2014/2140(DEC) | [ParlTrack]

Changes: 2021/12/18events.docs, events, docs.docs.url, events.type, committees.shadows, 2020/01/19committees, events.docs.url, 2019/07/06events, procedure.dossier_of_the_committee, activities, committees, procedure.subject, docs, links, other, procedure.legal_basis, commission, 2015/11/13procedure.stage_reached, 2015/11/04activities.docs.celexid, 2015/07/24activities.docs, activities.type, 2015/06/04activities.docs.celexid, 2015/06/01activities.docs.celexid

View current state | View Changes for this date

Procedure completed, awaiting publication in Official Journal

2014/2140(DEC) Court of Auditors' special reports in the context of the 2013 Commission discharge

Role	Committee	Rapporteur	Shadows
Lead	CONT	GRÄSSLE Ingeborg (EPP)	AYALA SENDER Inés (S&D), LIBERADZKI Bogusław (S&D), THEURER Michael (ALDE), DE JONG Dennis (GUE/NGL), STAES Bart (Verts/ALE), VALLI Marco (EFD)

Lead committee dossier: CONT/8/01689
Legal Basis RoP 150

Subjects

8.70.03.03 2013 discharge

Links

Activites

2015/04/29 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
- T8-0119/2015 summary
  
  The European Parliament adopted by 577 votes to 110, with 12 abstentions, a resolution on the Court of Auditors' special reports in the context of the 2013 Commission discharge. In its resolution, Parliament recalled that the special reports of the Court of Auditors provided information on issues of concern related to the implementation of funds, which were thus useful for Parliament in exercising its role of discharge authority. It specified that Parliament’s observations on the special reports of the Court of Auditors form an integral part of Parliament's resolution on general discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013, Section III – Commission. Parliament went on to discuss each of the special reports and made certain recommendations designed to improve the use of Community funding. To recall, these special reports relate to the following matters: Special Report No 11/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Getting the Gross National Income (GNI) data right: a more structured and better-focused approach would improve the effectiveness of the Commission’s verification" Special Report No 13/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU Development Assistance to Central Asia" Special Report No 15/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has the Environment component of the LIFE programme been effective?" Special Report No 16/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Taking stock of 'single audit' and the Commission's reliance on the work of national audit authorities in cohesion" Special Report No 17/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU Climate Finance in the context of External Aid" Special Report No 18/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The reliability of the results of the Member States' checks of the agricultural expenditure" Special Report No 1/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Effectiveness of EU-supported public urban transport projects" Special Report No 2/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Are Preferential Trade Arrangements appropriately managed?" Special Report No 3/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Lessons from the European Commission’s development of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)" Special Report No 4/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Integration of EU water policy objectives with the CAP: a partial success" Special Report No 5/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "European banking supervision taking shape - EBA and its changing context" Special Report No 6/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Cohesion policy funds support to renewable energy generation — has it achieved good results?" Special Report No 7/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has the ERDF successfully supported the development of business incubators?" Special Report No 8/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has the Commission effectively managed the integration of coupled support into the single payment scheme?" Special Report No 9/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Is the EU investment and promotion support to the wine sector well managed and are its results on the competitiveness of EU wines demonstrated?" Special Report No 10/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The effectiveness of European Fisheries Fund support for aquaculture" Special Report No 11/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The establishment of the European External Action Service" Special Report No 12/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Is the ERDF effective in funding projects that directly promote biodiversity under the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020?" Special Report No 13/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU support for rehabilitation following the earthquake in Haiti" Special Report No 14/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "How do the EU institutions and bodies calculate, reduce and offset their greenhouse gas emissions?" Special Report No 15/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The External Borders Fund has fostered financial solidarity but requires better measurement of results and needs to provide further EU added value" Special Report No 16/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The effectiveness of blending regional investment facility grants with financial institution loans to support EU external policies" Special Report No 17/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Can the EU’s Centres of Excellence initiative contribute effectively to mitigating chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear risks from outside the EU?" Special Report No 19/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU Pre-accession Assistance to Serbia" Special Report No 20/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has ERDF support to SMEs in the area of e-commerce been effective?" Special Report No 21/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU-funded airport infrastructures: poor value for money". A summary of the special reports in question may be found on the Court of Auditors’ website.
2015/04/28 Debate in Parliament
- Debate in Parliament
2015/03/27 Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
- A8-0067/2015 summary
  
