title: 2011/619/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2011 on the closure of the accounts of the European Police College for the financial year 2009#Resolution of the European Parliament of 10 May 2011 on the 2009 discharge: performance, financial management and control of EU agencies

text:
               27.9.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 250/268

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2011
   on the closure of the accounts of the European Police College for the financial year 2009
   (2011/619/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Police College for the financial year 2009,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Police College for the financial year 2009, together with the College’s replies (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 15 February 2011 (05892/2011 — C7-0052/2011),

               —

               having regard to Article 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Council Decision 2005/681/JHA of 20 September 2005 establishing the European Police College (CEPOL) (3), and in particular Article 16 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (4), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0150/2011),

               1.

               Postpones the closure of the accounts of the European Police College for the financial year 2009;

               2.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision to the Director of the European Police College, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Jerzy BUZEK

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 338, 14.12.2010, p. 137.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 256, 1.10.2005, p. 63.

      (4)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

      RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
      of 10 May 2011
      on the 2009 discharge: performance, financial management and control of EU agencies
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

                  having regard to the report of 15 October 2008 from the Commission to the European Parliament on the follow-up to 2006 discharge decisions (COM(2008) 629) and the accompanying Commission Staff Working Document (SEC(2008) 2579),

                  —

                  having regard to the Commission communication of 11 March 2008 entitled ‘European agencies — the way forward’ (COM(2008) 135),

                  —

                  having regard to its resolution of 5 May 2010 on the 2008 discharge: performance, financial management and control of EU agencies (1),

                  —

                  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2),

                  —

                  having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (3), and in particular Article 96 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Special Report No 5/2008 of the Court of Auditors entitled ‘The European Union’s agencies: getting results’,

                  —

                  having regard to the specific annual reports (4) of the Court of Auditors on the annual accounts of the decentralised agencies for the financial year 2009,

                  —

                  having regard to its study entitled ‘Opportunity and feasibility of establishing common support services for EU agencies’ issued on 7 April 2009,

                  —

                  having regard to its Declaration of 18 May 2010 on the Union’s efforts in combating corruption (5),

                  —

                  having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

                  —

                  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0149/2011),

                  A.

                  whereas this resolution contains, for each body within the meaning of Article 185 of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002, the horizontal observations accompanying the discharge decisions in accordance with Article 96 of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 and Article 3 of Annex VI to Parliament’s Rules of Procedure,

                  B.

                  whereas there has been an unprecedented increase in the number of agencies over recent years, and whereas this has enabled some of the Commission’s tasks to be outsourced,

                  C.

                  whereas, following the adoption of the abovementioned Commission communication of 11 March 2008, Parliament, the Council and the Commission relaunched the project of defining a common framework for the agencies and, in 2009, set up an Interinstitutional Working Group on Agencies,

                  D.

                  whereas this Interinstitutional Working Group met for the third time at political level on 10 November 2010 and whereas the points discussed were: the criteria for setting up new agencies, the choice of the agencies’ seat and seat agreement, the composition of management boards, the appointment procedures for directors, evaluation and performance, the multiannual programme, and the administrative support,

                  E.

                  whereas the Court of Auditors is also planning to reflect on the agencies’ performance and present a Special Report on cost benchmarking on Union agencies by the end of 2011,

                  F.

                  whereas Union contributions to the decentralised agencies drastically increased between 2000 and 2011,

                  G.

                  whereas Parliament’s Declaration of 18 May 2010 on the Union’s efforts in combating corruption calls on the Commission and the relevant Union agencies to take all necessary measures and provide sufficient resources to ensure that Union funds are not subject to corruption, and to adopt dissuasive sanctions where corruption and fraud are found,

            I.   COMMON CHALLENGES ON FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

         Carry-over and cancellation of operational appropriations

                  1.

                  Notes that the Court of Auditors has again drawn attention to a large volume of carry-overs and cancellations of operational appropriations by several agencies in the financial year 2009; further notes the existence of unused budgetary lines and the high number of transfers in some of the agencies; calls on the agencies concerned to step up their efforts to improve financial and budgetary planning and programming;

                  2.

                  Acknowledges the problems arising from the multiannual nature of many programmes and the time-lag between the receipt of fees and the execution and consecutive payment of the corresponding tasks; nevertheless stresses that the resultant expenditure should be predictable and a solution that respects the annuality principle of the Union budget should be found;

                  3.

                  Points out that the high level of carry-overs and cancellations is often indicative of the inability of an agency to manage a large increase in its budget; inquires whether it would not be more responsible for budgetary authorities, in future, to take greater care in deciding on increases in an agency’s budget in the light of the time needed to carry out the new activities;

         Cash management

                  4.

                  Calls on the agencies to enhance their annual forecast of cash needs; notes, in fact, that agencies often record high cash holdings and, therefore, encourages them to follow the good example of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) which, for the year 2009, enhanced its forecast by submitting to the relevant Commission’s services, and then constantly updating, a supporting document which justifies its quarterly requests for payment;

         Weaknesses in procurement procedures

                  5.

