2012/2087(DEC) | [ParlTrack]

View current state | View Changes for this date

Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage

2012/2087(DEC) Special Report No 3/2012 (2011 discharge): Structural Funds: Did the Commission successfully deal with deficiencies identified in the Member States' management and control systems?
Next event: EP 1R Plenary 2012/10/23 more...

Role	Committee	Rapporteur	Shadows
Opinion	AGRI
Opinion	BUDG
Lead	CONT	GEIER Jens (S&D)	STAES Bart (Verts/ALE), ČEŠKOVÁ Andrea (ECR), SØNDERGAARD Søren Bo (GUE/NGL), ANDREASEN Marta (EFD)
Opinion	EMPL
Opinion	PECH
Opinion	REGI

Lead committee dossier: CONT/7/09095
Legal Basis RoP 076

Subjects

Links

Activites

2012/10/23 EP 1R Plenary
2012/10/23 Prev DG PRES
- DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/', 'title': 'Budget'}, ŠEMETA Algirdas
2012/09/20 Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
- A7-0276/2012
2012/09/17 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
2012/07/12 Amendments tabled in committee
- PE492.938
2012/06/14 Committee draft report
- PE489.450
2012/05/10 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2012/04/26 Non-legislative basic document
- N7-0060/2012 summary
  
  PURPOSE : to present Special Report (No 3/2012) from the European Court of Auditors on improving Member States' management and control systems for Structural Funds. CONTENT: the European Court of Auditors (ECA) audit was mainly carried out on the basis of a review of 40 programmes in which significant management and control deficiencies had been identified. It aimed at assessing whether the Commission dealt in a satisfactory way with deficiencies identified in the Member States' management and control systems. To recall, the Structural Funds represent about one-third of the EU budget. During the 2000-2006 and 2007-2013 programming periods, EUR 475 billion were allocated to Structural Funds. Management of Structural Funds expenditure is shared between the Commission and the Member States. Member States prepare multi-annual programmes which are assessed and approved by the Commission and later implemented by the Member States. The Commission has to ensure that Member States have smoothly functioning management and control systems so that EU funds are efficiently and correctly used. The Commission bears the ultimate responsibility for the implementation of the EU budget. In its special report, the Court concludes that the Commission takes appropriate corrective actions when deficiencies in Member States' systems are identified, but the process to implementation is lengthy. The Commission had some success in ensuring that financial corrections were correctly applied, but was less successful in obtaining assurance that its actions led to improvements in Member States' management and control systems. Court recommendations: the ECA makes a number of recommendations to the Commission: reducing the duration of the administrative procedure from identification of deficiencies until implementation of corrective actions; giving higher priority to its audit work on the audit authorities to ensure that they produce robust error rates so that the financial corrections can be applied on the basis of these error rates; disseminating checklists that serve as best practice to be followed by Member States authorities for their first level checks; ensuring that financial corrections cover all expenditure incurred under deficient management and control systems. The ECA also recommends that the Commission, the Parliament and the Council reconsider, when discussing future plans for spending on Cohesion, whether any changes should be made to the arrangements regarding, on one hand, the reallocation of support from the Cohesion Fund and Structural Funds and, on the other, the possibilities for substitution of expenditure found to be ineligible.
- DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/', 'title': 'Budget'}, ŠEMETA Algirdas
2012/04/26 Date

Documents

Non-legislative basic document published: N7-0060/2012
Committee draft report: PE489.450
Amendments tabled in committee: PE492.938
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0276/2012

