Awaiting committee decision
2015/2128(INI) Annual report 2014 on the protection of the EU's financial interests - Fight against fraud
Next event: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading 2016/03/07
Lead committee dossier: CONT/8/03640
Legal Basis RoP 052
Next event: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading 2016/03/07
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Opinion | AFCO | BRESSO Mercedes (S&D) | |
| Lead | CONT | JÁVOR Benedek (Verts/ALE) | PITERA Julia (EPP), PIRINSKI Georgi (S&D), VISTISEN Anders Primdahl (ECR), ALI Nedzhmi (ALDE), DE JONG Dennis (GUE/NGL), VALLI Marco (EFD) |
| Opinion | INTA | LOONES Sander (ECR) | |
| Opinion | LIBE | JEŽEK Petr (ALDE) | |
| Opinion | REGI | VAUGHAN Derek (S&D) |
Legal Basis RoP 052
Activites
-
2016/03/07
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
-
2015/06/11
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Documents
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 234 |
2015/2128(INI)
2015/10/21
REGI
51 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the Annual Report as the first by this Commission; stresses that EU funds must be properly managed and used as efficiently as possible, the protection of the EU’s financial interests is at the core of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes, on the one hand, that once again cohesion policy is not the area with the highest number of irregularities reported as fraudulent, and that this is the case for the second year in a row; also notes that expenditure has fallen by 5 % compared to 2013, and, on the other hand, that the largest proportion of such irregularities in this policy area concern the European Regional Development Fund;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes, on the one hand, that once again cohesion policy is not the area with the highest number of irregularities reported as fraudulent, and, on the other hand, that the largest proportion of such irregularities in this policy area concern the European Regional Development Fund; recalls that all irregularities are not fraud and that non-fraudulent and fraudulent irregularities must be differentiated;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes, on the one hand, that once again cohesion policy is not the area with the highest number of irregularities reported as fraudulent, and, on the other hand, that the largest proportion of such irregularities in this policy area concern the European Regional Development Fund; calls on the Commission to prepare an impact study on the impact of the irregularities related to the delays in the implementation of the cohesion policy.
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Notes the last report by the European Court of Auditors, which questioned the procedures followed by the Member States for the disbursement of cohesion policy funds due to the large number of errors occurring in connection with awards of public contracts; notes that errors frequently mean that problems and delays are encountered when implementing projects, and that proven violations of EU rules may result in financial corrections amounting to as much as 100 % of the value of the contract;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Notes that the failure to comply with public procurement rules has been a significant source of error, amongst others the avoidance of public procurement, splitting of contracts into smaller tenders to avoid exceeding thresholds and the use of inappropriate procedures; reminds that the new public procurement directives have to be implemented by the Member States by April 2016;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Welcomes the new ESIF 2014-2020 regulatory framework with ex-ante conditionality concerning public procurement and urges those Member States which have not fulfilled the ex-ante conditionality, to seek to implement effectively the agreed action plans by the end of 2016;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Given that there continues to be a significant number of irregularities in the area of cohesion policy, invites the Commission and the Member States to establish standardised and comparable guidelines aimed at analysing performance of administrative personnel responsible for management and control of funds;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Calls on the Commission to develop a database on irregularities, capable of providing a basis for meaningful analysis in a comprehensive way of the frequency, seriousness and causes of public procurement errors; calls on the relevant authorities in Member States to develop and analyse their own data bases on irregularities in the area of cohesion policy, including those arising from public procurement, and to cooperate with the Commission to provide such data in a form and at a time that facilitates the Commission's work;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 c (new) 2c. Calls on the Commission to ensure full application of the rules governing the ex-ante conditionalities, including on public procurement, that have to be fulfilled by the end of 2016;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes that
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes that measures to detect irregularities continue to vary significantly between Member States
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes that measures to detect irregularities continue to vary between Member States, mainly on account of differing definitions of irregularities;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes that measures to detect irregularities continue to vary between Member States, mainly on account of differing definitions of irregularities; calls on the Commission to impose all Member States to adopt the same concepts when defining errors and the distinction between error and fraud; welcomes the preventive and corrective measures taken by the Commission to avoid fraudulent irregularities, including by interrupting 193 payments under the
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes that measures to detect irregularities continue to vary between Member States, mainly on account of differing definitions of irregularities; welcomes the preventive and corrective measures taken by the Commission to avoid fraudulent irregularities, including by interrupting 193 payments under the cohesion policy; underlines that non- fraudulent irregularities are often linked to complex rules and requirements for the recipients; believes that simplification of the rules and procedures by the Member States and the Commission will decrease the number of non-fraudulent irregularities; calls on the Member States to encourage exchanges of good practices in order to prevent, detect, transmit and evaluate frauds and irregularities;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes that measures to detect irregularities continue to vary between Member States, mainly on account of differing definitions of irregularities; welcomes the preventive and corrective measures taken by the Commission to avoid fraudulent irregularities, including by interrupting 193 payments under the cohesion policy; encourages the exchange of good practices between Member States to prevent and detect fraud;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Considers that the fight against fraud and irregularities requires a huge effort to raise awareness and to provide incentive for action among all institutional bodies on a European, national, regional and local level and among the general public, through the widespread dissemination of data, news and items of potential interest;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Notes that in 2014 the Commission applied financial corrections totalling more than EUR 2.2 billion, and issued recovery orders for EUR 736 million; notes with some concern that national budgets risk not recovering the amounts that have already been unduly paid to beneficiaries and that are subject to financial corrections;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Calls for the appointment of a European Prosecutor, imperative for proper analysis of fraudulent activity involving the Community budget and in light of the need to take an approach to combating fraud that goes beyond national borders and which takes into account the dangerous transnational dimension of organised crime;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the Annual Report as the first by this Commission and also the first in the new 2014-2020 programming period, which means that particular care should be taken to investigate the relationship between the new cohesion policy rules and the number of irregularities reported; stresses that the protection of the EU’s financial interests is at the core of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; notes that through a number of measures the Commission and the Member States have increased their effectiveness in fighting the overall rate of fraudulent or non-fraudulent irregularities in order to ensure that EU funds are protected from fraud; notes a total of 1 649 cases of irregularities reported as fraudulent, this being 2 % more than in 2013 and representing EUR 538 million in EU funds
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recalls that, pursuant to the Common Provisions Regulation
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recalls that the Common Provisions Regulation requires managing authorities to put in place effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures; points out that cohesion policy reform has led to decentralized EU fund management and that the new local management authorities need to be empowered to effectively combat fraud and irregularities; calls on the Commission to reinforce preventive action, in particular by strengthening the technical and administrative capacities of managing authorities to ensure more robust control systems able to reduce the risks of fraud and increase detection capacity; calls on the Member States to set up coherent national strategies encompassing prevention, detection and law enforcement to efficiently fight against fraud;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recalls that the Common Provisions Regulation requires managing authorities to put in place effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures; calls on the Commission to reinforce preventive action, in particular by strengthening the technical
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recalls that the Common Provisions Regulation requires managing authorities to put in place effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures which should be embedded in the anti-fraud national strategies; calls on the Commission to reinforce preventive action, in particular by strengthening the technical and administrative capacities of managing authorities to ensure more robust control systems able to reduce the risks of fraud and increase detection capacity in particular for less developed regions;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recalls that the Common Provisions Regulation requires managing authorities to put in place effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures; calls on the Commission to reinforce preventive action, in particular by strengthening the technical and administrative capacities of managing authorities - which may be achieved also through promoting the exchange of good practice and exchange of experts - to ensure more robust control systems able to reduce the risks of fraud and increase detection capacity;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recalls that the Common Provisions Regulation requires managing authorities to put in place effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures; calls on the Commission to reinforce preventive action, in particular by strengthening the technical and administrative capacities of managing authorities to ensure more robust control systems able to reduce the risks of fraud and increase detection capacity; recalls the importance of the involvement of partners, especially in the monitoring committees, and their crucial role in the fight against fraud and for transparency and prevention of conflict of interest;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recalls that the Common Provisions Regulation requires managing authorities to put in place effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures; calls on the Commission to reinforce preventive action, in particular by strengthening the technical and administrative capacities of managing authorities to ensure more robust control systems able to reduce the risks of fraud and increase detection capacity; calls on the Commission to lay down consistent reporting principles for all Member States, in order to collect comparable and accurate relevant data;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recalls that the Common Provisions Regulation requires managing authorities to put in place effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures; calls on the Commission to reinforce preventive action, in particular by strengthening the technical and administrative capacities of managing authorities to ensure more robust control systems able to reduce the risks of fraud and increase detection capacity; welcomes the establishment of the system for the early detection of irregularities and calls on the Member States to implement an emergency mechanism for dealing with deficiencies.
