Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | CONT | AYALA SENDER Inés ( S&D) | MACOVEI Monica ( PPE), MULDER Jan ( ALDE), STAES Bart ( Verts/ALE), ANDREASEN Marta ( ECR), VANHECKE Frank ( EFD) |
Committee Opinion | DEVE |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Events
The European Parliament adopted by 453 votes to 24, with 52 abstentions, a resolution on the Annual Report 2012 on the Protection of the EU’s Financial Interests – Fight against fraud.
According to Commission estimates, EUR 1 000 000 000 000 of potential tax revenue is lost to tax fraud, tax evasion, tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning in the EU every year, representing an approximate annual cost of EUR 2 000 for every European citizen.
The scale of fraud and tax avoidance in any form and of corruption in the EU undermines citizens’ trust and confidence in the Union. In order to give greater guarantees of integrity and transparency with regard to public spending , the report makes the following recommendations:
Strengthening the European Union’s anti-fraud machinery : in 2012, there was virtually no change in 2012, compared with 2011, in the number of fraudulent irregularities , with 1 231 cases of irregularity reported as fraudulent, while their financial impact decreased slightly to a total of EUR 392 million. The incidence of fraud was highest in the areas of cohesion policy and agriculture – especially as regards rural development and fisheries – which remain the two sectors of greatest concern, suffering an estimated financial impact from fraud of EUR 279 million and EUR 143 million respectively.
The number of cases of non-fraudulent irregularity reported to the Commission in 2012 increased by approximately 6% compared with 2011, with an associated financial impact of approximately EUR 29 billion (more than double the corresponding figure for 2011 and affecting in particular cohesion policy and direct expenditure). The considerable increase in 2012, to a value of EUR 3.7 billion, in corrective measures adopted by the Commission vis-à-vis Member States was stressed.
Members stressed the need to strengthen the cooperation and coordination between the Commission and the Member States in order to ensure that the Union’s financial interests are protected effectively. They proposed looking into the possibility of establishing a team of European customs officials specialised in combating fraud to work alongside national customs authorities.
The resolution welcomed the main initiatives taken by the Commission, at Parliament’s request, to shape a new EU legislative landscape for anti-fraud policy , and in particular the proposal for a directive on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law, as well as the proposal for a Council regulation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. It called on the Council not to finalise negotiations in a rush and to avoid a premature transition to the enhanced cooperation procedure, in order to develop a robust European legal framework.
The Commission, at the time of initiating the procedure for submission of the annual PIF report, is asked to submit to Parliament a report on the monitoring and implementation of the recommendations adopted by Parliament following the PIF report of the previous year.
Parliament called on Member States to follow-up on the Commission’s recommendations made in 2011 and 2012 in particular 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.
Revenue : while own resources are no longer the main source of EU budget revenue, they continue to make up 20% of it. The proper collection of VAT and customs duties has direct repercussions not only on Member States’ economies and the Union budget, but also on European taxpayers.
Parliament stressed that the Commission and Member States should continue to give absolute priority to combating fraud and tax evasion , for which it is necessary to develop a strategy for strengthened and multidimensional cooperation and coordination between Member States themselves and with the Commission. Special attention should be paid to the development of mechanisms for prevention and early detection , evaluation of results, improved revenue collection and more effective customs transit monitoring.
Excise Movement Control System (EMCS) : according to the enforcement agencies, increased abuse of the Excise Movement Control System (EMCS) by criminal groups has been observed.
The Commission is asked to take initiative in tightening the access rights of the EMCS to include a comprehensive history of compliance before trading so that it is possible to grant business actors the status of ‘empowered economic operator’ (‘trusted business actors’) so that only these actors could operate under EMCS directly by themselves.
VAT : according to a study published in 2013, EUR 193 000 000 000 in VAT revenue (1.5% of GDP) was lost in 2011 through non-compliance or non-recovery.
