw3s6eQaeMTqodaEeLeQJqPy

12. Amendment 39 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 43

    Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

    … how Members comply with the Code of Conduct and its implementing measures; Added: stresses, however, that Parliament remains unable to effectively combat corruption and financial malpractice within its own institution despite the strengthening of measures since the Qatargate affair, which highlighted the weaknesses of Parliament’s internal control mechanisms, and the application of a policy of double standards that has protected certain political groups; in light of the Huaweigate scandal4a in 2024 and the subsequent revelation of the LIFE affair relating to the Green Deal, recommends establishing a committee of inquiry to assess the effectiveness of the measures adopted by Parliament, in order to prevent large-scale corruption and misconduct, as well as conflicts of interest; 4a https://www.touteleurope.eu/institutions/soupcons-de-corruption-l-entreprise-chinoise-huawei-au-coeur-d-un-nouveau-scandale-au-parlement-europeen/

13. Amendment 40 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 46 a (new)

    Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

    Added: 46 a. Stresses that respect for the rights of Parliament by the European Commission must no longer be optional;

14. Amendment 41 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 53

    Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

    53. Removed: Recognises Added: Regrets that communication regarding the European elections Added: amounting to EUR 37 million plus EUR 11.7 million in grants, was at the forefront of DG COMM’s activities in 2024, most notably with the successful ‘Go-to-vote’ communication campaign, Added: by funding entities whose connection to the European democratic process raises serious questions: national media outlets, including public service broadcasters, known for violating political neutrality in some cases (France Télévisions in France), partnerships with over 300 civil society organisations Added: and NGOs (OXFAM), 200 multinational corporations (including Coca-Cola), 200 content creators and more than 18 000 journalists briefed; notes that all of DG … remaining 6 % relating to the implementation of the new website structure; Added: deeply regrets that the purpose of this budget line during the election period was to serve the interests of politically biased communication in favor of greater European integration, to the detriment of Member States’ sovereignty and democracy;

15. Amendment 43 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 58 a (new)

    Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

    Added: 58 a. condemns the exorbitant cost of the Europa Experience centers, amounting to nearly 13 million euros in 2024 and an initial investment of 112 million euros since their opening; notes the limited value of these centres, aside from serving as a vehicle for propaganda in favor of greater European integration at the expense of Member States’ sovereignty; expresses outrage at the average absurd cost per visitor in 2024, reaching up to 70 euros per person for the Paris centre, constituting a clear case of waste; finally, deplores the opening of new centres in non-Union states: Panama, Moldova, Albania5a; 5a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/fr/press-room/20250310IPR27226/european-parliament-to-establish-western-balkans-office-in-albania

16. Amendment 46 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 80

    Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

    80. Recalls Removed: the support expressed by the vast majority of Parliament for a single seat; notes that according to the TEU, Parliament shall have its seat in Strasbourg, where the 12 periods of monthly plenary sessions shall be held and that any change to the Treaties requires the unanimity of the Member States; notes that within the current Treaty framework through the optimisation of operations savings can be attained; calls for the establishment of concrete milestones and an action plan for achieving identified cost-reductions; Added: that the Treaties designate Strasbourg as Parliament’s official seat; regrets that this is not the case, resulting in considerable construction, acquisition, and maintenance costs at the various sites and cities, as well as costs for transferring equipment between the Brussels and Strasbourg offices during plenary sessions, instead of ensuring the efficient use of the Union’s budget and avoiding the waste of European taxpayers’ money;

17. Amendment 47 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 81 a (new)

    Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

    Added: 81 a. Calls for the catering services provided within Parliament to exclusively promote European products and to prioritise short supply chains in support of our agriculture, which safeguards food sovereignty and public health;

18. Amendment 48 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 82

    Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

    82. Removed: Welcomes that, in 2024, Added: Deplores the fact that the administration implemented Parliament’s ‘Building Strategy Beyond 2019’, Removed: and achieved its main objectives; notes with satisfaction that DG INLO, after years of expansion brought on by the growth of Parliament’s institutional powers, now concentrates on the consolidation of Parliament’s building stock and renovation of existing premises, welcomes DG INLO’s commitment to further developing Parliament’s role in the cities of Strasbourg, Brussels, and Luxembourg, fostering projects of common interest, and connecting the sites to the surrounding areas; Added: which consists of increasingly relying on long-term usufruct contracts—binding Parliament for several decades” —and expanding construction, renovation, and building acquisition projects across the three places of work, notably HAVEL, ADENAUER, CAMPOAMOR, MARTENS, TRÈVES II, VEIL, as well as the renovation project for the SPAAK building, the cost of which exceeds 450 million euro; regrets the lack of a comprehensive, long-term, and fully transparent overview of cumulative costs, including indirect costs related to maintenance, security, operations, and temporary relocations; emphasises that the credibility of Parliament depends on exemplary property management and therefore calls for greater transparency regarding the governance of real estate projects: a systematic presentation of detailed comparative analyses between purchase, lease, usufruct, and optimization of the existing portfolio in order to make informed decisions on major investment decisions, as well as enhanced budgetary monitoring, including regular reports on cost overruns, delays, and financial risks in a context of persistent financial constraints;

19. Amendment 53 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 94 a (new)

    Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

    Added: 94 a. In the interest of transparency of Parliament’s administrative budget, calls for full clarity to be provided on all mission expenses of administrative staff, with travel within and outside the Union amounting to more than EUR 732 000 in 2024; calls for the systematic and detailed disclosure of the purpose of each trip, the nature of the expenses incurred and the status of the participants, in order to provide the discharge authority with a comprehensive overview of the use of Union funds so that it can take informed decisions, and to ensure that taxpayers in the Member States also have access to this information;

20. Amendment 57 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 146

    Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

    … and to uphold democratic integrity in Parliament’s funding of European Political parties; Added: in this regard, is concerned that certain European political parties6a (primarily donations received by ALDE from Microsoft, Vodafone, etc.) and European political foundations6b (donations received by the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies from Janssen Pharmaceutica, Apple, Google, etc., by George Soros’s Open Society for the Foundation for European Progressive Studies and for the Green European Foundation, by Google, Janssen, Apple, Microsoft, Vodafone, for the European Liberal Forum, etc.) are partly funded by major IT, pharmaceutical, and other groups—whose parent companies are notably American—which could be equated with lobbying and thus suggest some influence on the legislative process or contribution to election campaigns; thus warns against potential conflicts of interest that could arise from this legal situation, albeit ethically questionable, particularly when members of these political groups serve as rapporteurs on dossiers relating to these sectors; expresses its deep concern regarding the suspicions of foreign interference that this could raise; 5 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2025/2445 of the European Parliament and of the … political parties and European political foundations (OJ L, 2025/2445, 8.12.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2025/2445/oj). Added: 6a https://www.appf.europa.eu/cmsdata/301297/2024%20PARTIES%20Contributions%20and%20Donations.pdf 6b https://www.appf.europa.eu/cmsdata/300386/2024%20FOUNDATIONS%20Contributions%20and%20Donations.pdf

21. Amendment 58 · Motion for a resolutionRejected

    Paragraph 149 a (new)

    Tabled by Julien Sanchez · PfE

    Added: 149 a. Recalls that in 2024, more than 10 million euro was spent by European political parties on election campaigns; emphasises the high sensitivity of this type of expenditure with regard to compliance with Member States’ electoral law and the differences in resources that each European party can mobilise; requests that this type of expenditure be the subject of a more detailed supplementary report as part of the accountability process to ensure the proper use of Union funds and compliance with Member States’ electoral law;