12 Amendments of Jeroen LENAERS related to 2020/2167(DEC)
Amendment 12 #
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 and an analysis was made on the use of unit costs for the deployment of human resources and light technical equipment; notes that the pilot projects for heavy equipment revealed that the unit cost approach would increase 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; notes that the Agency concluded that moving to unit-based reimbursement is not feasible due to lack of interest from Member States; insists that unnecessary bureaucratic burden needs to be avoided; calls on the Court theo examine the unit cost approach piloted by the Agency, particularly with a view to cooperation required by Member States, and inform the discharge authority if this approach is indeed not suited for heavy equipment;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates its callTakes note onf the Agency to's reply to the discharge authority on the review of its mechanisms concerning the construction payments and the call to ensure compliance with the principles of sound financial management; acknowledges that the Agency reported that a mechanism to prevent unchecked pre-financing payments has been implemented throughout the financial circuit; notes that the Agency ensured that all project managers, operational and financial actors dealing with HQ facilities have been instructed not to approve and not to launch such payments and that financial verifiers have been instructed to reject such payments and advise the authorising officers to reject as well;
Amendment 21 #
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 ; notes further that the Court highlighted risks related to the Agency’s mandate under Regulation (EU) 2019/18964 ; reminds that the Agency’s mandates from 2016 and 2019 partially overlap, which contributed to the risks to the implementation of the mandate identified by the Court; _________________ 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 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
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; notes, however, some drawbacks as far as external border control is concerned, 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; underlines that the latter observation cannot be solely attributed to the Agency, but needs to be remedied jointly with Member States and the Commission;
Amendment 31 #
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 milestones in the implementation of the Court’s recommendations are met;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Recalls that during a meeting of the Committee on Budgetary Control of 1 September 2021 the Deputy Director General of DG HOME stated that all enquiries have come to an end and that none have led to conclusions that there were traces of budgetary or financial mismanagement or fundamental rights violations or that the Agency had refused to comply with obligations under its regulation;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10 b. Recalls that during the last budgetary conciliation it was agreed for the Commission to exert stronger control functions regarding the agencies; calls therefore on the Commission and the Agency to expound how the identified deficits including recruitment and procurement will be solved for the budget 2022; calls on the Commission and the Agency to ensure a clear and transparent distribution of responsibilities; calls on the Commission as Guardian of the Treaties to ensure legal clarity regarding the implementation of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Underlines that transparency is a general rule that applies to the Agency, the Commission and the organisations in the consultative forum as a precondition of mutual trust and good cooperation;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recalls the establishment of the Frontex Scrutiny Working Group by Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs; notes that the Frontex Scrutiny Working Group published its report on the fact-finding investigation on Frontex concerning alleged fundamental rights violations on 14 July 2021; notes that the Frontex Scrutiny Working Group found no proof of the Agency’s involvement in alleged illegal pushbacks; notes that the Frontex Scrutiny Working Group identified gaps in the framework of cooperation with Member States, which may hamper the fulfilment of Frontex’s fundamental rights obligations, and highlighted the responsibility of the Member States and the Commission, also outside their role in the Management Board; emphasises that the Agency's staff needs legal clarity, particularly during high-risk missions at sea and that the Commission and the Member States need to ensure legal standards and clarity on the implementation of the Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 regarding various situations during missions;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that the Agency’s fundamental rights officer took office on 1 June 2021; underlines that the Agency’s establishment plan was cut from 377 AD posts to 275 AD posts in 2020; acknowledges that this has had an effect on the whole personnel structure including the recruitment of the 40 fundamental rights monitors; 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 7 level and fifteen at AST 4 level; reiterates that Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 provides for the recruitment of at least 40 fundamental rights monitors and insists that the Agency swiftly appoints the remaining 20 fundamental rights monitors; 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; recalls that the correction coefficient for staff in Warsaw, Poland, was 71.1 for 2019; acknowledges that lower salaries can have a negative impact on European applicants, and may contribute to Frontex’ general difficulties in recruiting;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Outlook for the discharge 2020 Recalls that the discussions on the Agency's discharge for the financial year 2019 has been impacted by events and incidents that happened in 2020 or 2021, therefore, and keeping in mind the current OLAF investigation on the Agency and the conclusions of the LIBE Frontex Scrutiny Working group, and in line with Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 ('the Regulation'), the Agency must by the end of the 2020 discharge procedure fulfil the following conditions: a) recruit the remaining 20 fundamental rights monitors in AD grade in line with Article 110 of the Regulation; b) recruit three deputy executive directors in line with Article 107 of the Regulation; c) adopt a detailed and specific procedurefor the implementation of Article 46 of the Regulation; d) present an adapted SIR mechanism in line with the FRaLO recommendations; e) establish a fully functioning fundamental rights monitoring system in line with Article 110 (1) and (2) of the Regulation. Failing to fulfil those conditions increases the risk of a refusal to grant the discharge for the financial year 2020;