The resolution stresses the importance of implementing new strategies and making more efficient use of existing EU structures in order to combat VAT fraud more vigorously, as well as the need to simplify the VAT system for companies throughout Europe. Member States should reform their national tax systems , making them simpler, fairer and more effective so as to facilitate compliance, prevent, deter and sanction tax fraud and evasion, and boost the efficiency of tax collection.
Irregularities reported as fraudulent : i t is noted that it takes on average two years and seven months from the start of a fraudulent practice until the moment it is detected; another seven or eight months lapse before the irregularity is reported to the Commission. The Commission is asked to draw up Europe-wide guidelines for the reporting of fraudulent irregularities and/or other irregularities to OLAF.
Parliament recalled that the staff of the European institutions are required, without delay and without any risk of their responsibility being called into question as a result, to notify OLAF of any fraud which has come to their attention in the fulfilment of their duties. They called for corruption with an impact on the financial interests of the EU to be considered as fraud for the purposes of Article 325(5) TFEU and to be included in the Commission’s annual report. Members regretted, however, the lack of information on the amounts to be recovered and the recovery rates related to cohesion policy for the financial year 2012. In addition, the Member States are asked to cooperate with and provide full and reliable information to the Commission regarding the beneficiaries of the EU funds managed by Member States.
OLAF : while welcoming the initial effects of the reorganisation and restructuring of OLAF’s investigative procedures, Parliament underlined the risk of a lack of consistency in the overall investigation selection procedure. In its view, future investigation policy priorities (IPPs) should always be subject to a thorough evaluation based on concrete needs, measurable indicators and lessons learnt from past IPPs. OLAF is called on to provide detailed information on the way in which it decides on IPPs.
Taking note of the OLAF 2012 annual report, Parliament called for: (i) closer analysis of the sources of the information received at the case selection stage; (ii) exhaustive information on the nature of follow-up to OLAF recommendations; (iii) further information on the number of on-the-spot checks that were carried out in each of the Member States and the number of investigations. Parliament recognised that the increase in the amount of information coming from the public sector may be a positive sign of improved cooperation with Member States.
In general, Members asked for an improvement in OLAF’s governance through the continual revision and consolidation of its core investigative processes. They emphasised, in this connection, particular importance to monitoring the observance of procedural safeguards and the fundamental rights of persons affected by investigations.
New-look European anti-fraud policy and programmes : Parliament welcomed all of the Commission initiatives to fight fraud in a generally more effective manner, with innovative actions to be taken as regards penalties. The introduction of anti-fraud clauses in international agreements, administrative cooperation agreements and in the field of public procurement is also a further significant step in terms of defending the Union’s financial interests and combating corruption.
In February 2014, the first EU anti-corruption report by the Commission indicated that corruption affects all Member States in very different ways and costs the EU economy around EUR 120 billion annually. Members welcomed all of the suggestions for intensifying exchanges of current good practice and identifying relevant new measures to be taken at EU level.
As regards the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office , the resolution stressed the need to establish a consistent, complementary system for protecting the Union’s financial interests. It urged the Commission to provide a clear EU-level definition of the roles of the future European Public Prosecutor’s Office, Eurojust and OLAF, delimiting their respective remits.
The Committee on Budgetary Control adopted an own-initiative report by Inés AYALA SENDER (S&D, ES) on the Annual Report 2012 on the Protection of the EU’s Financial Interests – Fight against fraud.
According to Commission estimates, EUR 1 000 000 000 000 of potential tax revenue is lost to tax fraud, tax evasion, tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning in the EU every year, representing an approximate annual cost of EUR 2 000 for every European citizen.
The scale of fraud and tax avoidance in any form and of corruption in the EU undermines citizens’ trust and confidence in the Union. In order to give greater guarantees of integrity and transparency with regard to public spending , the report makes the following recommendations:
Strengthening the European Union’s anti-fraud machinery : Members stressed the need to strengthen the cooperation and coordination between the Commission and the Member States in order to ensure that the Union’s financial interests are protected effectively. They proposed looking into the possibility of establishing a team of European customs officials specialised in combating fraud to work alongside national customs authorities.
