Activities of Bart STAES related to 2012/2064(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the future role of the Court of Auditors. The procedure on the appointment of Court of Auditors’ Members: European Parliament consultation PDF (191 KB) DOC (95 KB)
Amendments (26)
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is of the opinion that the Court should remain committed to independence, integrity, impartiality and professionalism, while building strong working relationships with its partners, namely the European Parliament, and including its responsiblemore specifically its budget control committee, but also the specialised committees, in the accountability process of the EU institutions;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Regrets that the Court of Auditors was – for the eighteenth time in a row – unable to grant a positive statement of assurance (DAS4) regarding the legality and regularity of payments; regrets, furthermore, in this context that after such an enormous and repetitive cycle and following the many efforts made, there has not been any change in this regard; highlights the fact that an error rate as such does notonly partially provide a comprehensive overview of the effectiveness of Union policies; __________________ 4 Abbreviation of the French term ‘Déclaration d'assurance’.
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Deplores the fact that the commitment and efforts demonstrated by the Commission to reach a fully positive DAS have not yet provided satisfactory results; points out in particular that, in its 2011 statement of assurance report, the Court again concluded that overall payments were materially affected by error and that the supervisory and control systems in place were, in general, only partially effective;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Points out that in addition to delivering an opinion on the reliability of accounts, the Court of Auditors must deliver three opinions on the legality and regularity of underlying operations; takes the view that this excessive number of opinions makes it more difficult for Members of Parliament to assess the Commission's implementation of the budget;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points out that the DAS is an annual indicator of an often multiannual spending scheme, which makes it difficult to capture the cyclical nature and effect of multiannual arrangements, and therefore the real impact and effectiveness of the management and control systems can only be measured at the end of the spending period; considers, therefore, that the Court should be able to present to the discharge authority a summary report on the final performance of a programming period;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Is of the opinion that the current DAS framework adds limited value and that an independent DAS could be made on a cyclical basis and/or be delegated in part toCommission should increase the number of so-called ‘mini DAS’ exercises which follow the methodology of the Court in detail because is the Commission, which holds power with respect to controls-monitoring devices based on discovery sampling, such as the DAS; notes that the Commission already carries out ‘mini DAS’ exercises which follow the methodology of the Court in detail;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Points out that this would free up resources to allow the Court' to prioritise its efforts in favour of a much more robust, efficient and effective role in assessing the systemic risk involved for the EU in adopting macro- and micro-financial and prudential policies and activities, focusing on the effectiveness of the EU public and private sector financial architecture, taking into account the spill-over effects of the associated systemic risks; notes that this would allow the Court to signal an economic and financial crisis;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that the moment has arrived to revisit and ‘re-engineer’ the mandate of the Court to suit present circumstances, taking account of the EU's present and future pressing needs; is of the opinion that the Court should be involved in the preparation of the Commission's work programme, providing advice as to the risks that may be encountered therein;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Highlights the fact that the Court's mandate, as established under the Treaty, provides the reference framework for the Court to fulfil its role as the independent external audit body of the Union; notes that the mandate provides for significant flexibility to allow the Court to carry out its mission beyond the scope of the DAS; recalls that the mandate enables the Court to present the results of its performance audits in special reports which provide significant opportunity to add value by focusing on high-risk areas and addressing topics of high interest to stakeholders;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Is of the opinion that the actual number of auditors after enlargement and considering the entry in the Union of future new Member-States is too high to be effective, expects that in the next revision of the Treaty the number will not be higher than 9, on a rotating bases between Member-States;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recommends, moreover, that the Court intervene in allspecific legislative proposals put forward by the Commission, providing advice during the conception period as to the financial and other risks involved, and also assisting the Commission to develop a new culture of performance, defining in their relevant legislative proposals and in their management procedures a number of targets and key performance indicators which meet the requirements of the Court of Auditors in terms of relevance, comparability and reliability;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – point 1
Paragraph 16 – point 1
· provision of support and advice through the issue of comprehensive opinions to the Commission, Parliament and the Council on the preparation and discussion of the Union's programme andrelevant new draft legislative proposals;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Is of the opinion that while the Treaty of Lisbon re-affirmed the legal framework and independence of the Court in promoting public accountability, thereby tasking it with the important role of holding the Commission to account; notes that Parliament and the Council should also play an influential role in the definition of the Court's multiannual strategy plan;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Believes that preparatory tripartite meetings between Parliament, the Council and the Court could form a basis upon which to establish the Court's annual work programme; stresses that such structured preparatory dialogue could greatly assist in ensuring the effective and democratic accountability to citizens of the public funds put at stake to meet EU objectives;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls, therefore, for closer cooperation between national audit institutions and the European Court of Auditors in connection with the auditing of shared-management arrangements, pursuant to Article 287(3) TFEU; suggests that all national courts of auditors will be presented within the European Court of Auditors by a permanent delegate;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 – introductory part
Paragraph 32 – introductory part
32. Proposes, therefore, that the Court should be composed of the following bodiesdeleted:
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 – point 1
Paragraph 32 – point 1
· a governing board consisting of the 28 heads of the national SAIs, which would meet three times per year to define the Court's annual and multiannual work programme, the possible improvement in the Court's functions and methodology, and the follow-up required on activities; the board should be chaired by the rotating Presidency of the Council of the European Union;deleted
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 – point 2
Paragraph 32 – point 2
· a management board, of not more than nine members, composed of a representative sample of large and small Member States, with an appropriate gender balance, which would decide on how the mandate should be aligned with the Commission's term of office; the management board should be headed by the president of the Court and eight vice- presidents;deleted
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 – point 3
Paragraph 32 – point 3
· the management board should be diverse and broad in its composition, and board members should have professional experience in management or auditing, in academic life or experience in political bodies; members of the Court should be especially qualified for their function and their independence must be assured beyond doubt;deleted
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 – point c
Paragraph 33 – point c
(c) in the Committee on Budgetary Control, hearings will be public and the discussions will be relayed via video. At public hearings, discussion will be kept to a minimum, so as to prevent candidates from being subjected to to personal criticism in public;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 – point d
Paragraph 33 – point d
(d) Parliament will take its decisions based on the majority of the votes cast at the plenary sitting, and its opinion must be respected by the Council, candidates will be present during the vote and will be requested by the President of the EP after a negative vote if they will withdraw as a candidate;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 – point d
Paragraph 34 – point d
(d) candidates are not to hold any elected office or have any responsibilities to a political party as of the date of their appointment;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 – point e
Paragraph 34 – point e
(e) in view of the nature of the work to be done, the age of candidates will also be taken into account, with it being deemed reasonable, for example, to stipulate that Members should not be over 65 years of age at the end of their first term of office or over 70 years of age at the end of their second;deleted
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 – point f
Paragraph 34 – point f
(f) it would be desirable for members not tomembers will not serve for more than two terms of office;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 – point a
Paragraph 36 – point a
(a) each recommendation on each nomination shall be submitted in the form of a report to be adopted based on the a majority of the votes cast and the report shall merely indicate the nomination;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 – point e a (new)
Paragraph 36 – point e a (new)
(ea) The government of the candidate's Member State will be informed on the outcome of the vote in committee;