  The Committee on Budgetary Control adopted the report by Ingeborg GRÄßLE (EPP, DE) on the Court of Auditors' special reports in the context of the 2013 Commission discharge. Members recalled that the special reports of the Court of Auditors provided information on issues of concern related to the implementation of funds, which were thus useful for Parliament in exercising its role of discharge authority. They specified that Parliament’s observations on the special reports of the Court of Auditors form an integral part of Parliament's resolution on general discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013, Section III – Commission. Members went on to discuss each of the special reports and made certain recommendations designed to improve the use of Community funding. To recall, these special reports relate to the following matters: Special Report No 11/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Getting the Gross National Income (GNI) data right: a more structured and better-focused approach would improve the effectiveness of the Commission’s verification" Special Report No 13/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU Development Assistance to Central Asia" Special Report No 15/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has the Environment component of the LIFE programme been effective?" Special Report No 16/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Taking stock of 'single audit' and the Commission's reliance on the work of national audit authorities in cohesion" Special Report No 17/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU Climate Finance in the context of External Aid" Special Report No 18/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The reliability of the results of the Member States' checks of the agricultural expenditure" Special Report No 1/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Effectiveness of EU-supported public urban transport projects" Special Report No 2/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Are Preferential Trade Arrangements appropriately managed?" Special Report No 3/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Lessons from the European Commission’s development of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)" Special Report No 4/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Integration of EU water policy objectives with the CAP: a partial success" Special Report No 5/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "European banking supervision taking shape - EBA and its changing context" Special Report No 6/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Cohesion policy funds support to renewable energy generation — has it achieved good results?" Special Report No 7/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has the ERDF successfully supported the development of business incubators?" Special Report No 8/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has the Commission effectively managed the integration of coupled support into the single payment scheme?" Special Report No 9/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Is the EU investment and promotion support to the wine sector well managed and are its results on the competitiveness of EU wines demonstrated?" Special Report No 10/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The effectiveness of European Fisheries Fund support for aquaculture" Special Report No 11/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The establishment of the European External Action Service" Special Report No 12/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Is the ERDF effective in funding projects that directly promote biodiversity under the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020?" Special Report No 13/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU support for rehabilitation following the earthquake in Haiti" Special Report No 14/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "How do the EU institutions and bodies calculate, reduce and offset their greenhouse gas emissions?" Special Report No 15/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The External Borders Fund has fostered financial solidarity but requires better measurement of results and needs to provide further EU added value" Special Report No 16/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The effectiveness of blending regional investment facility grants with financial institution loans to support EU external policies" Special Report No 17/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Can the EU’s Centres of Excellence initiative contribute effectively to mitigating chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear risks from outside the EU?" Special Report No 19/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU Pre-accession Assistance to Serbia" Special Report No 20/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has ERDF support to SMEs in the area of e-commerce been effective?" Special Report No 21/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU-funded airport infrastructures: poor value for money". A summary of the special reports in question may be found on the Court of Auditors’ website.
2015/03/24 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
2014/10/23 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2013/07/26 Non-legislative basic document published
- COM(2013)0570
- DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/budget/', 'title': 'Budget'}, GEORGIEVA Kristalina

Documents

Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2013)0570
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A8-0067/2015
Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T8-0119/2015