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls on the Member States to take all necessary measures for appropriate and quick transposition of the 2014 package of EU public procurement directives into their respective national legislation by 18th of April 2016; calls on the Commission to strictly supervise this process providing the respective guidance and technical assistance to the Member States in the context of the correct transposition of the directives into national law;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses how the prevention of irregularities and fraud must involve both constant training and support for personnel responsible for management and control of funds in the competent administrative authorities, and also innovative action, including circulating information regarding the most common errors and criminal methods, but also concerning good control practices;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the Annual Report as the first by this Commission; stresses that the protection of the EU’s financial interests is at the core of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; notes that through a number of measures the Commission and the Member States have increased their effectiveness in fighting the overall rate of fraudulent or non-fraudulent irregularities in order to ensure that EU funds are protected from fraud;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Urges the Member States and the Commission to fully exploit the opportunities of the information technology (IT) tools in public procurement, including e-procurement, good practices exchange, as well as preventive risk-scoring tools; appreciates the developed by the Commission web- based fraud alert tool ARACHNE, aiming to identify the most risky projects, based on a set of risk indicators, and calls on the Member States to use this tool;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Considers that non-fraudulent irregularities are often caused by insufficient knowledge of the rules, complex requirements and regulations and believes that simplification of the rules and procedures will decrease the number of non-fraudulent irregularities; Appreciates the Commission’s decision to carry out a mid-term assessment in 2018 in order to establish whether the new regulatory architecture for the cohesion policy prevents fraud and reduces the risk of irregularities; calls on the Council to endorse the proposal for a directive on the fight against fraud to the EU’s financial interests by means of criminal law.
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Appreciates the Commission’s decision to carry out a mid-term assessment in 2018 in order to establish whether the new regulatory architecture for the cohesion policy prevents fraud and reduces the risk of irregularities, and looks forward to receiving detailed proposals and information about the impact of the new cohesion policy regulations in terms of the risk of irregularities and fraud; calls on the Council to endorse the proposal for a directive on the fight against fraud to the EU’s financial interests by means of criminal law.
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Appreciates the Commission’s decision to carry out a mid-term assessment in 2018 in order to establish whether the new regulatory architecture for the cohesion policy prevents fraud and reduces the risk of irregularities; calls on the Council to endorse the proposal for a directive on the fight against fraud to the EU’s financial interests by means of criminal law. Calls on the Commission to adopt a coordinated regulatory framework for the Member States concerning the recovery of the damages, in order to increase the solvency of beneficiaries.
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Appreciates the Commission’s decision to carry out a mid-term assessment in 2018 in order to establish whether the new regulatory architecture for the cohesion policy prevents
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Notes that the establishment of a culture conductive to combating fraud is of vital importance, not only for the purpose of preventing potential fraud, but also with a view to ensuring maximum commitment to anti-fraud measures on the part of all the institutions involved in implementing the Structural Funds.
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Underlines that a significant part of the money spent in the area of regional policy is spent through public procurement; calls on the Commission and the Member States to fully analyse the frequency, seriousness and causes of public procurement errors in the area of cohesion policy; calls on the Member States to improve the transposition of all directives relative to public procurement;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls on the Council to support the establishment of an independent European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) provided that the relationship between the EPPO and other existing EU bodies is further defined and clearly demarcated in order to avoid an inefficient overlapping of competencies;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Expresses its concern regarding the discrepancy between the information collected in Member States from public and private sources, calls on the Commission to support initiatives aimed at increasing the collection of public information, stresses that this is important for combating corruption in the Member States.
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the Annual Report as the first by this Commission; stresses that the protection of the EU’s financial interests is at the core of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; stresses that not all irregularities are fraud; notes that through a number of measures the Commission and the Member States have increased their effectiveness in fighting the overall rate of fraudulent or non-fraudulent irregularities in order to ensure that EU funds are protected from fraud; notes a total of 1 649 cases of irregularities reported as fraudulent, this being 2 % more than in
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Underlines that fraud and corruption are more and more transnational; calls on the Council to support the establishment of an independent European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) provided that the relationship between the EPPO and other existing EU bodies is further defined and clearly demarcated in order to avoid the inefficient overlapping of competences;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Considers that the highly uneven financial recovery is a cause for concern; calls on the Commission to support initiatives aiming at increasing the effective and useful recovery of the damages (structural funds, cohesion funds); stresses that this is important for the financing of new European projects.
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Underlines the need to introduce a method that allows taking track from the fraudulent cases as reported to the amounts recovered, in order to be able to draw conclusions on the figures presented in the reporting of OLAF;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Calls on the Commission to prepare an impact study concerning payment discontinuation, both on the Member States and with regard to the effects on the delay of the cohesion policy.
