Activites

• 2015/10/27 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T8-0370/2015
• 2015/10/26 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2015/10/02 Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • A8-0283/2015 summary

    The Committee on Budgetary Control adopted the 2nd report by Ryszard CZARNECKI (ECR, PL) and called on the European Parliament to grant discharge to the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Artemis Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013. Members called on Parliament to approve the closure of Artemis’s accounts. Budgetary and financial management: Members recalled that the Court of Auditors stated that the 2013 annual accounts of the Joint Undertaking presented fairly, in all material respects, its financial position as of 31 December 2013 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year-end. They acknowledged from the Joint Undertaking that the practical arrangements for ex post audits concerning the administrative agreements signed with the national funding authorities (“NFAs”) have been put in place. The Joint Undertaking stated that the 23 NFAs that shared information on their audit strategies represented 95 % of the total grants awarded. Members acknowledged that Artemis had made progress in implementing the action plan aimed at remedying the deficiencies identified by the Court in its qualified opinion. At the same time, they noted that the Joint Undertaking developed a new methodology for residual error rate estimation, similar to the one used by the Commission services in charge of co-managed funding. Utilisation rate: Members recalled that the utilisation rate of payment appropriations after the end of year budget amendment was 69 %. The Joint Undertaking stated that the delay in issuing payment certificates by the NFAs was one of the main reasons for the low utilisation rate as the payments were executed without delay as soon as the national certificates were received. Evaluation of Artemis: Members noted that the Commission would carry out an evaluation to assess the ARTEMIS activity up to the date of the ECSEL JTI creation, as provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 74/2008 setting up the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking, to be considered for the discharge for the financial year 2014. Prevention and management of conflicts of interests and transparency: the report noted that due to the merger with the ENIAC JU, the Comprehensive policy for the prevention and management of conflicts of interests of the ENIAC JU was also applicable to the Joint Undertaking. Furthermore, the procedures for managing situations of conflicts of interests, as well as the mechanism proceedings in the event of a violation of the rules, were part of the adopted policy. Monitoring and reporting of research results: lastly, Members recalled that the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) Decision established a monitoring and reporting system related to the protection, dissemination and transfer of research results. They acknowledged from the Joint Undertaking that 211.5 publications and 16.6 patents per EUR 10 million of Union grants showed a high productivity of its research results and that it was compliant with all requests expressed so far by the FP7 coordinators.

• 2015/09/22 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
• 2015/04/29 Results of vote in Parliament
  • Results of vote in Parliament
  • T8-0163/2015 summary

    The European Parliament adopted by 455 votes to 232, with 6 abstentions, a decision to grant discharge to the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013. In parallel, Parliament postponed the closure of the accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013. It also adopted by 633 votes to 42, with 6 abstentions, a series of general recommendations that appear in the resolution on performance, financial management and control of EU agencies: Budgetary and Financial Management: Parliament noted that payments made in 2013 relating to certificates of acceptance of costs issued by the national funding authorities ("NFAs") of the Member States amounted to EUR 11 700 000, which accounted for 57 % of the total operational payments. It was concerned that the Joint Undertaking did not assess the quality of those audits and that, by the end of March 2014, it had not received information on the audit strategies of seven out of 23 NFAs. The JU was therefore not in a position to assess whether ex post audits provide sufficient assurance as to the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions. Whilst welcoming the action plan aiming to remedy the deficiencies identified by the Court in its qualified opinion, Parliament looked forward to the successful implementation of the entire plan as well as to the Court's opinion on its outcome. It went on to note that the utilisation rate of payment appropriations was only 69%, while the utilisation rate for operational commitment appropriations was 99.4%. Furthermore, Members were concerned that there was poor information regarding the evaluation of the Member States' and Research and Development organisations' contributions corresponding to the actual level of Union's payments. In line with the information received, the contribution of the Member States was under the level of 1.8 as requested by the Joint Undertaking’s statute. Parliament called on the Joint Undertaking to submit a report to the discharge authority concerning the contributions of all members other than the Commission, including the application of the evaluation rules, together with an assessment by the Commission. Internal audit: Parliament was concerned that the Joint Undertaking had not set up an internal audit capability as required by its establishing Regulation. It noted moreover that although the mission charter of the Commission's Internal Audit Service (IAS) was adopted by the Governing Board on 25 November 2010, the financial rules of the Joint Undertaking had not been amended in order to include the provision of the model financial regulation referring to the powers of the Commission's Internal Audit Service. Members acknowledged that the Joint Undertaking, along with the Clean Sky, ENIAC, FCH and IMI Joint Undertakings had been the subject of an IT risk assessment of their shared IT infrastructure performed by the IAS. Parliament also made a series of observations on conflicts of interest at the JU and its legal framework. It called upon the Joint Undertaking to adopt comprehensive policies for the management of conflict of interest situations such as divestment of the interest by the public official, recusal of the public official from involvement in an affected decision-making process, restriction of access by the affected public official to particular information, rearrangement of the public official's duties or resignation of the public official from their office. Other observations: Parliament ascertained that the Joint Undertaking had developed procedures in order to monitor the protection and dissemination of their research results at different project stages but from the Court's report, this should be further developed in order to fully meet the provisions of the Decision. It called on the Joint Undertaking to submit a report to the discharge authority on the social-economic benefits of the already completed projects, and for that report to be submitted to the discharge authority together with an assessment by the Commission. Parliament recalled that the discharge authority had previously requested the Court to draw up a special report on the capacity of the joint undertakings, together with their private partners, to ensure added value and efficient execution of Union research, technological development and demonstration programmes.

