Votazione al Parlamento europeo

Progetto di bilancio rettificativo n. 3 del bilancio generale 2025 - Adeguamento degli stanziamenti di pagamento, aggiornamento delle entrate e altri aggiornamenti tecnici

Victor Negrescu – Proposta di risoluzione (insieme del testo)
Data: 26.11.2025·Riferimento: A10-0237/2025
Relatore: Victor Negrescu

Risultato complessivo

Approvata
  • 519 A favore
  • 99 Contro
  • 45 Astensione
  • 56 Non ha votato
Stato e procedura

Risultato registrato dal Parlamento europeo.

Votazione del
Ultima fase documentata
Gazzetta ufficiale · (291 giorni fa)
Prossima fase prevista
Nella fonte non è prevista alcuna ulteriore fase.
Pubblicazione nella Gazzetta ufficiale documentata

Svolgimento della procedura

2025/0319(BUD) · BUD

Attività documentate della procedura. Non stabiliscono se una legge sia entrata in vigore.

  1. Documentato: Esame in commissione22 giorni alla fase successiva
  2. Documentato: Plenaria4 giorni alla fase successiva
  3. Documentato: DeferimentoFase successiva lo stesso giorno
  4. Documentato: Plenaria63 giorni alla fase successiva
  5. Ultimo documentato: Gazzetta ufficiale
Attività documentate (9)
  1. Relazione della commissione presentata
  2. Emendamenti presentati in commissione
  3. Relazione della commissione approvata
  4. Presentazione in plenaria
  5. Deferimento alla commissione
  6. Presentazione in plenaria
  7. Votazione in plenaria
  8. Risultati della votazione in plenaria
  9. Pubblicazione nella Gazzetta ufficiale
Attività previste (non confermano lo svolgimento)
  1. Votazione in plenaria

Scheda della procedura (OEIL) · Dati del Parlamento europeo
Consultato il:

Fonti

Dati: EP Open Data API

Di cosa si tratta?

  • The Draft Amending Budget No. 3/2025 adjusts EU payment appropriations and updates revenue estimates for 2025.
  • It prioritizes funding for the European Regional Development Fund and the Common Agricultural Policy to accelerate program implementation and ensure food security.
  • Additional resources are allocated to the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (STEP) and sustainable fisheries partnerships.
  • Revenue from fines and customs duties offsets increased payment needs, minimizing member state contributions.
  • Delays in instruments like the Ukraine Facility and customs control equipment are noted as concerns.
Fonte: relazione esplicativa (generata da IA)

Cronologia degli emendamenti (5)

Testo come pubblicato dal PE, in inglese.

  1. Emendamento 1Respinta

    Recital E

    Presentato da Julien Sanchez, Auke Zijlstra · PfE

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

  2. Emendamento 2Respinta

    Paragraph 1

    Presentato da Julien Sanchez, Auke Zijlstra · PfE

    1. Rimosso: 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; Aggiunto: 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. Emendamento 3Respinta

    Paragraph 8

    Presentato da Julien Sanchez, Auke Zijlstra · PfE

    8. Takes note of the Rimosso: adjustments of the Union contribution to Aggiunto: proposed adjustments to the Union’s contribution to the various decentralised agencies; Rimosso: 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); Aggiunto: 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. Emendamento 4Respinta

    Paragraph 8

    Presentato da Auke Zijlstra, Julien Sanchez · PfE

    … contribution to various decentralised agencies; considers these adjustments mostly technical in nature; Rimosso: 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); Aggiunto: 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. Emendamento 5Respinta

    Paragraph 8 a (new)

    Presentato da Julien Sanchez, Auke Zijlstra · PfE

    Aggiunto: 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;

Voto per gruppo politico

Come hanno votato i gruppi politici

Membri

Visualizzati 10 di 719

Posizione di voto
NomePaeseGruppoPosizione di voto
PoloniaS&D
A favore
SpagnaS&D
A favore
FranciaGUE/NGL
A favore
GreciaGUE/NGL
A favore
SveziaEPP
A favore
DanimarcaRenew
A favore
CechiaGreens/EFA
A favore
RomaniaS&D
A favore
GermaniaGreens/EFA
A favore
BelgioRenew
A favore
Mostra altro
Seguici su Instagram@checksomevotes@checksomevotes_en