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Notes that around 28 % of irregularities reported as fraudulent in 2014 were detected by anti-fraud bodies or during criminal investigations or other external controls;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Notes with some concern that cases of fraud are, on average, reported twelve months after first being detected, and that irregular practices are, on average, first detected six and a half years after having taken place;
source: 569.843
2015/11/03
AFCO
28 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that making the budget more credible, effective and relevant, so as to sustain citizens’ confidence in
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Welcomes the adoption by the Commission of a multiannual Anti-Fraud Strategy whic is helping to correct significant differences in the number of irregularities notified by each Member State;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Reiterates its call for all the Member States to make public national declarations by their respective Court of Auditors to account for the spending of EU funds;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Asks specifically that a clear distinction be drawn between fraud and error, and that information be disseminated about the most common types of fraud and error, including actual examples of both, so that users of EU funds and the authorities that manage them will be better informed on this, including regarding the serious consequences they may well incur; emphasises that more attention must also be paid to the results of projects that the Union finances – and not only to the accuracy of their accounts – as evidenced through on-the-spot checks by properly qualified
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses the importance of paying particular attention to fraud and crimes against the EU budget of a transational nature, perpetrated by organised crime;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Is keen, too, to see closer cooperation between Member States and the Commission
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Is keen, too, to see closer structured cooperation between Member States and the Commission, as well as
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Asks the Commission to add a chapter on the performance of the EU institutions in its next EU Anti-corruption report to be published in early 2016;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls, therefore, for Article 325 to be implemented right across the spectrum of Union policies, and for action not just in response to cases of fraud but also to prevent them; for compliance with Article 325, and particularly paragraph 5 on annual reports, on which there is currently a year’s delay; for simplification, especially, of the way that EU subsidies are used in cohesion policy; for adherence to agreed procedures and for the ratification of the agreements on combating fraud at regional and international level which have been
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls, therefore, for Article 325 to be implemented right across the spectrum of Union policies, and for action not just in response to cases of fraud but also to prevent them; for compliance with Article 325, and particularly paragraph 5 on annual
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls, therefore, for Article 325 to be implemented right across the spectrum of Union policies, and for action not just in response to cases of fraud but also to prevent them; for compliance with Article 325, and particularly paragraph 5 on annual reports, on which there is currently a year’s delay; for simplification, especially, of the way that EU subsidies are used in cohesion policy; for adherence to agreed procedures and for the ratification of the agreements on combating fraud at regional and international level which have been concluded between the Union and third countries or third-party organisations; for follow-up on the action plan and recommendations in Parliament’s resolution of 23 October 2013 on organised crime, corruption and money laundering: recommendations on action and initiatives to be taken (2013/2107(INI)), especially recommendations 130 (on the visibility of measures by the Member States to combat organised fraud and crime) and 131 (on a general action plan for the period 2014- 2019 to eradicate organised crime, corruption and money laundering – points i-xxii); for every effort to be made to secure the speediest possible adoption of the
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that making the budget more credible, accurate, effective and relevant, so as to sustain citizens’ confidence in the EU institutions and their identification with the project of European integration, must remain one of the core objectives of the policy to protect the Union’s financial interests which the Commission
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls, therefore, for Article 325 to be implemented right across the spectrum of Union policies, and for action not just in response to cases of fraud but also to prevent them; for compliance with Article 325, and particularly paragraph 5 on annual reports, on which there is currently a year’s delay; for simplification, especially, of the way that EU subsidies are used in cohesion policy; for adherence to agreed procedures and for the ratification of the agreements on combating fraud at regional and international level which have been concluded between the Union and third countries or third-party organisations; for follow-up on the action plan and recommendations in Parliament’s resolution of 23 October 2013 on organised crime, corruption and money laundering: recommendations on action and initiatives to be taken (2013/2107(INI)), especially recommendations 130 (on the visibility of measures by the Member States to combat organised fraud and crime) and 131 (on a general action plan for the period 2014- 2019 to eradicate organised crime, corruption and money laundering – points i-xxii); for every effort to be made to secure the speediest possible adoption of the plan
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Reiterates its call on the Commission to swiftly come up with a legislative proposal on the minimum level of protection for whistle-blowers in the European Union; Calls on the Institutions to amend the Staff Regulations to ensure that Staff Regulations not only formally oblige officials to report irregularities, but also lay down adequate protection for whistle-blowers'; Calls on the European Institutions that have not done so and other bodies to implement Article 22(c) of the Staff Regulations without delay;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls for every effort to be made to secure the speediest possible adoption of the plan for a European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the directive on combating fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law (the so- called PIF Directive); calls on the Council to keep Parliament informed, on an ongoing basis, about the latest state of play in negotiations about the European Public Prosecutor’s Office; points out that the Court of Justice of the European Union, in its judgment in Case C-105/14 of 8 September 2015, found there was a direct link between the levying of VAT in the Member States and the EU’s financial interests; reiterates therefore that VAT fraud should be governed by the PIF Directive in order to assign to a future European Public Prosecutor’s Office the power to investigate this offence and prosecute suspected offenders.
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Highlights the importance of establishing a coherent and effective European system for the investigation and prosecution of offences affecting the EU's financial interests, reiterates the Parliament's support for the creation of a European Public Prosecutor's Office and the urgent need for it, in order, inter alia, to contribute to helping to restore public trust in the effective management of EU funds, calls on the Council to prioritise making progress on this crucial dossier;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Takes the view that establishment of European Prosecutor's office triggers the principle of subsidiarity; calls to safeguard jurisdiction over offences of participating Member States set out in the Directive on the protection of the EU financial interests by means of criminal law and to enforce responsibilities of Member States for anti-fraud activities on national level;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Urges the Commission to publish a corruption index for EU member states in order to allow for an appropriate targeting of the controls;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Takes into consideration the complexity of EU legislation and calls for simplification of regulations applicable to EU budget, to prevent fraud and/or irregularities affecting EU funds;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 c (new) 5c. Urges the Commission to immediately publish the assessment on all agreements with tobacco companies, with a view to establish their efficiency to fight against fraud and counterfeit affecting the financial interests of the EU, and to evaluate the appropriateness to renew these kind of agreements;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 d (new) 5d. Reiterates its call relating to 2013 for a speedy resolution of the remaining issues between OLAF and its Supervisory Committee; reiterates that neither OLAF nor its SC can fulfil their legal duties effectively under the conditions of their current limited cooperation; notes with concern the lack of progress and thus considers the current situation unacceptable; calls on the Commission to play fully its role as intermediary between the two bodies and to actively work on a long-term solution to be put in place without delay.
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that making the budget more credible, effective
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that making the budget more credible, effective, transparent and relevant, so as to sustain citizens’ confidence in the EU institutions and their identification with the project of European integration, must remain one of the core objectives of the policy to protect the Union’s financial interests which the Commission and Member States are required to pursue under Article 325 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that making the budget more credible, effective and relevant, so as to sustain citizens’ confidence in the EU institutions and their identification with the project of European integration, must remain one of the core objectives of the policy to protect the Union’s financial interests which the Commission and Member States are required to pursue under Article 325 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; calls to this end for greater transparency through enhanced cooperation between the EU institutions;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Is deeply concerned by the validity and quality of data transmitted by the Member States concerning their GNI, the number of open and closed cases, as well as the lack of answers to clarifications requested by the Commission or OLAF;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes, in particular, that levels of corruption and fraud affecting the Union budget are in direct proportion to lack of transparency in the procedures for spending EU funds; calls, therefore, for better communication about the procedures in question, which should involve fewer – but more transparent – rules so as to render fraud virtually impossible; calls, to that end, for best practices to be disseminated as widely as possible; considers for example that where the Council fails to submit to Parliament documents on public expenditure that have been requested, this endangers above all the right of EU citizens to information and transparency: a clearer rule on the forwarding and exchange of documents between the institutions is needed therefore;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes, in particular, that levels of corruption and fraud affecting the Union budget are in direct proportion to lack of transparency in the procedures for spending EU funds; calls, therefore, for better communication between the EU Institutions and the Member States about the procedures in question, which should involve fewer – but more transparent – rules so as to render fraud virtually impossible; calls, to that
