59 Amendments of Jens GEIER related to 2012/2167(DEC)
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
(a) The Commission should annually, and for the first time in September 2013, adopt a communication to the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors with a view to making public the impact of its preventive and corrective actions as regards the protection of the Union budget; it should in particular disclose in due time all suspensions, interruptions and retentions which aimed to prevent errors and all the amounts (in nominal terms) recovered in the course of the preceding year through financial corrections and recoveries for all management modes at the level of the Union and broken down by Member States; the Commission should demonstrate to the greatestas far as possible extent that the financial corrections adequately compensated for errors made, and that they contributed to lasting improvements of the management and control systems;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
(b) The Commission should provide in Note 6 on "Financial corrections and recoveries", attached to the accounts of the Union, the relevant data covering all the policies managed by the Commission;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point c
Paragraph 1 – point c
(c) As to the policies managed by the multiannual programmes, the Commission 1 2 COM(2011) 376 final. SEC(2011) 787 final. should specify, upon the closure of the programming period, the impact of the recoveries and financial corrections made during that period on the overall error rate; moreover; the Commission should demonstrate that the financial corrections adequately compensated for errors made, and that they contributed to lasting improvements of the management and control systems;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point e
Paragraph 1 – point e
(e) requirurge the Member States to communicate to its services the draft eligibility rules in order that it may verify theiro adapt national eligibility rules which are not compatibilityle with the relevant Union rules, and shouldto intensify the controls on the declaration of costs and the effectiveness of the first-level checks;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point g
Paragraph 1 – point g
(g) support the management and control authorities of the Member States in identifying the systemic sources of errors and in particular in ensuring compliant implementation of public procurement rules and give guidance to those authorities in their simplification efforts;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point h
Paragraph 1 – point h
(h) harmonise the criteria used by its services for making reservations in its annual activity report and the different methodologies used to quantify public procurement errors in the two policy areas agriculture and regcohesional policy;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
(ia) evaluate the progress made in the financial management under the policy groups of the budget of the Union with a view to arriving at a positive statement of assurance and to report about this evaluation by March 2014 in the context of the annual activity reports drafted by the Directors-General and the Synthesis report on the Commission's management achievements for 2013;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point j
Paragraph 1 – point j
(j) DG AGRI should align its practices for the suspension/interruption of payments with the best practices of other directorates-general or services as well as put forward proposals for enhanced application and use of suspensions in the policy area of agriculture and rural development;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point k
Paragraph 1 – point k
(k) In particularTaking into account the legal framework, DG AGRI should systematically interrupt and suspend the payments when the prime level controls reveal that they are materially affected by error. The payments should be resumed only if sufficient appropriate evidence gathered on the spot proves that the weaknesses have been remedied;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 5
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph 5
DG REGIO
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point o
Paragraph 1 – point o
(o) The Commission should also use, as far as possible, net financial corrections to correct serious errors in the current programming period pursuant to Article 99 et seq. of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006*1; in particular net financial corrections should be applied at the closure of the programming period;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point p
Paragraph 1 – point p
(p) In addition, the Commission should defend its initial position not to allow the secondary selection of projects physically completed or fully implemented before the funding application (so-called ‘retrospective projects’) for the funding period 2014-20202;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point q
Paragraph 1 – point q
(q) DG REGIO should fully align its payment practices with the best practices of other directorates-general or services, and continue making direct and full use of the legal instruments provided for by the regulations, especially the interruption of payments followedor whenever necessary by the suspension of operational programmes;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point r
Paragraph 1 – point r
(r) In particular, DG REGIO should systematically interrupt the payments and suspend the programmes when the prime level controls reveal that they are materially affected by error; the payments should be resumed only if there is sufficient and reliable evidence that weaknesses have been remedied;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – new sub heading after point r
