2007/2047(DEC) | [ParlTrack]

Changes: 2023/08/03events.date, docs, docs.docs.url, 2021/12/18events, docs.docs.url, events.docs.url, docs, procedure.legal_basis, events.type, procedure.final.url, 2020/01/19docs.body, docs.docs.url, committees, events.docs.url, procedure.final.url, 2019/07/06council, events, procedure.dossier_of_the_committee, activities, committees, procedure.subject, docs, links, other, procedure.legal_basis, commission, procedure.title

View current state | View Changes for this date

Procedure completed

2007/2047(DEC) 2006 discharge: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions Eurofound

Role	Committee	Rapporteur	Shadows
Lead	CONT	MARTIN Hans-Peter (NI)
Opinion	EMPL	MADEIRA Jamila (PSE)

Lead committee dossier: CONT/6/53857
Legal Basis RoP 094

Subjects

8.70.03.07 Previous discharges

Links

Activites

2009/03/31 Final act published in Official Journal
- Budget 2009/197
- OJ L 088 31.03.2009, p. 0093
2008/04/22 Results of vote in Parliament
- Results of vote in Parliament
- Debate in Parliament
- T6-0142/2008 summary
  
  The European Parliament adopted, by 624 votes in favour, 19 against and 42 abstentions, a Decision to grant the Director of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions discharge in respect of the implementation of its budget for the financial year 2006. The decision to grant discharge also constitutes closure of the accounts of this EU agency.At the same time, the Parliament adopted, by 621 votes in favour, 19 against and 45 abstentions, a Resolution containing the comments which form part of the decision giving discharge. The report had been tabled for plenary by Hans-Peter MARTIN (NI, AT) on behalf of the Committee on Budgetary Control. As is the case for all EU agencies, the Parliament's Resolution is divided into two parts: part one contains general comments on EU agencies, while part two focuses on the specific case of the Foundation.1) General comments on the majority of EU agencies: the Parliament notes that the budgets of the 24 agencies and other satellite bodies audited by the Court of Auditors totalled more than EUR 1 billion and that the number of agencies is constantly increasing. The number of agencies subject to the discharge procedure evolved from 8 in 2000 to 20 in 2006. It concludes therefore that the auditing/discharge process has become cumbersome and disproportionate compared to the relative size of the agencies and that, in the future, this type of procedure should be simplified and rationalised for decentralised agencies.On the basis of the financial analysis, the Parliament is of the following opinion:Fundamental considerations: given the constantly increasing number of agencies, the Parliament requests that, before the creation of a new agency, the Commission provide clear explanations regarding agency type, objectives of the agency, internal governance structure, products, services, clients and stakeholders of the agency, formal relationship with external actors, budget responsibility, financial planning, and personnel and staffing policy. It also requests that each agency be governed by a yearly performance agreement which should contain the main objectives for the coming year and that the performance of the agencies be regularly audited by the Court of Auditors (and extend the financial analysis of expenditure to also cover administrative efficiency and effectiveness). More generally, the Parliament takes the view that, in the case of agencies, which are continually overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should be made on the basis of vacant posts in order to reduce the assigned revenue for the agencies and therefore also lower administrative costs of the EU. It recalls that it is a serious problem that a number of agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement, the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations etc., and consider that the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial Regulation are designed for bigger institutions rather than for small agencies. Therefore, it is necessary to seek a rapid solution in order to enhance the effectiveness of the legislation by grouping the administrative functions of various agencies together or by establishing implementing rules which are better adapted to the agencies. The Parliament also insists that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget, take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the individual agencies in former years and revise the budget requested by the particular agency accordingly. If the Commission does not undertake this revision, the Parliament invites the competent committee to revise, itself, the budget in question to a realistic level. At the same time, the Parliament recalls that it expects the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing agency and to not hesitate to close an agency if it is deemed useless by the analysis. Such an assessment is expected as soon as possible given that this type of assessment has yet to be presented. Furthermore, the Parliament insists that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements. Presentation of reporting data: noting that there is no standard approach among the agencies with regard to the presentation of information, the Parliament recalls that it already invited the directors of the agencies to accompany their annual activity report with a declaration of assurance concerning the legality and regularity of operations, similar to the declarations signed by the Directors General of the Commission. It therefore asks the Commission to amend its standing instructions to the agencies and to produce a harmonised model for presenting information, including: i) an annual report intended for a general readership on the body's operations, work and achievements; ii) financial statements and a report on implementation of the agency’s budget; iii) an activity report of the Directors of the agency (as requested by the Parliament since 2005); iv) a declaration of assurance signed by the body's director. General findings by the Court of Auditors: the Parliament refers to certain recurring findings by the Court, including the disbursement of subsidies paid by the Commission (not sufficiently justified estimates of the agencies' cash requirements), the non implementation of the ABAC accounting system by some agencies or the accrued charges for untaken leave which are accounted for by some agencies. It calls for rapid measures in these areas as well as improvements to the internal audit procedures of the agencies. The Parliament also calls on the agencies to consider an inter-agency disciplinary board, as some individual agencies have difficulty in setting up their own disciplinary boards due to their size. Draft inter-institutional agreement: the Parliament recalls the Commission's draft Interinstitutional agreement on the operating framework for the European regulatory agencies (see ACI/2005/2035), which was intended to create a framework for the creation, structure, operation, evaluation and control of the European regulatory agencies and awaits its adoption as soon as possible. It particularly welcomes the Commission's commitment to bring forward a Communication on the future of the regulatory agencies during the course of 2008.2) Specific points concerning the Foundation for Living and Working Conditions: the Parliament recalls that the Court of Auditors once again found high carry-over rates in the implementation of the Foundation’s budget for 2006 (43 % for administrative expenditure and 45 % for operating activities). It particularly draws attention to the reservations expressed by the Court regarding the Foundation’s respect of the principle of budget annuality, the conformance of the award of two contracts, the fact that amounts to be disbursed in full in 2007 were budgeted for in 2006, and the failure to observe the selection criteria applying to officials. In addition, the Court expressed reservations regarding personnel recruitment and selection procedures, even though the Foundation specifies that all vacancy notices now include a clear indication of whether success in tests is a precondition for success in the competition.The Parliament also points out that, in 2006, the Foundation set up a management system to improve its organisational efficiency through greater transparency and better coordination in the use of resources. The Foundation also implemented a performance monitoring system as well as a clearer procurement system. Lastly, in 2006, the Foundation launched an ex-post evaluation of the 2001-2004 Work Programme, with a view to determining the organisation's impact, added value and effectiveness.
2008/04/03 Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
- A6-0111/2008
2008/03/26 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
#2847
2008/02/12 Council Meeting
2007/10/25 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2007/03/30 Non-legislative basic document published
- SEC(2007)1055 summary
  