Amendments	Dossier
19	2012/2087(DEC) 2012/07/13 CONT 19 amendments... Amendment 1 # Jens GEIER Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Notes ~~however~~ that around 75 % of the requests based on annual reports as referred to in Article 13 of Commission Regulation (EC) 438/2001 (Article 13 reports) were not followed by financial corrections; calls on the Commission, therefore, to provide information on the reasons for the absence of financial corrections in this context (point 24); notes that the legal basis for the 2007-2013 period requires managing authorities to verify administratively all application for reimbursements by beneficiaries in accordance with Article 13(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1828/2006; Amendment 10 # Jean-Pierre AUDY Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Reiterates the importance of the supervisory role the Commission exercises in order to be able to bear the ultimate responsibility for the implementation of the budget including the areas of shared management; recalls the action plan to strengthen the Commission's supervisory role under shared management of structural actions which aimed at reducing the level of error in structural actions and thus to protect the EU budget; notes, however, that the action plan of 2008 came only into force after the programming period 2000- 2006; calls on the Commission therefore to fully enforce measures as stated in the action plan for the 2007-2013 programming period and beyond; expects in this context from the Commission a considerable and steady decrease in error rates, in particular of programmes that are expected to have the highest error rates; proposes that the Court carry out a regular assessment of the technical and ethical quality of national audit authorities, with particular regard to their independence, and that it report its findings and conclusions to the European Parliament and the Council; Amendment 11 # Andrea ČEŠKOVÁ Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Emphasises that speed is of the essence in the process of controls to ensure that the financial interests of European taxpayers are protected; calls on the Commission to prioritise the earliest possible scrutiny, assessment and follow-up action in its future management oversight of these funds; Amendment 12 # Jens GEIER Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Believes that improving the Commission's supervisory role is an ongoing process that can never be considered ‘implemented’; underlines in this context the Court of Auditor's' remark that although management and control systems were effective at a certain time this does not necessarily mean that they continue to be effective, as systems, personnel and entities in charge of management of structural actions may change; calls on the Commission to endorse fully the Court of Auditor's' recommendations; considers enhancements of the action plan to be necessary if the expectations with regard to the improvement of the Commission's financial management are not met; Amendment 13 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Asks the Commission to make efforts to ensure that Member States do not affect the continuity of programmes by changing entities, systems and personnel responsible for Structural Funds control, that had already been certified as effective by the Commission; Amendment 14 # Jens GEIER Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Is convinced that the Commission should continue to aim at implementing the single audit principle; emphasises that it is of utmost importance to ensure the quality of the work of audit authorities in the current and upcoming periods; notes that - provided that the audit authorities produce reliable results - the EU budget could be adequately protected even if high error rates are present as the Commission could apply financial corrections to counter those error rates; reiterates, however, the fact that in such cases the national taxpayer has to pay twice which is why preventing errors from happening is always more efficient than correcting it later on, for both the Commission and the Member States concerned; stresses in this context specifically indent 2 of the Court of Auditor's' recommendation 1 and urges the Commission to implement this recommendation; Amendment 15 # Jean-Pierre AUDY Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Is convinced that the Commission should continue to aim at implementing the single audit principle; emphasises that it is of utmost importance to ensure the quality of the work of audit authorities and to ensure that their independence is guaranteed; notes that - provided that the audit authorities produce reliable results - the EU budget could be adequately protected even if high error rates are present as the Commission could apply financial corrections to counter those error rates; reiterates, however, the fact that in such cases the national taxpayer has to pay twice which is why preventing errors from happening is always more efficient than correcting it later on, for both the Commission and the Member States concerned; stresses in this context specifically indent 2 of the Court of Auditor's recommendation 1 and urges the Commission to implement this recommendation; Amendment 16 # Andrea ČEŠKOVÁ Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Is convinced that the Commission should continue to aim at implementing the single audit principle; emphasises that it is of utmost importance to ensure the quality of the work of audit authorities and that to achieve this end it is essential to establish clear and transparent common standards for these audits; notes that - provided that the audit authorities produce reliable results - the EU budget could be adequately protected even if high error rates are present as the Commission could apply financial corrections to counter those error rates; reiterates, however, the fact that in such cases the national taxpayer has to pay twice which is why preventing errors from happening is always more efficient than correcting it later on, for both the Commission and the Member States concerned; stresses in this context specifically indent 2 of the Court of Auditor's recommendation 1 and urges the Commission to implement this recommendation; Amendment 17 # Jens GEIER Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Calls on the Commission to finalise the closure of the 