The report welcomed the main initiatives taken by the Commission, at Parliament’s request, to shape a new EU legislative landscape for anti-fraud policy , and in particular the proposal for a directive on the fight against fraud to the Union’s financial interests by means of criminal law, as well as the proposal for a Council regulation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. It called on the Council not to finalise negotiations in a rush and to avoid a premature transition to the enhanced cooperation procedure, in order to develop a robust European legal framework.
The Commission, at the time of initiating the procedure for submission of the annual PIF report, is asked to submit to Parliament a report on the monitoring and implementation of the recommendations adopted by Parliament following the PIF report of the previous year. Members called for clear distinctions to be made between cases of fraud, cases of error and cases of irregularity in the 2013 Annual Report.
Revenue : while own resources are no longer the main source of EU budget revenue, they continue to make up 20% of it. The proper collection of VAT and customs duties has direct repercussions not only on Member States’ economies and the Union budget, but also on European taxpayers.
Members stressed that the Commission and Member States should continue to give absolute priority to combating fraud and tax evasion , for which it is necessary to develop a strategy for strengthened and multidimensional cooperation and coordination between Member States themselves and with the Commission. Special attention should be paid to the development of mechanisms for prevention and early detection , evaluation of results, improved revenue collection and more effective customs transit monitoring.
Excise Movement Control System (EMCS) : according to the enforcement agencies, increased abuse of the Excise Movement Control System (EMCS) by criminal groups has been observed. Members believe believes that there is a lack of physical controls of goods being transported under the EMCS and that additional investment in controls may result in an increase in collected taxes, and an increase in prevented tax evasion.
The Commission is asked to take initiative in tightening the access rights of the EMCS to include a comprehensive history of compliance before trading so that it is possible to grant business actors the status of ‘empowered economic operator’ (‘trusted business actors’) so that only these actors could operate under EMCS directly by themselves.
VAT : according to a study published in 2013, EUR 193 000 000 000 in VAT revenue (1.5% of GDP) was lost in 2011 through non-compliance or non-recovery.
The report stresses the importance of implementing new strategies and making more efficient use of existing EU structures in order to combat VAT fraud more vigorously, as well as the need to simplify the VAT system for companies throughout Europe. Member States should reform their national tax systems , making them simpler, fairer and more effective so as to facilitate compliance, prevent, deter and sanction tax fraud and evasion, and boost the efficiency of tax collection.
Irregularities reported as fraudulent : the number of cases of fraudulent irregularity and their impact reported in 2012 were virtually the same as those of the previous year. It is noted that it takes on average two years and seven months from the start of a fraudulent practice until the moment it is detected; furthermore, that another seven or eight months lapse before the irregularity is reported to the Commission. The Commission is asked to draw up Europe-wide guidelines for the reporting of fraudulent irregularities and/or other irregularities to OLAF.
Members recalled that the staff of the European institutions are required, without delay and without any risk of their responsibility being called into question as a result, to notify OLAF of any fraud which has come to their attention in the fulfilment of their duties. They called for corruption with an impact on the financial interests of the EU to be considered as fraud for the purposes of Article 325(5) TFEU and to be included in the Commission’s annual report. In addition, the Member States are asked to cooperate with and provide full and reliable information to the Commission regarding the beneficiaries of the EU funds managed by Member States.
OLAF : while welcoming the initial effects of the reorganisation and restructuring of OLAF’s investigative procedures, Members underlined the risk of a lack of consistency in the overall investigation selection procedure. In their view, future investigation policy priorities (IPPs) should always be subject to a thorough evaluation based on concrete needs, measurable indicators and lessons learnt from past IPPs. OLAF is called on to provide detailed information on the way in which it decides on IPPs.
In general, Members asked for an improvement in OLAF’s governance through the continual revision and consolidation of its core investigative processes. They emphasised, in this connection, particular importance to monitoring the observance of procedural safeguards and the fundamental rights of persons affected by investigations.
New-look European anti-fraud policy and programmes : Members welcomed all of the Commission initiatives to fight fraud in a generally more effective manner, with innovative actions to be taken as regards penalties. The introduction of anti-fraud clauses in international agreements, administrative cooperation agreements and in the field of public procurement is also a further significant step in terms of defending the Union’s financial interests and combating corruption.
