Progress: Procedure completed
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | CONT |
MARTIN Hans-Peter ( NA)
|
|
| Committee Opinion | LIBE |
DÜHRKOP DÜHRKOP Bárbara ( PSE)
|
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 100
Legal Basis:
RoP 100Subjects
Events
PURPOSE: to grant discharge to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2006.
LEGISLATIVE ACT: Decision 2009/207/EC of the European Parliament on the discharge for the implementation of the budget of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2006.
CONTENT: with the present decision, the European Parliament grants discharge to the Director of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the implementation of the Centre's budget for the financial year 2006.
This decision is in line with the European Parliament’s resolution adopted on 22 April 2008 and comprises a series of observations that form an integral part of the discharge decision (please refer to the summary of the opinion of 22/04/2008).
The European Parliament adopted, by 626 votes in favour, 17 against and 41 abstentions, a Decision to grant the Director of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction discharge in respect of the implementation of its budget for the financial year 2006. The decision to grant discharge also constitutes closure of the accounts of this EU agency.
At the same time, the Parliament adopted, by 627 votes in favour, 16 against and 41 abstentions, a Resolution containing the comments which form part of the decision giving discharge. The report had been tabled for plenary by Hans-Peter MARTIN (NI, AT) on behalf of the Committee on Budgetary Control.
As is the case for all EU agencies, the Parliament's Resolution is divided into two parts: part one contains general comments on EU agencies, while part two focuses on the specific case of the Agency.
1) General comments on the majority of EU agencies : the Parliament notes that the budgets of the 24 agencies and other satellite bodies audited by the Court of Auditors totalled more than EUR 1 billion and that the number of agencies is constantly increasing. The number of agencies subject to the discharge procedure evolved from 8 in 2000 to 20 in 2006. It concludes therefore that the auditing/discharge process has become cumbersome and disproportionate compared to the relative size of the agencies and that, in the future, this type of procedure should be simplified and rationalised for decentralised agencies.
On the basis of the financial analysis, the Parliament is of the following opinion:
Fundamental considerations : given the constantly increasing number of agencies, the Parliament requests that, before the creation of a new agency, the Commission provide clear explanations regarding agency type, objectives of the agency, internal governance structure, products, services, clients and stakeholders of the agency, formal relationship with external actors, budget responsibility, financial planning, and personnel and staffing policy. It also requests that each agency be governed by a yearly performance agreement which should contain the main objectives for the coming year and that the performance of the agencies be regularly audited by the Court of Auditors (and extend the financial analysis of expenditure to also cover administrative efficiency and effectiveness). More generally, the Parliament takes the view that, in the case of agencies, which are continually overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should be made on the basis of vacant posts in order to reduce the assigned revenue for the agencies and therefore also lower administrative costs of the EU. It recalls that it is a serious problem that a number of agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement, the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations etc., and consider that the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial Regulation are designed for bigger institutions rather than for small agencies. Therefore, it is necessary to seek a rapid solution in order to enhance the effectiveness of the legislation by grouping the administrative functions of various agencies together or by establishing implementing rules which are better adapted to the agencies. The Parliament also insists that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget, take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the individual agencies in former years and revise the budget requested by the particular agency accordingly. If the Commission does not undertake this revision, the Parliament invites the competent committee to revise, itself, the budget in question to a realistic level . At the same time, the Parliament recalls that it expects the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing agency and to not hesitate to close an agency if it is deemed useless by the analysis. Such an assessment is expected as soon as possible given that this type of assessment has yet to be presented. Furthermore, the Parliament insists that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements.
Presentation of reporting data : noting that there is no standard approach among the agencies with regard to the presentation of information, the Parliament recalls that it already invited the directors of the agencies to accompany their annual activity report with a declaration of assurance concerning the legality and regularity of operations, similar to the declarations signed by the Directors General of the Commission. It therefore asks the Commission to amend its standing instructions to the agencies and to produce a harmonised model for presenting information, including: i) an annual report intended for a general readership on the body's operations, work and achievements; ii) financial statements and a report on implementation of the agency’s budget; iii) an activity report of the Directors of the agency (as requested by the Parliament since 2005); iv) a declaration of assurance signed by the body's director.