2000-2006 programming period duly taking into account the Court of Auditor's' observations and to report to Parliament on how the Commission will ensure legality and regularity in the process; Amendment 18 # Jens GEIER Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Calls on the Commission, furthermore, to take into account the lessons learned from the Court of Auditor's report and to monitor the implementation of structural actions for the 2007-2013 period and to bear in mind the Court of Auditor's' observations in the discussions on the future structural actions for the period 2014-2020; Amendment 19 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Believes strongly that the Commission should deepen its involvement in the Structural Funds scrutiny process by further assisting and supervising Member States' management and certifying authorities as well as the winding-up bodies, throughout all phases of implementation and verification, in order to ensure an even more efficient and less time and resource consuming process; Amendment 2 # Jens GEIER Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Is concerned about the Commission's different requirements in the 2000-2006 programming period with regard to the implementation of first-level checks as this can potentially result in the non-detection of irregular expenses; asks the Commission to apply a coherent approach to demands for first-level checks and to provide information for the programming periods after 2000-2006 (point 28); notes that the legal basis for the 2007-2013 period requires managing authorities to verify administratively all application for reimbursements by beneficiaries in accordance with Article 13(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1828/20061; __________________ 1 Commission Regulation (EC) No 1828/2006 of 8 December 2006 setting out rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and of Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Regional Development Fund (OJ L 371, 27.12.2006, p. 1). Amendment 3 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Is concerned about the Commission's different requirements with regard to the implementation of first-level checks, as this ~~can potentially result in the~~, alongside low coverage of expenditure or insufficient quality of the aforementioned first-level checks can generate high risks of non-detection of irregular expenses; asks the Commission to apply a coherent approach to demands for first-level checks and to provide information for the programming periods after 2000-2006 (point 28); Amendment 4 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Asks the Commission to disseminate even more extensively elaborated checklists and best practice manuals (with special focus on eligibility rules) to be followed by the Member States and to strengthen its supervision on how these elements are taken into account; Amendment 5 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Believes the first-level checks to be of utmost importance in ensuring a robust error rate from the onset of the implementation process; believes therefore, that the management authority should either be accredited by the Commission or the Commission should assist and supervise the management authority in exercising the aforementioned first-level checks; Amendment 6 # Jens GEIER Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Is furthermore concerned about the Court of Auditor's' finding that Commission's follow-up audits aiming to scrutinise the reliability of Member States‘ statements required further corrective actions by the Member States in 78 % of cases (point 45); is therefore worried that the Commission sometimes relied on potentially unreliable information by not sufficiently questioning information submitted by Member States (for example point 57, boxes 9 and 12) and that the Commission did not adequately scrutinise the reliability of the information; points out that the lack of reliability of Member States’ statements requires further audit resources by the Commission; acknowledges also the need to balance appropriately cost and benefits of such follow-up audits (point 46); Amendment 7 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Believes that an even higher degree of efficiency can stem from harmonising the various methods used to obtain assurance related to financial corrections accuracy; is of the opinion that, in order to avoid further correction, the accent should be placed on the Commission's carrying out the verification audits rather than issuing follow-up audits in case of defective statements and results received from the Member States; Amendment 8 # Jens GEIER Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Reminds the Commission that the error rate in the policy area Cohesion has increased in the Court of Auditor's' Annual Report 2010, which reverses the positive trend observed in previous years; and is contrary to an accelerated reduction of error rates, as called for by Parliament in the context of the 2008 discharge1; __________________ 1 See par. 4 of the resolution of 5 May 2010 with observations forming an integral part of its Decisions on discharge in respect of the implementation of the EU General Budget for the financial year 2008, Section III - Commission and executive agencies (OJ L 252, 25.9.2010, p. 39). Amendment 9 # Jens GEIER Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Reiterates the importance of the supervisory role the Commission exercises in order to be able to bear the ultimate responsibility for the implementation of the budget including the areas of shared management; recalls the action plan to strengthen the Commission's supervisory role under shared management of structural actions and the improved legal framework for the 2007-2013 programming period which aimed at reducing the level of error in structural actions and thus to protect the EU budget; notes, however, that the action plan of 2008 came only into force a~~fter~~t the end of the programming period 2000- 2006 and could therefore cover the closure process of that period only; calls on the Commission therefore to fully enforce measures as stated in the action plan for the 2007-2013 programming period and beyond; expects in this context from the Commission a considerable and steady decrease in error rates, in particular of programmes that are expected to have the highest error rates; source: PE-492.938