In February 2014, the first EU anti-corruption report by the Commission indicated that corruption affects all Member States in very different ways and costs the EU economy around EUR 120 billion annually. Members welcomed all of the suggestions for intensifying exchanges of current good practice and identifying relevant new measures to be taken at EU level.
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2014)469
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T7-0338/2014
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A7-0195/2014
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE526.047
- Committee draft report: PE521.833
- Committee draft report: PE521.833
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE526.047
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2014)469
Activities
- Inés AYALA SENDER
- Ingeborg GRÄSSLE
- Roberta ANGELILLI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Mario BORGHEZIO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Monica MACOVEI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jan MULDER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Paul RÜBIG
Plenary Speeches (1)
- László SURJÁN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Nikola VULJANIĆ
Plenary Speeches (1)
Votes
A7-0195/2014 - Inés Ayala Sender - Résolution #
Amendments | Dossier |
76 |
2013/2132(INI)
2014/02/25
CONT
76 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution 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 10 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A c (new) Ac. whereas the wide diversity of legal systems and traditions within the EU means that protection of its financial interests against fraud and any other illegal activity is a particularly demanding and unavoidable challenge;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas, t
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution 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 13 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas the wide diversity of legal systems and traditions within the EU means that protection of its financial interests against fraud and any other illegal activity is a particularly demanding and unavoidable challenge;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas the scale of
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that it is incumbent on both the Commission and the Member States to do everything in their power to
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Stresses that fraud is an act of intentional wrongdoing and a criminal offence, while an irregularity is a failure to comply with a rule; regrets that the Commission’s report fails to consider fraud in detail and deals with irregularities very broadly; points out that Article 325 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) relates to fraud, not irregularities, and calls for a distinction to be made between fraud and errors or irregularities;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Calls on the Commission, at the time of initiating the procedure for submission of the annual PIF report, to submit to Parliament a report on the monitoring and implementation of the recommendations adopted by the EP following the PIF report of the previous year, and give a reasoned explanation regarding those it has not considered or has been unable to comply with; calls on OLAF to do the same in respect of measures being sought by Parliament in this report;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Welcomes the main initiatives taken by the Commission, at the European Parliament
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution 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
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 7 a (new) - having regard to the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the protection of the financial interests of the European Union by criminal law and by administrative investigations - an integrated policy to safeguard taxpayers' money (COM (2011) 293 final);
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Notes that there was virtually no change in 2012, as against 2011, in the number of fraudulent irregularities
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution 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
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Proposes looking into the possibility of setting up a team of European customs officials specialised in combating fraud to work alongside national customs authorities;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution 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 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Calls on the Commission periodically to carry out a comparative analysis of differences in the effectiveness of national systems for the collection of traditional own resources, including the identification and dissemination of best practices regarding efficient recovery process in all Member States, and to propose suitable measures where necessary;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 b (new) 9b. Expresses concern that, although the number of non-fraudulent irregularities reported in 2012 to be affecting income from traditional own resources has remained stable, the total remains 20% above the average for 2008-2012;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 a (new) - having regard to the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on an Action Plan to strengthen the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion (COM (2012) 722 final);