  PURPOSE: presentation of the final accounts of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions for the 2006 financial year.CONTENT: this document sets out a detailed account of the implementation of the Foundation’s budget for 2006. It indicates that the Foundation’s final budget amounted to 19.8 million EUR in 2006 (compared with 19.3 million EUR in 2005) 98.9% of which is derived from a Community subsidy.In terms of personnel, the Foundation, whose headquarters are in Dublin (Ireland) officially had 94 posts provided for in the establishment plan, 89 of which were occupied and 10 further posts (seconded national experts and employment agency staff) amounting to 99 effective posts assigned to operational, administrative and mixed tasks. Expenditures relating to personnel in 2006 amounted to 9.774 million EUR.The tasks of the Foundation are to contribute to the establishment of better living and working conditions by increasing and disseminating knowledge which is relevant to this subject, fostering the exchange of information and experience in these fields, facilitating contact between universities, study and research institutes, economic and social administrations and carrying out studies or concluding study contracts and providing assistance for pilot projects in the area of working conditions.In 2006, the work undertaken by the Foundation included:Monitoring and surveysEstablishment of one Network of European Observatories (NEO) covering the former three networks attached to the European Industrial Relations Observatory (EIRO), the European Working Conditions Observatory (EWCO) and the European Restructuring Monitor (ERM), Fourth Working Conditions Survey: first results,First Company Survey: first results.Employment and restructuringStudies on the Food & Beverage sector and Knowledge Intensive Businesses Services, Geographical and Labour Market Mobility in Europe: report,Attractive Workplaces for All: a contribution to the Lisbon Strategy at company level, Labour Supply in Care Services: report.Work-life balance and Working ConditionsFourth Working Conditions Survey,15 years of European working surveys: trend report, Measuring Job Satisfaction in surveys, Working-time reports based on the Company survey.Industrial Relations (IR) and PartnershipWorking Time and Pay Developments,European Works Councils: reports and case studies,IR Country Profiles,Capacity Building for Social Dialogue: reports on New Member States and Turkey.Social Cohesion and Quality of LifeEurLIFE database updates, Ageing Workforce and Age Management: reports and case studies,Employment guidance services for people with disabilities.Communication and sharing ideas and experience332 publications, 53 press releases, 40 % increase in web use, 16 % increase of press cuttingsPromotion campaigns ‘Your work, your life; balance company needs with worker satisfaction’ and ‘Fourth Working Conditions survey: what workers say’,Foundation Forum 2006 ‘Competitive Europe, Social Europe — Partners or Rivals?’Company Network Seminars Foundation Seminar Series ‘Flexicurity and Employability’ National Outreach Centres covering AU, BE, ES, FI, FR, HU, IT, LUX, SP, UK, Exhibitions at Employment week in Brussels and at the PES conference in Oporto.The Foundation’s full 2006 accounts may be found at the following address: http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/about/publicaccess/categories/finance/2007.htm
- DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/', 'title': 'Budget'}, KALLAS Siim

Documents

Non-legislative basic document published: SEC(2007)1055
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A6-0111/2008
Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T6-0142/2008
: Budget 2009/197
: OJ L 088 31.03.2009, p. 0093