Amendments

Dossier

2012/2087(DEC)

2012/07/13 CONT 19 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Jens GEIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Notes ~~however~~ that around 75 % of the requests based on annual reports as referred to in Article 13 of Commission Regulation (EC) 438/2001 (Article 13 reports) were not followed by financial corrections; calls on the Commission, therefore, to provide information on the reasons for the absence of financial corrections in this context (point 24); notes that the legal basis for the 2007-2013 period requires managing authorities to verify administratively all application for reimbursements by beneficiaries in accordance with Article 13(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1828/2006;

Amendment 10 #

Jean-Pierre AUDY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Reiterates the importance of the supervisory role the Commission exercises in order to be able to bear the ultimate responsibility for the implementation of the budget including the areas of shared management; recalls the action plan to strengthen the Commission's supervisory role under shared management of structural actions which aimed at reducing the level of error in structural actions and thus to protect the EU budget; notes, however, that the action plan of 2008 came only into force after the programming period 2000- 2006; calls on the Commission therefore to fully enforce measures as stated in the action plan for the 2007-2013 programming period and beyond; expects in this context from the Commission a considerable and steady decrease in error rates, in particular of programmes that are expected to have the highest error rates; proposes that the Court carry out a regular assessment of the technical and ethical quality of national audit authorities, with particular regard to their independence, and that it report its findings and conclusions to the European Parliament and the Council;

Amendment 11 #

Andrea ČEŠKOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Emphasises that speed is of the essence in the process of controls to ensure that the financial interests of European taxpayers are protected; calls on the Commission to prioritise the earliest possible scrutiny, assessment and follow-up action in its future management oversight of these funds;

Amendment 12 #

Jens GEIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Believes that improving the Commission's supervisory role is an ongoing process that can never be considered ‘implemented’; underlines in this context the Court of Auditor's' remark that although management and control systems were effective at a certain time this does not necessarily mean that they continue to be effective, as systems, personnel and entities in charge of management of structural actions may change; calls on the Commission to endorse fully the Court of Auditor's' recommendations; considers enhancements of the action plan to be necessary if the expectations with regard to the improvement of the Commission's financial management are not met;

Amendment 13 #

Marian-Jean MARINESCU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Asks the Commission to make efforts to ensure that Member States do not affect the continuity of programmes by changing entities, systems and personnel responsible for Structural Funds control, that had already been certified as effective by the Commission;

Amendment 14 #

Jens GEIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Is convinced that the Commission should continue to aim at implementing the single audit principle; emphasises that it is of utmost importance to ensure the quality of the work of audit authorities in the current and upcoming periods; notes that - provided that the audit authorities produce reliable results - the EU budget could be adequately protected even if high error rates are present as the Commission could apply financial corrections to counter those error rates; reiterates, however, the fact that in such cases the national taxpayer has to pay twice which is why preventing errors from happening is always more efficient than correcting it later on, for both the Commission and the Member States concerned; stresses in this context specifically indent 2 of the Court of Auditor's' recommendation 1 and urges the Commission to implement this recommendation;

