title: 2013/627/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 17 April 2013 on the closure of the accounts of the SESAR Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011#Resolution of the European Parliament of 17 April 2013 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Union Agencies for the financial year 2011: performance, financial management and control

text:
               16.11.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 308/373

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 17 April 2013
   on the closure of the accounts of the SESAR Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011
   (2013/627/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the SESAR Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the SESAR Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011, together with the replies of the Joint Undertaking (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 12 February 2013 (05755/2013 – C7-0040/2013),

               —

               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 Council Regulation (EC) No 219/2007 of 27 February 2007 on the establishment of a Joint Undertaking to develop the new generation European air traffic management system (SESAR) (4), and in particular Article 4b 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 (A7-0101/2013),

               1.

               Approves the closure of the accounts of the SESAR Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2011;

               2.

               Instructs its President to forward this Decision to the Executive Director of the SESAR Joint Undertaking, 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

         Martin SCHULZ

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ C 6, 10.1.2013, p. 46.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

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

      (4)  OJ L 64, 2.3.2007, p. 1.

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

      RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
      of 17 April 2013
      on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Union Agencies for the financial year 2011: performance, financial management and control
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

                  having regard to the report of 14 November 2011 from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the follow-up to the discharge for the 2009 financial year (COM(2011) 736) and the accompanying Commission Staff Working Documents (SEC(2011) 1350 and SEC(2011) 1351),

                  —

                  having regard to the Joint Statement of the European Parliament, the Council of the EU and the European Commission on decentralised agencies of 19 July 2012,

                  —

                  having regard to the Common Approach on EU decentralised agencies annexed to the Joint Statement of 19 July 2012,

                  —

                  having regard to the Roadmap on the follow-up to the Common Approach on EU decentralised agencies, adopted by the Commission in December 2012,

                  —

                  having regard to the Commission Communication entitled ‘European agencies – the way forward’ (COM(2008) 135),

                  —

                  having regard to its resolution of 10 May 2012 on the 2010 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), 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 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 96 thereof,

                  —

                  having regard to Special Report No 15/2012 of the Court of Auditors entitled ‘Management of Conflict of Interest in selected EU Agencies’,

                  —

                  having regard to the specific annual reports (5) of the Court of Auditors on the annual accounts of the decentralised agencies for the financial year 2011,

                  —

                  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 (6), to its Resolution of 15 September 2011 on the EU’s efforts to combat corruption (7), and to the Commission Communication on Fighting corruption in the EU (COM(2011) 308);

                  —

                  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 opinions of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0118/2013),

                  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 a threefold increase in the number of agencies over the last decade, from 10 in 2001 to 30 in 2011,

         General issues

                  1.

                  Stresses the importance of the tasks performed by the agencies and their direct impact on the daily life of citizens, in particular as regards the quality of medicines, food safety, aviation security and the control of outbreaks of infectious diseases; in this context, emphasises the utmost importance of the autonomy of the agencies, in particular of the regulatory ones and of those in charge of collecting independent information; recalls that the main purpose of establishing decentralised agencies was to be able to provide independent technical and scientific assessments;

                  2.

                  Recalls that in July 2012, after three years of analysis and negotiations, Parliament, the Council and the Commission adopted a Common Approach on decentralised agencies, a political agreement concerning the future management and reform of the agencies; welcomes the conclusion of this agreement but deplores the fact that it neglects to set out either decision-making procedures in respect of the implementation of the actions proposed thereon or arrangements for Parliament oversight of those procedures;

                  3.

                  Welcomes the Court of Auditors’ reports and, in particular, its efforts to comply with the requests made by Parliament for the Court to conduct better audits and facilitate the discharge procedure;

                  4.

                  Notes with satisfaction that the Court’s audit reports now contain more detailed information than in previous years; encourages the Court to continue on this positive trend and to further develop performance audit elements, both in its several annual audit reports and in its special reports; calls on the Court to promote debates in which both parties are heard, whenever the agencies so wish, and to render its reports more informative and transparent, in particular by duly identifying cases in which an agency has uncovered a problem and has notified it to the Court, and by signalling even more clearly cases in which a reservation has been issued;

                  5.

                  Reminds all the agencies of their obligation to submit to the discharge authority a report drawn up by their director summarising the number and nature of internal audits conducted by their internal auditor, the recommendations made and the follow-up given to them, as provided for in Article 72(5) of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002;

                  6.