Amendments	Dossier
55	2007/2047(DEC) 2008/03/06 CONT 55 amendments... Amendment 1 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Proposal for a decision on discharge Paragraph 1 1. ~~Postpones its decision on g~~Grant~~ing~~s the Director of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions discharge in respect of the implementation of the Foundation's budget for the financial year 2006; Amendment 10 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Emphasises, in that connection, that in its White Paper on the reform of the Commission the Commission laid down as guidelines for the formulation of an externalisation policy cost-effectiveness and the ability to exercise its powers to implement the budget, pursuant to Article 274 TEC;deleted Amendment 11 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises that pursuant to Article 253 TEC regulations, directives and decisions adopted jointly by the European Parliament and the Council and such acts adopted by the Council or the Commission must state the reasons on which they are based and refer to any proposals or opinions which were required to be obtained pursuant to the TEC;deleted Amendment 12 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Notes that decentralisation and devolution were key results of the process of reforming the Commission started in 1999, but that to date the Commission has submitted neither a study, nor an activity report nor an interim assessment of this form of administration; by the same token, the Commission has never given a convincing explanation of the added value provided by the agencies and of why their tasks could not equally well be performed within the Commission itself;deleted Amendment 13 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Emphasises, in that connection, that between the year 2000 (publication of the White Paper on the Reform of the Commission) and 2007 the staff complement of the Commission and agencies (excluding executive agencies) increased by a total of 85%;deleted Amendment 14 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Notes, in that connection, that in recent years the pace at which decentralised agencies are being set up has steadily increased, and that they are being established unsystematically and with no uniform framework: whereas in 1990 only three, in 1995 six, and in 2000 seven agencies existed, the 2008 budget lists no fewer than 25, seven of which have been added since 2005 alone;deleted Amendment 15 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Emphasises, in that connection, that the agencies to which it grants discharge make up only a part of the total and that the increase in permanent and temporary posts for all the decentralised agencies from 166 in the year 2000 to a total of 3151 in 2007 (+1800%) clearly illustrates the problems in this area;deleted Amendment 16 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 ~~17. Emphasises further, in that connection, that average staff costs increased by more than 40% between 2006 and 2008;~~deleted Amendment 17 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Emphasises finally, in that connection, that the subsidies paid to the agencies from the Community budget have increased disproportionately in recent years, that the appropriations from the Community budget paid to agencies to which Parliament grants discharge, which were established between 1975 and 1997 and have thus gone well beyond the start- up and initial growth phases, increased by some 90% between 2000 and 2008, and that during that period the subsidies paid to some of these agencies increased by more than 210%;deleted Amendment 18 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 ~~19. Emphasises that only two agencies are not in any way dependent on EU subsidies, whilst most of them are funded exclusively from EU budget appropriations;~~deleted Amendment 19 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Notes, in that connection, that a clear trend is emerging whereby the agencies revise their need for Community subsidies disproportionately upwards every six months, thus committing a steadily increasing proportion of the available appropriations, and that there are insufficient incentives to use financial resources sparingly;deleted Amendment 2 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Proposal for a decision on the closure of the accounts Paragraph 2 2. ~~Postpon~~Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions for the financial year 2006; Amendment 20 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Takes the view that direct and indirect payments and subsidies to the agencies from host countries (e.g. funding for building projects, office facilities, municipal taxes, etc.) have made it impossible to draw up a comprehensive breakdown of the cost of the agencies and that this practice disguises the true costs;deleted Amendment 21 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Takes the view that in most cases there has been no proper strategy underpinning the process of establishing agencies and that political considerations and factors, such as the attempt, with the help of the agencies, to influence the balance of power among the institutions, outweigh, and in some cases run entirely counter to, the original objectives, such as greater responsibility, transparency and efficiency in European administration;deleted Amendment 22 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Takes the view that the lack of a proper strategy on setting up agencies has generated unnecessary costs and that the true costs have been hidden from taxpayers, since, for example, missing infrastructure has not been taken into account and additional costs – for instance for the construction of new office and conference buildings, the setting-up of new schools, the development of transport infrastructure in response to an increase in missions between places of work scattered throughout Europe, as a result of serious recruitment problems, etc. – have arisen as a result;deleted Amendment 23 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Notes that the Commission's devolution policy has given rise to the duplication of work, above all in the area of administration, generating unnecessary additional costs and requiring the same know-how to be available several times over; notes, at the same time, that many agencies' administrative expenditure is far too high;deleted Amendment 24 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Takes the view that, with a few exceptions, no efforts have been made systematically to involve the agencies in the work of the Commission and that the agencies' spheres of responsibility frequently relate only to areas covered by 'open coordination' and bear no relation to the European Union's real needs and taxpayers' expectations;deleted Amendment 25 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Takes the view that the Commission no longer regards the decentralised agencies as a means of implementing its policies and has attempted to shed all responsibility for them, for example by stipulating that the Commission's Internal Auditor should no longer be responsible for auditing the decentralised agencies and should in future only confirm that their internal audit practices are consistent with international standards;deleted Amendment 26 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 ~~27. Notes that in the case of some agencies the number of members of the administrative board exceeds the total number of staff, ruling out efficient and cost-effective decision-making;~~deleted Amendment 27 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Notes, on that basis, that the aim behind the practice of devolution - which is seen as one of the three main aspects of externalisation policy and was put forward as a reform strategy by the Commission in its White Paper - namely the more efficient, more rational and more effective provision of responsible administration, has not been achieved through the setting-up of decentralised agencies and that the Commission's reform efforts in this area have failed;deleted Amendment 28 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 ~~29. Calls on the Commission to comply strictly with the subsidiarity principle;~~deleted Amendment 29 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 ~~30. Calls on the Commission to meet to the letter the requirements to justify compliance with the subsidiarity principle;~~deleted Amendment 3 # Hans-Peter MARTIN Motion for a resolution Recital W W. calling on the Director of the agency to propose, by 1 June 2008 at the latest, practical measures to achieve savings, above all in the area of administrative costs; to explain in detail why administrative costs are unacceptably high; to explain in detail why the subsidy from the Community budget has continued to increase enormously over the period between 2000 and 2008; to explain in detail why staff expenditure per post increased by 9% between the financial year 2006 and the 2008 preliminary draft budget; and to explain in detail why the cost of staff privileges ~~– budget Items 1101, 1102, 1141, 1182 and 1183 –~~ makes up almost 10% of the agency's final budget and is thus much higher than for other agencies, ~~General points~~Or. de Amendment 30 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 ~~31. Calls on the Commission to comply strictly with the principle of sound financial management;~~deleted Amendment 31 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 ~~33. Calls for every decision on the final location of an agency to be taken when the regulation establishing that agency is adopted;~~deleted Amendment 32 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal which provides for the number of full members of the administrative board of an agency to be reduced as quickly as possible to a figure equal to no more than 10% of the posts in that agency’s establishment plan and to no more than 20 in total;deleted Amendment 33 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Requests that the performance of the agencies be regularly (and on an ad hoc basis) audited by the Court of Auditors or another independent auditor; considers that this should not be limited to traditional elements of financial management and the proper use of public money, but should also cover administrative efficiency and effectiveness and should include a rating of the financial management of each agency; Amendment 34 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 a (new) 36a. Takes the view that in the case of agencies which are continually overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should be made on the basis of vacant posts; is of the opinion that this will lead in the long run to less assigned revenue for the agencies and therefore also to lower administrative costs; Amendment 35 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 b (new) 36b. Notes that it is a serious problem that a number of agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement, the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations etc.; considers that the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial Regulation are designed for bigger institutions and that most of the small agencies do not have the critical mass to be able to cope with these regulatory requirements; therefore asks the Commission to look for a rapid solution in order to enhance the effectiveness by grouping the administrative functions of various agencies together, in order to achieve this critical mass (taking into consideration the necessary changes in the basic regulations governing the agencies and their budgetary independence), or urgently to draft specific rules for the agencies (in particular implementing rules for the agencies) which allow them to be in full compliance; Amendment 36 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 c (new) 36c. Insists that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget, take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the individual agencies in former years, in particular in year n-1, and, revise the budget requested by the particular agency accordingly; invites its competent committee to respect this revision and, if not undertaken by the Commission, to revise itself the budget in question to a realistic level matching the absorption and implementation capacity of the agency in question; Amendment 37 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 d (new) 36d. Recalls its decision on discharge in respect of the financial year 2005, in which it invited the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing agency; invites all relevant institutions in the case of a negative evaluation of the added value of an agency to take the necessary steps by reformulating the mandate of that agency or by closing it; notes that there has not been one single evaluation undertaken by the Commission in 2007; insists that the Commission should present at least 5 such evaluations before the decision on discharge in respect of the financial year 2007, starting with the oldest agencies; Amendment 38 # Jan MULDER Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 e (new) 36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations; Amendment 39 # Jan MULDER Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 f (new) 36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies; Amendment 4 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1.Emphasises that it unreservedly endorses the principle of the limited conferral of powers, which, in the current documents providing the legal basis for the European Union, is enshrined, inter alia, in Article 5 of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU) and which stipulates that the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice and the Court of Auditors exercise their powers under the conditions and for the purposes provided for, on the one hand, by the provisions of the Treaties establishing the European Communities and of the subsequent Treaties and Acts modifying and supplementing them and, on the other hand, by the other provisions of the TEU;deleted Amendment 40 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 ~~37. Calls on the Council to agree to a binding horizontal funding ceiling for the agencies;~~deleted Amendment 41 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 38. Acknowledges that Parliament, as the body responsible for financial control of the agencies, creates unacceptable conflicts of interest through its practice of appointing members of the agencies’ administrative boards and management bodies, and calls, therefore, for Parliament to halt this practice;deleted Amendment 42 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG ~~Privileges~~deleted Amendment 43 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 ~~39. Calls on the Commission to submit as quickly as possible a proposal to abolish or drastically cut back privileges, in particular under budget Items 1101, 1102, 1141, 1182 and 1183;~~deleted Amendment 44 # Hans-Peter MARTIN Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39. Calls on the Commission to submit as quickly as possible a proposal to abolish or drastically cut back privileges~~, in particular under budget Items 1101, 1102, 1141, 1182 and 1183~~; Amendment 45 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 ~~40. Refuses to accept that agency staff and members of their families should be able to undertake private travel paid for from the agency's budget;~~deleted Amendment 46 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal which seeks to amend the Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities, so that private travel by staff and members of their families, as governed by Annex VII, Section 3 C, Article 8, can no longer be paid for from public funds, and to achieve drastic savings in the area of staff privileges; Specific pointsdeleted Or. en Amendment 47 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 61 61. Notes that the agency's administrative spending in 2006 accounted for too great a proportion of its overall expenditure, making the effective and efficient performance of its tasks almost impossible;deleted Amendment 48 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 62 ~~62. Notes that no strict logic was applied to the choice of location for the agency and that as a result a substantial volume of unnecessary additional costs has arisen;~~deleted Amendment 49 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 63 63. Notes the unacceptable and frequently criticised overlaps between this agency’s area of activity and that of other agencies; this generates yet more additional costs, particularly as a result of the duplication of work in the administrative sphere;deleted Amendment 5 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that it unreservedly endorses the principle of subsidiarity, which, in the current documents providing the legal basis for the European Union, is enshrined, inter alia, in Article 5, second paragraph, of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) and which stipulates that in areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence the Community shall take action only if and in so far as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved by the Community;deleted Amendment 50 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 64 ~~64. Notes that it is not clear how this activity can be carried out more efficiently and more effectively in a decentralised agency and in this location than in the Commission itself;~~deleted Amendment 51 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 ~~65. Notes that in the financial year 2006 the cost of privileges for agency staff made up almost 10% of the agency's final budget;~~deleted Amendment 52 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 ~~66. Notes that the cost of private travel for agency staff and members of their families is unacceptably high;~~deleted Amendment 53 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 67 ~~67. Notes that the agency's staff expenditure per post increased by 9.3% between the financial year 2006 and the 2008 preliminary draft budget;~~deleted Amendment 54 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 68 ~~68. Notes that the administrative board has an unacceptably high number of members, so that efficient decision- making is impossible;~~deleted Amendment 55 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 69 ~~69. Notes that although the agency was set up as long ago as 1975, the rate of increase in the subsidy from the Community budget over the period from 2000 to 2006 was 27.13%;~~deleted Amendment 6 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Emphasises, in that connection, that pursuant to paragraph 4 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality for any proposed Community legislation the reasons on which it is based must be stated with a view to justifying its compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and the reasons for concluding that a Community objective can be better achieved at Community level must be substantiated by qualitative or quantitative indicators;deleted Amendment 7 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises, in that connection, that pursuant to paragraph 3 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality Community action within the limits of its powers can be either expanded or restricted or discontinued where it is no longer justified;deleted Amendment 8 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Emphasises, in that connection, that pursuant to paragraph 9 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality due account must be taken of the need for any financial or administrative burden falling on the Community to be minimised and proportionate to the objective to be achieved;deleted Amendment 9 # Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Emphasises that it unreservedly endorses the principle of sound financial management, as laid down, inter alia, in Article 274 TEC, and, hence, the objective of achieving the best possible result with a given volume of appropriations or achieving a given result using the smallest possible volume of appropriations;deleted source: PE-402.802

