Activities of Monica MACOVEI related to 2013/2132(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Annual Report 2012 on the protection of the EU's financial interests - Fight against fraud (debate)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the Annual Report 2012 on the Protection of the EU’s Financial Interests – Fight against fraud PDF (213 KB) DOC (106 KB)
Amendments (26)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2
Citation 2
– having regard to the report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council entitled ‘Protection of the European Union’s financial interests – Fight against fraud – Annual Report 2012’ (COM(2013)0548) and its accompanying documents (SWD(2013)0283, SWD(2013)0284, SWD(2013)0285 and SWD(2013)0286 and SWD(2013)0287),
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 15
Citation 15
– having regard to the proposal for a regulationRegulation (EU) No XXX/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Hercule IIIf XX/XX/2014 establishing a programme to promote activities in the field of the protection of the European Union’s financifinancial interests of the European Union (Hercule III programme) and repeal interests (COM(2011)0914),g Decision No 804/2004/EC1 a, __________________ 1a To be published in the OJ
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 16 a (new)
Citation 16 a (new)
- having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 September 2013 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (Euratom) No 1074/19992 a, __________________ 2a OJ L 248, 18.9.2013, p. 1.
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
- having regard to Opinion No 1/2014 of the Supervisory Committee of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) on OLAF Investigation Policy Priorities,
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) has the responsibility to protect the Union's financial interests by investigating fraud, corruption and any other illegal activities and whereas its Supervisory Committee was established in order to reinforce and guarantee OLAF's independence by regularly monitoring the implementation of OLAF's investigative function,
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that it is incumbent on both the Commission and the Member States to do everything in their power to combafight fraud, corruption and all other forms of illegal activity detrimental to the Union’'s financial interests, in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; points out that close cooperation and coordination between the Commission and the Member States is essential in order to ensure that the Union’'s financial interests are protected effectively, and hence such cooperation and coordination must, as a matter of priority, be strengthened and made as effective as possible; points out that protecting the Union’'s financial interests demands an equally vigilant approach to both resources and expenditure;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the main initiatives taken by the Commission, at the European Parliament’'s request, to shape a new EU legislative landscape for anti-fraud policy, and in particular the Commission’'s amended proposal for amending Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 concerning investigations conducted by OLAF and the strengthening of the procedural rights of persons concerned by OLAF investigations; the proposal for a directive on the fight against fraud to the Union’'s financial interests by means of criminal law, which aims to clarify and harmonise Member States’' provisions in criminal law on offences related to the EU budget (COM(2012)363); the proposal for a Council regulation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’'s Office (COM(2013)534); and the proposal for a regulation on the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) (COM(2013)535), all of which will; recognizes the importance for these different pieces of legislation to be well calibrated and thoroughly evaluated; calls on the Council to take the necessary time and not to finalise negotiations in a rush, in order to constitute a robust European legal framework and strengthening the existing institutional tools for protecting the Union’'s financial interests; stresses that a premature transition to the enhanced cooperation procedure should be avoided;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that there was virtually no change in 2012, as against 2011, in the number of fraudulent irregularities and their financial impact, ,with 1231 cases of irregularity, involving reported as fraudulent, while their financial impact slightly decreased to a total of EUR 392 million, reported as fraudulent; notes that the incidence of fraud was highest in the areas of cohesion policy and agriculture – especially rural development and fisheries – which remain the two sectors of most concern, suffering an estimated financial impact from fraud of EUR 279 million and EUR 143 million respectively; underscores, however, the general point that the number of fraudulent irregularities reported and the corresponding sums of money reflect the notion of fraud in its broadest sense and should not be seen as a reliable yardstick for fraud levels as such; calls for clear distinctions to be drawn between cases of fraud, cases of error and cases of irregularity in the 2013 Annual Report on protection of the European Union's financial interests – Fight against fraud;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Observes that the recommendations made by the Commission to Member States in 2011 – particularly on reported fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities, the recovery of amounts improperly paid, the monitoring of the results of criminal investigations and the improvement of national fraud statistics – were generally appropriate, and finds it regrettable that a number of concerns were not fully