                  Is concerned, once again, by the Court of Auditors’ findings that several agencies had deficiencies in procurement procedures;

                  6.

                  Calls, accordingly, on the agencies to strengthen their internal controls to make sure that contracts and procurement procedures are correctly applied; is, in fact, not ready to accept the chronic inability to put in place a control system which avoids or detects in time persistent errors undermining the legality and regularity of the agencies’ transactions;

                  7.

                  Urges, in this respect, the agencies to:

                              —

                              improve the transparency of estimates and responsibility of projects,

                              —

                              strengthen their procurement authorisation at the financing decision and work-programme level,

                              —

                              ensure that the disclosure of exceptions in their Annual Activity Report is made in a comprehensive manner,

                              —

                              ensure adequate follow up of potential irregularities,

                              —

                              develop and report on ex-post controls;

                  8.

                  Encourages, in addition, the agencies to develop, and then regularly update, a comprehensive table outlining their financial circuits and responsibilities of the financial and operational actors;

                  9.

                  Calls on all the agencies to make available on their website a list of all the contracts awarded over the last three years at least, and for the Commission to continue its efforts to make this information more accessible and to finally integrate it into its financial transparency system;

                  10.

                  Congratulates Eurojust, nevertheless, for having set up measures for estimating the market value of relevant products and services before opening their procurement procedures; considers this initiative an important practice to be followed by other agencies; welcomes, in addition, Eurojust’s Annual Procurement Plan for 2009 which greatly helped that agency’s units and services in the management of its tenders; stresses, in particular, that these initiatives enhance the authorising officer’s guidance and control;

         Grant management

                  11.

                  Considers it important that the agencies improve their grant management by:

                              —

                              carrying out on-the-spot checks on the grant beneficiaries,

                              —

                              promoting standard unit costs per categories instead of grants based on reimbursements of eligible costs,

                              —

                              clearly describing, communicating and monitoring the actors’ responsibilities,

                              —

                              providing an operational plan agreed by all actors;

            II.   COMMON CHALLENGES ON HUMAN RESOURCES

         Recruitment procedures

                  12.

                  Notes in several agencies deficiencies in staff selection procedures which put at risk the transparency of these procedures and/or infringe the principle of equal treatment in the application of the eligibility criteria; acknowledges, in particular, that the Court of Auditors repeatedly reports the following deficiencies:

                              —

                              no evidence exists whether the selection criteria and the thresholds that candidates have to meet to be invited to written tests/interviews are established before the evaluation process begins,

                              —

                              insufficient documentation of recruitment procedures,

                              —

                              unequal treatment in the recruitment procedure for internal/external candidates,

                              —

                              limited competition,

                        and considers that these deficiencies could reduce the ability of the agencies to counter possible allegations of arbitrary decisions on staff recruitment; considers, also that, to the extent that competition is limited, resulting recruitments may not represent the optimal choice and human and financial resources may be used inefficiently;

                  13.

                  Calls for the establishment of a system to cross-check between the agencies for instances of misconduct or mismanagement by an individual at an earlier agency-employer, when an application is made for employment by that individual at another agency;

                  14.

                  Calls, accordingly, on the agencies to take the necessary measures to increase the objectivity and transparency of their recruitment processes; considers, in this respect, that Frontex’s initiative to adopt implementing rules and internal guidelines for the members of its selection committees is an important practice to be followed by other agencies; welcomes, in particular, the initiative of Frontex to adopt a recruitment policy which includes concrete actions, such as:

                              —

                              respecting a deadline when nominating the selection board members,

                              —

                              prior preparation of the interview questions and content of the written test,

                              —

                              assessment of written tests anonymously,

                              —

                              model answers for interview questions and written tests,

                              —

                              minutes recording the decision for any recruitment,

                              —

                              an e-recruitment tool to facilitate the recruitment and the selection process,

                        and stresses the need to rigorously implement this policy and to prove that it delivers results;

         Execution of recruitment plans

                  15.

                  Notes that the agencies’ recruitment plans are often not fully executed and observes a lack of consistency between budgetary and staff forecasting which could affect the stakeholders’ view on the agencies’ use of their staff; encourages the Union institutions to further explore how recruitment procedures could be simplified; calls, accordingly, on the agencies to put further effort into the implementation and monitoring of their recruitment planning; encourages the agencies also to provide in their work programme and Annual Activity Reports additional information on the allocation and use of their human resources and a description of the impact on the available staff when setting their objectives; calls on the Commission to evaluate the required staff levels in the agencies, compare the actual staff levels at present to the budgeted forecasts, conclude whether the forecasts exceed the needs and capacities of the agencies and provide Parliament with an overview on this issue;

                  16.

                  Takes note of the fact that every year employees, including directors, rotate between the agencies; calls on the Commission to provide Parliament with an overview of all staff members who changed working places from one agency to another since 2008;

                  17.