Amendments	Dossier
19	2014/2140(DEC) 2015/03/06 CONT 19 amendments... Amendment 1 # Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ Motion for a resolution Paragraph 51 51. Welcomes that a commitment to improving EU Joint Programming since 2011 has been made in some 40 countries; points out however that coordination between the Commission and Member States in climate finance for developing countries still needs to be considerably improved to meet not only the 2020 commitment but also to allow the Union to stay a frontrunner in terms of climate actions and to combat corruption in developing countries; Amendment 10 # Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ Motion for a resolution Paragraph 178 a (new) 178a. Encourages the Commission to contribute to increased transparency of the wine promotion in the third countries by better system of controlling and monitoring of the funded projects; points out that this measure should also help to avoid double financing; Amendment 11 # Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ Motion for a resolution Paragraph 236 236. Is concerned that if the Commission and Member States do not agree on the main character of this part of the ISF, be it a solidarity mechanism or an instrument for the furtherance of the implementation of the Schengen acquis, Member States may still be inclined to use the funding for projects that they deem important from a national perspective, rather than seekingTherefore calls on the Member States to include the ISF into national strategies for border management in order to contribute to consular co-operation, to Frontex operations or to emergency actions and specific actions which are of importance to the Schengen area as a whole; urges the Commission and the Member States to improve their cooperation in this regard; Amendment 12 # Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ Motion for a resolution Paragraph 238 238. ~~Expects that by earmarking parts of the available funds, it will be easier for~~Recommends to the Member States to develop and use relevant and measurable indicators for output, outcome and impact of the actions concerned; notes in this regard that both actions in the solidarity segment, and actions that are particularly relevant from a national perspective should only be funded if it can be demonstrated ex ante that they serve concrete and measurable objectivesfunded projects; stresses that high quality ex ante verifications should be in place to ensure that all funded projects serve concrete and measurable objectives and have added value; notes that ex post verifications would help to provide quality control mechanism; Amendment 13 # Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ Motion for a resolution Paragraph 239 239. ~~Agrees with the C~~Points ourt that ~~the work of Frontex should be more directly supported by the ISF~~further EU added value can be achieved through additional contribution from the Member States to Frontex operations by making the entering of at least part of the ISF co- financed assets into Frontex’s technical equipment pool obligatory; Amendment 14 # Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ Motion for a resolution Paragraph 240 240. Is worried about the irregularities found by the Court in the various national procurement policies and states that the exception clause for defence and security procurements may not be used in cases, where less restrictive procedures could have been used without compromising security; recommends streamlining of the procurement procedures to ensure timely implementation of the funding; Amendment 15 # Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ Motion for a resolution Paragraph 241 a (new) 241a. Highlights the need to improve the standard of data collection on the funded projects on the national level in order to increase the degree of transparency; Amendment 16 # Zigmantas BALČYTIS Motion for a resolution Paragraph 285 285. Believes that Commission should ensure that it obtains consistent and reliable information from the Member States on the ~~progress of~~use of ERDF's funding; this information should indicate the oOperational pProgrammes' progress, not only in financial but also in performance terms; Amendment 17 # Cláudia MONTEIRO DE AGUIAR Motion for a resolution Paragraph 289 289. Recommends that funding ~~only~~ be granted to financially viable airports and to regional airports taking account of other criteria in addition to economic viability, particularly territorial, social and economic cohesion in the most remote regions, such as the outermost regions provided for in Article 349 TFEU; calls on the Commission, in its assessment of regional and national transport plans, to take particular account, in the case of an airport in an outermost island region, of that airport’s importance in terms of accessibility and citizens’ mobility; points out, in this context, that one of the Transport White Paper’s priorities is to reduce congestion, and regional airports thus have a significant part to play in making the sector more competitive; Amendment 18 # Cláudia MONTEIRO DE AGUIAR Motion for a resolution Paragraph 290 290. Recommends to the Commission to examine all new projects in light of a catchment area analysis to ensure viability, taking account in each case of the importance of regional airports for accessibility and mobility in the Union; Amendment 19 # Cláudia MONTEIRO DE AGUIAR Motion for a resolution Paragraph 291 291. Considers that the Commission should closely monitor, as a priority, Member States that the report identifies as having particularly problematic projects in the past, without however forgetting that the period in question includes years of economic crisis; Amendment 2 # Petri SARVAMAA Motion for a resolution Paragraph 62 a (new) 62a. Welcomes the ongoing Commission efforts for the simplification of CAP; expects that simplification of eligibility criteria leads to simplification of control rules, and can contribute towards a lower error rate; Amendment 3 # Petri SARVAMAA Motion for a resolution Paragraph 63 – point b (b) that the effectiveness of the Inte~~rnal Management~~grated Administration and Control System (IACS) is adversely affected mainly by inaccurate databases used for cross-checks; Amendment 4 # Petri SARVAMAA Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 66. Urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure that payments are based on inspection results and that those ~~on-the- spot~~ inspections are of the necessary quality to determine eligible area in a reliable and consistent manner; Amendment 5 # Petri SARVAMAA Motion for a resolution Paragraph 67 67. Urges the Commission to ensure that the design and quality of the work performed by the ~~directors of~~ paying agencies and the certification bodies provide a reliable basis for the assessment of the legality and regularity of underlying transactions; maintains that in order to achieve this, the Commission should work towards the goal of a single audit strategy for the CAP control system; Amendment 6 # Petri SARVAMAA Motion for a resolution Paragraph 70 a (new) 70a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to focus on cost-efficiency of controls as an area of importance, specifically by further developing the use of risk based controls; Amendment 7 # Ingeborg GRÄSSLE Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 127. Considers that it is necessary to improve the actual supervision rules in order to include a closer supervision on national banks in those countries which adopted the euro but are not Member States such as the Vatican, Andorra, Monaco, and ~~Liechtenste~~San Marino; Amendment 8 # Marco VALLI Motion for a resolution Paragraph 127 127. Considers that it is necessary to improve the actual supervision rules in order to include a closer supervision on national banks in those countries which adopted the euro but are not Member States such as the Vatican, Andorra, and Monaco~~, and Liechtenstein~~; Amendment 9 # Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ Motion for a resolution Paragraph 177 177. Supports the Court's recommendation that the Commission should analyse how the budget allocated to the national support programmes (NSPs) for the period 2014– 18 matches the needs of the Union wine sector, the absorption capacity of the Member States and readjust the budget where appropriate; invites the Commission to consider whether there is a need for extra financial tool for the wine sector compared to other agricultural sectors; source: 539.839