Amendment 15 #

Jean-Pierre AUDY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Is convinced that the Commission should continue to aim at implementing the single audit principle; emphasises that it is of utmost importance to ensure the quality of the work of audit authorities and to ensure that their independence is guaranteed; notes that - provided that the audit authorities produce reliable results - the EU budget could be adequately protected even if high error rates are present as the Commission could apply financial corrections to counter those error rates; reiterates, however, the fact that in such cases the national taxpayer has to pay twice which is why preventing errors from happening is always more efficient than correcting it later on, for both the Commission and the Member States concerned; stresses in this context specifically indent 2 of the Court of Auditor's recommendation 1 and urges the Commission to implement this recommendation;

Amendment 16 #

Andrea ČEŠKOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Is convinced that the Commission should continue to aim at implementing the single audit principle; emphasises that it is of utmost importance to ensure the quality of the work of audit authorities and that to achieve this end it is essential to establish clear and transparent common standards for these audits; notes that - provided that the audit authorities produce reliable results - the EU budget could be adequately protected even if high error rates are present as the Commission could apply financial corrections to counter those error rates; reiterates, however, the fact that in such cases the national taxpayer has to pay twice which is why preventing errors from happening is always more efficient than correcting it later on, for both the Commission and the Member States concerned; stresses in this context specifically indent 2 of the Court of Auditor's recommendation 1 and urges the Commission to implement this recommendation;

Amendment 17 #

Jens GEIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to finalise the closure of the 2000-2006 programming period duly taking into account the Court of Auditor's' observations and to report to Parliament on how the Commission will ensure legality and regularity in the process;

Amendment 18 #

Jens GEIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls on the Commission, furthermore, to take into account the lessons learned from the Court of Auditor's report and to monitor the implementation of structural actions for the 2007-2013 period and to bear in mind the Court of Auditor's' observations in the discussions on the future structural actions for the period 2014-2020;

Amendment 19 #

Marian-Jean MARINESCU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Believes strongly that the Commission should deepen its involvement in the Structural Funds scrutiny process by further assisting and supervising Member States' management and certifying authorities as well as the winding-up bodies, throughout all phases of implementation and verification, in order to ensure an even more efficient and less time and resource consuming process;

Amendment 2 #

Jens GEIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Is concerned about the Commission's different requirements in the 2000-2006 programming period with regard to the implementation of first-level checks as this can potentially result in the non-detection of irregular expenses; asks the Commission to apply a coherent approach to demands for first-level checks and to provide information for the programming periods after 2000-2006 (point 28); notes that the legal basis for the 2007-2013 period requires managing authorities to verify administratively all application for reimbursements by beneficiaries in accordance with Article 13(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1828/20061; __________________ 1 Commission Regulation (EC) No 1828/2006 of 8 December 2006 setting out rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and of Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Regional Development Fund (OJ L 371, 27.12.2006, p. 1).

Amendment 3 #

Marian-Jean MARINESCU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Is concerned about the Commission's different requirements with regard to the implementation of first-level checks, as this ~~can potentially result in the~~, alongside low coverage of expenditure or insufficient quality of the aforementioned first-level checks can generate high risks of non-detection of irregular expenses; asks the Commission to apply a coherent approach to demands for first-level checks and to provide information for the programming periods after 2000-2006 (point 28);

Amendment 4 #

Marian-Jean MARINESCU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Asks the Commission to disseminate even more extensively elaborated checklists and best practice manuals (with special focus on eligibility rules) to be followed by the Member States and to strengthen its supervision on how these elements are taken into account;

Amendment 5 #

Marian-Jean MARINESCU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Believes the first-level checks to be of utmost importance in ensuring a robust error rate from the onset of the implementation process; believes therefore, that the management authority should either be accredited by the Commission or the Commission should assist and supervise the management authority in exercising the aforementioned first-level checks;