                  Asks the Commission to provide information on the existence and application of regulations with respect to the relevant duties and obligations of officials provided for in Article 16 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (6) (so called ‘cooling-off periods’) in all the agencies;

         Interim staff

                  18.

                  Calls on the agencies to ensure that sensitive tasks are not assigned to interim staff knowing that interim staff are recruited subject to the limits of the establishment plan; deplores the fact that in some cases agencies hired these staff to perform sensitive tasks or have access to sensitive information; wishes to stress the risks of potential security breaches linked to interim staff’s access to sensitive information or unawareness by them of the procedure to follow;

         Conflicts of interest

                  19.

                  Reminds the agencies of the importance of fully guaranteeing the independence of their staff and experts; encourages, in particular, the agencies to carefully file and assess their controls on this; stresses, in fact, that an agency’s reputation could be affected in cases where it is challenged on the ground of conflicts of interest;

                  20.

                  Calls on the Commission to provide Parliament with a detailed overview of the criteria applied in order to ensure the independence of recruited staff, in particular with respect to possible conflicts of interest, and to apply dissuasive sanctions where any irregularity is found;

                  21.

                  Calls on the Court of Auditors to undertake a comprehensive analysis of the agencies’ approach to the management of situations where there are potential conflicts of interest;

            III.   COMMON CHALLENGES ON THE INTERNAL CONTROL SYSTEM

                  22.

                  Encourages the agencies to further improve their internal control system to underpin their Director’s annual statement of assurance; stresses also the importance for an agency to effectively establish a risk management function for registration of risks and creation of plans for mitigating actions;

         Summaries of the internal audit reports

                  23.

                  Urges the Directors of each agency to fully fulfil their obligation to include in their reports summarising the Internal Audit Service (IAS) reports to the discharge authority:

                              —

                              the number and type of IAS internal audits,

                              —

                              all recommendations (including those which could possibly be refused by the agency), and

                              —

                              all actions taken on these recommendations,

                        welcomes, in this respect, Frontex’s initiative to promote a harmonised structure for addressing these summaries to the discharge authority by all agencies;

                  24.

                  Notes, nevertheless, that certain agencies have provided, on a voluntary basis, their IAS internal audit reports to the discharge authority; considers that this should be the normal practice and expects that all other agencies of the Union will follow this practice while acknowledging that the discharge authority will ensure the confidentiality of these reports;

         IAS’s role

                  25.

                  Considers the role of the IAS as Internal Auditor of the decentralised agencies as crucial; stresses, in particular, that the IAS issues independent opinions on the quality of management and control systems and delivers recommendations for improving the conditions of implementation of operations and for promoting sound financial management of the agencies;

                  26.

                  Calls, accordingly, on the agencies’ Management Boards to duly take into account the recommendations made by the IAS, with a view to rapidly remedying the identified failings;

                  27.

                  Welcomes that, in accordance with Article 86(4) of the Financial Regulation, the agencies forward a summary of the IAS findings to Parliament; reiterates that reports drafted by the IAS are internal and not public documents; notes, further, that this also applies to separate annual reports on the agencies and other bodies; welcomes any cooperation on the part of the agencies to make available those reports upon a specific and justified request by Parliament; urges the Interinstitutional Working Group on Agencies to address the flaw in the legislation concerning IAS reports on the agencies and to propose a solution;

                  28.

                  Strongly encourages the Court of Auditors to include a reference in its annual reports on the agencies to the conclusions of the IAS audits and an assessment of the implementation by the agencies of the IAS recommendations;

                  29.

                  Would also like to stress the IAS’s important role in carrying out audits on the agencies’ performance; regrets, however, that the discharge authority is not necessarily informed about the findings of these audits as a result of the flaw in the agencies’ legislation mentioned in paragraph 27;

         Role of the Internal Audit Capability (IAC)

                  30.

                  Urges agencies to set up an Internal Audit function to provide support and advice to agencies’ Directors on the management of the internal control, and to perform risk assessments and internal audits;

                  31.

                  Welcomes also the initiative of the Community Fisheries Control Agency and the European Maritime Safety Agency of having established a shared IAC; considers this shared service a best practice to be followed by other agencies;

                  32.

                  Welcomes and encourages, in addition, the IAS activity of chairing the Audinet network for agencies, which meets two/three times per year, with the aim of coordinating the IACs work, and exchanging experiences on audit approach, methodology and best practice;

         Pilot audit on the ethical framework

                  33.

                  Congratulates the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop) for being the first agency that voluntarily undertook a pilot audit on the ethical framework in 2009; encourages Cedefop to share this initiative with other agencies;

            IV.   STATEMENT OF ASSURANCE AND ANNUAL ACTIVITY REPORT

         Statement of assurance

                  34.

                  Encourages the agencies to publish their Director’s statement of assurance on their websites and include them in an annex to their Annual Activity Reports confirming that the information contained in their Annual Activity Reports presents a true and fair view, except as otherwise specified in reservations related to defined areas, of revenue and expenditure;

                  35.

