7 Amendments of Derek VAUGHAN related to 0112/2167(DEC)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Observes that the level of error related to the implementation of cohesion policy has been progressively decreasing over the last years; highlights the distinction between error and fraud and that only 0.6% of errors were reported by Member States to be as a result of fraud for ERDF, Cohesion Fund and ESF programmes of the 2007-2013 period; notes however that regional policy remains one of the policy areas which is particularly error prone, with 98 out of the 168 ERDF and Cohesion Fund payments and 70 out of 160 ESF payments audited by the Court of Auditors for the year 2011 affected by different types of errors; points out, however, that these figures could be explained by the fact that twice as many payments were made in 2011 than in 2010 due to the completion of programmes;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recalls that an error occurs when a transaction is not carried out in accordance with the legal and regulatory provisions, therefore rendering declared (and reimbursed) expenditure irregular; an error does not necessarily mean that funds have disappeared, been lost or wasted or that fraud has been committed;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Highlights, however, that there is no distinction made between major and minor errors, some minor errors, such as not filling in a form properly are counted in the same way as more serious errors such as overpayment or underpayment;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Draws attention to the multiannuality of the cohesion policy management system and underlines that the final evaluation of irregularities related to the policy implementation will be possible only at the closure of the programming period; supports the commitment of the Commission to focus its efforts on the most risky-prone programmes and Member States andto strengthen administrative capacity and opt for adequate staffing where needed; is looking forward to the final results of the reinforced control provisions at the closure of the 2007-2013 programming period;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that 80% of funding is administered at Member State level and that the European Court of Auditors found that in the vast majority of errors found in regional policy transactions sufficient information was available for Member States to detect these errors themselves; therefore highlights that measures such as improving administrative capacity, streamlining procurement and eligibility rules and a focus on simplification and a risk-based approach should be implemented at Member State level;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that infringement of public procurement rules remains the most frequent reason for irregularities along with the non-compliance with eligibility rules; draws attention to the different approach to the application of corrections related to the public procurement eirroregularities by the Commission and the Court and calls for the standardisation of the methodology; takes note of the efforts of the Commission to provide training and guidance in order to improve the knowledge of the eligibility rules on the ground;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Observes the increasing level of suspension and interruption of payments carried out by the Commission; notes that in spite of the fact that the Commission ensures corrective actions to be systematically initiated whenever deficiencies are identified, the Court is of the opinion that there is no assurance that financial correction mechanisms adequately compensate the detected errors, nor that they prevent the recurrence of such errors; highlights the need for Member States to work more closely with national audit authorities to ensure better coordination;