Proyecto de presupuesto rectificativo n.º 3 al presupuesto general para 2025: ajuste de los créditos de pago y actualización de los ingresos y otras actualizaciones técnicas

Texto tal como lo publica el PE, en inglés.

1. Enmienda 1Rechazada

   Recital E

   Presentada por Julien Sanchez, Auke Zijlstra · PfE

   … GNI contributions of EUR 31,9 million are required to meet the payment Eliminado: needs; Añadido: needs reflecting a persistent willingness to increase the burden placed on Member States and taxpayers;

2. Enmienda 2Rechazada

   Paragraph 1

   Presentada por Julien Sanchez, Auke Zijlstra · PfE

   1. Eliminado: Takes note of Draft amending budget No 3/2025 as submitted by the Commission, and in particular of the overall very low impact on Member States’ GNI contributions, due to the balance of higher payment needs and additional revenue flows; Añadido: Disapproves of the presentation made by the Commission in Draft Amending Budget No 3/2025, which, despite the exceptional increase in revenue from fines and penalties as well as the surplus of traditional own resources, still requests additional GNI contributions amounting to EUR 31,9 million; stresses that such recourse reflects unbalanced budgetary management and confirms the Commission’s tendency to systematically shift the financial burden onto the Member States, instead of controlling its expenditure and making more efficient use of existing revenues;

3. Enmienda 3Rechazada

   Paragraph 8

   Presentada por Julien Sanchez, Auke Zijlstra · PfE

   8. Takes note of the Eliminado: adjustments of the Union contribution to Añadido: proposed adjustments to the Union’s contribution to the various decentralised agencies; Eliminado: considers these adjustments mostly technical in nature; welcomes them in as far as they optimise the use of resources under the operational lines, such as LIFE, AMIF or the Single Market Programme; regrets, however, that the underlying reason for ‘returning’ commitment and payment appropriations from the respective agency lines to the related programme lines is a delay in the recruitment of staff or a delay in the roll-out of new policy and legislative initiatives such as Retail Investment Strategy (which concerns ESMA and EIOPA), the Asylum and Migration Pact (which concerns the EUAA), the maritime safety package (which concerns EMSA) or the proposal on new genomic techniques (which concerns EFSA); Añadido: stresses that these adjustments, presented as purely technical, in fact reveal a lack of budgetary discipline and a questionable political orientation; underlines that the transfer of EUR 48 million in commitments and EUR 45 million in payments from the European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA) to the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF), officially intended to support the preparation of the implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum, exemplifies a costly, bureaucratic and ineffective model of migration governance, even though the mid-term revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework has already allocated an additional EUR 2 billion to this same Pact for the period 2025–2027; notes that, despite these successive budgetary increases, illegal arrivals continue to rise across the Union and the number of effective returns remains marginal; therefore considers that there is no tangible indicator demonstrating the effectiveness of AMIF and that any reinforcement of AMIF funding is unjustified;

4. Enmienda 4Rechazada

   Paragraph 8

   Presentada por Auke Zijlstra, Julien Sanchez · PfE

   … contribution to various decentralised agencies; considers these adjustments mostly technical in nature; Eliminado: welcomes them in as far as they optimise the use of resources under the operational lines, such as LIFE, AMIF or the Single Market Programme; regrets, however, that the underlying reason for ‘returning’ commitment and payment appropriations from the respective agency lines to the related programme lines is a delay in the recruitment of staff or a delay in the roll-out of new policy and legislative initiatives such as Retail Investment Strategy (which concerns ESMA and EIOPA), the Asylum and Migration Pact (which concerns the EUAA), the maritime safety package (which concerns EMSA) or the proposal on new genomic techniques (which concerns EFSA); Añadido: brings into memory the recent funding scandal concerning LIFE, involving NGO-contracts; points to the Second report on discharge in respect of the implementation of the EU agencies for the financial year 2023 (2024/2030(DEC)) reporting on the structural problems at the EUAA (asylum agency);

5. Enmienda 5Rechazada

   Paragraph 8 a (new)

   Presentada por Julien Sanchez, Auke Zijlstra · PfE

   Añadido: 8a. Deplores the reinforcement of the LIFE programme by EUR 6,4 million; stresses that such expenditure, the environmental impact of which remains uncertain, often reflect ideological choices made at the expense of a rigorous assessment of their effectiveness; considers that it would be more responsible to redirect these appropriations towards strategic priorities such as security, agriculture and research; calls on the Commission to put an end to the proliferation of costly and inefficient programmes;