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes, in particular, that levels of corruption and fraud affecting the Union budget are in direct proportion to lack of transparency in the procedures for allocating, managing and spending EU funds; calls, therefore, for better communication about the procedures in question, which should involve fewer – but more transparent – rules so as to render fraud virtually impossible; calls, to that end, for best practices to be disseminated as widely as possible;
source: 571.481
2015/11/05
INTA
34 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes firmly that
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes the problems of smuggling, trafficking and other forms of illegal
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes the problems of smuggling, counterfeiting, trafficking and other forms of illegal and illicit trade, which not only have an impact on Member States’ collection of customs duties and consequently on the EU budget, but are also strongly associated with organised international crime, threats to consumers and negative effects on the functioning of the single market, and which undermine a level playing field for all competing companies; requests, therefore, better coordination between the European Anti- Fraud Office (OLAF), customs authorities and market surveillance authorities in order not only to combat these problems but also to curb the trade in products that infringe intellectual property laws in the EU; notes that the closure of customs posts has meant that fewer checks are now carried out, and these types of unlawful activity have mushroomed as a result; notes that internet commerce makes new kinds of fraud possible, particular VAT fraud resulting in heavy losses of revenue to Member States;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes the problems of smuggling, trafficking and other forms of illegal and illicit trade, which not only have an impact on Member States’ collection of customs duties and consequently on the EU budget, but are also strongly associated with organised international crime, threats to consumers and negative effects on the functioning of the single market, and which undermine a level playing field for all competing companies, particularly SMEs; requests, therefore, better coordination between the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), customs authorities and market surveillance authorities in order not only to combat these problems but also to curb the trade in products that infringe intellectual property laws in the EU; stresses the importance of distinguishing between legitimate generic medicine and fraudulent counterfeiting drugs in order not to interrupt the legitimate flow of medicines;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes the problems of smuggling, trafficking and other forms of illegal and illicit trade, which are further compounded by the lack of uniformity in customs checks and procedures in the Member States and not only have an impact
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Welcomes the fact that Member States have taken specific measures to ensure more effective fight against fraud affecting the financial interests of the EU both on the expenditure and revenue sides, so that the EU budget is well-spent, detecting and prosecuting more fraud cases in 2014 than in the previous year;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Calls on Member States to put even more effort into ensuring that money from the EU budget is correctly used for projects that contribute to growth and jobs in Europe;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 c (new) 2c. Welcomes the proven effectiveness of OLAF’s origin investigations concerning the eligibility of preferential tariff measures and calls upon the Member States to consider these findings and take all necessary and appropriate measures in accordance with the provisions of EU customs legislation; in order to prevent losses to the EU budget due to the import of goods under PTAs not entitled to preferential tariff treatment, the Commission is called upon to continue to verify that Members States improve the effectiveness of their risk management systems and control strategies on the basis of the mutual assistance (MA) communications; furthermore asks the Commission to follow up on their commitment to carry out ex post evaluations on PTAs with significant economic, social and environmental impact including a periodical reporting system by beneficiary countries on their management and control of preferential origin;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes the implementation of the Hercule III Programme under the new financial framework, and considers it useful that this programme be used to assist the law enforcement agencies of certain Member States in combating illegal and illicit trade; hopes to see promotion of this programme stepped up to make it more effective and to facilitate access to it for the national and regional administrations it targets;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes the implementation of the Hercule III Programme under the new financial framework, and considers it useful that this programme be used to assist the law enforcement agencies of certain Member States in combating illegal and illicit trade; notes that the existence in the European Union of a number of tax havens encourages companies to divert monies they would normally use to pay tax, thus undermining Member States’ revenue;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Notes the implementation of the Hercule III Programme under the new financial framework, and considers it useful that this programme be used to assist the law enforcement agencies of certain Member States in combating illegal and illicit trade; calls on the European Union to put in place its European Public Prosecution Service without delay;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes firmly that, at a time of ongoing fiscal consolidation
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses that fight against illicit trade should remain a high priority for the EU as well as for the Member States;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Welcomes the fact that in 2014 there were 48 agreements in place that encompassed mutual administrative
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Welcomes the fact that in 2014 there were 48 agreements in place that encompassed mutual administrative assistance, covering 71 countries, with another 49 countries in negotiations, including major trading partners such as the USA and Japan; notes that VAT carousel fraud is costing EU Member States tens of billions of euro, and calls for a change in the rules on levying VAT in respect of trade between Member States, in order to put an end to this type of fraud;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Welcomes the fact that in 2014 there were 48 agreements in place that encompassed mutual administrative
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Welcomes the fact that in 2014 there were 48 agreements in place that encompassed mutual administrative assistance, covering 71 countries, with another 49 countries in negotiations, including major trading partners such as the USA and Japan; emphasises that the top priority in terms of protecting the EU’s financial interests and combating fraud effectively is to ensure that the existing legislation is applied and that all parties observe the relevant international agreements, including the provisions for sanctions;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 – point 1 (new) (1) Invites once again all EU Member States who have at present signed but not ratified the UN Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products to complete their respective ratification process as soon as possible;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Asks the Commission to publish a list of European companies and their subsidiaries abroad who have fraudulently or unduly used preferential customs regimes when importing into European Union countries and produce data on the amount of duties not collected for the EU budget because of that fraud;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Draws attention to the illicit financial outflows put in place by extra-EU transnational multinational companies engage in fraudulent schemes aimed at avoiding tax payments in the EU;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Recalls the internal EU standards on the fight against corruption and the protection of whistleblowers, and believes that these should be explicitly extended to whistleblowers revealing fraud in relation to international agreements, including trade agreements;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the key role played by the EU’s macro-financial assistance (MFA) programme in encouraging reform in the EU’s closest trading countries; requests that the Commission continue to report to Parliament and the Member States with a view to ensuring that all funds are spent in full compliance with the basic regulation; is concerned that much of the macro- financial assistance to Ukraine may be being misused, given that corruption is known to be rife in the Ukrainian authorities.
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the key role played by the EU’s macro-financial assistance (MFA) programme in encouraging anti-corruption and anti-fraud reforms in the EU’s closest trading countries; requests that the Commission continue to report to Parliament and the Member States with a view to ensuring that all funds are spent in full compliance with the basic regulation; further requests an long-term assessment of the effect MFA programmes have on tackling corruption and fraud in recipient countries.
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls on OLAF to investigate whether EU macro-financial assistance paid to third countries, and in particular the high amounts paid to the Ukraine, are spent in full compliance with the respective regulations, and to report to the European Parliament and to the Council on an annual basis whether fraud or corruption can be linked with the spending of EU MFA.