                  Underlines the obligation of the agencies’ Directors to declare reservations in their statements of assurance whenever major issues have been outlined by the Court of Auditors or by the IAS of the Commission i.e. critical audit recommendations for underlying weaknesses and where the materiality threshold is exceeded;

         Annual Activity Reports

                  36.

                  Encourages the agencies to standardise the structure of their Annual Activity Reports in accordance with the format used by the Commission’s Directorates-General (DGs) and, accordingly, by including the activities accomplished, the management challenges, the internal audit findings and the human resources improvements concerning the financial year in question; in this regard congratulates the European Environment Agency (EEA) for having already developed its own Annual Activity Report in accordance with the abovementioned structure and considers this best practice to be followed by the other agencies;

                  37.

                  Congratulates, in addition, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and, again, the EEA for having used in their Annual Activity Reports easy-to-read tables/graphics summarising the key performance achievements; considers this as a very welcomed practice which should be followed by other agencies;

                  38.

                  Encourages the Court of Auditors to include a global evaluation of each Annual Activity Report in its specific annual reports on the agencies as it is already the case in its annual report on the Commission, when the Court of Auditors examines the Annual Activity Reports of the different Commission DGs;

            V.   AGENCIES’ GOVERNANCE

         The agencies’ Management Boards

                  39.

                  Notes that the large size of certain agencies’ Governing Boards and the high turnover of their members could lead to an ineffective decision-making body; calls, accordingly, on the Interinstitutional Working Group on Agencies to address this issue; suggests also that consideration be given to the possibility of merging Governing Boards for agencies working in related fields to reduce the amount of time spent on meetings;

                  40.

                  Invites, in addition, the agencies’ Directors to take steps to strengthen their Governing Board’s role by bringing strategic issues/priorities on the discussion in due time for strategic decisions to be taken;

                  41.

                  Calls on the agencies’ Management Boards to achieve maximum convergence between the planning of tasks and of resources (both financial and human) through the improvement of their activity-based budgeting and management (ABB/ABM);

         Commission’s role

                  42.

                  Expresses its satisfaction with the second successful year of operation of the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), the Commission (DG Enterprise and Industry) having been responsible for the budgetary management of the ECHA in 2007; emphasises, in particular, that the smooth and fairly rapid establishment of the ECHA is mainly as a result of the effective support provided by its partner DG, exchanges of experience with other similar agencies and the provision of strong support by the host country; considers, accordingly, that this best practice could be followed by the Commission when ‘newcomer’ agencies open;

                  43.

                  Notes that the Interinstitutional Working Group on Agencies found that about 30 % of the agencies’ resources are used for administration; calls on the Commission to increase its efforts to provide all necessary administrative assistance to the relatively small agencies, in particular those that were established recently and to make sure that all agencies work efficiently;

         Disciplinary procedures

                  44.

                  Recalls once more that Parliament, in its 2006, 2007 and 2008 discharge resolutions, called on the agencies to consider setting up an inter-agency disciplinary board; notes that this project remains difficult to take forward, owing, in particular, to problems in finding staff with the appropriate career grade to be members of the board; none the less, calls on the agency responsible for coordinating the network of agencies to establish a network of staff at the grade required to be a member of the disciplinary board;

            VI.   PERFORMANCE

                  45.

                  Considers Eurojust’s initiative to include key performance indicators (KPIs) in its 2010 plans as a best practice for the other agencies; encourages, in addition, the agencies to effectively link KPIs to their objectives, budget and annual work programme; considers, in fact, that this practice will allow stakeholders to better evaluate agencies’ performance; encourages other agencies to include KPIs in their annual work programmes;

                  46.

                  Notes that performance and effectiveness are not measured in a standardised way; calls on the Interinstitutional Working Group on Agencies to address this issue;

                  47.

                  Notes that agencies that do include KPIs are mainly based on the procedural and process aspects of performance, not on actual results; encourages the agencies to formulate result-oriented KPIs and calls on the Interinstitutional Working Group on Agencies to address this issue;

         Multiannual work programme

                  48.

                  Urges each agency to establish a multiannual work programme, in accordance with the multiannual Union strategy in the sector it deals with; stresses the importance of the multiannual work programme in enabling an agency to better organise its activities, provide an enhanced risk-assessment of its activities, make effective organisational arrangements to implement its strategy and achieve its goals;

         Annual work programme

                  49.

                  Urges the agencies to improve the link between their budget and their annual work programme; acknowledges, in fact, that often the Court of Auditors reported insufficiently rigorous procedures for drawing up the budget which led to a considerable number of budgetary transfers affecting most of the budget lines;

                  50.

                  Welcomes the intention of Cedefop and the ECHA to make available Gantt charts for key operational activities; reminds the agencies that these charts outline, in a concise way, the amount of time spent by each staff member on a project and encourage an approach geared towards achieving results;

         Feedback procedures

                  51.

