21 Amendments of Caterina CHINNICI related to 2023/2183(DEC)
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. RegretNotes however that according to the Court’s report the DG INTPA’s KPI on reducing old pre-financing does not take into consideration the number of years for which each pre-financing transaction has remained open, therefore the Court considers that achievement of this KPI did not reflect the difficulties it had encountered in clearing older pre-financing transactions, some of which had been open for up to 12 years; notes the Commission’s reply that as to the ageing of open invoices and pre-financings that have remained uncleared for up to 12 years, the majority of these old pre-financings are linked to litigation cases, and that; calls on the Commission has already put in place annual controls and is using a Portfolio Dashboard allowing staff to monito continue to report to the European Parliament on these litigation cases, as already done subsequent tor these European transactions, which was updated in October 2023; calls on the Commission to provide a detailed report to the European Parliament and the Court specifically addressing these litigation cases, including an explanation concerning their origParliament’s recommendation n° 2015/PAR/04631a; notes furthermore that, in order to reduce the old pre-financing and to address the ageing of invoices, the Commission has already put in place annual controls, with 93% of the EDF payments made in due time in 2022, is using a Portfolio Management Dashboard (updated in October 2023) allowing staff to monitor the ageing of pre-financinsg and context, as well as a plan how to reduce and minimise litigation cases in the future; regrets that the Court did not probe the litigation cases and calls upon the Court to do so in its next audit report; to follow up on long overdue invoices, and is taking additional actions, including ad hoc campaigns, seminars and guidelines; _________________ 1a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/ 129482/2017-10-10- Draft%20EP%20Detailed%20replies%20 FINAL.PDF
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that the budget of the 9th EDF (2000-2007) was only EUR 13.8 billion, and that the10th EDF (2008-2013) nearly doubled to EUR 22.7 billion, and that the 11th EDF provides a staggeringhigh amount of EUR 30.5 billion, of which EUR 29.1 billion has been allocated to the ACP countries and EUR 0.4 billion to the OCTs, with EUR 1 billion for administrative costs;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Takes note of the Commission’s announcement to close the 8th EDF made in October 2021; points out that, in the annual accounts of the EDF for the financial year 2022, the Commission indicated that all 8th EDF activities had been completed and that all contracts and financial decisions had been closed in the EDF accounts and the remaining open recovery orders had been transferred to the 9th EDF; notes, however, that financial information on the 8th EDF still appeared in the accounts, and some 8th EDF balances were still open in 2022; regretnotes that the full accountingoperational closure of the 8th EDF therefore did not take place in a timely mannook place as foreseen in 2021 and that the full accounting closure of the 8th EDF is pending due to ongoing recovery orders;
Amendment 10 #
16. Reiterates its concern over the many possible reasons for the succession of adverse opinions of the Court on the legality and regularity of expenditure due to the fact that the expenditure accepted in the accounts for the year ended 31 December 2022 is materially affected by error; notes at the same time that the context in which the implementation of the EDF takes place is risky, complex and fast-evolving, with a remarkable diversity in terms of geographical dispersion, implementing entities and partner countries and of assistance delivery methods;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Notes the Commission’s reply that a single EU Delegation accounted for approximately 30% of the total error and that without such Delegation the level of error would have been approximately 4,7% instead of 7,1%; notes the actions taken by the Commission to address the weaknesses identified in this Delegation and to avoid similar problems in other Delegations;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes with concern that by typology of errors the estimated level of errors in the financial year 2022 related to expenditure not incurred was 51 % (14,9% in 2021), to ineligible expenditure was 24 % (38,6% in 2021), to serious failure to respect public procurement rules was 16 % (14,6% in 2021), to absence of essential supporting documents was 7% (23,3% in 2021) and related to other types of errors was 2% (8,6 % in 2021); highlights that errors such as expenditure not incurred is mostly due to deficiencies in the EU delegations’ control systems;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Takes note of the Commission’s reply that in 2022 approximately 50% of the summed errors are due to excess clearing, a practice where expenditure not incurred is included in the accounts as expenditure incurred, and are therefore temporary, since they will no longer exist after the final clearings; notes furthermore the actions taken by the Commission to allow for easier identification of incurred expenditure and calls on the Commission to refer to the discharge authority on the effects of these actions;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19 b. Notes that in 2022 DG INTPA’s ex-ante controls have prevented the payment of a total amount of EUR 167.94 million of ineligible expenditure, representing 2.91% of the total invoiced amount and above the benchmark set by DG INTPA for this indicator (2%) and above the result of 2021 (2.62%); encourages the Commission to further improve the control systems;