General findings by the Court of Auditors : the Parliament refers to certain recurring findings by the Court, including the disbursement of subsidies paid by the Commission (not sufficiently justified estimates of the agencies' cash requirements), the non implementation of the ABAC accounting system by some agencies or the accrued charges for untaken leave which are accounted for by some agencies. It calls for rapid measures in these areas as well as improvements to the internal audit procedures of the agencies. The Parliament also calls on the agencies to consider an inter-agency disciplinary board, as some individual agencies have difficulty in setting up their own disciplinary boards due to their size.
Draft inter-institutional agreement : the Parliament recalls the Commission's draft Interinstitutional agreement on the operating framework for the European regulatory agencies (see ACI/2005/2035 ), which was intended to create a framework for the creation, structure, operation, evaluation and control of the European regulatory agencies and awaits its adoption as soon as possible. It particularly welcomes the Commission's commitment to bring forward a Communication on the future of the regulatory agencies during the course of 2008.
2) Specific points concerning the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction : overall, the Parliament welcomes the efforts by the Centre to improve the implementation of its budget even though the level of carry-overs is still too high. It also welcomes the fact that an evaluation of the Centre’s operations was carried out in 2007 and that a management plan is envisaged for 2008 and 2009.
This plan aims to implement the recent recommendations of the Commission's Internal Audit Service, as well as:
developing ex-post control of financial transactions; developing an internal capacity for risk assessment and internal audit; developing tools and procedures for integrated resources management (particularly with the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA), also based in Lisbon); implementing a more structured and effective human resources policy; successfully completing the move to its new headquarters in Lisbon.
The Committee on Budgetary Control adopted the report by Hans-Peter MARTIN (NI, AT) recommending that the Parliament grant the Director of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2006.
The parliamentary committee notes that the final annual accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction are as annexed to the Court of Auditors' report.
MEPs make a series of general comments on the agencies of the EU before referring to the specific case of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction.
1. General comments on the majority of EU agencies : MEPs note that the budgets of the 24 agencies and other satellite bodies audited by the Court of Auditors totalled more than EUR 1 billion and that the number of agencies is constantly increasing. The number of agencies subject to the discharge procedure evolved from 8 in 2000 to 20 in 2006. They conclude therefore that the auditing/discharge process has become cumbersome and disproportionate compared to the relative size of the agencies and that, in the future, this type of procedure should be simplified and rationalised for decentralised agencies.
On the basis of the financial analysis, MEPs are of the following opinion:
Fundamental considerations : given the constantly increasing number of agencies, MEPs request that, before the creation of a new agency, the Commission provide clear explanations regarding agency type, objectives of the agency, internal governance structure, products, services, clients and stakeholders of the agency, formal relationship with external actors, budget responsibility, financial planning, and personnel and staffing policy. They also request that each agency be governed by a yearly performance agreement which should contain the main objectives for the coming year and that the performance of the agencies be regularly audited by the Court of Auditors (and extend the financial analysis of expenditure to also cover administrative efficiency and effectiveness). More generally, MEPs take the view that, in the case of agencies which are continually overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should be made on the basis of vacant posts in order to reduce the assigned revenue for the agencies and therefore also lower administrative costs of the EU. They recall that it is a serious problem that a number of agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement, the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations etc., and consider that the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial Regulation are designed for bigger institutions rather than for small agencies. Therefore, it is necessary to seek a rapid solution in order to enhance the effectiveness of the legislation by grouping the administrative functions of various agencies together or by establishing implementing rules which are better adapted to the agencies. MEPs also insist that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget, take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the individual agencies in former years and revise the budget requested by the particular agency accordingly. If this revision is not undertaken is not undertaken by the Commission, MEPs invite the competent committee to revise, itself, the budget in question to a realistic level. At the same time, MEPs recall that they expect the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing agency and to not hesitate to close an agency if it is deemed useless by the analysis. Such an assessment is expected as soon as possible given that this type of assessment has yet to be presented. Furthermore, MEPs insist that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements. Presentation of reporting