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11b. understands that increased controls might also have the additional benefit of removing those businesses, or front companies, that were only created by criminals to facilitate their fraud; notes that up to date dispatch and receipt of excise goods is confirmed in EMCS by business subjects themselves; requests the Commission to take initiative for a tightening of the EMCS access rights, to include a comprehensive history of compliance before trading so that it is possible to grant business subjects the status of "empowered economic operator" ("trusted business subject") so that only these subjects could operate EMCS directly by themselves.;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 c (new) 11c. demands that verification checks conducted by Member States on people and companies applying to the register need to be more robust and comprehensive; understands that goods can easily be miss-declared to evade excise duties; demands therefore a higher degree of cooperation with tax authorities;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 d (new) 11d. considers that time limits allowed for the excise movements to go between authorised warehouses are unrealistically long; understands that this allows multiple movements on the same declaration and diversion before the delivery date is entered in the system; demands that competent institution of the Member State of the declared destination and the new destination must be informed about changes immediately by the consignor; demands furthermore that the maximum allowed time for submission of the report on the receipt of the excise goods shall be one working day and furthermore that journey time should be calculated and set up for each transportation in accordance with the type of the means of transport used and distance between places of dispatch and destination;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 e (new) 11e. finds that the guarantees required to establish bonded warehouses are too low in comparison to the value of the excise goods; considers that there should be a variable depending on the type of goods and the amount of trade actually occurring;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 f (new) 11f. Is concerned since Member States have implemented their own EMCS systems according to broadly defined requirements by the European Commission; requests therefore the Commission to take initiative for a more uniform system across the EU;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution 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, d
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. notes that it takes on average 2 years and 7 months between the start of a fraudulent practice and the moment it is detected; notes furthermore that another 7 or 8 months elapse before the irregularity is reported to the Commission; is concerned since guidelines on the moments when Member States report fraudulent irregularities and/or other irregularities to OLAF, if such guideline exist in a Member State at all, differ not only across the individual Member States, but also across policy areas; expects the Commission to draw up European wide guidelines for the reporting of fraudulent irregularities and/or other irregularities to OLAF;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. Recommends that the staff of the European institutions be required, without delay and without any question of their responsibility being called into question as a result, to notify OLAF of any frauds which have come to their attention in the fulfilment of their duties;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Observes that, on the expenditure side,
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution 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, o
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 15 – having regard to the
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18a. Calls for corruption with an impact on the financial interests of the European Union to be considered as fraud for the purposes of Article 325(5) TFEU and to be included in the Commission’s annual report on the protection of the European Union’s financial interests - fight against fraud;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution 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) 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 22. Highlights the continuing wide divergence in Member States
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution 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) 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 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. requests the Court of Auditors to follow-up its previous special reports on the performance of OLAF in order to determine the effects of the reorganization;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution 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 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Expresses satisfaction that the reform of the rules governing the functioning of OLAF has finally been adopted, and welcomes the communication aimed at ‘Improving OLAF’s governance and reinforcing procedural safeguards in investigations: a step-by-step approach to accompany the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office’ (COM(2013)0533); notes the first positive effects of the reorganisation and restructuring of OLAF’s investigative procedures, leading to clarification of the procedural rights of those subject to investigation, more efficient investigation procedures and a shortening of the average length of time for processing investigations, particularly at the stage of case selection, as well as improved cooperation and dialogue with its partners;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 15 a (new) - having regard to Directive 2014/.../EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the award of concession contracts, 1a
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Expresses satisfaction that the reform of the rules governing the functioning of OLAF has finally been adopted, and welcomes the communication aimed at ‘Improving OLAF’s governance and reinforcing procedural safeguards in
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution 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) 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 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 – introductory part 24. Takes note of the OLAF 2012 annual report and
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 – point ii (ii) recognises that the increase in the number of information coming in from the public sector may be a positive sign of improved cooperation with Member States; notes that OLAF changed way in which it counts incoming information; notes that due to the lifecycle of the programming period more fraudulent irregularities have been reported in 2012 by public authorities since programmes were closed;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 – point iii (iii) reiterates its request for exhaustive information on the nature of follow-up to OLAF recommendations
