Activities of Bart STAES related to 2018/2166(DEC)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2017, Section III – Commission and executive agencies PDF (448 KB) DOC (187 KB)
Amendments (44)
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Takes note ofNotes with concern that the Court’s opinion is that there is necessity for improvement in the Commission’s actions to safeguard Union revenue in order to address weaknesses in its management of the risk of under-valued imports in relation to TOR and in its verifications on the VAT-based own resource;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 – introductory part
Paragraph 11 – introductory part
11. Expresses serious concern that these weaknesses may affect the Member States’ contributions to the EU budget; calls, in this regard, on the Commission to:
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes with concern that for the second year in a row, DG Budget set a reservation on the value of TOR collected by the UK, due to the country’s failure to make available to the EU budget evaded customs duties on textiles and footwear imports;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the infringement procedure initiated by the Commission on 8 March 2018 as a follow-up to the UK customs fraud case, but regrets that it took the Commission more than 7 years to launch this procedure after its request to the UK in 2011 to set risk profiles for under-valued textiles and footwear imports from China; calls on the Commission to approach such cases with no hesitation and unnecessary delays in future;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Points out that in 2017, 99,.3 % of the amount available for commitments was implemented (EUR 158,.7 billion), but stresses that the executed payments were only EUR 124,.7 billion, considerably lower than budgeted and Member States’ absorption rate lower than in the corresponding year of the 2007-2013 multiannual programme period, mainly due to Member States submitting fewer claims than anticipated for the multiannual programmes of the 2014-2020 European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF); calls on the Commission to provide the Member States with the maximum support to improve on their absorption rates;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Is deeply concerned that in 2017 the outstanding budgetary commitments increased to a new record of EUR 267,.3 billion (2016: EUR 238,.8 billion) and that the Court projections indicate this amount will rise even more by the end of the current MFF, which may lead to a significantly increased risk of insufficient payment appropriations, but also to a risk of errors under the pressure for a swift absorption given a potential loss of Union funding; stresses the fact that the EU budget is not allowed to run on deficit and that the growing payments backlog in fact represents a financial debt;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Commission to improve the accuracy of the payment forecast and to use the lessons learned from the previous programming period in order to deal with the accumulated backlog of payments and avoid its negative effect on the next MFF and to present the Action Plan on reducing the payments backlog during the 2020 - 2027 multiannual financial framework;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. RegretsStresses its deep concern that the overall financial exposure of the Union budget has grown, with significant long- term liabilities, guarantees and legal obligations implying that careful management needs to be applied in the future; calls, therefore, on the Commission when presenting legislative proposals that include the creation or addition of sizeable contingent liabilities to accompany them with an overview of the total value of contingent liabilities supported by the budget, as well as with an analysis of stress test scenarios and their possible impact on the budget;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Observes with satisfaction that the Court found very few public procurement errors in 2017: less than 1 % (2016 - 18 %), but notes that the reason for this could be the relatively low level of expenditure accepted under the ERDF and the CF, which used to be more prone to errors in public procurement; calls on the Commission and Member States not to weaken, but to continue strengthening their vigilance on the correct implementation of the public procurement rules;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Notes with satisfaction that, in the area of energy efficiency and renewables, more than 2,000 MW of additional capacity of renewable energy production was created, and greenhouse emissions were reduced by close to 3 million tonnes of CO2 equivalents until the end of 2016; stresses though that more must be done in order to achieve goals from the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Expresses concern that the Court identified and quantified 36 errors in its sample of 217 transactions for 2017, which audit authorities in Member States had not detected, and that the number and the impact of these errors indicate persisting weaknesses with the regularity of the expenditure declared by managing authorities; calls on the Commission to work even closer with managing authorities of individual member States on detecting these errors and by doing so specifically target those most frequent;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. RDeeply regrets that, in the context of financial instruments, the auditors were not able to verify the selection and implementation of investments at financial intermediary level, where a number of irregularities occurred, accounting for 1% of the estimated level of error for the area of “Economic, social and territorial cohesion”;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Notes with great concern that the Court