                  Invites the agencies to enhance their customer focus and feedback procedures and to make full use of the results of their evaluations in this regard; congratulates, in particular, the ECHA for having conducted a stakeholder survey in 2009 and for increased assistance activities for industry (as, for example, offering a phone advice service for lead-registrants, workshops, network meetings, and public consultations);

                  52.

                  Welcomes Eurofund’s initiative to carry out a second ex-post assessment exercise of its 2005-2008 work programme; considers this a valuable exercise also for the other agencies as a tool to tackle the agencies’ challenges;

                  53.

                  Finds it of the utmost importance, in addition, that the agencies further develop their performance monitoring system to ensure that the results of their performance are monitored and encourages agencies to refer to them in their yearly activities plan;

                  54.

                  Encourages, in addition, the agencies to provide consistent reporting on KPIs;

         Table annexed to the Court of Auditors’ report

                  55.

                  Congratulates the EMCDDA, the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union (CDT) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) for having set out, in a table annexed to the Court of Auditors’ 2009 specific annual reports, a comparison of the operations that were carried out during 2008 and 2009 so as to enable the discharge authority to assess more effectively their performance from one year to the next;

            VII.   REFLECTION ON THE AGENCIES: A COMMON APPROACH

                  56.

                  Welcomes the ongoing work of the Interinstitutional Working Group on Agencies which has the objective to review the role and position of decentralised agencies in the Union’s institutional landscape, the creation, structure and operation of those agencies, together with funding, budgetary, supervision and management issues; requests the Working Group to come up with an analysis and general advice regarding the effectiveness of the current agencies, and to propose plans for comprehensive efficiency improvements with regard to the type and the number of agencies;

                  57.

                  Recalls that the Interinstitutional Working Group on Agencies’ Common Statement issued in March 2009 launched a ‘dialogue on Regulatory Agencies with a view to assessing the existing situation, specifically the coherence, effectiveness, accountability and transparency of these Agencies’ and that the Working Group would ‘address a number of key issues put forward by the participating institutions, including the role and position of the Agencies in the EU’s institutional landscape, the creation, structure and operation of these agencies, together with funding, budgetary, supervision and management issues’;

                  58.

                  Notes that in the 2008 discharge resolution of 5 May 2010 Parliament stated that the Interinstitutional Working Group should ‘consider whether some agencies should work closely together or even be merged’ and that ‘the small agencies are faced with serious efficiency problems’;

                  59.

                  Calls for a moratorium on the creation of any further agencies at least until the questions raised by the Interinstitutional Working Group on Agencies’ Common Statement and the discharge resolution of 5 May 2010 are satisfactorily resolved;

                  60.

                  Believes that the creation of further agencies once these questions are resolved should be considered with the utmost caution to ensure that they are genuinely required and that they provide the best value for money in delivering an agreed policy objective;

                  61.

                  Re-emphasises the importance of considering a merger of some agencies so that they are able to share overhead and other costs;

                  62.

                  Asks that the Interinstitutional Working Group on Agencies consider grouping together some of the smaller agencies, which may not be suitable for outright merger, in the same city and indeed possibly the same building so they can benefit from common central resources to minimise the burden of overhead and other costs;

                  63.

                  Welcomes the Court of Auditors’ intention to publish in autumn 2011 a special report on cost benchmarking on Union agencies;

                  64.

                  Notes that a number of agencies evolving in common fields are performing similar activities; recalls that overlapping activities generate unnecessary additional costs;

                  65.

                  Recalls that the Union budget shall be based on a sound financial management requiring spending to be relevant, effective, and efficient and unnecessary expenditures to be properly addressed;

                  66.

                  Calls, therefore, on the Commission to carry out an evaluation of all the Union agencies aimed at detecting occurrences of overlapping activities and analysing, if overlaps are identified, the possibility of a merger between the agencies involved and to provide Parliament with a report on the issue by 31 December 2011;

            VIII.   GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS ON THE INCREASED ESTABLISHMENT OF JOINT UNDERTAKINGS (JUs)

                  67.

                  Draws attention to a record increase of JUs over the recent years; notes in particular that these bodies are subject to the same framework Financial Regulation as the decentralised agencies but still do not include in their financial rules a clear reference to the powers of the IAS as their Internal Auditor;

                  68.

                  Welcomes, nevertheless, the IAS’s intention to take this role of Internal Auditor of the JUs from the financial year 2011 onwards;

                  69.

                  Is furthermore of the opinion that, in view of the size of their budget and complexity of their tasks, the JUs should set up an audit committee, reporting directly to their Administrative Board;

                  70.

                  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the agencies subject to this discharge procedure, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors.

         (1)  OJ L 252, 25.9.2010, p. 241.

         (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

         (3)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

         (4)  OJ C 338, 14.12.2010.

         (5)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2010)0176.

