4 Amendments of Petr JEŽEK related to 2017/2177(DEC)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights that in order to cover its support to Member States of first entry, in particular for the registration and interviewing of asylum applicants and for the relocation scheme, the budgetWelcomes the Court of Auditors' conclusions that the annual accounts of the European Asylum Support Office (‘the Office’) incpreased by 273 %; underlines the fact that the Office’s staff increased by only 34 % and that far fewer experts from Member States have been deployed to Member States of first entry than actually needednt fairly its financial position on 31 December 2016; notes, however, that the Court of Auditors issued a qualified opinion on the payments underlying the Office's accounts;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Highlights that, in order to cover its support to Member States of first entry, in particular for the registration and interviewing of asylum applicants and for the relocation scheme, the budget of the European Asylum Support Office (‘the Office’) increased by 273 %; notes that the Office’s staff increased by 34 % and that fewer experts from Member States have been deployed to Member States of first entry than actually needed;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Requests the Office to improve its budgetary management asNotes that the level of committed appropriations for Title II (administrative expenditure) carried over was high at EUR 2,5 million (43,9 %) and corresponds to contracts signed towards the end of 2016 or for which invoices were only issued in 2017; requests therefore that the Office improve its budgetary management;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets theat the Court of Auditors issued a qualified opinion on the payments underlying the Office's accounts due to fact that two of the five procurement procedures that audited payments (representing 2.9% of the total expenditures) were irregular due to relatehad irregular public procurement procedures; notes also the signature of an irregular additional framework contract for which no payments were made; requests the Office to cancel all related contractscognises that the Office agreed to the contract due to the extreme pressures it was facing at the time; highlights, nevertheless, that such irregular procurement procedures are unacceptable and asks the Office to ensure that they are not repeated;