found a persistently high level of error in areas corresponding to one quarter of the budget for ‘Natural Resources’, which includes the expenditure for market measures, rural development, environment, climate action and fisheries under the EAGF; notes in addition that the main sources of error were non-compliance with eligibility conditions, the provision of inaccurate information on areas and non- compliance with agro-environmental commitments; stresses that such errors should be better detected by the managing authorities of individual Member States or in cases when the ex-post audits point to these errors the samples for future audits and on-site checks should be updated to provide for a better controls;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Calls on the Commission to assess the effectiveness of the Member States’ actions to address the underlying causes of these errors and to issue further guidance or direct help where necessary;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Notes with great concern that the results of the cross compliance on the spot checks made by DG AGRI are worrying, and in particular that 47 % of the total number of on the spot checks has led to sanctions; asks the Commission to check the implementation of the remedial action taken by Member State authorities where it found it could place no or limited reliance on the certification body’s work;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 a (new)
Paragraph 43 a (new)
43a. Notes in that the number of returnees co-financed by the AMIF was 48 250 in 2017 compared to 5 904 in 2014, and that of those returned, the share of non-voluntary returns has increased from one quarter (25 %) in 2014 to half (50 %) in 2017, while the reported number of persons who returned voluntarily was 17 736 in 2017; stresses that although the numbers of returns rose significantly the Commission should do its upmost to double check that non- voluntary returns are fully justified;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Points out that for 2017, the Court found the highest estimated level of error in spending under “Competitiveness for growth and jobs”, at 4,2 %; notes that these are expenditures managed directly by the Commission, and for which the Commission is solely and directly accountable; expects that the Commission adopts an urgent Action Plan to improve the situation and implements all measures at its disposal to lower the level of error in spending;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Notes that for 2017, the Court has not calculated an error rate for the Union funds spent under heading 4 of the MFF “Global Europe” and that this decision was taken following the general strategy of the Court to reduce its substantive testing and partially rely on the so-called “work of others”; calls on the Court to check and calculate an error rate again for 2018;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Notes with concern the fact that the Court considered that the RER studies were only broadly fit for purpose whilst having concerns about the quality of those studies; stresses the fact that the Commission is using more than 10 different methodologies to calculate the error rate of their payments which does not contribute to better transparency and accountability of the Commission but, to the opposite, only blurs the true value of the error rates; calls on the Commission to use the same methodology when calculating the error rate as the Court does;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62
Paragraph 62
62. Noticed that the Annual Activity Report (AAR) of the Directorate General (DG) RTD mentioned 6 different error rates, three for FP7 and three for Horizon 2020; stresses that such an approach does not facilitate transparency and accountability and should be improved immediately; accepts however that two different programmes under two different financial periods were concerned;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 20
Subheading 20
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64
Paragraph 64
64. Notes with satisfaction that the budget managed by DG HOME and its number of staff have been increased in order to cope with the increased activities in the context of the migration crisis and threats to the internal security; in terms of human resources, at the end of 2017, DG HOME had 556 staff members, compared to 480 in 2016;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 66
Paragraph 66
66. Is concerned by the significant weaknesses identified in the management and control systems of EASO that justified the adoption of a reservation on reputational grounds; stresses though that DG HOME has promptly reacted by introducing a co-decision process by the executive board and put in place new management of EASO to bring the situation under control;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 71
Paragraph 71
71. Notes with concern that the Court found that the RER studies have certain limitations, as they are studies and not audits and so do not follow International Audit Standards and include very limited checks on public procurement; calls on the Commission to use the same methodology as the Court when assessing the error rate;
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82
Paragraph 82
82. Notes that in its Special report 27/2018 on the Facility for Refugees in Turkey, the Court found that, in a challenging context, the Facility for Refugees in Turkey rapidly mobilised EUR 3 billion to provide a swift response to the refugee crisis, but did not fully achieve its objective of coordinating this response effectively, or achieving sufficient value for money;
Amendment 187 #
