Activities of Mireille D'ORNANO related to 2017/2136(DEC)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2016, Section III - Commission and executive agencies
Amendments (7)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is satisfied with the work carried out by the five decentralised agencies which are under its remit and which carry out technical, scientific or managerial tasks that help the Union institutions elaborate and implement policies in the area of environment, climate, public health and food safety, as well as with the way those agencies’ budgets are implemented; points out, however, that the independence of several agencies has been called into serious question by the publication of documents known as the 'Monsanto papers', which reveal probable conflicts of interest, particularly in relation to the European Food Safety Authority;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines that the budget of DG ENV is mainly implemented through direct centralised management, and that in 2016 commitments and payment appropriations amounted to EUR 438,31 million and EUR 357,62 million respectively; stresses that it is satisfactory that the implementation rates of commitment appropriations reached 98,95 % and that those of payment appropriations reached 99,17 % at year end; stresses, at the same time, that the budget of DG ENV, like the budget of the Commission as a whole, should be strictly limited, given that their contribution to the increase in the contributions of certain net contributor Member States is becoming increasingly financially untenable;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that internal audits carried out in 2016 showed that in DG ENV improvements in human resources management were possible as this DG was not able to effectively monitor and compare workload within the DG; adds that this is worrying in view of the future management of the Union's revenue, which is likely to decline following the departure of the United Kingdom;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Supports the use of budget support but urges the Commission to better define the development outcomes to be achieved in each case and above all to enhance control mechanisms concerning recipient states' conduct in the fields of corruption, respect of human rights, rule of law and democracy; notes the Court’s Special Report 35/2016 on the use of budget support for domestic resource mobilisation (DRM) in sub-Saharan Africa, which finds that the Commission's ex-ante analyses of DRM are not sufficiently detailed and do not follow its own guidelines, that the Commission often fails to assess tax exemptions and illicit capital outflows and does not properly consider extraction dividends and whether royalties for access to natural resources have been paid; is concerned about the Commission’s low and sometimes not relevant use of DRM conditions in budget support contracts; calls on the Commission to improve its ex post evaluation of action financed by budget support, which will enable the most effective kinds of intervention in the field of development to be more precisely determined in the future; stresses in addition that Member States with fiscal difficulties (in particular the net contributors), being unable to achieve the official development assistance objectives they have set, cannot put up with any failure, in connection with budget support, to meet these basic requirements as regards transparency and evaluation.
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that internal audits also showed that there were delays in the implementation of one very important IT security related recommendation (on the management of the security of the EU ETS IT system), which exposes the DG to the risk of security breaches; adds that this is particularly worrying given that this system covers 31 countries and limits emissions from more than 11 000 installations, particularly industrial plants, as well as from airlines that link participating countries, and bearing in mind that the consequences of an IT failure would be disastrous given the tension that the ETS creates for our industries, which face often unfair, highly CO2-emitting global competition;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Looks forward to being fully informed and consulted on the mid-term review of the Development Cooperation Instrument which is supposed to take into account the Agenda 2030 and a new European Consensus on Development; stresses that, to be properly comprehensive, the mid-term review should contain an analysis of the synergies observed between development aid delivered by the EDF and that delivered by each Member State under its development assistance policy.
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls the Union's collective commitment to raise the Union's and its Member States' official development assistance (ODA) to 0.7% of their Gross National Income (GNI);notes that an increase in EU budget contributions by Member States that are net contributors complicates their fiscal position, and thus makes them less able to achieve the goal of increasing ODA to 0.7 % of their GNI, thus heightening legitimate expectations for more effective EU ODA to beneficiary states.