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Is convinced that both police and policy issues are at stake, and that, while criminal investigation into illegal trade practices by importers into the EU is necessary, shortcomings and failures related to deficient Commission policy have to be fully revealed and need to be tackled, from missing ex-ante and ex-post evaluations of the effect of trade agreements on the EU budget, to weaknesses in control strategies and risk management of customs duties collection and customs clearance;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Considers that the ongoing deregulation of the financial markets and the diminishment of the existing regulatory frameworks in international trade risks to facilitate phenomena such as corruption, smuggling, trafficking and other forms of illegal and illicit trade, especially at profit of transnational organized crimes; therefore calls to keep this aspect carefully in consideration while negotiating FTAs and trade facilitation agreement;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Urges that the Commission come up with proposals on how it will improve ex- ante assessments of trade agreements in order to estimate in advance revenue foregone following the granting of trade preferences, and believes that reliable analysis models have to be developed as an urgent matter, as the European Union sis concluding an ever increasing number of preferential trade agreements, with effects on its own budget;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Supports the attempt to include a strong and binding anti-fraud and corruption clause that can pave the ground for enhanced cooperation against organized crime, trafficking and other illegal or illicit trade, as structural element in all the Free Trade Agreements involving the EU; considers therefore extremely important the inclusion also in the ongoing TTIP and TISA negotiations;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 c (new) 1c. Is concerned about reported deficient or in-total non-executed recovery of customs debt after discovery of fraud in some member states; is of the opinion that non-recovery is a form of impunity and complicity with those who committed the fraud and paves the way to repetition of customs fraud;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
source: 569.703
2015/11/12
LIBE
31 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas Member States are primarily responsible for the collection of own resources, inter alia in the form of VAT and customs duties;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Encourages the Council to give a new impetus to the negotiations on the PIF Directive in order to strengthen the existing legal framework by establishing common minimum rules for the definition of offences affecting the Union’s financial interests and by laying down sanctions and time limits for such cases, particularly in view of the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Taricco case, in which it was established that there a direct connection between the levying of VAT in the Member States and the financial interests of the EU;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Encourages the Council to give a new impetus to the negotiations on the PIF Directive in order to strengthen the existing legal framework by establishing common minimum rules for the definition of offences affecting the Union’s financial interests with VAT included in the scope, and by laying down sanctions and
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Insists that all forms of illegal behaviour which adversely affect the EU budget related to fraud in the strict sense should be covered by the directive on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law, such as corruption, money laundering or the correct application of EU rules on public procurement. It is therefore necessary to introduce a clear definition of offenses covering all types of practices;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Encourages Member States to cooperate in the fight against fraud through existing instruments and agencies such as EUROPOL, EUROJUST, and OLAF; and to improve the cooperation and coherence between these bodies;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Reiterates its call to the Council to keep the Parliament – which will ultimately have to approve the proposed legislative act – informed of and closely involved in the current negotiations for the establishment of the EPPO and recalls the recommendations made in its resolutions of March 2014 and April 2015;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Reiterates its call to the Council to keep the Parliament informed of and closely involved in the current negotiations for the establishment of the EPPO and recalls the recommendations made in its resolutions of March 2014 and April 2015; stresses that the EPPO Regulation should be adopted swiftly and demands that the Council explain its reasons for delaying the negotiations;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Expresses its concern about the estimated losses on VAT collections in the EU, amounting to EUR 168 billion; reiterates therefore that VAT fraud should be governed by the PIF Directive in order to assign to a future European Public Prosecutor’s Office the power to investigate this offence and prosecute suspected offenders;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Expresses its concern about the estimated losses on VAT collections in the EU, amounting to EUR 168 billion in 2013; underlines the fact that in many Member States VAT fraud and avoidance remains at a continuously high level; reiterates that the Commission has the competence to control and supervise measures taken by the Member States; calls on the Commission to make full use of its executive powers in order to both control and help the Member States in their fight against VAT fraud and tax avoidance;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Notes with concern that the number of irregularities reported as fraudulent in 2014 dropped by only 4 % after a 76 % increase in 2013; urges the competent authorities to take all necessary measures to decrease the number of fraudulent irregularities, although not at the expense of control standards;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Reiterates that the integrity and full transparency of public expenditure in the EU should be guaranteed as priority placed on current economic challenges;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas corruption affects all Member States and costs around 120 billion euros per year for the EU economy as stated by the Commission’s first report dedicated to the anti-corruption policy of the European Union, published in February 2014;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses the importance of increasing the level of reporting of fraudulent activity across the whole EU in order to give a more accurate picture of the situation, and so that the necessary mechanisms and follow-up procedures can be put in place to more effectively address this issue;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the Commission’s first Anti- Corruption Report and its recommendations to the administrations of the Member States, and calls on the Commission to publish its second Anti- Corruption Report no later than the beginning of 2016; calls on the Commission furthermore, in view of the importance of that report, to inform the public and all levels of public administration about its publication using all available means, in order to increase transparency;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the Commission’s first Anti- Corruption Report and its recommendations to the administrations of the Member States, and calls on the Commission
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the Commission’s first Anti- Corruption Report and its recommendations to the administrations of the Member States, and calls on the Commission to publish its second Anti- Corruption Report no later than the beginning of 2016; in this regard stresses the importance of the Commission producing figures which accurately reflect the extent of fraudulent activity within the EU;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Urges the European Commission to promote the annual evaluation of the Member States’ performance in the fight against corruption;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Invites the Commission to develop a system of strict indicators and easily applicable criteria based on the requirements set out in the Stockholm Programme to measure the level of corruption in the Member States; is concerned about the reliability and quality of data coming from the Member States; calls on the Commission, therefore, to work closely with Member States to guarantee comprehensive, exact and reliable data; invites the Commission to work out a corruption index to categorise Member States;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Insists that, in order to be credible, EU institutions must lead by example and live up the highest standards on transparency, integrity and conflicts of interest; asks the Commission, in this connection, to add a chapter to the upcoming report on the performance of the EU institutions in fighting corruption; proposes, on the basis of these results, that the same chapter should also include the objectives that it is intended to pursue in the next period.
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls on the European Commission, keeping in mind that 85% of the EU budget is managed by the Member States, to ensure effective coordination between anti-fraud organizations and national authorities of all Member States’ authorities through cooperation mechanisms and the exchange of information.
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Reiterates its call on the Commission to swiftly promote legislation on the minimum level of protection for whistle- blowers in the European Union; calls on the European institutions to amend the Staff Regulations to ensure that these not only formally oblige officials to report irregularities, but also lay down adequate protection for whistle-blowers; calls on the European institutions that have not done so and other bodies to implement Article 22(c) of the Staff Regulations without delay;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Reiterates that, according to Article 325(2) TFEU, Member States ‘shall take the same measures to counter fraud affecting the financial interests of the Union as they take to counter fraud affecting their own financial interests’; is of the opinion that this provision is not met in the EU; is of the opinion that the Commission should develop a horizontal policy on the fight against fraud and corruption; emphasises that the Commission is also responsible for the effective spending of funds, and calls therefore on the Commission to put in place internal performance requirements;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Recital A b (new) Ab. whereas the diversity of legal and administrative systems in the Member States presents a challenging environment in which to overcome irregularities and combat fraud; whereas any incorrect use of EU funds entails not only individual, but also collective, losses;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 c (new) 6c. Notes that the comprehensive prosecution of crime, including fraud and corruption or money laundering or related organised crime and other illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the EU, is a conditio sine qua non for the effective functioning of the EU; emphasises the need for a systemic follow- up to OLAF recommendations; is of the opinion that following up those recommendations requires procedural rights for OLAF in national legislations to make sure that recommendations are respected and taken into account by national authorities;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 