Amendment 6 #

Jens GEIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Is furthermore concerned about the Court of Auditor's' finding that Commission's follow-up audits aiming to scrutinise the reliability of Member States‘ statements required further corrective actions by the Member States in 78 % of cases (point 45); is therefore worried that the Commission sometimes relied on potentially unreliable information by not sufficiently questioning information submitted by Member States (for example point 57, boxes 9 and 12) and that the Commission did not adequately scrutinise the reliability of the information; points out that the lack of reliability of Member States’ statements requires further audit resources by the Commission; acknowledges also the need to balance appropriately cost and benefits of such follow-up audits (point 46);

Amendment 7 #

Marian-Jean MARINESCU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Believes that an even higher degree of efficiency can stem from harmonising the various methods used to obtain assurance related to financial corrections accuracy; is of the opinion that, in order to avoid further correction, the accent should be placed on the Commission's carrying out the verification audits rather than issuing follow-up audits in case of defective statements and results received from the Member States;

Amendment 8 #

Jens GEIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reminds the Commission that the error rate in the policy area Cohesion has increased in the Court of Auditor's' Annual Report 2010, which reverses the positive trend observed in previous years; and is contrary to an accelerated reduction of error rates, as called for by Parliament in the context of the 2008 discharge1; __________________ 1 See par. 4 of the resolution of 5 May 2010 with observations forming an integral part of its Decisions on discharge in respect of the implementation of the EU General Budget for the financial year 2008, Section III - Commission and executive agencies (OJ L 252, 25.9.2010, p. 39).

Amendment 9 #

Jens GEIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Reiterates the importance of the supervisory role the Commission exercises in order to be able to bear the ultimate responsibility for the implementation of the budget including the areas of shared management; recalls the action plan to strengthen the Commission's supervisory role under shared management of structural actions and the improved legal framework for the 2007-2013 programming period which aimed at reducing the level of error in structural actions and thus to protect the EU budget; notes, however, that the action plan of 2008 came only into force a~~fter~~t the end of the programming period 2000- 2006 and could therefore cover the closure process of that period only; calls on the Commission therefore to fully enforce measures as stated in the action plan for the 2007-2013 programming period and beyond; expects in this context from the Commission a considerable and steady decrease in error rates, in particular of programmes that are expected to have the highest error rates;

source: PE-492.938

History

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

2012-09-23Show (10) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3	date 2012-06-14T00:00:00 docs url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE489.450 type: Committee draft report title: PE489.450 body EP type Committee draft report
activities/3/date	Old 2012-07-12T00:00:00 New 2012-06-14T00:00:00
activities/3/docs/0/title	Old PE492.938 New PE489.450
activities/3/docs/0/type	Old Amendments tabled in committee New Committee draft report
activities/3/docs/0/url	Old http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE492.938 New http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE489.450
activities/3/type	Old Amendments tabled in committee New Committee draft report
activities/4/date	Old 2012-10-23T00:00:00 New 2012-07-12T00:00:00
activities/4/docs	url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE492.938 type: Amendments tabled in committee title: PE492.938
activities/4/type	Old EP 1R Plenary New Amendments tabled in committee
activities/8	body EC date 2012-10-23T00:00:00 type Prev DG PRES commission DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget Commissioner: ŠEMETA Algirdas

2012-09-21Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/6

date: 2012-09-20T00:00:00

docs: type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0276/2012

body: EP

type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading

2012-09-19Show (4) Changes | Timetravel

activities/4/docs	url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE492.938 type: Amendments tabled in committee title: PE492.938
activities/4/type	Old Deadline Amendments New Amendments tabled in committee
activities/5/committees	body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development committee: AGRI body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Budgets committee: BUDG body: EP shadows: group: Verts/ALE name: STAES Bart group: ECR name: ČEŠKOVÁ Andrea group: GUE/NGL name: SØNDERGAARD Søren Bo group: EFD name: ANDREASEN Marta responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2012-01-12T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: S&D name: GEIER Jens body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs committee: EMPL body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Fisheries committee: PECH body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Regional Development committee: REGI
activities/5/type	Old Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading New Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading

2012-09-15Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

activities/6/type	Old Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading New EP 1R Plenary
activities/7	body EC date 2012-10-23T00:00:00 type Prev DG PRES commission DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget Commissioner: ŠEMETA Algirdas

2012-08-30Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/6/date

Old

2012-10-25T00:00:00

New

2012-10-23T00:00:00

2012-08-09Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

activities/2/committees/2/shadows	group: Verts/ALE name: STAES Bart group: ECR name: ČEŠKOVÁ Andrea group: GUE/NGL name: SØNDERGAARD Søren Bo group: EFD name: ANDREASEN Marta
committees/2/shadows	group: Verts/ALE name: STAES Bart group: ECR name: ČEŠKOVÁ Andrea group: GUE/NGL name: SØNDERGAARD Søren Bo group: EFD name: ANDREASEN Marta

2012-07-06Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

activities/1/docs/0/text/0

Old

PURPOSE : to present Special Report (No 3/2012) from the European Court of Auditors on improving Member States' management and control systems for Structural Funds.

CONTENT: the European Court of Auditors (ECA) audit was mainly carried out on the basis of a review of 40 programmes in which significant management and control deficiencies had been identified. It aimed at assessing whether the Commission dealt in a satisfactory way with deficiencies identified in the Member States' management and control systems.

To recall, the Structural Funds represent about one-third of the EU budget. During the 2000-2006 and 2007-2013 programming periods, EUR 475 billion were allocated to Structural Funds. Management of Structural Funds expenditure is shared between the Commission and the Member States. Member States prepare multi-annual programmes which are assessed and approved by the Commission and later implemented by the Member States.

The Commission has to ensure that Member States have smoothly functioning management and control systems so that EU funds are efficiently and correctly used. The Commission bears the ultimate responsibility for the implementation of the EU budget.

In its special report, the Court concludes that the Commission takes appropriate corrective actions when deficiencies in Member States' systems are identified, but the process to implementation is lengthy. The Commission had some success in ensuring that financial corrections were correctly applied, but was less successful in obtaining assurance that its actions led to improvements in Member States’ management and control systems.

Court recommendations: the ECA makes a number of recommendations to the Commission:

reducing the duration of the administrative procedure from identification of deficiencies until implementation of corrective actions;
giving higher priority to its audit work on the audit authorities to ensure that they produce robust error rates so that the financial corrections can be applied on the basis of these error rates;
disseminating checklists that serve as best practice to be followed by Member States authorities for their first level checks;
ensuring that financial corrections cover all expenditure incurred under deficient management and control systems.

The ECA also recommends that the Commission, the Parliament and the Council reconsider, when discussing future plans for spending on Cohesion, whether any changes should be made to the arrangements regarding, on one hand, the reallocation of support from the Cohesion Fund and Structural Funds and, on the other, the possibilities for substitution of expenditure found to be ineligible.

New

PURPOSE : to present Special Report (No 3/2012) from the European Court of Auditors on improving Member States' management and control systems for Structural Funds.

Court recommendations: the ECA makes a number of recommendations to the Commission:

reducing the duration of the administrative procedure from identification of deficiencies until implementation of corrective actions;
giving higher priority to its audit work on the audit authorities to ensure that they produce robust error rates so that the financial corrections can be applied on the basis of these error rates;
disseminating checklists that serve as best practice to be followed by Member States authorities for their first level checks;
ensuring that financial corrections cover all expenditure incurred under deficient management and control systems.

procedure/legal_basis

Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 076

2012-06-16Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3/docs/0/url

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE489.450

2012-06-14Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3/date

Old

2012-05-09T00:00:00

New

2012-06-14T00:00:00

2012-06-13Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/6

date: 2012-10-25T00:00:00

body: EP

type: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading

2012-06-08Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

activities/4/date	Old 2012-06-04T00:00:00 New 2012-07-12T00:00:00
activities/5	body EP date 2012-07-09T00:00:00 type Prev Adopt in Cte

2012-06-07Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/6

date: 2012-09-17T00:00:00

body: EP

type: Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading

2012-06-05Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/1/docs/0/text

PURPOSE : to present Special Report (No 3/2012) from the European Court of Auditors on improving Member States' management and control systems for Structural Funds.