Amendments

Dossier

2007/2047(DEC)

2008/03/06 CONT 55 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Proposal for a decision on discharge
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Postpones its decision on g~~Grant~~ing~~s the Director of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions discharge in respect of the implementation of the Foundation's budget for the financial year 2006;

Amendment 10 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Emphasises, in that connection, that in its White Paper on the reform of the Commission the Commission laid down as guidelines for the formulation of an externalisation policy cost-effectiveness and the ability to exercise its powers to implement the budget, pursuant to Article 274 TEC;deleted

Amendment 11 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Emphasises that pursuant to Article 253 TEC regulations, directives and decisions adopted jointly by the European Parliament and the Council and such acts adopted by the Council or the Commission must state the reasons on which they are based and refer to any proposals or opinions which were required to be obtained pursuant to the TEC;deleted

Amendment 12 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Notes that decentralisation and devolution were key results of the process of reforming the Commission started in 1999, but that to date the Commission has submitted neither a study, nor an activity report nor an interim assessment of this form of administration; by the same token, the Commission has never given a convincing explanation of the added value provided by the agencies and of why their tasks could not equally well be performed within the Commission itself;deleted

Amendment 13 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Emphasises, in that connection, that between the year 2000 (publication of the White Paper on the Reform of the Commission) and 2007 the staff complement of the Commission and agencies (excluding executive agencies) increased by a total of 85%;deleted

Amendment 14 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Notes, in that connection, that in recent years the pace at which decentralised agencies are being set up has steadily increased, and that they are being established unsystematically and with no uniform framework: whereas in 1990 only three, in 1995 six, and in 2000 seven agencies existed, the 2008 budget lists no fewer than 25, seven of which have been added since 2005 alone;deleted

Amendment 15 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Emphasises, in that connection, that the agencies to which it grants discharge make up only a part of the total and that the increase in permanent and temporary posts for all the decentralised agencies from 166 in the year 2000 to a total of 3151 in 2007 (+1800%) clearly illustrates the problems in this area;deleted

Amendment 16 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

~~17. Emphasises further, in that connection, that average staff costs increased by more than 40% between 2006 and 2008;~~deleted

Amendment 17 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Emphasises finally, in that connection, that the subsidies paid to the agencies from the Community budget have increased disproportionately in recent years, that the appropriations from the Community budget paid to agencies to which Parliament grants discharge, which were established between 1975 and 1997 and have thus gone well beyond the start- up and initial growth phases, increased by some 90% between 2000 and 2008, and that during that period the subsidies paid to some of these agencies increased by more than 210%;deleted

Amendment 18 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

~~19. Emphasises that only two agencies are not in any way dependent on EU subsidies, whilst most of them are funded exclusively from EU budget appropriations;~~deleted

Amendment 19 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Notes, in that connection, that a clear trend is emerging whereby the agencies revise their need for Community subsidies disproportionately upwards every six months, thus committing a steadily increasing proportion of the available appropriations, and that there are insufficient incentives to use financial resources sparingly;deleted

Amendment 2 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Proposal for a decision on the closure of the accounts
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Postpon~~Approves the closure of the accounts of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions for the financial year 2006;

Amendment 20 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Takes the view that direct and indirect payments and subsidies to the agencies from host countries (e.g. funding for building projects, office facilities, municipal taxes, etc.) have made it impossible to draw up a comprehensive breakdown of the cost of the agencies and that this practice disguises the true costs;deleted

Amendment 21 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Takes the view that in most cases there has been no proper strategy underpinning the process of establishing agencies and that political considerations and factors, such as the attempt, with the help of the agencies, to influence the balance of power among the institutions, outweigh, and in some cases run entirely counter to, the original objectives, such as greater responsibility, transparency and efficiency in European administration;deleted

Amendment 22 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Takes the view that the lack of a proper strategy on setting up agencies has generated unnecessary costs and that the true costs have been hidden from taxpayers, since, for example, missing infrastructure has not been taken into account and additional costs – for instance for the construction of new office and conference buildings, the setting-up of new schools, the development of transport infrastructure in response to an increase in missions between places of work scattered throughout Europe, as a result of serious recruitment problems, etc. – have arisen as a result;deleted

Amendment 23 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Notes that the Commission's devolution policy has given rise to the duplication of work, above all in the area of administration, generating unnecessary additional costs and requiring the same know-how to be available several times over; notes, at the same time, that many agencies' administrative expenditure is far too high;deleted

Amendment 24 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Takes the view that, with a few exceptions, no efforts have been made systematically to involve the agencies in the work of the Commission and that the agencies' spheres of responsibility frequently relate only to areas covered by 'open coordination' and bear no relation to the European Union's real needs and taxpayers' expectations;deleted

Amendment 25 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Takes the view that the Commission no longer regards the decentralised agencies as a means of implementing its policies and has attempted to shed all responsibility for them, for example by stipulating that the Commission's Internal Auditor should no longer be responsible for auditing the decentralised agencies and should in future only confirm that their internal audit practices are consistent with international standards;deleted

Amendment 26 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

~~27. Notes that in the case of some agencies the number of members of the administrative board exceeds the total number of staff, ruling out efficient and cost-effective decision-making;~~deleted

Amendment 27 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Notes, on that basis, that the aim behind the practice of devolution - which is seen as one of the three main aspects of externalisation policy and was put forward as a reform strategy by the Commission in its White Paper - namely the more efficient, more rational and more effective provision of responsible administration, has not been achieved through the setting-up of decentralised agencies and that the Commission's reform efforts in this area have failed;deleted

Amendment 28 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

~~29. Calls on the Commission to comply strictly with the subsidiarity principle;~~deleted

Amendment 29 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

~~30. Calls on the Commission to meet to the letter the requirements to justify compliance with the subsidiarity principle;~~deleted

Amendment 3 #

Hans-Peter MARTIN

Motion for a resolution
Recital W

W. calling on the Director of the agency to propose, by 1 June 2008 at the latest, practical measures to achieve savings, above all in the area of administrative costs; to explain in detail why administrative costs are unacceptably high; to explain in detail why the subsidy from the Community budget has continued to increase enormously over the period between 2000 and 2008; to explain in detail why staff expenditure per post increased by 9% between the financial year 2006 and the 2008 preliminary draft budget; and to explain in detail why the cost of staff privileges ~~– budget Items 1101, 1102, 1141, 1182 and 1183 –~~ makes up almost 10% of the agency's final budget and is thus much higher than for other agencies, ~~General points~~Or. de

Amendment 30 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

~~31. Calls on the Commission to comply strictly with the principle of sound financial management;~~deleted

Amendment 31 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

~~33. Calls for every decision on the final location of an agency to be taken when the regulation establishing that agency is adopted;~~deleted

Amendment 32 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal which provides for the number of full members of the administrative board of an agency to be reduced as quickly as possible to a figure equal to no more than 10% of the posts in that agency’s establishment plan and to no more than 20 in total;deleted