Amendment 19 #
20. Is concerned that Benin´s EDF national authorising officer awarded a contract to a consultancy company to strengthen civil society involvement in the country, in serious breach of the public procurement rules; notes with concern that according to the Commission, the Evaluation Committee used its “discretionary power” to apply a calculation method which was not sufficiently documented in the procedure; recalls that the Qatargate scandal has revealed the role of non-profit organisations and civil society in corruption; recalls that transparency and accountability are essential for NGOs, which are called upon to act in full compliance with EU financial rules and values, especially in the management of European funds; stresses that NGOs should be supported in their control and monitoring systems, especially those operating in third countries, in order to strengthen their transparency to stop corrupt circles and avoid being subject to fraud; recalls that European Court of Auditors Special Report No 35/2018 warns that the Commission does not have sufficiently detailed information on how the money is spent on civil society organisations, recalls the report of the Budgetary Control Committee A9- 0446/2023 on the transparency and accountability of non-governmental organisations; calls on the Court to produce a special report on EU funds being funnelled into civil society organisations, and to propel the Evaluation Committee and its discretionary powers concerning public procurement procedures, as well as any contacts and ties between the Evaluation Committee, including its members, and civil society organisations and other non-governmental organisations;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Notes with concern that the Commission and its implementing partners committed more errors in transactions relating to programme estimates and grants and to contribution and delegation agreements with beneficiary countries, international organisations and member state agencies; notes, in addition that out of the 99 transactions of this type examined by the Court, 46 contained quantifiable errors, which accounted for 86 % of the estimated level of error;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Notes that, according to the Court’s report, in 23 cases of quantifiable error and five cases of non-quantifiable error the Commission had sufficient information to prevent, or to detect and correct the error before accepting the expenditure; notes, moreover, that, according to the Court’s assessment, had the Commission made proper use of all the information at its disposal, the estimated level of error would have been 5,5 percentage points lower, compared to 2,4 percentage points lower in 2021; notes the Commission’s reply that most errors that could have been avoided are due to insufficient financial reporting provided by implementing partners in indirect management; takes note of the Commission’s commitment to review its control strategy, including reporting requirements and calls on the Commission to refer on the remedial measures taken;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Notes that, according to the Court’s report, 22 transactions containing quantifiable errors, contributing 2,3 percentage points to the estimated level of error, were subject to an audit or expenditure verification; notes, furthermore, that DG INTPA’s control system is based on ex ante checks, and that the information provided in the audit/verification reports describing the work actually done did not allow the Court to assess whether the errors could have been detected and corrected during these ex ante checks, as the reports do not cover 100% of the reported expenditure, nor do they give sufficient detail to confirm whether the items where the Court identified errors had been part of the ex- ante checks; notes in this regard that the Commission is regularly updating the terms of reference for the expenditure verifications, in order to increase the completeness and clarity of reporting; calls on the Commission to refer to the discharge authority about the improvements achieved;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Is concerned that, as in previous years, some international organisations provided only limited access to documents (e.g., in read-only format), which hindered the planning, execution and quality control of ECA audit and led to delays; notes that control issues were discussed with UN entities and the World Bank on several occasions, including in the context of joint technical reference group meetings and the EU-UN FAFA working group, and that Joint Technical Groups were set up to discuss regularly audit and control issues; notes furthermore that the Commission is working with the concerned International Organisations and has intensified communication with them on ECA’s access to documents; encourages the Commission to increase these efforts;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Notes that, from 2018, DG INTPA significantly reduced the scope of reservations (i.e., the share of expenditure covered by them) in the annual activity reports (AARs) and that, similarly, the 2022 AAR does