The European Parliament held a vote on granting discharge to the European Union institutions, including the European Commission, for the implementation of the EU budget in 2024. The PiS delegation did not support granting discharge or the adopted resolution, citing significant reservations regarding the manner in which the report was prepared and its content.
In the PiS delegation’s view, the document goes beyond the scope of a technical review of budget implementation and largely takes on the character of a political manifesto, reflecting the European Commission’s current policy directions. Attention was drawn to one-sided references regarding the situation in Poland and Hungary in the area of the rule of law, which—as the PiS delegation emphasizes—do not meet the standards of a balanced and objective analysis required in the discharge procedure.
The PiS delegation also points out that the report places excessive emphasis on climate issues, while failing to give sufficient consideration to the competitiveness and innovation of the European economy.
Another key point of contention is the proposal to introduce new EU own resources, which the PiS delegation views as an issue requiring separate and in-depth interinstitutional negotiations, independent of the discharge procedure.
PiS MEP Joachim Brudziński, a member of the European Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT), emphasized: “The discharge cannot be a tool for political evaluation of member states or an instrument of ideological pressure. It should remain a rigorous audit of the implementation of the EU budget—without selectivity or double standards. During the work on the report, we proposed amendments aimed at genuinely improving the oversight of spending and limiting the political misuse of mechanisms such as milestones or the rule of law. However, these amendments were rejected, including due to a lack of support from PO MEPs, which shows that there was no will to make substantive corrections to this document.”
The PiS delegation also points out that although the report addresses irregularities in the functioning of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and to the challenges arising from the war in Ukraine, it does not provide a fully neutral and comprehensive assessment of the implementation of the EU budget.
In many places, the document—instead of focusing on a financial assessment—too often strayed into strictly political issues, repeatedly undermining its original, oversight-oriented nature.
Consequently, PiS MEPs voted against granting discharge to the European Commission and against adopting the accompanying resolution.