• 2015/04/28 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2015/03/31 Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • A8-0103/2015 summary

    The Committee on Budgetary Control adopted the report by Ryszard CZARNECKI (ECR, PL) on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013. It called on the European Parliament to postpone its decision on granting the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013. Members postponed the closure of the accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013. At the same time, they made a number of recommendations that needed to be taken into account when the discharge is granted, in addition to the general recommendations that appear in the draft resolution on performance, financial management and control of EU agencies. Budgetary and Financial Management: Members noted that payments made in 2013 relating to certificates of acceptance of costs issued by the national funding authorities ("NFAs") of the Member States amounted to EUR 11 700 000, which accounted for 57 % of the total operational payments. They were concerned that the Joint Undertaking did not assess the quality of those audits and that, by the end of March 2014, it had not received information on the audit strategies of seven out of 23 NFAs. The JU was therefore not in a position to assess whether ex post audits provide sufficient assurance as to the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions. Whilst welcoming the action plan aiming to remedy the deficiencies identified by the Court in its qualified opinion, Members looked forward to the successful implementation of the entire plan as well as to the Court's opinion on its outcome. They went on to note that the utilisation rate of payment appropriations was only 69 %, while the utilisation rate for operational commitment appropriations was 99.4 %. Furthermore, they were concerned that there was poor information regarding the evaluation of the Member States' and Research and Development organisations' contributions corresponding to the actual level of Union's payments. In line with the information received, the contribution of the Member States was under the level of 1,8 as requested by the Joint Undertaking’s statute. The committee called on the Joint Undertaking to submit a report to the discharge authority concerning the contributions of all members other than the Commission, including the application of the evaluation rules, together with an assessment by the Commission. Internal audit:  the committee was concerned that the Joint Undertaking had not set up an internal audit capability as required by its establishing Regulation. It noted moreover that although the mission charter of the Commission's Internal Audit Service (IAS) was adopted by the Governing Board on 25 November 2010, the financial rules of the Joint Undertaking had not been amended in order to include the provision of the model financial regulation referring to the powers of the Commission's Internal Audit Service. Members acknowledged that the Joint Undertaking, along with the Clean Sky, ENIAC, FCH and IMI Joint Undertakings had been the subject of an IT risk assessment of their shared IT infrastructure performed by the IAS. Members also made a series of observations on conflicts of interest at the JU and its legal framework. Other observations: the committee ascertained that the Joint Undertaking had developed procedures in order to monitor the protection and dissemination of their research results at different project stages but from the Court's report, this should be further developed in order to fully meet the provisions of the Decision. They called on the Joint Undertaking to submit a report to the discharge authority on the social-economic benefits of the already completed projects, and for that report to be submitted to the discharge authority together with an assessment by the Commission. Members recalled that the discharge authority had previously requested the Court to draw up a special report on the capacity of the joint undertakings, together with their private partners, to ensure added value and efficient execution of Union research, technological development and demonstration programmes.