Paragraph 1 – new sub heading after point r
Error rate in centralised management
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point s
Paragraph 1 – point s
(s) By the end of June 2013 the Commission should present a report to the European Parliament onassessing the impact of the simplification measures announced in its Synthesis report for the year 2011 on the error rate in research policyintroduced in 2011;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point t
Paragraph 1 – point t
(t) That report should evaluate the result ofalso assess the improvements announced by the Commission in respect of the ex ante control and the ex post audit strategies and of the improvement in the guidance on the most common errors given to participants in the Seventh Framework Research Programme and to auditors;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point u
Paragraph 1 – point u
(u) In that report, the Commission should explain whether the measures taken to reduce the audit burden, generated by the fact that seven Authorising Officers by Delegation are responsible for the Research budget, are efficienthave been effective and, if not, propose other solutions;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point y
Paragraph 1 – point y
(y) provide Parliament, in time for the 2012 discharge procedure, with an evaluation of the cost of postponing the full application of the Modernised Customs Code (MCC), which would quantify the budgetary consequences of such postponement;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point z
Paragraph 1 – point z
(z) collect reliable data on the customs and VAT gap in the Member States, and report on a regular basis to Parliament in this regard;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – point a c
Paragraph 1 – point a c
(ac) raise the Member States' and public awareness, in the context of the negotiations on the Multiannual Financial Framework, of thethat effective revenue collection remains an essential feature of sound management of public finances, including the fact that uncollected revenue aspects and theirhave an impact on the availability of the Union's own resources, the economic situation of the Member States and the internal market;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Reiterates that Parliament invited the Commission to evaluate objectively and critically the experiences with FEIs in the Cohesion policy for the programming period 2007-2013, to provide a risk assessment considering different FEIs separately, as well as taking into account the risk structure of beneficiaries of the FEIs, and to report annually to Parliament, in time for the respective discharge procedure, on the use of FEIs in Member States, including comparable indicators on the effectiveness, efficiency and economy of FEIs, and also on how the Commission coordinates, ensures consistency and mitigates the risk of overlapping across the policy areas;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Notices that there are some differences of opinionviews between the Court of Auditors and the Commission with regard to the way in which errors should be calculated, in particular as to whether pre-financing should be included or excluded, as to the handling of quantifiable and non- quantifiable errors, and as to the way in which recoveries and financial corrections should be considered in the error calculationoverall assessment of the financial impact of errors and the corrective capacity of systems; is of the opinion that the differences of opiniont approaches mirror the different roles respectively played by the institutions, namely the role of auditor on the one hand and manager on the other;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Attributes this development mainly to the increase of the most likely error rate in the area of agriculture, and in particular in the fis concerned in particular about the high leveld of error in the rural development, which rose significantly toere the most likely error rate reported was 7,7 %;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading after paragraph 27 (new)
Subheading after paragraph 27 (new)
Council recommendation
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)
Paragraph 27 b (new)
27b. Notes that the Council recommends to give discharge to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Union for the financial year 2011; notes that the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom have voted against granting discharge to the Commission for the execution of the Union's budget for the financial year 2011; takes notice of these countries' observations: - for the 18th time in succession the Court of Auditors was unable to grant a positive unqualified statement of assurance, - underlining that the credibility of Union spending depends on sound financial management at all levels, orderly accounting and transparent accountability of all relevant actors, - pointing out that 80% of the Union budget is spent under the system of shared management by Member States, - regretting that only four out of seven Member States' audit authorities, assessed by the Court of Auditors, were considered effective, - calling on all Member States to provide full, transparent and accurate data as part of their annual summaries, - encouraging the Commission to continue driving better financial management by all Member States, including strict application of sanctions such as suspensions and interruptions;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 c (new)
Paragraph 27 c (new)