                  Commends the good cooperation with the responsible committee from the side of the Union Agencies Network (‘the Network’), a forum for coordination, information exchange and agreement of common positions on issues of common interest for agencies, and encourages the strengthening of the Network; notes with satisfaction the availability and openness of the directors of the agencies contacted in the framework of the annual discharge procedure; notes with surprise the Network’s letter of 19 October 2012 asking Parliament to ‘revert to its practice of earlier years’; encourages and expects the Network, on the contrary, to support the changes requested by Parliament, in its previous discharge reports, for improved management and transparency and for anti-conflict of interest measures to be taken for the benefit of consumers and taxpayers’ money;

                  7.

                  Emphasises the need to focus on effectiveness and transparency in the discharge exercise and invites all involved parties – the Court of Auditors, the Council, the agencies and the Network – to approach the discharge from that position; emphasises that the focus shift towards performance should by no means hamper regularity and sound financial management;

                  8.

                  Points out, in this context, the relationship between administrative weight and the output of the agencies; believes that for the agencies to operate as efficiently as possible and to make the most of their resources, they must seek synergies, exchange best practices and share services on the basis of geographical proximity or relevance; considers that access to services provided by the Commission should also be improved, expanded and facilitated;

                  9.

                  Suggests that the financial rules applicable to the Agencies should be simplified, which would allow the agencies’ administrative staff costs to be reduced; calls on the Commission to draw up proposals to that effect and to encourage the agencies to use the simplification option as regards recruitment procedures where the standard procedure is designed for a larger scale organisation and presents an excessive burden for the agencies;

                  10.

                  Notes with concern that there are a number of problems identified by the Court of Auditors which affect several agencies, in particular as regards:

                              —

                              carryovers which are not supported by commitments or which appear excessively high,

                              —

                              lack of transparency or rigour in recruitments,

                              —

                              procurement and contract management,

                              —

                              potential conflicts of interest, including at management board level;

                  11.

                  Notes, in this context, the reply of the Network; welcomes the coordinated action of the agencies and their intention to tackle the problems identified by the Court of Auditors and urges the Network, as well as the individual agencies, to report back to the discharge authority on the progress of the implementation of the concrete measures to redress the shortcomings identified by the Court of Auditors and Parliament in the discharge procedure for the financial year 2010; emphasises the fact that the responsibility lies with the executive directors and the management boards of the agencies;

                  12.

                  Urges the Network, as well as the individual agencies, to report to the discharge authority on the progress of the implementation of those ideas and approaches to assess whether a chosen approach has proved effective in resolving the outstanding issues identified by the Court of Auditors and pointed out in the Common Approach, and to report to the discharge authority on both the individual and collective actions taken to address the Court of Auditors’ findings, and the results thereof;

                  13.

                  Emphasises that the agencies have for some time been calling for greater flexibility in the rules applicable to them under the Financial Regulation; recognises that most of those rules are disproportionate and ill-suited not only to the size and objectives of the majority of agencies, but also to their characteristics; considers that simplification of the financial and statutory rules applicable to the agencies would improve their efficiency, reduce their expenditure and solve many of the problems pointed out by the Court of Auditors;

                  14.

                  Notes that some agencies in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice are operational ones and that the implementation of their budget also depends on external factors, which should be considered during the budgetary process;

         Budgetary and financial management

                  15.

                  Reiterates that the principle of annuality is one of the three basic accounting principles (unity, annuality and balance) indispensable to ensure an efficient implementation of the Union budget; notes that decentralised agencies do not always fully comply with this principle;

                  16.

                  Reminds the agencies that the persistent problem of carryovers has yet to be addressed; takes note of the agencies’ explanations as regards the difficulty in avoiding carryovers in operational expenditure; believes, nevertheless, that in a number of cases there is room for improvement, in particular by means of a better management of commitment appropriations based on real needs, better internal planning and general revenue forecasting and more stringent budgetary discipline and regular overview of spending; calls on the agencies to assess their internal administrative procedures in order to reduce their administrative burden, in particular as regards public procurement and staff recruitment procedures; believes that both the Commission and the Court of Auditors should provide effective assistance to the agencies in this area;

                  17.

                  Points out that in some cases the internal planning needs to be improved, which calls on the agencies to enhance their procedures; acknowledges at the same time that under certain circumstances and with due justification (e.g. settlements of payments have not been possible in the contracting year) this should be mentioned in a transparent way in the report of the Court of Auditors; is of the opinion that only so a true assessment can be made whether carryovers are too high or not;

                  18.