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 – point iii a (new) (iiia) reiterates its request to receive more information on the number of on-the-spot checks were carried out in each of the Member States;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 – point iii b (new) (iiib) requests again to receive information on the number of investigations by each investigation area (agriculture, cigarettes, customs, internal EU policies, external aid, internal investigations, structural funds, VAT) for each Member State
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 – point iii c (new) (iiic) requests again detailed information in the Annual Reports on the duration of investigations broken down by external, internal, coordination and criminal assistance cases grouped by on-going cases and cases closed at year end;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 – point iii d (new) (iiid) requests again information on the number of on-going and closed investigations in each European institution;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution 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 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Takes note of the Supervisory Committee's Opinion 1/2014 on OLAF Investigation Policy Priorities (IPP) and endorses its recommendations, especially with regard to establishing guidelines on the application of financial indicators as a proportionality criterion which would give the unit responsible for case selection a clearer guidance in this respect; expects, furthermore, that future evolution in the IPPs will involve regular dialogue between the Director General of OLAF and the Directors General whose policy areas are covered by the IPPs and the financial indicators therein;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 b (new) 25b. Takes note of the Supervisory Committee's remarks as regards OLAF's "de minimis" policy; recalls that the "de minimis" policy is not the only criterion for case selection and that its objective is to ensure that OLAF concentrates its efforts and resources on more serious and complex cases and that human resources are allocated in order to maximise the recovery of the amounts unduly spent from the EU budget; calls on the Director General to take the Supervisory Committee's views into consideration when reviewing OLAF's "de minimis" policy; expects to be duly informed about the Director General's decision in this respect;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 6 New-look European anti-fraud policy and programmes
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 a (new) 26a. recalls that according to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1848/2006 of 14 December 2006, Member States shall provide information on the initiation or abandonment of any procedures for imposing administrative or criminal sanctions related to the notified irregularities as well as of the main results of such procedures; recalls further that this information shall also indicate the character of the sanctions applied and/or whether the sanctions in question relate to the application of Community and/or national legislation, including a reference to the Community and/or national rules in which the sanctions are laid down; requests to be informed in detail with a comprehensive analysis on the reports received under Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1848/2006;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 a (new) 26a. Notes that Member States must introduce anti-fraud monitoring procedures and that statistics regarding criminal cases and their outcome are incomplete, making it hard to evaluate fraud investigation and prosecution procedures in the Member States and the effectiveness of future basic policies;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 b (new) 26b. Points out that, for many years, Member States have been failing to pass on data promptly or have been providing inaccurate data, making it impossible to compare the data and objectively assess the extent of fraud in the EU Member States; notes that the European Parliament, the Commission and OLAF are unable properly to fulfil their task of assessing the situation and formulating recommendations; reiterates that this state of affairs is therefore inadmissible;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 c (new) 26c. Calls on the Commission to assume full responsibility for the recovery of funds unduly paid into the EU budget and to establish uniform reporting principles in all Member States with a view to ensuring comparable, reliable and adequate data collection;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Welcomes the
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Welcomes the
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Stresses that. in this connection, faced with the current challenges arising from the underlying economic and financial crisis, European citizens are calling for guarantees of total integrity and transparency in public spending;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution 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 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 b (new) 27b. Calls on the Court of Auditors to study the problem and make recommendations based on its own perspective and experience, in the form of one or more reports on the main issues identified by the Commission report on corruption, taking particular account of findings for individual countries;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution 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 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Supports the Commission and OLAF on the introduction of an action plan to combat cigarette smuggling and insists that the levels of resources and expertise applied to this area in the past within OLAF should be restored;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29.
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Supports the Commission and OLAF on the introduction of an action plan to combat cigarette smuggling; demands a better cooperation between OLAF and EUROPOL in that regard;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31.