Amendments

Dossier

2014/2140(DEC)

2015/03/06 CONT 19 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51

51. Welcomes that a commitment to improving EU Joint Programming since 2011 has been made in some 40 countries; points out however that coordination between the Commission and Member States in climate finance for developing countries still needs to be considerably improved to meet not only the 2020 commitment but also to allow the Union to stay a frontrunner in terms of climate actions and to combat corruption in developing countries;

Amendment 10 #

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 178 a (new)

178a. Encourages the Commission to contribute to increased transparency of the wine promotion in the third countries by better system of controlling and monitoring of the funded projects; points out that this measure should also help to avoid double financing;

Amendment 11 #

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 236

236. Is concerned that if the Commission and Member States do not agree on the main character of this part of the ISF, be it a solidarity mechanism or an instrument for the furtherance of the implementation of the Schengen acquis, Member States may still be inclined to use the funding for projects that they deem important from a national perspective, rather than seekingTherefore calls on the Member States to include the ISF into national strategies for border management in order to contribute to consular co-operation, to Frontex operations or to emergency actions and specific actions which are of importance to the Schengen area as a whole; urges the Commission and the Member States to improve their cooperation in this regard;

Amendment 12 #

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 238

238. ~~Expects that by earmarking parts of the available funds, it will be easier for~~Recommends to the Member States to develop and use relevant and measurable indicators for output, outcome and impact of the actions concerned; notes in this regard that both actions in the solidarity segment, and actions that are particularly relevant from a national perspective should only be funded if it can be demonstrated ex ante that they serve concrete and measurable objectivesfunded projects; stresses that high quality ex ante verifications should be in place to ensure that all funded projects serve concrete and measurable objectives and have added value; notes that ex post verifications would help to provide quality control mechanism;

Amendment 13 #

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 239

239. ~~Agrees with the C~~Points ourt that ~~the work of Frontex should be more directly supported by the ISF~~further EU added value can be achieved through additional contribution from the Member States to Frontex operations by making the entering of at least part of the ISF co- financed assets into Frontex’s technical equipment pool obligatory;

Amendment 14 #

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 240

240. Is worried about the irregularities found by the Court in the various national procurement policies and states that the exception clause for defence and security procurements may not be used in cases, where less restrictive procedures could have been used without compromising security; recommends streamlining of the procurement procedures to ensure timely implementation of the funding;

Amendment 15 #

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 241 a (new)

241a. Highlights the need to improve the standard of data collection on the funded projects on the national level in order to increase the degree of transparency;

Amendment 16 #

Zigmantas BALČYTIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 285

285. Believes that Commission should ensure that it obtains consistent and reliable information from the Member States on the ~~progress of~~use of ERDF's funding; this information should indicate the oOperational pProgrammes' progress, not only in financial but also in performance terms;

Amendment 17 #

Cláudia MONTEIRO DE AGUIAR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 289

289. Recommends that funding ~~only~~ be granted to financially viable airports and to regional airports taking account of other criteria in addition to economic viability, particularly territorial, social and economic cohesion in the most remote regions, such as the outermost regions provided for in Article 349 TFEU; calls on the Commission, in its assessment of regional and national transport plans, to take particular account, in the case of an airport in an outermost island region, of that airport’s importance in terms of accessibility and citizens’ mobility; points out, in this context, that one of the Transport White Paper’s priorities is to reduce congestion, and regional airports thus have a significant part to play in making the sector more competitive;