data : noting that there is no standard approach among the agencies with regard to the presentation of information, MEPs recall that they already invited the directors of the agencies to accompany their annual activity report with a declaration of assurance concerning the legality and regularity of operations, similar to the declarations signed by the Directors General of the Commission. They therefore ask the Commission to amend its standing instructions to the agencies and to produce a harmonised model for presenting information, including: i) an annual report intended for a general readership on the body's operations, work and achievements; ii) financial statements and a report on implementation of the agency’s budget; iii) an activity report of the Directors of the agency (as requested by the Parliament since 2005); iv) a declaration of assurance signed by the body's director. General findings by the Court of Auditors : MEPs refer to certain recurring findings by the Court, including the disbursement of subsidies paid by the Commission (not sufficiently justified estimates of the agencies' cash requirements), the non implementation of the ABAC accounting system by some agencies or the accrued charges for untaken leave which are accounted for by some agencies. They call for rapid measures in these areas as well as improvements to the internal audit procedures of the agencies. MEPs also calls on the agencies to consider an inter-agency disciplinary board, as some individual agencies have difficulty in setting up their own disciplinary boards due to their size. Draft inter-institutional agreement : MEPs recall the Commission's draft Interinstitutional agreement on the operating framework for the European regulatory agencies (see ACI/2005/2035 ), which intended to create a framework for the creation, structure, operation, evaluation and control of the European regulatory agencies and insist that it be completed as soon as possible. They particularly welcome the Commission's commitment to bring forward a Communication on the future of the regulatory agencies during the course of 2008.
2. Specific points concerning the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction : MEPs note alongside the Court that:
the Centre reduced the level of carry-overs to 25 % in 2006 (40 % in 2005); there were delays in making payments to the national focal points of REITOX (European Information Network on Drugs and Drug Addiction), with which the Centre has very a close relationship; a staff member continued to be paid by the Centre without having resumed work in Lisbon.
Overall, MEPs welcome the efforts by the Centre to improve the implementation of its budget even though the level of carry-overs is still too high. They also welcome the fact that an evaluation of the Centre’s operations was carried out in 2007 and that a management plan is envisaged for 2008 and 2009. This plan aims to implement the recent recommendations of the Commission's Internal Audit Service, as well as:
developing ex-post control of financial transactions; developing an internal capacity for risk assessment and internal audit; developing tools and procedures for integrated resources management (particularly with the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA), also based in Lisbon); implementing a more structured and effective human resources policy; successfully completing the move to its new headquarters in Lisbon.
Based on the observations contained in the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2006, as well as on the Court of Auditor’s report and the Centre’s replies to the Court’s observations, the Council recommends that the Parliament grant the Director of the Centre discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget for the financial year 2006.
In doing so, the Council confirms that EUR 0.9 million (84%) of the appropriations carried over from 2005 to 2006 (EUR 1.1 million) was used, that appropriations carried over from 2006 to 2007 amount to EUR 1 million and that EUR 0.5 million was cancelled.
Recalling that the Court of Auditors was able to obtain reasonable assurance that the Centre’s annual accounts were, in all material aspects, reliable, the Council believes that there is a certain number of observations that must be taken into consideration when providing the discharge on the implementation of the 2006 budget, particularly regarding the following points:
Carry-overs: while noting the Centre’s efforts to increase its utilisation rate of commitment appropriations and the corresponding rate for payment, the Council invites the Centre to take appropriate measures to continue to improve the implementation of the budget, by reducing the level of carry-overs, in order to comply in full with the principle of annuality. It also emphasises the importance of observing the timetables for making the payments to the national focal points of Reitox (European Information Network on Drugs and Drug Addiction) under the grant agreements, in line with the provisions of the contracts; Recruitment procedure: the Council regrets that the shortcomings already noted by the Court last year concerning the proper application of staff rules remain in 2006. Once again, it invites the Centre to use all instruments made available by the relevant Regulations to rectify the aforementioned situation.
PURPOSE: presentation of the report from the Court of Auditors on the 2006 annual accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA).
CONTENT: the report indicates that the appropriations entered in the EMCDDA’s budget for the financial year in question are EUR 13.121 million , EUR 12.66 million was committed and EUR 11.641 million was paid (in a system of differentiated appropriations). Of this overall amount, EUR 972 000 was carried over to 2007 and EUR 508 000 was cancelled (in payment appropriations in a system of differentiated appropriations).