Amendment 33 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36

36. Requests that the performance of the agencies be regularly (and on an ad hoc basis) audited by the Court of Auditors or another independent auditor; considers that this should not be limited to traditional elements of financial management and the proper use of public money, but should also cover administrative efficiency and effectiveness and should include a rating of the financial management of each agency;

Amendment 34 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)

36a. Takes the view that in the case of agencies which are continually overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should be made on the basis of vacant posts; is of the opinion that this will lead in the long run to less assigned revenue for the agencies and therefore also to lower administrative costs;

Amendment 35 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 b (new)

36b. Notes that it is a serious problem that a number of agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement, the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations etc.; considers that the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial Regulation are designed for bigger institutions and that most of the small agencies do not have the critical mass to be able to cope with these regulatory requirements; therefore asks the Commission to look for a rapid solution in order to enhance the effectiveness by grouping the administrative functions of various agencies together, in order to achieve this critical mass (taking into consideration the necessary changes in the basic regulations governing the agencies and their budgetary independence), or urgently to draft specific rules for the agencies (in particular implementing rules for the agencies) which allow them to be in full compliance;

Amendment 36 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 c (new)

36c. Insists that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget, take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the individual agencies in former years, in particular in year n-1, and, revise the budget requested by the particular agency accordingly; invites its competent committee to respect this revision and, if not undertaken by the Commission, to revise itself the budget in question to a realistic level matching the absorption and implementation capacity of the agency in question;

Amendment 37 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 d (new)

36d. Recalls its decision on discharge in respect of the financial year 2005, in which it invited the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing agency; invites all relevant institutions in the case of a negative evaluation of the added value of an agency to take the necessary steps by reformulating the mandate of that agency or by closing it; notes that there has not been one single evaluation undertaken by the Commission in 2007; insists that the Commission should present at least 5 such evaluations before the decision on discharge in respect of the financial year 2007, starting with the oldest agencies;

Amendment 38 #

Jan MULDER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)

36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;

Amendment 39 #

Jan MULDER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 f (new)

36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;

Amendment 4 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1.Emphasises that it unreservedly endorses the principle of the limited conferral of powers, which, in the current documents providing the legal basis for the European Union, is enshrined, inter alia, in Article 5 of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU) and which stipulates that the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice and the Court of Auditors exercise their powers under the conditions and for the purposes provided for, on the one hand, by the provisions of the Treaties establishing the European Communities and of the subsequent Treaties and Acts modifying and supplementing them and, on the other hand, by the other provisions of the TEU;deleted

Amendment 40 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

~~37. Calls on the Council to agree to a binding horizontal funding ceiling for the agencies;~~deleted

Amendment 41 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38

38. Acknowledges that Parliament, as the body responsible for financial control of the agencies, creates unacceptable conflicts of interest through its practice of appointing members of the agencies’ administrative boards and management bodies, and calls, therefore, for Parliament to halt this practice;deleted

Amendment 42 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

~~Privileges~~deleted

Amendment 43 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

~~39. Calls on the Commission to submit as quickly as possible a proposal to abolish or drastically cut back privileges, in particular under budget Items 1101, 1102, 1141, 1182 and 1183;~~deleted

Amendment 44 #

Hans-Peter MARTIN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Calls on the Commission to submit as quickly as possible a proposal to abolish or drastically cut back privileges~~, in particular under budget Items 1101, 1102, 1141, 1182 and 1183~~;

Amendment 45 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40

~~40. Refuses to accept that agency staff and members of their families should be able to undertake private travel paid for from the agency's budget;~~deleted

Amendment 46 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41

41. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal which seeks to amend the Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities, so that private travel by staff and members of their families, as governed by Annex VII, Section 3 C, Article 8, can no longer be paid for from public funds, and to achieve drastic savings in the area of staff privileges; Specific pointsdeleted Or. en

Amendment 47 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61

61. Notes that the agency's administrative spending in 2006 accounted for too great a proportion of its overall expenditure, making the effective and efficient performance of its tasks almost impossible;deleted

Amendment 48 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62

~~62. Notes that no strict logic was applied to the choice of location for the agency and that as a result a substantial volume of unnecessary additional costs has arisen;~~deleted

Amendment 49 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63

63. Notes the unacceptable and frequently criticised overlaps between this agency’s area of activity and that of other agencies; this generates yet more additional costs, particularly as a result of the duplication of work in the administrative sphere;deleted

Amendment 5 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that it unreservedly endorses the principle of subsidiarity, which, in the current documents providing the legal basis for the European Union, is enshrined, inter alia, in Article 5, second paragraph, of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC) and which stipulates that in areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence the Community shall take action only if and in so far as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved by the Community;deleted

Amendment 50 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64

~~64. Notes that it is not clear how this activity can be carried out more efficiently and more effectively in a decentralised agency and in this location than in the Commission itself;~~deleted

Amendment 51 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65

~~65. Notes that in the financial year 2006 the cost of privileges for agency staff made up almost 10% of the agency's final budget;~~deleted

Amendment 52 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 66

~~66. Notes that the cost of private travel for agency staff and members of their families is unacceptably high;~~deleted

Amendment 53 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67

~~67. Notes that the agency's staff expenditure per post increased by 9.3% between the financial year 2006 and the 2008 preliminary draft budget;~~deleted

Amendment 54 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 68

~~68. Notes that the administrative board has an unacceptably high number of members, so that efficient decision- making is impossible;~~deleted

Amendment 55 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 69

~~69. Notes that although the agency was set up as long ago as 1975, the rate of increase in the subsidy from the Community budget over the period from 2000 to 2006 was 27.13%;~~deleted

Amendment 6 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises, in that connection, that pursuant to paragraph 4 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality for any proposed Community legislation the reasons on which it is based must be stated with a view to justifying its compliance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and the reasons for concluding that a Community objective can be better achieved at Community level must be substantiated by qualitative or quantitative indicators;deleted

Amendment 7 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises, in that connection, that pursuant to paragraph 3 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality Community action within the limits of its powers can be either expanded or restricted or discontinued where it is no longer justified;deleted

Amendment 8 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Emphasises, in that connection, that pursuant to paragraph 9 of the Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality due account must be taken of the need for any financial or administrative burden falling on the Community to be minimised and proportionate to the objective to be achieved;deleted

Amendment 9 #

Paulo CASACA, Edit HERCZOG

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Emphasises that it unreservedly endorses the principle of sound financial management, as laid down, inter alia, in Article 274 TEC, and, hence, the objective of achieving the best possible result with a given volume of appropriations or achieving a given result using the smallest possible volume of appropriations;deleted