Amendment 18 #

Cláudia MONTEIRO DE AGUIAR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 290

290. Recommends to the Commission to examine all new projects in light of a catchment area analysis to ensure viability, taking account in each case of the importance of regional airports for accessibility and mobility in the Union;

Amendment 19 #

Cláudia MONTEIRO DE AGUIAR

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 291

291. Considers that the Commission should closely monitor, as a priority, Member States that the report identifies as having particularly problematic projects in the past, without however forgetting that the period in question includes years of economic crisis;

Amendment 2 #

Petri SARVAMAA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62 a (new)

62a. Welcomes the ongoing Commission efforts for the simplification of CAP; expects that simplification of eligibility criteria leads to simplification of control rules, and can contribute towards a lower error rate;

Amendment 3 #

Petri SARVAMAA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 63 – point b

(b) that the effectiveness of the Inte~~rnal Management~~grated Administration and Control System (IACS) is adversely affected mainly by inaccurate databases used for cross-checks;

Amendment 4 #

Petri SARVAMAA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 66

66. Urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure that payments are based on inspection results and that those ~~on-the- spot~~ inspections are of the necessary quality to determine eligible area in a reliable and consistent manner;

Amendment 5 #

Petri SARVAMAA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67

67. Urges the Commission to ensure that the design and quality of the work performed by the ~~directors of~~ paying agencies and the certification bodies provide a reliable basis for the assessment of the legality and regularity of underlying transactions; maintains that in order to achieve this, the Commission should work towards the goal of a single audit strategy for the CAP control system;

Amendment 6 #

Petri SARVAMAA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70 a (new)

70a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to focus on cost-efficiency of controls as an area of importance, specifically by further developing the use of risk based controls;

Amendment 7 #

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 127

127. Considers that it is necessary to improve the actual supervision rules in order to include a closer supervision on national banks in those countries which adopted the euro but are not Member States such as the Vatican, Andorra, Monaco, and ~~Liechtenste~~San Marino;

Amendment 8 #

Marco VALLI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 127

Amendment 9 #

Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177

177. Supports the Court's recommendation that the Commission should analyse how the budget allocated to the national support programmes (NSPs) for the period 2014– 18 matches the needs of the Union wine sector, the absorption capacity of the Member States and readjust the budget where appropriate; invites the Commission to consider whether there is a need for extra financial tool for the wine sector compared to other agricultural sectors;

source: 539.839

History

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

2015-06-01Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/0/docs/0/celexid

CELEX:52013DC0570:EN

2015-05-30Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/0/docs/0/celexid

CELEX:52013DC0570:EN

2015-05-15Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/5/docs/0/url

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2015-0119

2015-05-09Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/5/docs/0/text

The European Parliament adopted by 577 votes to 110, with 12 abstentions, a resolution on the Court of Auditors' special reports in the context of the 2013 Commission discharge.

In its resolution, Parliament recalled that the special reports of the Court of Auditors provided information on issues of concern related to the implementation of funds, which were thus useful for Parliament in exercising its role of discharge authority.

It specified that Parliament’s observations on the special reports of the Court of Auditors form an integral part of Parliament's resolution on general discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013, Section III – Commission.

Parliament went on to discuss each of the special reports and made certain recommendations designed to improve the use of Community funding.