The Court notes that the annual accounts are reliable in all material respects and that the underlying transactions of the Centre’s accounts, taken as a whole, are legal and regular.
Analysis of the accounts by the Court : the Court indicates that the utilisation rate of commitment appropriations (including assigned revenue) was 95% in 2006 (compared to 94% in 2005), and the utilisation rate for payment appropriations improved to 87% (85% in 2005). The Centre also reduced the level of carryovers to 25% in 2006 (40% in 2005). The Court notes, however, that in 9 of 13 cases examined, and contrary to the provisions of the contracts, there were delays in making the payments to the national focal points of the European Information Network on Drugs and Drug Addiction (REITOX) under the grant agreements.
In its report on the annual accounts of the Centre for 2005 (see DEC/2006/2157 ), the Court made an observation in respect of a member of staff who had been sent on a long-term mission to Brussels and who, after the end of the mission, had been seconded to the Commission. Since the end of the secondment, this staff member continued to be paid by the Centre without having resumed work in Lisbon. The situation remained unchanged in 2006. In 2007, this agent was declared able to work anywhere, except specifically in Lisbon.
The Centre’s replies : the Centre replies to all of the criticisms one by one and indicates that it will continue its efforts to maintain the high rate of execution of its budget and, if possible, to improve it.
The Centre also indicates that it has taken various measures in order to improve the payment process, by:
improving the communication/notification process to the National Focal Points (NFP); providing guidelines and specific training for NFPs on financial procedures; reinforcing the operating capacity for the financial and administrative management of the grants; streamlining the internal control processes.
The secondment of the staff member concerned ended on 30 September 2006. As from 1 October 2006, the staff member was reinstated in the EMCDDA services. However, the staff member took sick leave, providing evidence (by means of regular medical certificates) of inability to carry out duties due to illness. The EMCDDA requested the medical service of the European Commission twice to carry out a medical examination to verify the grounds for the referred sick leave. The examinations confirmed the existence of reasons justifying the absence for sickness. The EMCDDA indicates that it will continue to use all instruments provided by the relevant regulations to manage the referred case.
PURPOSE: presentation of the final accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) for the 2006 financial year.
CONTENT: this document sets out a detailed account of the implementation of the EMCDDA’s 2006 budget. It indicates that EMCDDA’s final budget amounted to 13.12 million EUR in 2006 (compared with 12.8 million EUR in 2005) 92% of which is derived from a Community subsidy.
In terms of personnel, the EMCDDA, whose headquarters are in Lisbon (Portugal) had 77 posts in its establishment plan 68 of which are occupied and 23 others (auxiliary contracts, contract staff and temporary replacements) amounting to 91 posts undertaking operational, administrative or mixed tasks. Expenditure on personnel in 2006 represented 6.373 million EUR.
The main task of the EMCDDA is to provide the Union and its Member States with information regarding illegal drugs in the Union and their effects on Europeans. In particular, it collects data, carries out surveys, disseminates information, improves the coordination between national and Community actions in this field and promotes the integration of information on drugs in international programmes.
In 2006, the EMCDDA’s activities mainly focused on:
The REITOX network : the Observatory manages a computerised network for the collection and exchange of information called Reitox (the European Information Network on Drugs and Drug Addiction); this network links together the national drugs information networks, specialised centres in Member States and the information systems of international organisations cooperating with the Observatory.
Publications:
Annual Report on the state of the drugs problem in Europe (23 language versions, publication and interactive website web), Annual report ‘Selected issues’ (EN, publication and interactive website), Statistical bulletin and interactive website including more than 250 tables, 150 illustrations and PDF files, General activity report (annual, EN), ‘Drugnet Europe’ newsletter (4 issues - 2 in five languages, 2 in English), Studies/technical and scientific articles (21), Scientific articles and summaries (16); Other websites: creation/updating/development of content: Country situation summaries; Country data profiles; Drug treatment overviews; European legal database on drugs; Evaluation instruments bank; Exchange on drug demand reduction action; Promotional brochures: 4 prepared ; Media products: 174 products of various kinds; Participation in 162 international conferences/meetings ; Organisation of 27 technical and scientific meetings.