source: PE-402.802

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

2019-07-06Show (16) Changes | Timetravel

activities	date: 2007-03-30T00:00:00 docs: url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=SECfinal&an_doc=2007&nu_doc=1055 type: Non-legislative basic document published title: SEC(2007)1055 body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget Commissioner: KALLAS Siim type: Non-legislative basic document published date: 2007-10-25T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2007-03-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: NI name: MARTIN Hans-Peter body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2007-12-17T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs rapporteur: group: PSE name: MADEIRA Jamila date: 2008-02-12T00:00:00 body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Economic and Financial Affairs ECOFIN meeting_id: 2847 date: 2008-03-26T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2007-03-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: NI name: MARTIN Hans-Peter body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2007-12-17T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs rapporteur: group: PSE name: MADEIRA Jamila type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading date: 2008-04-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-111&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A6-0111/2008 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading date: 2008-04-22T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=14849&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20080422&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2008-142 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T6-0142/2008 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament date: 2009-03-31T00:00:00 type: Final act published in Official Journal docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B[%g]-2009-197&language=EN title: Budget 2009/197 url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2009:088:TOC title: OJ L 088 31.03.2009, p. 0093
commission	body: EC dg: Budget commissioner: KALLAS Siim
committees/0	type Responsible Committee body EP associated False committee_full Budgetary Control committee CONT date 2007-03-27T00:00:00 rapporteur name: MARTIN Hans-Peter group: Non-attached members abbr: NA
committees/0	body EP responsible True committee CONT date 2007-03-27T00:00:00 committee_full Budgetary Control rapporteur group: NI name: MARTIN Hans-Peter
committees/1	type Committee Opinion body EP associated False committee_full Employment and Social Affairs committee EMPL date 2007-12-17T00:00:00 rapporteur name: MADEIRA Jamila group: Socialist Group in the European Parliament abbr: PSE
committees/1	body EP responsible False committee EMPL date 2007-12-17T00:00:00 committee_full Employment and Social Affairs rapporteur group: PSE name: MADEIRA Jamila
council	body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Economic and Financial Affairs ECOFIN meeting_id: 2847 url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=SMPL&ROWSPP=25&RESULTSET=1&NRROWS=500&DOC_LANCD=EN&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC&CONTENTS=2847*&MEET_DATE=12/02/2008 date: 2008-02-12T00:00:00
docs	date: 2007-11-15T00:00:00 docs: url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:309:SOM:EN:HTML title: OJ C 309 19.12.2007, p. 0001 title: N6-0004/2008 summary: PURPOSE: presentation of the report by the Court of Auditors on the 2006 annual accounts of the Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions. CONTENT: the report indicates that the appropriations entered in the Foundation’s Dublin budget for the financial year in question are EUR 19.76 million , EUR 19.217 million were committed and EUR 15.248 million paid. Of this overall amount, an amount of EUR 4.312 million was carried over to 2007 and EUR 200 000 was cancelled. The Court notes that the Foundation’s accounts are reliable in all material respects and that the underlying transactions, taken as a whole, are legal and regular. Analysis of the accounts by the Court : the Court indicates that the implementation rate for 2006 commitment appropriations was more than 97%. However, carryover rates were 43% for administrative expenditure (Title II) and 45% for operating activities (Title III). Thus, the budgetary principle of annuality was not strictly observed, according to the Court. The Court also indicates that the Foundation signed two contracts for services to be rendered in 2007 for a total value of EUR 305 987. These contracts were covered by 2006 commitment appropriations from Title II – Administrative expenditure. Despite the fact that the above contracts related to services to be rendered exclusively in 2007, they were not charged to the budget of the related financial year. For recruitment procedures the selection criteria were neither decided by selection committees at the outset nor defined in conformance with the vacancy notice. According to the Court, this did not ensure transparent and non-discriminatory procedures. The Foundation’s replies : the Foundation replies to all of the criticisms one by one and indicates that measures will be taken to significantly reduce the carryover rate of appropriations for Title II in 2007. The Foundation also indicates that, taking into account the average duration of study contracts (18 months) and the payments schedule, about 35% of Title III credits unavoidably had to be carried over. Concerning the contracts committed in 2006 (and paid in 2007), the Foundation indicates that the latter started on 1 January 2007 and that the 2007 budget was not yet established at that time. However, from 2007 onwards, they will be committed against the appropriations of the following year. Lastly, the Court specifies that from March 2007, all vacancy notices include a clear indication of whether success in tests is a precondition for success in the examination. type: Court of Auditors: opinion, report body: CofA date: 2008-01-29T00:00:00 docs: url: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/content/out?lang=EN&typ=SET&i=ADV&RESULTSET=1&DOC_ID=5843%2F08&DOC_LANCD=EN&ROWSPP=25&NRROWS=500&ORDERBY=DOC_DATE+DESC title: 05843/2008 summary: Based on the observations contained in the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions for the financial year 2006, as well as on the Court of Auditor’s report and the Foundation’s replies to the Court’s observations, the Council recommends that the Parliament grant the Director of the Foundation discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2006. In doing so, the Council confirms that EUR 4.3 million (94%) of the appropriations carried over from 2005 to 2006 (EUR 4.6 million) was used, that the appropriations carried over from 2006 to 2007 amount to EUR 4.3 million and that a total of EUR 200 000 was cancelled. Recalling that the Court of Auditors was able to obtain reasonable assurance that the Foundation’s annual accounts were, in all material aspects, reliable, the Council believes that there is a certain number of observations that must be taken into consideration when providing the discharge on the implementation of the 2006 budget, particularly regarding the following points: Carry-overs: the Council regrets the recurring carry-over rates, which are exceptionally high, for administrative expenditure (Title II) and operating activities (Title III) of the Foundation and call on it to remedy this short-term situation. It notes the Court’s observation that the two contracts for services to be rendered exclusively in 2007 were charged in their entirety to the 2006 budget and encourages the Foundation to avoid such a practice in the future and to fully comply with the principle of annuality; Recruitment procedure: the Council notes the Court’s observation on the shortcomings concerning the selection criteria which were neither decided at the outset nor defined in conformity with the vacancy notice. It calls on the Foundation to take action in this area, as soon as possible, in order to ensure that procedures are transparent and non-discriminatory. type: Supplementary non-legislative basic document body: CSL date: 2008-02-13T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE396.689 title: PE396.689 type: Committee draft report body: EP date: 2008-03-05T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE400.444&secondRef=04 title: PE400.444 committee: EMPL type: Committee opinion body: EP date: 2008-03-06T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE402.802 title: PE402.802 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP date: 2008-04-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-111&language=EN title: A6-0111/2008 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP date: 2008-05-28T00:00:00 docs: url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=14849&j=0&l=en title: SP(2008)3169 type: Commission response to text adopted in plenary
events	date: 2007-03-30T00:00:00 type: Non-legislative basic document published body: EC docs: url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=SECfinal&an_doc=2007&nu_doc=1055 title: EUR-Lex title: SEC(2007)1055 summary: PURPOSE: presentation of the final accounts of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions for the 2006 financial year. CONTENT: this document sets out a detailed account of the implementation of the Foundation’s budget for 2006. It indicates that the Foundation’s final budget amounted to 19.8 million EUR in 2006 (compared with 19.3 million EUR in 2005) 98.9% of which is derived from a Community subsidy. In terms of personnel, the Foundation, whose headquarters are in Dublin (Ireland) officially had 94 posts provided for in the establishment plan, 89 of which were occupied and 10 further posts (seconded national experts and employment agency staff) amounting to 99 effective posts assigned to operational, administrative and mixed tasks. Expenditures relating to personnel in 2006 amounted to 9.774 million EUR. The tasks of the Foundation are to contribute to the establishment of better living and working conditions by increasing and disseminating knowledge which is relevant to this subject, fostering the exchange of information and experience in these fields, facilitating contact between universities, study and research institutes, economic and social administrations and carrying out studies or concluding study contracts and providing assistance for pilot projects in the area of working conditions. In 2006, the work undertaken by the Foundation included: Monitoring and surveys Establishment of one Network of European Observatories (NEO) covering the former three networks attached to the European Industrial Relations Observatory (EIRO), the European Working Conditions Observatory (EWCO) and the European Restructuring Monitor (ERM), Fourth Working Conditions Survey: first results, First Company Survey: first results. Employment and restructuring Studies on the Food & Beverage sector and Knowledge Intensive Businesses Services, Geographical and Labour Market Mobility in Europe: report, Attractive Workplaces for All: a contribution to the Lisbon Strategy at company level, Labour Supply in Care Services: report. Work-life balance and Working Conditions Fourth Working Conditions Survey, 15 years of European working surveys: trend report, Measuring Job Satisfaction in surveys, Working-time reports based on the Company survey. Industrial Relations (IR) and Partnership Working Time and Pay Developments, European Works Councils: reports and case studies, IR Country Profiles, Capacity Building for Social Dialogue: reports on New Member States and Turkey. Social Cohesion and Quality of Life EurLIFE database updates, Ageing Workforce and Age Management: reports and case studies, Employment guidance services for people with disabilities. Communication and sharing ideas and experience 332 publications, 53 press releases, 40 % increase in web use, 16 % increase of press cuttings Promotion campaigns ‘Your work, your life; balance company needs with worker satisfaction’ and ‘Fourth Working Conditions survey: what workers say’, Foundation Forum 2006 ‘Competitive Europe, Social Europe — Partners or Rivals?’ Company Network Seminars Foundation Seminar Series ‘Flexicurity and Employability’ National Outreach Centres covering AU, BE, ES, FI, FR, HU, IT, LUX, SP, UK, Exhibitions at Employment week in Brussels and at the PES conference in Oporto. The Foundation’s full 2006 accounts may be found at the following address: http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/about/publicaccess/categories/finance/2007.htm date: 2007-10-25T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP date: 2008-03-26T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP summary: The Committee on Budgetary Control adopted a report by Hans-Peter MARTIN (NI, AT) recommending that the Parliament grant the Director of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions discharge in respect of the implementation of the Foundation's budget for the financial year 2006. The parliamentary committee notes that the Foundation’s final annual accounts are as annexed to the Court of Auditors' report. MEPs make a series of general comments on the EU agencies before focusing on the individual case of the Foundation. 