not include any reservations; notes that the Court finds the lack of reservations in the 2022 AAR unjustified and considers that it results partly from the limitations of the RER study; takes note of the Commission’s reply that the absence of reservations is justified by the correct implementation of the RER methodology and instructions by its central services;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Notes that DG INTPA’s 2022 Action Plan addressing identified control weaknesses and high risks include the improvement of the follow up of ECA/RER findings and that new versions of the RER manual and methodology were adopted in September 2022 to address issues raised in the previous Court’s observations; takes note of the Commission’s reply that the amended rules avoid overreliance on previous control work, as it is now required that instances of reliance on prior control work should be monitored in the light of historical averages; notes furthermore that the Commission has fully implemented ECA’s recommendation from 2020 annual report to establish obligations for the RER study contractor to report to the Commission any suspected fraud against the EU budget during its work; regrets, however, that the Commission does not accept the recommendation, included in the 2022 Court’s annual report, to improve the RER methodology and verify its proper application as it sees no necessity to change the methodology used for the RER study for the extrapolation of high-value items;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Notes that, since 2014, DG INTPA has developed and implemented its own anti-fraud strategy on the basis of the methodology provided by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF); regret and that the strategy has been updated three times since its entry into force; notes that DG INTPA decided to postpone the mid- term assessment of its anti-fraud strategy (initially planned in 2022) due to several ongoing auditing and updating exercises led by the IAS, ECA and OLAF; notes, moreover, that DG INTPA implemented 90% of the accompanying action plan, and that all actions have been implemented within the deadlines announced, apart from exploring with OLAF the possibility of circulating anonymised examples of fraud cases within the Commission internal network, which was implemented in 2023;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Notes that DG INTPA also contributed to the Commission anti-fraud strategy and followed up to OLAF’s financial recommendations issued in 2018- 2022 resulting in the closure of only 24% of financial recommendations and the follow-up of 76% of financial recommendations; notwelcomes, moreover, the results achieved during 2022, such as the entry into force of new internal guidelines on the handling of fraud-related information, reinforced appointing system of DG INTPA’s anti-fraud network, launch of external awareness actions towards DG INTPA's implementing partners and beneficiaries , continued update of all internal webpages, manuals and databases, and annual note to all staff on professional ethics standards, fraud prevention and detection, and rules for disclosure of information;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Notes that in 2022 the two largest budget support recipients were Morocco and Tunisia; recalls that Tunisia denied entry to an official delegation of the European Parliament Foreign Affairs Committee in September 2023 and has been the first country to ever do so; recalls that Morocco is at the centre of the Qatargate scandal and that a senior member of the Moroccan royal family features prominently in the Pandora Papers; urges therefore for the EDF support to these countries to be substantially lowered until all concerns regardingcalls for the EDF to be conditional when there is evidence of human rights abuseviolations, corruption andor tax evasion have been properly addressed;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Notes that the Commission and its partner institutions (including development financial institutions and development agencies) actively engage with local private sector organisations to discuss challenges and opportunities to increase access to finance through financial instruments such as blended finance operations, and that policy dialogue is held in partnerships with partner countries through the European Union Delegations and National Investment Forums; stresses the importance of private sector mobilisation for closing the development financing gap and achieving the SDGs;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46 a (new)
Paragraph 46 a (new)
46 a. Welcomes the Global Gateway strategy as a concerted EU response to global challenges; is of the opinion that in times of new geostrategic challenges, EU foreign and security policy and development cooperation actors must coordinate better in order to increase the EU’s presence and visibility worldwide by means of hard and soft infrastructure investment that creates national value in partner countries through cooperation with the private sector and development financing institutions, in line with the SDGs;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46 b (new)
Paragraph 46 b (new)
46 b. Stresses the importance of Team Europe approach for the effectiveness and visibility of EU’s assistance and welcomes the initiative of the Commission to deepen coordination with Member States and make the most of their existing expertise in partner countries ensuring a stronger Europe in the word;