85. Is not satisfied by the Commission’s reactions to the media and general public immediately after the appointment took place, or by Commission’s explanations offered at the debate during the parliament’s plenary, or by written reaction to Parliament’s resolution from 18 April 2018, which all demonstrates a lack of sensitivity for the importance European citizens attach to transparent, fair and open recruitment procedures;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 87
Paragraph 87
87. WelcomesTakes into account the fact that Commissioner Oettinger organised an inter-institutional round table on senior management selection and appointment on 25 September 2018, although the meeting seems to have been inconclusive; calls therefore on the Commission to put in practice paragraph 29 of its resolution on integrity policy in the Commission;
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88
Paragraph 88
88. Calls on all European institutions to review, where necessary, their nomination procedures, in particular for senior officials, based on the principles of fairness, transparency and equal opportunity, and to report back to the European Parliament by 31 August 2019 on the progress made;
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 89
Paragraph 89
89. HighlightNotes that the European Schools received EUR 189.9 million from the European budget in 2017;
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94
Paragraph 94
94. Insisted that the planning, implementation and reporting on the achieved results of the European Union budget should be policy driven;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 95
Paragraph 95
95. Insisted that the implementation of the European Union budget should focus on results and achieving broader positive outcomes and that the structure of the EU budget should be modified to provide for measuring progress and performance;
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 96
Paragraph 96
96. Encouraged, in this context, the Commission and the Court to pay greater attention to results and broader outcomes achieved, performance audits and the final impact of policies;
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 102
Paragraph 102
102. Advocated that environmental requirements should be reinforced, that income support should be more fairly allocated with progressive payments scheme favourable to small farms and sustainable and environmentally friendly farming and that the CAP should urgently and definitively be made more attractive to young farmers;
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103
Paragraph 103
103. Called on the CAP to become more competitivenvironmentally-sensible whilst farmer- friendly;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111
Paragraph 111
111. Insists that this report should analyse the impact of commitments to the size of payments’ backlog of a given Multiannual Financial Framework;
Amendment 224 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 113
Paragraph 113
113. Wonders why the Commission uses two sets of objectives and indicators to measure the performance of financial management: on the one hand, the Commission’s Directors-General evaluate the achievement of the objectives defined in their management plan in their AARs, and, on the other, the Commission measures the performance of spending programmes via the programme statements of operational expenditure annexed to the draft budget; calls on the Commission to make its reporting based on single set of objectives and indicators;
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 115
Paragraph 115
115. Points out that there is no requirement for DGs or the Commission to explain in their performance reports how they used performance information in decision-making; calls on the Commission to include such information in their future performance reports;
Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 115
Paragraph 115
115. Points out that there is no requirement for DGs or the Commission to explain in their performance reports how they used performance information in decision-making; calls on the Commission to include such information in their future performance reports;
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 123
Paragraph 123
123. In this regard, asks the Commission to harmonise its methods for calculating error rates with the Court and to clearly distinguish the amount at risk with and without integrated financial corrections; requests also that the Commission present information about the corrective capacity for recovering unduly payments from the EU budget;
Amendment 258 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 129
Paragraph 129
129. Notes that the slow absorption of funds remains a problem in some countries; is therefore of the opinion that it is appropriate to leave the “Task Force for Better Implementation” in place; notes also that the Commission has created a “Catching-up Regions” initiative; in this context, points to the risk of can not stress enough the risk of potential political and financial damage caused by accumulating a huge backlog of commitment appropriations by the end of the financial term;
Amendment 259 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 46
Subheading 46
Conflicts of interest and fight against fraud and corruption
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 130 a (new)
Paragraph 130 a (new)
130a. In this regard calls on the Commission to fully investigates the Conflict of Interests of the Prime Minister of the Czech Republic as demanded by the parliament’s resolution of December 2018;
Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 132 a (new)
Paragraph 132 a (new)
132a. Calls on the Commission to also conduct a regular assessment of the anti corruption policies in the Member States; and to publish an annual report with key findings and recommendations; also highlights that an independent external assessment of the anti corruption policies of the EU institutions themselves should be conducted on a regular basis with a view to eliminating corruption risks;