                  Stresses, in this context, that the hierarchy of norms is to be taken into account, and believes that the focus should be put on sound financial management; points out, however, that the current financial rules do not resolve the problem of agencies whose funding is based on charges, and calls on the Commission to propose a solution to this issue during the next revision of the financial rules applicable to the agencies; points out that the Financial Regulation is not suited either to agencies which generate surpluses, and stresses that it is essential to consider, as part of the revision, ways of resolving this problem, e.g. by creating a limited reserve fund;

                  19.

                  Expects the Court of Auditors, in its role as an external auditor as a follow-up to Parliament’s discharge report in 2010 and its report on the benchmarking of agencies, to consult the Network to compose an openly accessible and transparent benchmarking and ranking procedure for agencies by using important indicators in the fields of sound financial and budgetary management, low governance costs and efficient operational effectiveness, and to provide the underlying data in an easily accessible format (e.g. Excel files and/or CSV files);

                  20.

                  Notes with concern that the lack of flexibility within the budget has been recognised as a weakness by certain agencies, which suggests that savings could be made if there was enough flexibility within the budget from title to title; calls on the Commission to closely examine the situation and to come forth with proposals addressing this issue;

                  21.

                  Notes that the agencies undergo numerous different audit and control procedures in the course of the year, which are often very unevenly distributed and may create difficulties to them; believes that that problem should be addressed primarily by better coordinating those various audits (8); considers that the agencies should be consulted in order to find practical solutions for this issue without hampering the performance of their core tasks; invites the Court of Auditors, the Commission, the agencies and the Network to come up with an approach of this matter suitable for all involved parties;

                  22.

                  Demands that all agencies and joint undertakings systematically annex a standardised template regarding the publication of their final annual accounts which includes the data presented in their reports on the implementation of the budget and in their reports on the budgetary and financial management; recommends that all agencies and joint undertakings provide this information in a comprehensive, friendly accessible and transparent manner (e.g., Excel files and/or CSV files), in order to ease the comparison between their budgetary executions, and thus enabling Parliament and the public to comprehensively compare their expenses;

                  23.

                  Requests the Network to introduce a detailed, standardised budget line system so that an aggregation and comparison of the agencies revenues and expenses, as well as the implementation and use of appropriations for each budget line, can be compared by title, by chapter and by line; furthermore, asks the Network to make the subsequent comparison and to ensure that the conclusions as well as the underlying data are freely available in an easily accessible format (e.g. Excel files and/or CSV files);

         Human resources and recruitment policy

                  24.

                  Points out that the Staff Regulations establish the principles underlying the staff policy adopted by the agencies and that there is a need for greater flexibility and simplification of the statutory rules applicable to agencies in order to ensure that they function more effectively in this respect; points out furthermore that, although Article 110 of the Staff Regulations allows some flexibility, since the final decision rests with the Commission, it is vital that a previous agreement be reached between the agencies and the Commission; considers that, in the event of disagreement, the Commission should present a reasoned decision to Parliament’s committee responsible;

                  25.

                  Reminds the agencies that their staff policy planning should adopt a global programming approach to human resources which tallies with their budgetary and administrative capacities, in order to ensure that staff policy is cohesive and suited to their needs; points out, furthermore, that staff plans should take into account certain basic considerations, such as gender and geographical balance; welcomes, in this regard, the initiatives envisaged by the Commission in the Roadmap and the fact that the specific characteristics of the agencies are being acknowledged in the ongoing revision of the Staff Regulations;

                  26.

                  Expresses its concern at the fact that the procedures for recruiting staff to the agencies have posed a regular problem ever since the agencies were created, while the Court of Auditors in its audits concerning the financial year 2011 detected problems or weaknesses in this area in all but two of the agencies; is surprised that neither the Common Approach nor the Roadmap provide for any action in this area;

                  27.

                  Considers that the well-established practice of Staff Policy Plans is a valuable tool for long-term staff planning; is increasingly concerned that the Commission annuls agreed Staff Policy Plans within the annual budget procedure and, therefore, calls on the Commission to restrict itself in this respect;

                  28.

                  Calls on all agencies to inform the discharge authority of the number of days of leave authorised to each grade under the flexitime and compensatory leave schemes annually annexed to their annual activity reports;

         Conflicts of interest and transparency

                  29.

                  Welcomes the Special Report No 15/2012 of the Court of Auditors on Management of Conflict of Interest in selected EU Agencies, which stems from Parliament’s request for the Court to undertake a comprehensive analysis of the agencies’ approach to the management of situations where there are potential conflicts of interest;

                  30.