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Welcomes the fact that the Commission transmits to Parliament the annual summaries submitted by the Member States with an analysis of their content, and calls on the Commission to address to the Member States the necessary recommendations in order to improve the reporting instruments; calls further on the Commission, in conjunction with the Member States, to make sure that annual summaries are not only made available in the language of the Member State, thus increasing transparency and accountability;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Calls on the Commission to establish in the short term, in cooperation with the Member States, a model for national management declarations which will make them meaningful and comparable; takes thecalls on the Commission to openly provide its opinion on those declarations; takes the See the Commission's Synthesis report, point 3.3, in footnote 9 on page 11 of COM(2012)0281. view that such declarations should, inter alia, certify criteria (such as true and fair 1 accounts, the effectiveness of management and control systems and the legality and regularity of underlying transactions) and specify the scope of assurance reservations and disclaimers; asks the Commission to present proposals for decreasing the burden of controls for those Member States or regions that perform consistently well according to the annual reports of the Court of Auditors and to their own national management declarations; is of the opinion that the Court of Auditors and the Commission should be able to incorporatetake account of the substance of national management declarations in their audit work;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Is worriedNotes that the total number of reservations included by the Directors- General of the Commission in their annual activity reports increased to 27 in 2011 from 17 in 2010, and that the estimated total financial impact of reservations increased to EUR 1 959 million or 1,5 % of the payments made in 2011(2010: EUR 423 million, corresponding to 0,3. %);
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Encourages the Commission to make progress in disclosing more precise and reliable data concerning recoveries and financial corrections and to present information reconciling as far as possible the year in which payment is made, the year in which the related error is detected and the year in which recoveries or financial corrections are disclosed in the notes to the accounts*1 ;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Expects to receive as soon as possiblein March 2013 the report by the Commission on financial corrections at closure 2000-2006 in Rregional policy which shows the impact of the financial corrections made during the programming period and at closure on the overall error rate of the 2000-2006 programming period ;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Calls on the Commission to issue in time for the respective discharge procedure annual communications to Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors listing, by country and programme, financial corrections and recoveries collected, in order to demonstrate its performance in the protection of the Union's budget;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Notes with concern that the abovementioned note 6 attached to the consolidated accounts covers only financial corrections and recoveries performed at Union level, and that information on withdrawals, recoveries and pending recoveries of structural funds made by the Member States is not disclosed for reliability reasons ‘since doubts remain as to the quality and completeness of data submitted by some Member States and/or for some programmes’; calls on the Commission to make annually public in a communication all the amounts corrected the preceding year through financial corrections and recoveries for all management modes at the level of the Union and by the Member States;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Is worried that the Commission itself confirms in the said note 6 the assessment made by the Court of Auditors on the lack of reliability of supervisory and control systems of the Member States, and deeply regrets that this could affect the reliability of Commission management representations; calls on the Commission to ensure that data communicated by Member States are complete and fully reliable;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64
Paragraph 64
64. Urges the Member States to identify, in coordination with the Commission and in consultation with the Court of Auditors, those unnecessarily complex national rules in order to simplify them;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73
Paragraph 73
73. Notes that the Court of Auditors, in its annual report, found that the revenue calculation was free from material error; is concerned however that, as far as traditional own resources (TOR) are concerned, the Court's audit does cannot cover undeclared imports or those that have escaped customs surveillance, and that the annual report does not therefore provide an estimation of losses to the Union budget in that respect;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 76
Paragraph 76
76. Is deeply concerned by the Court's conclusion that there are continuing weaknesses in national customs supervision and that therefore it cannot be ensured that the TOR recorded are complete and correct; finds it unacceptable that control of customs procedures in the Member States is not functioning properly; recalls that correct operation of customs procedures has direct consequences in terms of the calculation of the value added tax; is deeply worried by the Court's finding, in its Special Report No 13/2011, that the application of customs procedure 42*1 alone accounted in 2009 for extrapolated losses of approximately EUR 2 200 million*2 with regard to the seven Member States which were audited, representing 29 % of the VAT theoretically applicable on the taxable amount of all the imports made under customs procedure 42 in 2009 in those seven EU Member States;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 78