1) General comments on the majority of EU agencies : MEPs note that the budgets of the 24 agencies and other satellite bodies audited by the Court of Auditors totalled more than EUR 1 billion and that the number of agencies is constantly increasing. The number of agencies subject to the discharge procedure evolved from 8 in 2000 to 20 in 2006. They conclude therefore that the auditing/discharge process has become cumbersome and disproportionate compared to the relative size of the agencies and that, in the future, this type of procedure should be simplified and rationalised for decentralised agencies. On the basis of the financial analysis, MEPs are of the following opinion: Fundamental considerations : given the constantly increasing number of agencies, MEPs request that, before the creation of a new agency, the Commission provide clear explanations regarding agency type, objectives of the agency, internal governance structure, products, services, clients and stakeholders of the agency, formal relationship with external actors, budget responsibility, financial planning, and personnel and staffing policy. They also request that each agency be governed by a yearly performance agreement which should contain the main objectives for the coming year and that the performance of the agencies be regularly audited by the Court of Auditors (and extend the financial analysis of expenditure to also cover administrative efficiency and effectiveness). More generally, MEPs take the view that, in the case of agencies, which are continually overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should be made on the basis of vacant posts in order to reduce the assigned revenue for the agencies and therefore also lower administrative costs of the EU. They recall that it is a serious problem that a number of agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement, the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations etc., and consider that the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial Regulation are designed for bigger institutions rather than for small agencies. Therefore, it is necessary to seek a rapid solution in order to enhance the effectiveness of the legislation by grouping the administrative functions of various agencies together or by establishing implementing rules which are better adapted to the agencies. MEPs also insist that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget, take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the individual agencies in former years and revise the budget requested by the particular agency accordingly. If the Commission does not undertake this revision, MEPs invite the competent committee to revise, itself, the budget in question to a realistic level. At the same time, MEPs recall that they expect the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing agency and to not hesitate to close an agency if it is deemed useless by the analysis. Such an assessment is expected as soon as possible given that this type of assessment has yet to be presented. Furthermore, MEPs insist that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements. Presentation of reporting data : noting that there is no standard approach among the agencies with regard to the presentation of information, MEPs recall that they already invited the directors of the agencies to accompany their annual activity report with a declaration of assurance concerning the legality and regularity of operations, similar to the declarations signed by the Directors General of the Commission. They therefore ask the Commission to amend its standing instructions to the agencies and to produce a harmonised model for presenting information, including: i) an annual report intended for a general readership on the body's operations, work and achievements; ii) financial statements and a report on implementation of the agency’s budget; iii) an activity report of the Directors of the agency (as requested by the Parliament since 2005); iv) a declaration of assurance signed by the body's director. General findings by the Court of Auditors : MEPs refer to certain recurring findings by the Court, including the disbursement of subsidies paid by the Commission (not sufficiently justified estimates of the agencies' cash requirements), the non implementation of the ABAC accounting system by some agencies or the accrued charges for untaken leave which are accounted for by some agencies. They call for rapid measures in these areas as well as improvements to the internal audit procedures of the agencies. MEPs also calls on the agencies to consider an inter-agency disciplinary board, as some individual agencies have difficulty in setting up their own disciplinary boards due to their size. Draft inter-institutional agreement : MEPs recall the Commission's draft Interinstitutional agreement on the operating framework for the European regulatory agencies (see ACI/2005/2035 ), which intended to create a framework for the creation, structure, operation, evaluation and control of the European regulatory agencies and insist that it be completed as soon as possible. They particularly welcome the Commission's commitment to bring forward a Communication on the future of the regulatory agencies during the course of 2008. 2) Specific points concerning the Foundation for Living and Working Conditions: MEPs recall that the Court of Auditors once again found high carry-over rates in the implementation of the Foundation’s budget for 2006 (43 % for administrative expenditure and 45 % for operating activities). They particularly draw attention to the reservations expressed by the Court regarding the Foundation’s respect of the principle of budget annuality, the conformance of the award of two contracts, the fact that amounts to be disbursed in full in 2007 were budgeted for in 2006, and the failure to observe the selection criteria applying to officials. In addition, the Court expressed reservations regarding recruitment and selection procedures of personnel, even though the Foundation specifies that all vacancy notices now include a clear indication of whether success in tests is a precondition for success in the competition. MEPs also point out that in 2006 the Foundation set up a management system to improve its organisational efficiency through greater transparency and better coordination in the use of resources. The Foundation also implemented a performance monitoring system as well as a clearer procurement system. Lastly, in 2006, the Foundation launched an ex-post evaluation of the 2001-2004 Work Programme, with a view to determining the organisation's impact, added value and effectiveness. date: 2008-04-03T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-111&language=EN title: A6-0111/2008 date: 2008-04-22T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=14849&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament date: 2008-04-22T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20080422&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament date: 2008-04-22T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2008-142 title: T6-0142/2008 summary: The European Parliament adopted, by 624 votes in favour, 19 against and 42 abstentions, a Decision to grant the Director of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions discharge in respect of the implementation of its budget for the financial year 2006. The decision to grant discharge also constitutes closure of the accounts of this EU agency. At the same time, the Parliament adopted, by 621 votes in favour, 19 against and 45 abstentions, a Resolution containing the comments which form part of the decision giving discharge. The report had been tabled for plenary by Hans-Peter MARTIN (NI, AT) on behalf of the Committee on Budgetary Control. As is the case for all EU agencies, the Parliament's Resolution is divided into two parts: part one contains general comments on EU agencies, while part two focuses on the specific case of the Foundation. 1) General comments on the majority of EU agencies : the Parliament notes that the budgets of the 24 agencies and other satellite bodies audited by the Court of Auditors totalled more than EUR 1 billion and that the number of agencies is constantly increasing. The number of agencies subject to the discharge procedure evolved from 8 in 2000 to 20 in 2006. It concludes therefore that the auditing/discharge process has become cumbersome and disproportionate compared to the relative size of the agencies and that, in the future, this type of procedure should be simplified and rationalised for decentralised agencies. On the basis of the financial analysis, the Parliament is of the following opinion: Fundamental considerations : given the constantly increasing number of agencies, the Parliament requests that, before the creation of a new agency, the Commission provide clear explanations regarding agency type, objectives of the agency, internal governance structure, products, services, clients and stakeholders of the agency, formal relationship with external actors, budget responsibility, financial planning, and personnel and staffing policy. It also requests that each agency be governed by a yearly performance agreement which should contain the main objectives for the coming year and that the performance of the agencies be regularly audited by the Court of Auditors (and extend the financial analysis of expenditure to also cover administrative efficiency and effectiveness). More generally, the Parliament takes the view that, in the case of agencies, which are continually overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should be made on the basis of vacant posts in order to reduce the assigned revenue for the agencies and therefore also lower administrative costs of the EU. It recalls that it is a serious problem that a number of agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement, the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations etc., and consider that the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial Regulation are designed for bigger institutions rather than for small agencies. Therefore, it is necessary to seek a rapid solution in order to enhance the effectiveness of the legislation by grouping the administrative functions of various agencies together or by establishing implementing rules which are better adapted to the agencies. The Parliament also insists that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget, take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the individual agencies in former years and revise the budget requested by the particular agency accordingly. If the Commission does not undertake this revision, the Parliament invites the competent committee to revise, itself, the budget in question to a realistic level. At the same time, the Parliament recalls that it expects the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing agency and to not hesitate to close an agency if it is deemed useless by the analysis. Such an assessment is expected as soon as possible given that this type of assessment has yet to be presented. Furthermore, the Parliament insists that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements. Presentation of reporting data : noting that there is no standard approach among the agencies with regard to the presentation of information, the Parliament recalls that it already invited the directors of the agencies to accompany their annual activity report with a declaration of assurance concerning the legality and regularity of operations, similar to the declarations signed by the Directors General of the Commission. It therefore asks the Commission to amend its standing instructions to the agencies and to produce a harmonised model for presenting information, including: i) an annual report intended for a general readership on the body's operations, work and achievements; ii) financial statements and a report on implementation of the agency’s budget; iii) an activity report of the Directors of the agency (as requested by the Parliament since 2005); iv) a declaration of assurance signed by the body's director. General findings by the Court of Auditors : the Parliament refers to certain recurring findings by the Court, including the disbursement of subsidies paid by the Commission (not sufficiently justified estimates of the agencies' cash requirements), the non implementation of the ABAC accounting system by some agencies or the accrued charges for untaken leave which are accounted for by some agencies. It calls for rapid measures in these areas as well as improvements to the internal audit procedures of the agencies. The Parliament also calls on the agencies to consider an inter-agency disciplinary board, as some individual agencies have difficulty in setting up their own disciplinary boards due to their size. Draft inter-institutional agreement : the Parliament recalls the Commission's draft Interinstitutional agreement on the operating framework for the European regulatory agencies (see ACI/2005/2035 ), which was intended to create a framework for the creation, structure, operation, evaluation and control of the European regulatory agencies and awaits its adoption as soon as possible. It particularly welcomes the Commission's commitment to bring forward a Communication on the future of the regulatory agencies during the course of 2008. 2) Specific points concerning the Foundation for Living and Working Conditions: the Parliament recalls that the Court of Auditors once again found high carry-over rates in the implementation of the Foundation’s budget for 2006 (43 % for administrative expenditure and 45 % for operating activities). It particularly draws attention to the reservations expressed by the Court regarding the Foundation’s respect of the principle of budget annuality, the conformance of the award of two contracts, the fact that amounts to be disbursed in full in 2007 were budgeted for in 2006, and the failure to observe the selection criteria applying to officials. In addition, the Court expressed reservations regarding personnel recruitment and selection procedures, even though the Foundation specifies that all vacancy notices now include a clear indication of whether success in tests is a precondition for success in the competition. The Parliament also points out that, in 2006, the Foundation set up a management system to improve its organisational efficiency through greater transparency and better coordination in the use of resources. The Foundation also implemented a performance monitoring system as well as a clearer procurement system. Lastly, in 2006, the Foundation launched an ex-post evaluation of the 2001-2004 Work Programme, with a view to determining the organisation's impact, added value and effectiveness. date: 2008-04-22T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP date: 2009-03-31T00:00:00 type: Final act published in Official Journal summary: PURPOSE: to grant discharge to the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions for the financial year 2006. LEGISLATIVE ACT: Decision 2009/197/EC of the European Parliament on the discharge for implementation of the budget of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions for the financial year 2006. CONTENT: with the present decision, the European Parliament grants discharge to the Director of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions for the financial year 2006. This decision is in line with the European Parliament’s resolution adopted on 22 April 2008 and comprises a series of observations that form an integral part of the discharge decision (please refer to the summary of the opinion of 22/04/2008). docs: title: Budget 2009/197 url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B[%g]-2009-197&language=EN title: OJ L 088 31.03.2009, p. 0093 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2009:088:TOC
links
other	body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget commissioner: KALLAS Siim
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee	Old CONT/6/53857 New CONT/6/53857
procedure/legal_basis/0	Rules of Procedure EP 94
procedure/legal_basis/0	Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 094
procedure/subject	Old 8.70.03.07 Previous discharges New 8.70.03.07 Previous discharges
procedure/title	Old 2006 discharge: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions Eurofound New 2006 discharge: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound)