d (new) 6d. Underlines the importance of access to information and the transparency of lobbying, and of using EU funding to support the work of independent organisations in this area, inter alia to establish financial support for cross- border investigative journalism;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Recital A b (new) Ab. whereas the fight against fraud, corruption, money laundering and, in general, the protection of the financial interests of the Union should be a key element of the political agenda of the Union. The European Union and the Member States have the obligation to protect Union’s financial interests against criminal offenses that generate significant financial damage;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Recital A c (new) Ac. whereas corruption can help to finance the activities of networks of organized crime or terrorism in Europe; whereas corruption also undermines citizens’ trust in the institutions and democratic processes;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Recital A d (new) Ad. whereas - beyond the civilizational assumption based on ethical principles inherent in the rule of law - combating fraud and corruption contributes to the Union’s competitiveness in the global economy;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Recital A e (new) Ae. whereas the creation of a European Public Prosecutor, in coordination with the competent authorities of the Member States, with competence to conduct criminal proceedings in crimes affecting the financial interests of the European Union, is essential to fight against cross- border fraud, ensuring the priority to the protection of the EU budget across Europe;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph - 1 (new) -1. Welcomes the implementation of a new anti-fraud policy at EU level by the European Commission in accordance with the principle of sound financial management and ensuring that the EU’s financial interests are adequately protected;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph - 1a (new) -1a. Welcomes the continuing efforts of the European Parliament and the Council to enhance efficiency of the criminal law on the protection of EU financial interests by pushing forward the draft directive on the fight against fraud through criminal law, proposed in July 2012 by the European Commission, which aims to eliminate loopholes in the anti-fraud legislation of the Member States, ensuring an effective remedy against fraud perpetrators and the draft Regulation establishing a European Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), proposed in July 2013 by the European Commission, which is a fundamental instrument in order to protect the financial interests of the EU;
source: 571.696
2015/12/07
CONT
90 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas achieving good performance involves inputs, outputs, results and impacts regularly assessed through the performance audits;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls for the Commission and the European Court of Auditors to facilitate openness of the audit data by releasing more detailed information as regards the best- and worst-performing Member- states per policy area and sector, so as to allow actors to identify the areas where help is most needed and design actions accordingly;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Notes with concern that the amount of Traditional Own Resources (TOR) affected by fraud
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Is concerned by the fact that the average TOR recovery rate per Member State for both fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities for 2014 is, at 24%, at its
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Is concerned by the fact that the TOR recovery rate for 2014 is, at 24%, at its historic lowest point; urges the
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Is concerned about the VAT gap and the estimated losses on VAT collection, which amounted to EUR 168 billion in 2013; underlines the fact that in
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Is concerned about the VAT gap, which amounted to EUR 168 billion in 2013; underlines the fact that in many Member States VAT fraud and avoidance remains at a continuously high level; points out that the fight against VAT fraud is a national competence, meaning that the Commission does not have access to the information exchanged between Member States to prevent and combat so-called ‘carousel’ fraud; calls on all Member States to participate in all EUROFISC’s fields of activity so as to facilitate the exchange of information to help combat fraud; reiterates that the Commission has the competence to control and supervise measures taken by the Member States1; calls on the Commission to make full use of its executive powers in order to both control and help the Member States in their fight against VAT fraud and tax avoidance; __________________
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Encourages the Commission to develop such a mechanism that would motivate the companies to pay regular taxes rather than avoiding them;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Notes an increasing number of coordination centres supported by Eurojust and Europol; welcomes the results of cross-border operations vertigo 2 and 3 and the efficient cooperation between law enforcement and judicial authorities from Germany, Poland, the Netherlands, the UK, Belgium, Spain, the Czech Republic and Switzerland, leading to the neutralization of criminal networks responsible for defrauding approximately EUR 320 million of tax revenues, including VAT;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Expresses concern with regard to customs inspections and the related collection of customs duties, which are one of the own resources under the EU budget; points out that it is the customs authorities of the Member States that conduct inspections to check that importers are complying with the rules on tariffs and imports, and stresses that the Court of Auditors has found the quality of those inspections to vary from one Member State to another; calls on the Commission to update the Customs Audit Guide, published in 2014, in order to eliminate the shortcomings detected by the Court of Auditors, such as the issues surrounding the handling of imports cleared through customs in another Member State;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Notes
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the diversity of legal and administrative systems in the Member States presents a challenging environment in which to overcome irregularities and combat fraud
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Encourages the Commission to further enhance its supervisory role through audit, control and inspection activities, remedial action plans and early warning letters; calls on the Member States to intensify their efforts and to tap their potential to detect and correct errors prior to claiming reimbursement from the Commission; underlines, in this regard, the particular value of preventive actions in forestalling disbursements and thus eliminating the need for subsequent actions to recover misappropriated funds
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Repeats its call on the Commission to develop a system for the exchange of information among the competent authorities so as to enable the cross-checking of accounting entries between two or more Member States in order to prevent transnational fraud in respect of the Structural and Investment Funds, hence ensuring a cross-cutting approach to the protection of the EU’s financial interests;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Is concerned that in 2014 the rural development sector accounted for the largest number of reported fraudulent irregularities showing the biggest increase in comparison with 2013 and takes note that four Member States reported about 71% of the total fraudulent cases;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Acknowledges that the clearance mechanism (50/50 rule) provides a strong incentive for Member States
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Acknowledges that Member States’ recovery for the EAGF is below the overall average, and fewer than half of the irregularities detected in 2009 had been recovered by the end of 2014; Expresses concern that 2014 was a third consecutive year with a noted growth of number of cases of fraudulent irregularities in the EAGF and a fourth consecutive year of growth of the amount of fraudulent cases reported in the rural development; points to significant differences between the abilities of Member States to recover sums for irregular payments detected under the CAP and urges Bulgaria, France, Greece and Slovakia to significantly improve their results;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Acknowledges that Member States’ recovery for the EAGF is below the overall average, and fewer than half of the irregularities detected in 2009 had been recovered by the end of 2014; points to significant differences between the abilities of Member States to recover sums for
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Acknowledges that Member States’ recovery for the EAGF is below the overall average, and fewer than half of the irregularities detected in 2009 had been recovered by the end of 2014; points to significant differences between the abilities of Member States to recover sums for irregular payments detected under the CAP and urges Bulgaria, France, Greece and Slovakia to significantly improve their results; stresses the need for faster recovery of funds;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10.
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Notes that the irregularities linked to the Common Fisheries Policy in 2014 returned to a level comparable to 2012 after a one-year peak in 2013;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Notes that the irregularities linked to
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) has the responsibility to protect the Union's financial interests by investigating fraud, corruption and any other illegal activities; whereas its Supervisory Committee has been established in order to reinforce and guarantee OLAF's independence by regularly monitoring the implementation of OLAF's investigative function; whereas the Supervisory Committee shall in particular monitor developments concerning the application of procedural guarantees and the duration of investigations in the light of the information supplied by the Director- General in accordance with Article 7(8);
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Notes that the irregularities linked to the Common Fisheries Policy in 2014 returned to a level comparable to 2012 after a one-year peak in 2013; expresses concern regarding the high amount of non- fraudulent and fraudulent cases reported by Spain, Poland, the United Kingdom and Romania;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Notes that in the area of cohesion policy the trend for the number of irregularities reported as fraudulent is
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Notes that in the area of cohesion policy the trend for the number of irregularities reported as fraudulent is stabilising, with 306 cases reported; is seriously concerned about the increase of over EUR 115 million, which is mainly due to a sharp increase (by 660 %) in reported fraudulent irregularities in the 2007-2013 cohesion fund programming period from EUR 21 million to EUR 161 million; takes note that out of 74 cases of established fraud in the cohesion policy between 2008 and 2014, 61 (82%) were reported by three Member States - Germany (42 cases), Poland (11 cases) and Slovenia (8 cases); expresses concern that 14 Member States have a 0% established fraud ratio for that period of time which may raise questions to the efficiency of their systems of control.
