5 Amendments of Eva JOLY related to 2016/2151(DEC)
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Regrets that the Commission's audits of a selection of Member States' management and control systems used for the SOLID programmes did not include tests of the effectiveness of internal controls over most key processes (selection and award procedures, project monitoring, payments and accounting), but were rather focused on the description of those processes; notes that there is a risk that some annual programmes with ineffective control systems might be considered by the Commission to provide reasonable assurance and will not be the focus of the Commission's ex post audits; calls on the Commission to ensure that audits cover tests of controls on most key processes;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that 2015 was extraordinarily challenging for Union home affairs policies, particularly in the field of migration, with 1,8 million irregular arrivals at the Union’s borders, as well as in the field of security, with a series of terror attacks in several Member States; acknowledges the central role of DG-HOME in developing policy responsesAcknowledges the role of DG- HOME in developing policy responses in the fields of migration and security and in mobilising staff and emergency funding to support the most affected Member States;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Shares the Court's assessment that the proliferation of financial mechanisms which are not directly funded by the EU budget nor audited by the Court poses risks both for accountability and the coordination of EU policies and operations1a; _________________ 1aEuropean Court of Auditors, Annual report on the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2015, together with the institutions' replies, p. 74
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Notes that the European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 9/2016: EU external migration spending in Southern Mediterranean and Eastern Neighbourhood countries until 20141a concludes that the total amount of expenditure charged to the EU budget could not be established in the course of the audit, and that it was unclear whether expenditure had been directed in line with the intended geographical and thematic priorities; questions whether this was still the case for the year 2015; calls on the Commission to develop quality and result- oriented indicators aimed at assessing the quality and results obtained through the use of funds spent in its external migration policies; _________________ 1aEuropean Court of Auditors, Special Report No 9/2016: EU external migration spending in Southern Mediterranean and Eastern Neighbourhood countries until 2014, p. 7
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Believes the positive impact of the EU migration funds relies on processes at national and EU level to ensure transparency, effective monitoring and accountability; calls for the introduction of monitoring and evaluation mechanisms in itinere and not only ex post which ensure effective expenditure and implementation of policy objectives; calls on the Commission to ensure that result indicators and measurable targets based on the activities undertaken are defined at policy and project levels; calls for the establishment of stable and comparable qualitative and quantitative indicators; believes the European Court of Auditors should be monitoring the use of funds throughout the project cycle and not only at the very end;