To recall, these special reports relate to the following matters:
- Special Report No 11/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Getting the Gross National Income (GNI) data right: a more structured and better-focused approach would improve the effectiveness of the Commission’s verification"
- Special Report No 13/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU Development Assistance to Central Asia"
- Special Report No 15/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has the Environment component of the LIFE programme been effective?"
- Special Report No 16/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Taking stock of 'single audit' and the Commission's reliance on the work of national audit authorities in cohesion"
- Special Report No 17/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU Climate Finance in the context of External Aid"
- Special Report No 18/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The reliability of the results of the Member States' checks of the agricultural expenditure"
- Special Report No 1/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Effectiveness of EU-supported public urban transport projects"
- Special Report No 2/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Are Preferential Trade Arrangements appropriately managed?"
- Special Report No 3/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Lessons from the European Commission’s development of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)"
- Special Report No 4/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Integration of EU water policy objectives with the CAP: a partial success"
- Special Report No 5/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "European banking supervision taking shape - EBA and its changing context"
- Special Report No 6/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Cohesion policy funds support to renewable energy generation — has it achieved good results?"
- Special Report No 7/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has the ERDF successfully supported the development of business incubators?"
- Special Report No 8/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has the Commission effectively managed the integration of coupled support into the single payment scheme?"
- Special Report No 9/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Is the EU investment and promotion support to the wine sector well managed and are its results on the competitiveness of EU wines demonstrated?"
- Special Report No 10/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The effectiveness of European Fisheries Fund support for aquaculture"
- Special Report No 11/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The establishment of the European External Action Service"
- Special Report No 12/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Is the ERDF effective in funding projects that directly promote biodiversity under the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020?"
- Special Report No 13/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU support for rehabilitation following the earthquake in Haiti"
- Special Report No 14/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "How do the EU institutions and bodies calculate, reduce and offset their greenhouse gas emissions?"
- Special Report No 15/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The External Borders Fund has fostered financial solidarity but requires better measurement of results and needs to provide further EU added value"
- Special Report No 16/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The effectiveness of blending regional investment facility grants with financial institution loans to support EU external policies"
- Special Report No 17/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Can the EU’s Centres of Excellence initiative contribute effectively to mitigating chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear risks from outside the EU?"
- Special Report No 19/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU Pre-accession Assistance to Serbia"
- Special Report No 20/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has ERDF support to SMEs in the area of e-commerce been effective?"
- Special Report No 21/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU-funded airport infrastructures: poor value for money".
A summary of the special reports in question may be found on the Court of Auditors’ website.

2015-05-07Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3/docs/0/text/0

Old

New

The Committee on Budgetary Control adopted the report by Ingeborg GRÄßLE (EPP, DE) on the Court of Auditors' special reports in the context of the 2013 Commission discharge.

Members recalled that the special reports of the Court of Auditors provided information on issues of concern related to the implementation of funds, which were thus useful for Parliament in exercising its role of discharge authority. They specified that Parliament’s observations on the special reports of the Court of Auditors form an integral part of Parliament's resolution on general discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2013, Section III – Commission.

Members went on to discuss each of the special reports and made certain recommendations designed to improve the use of Community funding.

To recall, these special reports relate to the following matters:

Special Report No 11/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Getting the Gross National Income (GNI) data right: a more structured and better-focused approach would improve the effectiveness of the Commission’s verification"
Special Report No 13/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU Development Assistance to Central Asia"
Special Report No 15/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has the Environment component of the LIFE programme been effective?"
Special Report No 16/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Taking stock of 'single audit' and the Commission's reliance on the work of national audit authorities in cohesion"
Special Report No 17/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU Climate Finance in the context of External Aid"
Special Report No 18/2013 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The reliability of the results of the Member States' checks of the agricultural expenditure"
Special Report No 1/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Effectiveness of EU-supported public urban transport projects"
Special Report No 2/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Are Preferential Trade Arrangements appropriately managed?"
Special Report No 3/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Lessons from the European Commission’s development of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II)"
Special Report No 4/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Integration of EU water policy objectives with the CAP: a partial success"
Special Report No 5/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "European banking supervision taking shape - EBA and its changing context"
Special Report No 6/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Cohesion policy funds support to renewable energy generation — has it achieved good results?"
Special Report No 7/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has the ERDF successfully supported the development of business incubators?"
Special Report No 8/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has the Commission effectively managed the integration of coupled support into the single payment scheme?"
Special Report No 9/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Is the EU investment and promotion support to the wine sector well managed and are its results on the competitiveness of EU wines demonstrated?"
Special Report No 10/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The effectiveness of European Fisheries Fund support for aquaculture"
Special Report No 11/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The establishment of the European External Action Service"
Special Report No 12/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Is the ERDF effective in funding projects that directly promote biodiversity under the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020?"
Special Report No 13/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU support for rehabilitation following the earthquake in Haiti"
Special Report No 14/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "How do the EU institutions and bodies calculate, reduce and offset their greenhouse gas emissions?"
Special Report No 15/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The External Borders Fund has fostered financial solidarity but requires better measurement of results and needs to provide further EU added value"
Special Report No 16/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "The effectiveness of blending regional investment facility grants with financial institution loans to support EU external policies"
Special Report No 17/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Can the EU’s Centres of Excellence initiative contribute effectively to mitigating chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear risks from outside the EU?"
Special Report No 19/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU Pre-accession Assistance to Serbia"
Special Report No 20/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "Has ERDF support to SMEs in the area of e-commerce been effective?"
Special Report No 21/2014 of the Court of Auditors entitled "EU-funded airport infrastructures: poor value for money".

