Activities of Edit HERCZOG related to 2011/2224(DEC)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2010 PDF (193 KB) DOC (126 KB)
Amendments (25)
Amendment 1 #
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. ...Grants the Executive Director of the European Aviation Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency's budget for the financial year 2010;
Amendment 3 #
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. ...Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2010;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that two-thirds from the Agency's budget come from fees and charges paid by the industry, one-third comes from Union subsidy and the initial European Union contribution to the Agency for 2010 amounted to EUR 32 879 000; notes however that EUR 1 318 000, coming from the recovery of surplus, was added to it which, as a result, makes a total European Union contribution of EUR 34 197 000 for 2010;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that under Article 3 of Commission Regulation N°593/2007 of 31 May 2007 on the fees and charges levied by the European Aviation Safety Agency15 the revenues from fees constitute assigned revenues which can be carried over by the Agency as long as they have not been used and that the positive budget result f; notes that industry receipts may be related to more the year is put into aan one financial year; notes that the reserve that can be used during the subsequent years, is adjusted based on the budget result for the year; notes that the amount of the reserve decreased over the last two years from EUR 29 000 000 at the end of 2008 to EUR 21 000 000 at the end of 2010;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls once more on the Agency to further improve its monitoring system for certification projects to make sure that, over the entire project duration, the fees levied do not deviate significantly from the actual cost;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – introductory part
Paragraph 10 – introductory part
10. Acknowledges, in particular, from the Court of Auditors that, for two large procurement procedures, the evaluation method did notmight not have allowed tenders offering the best financial bid to achieve the highest price score; notes from the Agency that these two procurement procedures refer to:
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – indent 2
Paragraph 10 – indent 2
- A Framework Contract of maximum four years for studies on aircraft engine certification requirements and standards with a maximum value of EUR 2 500 000 for which the awarded contractor did not complete all cost elements in its application;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – subparagraph 1
Paragraph 10 – subparagraph 1
Notes that the Agency replied that no negative impact on the outcome was to be reported and considers this answer to be incomplete; will nevertheless take into account the considerations of the Court and in the future address the risk identified through paying even more attention to financial evaluation formulas;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Agency to inform the discharge authority on the total value of the Framework Contract and to remedyfurther take the adequate measures in order to avoid deficiencies that put at risk the transparency of the procurement process as well as the principle of sound financial management;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Is concerned that, once more,Notes that the discharge authority fiounds deficiencies in staff selection procedures which put at risk the transparency of these procedures; acknowledges from the Court of Auditors that there was no evidence that thresholds for being invited to interview or put on the reserve list have been defined before the examination of the applications started; notes that this could be to cover up a situation of nepotism or conflict of interestsacknowledges that meanwhile the matter has been addressed;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Is concernedNotes that the Agency did not inform the discharge authority of the actions taken to redress this situation and make the selection procedures of its experts/staff more transparent as requested in 2009, and took action only in 2010, after the Court of Auditors re-underlined the issue in its report; stresses, once more, that the impact of these deficiencies is even more crucial when considering that the Agency has the following objectives, namely issuing certification specifications, taking decisions regarding airworthiness and environmental certification and conducting standardisation inspections of the competent authorities in the Member Stateslthough understands that the matter was addressed without delay;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes the Agency's reply to the Court that it has written in its guidelines for panel members the minimum threshold which candidates have to meet in order to be invited for interviews (50 %) or to be put on the reserve list (65 %) but that it reserves its right to decide on what constitutes a maximum reasonable number of candidates to be invited according to their rank of merit;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Reminds the Agency of the importance of ensuring adequate training and qualification criteria for inspection teams and team leaders; calls on the Agency to take concrete steps and inform the discharge authority thereof;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that the Agency's technical staff members arneed to be commonly recruited from national aviation authorities and the aviation industry; understands that the staff members must have sufficient and up-to- date technical experience of working in the field of aviation to perform a technical verification of compliance demonstration documents in order to be able to ensure the adequate level of aviation safety as requested