2015-11-04Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/6/docs

url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B[%g]-2009-197&language=EN title: Budget 2009/197
url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2009:088:TOC title: OJ L 088 31.03.2009, p. 0093

2014-11-10Show (5) Changes

activities	date: 2007-03-30T00:00:00 docs: url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=SECfinal&an_doc=2007&nu_doc=1055 type: Non-legislative basic document published title: SEC(2007)1055 type: Non-legislative basic document published body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget Commissioner: KALLAS Siim date: 2007-10-25T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2007-03-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: NI name: MARTIN Hans-Peter body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2007-12-17T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs rapporteur: group: PSE name: MADEIRA Jamila date: 2008-02-12T00:00:00 body: CSL type: Council Meeting council: Economic and Financial Affairs ECOFIN meeting_id: 2847 date: 2008-03-26T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2007-03-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: NI name: MARTIN Hans-Peter body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2007-12-17T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs rapporteur: group: PSE name: MADEIRA Jamila type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading date: 2008-04-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-111&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A6-0111/2008 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading date: 2008-04-22T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=14849&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20080422&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2008-142 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T6-0142/2008 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament date: 2009-03-31T00:00:00 type: Final act published in Official Journal
committees	body: EP responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2007-03-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: NI name: MARTIN Hans-Peter body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2007-12-17T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs rapporteur: group: PSE name: MADEIRA Jamila
links
other	body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget commissioner: KALLAS Siim
procedure	dossier_of_the_committee CONT/6/53857 reference 2007/2047(DEC) title 2006 discharge: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions Eurofound legal_basis Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 094 stage_reached Procedure completed type DEC - Discharge procedure final url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B[%g]-2009-197&language=EN title: Budget 2009/197 subject 8.70.03.07 Previous discharges

Activites

Documents

History

ParlTrack - 2011-2024