BETA

5 Amendments of Lorenzo FONTANA related to 2017/2136(DEC)

Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the opinion of the European Court of Auditors on the 2016 accounts of the Union; highlights especially the further reduction of payment errors in 2016 to the all-time low of 3.1 % and notes that this is the first time that the Court issues a qualified opinion on payments since 1994; regrets however that the payment error rate for Heading 3 (Security and Citizenship) was not calculated by the Court as only 15 transactions have been audited;deleted
2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that shared management payments for Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund and Internal Security Fund was slow considering that 2016 was already the third year of the implementation of the current Multiannual financial framework (MFF); stresses the importance of reducing risks of delays in the implementation of national plans and in the correction of deficiencies in Member States control systems; highlights the importance of assessing Member States control systems based on sufficiently detailed information;deleted
2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Reminds that special instruments were used extensively in 2015, 2016 and 2017 to respond notably to the humanitarian situation faced by asylum- seekers in the EU and that there is therefore a risk that the amounts left until the end of the current MFF may not be sufficient to respond to unexpected events that may occur before 2020; requests the Commission to solve this structural issue in the next MFFand illegal migrants in the EU;
2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
6. Urges the development of a coherent and systematic strategy with clearer political and operational priorities for protecting the fundamental rights and freedoms, while ensuring its effective implementation also by granting sufficient funds for this purpose;deleted
2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. StressDeplores that only one third of the projects examined had a performance measurement system with output and result indicators linked to the operational programme objectives, while the majority of the projects met their output objectives at least partially; highlights that for 42 % of the projects it was not possible to identify and measure a specific contribution to the overall programme objectives since no result indicators or targets were defined at project level.
2018/01/19
Committee: LIBE