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Notes that in the area of cohesion policy the trend for the number of irregularities reported as fraudulent is stabilising, with 306 cases reported; is seriously concerned about the increase of over EUR 115 million, which is mainly due to a sharp increase (by 660%) in reported fraudulent irregularities in the 2007-2013 cohesion fund programming period from EUR 21 million to EUR 161 million; welcomes the use of the Arachne tool in support of the management and control of operational programmes and calls on all the Member States to apply that tool so as to reduce the error rate and strengthen the prevention and detection of fraud;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Is furthermore worried that the overall time gap between the occurrence of an irregularity, its detection and finally its reporting to the Commission is increasing in the cohesion area up to 3 years and 4 months; recalls that after the detection of the irregularity further procedures kick in (recovery orders, OLAF investigations etc.); urges the Commission to work together with Member States to improve the detection and reporting efficiency;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Welcomes the overall drop in reported irregularities in Pre-Accession Assistance (PAA); regrets the steadily increasing trend concerning irregularities in the Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA) since 2010, both in amounts and in the number of cases, with Turkey being the main contributor to this negative development and calls on the Commission to do everything it can to improve the situation, in particular in the context of the upcoming efforts to enhance EU-Turkey cooperation;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Welcomes the overall drop in reported irregularities in Pre-Accession Assistance (PAA); regrets the steadily increasing trend concerning irregularities in the Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA) since 2010, both in amounts and in the number of cases, with Turkey being the main contributor to this negative development. expresses concern at the fact that in Serbia pre- accession funding is being used to offer tax advantages to European companies that set up production operations there; calls on the Commission to ensure that the use of pre-accession funding by recipient States goes hand-in-hand with complete transparency;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Takes note of the decrease in non- fraudulent irregularities regarding directly managed EU funds by the Commission, in terms both of the number of cases and the sums involved; is surprised that the number of fraudulent irregularities in 2014 quadrupled compared to the previous year and asks the Commission for detailed explanations and necessary action to counter this trend;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 b (new) 13b. Notes with concern that despite of the numerous calls from the Parliament for the establishment of uniform reporting principles in all Member States the situation remains highly unsatisfactory and there are still significant differences in the number of fraudulent and non- fraudulent irregularities reported by each Member State; Considers that this problem creates a distorted picture of the real situation of the level of infringements and protection of the EU financial interests; Urges the Commission to make serious efforts to resolve the problem of existing different approaches in Member States to detect irregularities and non- homogeneous interpretations when applying the EU legal framework; (This amendment should come immediately below the subtitle "Better reporting")
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Welcomes the Commission’s commitment to publish an EU Anti- Corruption report biannually, and looks forward to reading the next report in early 2016; asks the Commission to add a chapter on the performance of the EU institutions in fighting corruption with carrying out further analysis at the level of the EU institutions concerning which policies are implemented, in order to identify inherent critical factors, vulnerable areas and risk factors conducive to corruption;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas any incorrect use of EU funds entails not only individual, but also collective, losses, and seriously undermines the credibility and transparency of the EU institutions and of the EU as a whole;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Calls on the Commission to harmonize the framework of reporting 'suspected fraud' and to establish rules on reporting all judicial action undertaken in the Member states related to potential fraudulent use of community resources, indicating the judicial actions based on OLAF judicial recommendations specifically in the reporting
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Invites the Commission to develop a system of strict indicators and easily applicable uniform criteria based on the requirements set out in the Stockholm Programme to measure the level of corruption in the Member States; is concerned about the reliability and quality of data coming from the Member States; calls on the Commission, therefore, to work closely with Member States to guarantee comprehensive, exact and reliable data; invites the Commission to work out a corruption index to categorise Member States;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Invites the Commission to develop a system of strict indicators and easily applicable criteria based on the
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Invites the Commission to develop a system of strict indicators and easily applicable criteria based on the requirements set out in the Stockholm Programme to measure the level of corruption in the Member States; is concerned about the reliability and quality of data coming from the Member States; calls on the Commission, therefore, to work closely with Member States to guarantee comprehensive, exact and reliable data; invites the Commission to work out a
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Invites the Commission to evaluate the performance of Member States in fighting corruption on a yearly basis; believes that these control mechanisms should reflect the performance of the Member States in fighting corruption
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. Calls on the Commission, as part of the annual evaluation of the results achieved in the fight against corruption, to give Member State precise guidelines as to how to facilitate gradual and continuous implementation of the obligations taken on by each State as regards combating corruption;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Reiterates its call on the Commission to swiftly promote legislation on the minimum level of protection for whistle-
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Underlines the importance of access to information and the transparency of lobbying, and of using EU funding to support the work of independent organisations in this area
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18a. Believes that the level of transparency could be raised through the creation of a legislative footprint for EU lobbying, with the objective of switching from a voluntary to a mandatory EU register for all lobbying activities for any of the EU institutions;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Urges the Commission to maintain its strict policy on interruptions and suspension of payments;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Stresses that 1 649 out of a total of 16
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Urges the Commission to maintain its strict policy on interruptions and suspension of payments as a preventive measure against irregularities affecting the EU budget according to the relevant legal basis; calls on
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Calls for the EU to apply for membership of the Council of Europe Group of States against Corruption (GRECO);
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20.
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Is concerned by the steady increase in non-fraudulent irregularities regarding directly managed EU funds, in terms both of the number of cases and the sums involved; is surprised that the number of fraudulent irregularities in 2014 quadrupled compared to the previous year and asks the Commission for detailed explanations and necessary action to counter this trend; emphasises the complex nature of irregularities; takes the view that the Commission and the Member States take firm action against fraudulent irregularities; believes that non-fraudulent irregularities should be tackled with administrative measures, and in particular with more transparent and simpler requirements, but also that the methodology for calculating error rates must be harmonised at EU and Member State level;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Welcomes the fact that the ex-ante and ex-post 'Community Controls' detect more and more cases of irregularities and therefore these controls should be further promoted;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Calls on the relevant authorities in Member States to perform better control and to use all available information to avoid errors and irregular payments involving EU funds;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Welcomes the fact that all of the Commission
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Welcomes the
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Reiterates that, according to Article 325(2) TFEU, Member States
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23a. Considers that greater involvement of EU citizens is necessary at the programming and control stage, through easily accessible information tools, especially where major infrastructure is being financed; calls on the Commission to consider the idea of participatory budgeting, in order to involve citizens in monitoring the spending of EU funds, and to establish an accessible electronic desk to report cases of fraud;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Stresses that 1 649 out of a total of 16 473 irregularities reported to the Commission in 2014 were fraudulent
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Reiterates its strong views on the need to adopt the PIF Directive,
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Reiterates its
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24.
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25.
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Notes that the level of irregularities due to non-compliance with public procurement rules remains high; calls on the Member States to transpose rapidly into national law Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement1, which makes e-procurement mandatory and introduces monitoring and reporting obligations to curb procurement fraud and other serious irregularities; calls on the Commission to make it compulsory to publish all documentation relating to beneficiaries, and in particular to subcontractors; __________________ 1 OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65.