                  Considers that the main added value of Special Report No 15/2012 of the Court of Auditors lies in the regular monitoring of the agencies’ progress as regards management and prevention of conflicts of interest; calls on the Court to further follow-up this issue extending the scope of its audit to other agencies, and to present its findings in a future Special Report on the matter;

                  31.

                  Recalls that in its Special Report No 15/2012, the Court of Auditors has evaluated policies and procedures for the management of conflict of interest in four selected agencies: European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA);

                  32.

                  Considers that the purpose of the Court of Auditors’ audit was to give an answer to two questions: firstly, were adequate policies and procedures in place, and secondly, were those policies and procedures adequately implemented; notes, furthermore, that the Court based its work on the definition of conflict of interest as provided for in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) guidelines, and that the reference framework for minimum requirements adopted by the Court was also derived from those guidelines; stresses however that, although the OECD guidelines offer an international benchmark on this matter, they basically relate to conflicts of interests in the framework of public sector employees and cannot, therefore, provide an adequate basis for an effective response in the case of potential conflicts of interests among the governing bodies and other bodies involved in the agencies’ work, such as management boards and expert panels; nevertheless recognises the value of the OECD’s toolkit, and especially the checklist for gifts and benefits, etc., as well as the recommendations made concerning penalties, the need to check the completeness and content of statements of interests and the requirement to harness expertise and identify potential conflicts of interest;

                  33.

                  Notes that conflicts of interest can also occur between members of the Management Board of an agency and the agency itself, due to national or institutional interests which may endanger the proper functioning of the agency; therefore, calls on the Commission to urgently submit to Parliament a proposal to address this issue; expects that in the meantime the declarations of interests of each and every member of the management boards of the agencies will be made public, in the interests of transparency;

                  34.

                  Regrets that, according to the findings of the Court of Auditors in its Special Report No 15/2012, at the time of completion of its field work (October 2011), none of the four selected agencies had adequately managed conflict of interest situations; notes that while EMA and EFSA had developed more advanced policies for managing conflict of interest, ECHA’s policies were incomplete and EASA did not have such policies in place;

                  35.

                  Notes with concern that the Court of Auditors reported a number of shortcomings, in particular as regards the implementation of policies and procedures for staff and the board of appeal (ECHA), transparency as regards the publication of annual declarations of interest (EASA) and training on conflicts of interest (ECHA and EASA); stresses that, out of the four agencies audited by the Court, only EMA had a policy on gifts and invitations put in place;

                  36.

                  Welcomes the recommendations made by the Court of Auditors to the four agencies audited; welcomes the fact that following the Court’ audits, the four selected agencies have taken a number of steps to address their individual deficiencies; urges the agencies to report to the discharge authority on any further measures taken as regards the implementation of their policies and procedures to address those shortcomings, including as regards management of conflicts of interest;

                  37.

                  Notes that the Court of Auditors identified a number of significant shortcomings related to post-employment issues which weaken the prevention of ‘revolving doors’ situations; supports the Court of Auditors’ recommendation stressing the need to address those post-employment issues, and takes the view that the ‘cooling-off’ period of anyone who has served as director of an agency or has discharged major responsibilities within an agency needs to be clarified;

                  38.

                  Endorses the Court of Auditors’ recommendation inviting all Union institutions and decentralised bodies to examine whether the recommendations of its Special Report No 15/2012 are relevant and applicable to them; considers that all agencies should develop and implement comprehensive independence policies and procedures, inter alia, establishing a breach of trust mechanism and clear sanctions or changing those already in place on the basis of lessons learned and recommendations of Special Report No 15/2012; calls on the agencies to report to the discharge authority on this matter before the end of 2013;

                  39.

                  Welcomes the European Ombudsman’s decision to conduct an own initiative inquiry into cases of ‘revolving door-type’ conflicts of interest in several cases recently reported at the Commission; endorses the warning issued by the Ombudsman according to which, although effective management of conflicts of interest is a key part of good governance and sound ethical conduct, not all problems relating to governance and ethics necessarily imply a conflict of interest; takes the view that conflicts of interests need to be addressed within their strict limits, and stresses the need for training and prevention strategies and actions to be promoted as regards conflicts of interest in the Union institutions;

                  40.

                  Welcomes the Court of Auditors’ recommendation for the Union to consider further developing its regulatory framework dedicated to the management of conflict of interest situations;

                  41.

                  Welcomes the interinstitutional Joint Statement of 19 July 2012 on decentralised agencies, and in particular its provisions on management and prevention of conflict of interest (paragraphs 11 and 18) and on the independence of their scientific experts (paragraph 20);

                  42.

