Activities of Brian HAYES related to 2016/2201(DEC)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2015 PDF (284 KB) DOC (56 KB)
Amendments (5)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. NoteRegrets that the Court has once again only issued a qualified opinion on the legality and regularity of the transactions underlying the annual accounts on the grounds of the administrative agreements signed with the National Funding Authorities (NFAs) regarding ex-post audits of project payments and the fact that the Joint Undertaking audit strategies relied heavily on the NFAs;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. NotesExpresses concern that the Court's report finds that it was impossible for the Joint Undertaking to calculate a reliable weighted error rate or a residual error rate because of the significant variation in the methodologies and procedures used by the NFAs and thus the Court could not conclude whether ex-post audits were functioning effectively and whether this key control provided sufficient assurance as to the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions for Seventh Framework Programme projects; recognises that the issue is related to the Seventh Framework Programme legal framework setup and thus not caused by the Joint Undertaking’s performance;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. NoteRegrets that the 28 Participating States were required to make a financial contribution to the operational costs of the Joint Undertaking proportional to the Union’s financial contribution; notes furthermore that so far only 11 Participating States declared payments in total amount of EUR 15 800 000;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that in 2015 the Internal Audit Services (IAS) performed a risk assessment of the Joint Undertaking, and is concerned that as a result it identified two ‘high impact/high risk areas’ administrative processes (namely, its risk management and anti-fraud strategy) and two ‘high risk/high impact area’ operational processes (namely, ex-post controls and the coordination/implementation of CSC tools); welcomes, however, the Joint Undertaking's already implemented and ongoing efforts to mitigate these risks;