EU Budget expenditure tracking and performance framework

Key points

The EESC:

• supports the initiative to establish a unified and coherent set of output and result indicators across the entire Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), to harmonise the application of horizontal principles, to introduce a single annual management and performance report, and to create a single portal for all MFF-related information;
• points out that the Performance Regulation implicitly defines the scope of eligible programmes on an ex-ante basis, with disbursement of EU funds is linked to the achievement of milestones and targets to be defined by output and result indicators. This renders the framework highly political; 
• stresses that, where payments are conditional on milestones and targets, results are often difficult to measure in a timely fashion, particularly for social interventions. Therefore proposes that an opt-out option be introduced in the performance framework: public authorities should be able either to apply cost-based financing in the implementation of NRRP’s in the event of objective difficulties in collecting and measuring data, or to supplement the quantitative reporting with qualitative indicators;
• calls for efforts to promote the visibility of biodiversity spending within the broader environmental target;
• recommends ensuring a transparent, predictable and proportionate application of the ‘do no significant harm’ (DNSH) principle across the EU budget. The principle should be applied consistently across programmes and be supported by a clear definition of what constitutes significant harm. Its application should be proportionate to the actual risks posed by an initiative to the objectives protected by the DNSH principle. This proportionality should avoid unduly penalising activities that, when carried out within the EU, are already significantly more climate and environmentally friendly than comparable activities elsewhere, thereby reducing the risk of offshoring investments to jurisdictions with lower standards. Furthermore, the application of the DNSH principle should take into account the size and capacity of beneficiaries, recognising that smaller entities may face greater challenges in meeting reporting requirements. Finally, the EESC believes that the exemption of defence from the DNSH principle should be targeted and not allow for a broad exemption of activities under the guise of dual use;
• urges that funding counted under the social investment quota remain focused on the core objectives of the European Social Fund (ESF);
• considers that Article 6 of the Performance Regulation needs to be strengthened to ensure that, where feasible, appropriate and in accordance with sector-specific rules, EU-funded programmes and activities contribute to creating and maintaining quality jobs through proportionate social conditionalities and recommends an annual reporting on the quality of jobs;
• recommends identifying quantitative and qualitative indicators to measure organised civil society and social partner engagement, from design to implementation stage, making the partnership principle in the context of the NRPP more effective, meaningful, executable and measurable;
• points out that civil society organisations and social partners are expected to use the Performance Regulation indicators to translate policy into local strategy. Therefore, the EESC recommends co-legislators to increase technical assistance;
• is in favour of introducing gender mainstreaming into the Performance Framework as a horizontal principle;
• the EESC proposes certain changes to ANNEX I of the Commission proposal "Intervention fields and indicators", to be consulted in the annex to this EESC opinion.