                  Calls on the Court of Auditors to conduct an assessment of the implementation by the agencies of any measures taken on the basis of the recommendations made to them in its Special Report No 15/2012; calls on the Network to develop proposals based on exchanges of best practices and lessons learned to enable it to identify, in cooperation with the Commission and the Court of Auditors, those agencies, or fields in which they operate, where there is greatest risk of conflicts of interest; welcomes, in that context, the review of the Transparency Register for lobby groups in the Union institutions, and urges the Commission and the agencies to implement measures stemming from that review concerning potential conflicts of interest;

                  43.

                  Welcomes the Commission’s foreseen action on conflicts of interest and, in particular, its intention to come up with guidelines for a coherent policy on the prevention and management of conflicts of interest for members of the management boards and directors, experts in scientific committees, and members of boards of appeal (9), a task for which the Commission itself takes responsibility and has set 2013 as the target year; notes with satisfaction that this task is one of the Commission’s priority actions and milestones; urges the Commission to respect the proposed deadline to implement this action and to report to the discharge authority on its outcome before the end of 2013, attaching to its report the relevant legislative proposals;

                  44.

                  Notes that, in this regard, the Commission foresees two actions to be undertaken by the agencies in 2013, namely, to adopt and implement a clear policy on conflicts of interest and, in particular, exchange experience and possibly develop a coordinated approach to common problems concerning scientific committees and boards of appeal, and define transparent and objectively verifiable criteria for the impartiality and independence of the members of boards of appeal, and to review selection procedures for members of scientific committees (10); urges the agencies to report to the discharge authority on the state of play as regards those tasks before the end of 2013;

                  45.

                  Invites the Commission to bear in mind the need to maintain an adequate balance between risks/benefits as regards the management of conflicts of interest, on one hand, and the objective to obtain the best possible scientific advice, on the other; considers that the proliferation of codes of conduct and ethical guidelines cannot rule out conflicts of interest; takes the view that the adoption of codes of conduct and ethical guidelines is necessary, but not sufficient, and that the eradication of conflicts of interest can only be achieved through the implementation of simple and appropriate rules, and their effective enforcement, as part of a general culture of honesty, integrity and transparency;

                  46.

                  Reiterates the fact that a high level of transparency is a key element to mitigate risks of conflict of interest; calls therefore on the agencies that have not yet done so to make available on their websites the list of their management boards’ members, management staff and external and in-house experts, together with their respective declarations of interests and curriculum vitae;

         Roadmap

                  47.

                  Welcomes the Roadmap on the follow-up to the Common Approach on EU decentralised agencies (‘the Roadmap’), adopted by the Commission in December 2012, and invites all involved parties to take on board the ideas expressed thereon, in particular in the context of the ongoing negotiations on the multiannual financial framework (MFF);

                  48.

                  Fully supports the Commission’s main objectives set out in the Roadmap, namely, achieving more balanced governance, enhancing the agencies’ efficiency and accountability and introducing greater coherence in the way they function; welcomes the actions proposed thereon, in particular regarding the streamlining of management boards, efforts to seek synergies between agencies and the possibility of merging some of them;

                  49.

                  Notes, however, that the Roadmap, while being a good starting point, still lacks a comprehensive assessment of the current agencies landscape, as well as a clear vision and strategy addressing the need to modernise the agencies; believes that the Commission could have been more ambitious and demanding when it comes to specific actions targeting individual agencies or types or groups of agencies; regrets that the lengthy work of the Interinstitutional Working Group has led to a rather modest outcome at this stage, and that the Council has not shown openness to a more ambitious approach; is convinced that a more proactive and forward looking approach would have led to a more considerable added value;

                  50.

                  Welcomes the fact that one of the priorities of the Common Approach is to improve the governance of the agencies, in particular by defining more clearly the roles of the management board and the executive director, and by reviewing the remit of Commission and Parliament representatives on the governing boards; takes the view that this process will also help to clarify the agencies’ relationship with the Union institutions and Member States, to establish enhanced accountability mechanisms for the agencies and to define the Commission’s degree of responsibility in respect of the agencies’ activities, whilst respecting the principle of the agencies’ independence;

                  51.

                  Calls on the Commission to better use the capacity building and the recommendations of agencies in the framework of the European Semester, notably when elaborating the Annual Growth Survey and macroeconomic indicators; underlines the key role of the agencies in achieving the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy;

         Independence

                  52.