• 2015/03/23 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
• 2014/10/20 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 2014/07/30 Non-legislative basic document published
  • COM(2014)0510 summary

    PURPOSE: presentation by the Commission of the consolidated annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2013, as part of the 2013 discharge procedure. Analysis of the accounts of the Artemis Joint Undertaking. CONTENT: this Commission document sets out the consolidated annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2013 as prepared on the basis of the information presented by the institutions, organisations and bodies of the EU, in accordance with Article 129 (2) of the Financial Regulation applicable to the EU's General Budget, including the Artemis Joint Undertaking. The document contains the figures on which the discharge procedure is based. Discharge procedure of the EU Joint Undertakings: the EU Budget finances a wide range of policies and programmes throughout the EU. In accordance with the priorities set by the European Parliament and the Council in the multi-annual financial framework (MFF), the European Commission carries out specific programmes, activities and projects in the field with the technical support of some specialised agencies. The consolidated annual accounts of the EU provide information on the activities of the institutions, agencies and other bodies of the EU from a budgetary and accrual accounting perspective. The consolidated reports on the implementation of the general budget of the EU include the budget implementation of all Institutions. Agencies and Joint Undertakings (JUs) do not have a separate budget inside the EU budget; and they are partially financed by a Commission budget subsidy. Each JU is subject to its own discharge procedure. ARTEMIS: in 2013, the tasks and budget of the Joint Undertaking were as follows: description of the tasks of the Joint Undertaking: the joint undertaking, which is located in Brussels, was set up in 2007 by Council Regulation 74/2008/EC for a period of 10 years. The main objective of the Joint Undertaking is to implement a 'Research Agenda' for the development of key technologies for Embedded Computing Systems across different application areas; accounts of the JU: the maximum indicative contribution of the Commission amounts to EUR 420 million until 2017. The cumulative unrecognised share of losses is EUR 9 million (94.57% ownership participation). Please also consult Artemis Joint Undertaking’s final accounts.

  • DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/', 'title': 'Budget'}, GEORGIEVA Kristalina

Documents

• Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2014)0510
• Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A8-0103/2015
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T8-0163/2015
• Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A8-0283/2015
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T8-0370/2015