by the applicable Union legislation; is concerned however that this situation could causes conflicts of interest if a staff member recruited from an aircraft manufacturer works and takes decisions at the Agency on the certification of the aircraft he/she used to work on while employed by the manufacturer; is seriously concerned that such cases have the potential to put aviation safety at risk in the cases concerned could, if not detected and adequately managed, result in a conflict of interests situation; recognises however that the Agency has put in place a certification procedure where impartiality of the decision-making process is guaranteed through the collegiality of the technical assessments and the decision-making process itself; also understands that the Agency is in the process to set up an Agency wide policy in the area of code of conduct including identification, prevention, monitoring and dealing with the consequences of potential conflict of interest cases which will help the Agency to further improve the identification and handling of conflict of interests situations in a way that aviation safety is not put at risk at any time;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Agency to take duly into consideration the professional background of its staff members in order to avoid any conflict of interest; is of the opinion that anthe Agency employee should not's conflict of interests policy should elaborate to which extent and under which conditions an Agency employee can be involved in the certification of an aircraft on which they worked prior to joining the Agency;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. UrgesCalls on the Agency to inform the discharge authority and the Commission of such cases of conflict of interest and to immediately appoint an independent expert/staff member to verify the decisions taken in these casesadopt effective processes that duly address potential cases of allegations of conflict of interests within the Agency;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. UrgesCalls on the Agency to further implement anthe existing activity-based structure for the operational budget in order to establish a clear link between the work programme and the financial forecasts and further improve performance monitoring and reporting;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Calls, for the third year, on the Agency to make a Gantt diagram part of the programming for each of its operational activities, in order to indicate in a concise form the amount of time spent by each staff member on a project and encourage an approach geared towards achieving results; calls on the Agency to inform the discharge authority of the concrete steps taken; stresses also how important it is for the Agency to set SMART objectives and RACER indicators in its programming in order to assess its achievements; is seriously concerned that the Agency did not provide any information on progress in this area yet where relevant; stresses also how important it is for the Agency to set SMART objectives and RACER indicators in its programming as it has done in the Annual Work Programme and Annual Activity Report since 2008;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. UrgesCalls on the Agency to further improve the documentation of inspection planning and inspection programming; reminds the Agency of the importance of documenting the risk assessment and criteria used when establishing its inspection planning in order to justify its internal decision-making process for cases presenting significant deficiencies affecting Union citizens' safety;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 – introductory part
Paragraph 24 – introductory part
24. UrgeCalls moreover the Agency to further improve its effectiveness in managing key safety concerns by:
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 – indent 2
Paragraph 24 – indent 2
- Reducing the length of the reporting and implementing timeframe, where feasible,
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 – indent 4
Paragraph 24 – indent 4
- StoppingAdequately mitigating the risks of andy prevotenting anyal conflict of interest situation;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls moreover on the Agency to classify, monitor and follow up its inspection findings classified as ‘"Observations’"; is concernedtakes note that the Agency still did nothas developed an operating procedure to define those findings and to communicate them to the Commission; calls therefore on the Agency to rapidly remedy this deficiency and to inform the discharge authority on the action taken;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Acknowledges that several ‘"very important’" recommendations from the Internal Audit Service (IAS) aimed at reducing outstanding risks to the Agency are still open; urges, therefore, the Agency to inform the discharge authority of progress on these recommendations and on the reasons for delaying the implementation of the IAS; understands that those recommendations on human resources management (i.e. on appraisal reports of directors and on setting individual objectives) have been already implemented by the Agency and are currently under review by the IAS;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Notes in particular that in 2010 the IAS performed an audit on the Standardisation Inspection Process in order to assess and provide an independent assurance on the internal control system related to the standardisation inspection process in the Agency, in order to monitor the application of the Regulations of the Union by the National Aviation Authorities and report to the Commission; also notes that the Agency has already developed a corrective action plan which was agreed by the IAS and already provided to the IAS for its review evidence of implementation regarding those recommendations addressed in paragraphs 23 to 25;