         (6)  OJ L 56, 4.3.1968, p. 1.


title: 2011/755/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 25 October 2011 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009, Section II – Council#Resolution of the European Parliament of 25 October 2011 with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009, Section II – Council

text:
               26.11.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 313/11

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 25 October 2011
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009, Section II – Council
   (2011/755/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
   having regard to the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009 (1),
   having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2009 (SEC(2010) 963 – C7-0213/2010) (2),
   having regard to the Council’s annual report to the discharge authority on internal audits carried out in 2009,
   having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2009, together with the institutions’ replies (3),
   having regard to the statement of assurance as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (4),
   having regard to its decision of 10 May 2011 (5) postponing the discharge decision for the financial year 2009, and to the accompanying resolution,
   having regard to Article 272(10) and Articles 274, 275 and 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (6), and in particular Articles 50, 86, 145, 146 and 147 thereof,
   having regard to Decision No 190/2003 of the Secretary-General of the Council/High-Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy concerning reimbursement of travel expenses of delegates of Council Members (7),
   having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, of 17 May 2006, on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (8),
   having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,
   having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0328/2011),

               1.

               Refuses to grant the Secretary-General of the Council discharge in respect of the implementation of the Council budget for the financial year 2009;

               2.

               Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the Court of Auditors, the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Jerzy BUZEK

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ L 69, 13.3.2009.

      (2)  OJ C 308, 12.11.2010, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ C 303, 9.11.2010, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ C 308, 12.11.2010, p. 129.

      (5)  OJ L 250, 27.9.2011, p. 23.

      (6)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (7)  Decision stemming from the Rules of Procedure of the Council of 22 July 2002 (OJ L 230, 28.8.2002, p. 7).

      (8)  OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.

      RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
      of 25 October 2011
      with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009, Section II – Council
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
      having regard to the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009 (1),
      having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2009 (SEC(2010)963 – C7-0213/2010) (2),
      having regard to the Council’s annual report to the discharge authority on internal audits carried out in 2009,
      having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2009, together with the institutions’ replies (3),
      having regard to the statement of assurance as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (4),
      having regard to its decision of 10 May 2011 (5) postponing the discharge decision for the financial year 2009, and to the accompanying resolution,
      having regard to Articles 272(10) and Articles 274, 275 and 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),
      having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (6) (Financial Regulation), and in particular Articles 50, 86, 145, 146 and 147 thereof,
      having regard to Decision No 190/2003 of the Secretary-General of the Council/High-Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy concerning reimbursement of travel expenses of delegates of Council Members (7),
      having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, of 17 May 2006, on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (8),
      having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,
      having regard to the second report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0328/2011),

                  A.

                  whereas ‘citizens have the right to know how their taxes are being spent and how the power entrusted to political bodies is handled’ (9),

                  B.

                  whereas the Council administration should be subject to democratic accountability towards Union citizens as far as the implementation of Union funds is concerned,

                  C.

                  whereas it is also important to ensure greater transparency in the application of Union legislation, and European citizens have the right to be better informed in this respect too, Parliament welcomes the agreement reached with the Council on the subject of correlation tables,

                  D.

                  whereas Parliament is the sole directly elected body among the Union institutions and has responsibility to grant discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union,

         Pending issues

                  1.

                  Deplores the difficulties encountered in the 2007-09 discharge procedures and, in addition, reaffirms its position expressed in its previous discharge resolutions concerning those financial exercises;

                  2.

                  Acknowledges receipt on 28 February 2011 of a letter from the Secretary-General of the Council containing a number of documents for the 2009 Council discharge procedure (final financial statements of 2009 including accounts, financial activity report and summary of 2009 internal audits) and welcomes this as a constructive step towards ensuring the democratic accountability of the Council’s administrative budget;

                  3.

                  Welcomes the fact that the Council submitted the abovementioned documents to Parliament and that the Council Presidency participated in Plenary at the 2009 discharge debate; recalls, however, that the discharge was postponed as Parliament had not received any responses to a number of pending issues concerning the 2009 Council discharge which were raised at an earlier stage, notably:

                              (a)

                              the Council administration has not accepted any invitation to meet Parliament’s Committee responsible for the discharge procedure in order to discuss matters concerning the Council budget execution for 2009 and consequently Parliament still needs confirmation of the willingness of the Secretary-General of the Council to appear in person at a meeting of the Committee responsible for the discharge procedure and to answer committee members’ questions;

                              (b)

                              Parliament has not received from the Council administration the information and documents requested in its resolution of 10 May 2011;

         The right of Parliament to grant discharge

                  4.

                  Takes note of the letter of 2 June 2011 from the Council Presidency to the President of the European Parliament in which the Council considers ‘that all the Union accounts for 2009, including its own, have been discharged in accordance with EU law by vote of the Parliament on 10 May 2011, in accordance with Article 319 of the TFEU’;

                  5.

                  Underlines the right of Parliament to grant discharge, pursuant to a combined reading of Articles 316, 317 and 319 of the TFEU, that should be interpreted in the light of their context and purpose, which is to submit the implementation of the entire budget of the European Union to parliamentary control and scrutiny without exception, and to grant discharge autonomously not only in respect of the section of the budget implemented by the Commission, but also in respect of the sections of the budget implemented by the other institutions, as referred to in Article 1 of the Financial Regulation;

                  6.

