The European Court of Auditors found that the Commission's interventions during COVID-19 led to more complexity and less transparency.

Omissions

• The MEP did not cite a specific ECA report number or year; multiple ECA audits touch on COVID-19 transparency, each with different scope and nuance.
• The ECA's findings on complexity are more implicit — arising from the proliferation of new instruments (SURE, RRF, CRII, CRII+) — than stated as an explicit finding of 'more complexity.'
• The MEP's formulation presents the ECA's criticism as a blanket judgment, whereas ECA reports typically balance criticism with recognition of the unprecedented circumstances of the pandemic.
• An ECA special report on RRF traceability and transparency was scheduled for publication on 6 May 2026, just 12 days before the session; the MEP may have been referencing its preview, but its final content and conclusions were not publicly available at session_date in a form the MEP could fully rely upon.

Sources

• PrimaryEuropean Court of Auditors — Special Report 02/2023The ECA recommended that 'the Commission applies corrections in line with the legal framework, ensures timely implementation, and improves transparency' in the context of adapting cohesion policy rules to respond to COVID-19.
• Secondaryeucrim — European Criminal Law Association Platform'The auditors reiterate their criticism that the RRF suffers from several weaknesses in terms of performance, accountability and transparency.' This summarises ECA criticism of the Recovery and Resilience Facility, a key COVID-19 Commission intervention.
• SecondaryIEU MonitoringAnnounces an ECA special report on 'traceability and transparency of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF)' to be published on 6 May 2026 — confirming the ECA's ongoing scrutiny of Commission COVID-19 instrument transparency. The report examines whether the Commission and member states ensured sufficient traceability and transparency of RRF funds.