addressed; calls on Member States to ensure thatfollow-up on the Commission’'s recommendations made in 2011 and to ensure that those made to them in its 2012 report are followed in full, and that where action on recommendations cannot be taken they submit a reasoned explanation;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Acknowledges that the amount to be recovered following fraud and other irregularity cases in 2012 reached EUR 444 million of which EUR 208 million were already recovered by the Member States; notes that further EUR 83 million were recovered in 2012 which related to cases detected between 1989 and 2011;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on Member States to reform their national tax systems, making them simpler, fairer and more effective so as to facilitate compliance, discourageeter and sanction tax fraud and evasion and boost the efficiency of tax collection; also asks Member States to take heed of the country-specific recommendations made by the Commission in 2013; welcomes the Commission’'s renewed call to Member States to extend their national tax bases and to restrict tax exemptions and deductions, thus enabling them not only to simplify their tax systems but also to avoid increasing their standard VAT rates;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Observes that, on the expenditure side, both the number of cases of irregularity reported as fraudulent and their value are low, that they involve already identified forms of irregularity and that over the period 2008 to 2012, fraud accounted for 5% of the cases reported; notes that, as in previous years, cohesion policy was the field in which most of the fraudulent irregularity – 50% of all cases and 63% in terms of value – was detected; stresses that, only a tiny proportionut of the 1194 cases of irregularity reported as fraudulent, 9 related to corruption butand that all cases were detected in the cohesion policy area; is concerned that the incidence of such cases is rising; highlights with concern the trend towards simpler forms of fraud, probably reflecting the phenomenon of beneficiaries who would not normally break the law engaging in attempted fraud because of the economic crisis; believes that thisose trends should be monitored and studied in the years ahead;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Acknowledges that in the agriculture and rural development area, Member States recovered EUR 169.4 million from the beneficiaries during the financial year 2012 while EUR 1 216.8 million remains to be recovered from the beneficiaries at the end of that financial year was; takes note that the recovery rate of 43% is significantly affected by the low recovery rates (below 30%) displayed by six Member States3 a; calls on those Member States to take the adequate measure to ensure significantly higher level of recovery rate; __________________ 3a Belgium (23%), Bulgaria (4%), Greece (18%), France (22%), Slovenia (25%) and Slovakia (26%)
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Regrets however the lack of information on the amounts to be recovered and the recovery rates related to the cohesion policy for the financial year 2012; calls on the Commission to provide detailed information on this respect in its future annual report;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Highlights the continuing wide divergence in Member States’' approaches to fraud, reflecting chiefly legal and organisational differences, both between countriamong Member States and between administrations in the same country, but also the fact that fraud detection is approached in a variety of ways; points out, too, that Member States are still failing to forward data on time or are supplying inaccurate data, thus impeding comparison and objective country-by-country evaluation of the scale ofis notably concerned that in cases of fraudulent irregularities some Member States limit their actions to the application of financial corrections instead of investigating the potential criminal offence; emphasizes that such failure to investigate criminal offences could encourage fraudulent behaviours hence undermining the fight against fraud, and that this makes it very hard to assess the real situationfraudsters; calls on those Member States to invest more resources to counter fraud including through criminal proceedings; asks the Commission to continue to monitor closely the workings and effectiveness of Member States’' current surveillance and control systems and stresses how important it is that the Commission should establish uniform reporting principles for all the Member States and ensure that the data collected are comparable, reliable and sufficient; calls on Member States to implement the Commission’'s recommendations, particularly with regard to early detection, simplification of the rules and rapid reporting; calls, too, for Member States to ensure that the information they submit is as exhaustive as possible, that it reflects the facts and that it is supplied on time;(The information related to statistical data would be better placed in a separate paragraph)
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 b (new)
Paragraph 22 b (new)
22b. Underlines that greater transparency allowing for proper scrutiny is key to detect fraud schemes; recalls that in previous years the Parliament urged the Commission to take action to ensure one- stop transparency of all beneficiaries of EU-funds from all Member States by publishing on the same Commission's site all beneficiaries of EU funds , independently of the administrator of the funds and based on standard categories of information to be provided by all Member States in at least one working language of the Union; calls on the Member States to cooperate with and provide to the Commission full and reliable information regarding the beneficiaries of the EU funds managed by Member States; regrets that this measure has not been implemented and calls on the Commission to implement it urgently;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 c (new)