                  Stresses the utmost importance of the agencies’ independence; recalls that the agencies should be able to independently execute their mandate and regrets that this is not always the case currently; believes that the Commission’s Directorates General should be seen as partners of the agencies, and notes with concern that the Commission’s interventions at times cast doubt on the objectivity of the agencies’ decisions and performed actions, especially when high risks are involved regarding the safety of consumers;

         Accountability

                  53.

                  Considers that the democratic accountability of the agencies should be streamlined, mainly as regards their way of reporting to the discharge authority (there are, in particular, inconsistencies in the presentation of financial information and in the submission of discharge follow-up reports); believes that the relationship between Parliament and the agencies would benefit from a stronger and better structured system of reporting to Parliament; considers that the current situation is rather fragmented and that contact and reporting takes place too often only on an ad-hoc basis;

                  54.

                  Considers it vital for the parliamentary committees responsible for the agencies to scrutinise their annual work programmes as closely as possible and to ensure that they reflect current circumstances and political priorities; expects, in that respect, the agencies to cooperate closely with those committees and the Commission, in line with the Joint Statement of 19 July 2012 on decentralised agencies, when drafting their annual work programmes;

                  55.

                  Asks the agencies to publish the minutes of their management board meetings on their websites, in the interests of transparency and democratic scrutiny, including by Parliament;

                  56.

                  Suggests that a member of Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control should be able to attend agencies’ management board meetings as an observer;

         Possibilities of closer cooperation and of merging certain agencies

                  57.

                  Believes that further synergies should be explored between the European Police College and the European Police Office, taking into account the results of the study issued by CEPOL in 2011 (contract CEPOL/CT/2010/002); notes that in March 2014, the College is to leave its current premises in Bramshill (UK); requests that the Commission presents a proposal to the European Parliament and the Council for the relocation of the College to The Hague (NL), where the European Police Office is currently located, in order for both agencies to be able to share facilities and services without jeopardizing their core tasks and autonomy; stresses that a swift decision on the relocation of CEPOL would considerably reduce the level of uncertainty which can adversely affect staff and recruitment procedures;

                  58.

                  Invites the Commission to further explore, together with the European Training Foundation, the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training, the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions and the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, the synergies that exist between those agencies and to report to the discharge authority on their possible deeper integration; invites those agencies and the Commission to evaluate whether closer cooperation could lead to economies of scale and optimisation of their performance;

                  59.

                  Considers that closer coordination should be put in place between certain agencies, in particular as regards decisions impacting on the remit of another agency; proposes that the agencies concerned reach an agreement among themselves, with the involvement of the relevant stakeholders, in order to avoid competing legislation; calls on the agencies, in such cases, to inform the Parliament committees responsible at all times;

         Sharing best practices

                  60.

                  Stresses the need to ensure that newly-formed agencies (e.g. the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators, the European Banking Authority (EBA), the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), all founded in 2011) benefit from best practices of older and more experienced ones, in order to avoid recruitment, procurement and financial regulation shortcomings;

                  61.

                  Notes with satisfaction that newly formed agencies are participating in the Network’s meetings three times a year and that those meetings comprise sharing best practices; notes, furthermore, that newly established agencies are invited to sub-networks which are set up to discuss issues requiring technical knowledge, in particular the sub-network of the Heads of Administration, which meets with the same frequency as the Network and deals with issues of recruitment, procurement and financial regulations;

                  62.

                  Takes note of the two study visits organised by ESMA which took place at the European Railway Agency (ERA) in 2011 and at the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) in 2012, in which ESMA staff had the opportunity to learn best practices from those well-established agencies; notes the development of frequent contact between ESMA, EIOPA and EBA, sharing experiences, aligning practices and profiting from synergies;

                  63.

                  Invites the Network to liaise with the Commission in order to explore the possibilities of organising common training actions for agencies aimed at overcoming the financial problems identified by the Court of Auditors in 2011;

         European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs)

                  64.

                  Notes with concern that the provisions of the Financial Regulation are not fully adapted to the ESAs’ financing scheme as 55 % to 60 % of their budget is financed by contributions from Member States and European Free Trade Association countries; believes that appropriate mechanisms need to be found to guarantee the security and financial stability of the ESAs, which are exposed to specific risks on account of the mixed nature of their funding; believes that that issue should be addressed, at the latest, in the course of the next revision of the Financial Regulation as regards the agencies, and calls on the Commission to evaluate this situation and to report on this issue to the discharge authority;

                  65.

