Activities of Caterina CHINNICI related to 2020/2167(DEC)
Shadow reports (1)
SECOND REPORT on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency for the financial year 2019
Opinions (2)
OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency for the financial year 2019
OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency for the financial year 2019
Amendments (10)
Amendment 2 #
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Grants/Refuses to grant the Executive Director of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2019;
Amendment 6 #
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency for the financial year 2019 / Points out that a proposal to close the accounts of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency for the financial year 2019 must be submitted at a subsequent part-session;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls the finding of the Court of Auditors (the ‘Court’) regarding financing agreements that reimbursements were still based on actual costs instead of on unit costs, and the associated issues identified with supporting evidence; recalls that this issue was also identified in the discharge for 2018; notes from the Agency’s follow- up report that the Agency has piloted the unit cost approach for heavy equipment with two Member States and an analysis was made on the use of unit costs for the deployment of human resources and light technical equipment; notes that in the pilot projects for heavy equipment revealed that the unit cost approach would increased the total costs, as the financial consequences of unpredictable events such as weather conditions, repairs and days needed for transfer of the asset, that are now reimbursable on the basis of presented evidence, would need to be factored into the unit cost; calls on the Court the examine the unit cost approach piloted by the Agency and inform the discharge authority if this approach is indeed not suited for heavy equipment;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes the Court’s Special Report 08/2021 entitled ‘Frontex’s support to external border management: not sufficiently effective to date’; notes the Court’s conclusion that the Agency’s support to Member States and Schengen associated countries in fighting against illegal immigration and cross-border crime is not sufficiently effective and that the Agency has not fully implemented its mandate under Regulation (EU) 2016/16243 since it has not taken the measures necessary to adapt its organisation to address that mandate; notes further that the Court highlighted significant risks related to the Agency’s mandate under Regulation (EU) 2019/18964 ; _________________ 3 Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2016 on the European Border and Coast Guard and amending Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Regulation (EC) No 863/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Council Regulation (EC) No 2007/2004 and Council Decision 2005/267/EC (OJ L 251, 16.9.2016, p. 1). 4Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2019 on the European Border and Coast Guard and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1052/2013 and (EU) 2016/1624 (OJ L 295, 14.11.2019, p. 1).
Amendment 27 #
7. Notes the Court’s conclusion that although a functional information exchange framework is in place to support the fight against illegal immigration, it did not function well enough to provide accurate, complete and up-to-date situational awareness of the Union’s external borders; notes that the Agency dispatches timely and relevant migration information about the situation at the external borders and provides information about specific events; notesis concerned, however, someby serious drawbacks as far as external border control is concernedundermining complete situational awareness at the Union external border, such as the lack of information, technical standards for border control equipment, a common catalogue for cross-border crime reporting, and near- real-time information about the situation at the Union’s air borders, and delays in updating the common integrated risk analysis model;
Amendment 30 #
9 a. Is concerned by the Court’s finding that the Agency did not provide adequate information about the impact or cost of its activities and that the Agency did not carry out a robust evaluation of joint operations, did not explain any deviation or identify the impact of any gaps in resources, and did not provide information about the real costs of its joint operations; highlights that the Agency has an obligation to provide adequate information about the impacts and costs of its activities to ensure transparency and accountability;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that the Commission and the Agency accepted or partially accepted, all recommendations of the Court and calls on the budgetary authority to look into the possibility to put a part of the Agency’s future budget appropriations in a reserve that can be made available when the following conditions are met: a. at least 40 fundamental rights monitors are recruited at AD grade in line with Article 110 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2019 on the European Border and Coast Guard and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1052/2013 and (EU) 2016/1624; b. three deputy executive directors are recruited in line with Article 107 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896; c. a detailed specific procedure for the implementation of Article 46 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 is adopted; d. milestones in the implementation of the Court’s recommendations are met;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recalls the establishment of the Frontex Scrutiny Working Group (FSWG) by Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs; notes that the Frontex Scrutiny Working GroupSWG published its report on the fact-finding investigation on Frontex concerning alleged fundamental rights violations on 14 July 2021; notes that the Frontex Scrutiny WSWG did not find conclusive evidence on the direct performance of pushbacks and/or collective expulsions by Frontex, but concluded that Frontex found evidence supporkting Group found no proof of the Agency’s involvement in alleged illegal pushbacksallegations of fundamental rights violations in Member States with which it had a joint operation, but failed to adequately address these violations; notes that the FSWG found deficiencies in Frontex’s mechanisms to monitor, report and assess fundamental rights situations and developments and deficiencies in cooperation with Member States; highlights the concern of the FSWG over the lack of cooperation of the Executive Director to ensure compliance with the fundamental rights provisions of the Regulation (EU) 2019/1896; calls on the Agency to act on the recommendations of the FSWG without delay;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Notes the conclusions of the European Ombudsman’s enquiry into the Agency complaints mechanism for reporting breaches of fundamental rights and the Fundamental Rights Officer; notes that the Ombudsman identified shortcomings in the complaints mechanism, which may make it more difficult for individuals to report alleged fundamental rights violations and seek redress; notes that the Ombudsman identified delays in fulfilling the obligations of the Agency in this regard;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. NStrongly disapproves of the delay in appointing the fundamental rights officers and the fundamental rights monitors, especially in light of the extension of the Cabinet of the Executive Management of Frontex; notes that the Agency’s fundamental rights officer took office on 1 June 2021; notes the statements of the Agency’s executive director that the recruitment of a first batch of 20 fundamental rights monitors is completed, with the fundamental rights monitors starting their training from 1 June 2021, and that the appointment of a second batch of 20 fundamental rights monitors is ongoing; further notes the statement that of those 20 fundamental right monitors, five have been appointed at AD level and fifteen at AST level; is concerned that this lower ranking might affect the effectiveness of the monitors; reiterates that Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 provides for the recruitment of at least 40 fundamental rights monitors by 5 December 2020; is deeply concerned that this obligation remains unfulfilled and insists that the Agency swiftly appoints the remaining 20 fundamental rights monitors at AD grade; notes the Agency’s statement that those remaining 20 fundamental rights monitors will be recruited from an established AD 7 reserve list, once additional AD7 posts have been allocated to the Agency;