The Observatory’s full accounts are available from the following address:
http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=public.Content&nnodeid=6465&sLanguageiso=EN
PURPOSE: presentation of the final accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) for the 2006 financial year.
CONTENT: this document sets out a detailed account of the implementation of the EMCDDA’s 2006 budget. It indicates that EMCDDA’s final budget amounted to 13.12 million EUR in 2006 (compared with 12.8 million EUR in 2005) 92% of which is derived from a Community subsidy.
In terms of personnel, the EMCDDA, whose headquarters are in Lisbon (Portugal) had 77 posts in its establishment plan 68 of which are occupied and 23 others (auxiliary contracts, contract staff and temporary replacements) amounting to 91 posts undertaking operational, administrative or mixed tasks. Expenditure on personnel in 2006 represented 6.373 million EUR.
The main task of the EMCDDA is to provide the Union and its Member States with information regarding illegal drugs in the Union and their effects on Europeans. In particular, it collects data, carries out surveys, disseminates information, improves the coordination between national and Community actions in this field and promotes the integration of information on drugs in international programmes.
In 2006, the EMCDDA’s activities mainly focused on:
The REITOX network : the Observatory manages a computerised network for the collection and exchange of information called Reitox (the European Information Network on Drugs and Drug Addiction); this network links together the national drugs information networks, specialised centres in Member States and the information systems of international organisations cooperating with the Observatory.
Publications:
Annual Report on the state of the drugs problem in Europe (23 language versions, publication and interactive website web), Annual report ‘Selected issues’ (EN, publication and interactive website), Statistical bulletin and interactive website including more than 250 tables, 150 illustrations and PDF files, General activity report (annual, EN), ‘Drugnet Europe’ newsletter (4 issues - 2 in five languages, 2 in English), Studies/technical and scientific articles (21), Scientific articles and summaries (16); Other websites: creation/updating/development of content: Country situation summaries; Country data profiles; Drug treatment overviews; European legal database on drugs; Evaluation instruments bank; Exchange on drug demand reduction action; Promotional brochures: 4 prepared ; Media products: 174 products of various kinds; Participation in 162 international conferences/meetings ; Organisation of 27 technical and scientific meetings.
The Observatory’s full accounts are available from the following address:
http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/index.cfm?fuseaction=public.Content&nnodeid=6465&sLanguageiso=EN
Documents
- Final act published in Official Journal: Budget 2009/207
- Final act published in Official Journal: OJ L 088 31.03.2009, p. 0134
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2008)3169
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T6-0147/2008
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A6-0116/2008
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A6-0116/2008
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE402.805
- Committee opinion: PE400.460
- Committee draft report: PE396.692
- Supplementary non-legislative basic document: 05843/2008
- Court of Auditors: opinion, report: N6-0004/2008
- Court of Auditors: opinion, report: OJ C 309 19.12.2007, p. 0001
- Non-legislative basic document: EUR-Lex
- Non-legislative basic document: SEC(2007)1055
- Non-legislative basic document published: EUR-Lex
- Non-legislative basic document published: SEC(2007)1055
- Non-legislative basic document: EUR-Lex SEC(2007)1055
- Court of Auditors: opinion, report: N6-0004/2008 OJ C 309 19.12.2007, p. 0001
- Supplementary non-legislative basic document: 05843/2008
- Committee draft report: PE396.692
- Committee opinion: PE400.460
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE402.805
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A6-0116/2008
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2008)3169
Votes
Rapport Martin H.P. A6-0116/2008 - décision #
PPE-DE
ALDE
Verts/ALE
UEN
GUE/NGL
IND/DEMRapport Martin H.P. A6-0116/2008 - résolution #
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 52 |
2007/2050(DEC)
2008/03/06
CONT
52 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Proposal for a decision on discharge Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 Amendment 2 #
Proposal for a decision on the closure of accounts Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital V V. calling on the Director of the agency to propose, by 1 June 2008 at the latest, practical measures to achieve savings, above all in the area of administrative costs; to explain in detail why administrative costs are unacceptably high; to explain in detail why staff expenditure per post increased by more than11% between the financial year 2006 and the 2008 preliminary draft budget; to explain in detail why the subsidy from the Community budget has continued to increase enormously over the period between 2000 and 2008; and to explain in detail why the cost of staff privileges
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Requests that the performance of the agencies be regularly (and on an ad hoc basis) audited by the Court of Auditors or another independent auditor; considers that this should not be limited to traditional elements of financial management and the proper use of public money, but should also cover administrative efficiency and effectiveness and should include a rating of the financial management of each agency;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 a (new) 36a. Takes the view that in the case of agencies which are continually overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should be made on the basis of vacant posts; is of the opinion that this will lead in the long run to less assigned revenue for the agencies and therefore also to lower administrative costs;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 b (new) 36b. Notes that it is a serious problem that a number of agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement, the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations etc.; considers that the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial Regulation are designed for bigger institutions and that most of the small agencies do not have the critical mass to be able to cope with these regulatory requirements; therefore asks the Commission to look for a rapid solution in order to enhance the effectiveness by grouping the administrative functions of various agencies together, in order to achieve this critical mass (taking into consideration the necessary changes in the basic regulations governing the agencies and their budgetary independence), or urgently to draft specific rules for the agencies (in particular implementing rules for the agencies) which allow them to be in full compliance;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 c (new) 36c. Insists that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget, take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the individual agencies in former years, in particular in year n-1, and, revise the budget requested by the particular agency accordingly; invites its competent committee to respect this revision and, if not undertaken by the Commission, to revise itself the budget in question to a realistic level matching the absorption and implementation capacity of the agency in question;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 d (new) 36d. Recalls its decision on discharge in respect of the financial year 2005, in which it invited the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing agency; invites all relevant institutions in the case of a negative evaluation of the added value of an agency to take the necessary steps by reformulating the mandate of that agency or by closing it; notes that there has not been one single evaluation undertaken by the Commission in 2007; insists that the Commission should present at least 5 such evaluations before the decision on discharge in respect of the financial year 2007, starting with the oldest agencies;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 e (new) 36e. Is of opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 f (new) 36f. Is concerned that a significant number of staff is employed on a temporary basis in a way that could undermine the quality of their work; therefore asks the Commission to improve its monitoring of the implementation of the Staff Regulations by the agencies;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 Amendment 42 #
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39. Calls on the Commission to submit as quickly as possible a proposal to abolish or drastically cut back privileges
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 61 Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 62 Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 63 Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 64 Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 65 Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 66 Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 source: PE-402.805
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/1 |
|
| docs/1/docs/1/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2007:309:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:309:SOM:EN:HTML |
| docs/3 |
|
| docs/4 |
|
| docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE400.460&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/LIBE-AD-400460_EN.html |
| events/0/date |
Old
2007-03-30T00:00:00New
2007-03-29T00:00:00 |
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/0 |
|
| docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE396.692New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE396.692 |
| docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE400.460&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE400.460&secondRef=02 |
| docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE402.805New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE402.805 |
| docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0116_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0116_EN.html |
| docs/6/docs/0/url |
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=14854&j=0&l=en
|
| events/1/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
| events/2/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
| events/3 |
|
| events/3 |
|
| events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20080422&type=CRENew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=20080422&type=CRE |
| events/6 |
|
| events/6 |
|
| events/8/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/B-2-07-09B0_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/B-2-07-09B0_EN.html |
| procedure/final/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/B-2-07-09B0_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/B-2-07-09B0_EN.html |
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 100
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 94
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2007:309:TOCNew
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:309:SOM:EN:HTML |
| docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-116&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0116_EN.html |
| docs/6/body |
EC
|
| events/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A6-2008-116&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-6-2008-0116_EN.html |
| events/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2008-147New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2008-0147_EN.html |
| events/8/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B[%g]-2009-207&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/B-2-07-09B0_EN.html |
| procedure/final/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=MOTION&reference=B[%g]-2009-207&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/B-2-07-09B0_EN.html |
| activities |
|
| commission |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| council |
|
| docs |
|
| events |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
CONT/6/53863New
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 94
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 094
|
| procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
| activities/6/docs |
|
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|