7 Amendments of Atidzhe ALIEVA-VELI related to 2020/2140(DEC)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that 2019 is the penultimate year of the implementation of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2014-2020 and that all the financial programmes are fully operational at this stage; notes that the Court issued a clean opinion on the reliability of the 2019 accounts of the European Union and found that revenue for 2019 was legal, regular and free from material error while issuing an adverse opinion on expenditure;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes that in 2019, the Court noted a significant increase in payment claims for the European Structural and Investment (ESI) funds which include the European Social Fund; further notes that in 2019 the rate of cumulative absorption from the ESI funds remained lower than under the previous MFF and only nine Member States had higher absorption rates under the current MFF than under the previous one; calls on the Commission to analyse the reasons for the low absorption levels and take measures to avoid both undue pressure on the level of appropriations in the first years of the next MFF 2021-2027 and unnecessarily complex and/or burdensome rules; regrets that at the start of the sixth year of the current MFF, only around 17 % of the total ESI funding committed through financial instruments under shared management (FISMs) had reached final recipients and urges both the Commission and Member States to examine and address this issue;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Recalls that spending under this subheading is aimed at strengthening competitiveness and reducing development disparities between the different Member States and regions of the EU; stresses the importance of EU cohesion policy in supporting the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights and assisting Member States and regions to harness new opportunities and address challenges, such as globalisation, unemployment, industrial change, digitalisation and supporting up and re-skilling and lifelong learning;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes with concern that the estimated overall level of error in the policy area ‘Economic, social and territorial cohesion’ in 2019 stood at 4.4 % (2018: 5.0 %); underlines that despite the slight decrease in comparison with the previous year, this figure is still largely above the 2 % materiality threshold and the estimated level of error in expenditure for the Union budget as a whole (2.7 %); recognises that the majority of spending in this area is deemed high-risk expenditure as mainly reimbursement- based and often subject to complex rules; notes that the most common errors under the Cohesion heading were ineligible projects and infringements of internal market rules in particular non- compliance with public procurement and state aid rules;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls the crucial role of audit authorities in the Member States in the assurance and control framework in the cohesion policy area; regrets the fact that also for 2019 financial year, the Court of Auditors (the ‘Court’) concludes that the weaknesses detected in some audit authorities’ sampling methods have affected representativeness, and that shortcomings remain in the way audit authorities perform and document their work; welcomes the Commission’s and audit authorities’ joint efforts resulting in a ‘good practice note’ for the documentation of audit authorities’ work as a first step to improvement;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. TRecalls the vital importance of the ESF as the EU's main tool in fostering increased employment, education and training and promoting social inclusion; takes note that for the ESF, representing 94.7 % of DG EMPL’s 2019 budget, the major inherent risk relates to the complexity of the operations and activities financed, the typology and variety of recipients, and the high number of annual interventions;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Notes that for the first time the Court also issued an overall assessment of the conditions put in place by the EU to enable the agencies to deliver their policies for the public good and recommends to the Commission to ensure the relevance, coherence and flexibility of the set-up of agencies, allocate resources in a more flexible manner, improve governance, accountability and reporting on performance and strengthen the role of the agencies as centres of expertise and networking1a; __________________ 1a https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADoc uments/SR20_22/SR_Future_of_EU_Age ncies_EN.pdf