49 Amendments of Bogusław LIBERADZKI related to 2008/2186(DEC)
Amendment 1 #
Paragraph 1
1. .........Grants the Commission discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2008;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 - indent 1
Paragraph 11 - indent 1
- in the Court's opinion, the transactions underlying the revenue and commitments for the financial year are, taken as a whole, legal and regular (paragraph VIII, Statement of Assurance), "except forwhilst the Court draws attention to the high fiduciary risk with regard to budget support resulting from the Commission's 'dynamic interpretation' of the eligibility criteria" (paragraph X, Statement of Assurance)
Amendment 6 #
Paragraph 1
1. .........Grants the Director of the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2008;
Amendment 8 #
Paragraph 1
1. .........Grants the Director of the Executive Agency for Competitiveness and innovation discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2008;
Amendment 10 #
Paragraph 1
1. .........Grants the Director of the Executive Agency for Health and Consumers discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2008;
Amendment 12 #
Paragraph 1
1. .........Grants the Director of the Trans- European Transport Network Executive Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2008;
Amendment 14 #
Paragraph 1
1. .........Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2008;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution with observations forming an integral part of the Decisions on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2008, Section III – Commission and executive agencies
Heading before paragraph -1 (new)
Heading before paragraph -1 (new)
Overriding concerns
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Welcomes the initial signs of a collegial approach from the new Commission, as demonstrated in the engagement of Commissioners Andor, Hahn and Semeta in discussions with Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control, and expects a strong statement from Commissioners Lewandowski and Semeta promising action in the areas of: Member State statements of assurance, proposals for tolerable risk of error, simplification and transparency, and trust funds covering external actions, and further believes that this must cover further action in the area of corrections and recoveries, and internal control systems;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 b(new)
Paragraph -1 b(new)
-1b. Believes that errors in expenditure hinder effectiveness in achieving EU policy targets, and reiterates that policy groups with an error rate below 2 % still account for only 47 % of the EU budget, representing an increase of just 9 % from 2005 to 2008; considers that this is still an inadequate level of improvement year on year and points out that, despite some areas of improvement, an error rate above 5 % remains in policy groups which account for 31 % of the budget, and a rate of between 2 % and 5 % for a further 22 %;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 c (new)
Paragraph -1 c (new)
-1c. Calls on the Commission to prepare and submit to Parliament a new Action Plan for 2010 onwards, providing for an acceleration in the reduction of error rates so as to ensure that a further 20 % of the budget can be given an ECA ‘green’ classification by 2014, with interim targets for an error rate below 2 % in 70 % of expenditure, and a goal of reducing to 15 % the proportion of the budget with an ECA ‘red’ classification in 2011; considers that reaching these targets is an essential part of getting full value for EU expenditure in the future and progressing towards a positive DAS;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 d (new)
Paragraph -1 d (new)
-1d. Calls on the Commission President to inform Parliament about how the Commission will operate in a more coordinated way, so as to address remaining weaknesses in the financial systems and significantly reduce error rates as indicated above;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that significant action is needed to ensure that the CommissionAcknowledges that in its Communication on the impact of the action plan to strengthen the Commission’s supervisory role under shared management of structural actions brings, the Commission indicates that the steps outlined in it have been completed; notes that the preliminary results show an error rate in expenditure of around 5 % for the 2007- 2013 period; awaits, however, the wider benefits to cohesion policy, where there are still very large problems despite the progress made by the Commission towards a more efficient use of EU funds and the overall control environment;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Calls on the Commission to carry out a more complete and exhaustive evaluation of the resources given over to control systems, by spending area, for all Union spending areas, as called for by Parliament in its discharge resolutions in previous years and in view of the "getting results" concept;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Is concerned that outstanding budgetary commitments (unused commitments carried forward to be used in future years), mainly on multiannual programmes, increased in 2008 by EUR 16,4 billion (11,8 %) to EUR 155,0 billion (point 3.9 of the 2008 Annual Report), whilst acknowledging that this is due to delays in the start-up phase of the new programmes, and is concerned that unused funds each year represent lost opportunities for implementation of EU policies and programmes;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Requests the Commission to present complete and reliable figures for financial corrections and, in particular, recoveries specifying the Member State concerned, the exact budget line and the year to which the individual recoveries relate (as already specified in the Discharge Report for 20061), given that any other presentation makes serious control impossible; 1 OJ L 88, 31.3.2009, p. 25.Or. en
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Draws attention to the example of Greece, where significant financial corrections brought about by Commission decision appear to have resulted in better performance in the implementation and control systems in the Cohesion Policy area;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Welcomes the statement by the Interparliamentary Conference on ‘Improving National Accountability of EU funds’ which took place in The Hague on 28-29 January 2010, recommending that national policy instruments be implemented or strengthened to contribute to the improvement of the control and management of EU expenditure in Member States, and that instruments used for the management and accountability of EU funding should contain elements of a common EU framework in order to make comparisons and identify ‘best practices’;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Notwithstanding the progressive improvement in the DAS since 2003 (56 % of expenditure given the Court’s green lighbeing given positive audit opinions by the Court in 2008 compared to 6 % in 2003), remains concerned by the Court’s assessment that it is not yet possible to determine whether the Action Plan has had a measurable impact on the supervisory and control systems, and that the Commission is not able to demonstrate that the steps taken by it to improve supervisory and control systems have been effective in mitigating the risk of error in some areas of the budget (points 2.28 and 2.33 of the 2008 Annual Report);