                  Is of the opinion that Article 319 of the TFEU and Article 50 of the Financial Regulation require the other institutions to respect the same rules and conditions as the Commission in the execution of its budget; considers that, as a consequence, the responsibility for the implementation of each budget lies with each respective institution and not with the Commission alone;

                  7.

                  Underlines that, notwithstanding possible different legal interpretations of the autonomous closure of accounts, Parliament is of the opinion that for all intents and purposes, political assessment of the institution’s financial management during the year under examination should be completed, thereby maintaining the current institutional equilibrium, in accordance with which Parliament is responsible for the assurance of democratic accountability towards Union citizens;

                  8.

                  Considers that the abovementioned legal reasoning as well as the established practice of adopting individual decisions on discharge in respect of each Union institution and body support this interpretation and, in addition, the decisions on discharge need to be adopted separately for operational reasons in order to avoid discontinuity and disruption of Union action;

                  9.

                  Is of the opinion that the proper interpretation of Article 147 of the Financial Regulation and Article 265 of the TFEU is that failure to take the appropriate steps to act on the observations accompanying Parliament’s discharge decision, entitles Parliament to bring an action for failure to act;

         A different role for Parliament and the Council in the discharge procedure

                  10.

                  Notes that, according to the Council Presidency’s declaration at the meeting of the Committee on Budgetary Control of 21 June 2011, the ‘memorandum of understanding’ adopted by the Coreper on 2 March 2011 is intended to form the basis of relations between Parliament and the Council regarding the discharge of their respective budgets; further notes that this memorandum requires full reciprocity between Parliament and the Council in respect of submission of documents, answers to questions and a bilateral meeting to be organised every year between representatives of the Council and Parliament’s Committee responsible for the discharge procedure, as well as Secretaries-General of both institutions;

                  11.

                  Fully respects the Council’s role as recommending authority in the annual discharge procedure, provided for in Article 319 of the TFEU; would disagree with the Council, however, should it consider itself to be in an identical position to Parliament as regards the granting of discharge;

                  12.

                  Reiterates that a distinction must be maintained in respect of the different roles of Parliament and the Council in the discharge procedure and that the Council administration (its General Secretariat), as with the other administrations of Union institutions, including the Parliament administration itself, should be subject to the control of the Court of Auditors and should be fully accountable to Union citizens for the implementation of their respective budgets, by means of the discharge procedure as set out in the TFEU;

                  13.

                  Notes that the Court of Auditors carries out its controls on these institutions separately from the Commission controls and underlines that the final element of the accountability chain should be the democratic control through the discharge granted by Parliament;

                  14.

                  Reminds the Court of Auditors of Parliament’s suggestion to perform an in-depth assessment of supervisory and control systems in the Council, similar to the assessments it performed on the Court of Justice, the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor, in the course of preparation of the Court of Auditors’ annual report concerning the financial year 2010;

         Main elements of the Council’s discharge

                  15.

                  Recalls that the expenditure of the Council must be scrutinised in the same way as that of the other institutions, and the fundamental elements of such scrutiny should be:

                              (a)

                              a formal meeting to be held between representatives of the Council and Parliament’s Committee responsible for the discharge procedure, potentially ‘in camera’, in order to answer committee members’ questions. This meeting should be attended by the Secretary-General of the Council, the bureau of the Committee responsible for the discharge procedure, the rapporteur and the members representing political groups (coordinators and/or shadow rapporteurs);

                              (b)

                              as indicated in its resolution of 16 June 2010 (10) concerning the 2008 Council discharge procedure, that the discharge should be based on the following written documents submitted by all institutions:

                                          —

                                          accounts of the preceding financial year relating to the implementation of their budgets,

                                          —

                                          a financial statement of their assets and liabilities,

                                          —

                                          the Annual Activity Report on their budget and financial management,

                                          —

                                          the annual report of their internal auditor.

         (1)  OJ L 69, 13.3.2009.

         (2)  OJ C 308, 12.11.2010, p. 1.

         (3)  OJ C 303, 9.11.2010, p. 1.

         (4)  OJ C 308, 12.11.2010, p. 129.

         (5)  OJ L 250, 27.9.2011, p. 23.

         (6)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

         (7)  Decision stemming from the Rules of Procedure of the Council of 22 July 2002 (OJ L 230, 28.8.2002, p. 7).

         (8)  OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.

         (9)  The European Transparency Initiative.

         (10)  OJ L 252, 25.9.2010, p. 22.


title: 2013/588/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 17 April 2013 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2011#Resolution of the European Parliament of 17 April 2013 with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2011

text:
               16.11.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 308/267

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 17 April 2013
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2011
   (2013/588/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2011,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2011, together with the Agency’s replies (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 12 February 2013 (05753/2013 – C7-0041/2013),

               —

               having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (3), and in particular Article 208 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency (4), and in particular Article 19 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

               —

               having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0078/2013),

               1.