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 a (new) Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Emphasises that the failure to comply with public procurement rules was a significant source of error for the 2009- 2013 programming period amongst others the avoidance of public procurement by splitting contracts into smaller tenders to avoid exceeding thresholds and the use of inappropriate procedure; ; points out that the new public procurement directives have to be implemented by April 2016; emphasises that reducing the incidence of irregularities requires correct implementation of the directives by the Member States; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the implementation of these directives; is of the belief that ex ante conditionalities have the potential to improve public procurement;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Emphasises that the failure to comply
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Emphasises that the failure to comply with public procurement rules was a significant source of error for the 2009- 2013 programming period; points out that the new public procurement directives have to be implemented by April 2016; emphasises that reducing the incidence of irregularities requires correct implementation of the directives by the Member States; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the implementation of these directives; is of the belief that ex ante conditionalities have the potential to improve public procurement; calls on the Commission to develop a database on irregularities capable of providing a basis for meaningful analysis of public procurement errors;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Emphasises that the failure to comply with public procurement rules was a significant source of error for the 2009- 2013 programming period; points out that the new public procurement directives have to be implemented by April 2016; emphasises that reducing the incidence of irregularities requires correct implementation of the directives by the Member States; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the implementation of these directives; is of the belief that ex ante conditionalities have the potential to improve public procurement; emphasizes the need for transparent and accessible rules;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Underlines that the overall financial impact of non-fraudulent irregularities reported in 2014 is
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 a (new) 28a. Questions the non-fraudulent nature of the increasing number of serious errors made in the context of public procurement procedures and asks the Commission to be particularly vigilant in this regard, not only by engaging into a dialogue with Member States with a view of better application of the existing and new public procurement directives, but also by submitting relevant cases to OLAF for further consideration;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 a (new) 28a. Points out that in emergency situations, such as the use of funds for refugees, there are often exemptions from normal procurement procedures, involving direct access to funds; regrets that, for this reason, there have often been cases of misconduct; calls on the Commission to supervise more effectively the use of such exemptions and the widespread practice of splitting procurement contracts so as not to exceed the thresholds, thereby avoiding regular procurement procedures;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 b (new) 28b. Calls on the Commission to make public all the documentation relating to the Lyon-Turin project and to consider submitting a proposal to make it compulsory for all accounting and planning documents concerning major infrastructure work to be published, including documentation on subcontractors;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 9 Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Calls on the Commission to adopt the planning, implementation and control phase of the MFF in accordance with the
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Stresses the importance of leading by example and warmly welcomes the inter- institutional approach to implement the Performance Based Budgeting; Calls on the Commission to adopt the planning, implementation and control phase of the MFF in accordance with the results-based budgeting principle;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Notes the importance of further and continuous measures to avoid fraudulent irregularities, but also
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Notes the importance of further and continuous measures to avoid fraudulent irregularities, but also pushes for more focus on ensuring the ‘Value for Money’ principle in public spending; calls on Commission to reinforce their activities in relation to applying efficiency and effectiveness indicators in all its programmes and not to concentrate only on the error rate; furthermore calls on the Commission not to work only on the 3 main categories – namely Economy, Efficiency and Effectiveness- but to start focusing also on the new triptych (Ecology, Equality and Ethics);
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Notes the importance of further and continuous measures to avoid fraudulent irregularities, but also pushes for more focus on ensuring the ‘Value for Money’ principle in public spending; calls for the mandatory inclusion of ex ante assessments of environmental, economic and social added value in the process to select projects for funding, both within and outside the Union, and for the results of those assessments and the indicators used to be made public and to be fully accessible;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Underlines that the overall financial impact of fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities reported in 2014 is 36% greater than in 2013, while the number of such irregularities registered increased by 48%;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 a (new) 30a. Notes that the reporting on performance is still weak. There is a need to assess regularly input parameters (financial, human, material, organizational or regulatory means needed for implementation of the programme), outputs (the deliverables of the programme), results (the immediate effects of the programme) and impacts (long-term changes in the society);
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 a (new) 30a. Emphasises that EU added value must always be demonstrated, not only by pointing to results, but also by showing that the same results would not have been achieved without EU-funding and by including the costs of applying for EU- funding and of the accompanying lobbying activities of Member States and, in particular, of their local and regional authorities;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 a (new) 32a. Calls on the Commission to be fully transparent as regards its agreements with tobacco companies and urges Member States always to report on any money they spend from the funds received as a result of those agreements;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Welcomes the successful outcomes of numerous joint customs operations (JCOs) involving the cooperation of OLAF and Member States with various third-country services, which have resulted in the seizure of, inter alia, 1.2 million counterfeit goods, including perfumes, car spare parts, electronic devices and 130 million cigarettes; underlines the fact that the smuggling of heavily taxed goods causes significant losses of revenue to the budgets of the EU and the Member States, and that direct losses in customs revenue as a result of cigarette smuggling alone are estimated at more than EUR 10 billion a year;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Welcomes the successful outcomes of numerous joint customs operations (JCOs) involving the cooperation of OLAF and Member States with various third-country services, which have resulted in the seizure of, inter alia, 1.2 million counterfeit goods, including perfumes, car spare parts, electronic devices and 130 million cigarettes; draws attention, moreover, to trafficking in counterfeit goods, which inflicts damage upon both the tax authorities of the Member States and EU companies;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Welcomes the successful outcomes of numerous joint customs operations (JCOs) involving the cooperation of OLAF and Member States with various third-country services, which have resulted in the seizure of, inter alia, 1.2 million counterfeit goods, including perfumes, car spare parts, electronic devices and 130 million cigarettes; points out that trafficking in counterfeit goods inflicts damage on both the revenue of the Member States and on European companies;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 a (new) 34a. Takes note of the role of OLAF within different JCOs in preventing losses for the EU budget and asks OLAF to include in its future annual reports more information and concrete figures about its contribution to the protection of the revenue side of the EU budget; (This amendment should come immediately below the subtitle "Investigations and the role of OLAF")
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Is of the opinion that the Supervisory Committee should, as a matter of consistency with its mandate, have autonomous staff who are detached from the OLAF administration and financial autonomy; calls on OLAF to grant the SC access to the documents that the SC deems necessary to fulfil its task;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Is of the opinion that the Supervisory Committee should, as a matter of consistency with its mandate, have autonomous staff who are detached from the OLAF administration and financial autonomy; calls on OLAF to grant the SC access to the documents necessary to fulfil its task; urges the Commission to put forward a proposal to change the OLAF regulation in this sense;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 a (new) 37a. Urges the Commission to give full transparency on all demands of national prosecutors to lift immunity of OLAF staff including the OLAF Director- General.
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 – point 1 (new) (1) Underlines that the simplification of administrative rules will decrease the number of non-fraudulent irregularities, help identify fraudulent cases, and make EU funds more accessible to the beneficiaries;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the European Court of Auditors, OLAF and the OLAF Supervisory
source: 573.013
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2016-01-30Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1 |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
|
2015-11-11Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1 |
|
2015-10-21Show (8) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/1/shadows/2 |
|
| activities/0/committees/1/shadows/3 |
|
| activities/0/committees/2/date |
2015-06-15T00:00:00
|
| activities/0/committees/2/rapporteur |
|
| committees/1/shadows/2 |
|
| committees/1/shadows/3 |
|
| committees/2/date |
2015-06-15T00:00:00
|
| committees/2/rapporteur |
|
2015-07-16Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0/date |
2015-07-15T00:00:00
|
| activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
| committees/0/date |
2015-07-15T00:00:00
|
| committees/0/rapporteur |
|
2015-07-11Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/4/date |
2015-06-17T00:00:00
|
| activities/0/committees/4/rapporteur |
|
| committees/4/date |
2015-06-17T00:00:00
|
| committees/4/rapporteur |
|
2015-07-08Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/3/date |
2015-05-25T00:00:00
|
| activities/0/committees/3/rapporteur |
|
| committees/3/date |
2015-05-25T00:00:00
|
| committees/3/rapporteur |
|
2015-06-22Show (6) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/1/date |
2015-06-16T00:00:00
|
| activities/0/committees/1/rapporteur |
|
| activities/0/committees/1/shadows |
|
| committees/1/date |
2015-06-16T00:00:00
|
| committees/1/rapporteur |
|
| committees/1/shadows |
|
2015-06-13Show (5) Changes
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|