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
55. Invites the Commission to establish an interinstitutional dialogue for the determination of the rates of error, which may vary in different policy areas, and calls on the Commission to carry out such comparative analysis, inasmuch as this will form the sole basis making it possible to establish an ‘acceptable risk level’;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78
Paragraph 78
78. Stresses its proposals regarding the profile of an appropriate candidate forRequires the Commission to come forward, as a matter of urgency, with its promised and long-awaited ‘reflection paper’, and reiterates the importance of Parliament’s above-mentioned first- reading position of 20 November 2008 on the subject; wishes to re-emphasise that, for the future strength of OLAF, it should remain within the Commission whilst retaining its independence; stresses its proposals regarding the post of Director- General of OLAF, as contained in Parliament’s above-mentioned first-reading position of 20 November 2008; takes the view that the terms of the vacancy notice need to reflect this demand and stresses that the entire selection procedure needs to be carried out in an interinstitutional framework which fully respects Parliament’s prerogatives;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79
Paragraph 79
79. Welcomes the fact that the Court considered that, overall, the Member States’ statements regarding traditional own resources sent to the Commission were reliable and free from material error and also that the VAT– and GNI-based own resources were correctly calculated by Member States and correctly collected and entered in the Community accounts by the Commission;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 80
Paragraph 80
80. Notes however, regarding the VAT- based own resources, that the number of outstanding reservations increased in 2008, and thereforereservations dating back as far as 1989 continue to exist, and calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, to continue its efforts to ensure that reservations are lifted within reasonable timescales;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
Paragraph 81
81. Asks the Commission, regarding GNI- based own resources, to follow the Court’s recommendation in point 4.36 of its 2008 Annual Report and to communicate to Parliament what it intends to do to provide the reasonable assurance on the accuracy of the data requested by the Courtdetails of the progress made in applying direct verification and assessing supervisory and control systems in Member States’ national statistical institutes;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 105
Paragraph 105
105. Voices serious concern at the fact that the Commission suspended EUR 200 000 000 in agricultural funding for Romania and froze EUR 250 000 000 in Phare funding, EUR 105 000 000 in Sapard funding and EUR 144 000 000 in ISPA funding in Bulgaria, resulting in a final loss of; notes that the final loss for Bulgaria under Phare is EUR 220 000 000 for Bulgaria;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106
Paragraph 106
106. Is aware that the lack of reliable control systems and the management problems encountered pose a risk to European taxpayers' money; acknowledges the efforts made in the meantime to overcome these problems; disapproves of the fact that a Member State has failed to makeurges the Member States to continue making every effort to meet European requirements;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 107
Paragraph 107
107. Considers that the Commission should step up technical assistance to Member States lackito streng the necessaryn their administrative capacity; points out that sound management of European funds is an obligation and a duty for all Member States, and supports the temporary suspension of funding by the Commission in cases where a Member State's management systems fail to function as required; encourages the Commission to formulate a range of measures that might be used to exert pressure on a Member State, should this prove necessaryclear and detailed rules to be used by the Member States for further improvement of the EU funds management;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 108
Paragraph 108
108. Notes that over the period 2007 to 2013, Bulgaria is to receive EUR 6 500 000 000 in structural funding, and Romania EUR 20 300 000 000; calls for quarterly reports on thresponsible and effective administration of these funds;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111
Paragraph 111
111. Calls, furthermore, on OLAF to forward to it the findings of its enquiries concerning Bulgariaall the irregularities in the Member States;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112
Paragraph 112
112. Agrees with the Commission that all actions and measures recently taken by Bulgaria need to be followed up by credible, structural corrective actions and a fundamental reform of all structures involved in the management of EU funds, ensuring the correct and timely absorption of funds and a high level of transparency; calls in this context on the Commission to improve the coordination and communication with the national authorities and closely monitor the implementation of the various action plans submitted to it by Bulgaria, and to keep Parliament informed thereof;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97 a (new)
Paragraph 97 a (new)
97a. Notes with concern the difficulties encountered by Member States’ authorities as regards both the transposition of the 2007-2013 regulatory requirements (such as incompatibility issues between EU and national levels, delays in the establishment of the rules, unclear rules) and the establishment of the new management and control systems (allocation of tasks for the new institutions, i.e. the managing, certifying and audit authorities);
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 100
Paragraph 100
100. Welcomes the Commission’s undertaking to present a report on the initial impact of thits Action Plan in February 2010 and looks forward to receiving that report;and suggests to the Court that it carefully audit/analyse the report in its forthcoming annual report;