CONTENT: the European Court of Auditors (ECA) audit was mainly carried out on the basis of a review of 40 programmes in which significant management and control deficiencies had been identified. It aimed at assessing whether the Commission dealt in a satisfactory way with deficiencies identified in the Member States' management and control systems.

To recall, the Structural Funds represent about one-third of the EU budget. During the 2000-2006 and 2007-2013 programming periods, EUR 475 billion were allocated to Structural Funds. Management of Structural Funds expenditure is shared between the Commission and the Member States. Member States prepare multi-annual programmes which are assessed and approved by the Commission and later implemented by the Member States.

The Commission has to ensure that Member States have smoothly functioning management and control systems so that EU funds are efficiently and correctly used. The Commission bears the ultimate responsibility for the implementation of the EU budget.

In its special report, the Court concludes that the Commission takes appropriate corrective actions when deficiencies in Member States' systems are identified, but the process to implementation is lengthy. The Commission had some success in ensuring that financial corrections were correctly applied, but was less successful in obtaining assurance that its actions led to improvements in Member States’ management and control systems.

Court recommendations: the ECA makes a number of recommendations to the Commission:
- reducing the duration of the administrative procedure from identification of deficiencies until implementation of corrective actions;
- giving higher priority to its audit work on the audit authorities to ensure that they produce robust error rates so that the financial corrections can be applied on the basis of these error rates;
- disseminating checklists that serve as best practice to be followed by Member States authorities for their first level checks;
- ensuring that financial corrections cover all expenditure incurred under deficient management and control systems.
The ECA also recommends that the Commission, the Parliament and the Council reconsider, when discussing future plans for spending on Cohesion, whether any changes should be made to the arrangements regarding, on one hand, the reallocation of support from the Cohesion Fund and Structural Funds and, on the other, the possibilities for substitution of expenditure found to be ineligible.

2012-05-15Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

activities/1/commission/0	DG url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget Commissioner ŠEMETA Algirdas
other/0	body EC dg url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/ title: Budget commissioner ŠEMETA Algirdas

2012-05-15Show (5) Changes

activities	body: EP date: 2012-04-26T00:00:00 type: Date date: 2012-04-26T00:00:00 docs: type: Non-legislative basic document published title: N7-0060/2012 type: Non-legislative basic document body: EC commission: date: 2012-05-09T00:00:00 docs: type: Committee draft report title: PE489.450 body: EP type: Committee draft report date: 2012-05-10T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development committee: AGRI body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Budgets committee: BUDG body: EP responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2012-01-12T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: S&D name: GEIER Jens body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs committee: EMPL body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Fisheries committee: PECH body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Regional Development committee: REGI body: EP date: 2012-06-04T00:00:00 type: Deadline Amendments body: EP date: 2012-07-09T00:00:00 type: Prev Adopt in Cte
committees	body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Agriculture and Rural Development committee: AGRI body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Budgets committee: BUDG body: EP responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2012-01-12T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: S&D name: GEIER Jens body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs committee: EMPL body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Fisheries committee: PECH body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Regional Development committee: REGI
links
other
procedure	dossier_of_the_committee CONT/7/09095 reference 2012/2087(DEC) title Special Report No 3/2012 (2011 discharge): Structural Funds: Did the Commission successfully deal with deficiencies identified in the Member States' management and control systems? stage_reached Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage type DEC - Discharge procedure subject 4.70.01 Structural funds in general 8.70.03 Budgetary control and discharge, implementation of the budget 8.70.03.06 2011 discharge

Activites

Documents

History

ParlTrack - 2011-2024