Paragraph 22 c (new)
22c. Notes that in 2012 OLAF made 54 recommendations for judicial action were sent to national authorities and about EUR 284 000 000 was recommended for recovery; regrets the lack of information on the number of judicial proceedings launched and the level of amounts actually recovered based on OLAF recommendations as well as the conviction rate in cases involving offences against the Union's budget; reiterates its call on the Commission and the Member States to ensure the effective and timely implementation of the recommendations made once cases have been investigated by OLAF;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 d (new)
Paragraph 22 d (new)
22d. Is however seriously concerned that in some instances OLAF dismissed cases and transferred those cases back to Directorate Generals for appropriate action while they have no investigative competencies;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Notes that since 2012 OLAF establishes Investigation Policy Priorities (IPPs) on a yearly basis in order to improve its investigation selection procedure; observes significant changes between the IPPs selected in 2012, 2013 and 2014 and is therefore concerned by the risk entailed of a lack of consistency in the overall investigation selection procedure; is of the opinion that future IPPs should always be subject to a thorough evaluation assessing based on concrete needs, measurable indicators and lessons learnt from past IPPs; calls on OLAF to provide detailed information on the way it decides on IPPs;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Is seriously concerned that the financial indicators for the 2012 IPPs and 2013 IPPs were excessively high and established without adequate consultation with the relevant stakeholders revealing a lack of consistency with the Commission's anti-fraud strategy and putting at risk the effective protection of the Union's financial interests; highlights in particular that OLAF defined the financial indicator for the rural development priority as over EUR 250 000 thus ruling-out 99,83% of cases since the majority of the beneficiaries receives subsidies below that threshold; takes note that the policy on financial indicators has been reviewed but is worried by the absence of financial indicators for the draft IPPs for 2014; supports OLAF's Supervisory Committee recommendations and insists that balanced financial indicators defined in consultation with the relevant stakeholders are key to ensure an efficient case selection procedure;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 6
Subheading 6
New-look European anti-fraud policy and programmes
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Welcomes the first report onpublication of the first anti- corruption policyreport and all the suggestions for intensifying exchanges of current good practice and identifying relevant new measures to be taken at EU level; regrets however that the content of the report presents a limited overview of corruption in the European Union; calls for further efforts, commensurate with the large sums of money at stake, in order to prevent and penalisesanction efficiently corruption, which corrodes the Europe’san economy and undermine, harms Member States’' revenue from taxation and undermines the citizens' trust in their institutions;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Welcomes the publication of the Commission study "Identifying and Reducing Corruption in Public Procurement in the EU" following the Parliament's request which develops a methodology to measure costs of corruption in public procurement concerning the Union's funds; notes that the overall direct costs of corruption in public procurement in 2010 is estimated to EUR 1.4 - 2.2 billion for the five sectors studied in 8 Member States 4 a; underlines that the study recommended inter alia further transparency in public procurement, improved auditing and evaluation mechanisms, the development of a central collection of public procurement data, an update of the TED- database as well as a reinforced whistle- blowers protection; calls on the Commission to provide information on the policies and measures implemented in order to address those recommendations; __________________ 4a Road & rail, Water & waste, Urban/utility construction, Training and Research & development in France, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania and Spain
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. SNotes that according to official estimates EU Member States lose over 11 billion euro per year in tax revenues due to cigarette smuggling at the benefit of organised crime networks; strongly supports the Commission and OLAF on the introduction of an action plan to combat cigarette smuggling;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. Welcomes the adoption of the Regulation establishing Hercule III for the financial period 2014-2020; notes that with a budget of over EUR 104 million the programme will co-finance inter alia scanning equipment to identify smuggled goods in trucks, automated container- code and number-plate recognition systems in order to reinforce the fight against smuggling and counterfeiting; regrets the lack of transparency observed during the implementation of Hercule II on the purchase and utilisation of technical equipment by the beneficiaries and reminds that the situation led the Parliament to hold in reserve some of OLAF's appropriations from the 2013 and 2014 Union's budget pending appropriate information to be received on this matter; calls on OLAF continue to provide those information including details on the current status and impact of the financed equipment and to demonstrate greater transparency in the implementation of Hercule III;