A summary of the special reports in question may be found on the Court of Auditors’ website.

2015-05-01Show (5) Changes | Timetravel

activities/4/docs	url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20150428&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament
activities/4/type	Old Debate scheduled New Debate in Parliament
activities/5/docs	type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T8-0119/2015
activities/5/type	Old Vote in plenary scheduled New Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
procedure/stage_reached	Old Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage New Procedure completed, awaiting publication in Official Journal

2015-04-30Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/4/type

Old

Debate in plenary scheduled

New

Debate scheduled

2015-04-25Show (16) Changes | Timetravel

activities/1/committees/0/shadows/0	group S&D name AYALA SENDER Inés
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/1	group S&D name LIBERADZKI Bogusław
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/2	group ALDE name THEURER Michael
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/4	group Verts/ALE name STAES Bart
activities/2/committees	body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: AYALA SENDER Inés group: S&D name: LIBERADZKI Bogusław group: ALDE name: THEURER Michael group: GUE/NGL name: DE JONG Dennis group: Verts/ALE name: STAES Bart group: EFD name: VALLI Marco responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2014-10-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: EPP name: GRÄSSLE Ingeborg
activities/2/date	Old 2015-03-27T00:00:00 New 2015-03-24T00:00:00
activities/2/docs	url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2015-0067&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0067/2015
activities/2/type	Old Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading New Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
activities/3/committees	body: EP shadows: group: GUE/NGL name: DE JONG Dennis group: EFD name: VALLI Marco responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2014-10-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: EPP name: GRÄSSLE Ingeborg
activities/3/date	Old 2015-03-24T00:00:00 New 2015-03-27T00:00:00
activities/3/docs	url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2015-0067&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0067/2015
activities/3/type	Old Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading New Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
committees/0/shadows/0	group S&D name AYALA SENDER Inés
committees/0/shadows/1	group S&D name LIBERADZKI Bogusław
committees/0/shadows/2	group ALDE name THEURER Michael
committees/0/shadows/4	group Verts/ALE name STAES Bart

2015-04-18Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/5

date: 2015-04-29T00:00:00

body: EP

type: Vote in plenary scheduled

2015-04-17Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3/docs/0/url

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2015-0067&language=EN

2015-04-15Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3/docs

type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0067/2015

2015-03-28Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

activities/3	date 2015-03-27T00:00:00 body EP type Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
procedure/stage_reached	Old Awaiting committee decision New Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage

2015-03-26Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/2

date: 2015-03-24T00:00:00

body: EP

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

committees: body: EP shadows: group: GUE/NGL name: DE JONG Dennis group: EFD name: VALLI Marco responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2014-10-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: EPP name: GRÄSSLE Ingeborg

2015-03-13Show (1) Changes | Timetravel

activities/2/type

Old

Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading

New

Debate in plenary scheduled

2014-12-12Show (2) Changes | Timetravel

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

2014-12-04Show (5) Changes

activities	date: 2013-07-26T00:00:00 docs: url: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2013&nu_doc=0570 celexid: CELEX:52013DC0570:EN type: Non-legislative basic document published title: COM(2013)0570 type: Non-legislative basic document published body: EC commission: date: 2014-10-23T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP shadows: group: GUE/NGL name: DE JONG Dennis group: EFD name: VALLI Marco responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2014-10-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: EPP name: GRÄSSLE Ingeborg date: 2015-04-28T00:00:00 body: EP type: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
committees	body: EP shadows: group: GUE/NGL name: DE JONG Dennis group: EFD name: VALLI Marco responsible: True committee: CONT date: 2014-10-15T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgetary Control rapporteur: group: EPP name: GRÄSSLE Ingeborg
links
other
procedure	dossier_of_the_committee CONT/8/01689 reference 2014/2140(DEC) title Court of Auditors' special reports in the context of the 2013 Commission discharge legal_basis Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150 stage_reached Awaiting committee decision type DEC - Discharge procedure subject 8.70.03.03 2013 discharge

Activites

Documents

History

ParlTrack - 2011-2024