BETA

9 Amendments of Jan OLBRYCHT related to 2011/2201(DEC)

Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes the different approaches taken by the Court of Auditors and the Commission to quantify errors; calls for the harmonisation of methodology in order to ensure transparency;
2012/02/02
Committee: REGI
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Notes the lack of precision in the Court of Auditors' communication about the most likely level of error over recent years, and references to either the lower error limit or to the average error limit calculated by the Court of Auditors; calls for clear and consistent methodology to be applied in this respect to ensure the comparability and a reliable analysis of the evolution of data over the years;
2012/02/02
Committee: REGI
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Welcomes the explanation by the Commission which states, for the first time, that the large majority of errors are concentrated in only three Member States and only in several operational programmes.
2012/02/02
Committee: REGI
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
10. Attributes this development mainly to the increase of the most likely error rate in the area of Cohesion, Energy and Transport which marked a significant increase to 7,7 %;
2012/03/07
Committee: CONT
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58
58. Notes, furthermore, that the co- financing rates for Member States in difficulties were increased for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), the Structural Funds, the Cohesion Fund and the European Fisheries Fund; believes that this measure increases the risk of error;
2012/03/07
Committee: CONT
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 76 a (new)
76a. Encourages the Court of Auditors to examine the possibility to respond to the ongoing problem of multiannuality of the implementation of funds and the annuality of the Court's audits; stresses that during the implementation period the error rate tends to be higher than at the closure when the expenditure has undergone all levels of control;
2012/03/07
Committee: CONT
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
81. Deplores the fact that the error rate in Cohesion, and in particular in Regional Policy, has increased despite the increased use of interruptions and despite the fact that the Commission has identified the Member States and the regions which contribute most to the error rate; views this as an indication that interruptions are not effective in convincing Member States to remedy weaknesses and to correct errors;
2012/03/07
Committee: CONT
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86
86. Is of the opinion that these facts seriously undermine the effectiveness of financial corrections; fears that the possibility of replacing ineligible expenditure puts pressure on Member States to present other, possibly retrospective projects, which could even lead to the adverse effect of increasing the risk in terms of legality and regularity to the Union budget;deleted
2012/03/07
Committee: CONT
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 – indent 1
– making net reductions the rule rather than the exception and abolishing the possibility to replace ineligible projects by other possibly retrospective projects;deleted
2012/03/07
Committee: CONT