Activities of Saskia BRICMONT related to 2022/2134(DEC)
Opinions (1)
OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Union Agencies for the financial year 2021: performance, financial management and control
Amendments (9)
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the Court issued three ‘emphasis on the matter’ paragraphs in relation to Frontex for reliability of the accounts regarding the carry-over to 2021, for reliability of the accounts concerning the incorrect calculation of contributions from non-EU Schengen area countries, and for reliability of the accounts and for the legality and regularity of payments concerning certification of the accounts; is concerned about weaknesses in recruitment at Frontex related to the evaluation process; reiterates its deep concern about the findings of the OLAF report; and reaffirms that the granting of discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the JHA Aagencies is conditional on the Agencies’ accountability and transparency, fundamental rights compliance, and commitment to comply with Union lawmust comply with fundamental rights as a pre-requisite for the discharge to be granted; recommends the Committee on Budgetary Control to postpone granting the discharge to Frontex in respect of the implementation of its budget for the financial year 2021 until Frontex fully complies with such requirements and there are no further instances of fundamental rights violations;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that weaknesses in budgetary management can result in high carry-overs or late payments; is concerned that the Court found such shortcomings at Frontex, eu-LISA, EPPO and FRA; acknowledges that such situation could indicate a structural issue, weak budgetary planning, or possibly a contravention of the budgetary principle of annuality; recalls the importance of ensuring appropriate budget planning and its implementation cycles;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Applauds that the Court has decided to examine potential ‘revolving door’ situations in its audit and asks that this topic, as well as the associated risk of conflict of interests, is also included in future annual reports; shares the opinion by the Court that Agencies are particularly prone to the risk of ‘revolving door’ situations; expresses deep concern that the EU legal framework applicable to managing ‘revolving door’ risks lacks clear requirements on compliance and monitoring, and that it do not apply to members of the agencies’ boards; urges agencies to ensure that internal rules managing ‘revolving door’ and potential conflict of interests risks are put in place and fully and correctly implemented;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that the EU legal framework for managing ‘revolving door’ and conflict of interests risks should define a common legal basis defining a minimum level of requirements to prevent such situations, as well as the manner in which monitoring compliance of current and former staff with the ‘revolving door’ and conflict of interest requirements should take place; calls on the Commission to propose changes to prevent any risk of ‘revolving door’ and conflict of interest;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Reiterates its concern that the Court has identified a recurrent shortcoming applying to several agencies in the use of external staff and interim workers; calls for the dependency on external recruitment by agencies to be addressed and for applicable labour law to be respected; notes the judgement of the Court of Justice of 11 November 2021 in Case C-948/19 which considered as part of the scope of the application of Directive 2008/104/EC temporary agency workers to Union agencies; calls on the agencies to rely as much as possible on permanent staff and on the Commission to ensure appropriate human resources allocations for this purpose;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Requests that cooperation among JHA agencies is fully transparent and accountability ensured; calls on all JHA agencies to take measures to ensure full compliance with EU transparency rules as well as with fundamental rights and data protection standards; considers that the disclosure of meetings and interactions between JHA Agencies and third parties is required to ensure enhanced transparency by JHA Agencies; urges JHA Agencies to step up efforts in this direction;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on all JHA agencies to take into account sustainability in their overall business processes in order to improve the agencies’ environmental performance, and to report to the discharge authority on implemented measures and progress;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. CRegrets the lack of gender balance and diversity in the Management boards and within the staff of JHA Agencies; calls on all JHA agencies to ensure a gender balanced distribution on all levels of staff and report to the discharge authority on implemented measures and progress; further calls on all JHA Agencies to develop internal policies and practices to ensure inclusiveness and diversity, and prevent any type of discrimination; asks the Court to systematically inform about it in its future reports;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Urges all JHA agencies to implement a clear anti-harassment policy; to prevent and firmly condemn any such behaviour within the organisation;