23 Amendments of Peter JAHR related to 2017/2136(DEC)
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the fall in the error rate for rural development to 4,9 % from 6 % in 2015, and 6 % in 2014; recognises that rural problems require complex investment programmes, and that the error rate springs from the different objectives for addressing economic, rural infrastructure, environmental, and animal health challenges, contrasting with the EAGF rate of 1,7 %; believes also that rural development investments are a core part of the policy to be maintained alongside proven sound and beneficial risk management models; is concerned at falling employment in agriculture and believes that Pillar 2 investments are key for rural development and infrastructure; stresses that the method for calculating the error rate for CAP payments (in particular rural development programmes) can be improved by i.e. simplification and less bureaucracy as presented with the ELER Reset initiative.
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls that there is a significant difference in types and scale of error, and regrets that, even if the investment was effective, expenditure is still judged 100 % ineligible by the ECA in the event of public procurement errors; stresses therefore that further rationalisation in the error calculation method is desirable.; stresses that, for the purposes of error calculation, a distinction must be made between errors with financial implications and those without;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Encourages the Commission to keep moving towards a single audit scheme, that would allow for a reduction in administrative burden at all levels brought by controls, while maintaining efficient control on the legality and regularity of payments;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Reiterates the request of the European Parliament of 8 September 2015 (Resolution A8-0240/2015) that the Commission, the Member States and the Court of Auditors further develop risk- based audit strategies factoring in all relevant data;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Stresses that there is a significant difference in types of errors, i.e. between unintentional omissions and cases of fraud, and that omissions do not as a rule cause any financial damage to the taxpayer, which should also be taken into account while estimating the actual error rate; reminds the Commission that the risk of unintentional errors owing to complex regulation is in the end borne by the beneficiary;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to commit itself to fundamentally reviewing the young farmers’ and greening schemes in light of the findings of the Court of Auditors (the “Court”) beforewith regard to the next financing period;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Points out that the Commission notes in its AMPR a deterioration of the financial management indicators in terms of AARs reservations and explained it by the difficulties of putting in place new and more demanding schemes, notably greening77 ; whilst the Court points out a clear amelioration in this very precise policye determination of eligible agricultural areas; _________________ 77 2016 AMPR, p/. 82, DG AGRI, annual activity reports annex 10, p.140.
Amendment 75 #
28. Is surprised by the divergentNotes the views expressed by the Court and the Commission as to financial management of the first pillar of the CAP; expresses doubts as toin particular the assertion made by the Court that in expenditure the error is not “pervasive” (ECA annual report paragraph 1.8) sinceand the director general of Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development (DG AGRI), in his AAR, issued a reservation in direct payments concerning 18 paying agencies comprising 12 Member States while still having an error rate below materiality;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Points out in particular that for more than three quarters of 2016 expenditure, Commission directorates- general base their estimates of amount at risk on data provided by national authorities, whilst it appears from the AARs of the concerned Commission directorates-general (in particular DG AGRI and DG REGIO) that while the reliability of Member States’ control reports reflect the error detected by the Member State, the reliability of some management and control systems remains a challenge;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Endorses the reservations issued by the directors general of DG REGIO, MARE, HOME, DEVCO and AGRI, in their annual activity report; is of the opinion that those reservations demonstrate that the control procedures put in place in the Commission and the Member States cannot give the necessary guaranteesallow for a reasonable assurance concerning the legality and regularity of all the underlying transactions in the corresponding policy areas;
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 199
Paragraph 199
Amendment 330 #
200. Reiterates its viewPoints out that direct payments may not fully play their role as a safety net mechanism for stabilising farm income, particularly for smaller farms given the unbalanced distribution of paymentplay an essential role in stabilising farm incomes;
Amendment 334 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 205
Paragraph 205
205. Notes that the greening payments have been a source of errors impacting 17% of the level of error estimated by the Court and that the errors were found mainly to be related to the ecological focus area requirements, although the error rate for EAGF was below materiality; welcomes in this regard the fall in the error rate for EAGF to 1.7%;
Amendment 336 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 207
Paragraph 207
207. Points out that the positive trend in the error rates issued by the Court is not corroboratedand whereas by the evolution of the amounts at risks reported by DG AGRI in its AARs, namely from 1.38% in 2015 to 1.996% in 2016 (the market measures with an error rate of 2.85% being not included) and 4% for both financial years in rural development; show some fluctuations from one year to another, with the error rate for direct payments remaining below materiality;
Amendment 342 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 213
Paragraph 213
213. Points out that since the error rates reported by the Member States for each paying agency are not always reliable, DG AGRI adjusts that level of errormanagement and control system of some Member States are affected by deficiencies, DG AGRI adjusts the reported control statistics based mainly on the Commission's and the Court's audits carried out in the last three years as well as on the opinion of the Certification Body for the financial year in question;
Amendment 348 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 222
Paragraph 222
Amendment 351 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 224
Paragraph 224
224. Points out with concern that according to the Commission: “ the actual impact (of the greening schemes) on environmental outcomes depends on the choices made by Member States and farmers and that so far few Member States made use of the possibilities to limit the use of pesticides and fertilisers in the ecological focus areas”;
Amendment 354 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 226
Paragraph 226
226. Deplores the fact that greening adds significant complexity to the CAP due to overlaps with the CAP’s other environmental instruments (cross- compliance and the Pillar II environmental measures), which creates the risk of double funding;
Amendment 355 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 232 – point a
Paragraph 232 – point a
Amendment 362 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 232 – point h
Paragraph 232 – point h
Amendment 363 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 233 – point a
Paragraph 233 – point a
(a) Farmers should only have access tobenefit from CAP payments if they meet a single set of basic environmental norms including GAECs and greening requirements which are both meant to go beyond the requirements of environmental legislation; welcomes in this regard the logic of the Commission's "budget focused on results" approach, a future delivery system should thus be more result-driven;
Amendment 367 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 233 – point b
Paragraph 233 – point b
(b) Specific, local environmental and climate-related needs can be appropriately addressed through strongertargeted programmed action regarding agriculture;