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution 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;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas protection of the financial interests of the EU is a key element of the EU policy agenda to strengthen and increase the confidence of citizens and ensure that their money is used properly;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A b (new) Ab. whereas the Treaty of Lisbon has substantially strengthened the instruments available to protect the financial interests of the EU, requiring both the EU and its Member States to combat all forms of illegal activity affecting the financial interests of the EU;
source: PE-526.047
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
events/3/docs |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE521.833New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CONT-PR-521833_EN.html |
docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE526.047New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CONT-AM-526047_EN.html |
events/0/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
events/1/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/2 |
|
events/2 |
|
events/3/docs |
|
events/5 |
|
events/5 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 150
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 052
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
docs/2/body |
EC
|
events/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2014-0195&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2014-0195_EN.html |
events/4 |
|
events/4 |
|
events/5 |
|
events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2014-0338New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2014-0338_EN.html |
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 150 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
CONT/7/13187New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 052
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
activities/0/committees |
|
activities/0/date |
Old
2014-04-02T00:00:00New
2013-07-04T00:00:00 |
activities/0/type |
Old
Debate in ParliamentNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading |
activities/1/committees/0/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
4de182da0fb8127435bdbb40New
4f1ac616b819f25efd00001b |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/0/group |
Old
EPPNew
PPE |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/0/mepref |
Old
4de186f10fb8127435bdc11cNew
4f1ad952b819f207b300000e |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/0/name |
Old
MACOVEI Monica LuisaNew
MACOVEI Monica |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/1/mepref |
Old
4de186b20fb8127435bdc0c1New
4f1ac452b819f25896000005 |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/2/mepref |
Old
4de188650fb8127435bdc331New
4f1adb8fb819f207b30000cf |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/3/mepref |
Old
4de182e40fb8127435bdbb4bNew
4f1ac5e7b819f25efd00000a |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
4de1888a0fb8127435bdc36aNew
4f1adb84b819f207b30000cb |
activities/1/committees/0/shadows/5/mepref |
Old
4de189170fb8127435bdc41fNew
4f1adc48b819f207b300010e |
activities/1/date |
Old
2013-07-04T00:00:00New
2014-03-17T00:00:00 |
activities/1/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading |
activities/2/docs/0/text |
|
activities/3/committees |
|
activities/3/date |
Old
2014-03-17T00:00:00New
2014-04-02T00:00:00 |
activities/3/docs |
|
activities/3/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Debate in Parliament |
activities/4/docs/0/text |
|
activities/4/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2014-0338
|
committees/0/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
4de182da0fb8127435bdbb40New
4f1ac616b819f25efd00001b |
committees/0/shadows/0/group |
Old
EPPNew
PPE |
committees/0/shadows/0/mepref |
Old
4de186f10fb8127435bdc11cNew
4f1ad952b819f207b300000e |
committees/0/shadows/0/name |
Old
MACOVEI Monica LuisaNew
MACOVEI Monica |
committees/0/shadows/1/mepref |
Old
4de186b20fb8127435bdc0c1New
4f1ac452b819f25896000005 |
committees/0/shadows/2/mepref |
Old
4de188650fb8127435bdc331New
4f1adb8fb819f207b30000cf |
committees/0/shadows/3/mepref |
Old
4de182e40fb8127435bdbb4bNew
4f1ac5e7b819f25efd00000a |
committees/0/shadows/4/mepref |
Old
4de1888a0fb8127435bdc36aNew
4f1adb84b819f207b30000cb |
committees/0/shadows/5/mepref |
Old
4de189170fb8127435bdc41fNew
4f1adc48b819f207b300010e |
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 048New
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052 |
activities/4 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stageNew
Procedure completed |
activities/4 |
|
activities/3/type |
Old
Debate scheduledNew
Debate in Parliament |
activities/4/type |
Old
Vote in plenary scheduledNew
Vote scheduled |
activities/3/type |
Old
Debate in plenary scheduledNew
Debate scheduled |
activities/2/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2014-0195&language=EN
|
activities/2 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage |
activities/1 |
|
activities/1/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Debate in plenary scheduled |
activities/2 |
|
activities/1/date |
Old
2014-03-10T00:00:00New
2014-04-02T00:00:00 |
activities/1/date |
Old
2014-04-02T00:00:00New
2014-03-10T00:00:00 |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
activities/1/date |
Old
2014-02-27T00:00:00New
2014-04-02T00:00:00 |
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/0 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/1 |
|
committees/0/shadows/0 |
|
committees/0/shadows/1 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/shadows/2 |
|
committees/0/shadows/2 |
|
activities/1 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/date |
2013-08-27T00:00:00
|
activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
activities/0/committees/0/shadows |
|
committees/0/date |
2013-08-27T00:00:00
|
committees/0/rapporteur |
|
committees/0/shadows |
|
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|