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 101
Paragraph 101
101. Deplores the fact that the Commission intends to wait until 2012 before presentingEncourages the Commission to present by 2011 at the latest a proposal on tolerable risk of error in the Cohesion policy area, which has been the most error- prone area;
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 105 a (new)
Paragraph 105 a (new)
105a. Requests the Commission to identify and spread best practices amongst Member States in order to allow an increased absorption of funds and improved beneficiary cash-flow by amending and simplifying the Structural Funds implementing regulations at national level;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 118
Paragraph 118
118. Notes that some legal provisions regarding research funding (e.g. concerning sanctions) were not applied previously, and calls on the Commission to end this state of affairs and to ensure the full and consistent application of the existing legal provisions;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution
Heading after paragraph 124
Heading after paragraph 124
Second-generation Schengen Information System
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 a (new)
Paragraph 124 a (new)
124a. Is very concerned about the delays in setting up the second-generation Schengen Information System and the implications of these delays for the EU budget and the Member States’ budgets; notes that the so-called ‘milestone 1 test’ concerning the stability, reliability and performance of the SIS II project, carried out at the end of January 2010, was not successful;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 c (new)
Paragraph 124 c (new)
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 d (new)
Paragraph 124 d (new)
124d. Stresses that the Commission should comply with its reporting obligations in a more timely and transparent manner;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 e (new)
Paragraph 124 e (new)
124e. Invites the European Court of Auditors to carry out an in-depth audit and to present a special report evaluating the management of the SIS II project by the Commission, from the beginning of the project starting with the initial call for tenders;
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 f (new)
Paragraph 124 f (new)
124f. Reserves the right to hold in reserve the funds to be allocated for the development of SIS II in the 2011 annual budget, in order to ensure full parliamentary scrutiny and oversight of the process;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 135
Paragraph 135
135. Notes with satisfaction the improvement in the clarity and structure of the Commission’s assessments of compliance with the requirements of the Cotonou AgreementDCI Agreement (Financing instrument for development cooperation); however, deplores the fact that the Court has found frequent cases in which the Commission did not demonstrate in a structured and formalised manner that public finance management was sufficiently transparent, accountable and effective, or, at least, that a credible and relevant reform programme was in place;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution – Conclusions concerning the special reports issued by the Court of Auditors
Part XVI a (new)
Part XVI a (new)
Part XVIa Special report No 16/2009 on the European Commission’s management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution – Conclusions concerning the special reports issued by the Court of Auditors
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 a (new)
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 a (new)
260a. Welcomes the Court’s sound assessment regarding the administration by the Commission of pre-accession assistance to Turkey;
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution – Conclusions concerning the special reports issued by the Court of Auditors
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 b (new)
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 b (new)
260b. Considers it worrying that the strategic planning for 2002-2004 as well as the 236 ‘priorities’ of the accession partnership in 2006 did not include any ranking in terms of importance or any consideration of the level/measures required concerning progress towards accession; criticises the obvious lack of efficient use of European financial aid; is disappointed that between 2006 and 2008 priorities which were marked as ‘short- term’ did not achieve any significant progress;
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution – Conclusions concerning the special reports issued by the Court of Auditors
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260c (new)
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260c (new)
260c. Underlines the Court’s call for a robust methodology with which to determine the strategic objectives for which EU financial assistance is most needed; considers that the designated measures for achieving each strategic objective need to be clearly defined; requests the Commission to ensure that the various project proposals include specific, quantifiable, realistic and relevant objectives so that their contribution demonstrably achieves strategic objectives;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution – Conclusions concerning the special reports issued by the Court of Auditors
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 d (new)
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 d (new)
260d. Points out that, even though the Commission has introduced measures aimed at addressing many of the weaknesses in the Decentralised Implementation System, in particular since the introduction of the new Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA 2007-2013), the Commission still has to address the remaining weaknesses in overall programming and performance management, as recommended by the Court; also expects the Commission to make the Turkish authorities aware of this fact so that project proposals are drawn up which would allow the strategic objectives relating to the financing of the European Union to be achieved within a realistic timescale; considers that the Commission should undertake new initiatives in order to improve the design and implementation of the projects by the institutions of the Decentralised Implementation System (measures such as compulsory needs assessments and better scheduling of contracting arrangements);
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution – Conclusions concerning the special reports issued by the Court of Auditors
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 e (new)
Part XVI a – Paragraph 260 e (new)
260e. Recalls the importance of an evaluation by the Commission of the entirety of the programme for pre- accession assistance to Turkey;