               Grants the Executive Director of the European Maritime Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency’s budget for the financial year 2011;

               2.

               Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

               3.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the Executive Director of the European Maritime Safety Agency, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Martin SCHULZ

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 388, 15.12.2012, p. 129.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 208, 5.8.2002, p. 1.

      (5)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

      RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
      of 17 April 2013
      with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2011
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

                  having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2011,

                  —

                  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Maritime Safety Agency for the financial year 2011, together with the Agency’s replies (1),

                  —

                  having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 12 February 2013 (05753/2013 – C7-0041/2013),

                  —

                  having regard to Article 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

                  —

                  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (2), and in particular Article 185 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 (3), and in particular Article 208 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2002 establishing a European Maritime Safety Agency (4), and in particular Article 19 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Rule 77 of, and Annex VI to, its Rules of Procedure,

                  —

                  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0078/2013),

                  A.

                  whereas the Court of Auditors stated that it has obtained reasonable assurances that the annual accounts of the European Maritime Safety Agency (‘the Agency’) for the financial year 2011 are reliable and that the underlying transactions are legal and regular,

         Budgetary and financial management

                  1.

                  Notes that the Agency’s 2011 budget amounted to EUR 56,4 million, compared to EUR 54,4 million in the previous year;

                  2.

                  Notes with concern the Court of Auditors’ finding that budget commitments amounting to EUR 0,9 million were not related to existing legal commitments and the Agency should have decommitted and paid back the amount to the Commission at the beginning of 2012; notes, however, that the Agency initiated the process too late and as a result, due to restrictions imposed by the IT system, the funds will be blocked for one year and will only be decommitted and paid back at the end of 2012;

                  3.

                  Acknowledges that the Agency took steps in order to ensure outstanding balances on commitments not related to existing legal obligations were decommitted before the end of the year, and had instructed its Authorising Officers to initiate the decommitment procedure as soon as there is certainty that a measure is not or will not be fully implemented; calls on the Agency to report to the discharge authority whether the measures have been sufficient for avoiding the recurrence of a similar situation;

                  4.

                  Regrets that the Court of Auditors identified the need to improve the Agency’s asset management; it found, in particular, unexplained differences between the recorded annual and cumulated depreciation and that for internally created intangible assets, accounting procedures and information on costs were not reliable; notes that evidence of a physical inventory of administrative equipment within the required period was lacking;

                  5.

                  Acknowledges from the Agency that it has addressed all the issues concerning its asset management, in particular, in the course of 2012, detailed rules and procedures as regards asset management were developed and implemented, the correctness of the inventory was verified and as anticipated, a full inventory of physical assets has been completed in the course of the second half of 2012; notes that the asset register supporting accrual-based accounting for assets, the Agency’s tool to keep track of all its assets, has finally been fully updated;

                  6.

                  Notes with concern the Court of Auditors’ finding that the Agency sold two sets of sweeping arms systems for at-sea oil recovery services in December 2011, aiming to obtain at least the equipment’s net book value of EUR 319 050; notes that as a result of the minimum price being wrongly set below net book value, the equipment was sold at a loss of EUR 93 950; believes that as the price obtained was the result of a tender process, this should indicate that depreciation rates used may need examination;

                  7.

                  Acknowledges from the Agency that it has established a number of guidelines and procedures with regard to managing its marine pollution response assets, acknowledges that they have been consolidated in a consistent manner in a compendium, and that compendium includes a chapter on the public sale procedure and a detailed procedure for the establishment of the relevant depreciated book value;

         Recruitment

                  8.

                  Notes from the Court of Auditors’ report that there was room to improve the transparency of recruitment procedures, in particular, the thresholds which candidates had to meet in order to be invited to interview, the questions for written tests and interviews and the corresponding weightings for the evaluation of candidates were not set before the applications were examined; acknowledges that the Agency has updated its recruitment procedures accordingly;

         Conflicts of interest

                  9.

                  Calls on the Agency to scrutinise and prohibit possible conflicts of interest when hiring experts and staff from the sector it supervises;

         Internal audit

                  10.

                  Notes that in 2011, the Commission’s Internal Audit Service (IAS) performed the audit of ‘Inspection at EMSA’, and that following the audit, the Agency prepared a detailed action plan, which according to IAS, adequately addressed the very important risks; notes that IAS also followed up the status of implementation of the open ‘very important’ recommendation of previous audits and found that the Agency has implemented all those recommendations; notes that by the end of 2011, the Agency considered closed 26 out of a total of 30 recommendations, made by both the IAS and the Agency’s Internal Auditor (Internal Audit Capability);

                  11.

                  Refers, in respect of the other observations accompanying its Decision on discharge, which are of a horizontal nature, to its Resolution of 17 April 2013 (6) on the performance, financial management and control of the agencies.

         (1)  OJ C 388, 15.12.2012, p. 129.

         (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

         (3)  OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1.

         (4)  OJ L 208, 5.8.2002, p. 1.

         (5)  OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

         (6)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2013)0134 (see page 374 of this Official Journal).