Paragraph 78
78. Underlines that the Court's findings in its Special Report No 13/2011 were corroborated by the conclusions of the fact- finding mission of Parliament's Budgetary Control Committee to the ports of Rotterdam and Antwerp, which took place on 19 and20 September 2012; notes that Rotterdam, the largest European port, attracts a lot of ships thanks to the simplified Dutch data processing systemimport procedures and fewer import controls in the Netherlands; stresses that simplification of customs procedures should not lead to less effective control systems in European ports and that ‘"simplified procedures’" should be effectively controlled by the Member States; notes that reduced controls could translate into major economic advantages for a port, points out, however, that seeking such competitive advantages may seriously harm the financial interests of the Union and its Member States;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94
Paragraph 94
94. Takes note of the Court's approach which for the first time included cross compliance infringements in the calculation of the error rate as ‘cross- compliance obligations are substantive legal requirements that must be met by all recipients of direct aid and are the basic and in many cases the only conditions to be respected in order to justify the payments of full amount of direct payments’*2 ; asks the Court in this context to further explain and justify its changes of methodology and to align its methodology with that of the Commission;
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 96
Paragraph 96
96. Notes that it is up to the Member States to define ‘"good agricultural and ecological condition’" and to which acreage it will be applied; criticises strongly that thereby guarantee payments will be received by beneficiaries who very often can hardly be called farmerse fact that thereby beneficiaries who very often are not farmers will receive direct payments ; considers this to be a wrong allocation of funds which could be saved;
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 98
Paragraph 98
98. Welcomes the register providing information on beneficiaries of the Common Agricultural Policy payments in the Member States; considers this tool to be an important step towards more transparency in the agricultural sector; recalls nevertheless that, in accordance with the ruling of the European Court of Justice of 9 November 2010 invalidating the legislation as regards natural persons*1 , Commission Regulation (EC) No 259/2008*2 has been modified limiting the obligation to publish information on the beneficiaries of CAP payments to legal persons; expectnotes the Commission to draft a new proposal, taking into consideration the arguments of the Court of Justice while complying with the transparency objective; 1 Joined cases C-92/09 and C-93/09, ECR 2010, p. I-11063. 2 Commission Regulation (EC) No 259/2008 of 18 March 2008 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as regards the publication of inform's proposal for new transparency rules, adopted on 25 September 2012, to make it obligatory for Member States to disclose data of all beneficiaries including natural persons, except for beneficiaries whose annual aid does not exceed a certain de-minimis threshold, taking into consideration on the beneficiaries of fund deriving from the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ L 76, 19.2008, p. 28).objections made in the Court's judgment, in particular on data protection concerns; Or. en
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 99
Paragraph 99
99. Regrets that the EAGF payments are not free from material error in 2011, the most likely error rate being estimated by the Court of Auditors at 2,9 %, and that the control systems audited by the Court in Austria, Finland, Hungary, Italy and Spain were found to be only partially effective in assuring the legality and regularity of payments;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102 a (new)
Paragraph 102 a (new)
102a. Is concerned that the Commission, in its annual activity report, maintained its reservations concerning the IACS systems in Bulgaria and Portugal due to serious deficiencies; underlines that, given the importance of IACS for the management and control of agricultural expenditure, serious deficiencies in its set- up an operation exposes the Commission to reputational risk even if the financial impact does not exceed the materiality threshold;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 116
Paragraph 116
116. Is particularly concerned by the fact that DG AGRI considers that ‘"in general Member States are improving their management and control systems for rural expenditure’*"3 while the audit of the Court shows that 5 of the 6 selectedthe supervisory and control systems assessedin Denmark, Finland, Hungary, Italy and Spain were not effective or only partially effective* 4; is of the opinion that such a big divergence between the assessments of the Commission and the Court of Auditors makes it difficult for the discharge authority to reach objective conclusions; calls therefore on both institutions to establish amake more effective use of the data exchange mechanism in order to provide the discharge authority with coherent and credible data; is convinced of the usefulness of tripartite meetings between the Court, the Commission and 1 2 3 DG AGRI, annual activity report, page 79. 4 The Court's 2011 Annual report, annex 4.2. The Court's 2011 Annual report, 4.18. The Court's 2011 Annual report, 4.18. between the Court, the Commission and representatives from Member States concerned when looking for common analysis;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 118 a (new)
Paragraph 118 a (new)
118a. Calls on the Commission to further improve the quality control of accreditation criteria for paying agencies and certifying bodies;