Amendments

Dossier

19

2014/2132(DEC) 2015/03/05 CONT 17 amendments... Amendment 1 # Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Marian-Jean MARINESCU Proposal for a decision 1 Paragraph 1 1. Grants the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013; Amendment 10 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that in addition to the improvements to its ex post audit strategy, an action plan, was submitted which aims to remedy the deficiencies identified by the Court in its qualified opinion; acknowledges receipt from the Joint Undertaking of the last update with regard to the Ex-post audit implementation in the Joint Undertaking; awaits the Court's opinion on the new formula proposed for the calculation of an estimated residual error rate in the Joint Undertaking’s transactions; notes that the implementation of the action plan commenced in 2014; looks forward to the successful implementation of the entire action plan as well as to the Court's opinion on its outcome; points out that difficulties may arise as to the boundaries between NFA's sovereign authority and the Joint Undertaking's authority; Calls on the Joint Undertaking to provide a first interim evaluation report on the implementation of the action plan Amendment 11 # Zigmantas BALČYTIS Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Ascertains from the Court's report that the Joint Undertaking's initial 2013 budget included commitment appropriations amounting to EUR 68,9 million and was amended at the end of the year, thus reducing commitment appropriations to EUR 32,6 million; notes with concern that after the reduction, the utilisation rate of payment appropriations was only 69 %, while the utilisation rate for operational commitment appropriations was 99,4 %; the low budget implementation rate is mainly due to the lengthy and complex process for the financial closure of projects; Amendment 12 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. Is concerned that there is poor information regarding the evaluation of the MS and R&D organisations' contributions corresponding to the actual level of Union's payments; in line with the information received, the contribution of the MS is under the level of 1.8 as requested by the Joint Undertaking’s statute; calls on the Joint Undertaking to submit a report to the discharge authority concerning the contributions of all members other than the Commission, including the application of the evaluation rules, together with an assessment by the Commission; Amendment 13 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Notes the Joint Statement by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission and the subsequent political agreement reached on the separate discharge to be given by the European Parliament upon recommendation of the Council, for Joint Undertakings under Article 209 of the Financial Regulation Amendment 14 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11 b. Reiterates its demand to the Court of Auditors to present a complete and appropriate financial assessments of rights and obligations of the Joint Undertaking for the period up to the date of ECSEL Joint Undertaking starting activity. Amendment 15 # Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes with great concern that the Joint Undertaking does not have a comprehensive written procedure to deal withfailed to respect 2014 recommendation of the discharge authority and did not adopt a comprehensive policy for the prevention and management of conflicts of interests; rReiterates the need for a clear definition of the concept of conflict of interest as well as the need of a regularly updated database which includes all information related to conflicts of interest and a procedure to manage them along with a mechanism for dealing with breaches of the policy; a, which has to include the financial as well as the non-financial interest; Urges the Joint Undertaking to proceed to a rapid, complete and in-depth disclosure of CVs and declaration of interests until the end of September 2015. Also requests the creation of a regularly updated database which includes all information related to conflicts of interest and a procedure to manage them along with a mechanism for dealing with breaches of the policy until the end of September 2015; Calls upon the Joint Undertaking to adopt comprehensive policies for the management of conflict of interest situations such as: divestment of the interest by the public official, recusal of the public official from involvement in an affected decision-making process, restriction of access by the affected public official to particular information, rearrangement of the public official's duties or resignation of the public official from their office; As the Joint Undertaking has merged in 2014, the discharge authority calls on the ECSEL Joint Undertaking not to perpetuate the lack of a policy on management of conflicts of interest; Amendment 16 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18 a. Calls on the Joint Undertaking to submit a report to the discharge authority on the social-economic benefits of the already completed projects; calls for that report to be submitted to the discharge authority together with an assessment by the Commission; Amendment 17 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 c (new) 18 c. Recalls that the discharge authority has previously requested that the Court draws up a special report on the capacity of the joint undertakings, together with their private partners, to ensure added value and efficient execution of Union research, technological development and demonstration programmes Amendment 2 # Igor ŠOLTES Proposal for a decision 1 Paragraph 1 1. Grants the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013; Amendment 3 # Richard ASHWORTH, Richard SULÍK, Beata GOSIEWSKA Proposal for a decision 1 Paragraph 1 1. Grants the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013 / Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking’s budget for the financial year 2013; Amendment 4 # Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Marian-Jean MARINESCU Proposal for a decision 2 Paragraph 1 1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013; Amendment 5 # Igor ŠOLTES Proposal for a decision 2 Paragraph 1 1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013; Amendment 6 # Richard ASHWORTH, Richard SULÍK, Beata GOSIEWSKA Proposal for a decision 2 Paragraph 1 1. Approves the closure of the accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013 / Postpones the closure of the accounts of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2013; Amendment 7 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) C a. whereas financial contributions from ARTEMIS Member States should amount in total to at least 1.8 times the Union's financial contribution and research and development organisations' participating in projects in-kind contribution over the duration of the Joint Undertaking shall be equal to or greater than the contribution of public authorities. Amendment 8 # Igor ŠOLTES Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Is concerned that for the third year in a row, the Joint Undertaking received a qualified opinion from the Court on the legality and the regularity of the transactions underlying the annual accounts on the grounds that the Joint Undertaking was not in a position to assess whether the ex post audit strategy provides sufficient assurance with respect to the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions;deleted Amendment 9 # Igor ŠOLTES Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Is deeply concerned that for the third year in a row, the Joint Undertaking received a qualified opinion from the Court on the legality and the regularity of the transactions underlying the annual accounts on the grounds that the Joint Undertaking was not in a position to assess whether the ex post audit strategy provides sufficient assurance with respect to the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions; considers that the qualified opinion put into question the willingness of the Joint Undertaking to be effective and efficient according to the principle of ''value for money''; urges therefore the Joint Undertaking to report to the discharge authorities on its strategy to change swiftly those current practices; source: 544.161 2015/09/04 CONT 2 amendments... Amendment 1 # Anders VISTISEN Proposal for a decision 1 Paragraph 1 1. Grants the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking's budget for the financial year 2013 / Refuses to grant the Executive Director of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking discharge in respect of the implementation of the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking's budget for the financial year 2013; Amendment 2 # Marian-Jean MARINESCU Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Takes note that the Commission will carry out an evaluation to assess the ARTEMIS activity up to the date of the ECSEL JTI creation, as provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 74/2008 setting up the ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking, to be considered for the discharge for the financial year 2014. source: 565.166

History

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