                  Stresses the importance of adequately matching the allocated budget and available posts on one hand and the tasks entrusted to the ESAs on the other hand, as a mismatch may result in unbalanced staffing as regards the recruitment of the ESAs’ staff on one hand and the involvement of national experts on the other; expresses concern about the fact that the Commission has altered the establishment plans proposed by the ESAs without clearly indicating this; urges the Commission to be fully transparent on this and other issues;

                  66.

                  Notes in this respect the concerns that were raised in the preliminary conclusions of the IMF financial sector assessment of December 2012 on the Union, in which it is recommended to increase the resources and powers of the ESAs in order to enable them to successfully fulfil their mandates, while enhancing their operational independence;

         Gender equality

                  67.

                  Stresses the importance of putting in place policies ensuring that women and men are properly represented on the agencies’ governing bodies; urges the Network to introduce and promote general guidelines regarding best practices on this matter, even where no specific indications are given in the agencies’ founding regulations; calls on the agencies’ executive directors, who have ultimate responsibility for staffing issues, to ensure gender parity among agency staff as a whole and among people in positions of responsibility;

                  68.

                  Notes with concern that few of the executive director positions in the agencies are held by women; given that in most of the agencies, directors are appointed by the management board on the basis of a shortlist adopted by the Commission, calls on the management boards of the agencies and on the Commission to uphold the principles of gender equality and to take account of the strategy launched by the Commission in 2010 to achieve a better gender balance in positions of responsibility; expresses concern about the fact that the Common Approach and the Roadmap do not count gender equality policies among their objectives, and calls on the Commission to devise specific proposals to address this issue;

                  69.

                  Notes that it is the responsibility of Members States to select their representatives on the agencies’ governing boards; invites Members States to bear in mind the principles of gender equality when appointing their representatives to those bodies, and urges the executive directors to raise the awareness of the members of the boards on this topic when the chairs and vice-chairs are to be elected; notes with satisfaction that two of the current Troika agencies have a woman as chair of their governing board;

         Complex IT systems

                  70.

                  Stresses the need for the agencies, as well as the Commission, to coordinate and to share best practices and experiences in order to overcome the technical and management challenges presented by complex information technology (IT) systems which have to operate on a Union-wide basis; finds it strange that the Commission charges the agencies fees for using its IT systems, and that those fees are not set according to objective parameters, such as the size of the agencies; given that those fees represent a considerable burden for the small agencies, and if there is no alternative to charging them, calls on the Commission to adapt the fees to the size and financial capacity of the agencies;

                  71.

                  Draws the Commission’s attention to the difficulties encountered by the agencies with complex IT systems like accrual-based accounting (ABAC) and SYSPER2, due to the fact that those systems are designed to satisfy the Commission’s needs, rather than those of the agencies; welcomes the actions of the sub-networks dealing with the consequences of this problem and, in particular, the Union Agencies Information and Communication Technology Network (IT issues) and the Heads of Administration sub-network (ABAC and SYSPER2), and invites the Commission to cooperate more closely with the agencies on this issue;

                  72.

                  Proposes that the agencies be given the possibility of using the human resources software, or any other kind of software, of the Commission, instead of having to purchase their own expensive software;

                  73.

                  Proposes that, as from the next financial year, in order to facilitate the work of the discharge authority as regards the agencies, and given the great number of agencies and the increasing complexity of their work and output, Parliament considers, when studying and preparing its opinion on an agency, making a reconfiguration that would provide for the appointment of several rapporteurs, as it was already the case this year with other institutions;

                  74.

                  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 286, 17.10.2012, p. 388.

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

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

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

         (5)  OJ C 368, 16.12.2011.

         (6)  OJ C 161 E, 31.5.2011, p. 62.

         (7)  OJ C 51 E, 22.2.2013, p. 121.

         (8)  In this respect, see action 53 of the Roadmap on the follow-up to the Common Approach on EU decentralised agencies.

         (9)  See the Roadmap on the follow-up to the Common Approach on EU decentralised agencies, action 33.

         (10)  See the Roadmap on the follow-up to the Common Approach on EU decentralised agencies, actions 34 and 35.


title: Council Decision 2012/486/CFSP of 23 July 2012 concerning the signing and conclusion of the Agreement between the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation and the European Union on the protection of classified information#Agreement between the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation and the European Union on the protection of classified information

text:
               24.8.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 229/1

         COUNCIL DECISION 2012/486/CFSP
   of 23 July 2012
   concerning the signing and conclusion of the Agreement between the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation and the European Union on the protection of classified information
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 37 thereof, in conjunction with Article 218(5) and (6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to the proposal of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               At its meeting on 15 June 2009, the Council decided to authorise the Presidency to open negotiations pursuant to former Article 24 of the Treaty on European Union for a security of information agreement between the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation and the European Union.