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 122 a (new)
Paragraph 122 a (new)
122a. Calls on the Commission to use all available instruments over the next programming period 2014-2020, as outlined in the Commission proposal (COM (2011)0615), in particular by means of delegated acts and implementing acts, with a view to setting out conditions which the national audit authorities shall fulfil, and to adopting models for the audit strategy, the audit opinion and the annual control report, as well as the methodology for the sampling method;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 122 b (new)
Paragraph 122 b (new)
122b. Takes note that in 2011 the DG REGIO found serious deficiencies in five Member States: France, Austria, Italy, Romania and Czech Republic; notes that, whereas the difficulties in France and Austria have been identified by the national audit authorities themselves, the deficiencies in Italy, Romania and Czech Republic were primarily linked to the architecture of the management and control systems;
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 a (new)
Paragraph 124 a (new)
124a. Notes the high number of the Commission's reservations concerning the ERDF/Cohesion Fund management and control systems for the period 2007-2013 in the following Member States: Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, Spain and United Kingdom, due to significant issues regarding the effective functioning of management and control systems; is deeply concerned about the reputational risks in Greece, Hungary and Romania;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 124 b (new)
Paragraph 124 b (new)
124b. Notes the Commission's reservations, for the 2000-2006 period, concerning the Cohesion Fund management and control systems in Hungary and Spain, and concerning the ERDF linked to outstanding issues at closure stage in Spain, Germany, Ireland, Italy and Cross-Border programmes, all due to reputational reasons;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 127
Paragraph 127
127. Points to the fact that the detection of non-quantifiablequantification of errors could give rise to a difference of opiniontreatment: whereas the Court looks at compliance, according to which rules were either adhered to or not, the Commission takes into consideration the financial impact of an error and financial corrections may vary accordingly;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 135
Paragraph 135
135. Calls on the Commission andin consultation with the Court to establish a transparent system which allows, on the one hand, to takeaking into consideration annual financial corrections but also, on the other, financial corrections during the life span of a programming period;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 136
Paragraph 136
136. Calls on the Commission to assist Member States in rendering first-level controls and national audit authorities more effective by exchange of best practice and closer cooperation between the Commission, the Court and national authorities (‘tripartite meetings’); furthermore calls on the Commission to certify national audit authorities;
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 137 a (new)
Paragraph 137 a (new)
137a. Notes that, in 2011, the Director- General issued reservations in his annual activity report with regard to operational programmes in Belgium, the Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, Spain, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and the United Kingdom;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 151
Paragraph 151
151. Calls on the Commission to assist Member States in rendering first-level controls and national audit authorities more effective by exchange of best practice and closer cooperation between the Commission, the Court and national authorities (‘tripartite meetings’); welcomes tripartite meetings as an important part in the contradictory process aiming at enhanced cooperation among the parties resulting in a more effective detection and correction of errors, in particular with regard to the European Social Funds; furthermore calls on the Commission to certify national audit authorities;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153
Paragraph 153
153. Is concerned by the difference in the methodologies applied by the Court for the calculation of the error rate for transactions for external relations, aid and enlargement in the general budget on the one hand and for the level of error for payments from the EDFs on the other hand; calls on the Courttakes note that the Court has decided to align its methodology from 2012 onwards in order to provide the Parliament with a uniform picture of the activities in the area of the EU's external action;
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 166
Paragraph 166
166. Finds it incomprehensible that auditors of beneficiaries submit erroneous certificates on the financial statements; strongly believes that the Commission must focus on verifyinggiving guidance on the professional qualifications of private auditors and providing additional expertise;
Amendment 251 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 167
Paragraph 167
167. Notes the examples given by the Court of Auditors on errors in declarations of personnel and indirect costs; notes that the Horizon 2020 programme couldproposal introduced significant simplifications of the rules for these cost categories; considers that these simplifications are essential if there is to be a significant reduction in the error rate;
Amendment 280 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas austerity measures triggered by the economic and financial crisis could have a negative impact on error rates when Member States and the Commission downsize their administrations;