               (2)

               Following that authorisation to open negotiations, the Presidency negotiated the Agreement between the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation and the European Union on the protection of classified information.

               (3)

               The Agreement should be approved,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The Agreement between the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation and the European Union on the protection of classified information is hereby approved on behalf of the Union.
   The text of the Agreement is attached to this Decision.
   Article 2
   The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement in order to bind the Union.
   Article 3
   This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.

      Done at Brussels, 23 July 2012.

            For the Council

            The President

         C. ASHTON

      AGREEMENT
      between the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation and the European Union on the protection of classified information
      The Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation, hereinafter referred to as ‘OCCAR’,
      and
      The European Union, hereinafter referred to as ‘the EU’,
      hereinafter referred to as ‘the Parties’,
      CONSIDERING THAT the Parties agree that consultations and co-operation should be developed between them on questions of common interest relating to security;
      RECOGNISING THAT full and effective consultation and co-operation may require access to classified information of OCCAR and the EU, as well as the exchange of classified information between the Parties;
      CONSCIOUS THAT such access to and exchange of classified information requires appropriate security measures;
      CONSIDERING THAT on 18 May 2009 the Council endorsed the European Defence Agency Steering Board’s recommendation to take work forward on the establishment of a Security Agreement between the EU and OCCAR with the objective of it being available in time for the approval of the Administrative Arrangement between the EDA and OCCAR;
      NOTING THAT the Board of Supervisors of OCCAR has authorised the Director of the Executive Administration (EA) of OCCAR to conclude such a Security Agreement;
      NOTING THAT on 15 June 2009 the Council authorised the Presidency to open negotiations with OCCAR in order to conclude a security of information agreement,
      HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
      Article 1
      The Agreement between OCCAR and the EU on the protection of classified information (hereinafter the ‘Agreement’) shall apply to classified information in any form either provided or exchanged between the Parties.
      Article 2
      For the purposes of this Agreement, ‘classified information’ shall mean any information, (namely, knowledge that can be communicated in any form) document or material which has been determined by either Party to require protection against unauthorised disclosure that could cause varying degrees of damage, harm or prejudice to the interests of OCCAR, or of the EU or one or more of their respective Member States, and has been so designated by a security classification.
      Article 3
      The EU institutions and entities to which this Agreement applies shall be: the European Council, the Council of the European Union (hereafter ‘the Council’), the General Secretariat of the Council, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the European Commission and the European External Action Service (hereafter ‘the EEAS’). For the purposes of this Agreement, these institutions and entities shall be referred to as ‘the EU’.
      Article 4
      1.   Classified information may be disclosed or released by one Party (the providing Party) to the other Party (the receiving Party) in accordance with the principle of originator control.
      2.   In implementing paragraph 1, no generic release shall be possible unless procedures are agreed between the Parties regarding certain categories of information, relevant to their operational requirements.
      Article 5
      Each of the Parties, and entities thereof as defined in Article 3 of this Agreement, shall ensure that it has a security system and security measures in place, based on the basic principles and minimum standards of security laid down in its respective security rules and regulations, and reflected in the arrangements to be established pursuant to Article 12, in order to ensure that an equivalent level of protection is applied to classified information provided or exchanged under this Agreement.
      Article 6
      1.   Classified information shall be marked as follows:

                  (a)

                  For OCCAR, classified information shall be marked OCCAR SECRET, OCCAR CONFIDENTIAL or OCCAR RESTRICTED.

                  (b)

                  For the EU, classified information shall be marked SECRET UE/EU SECRET, CONFIDENTIEL UE/EU CONFIDENTIAL or RESTREINT UE/EU RESTRICTED.

            2.   The corresponding security classifications are:

                  In OCCAR

                  In the European Union

                  OCCAR SECRET

                  SECRET UE/EU SECRET

                  OCCAR CONFIDENTIAL

                  CONFIDENTIEL UE/EU CONFIDENTIAL

                  OCCAR RESTRICTED

                  RESTREINT UE/EU RESTRICTED

            Article 7
      1.   Each Party shall:

                  (a)

                  protect and safeguard classified information provided or exchanged by the other Party under this Agreement from unauthorised disclosure, loss or compromise;

                  (b)

                  ensure that classified information provided or exchanged under this Agreement keeps the security classification marking given to it by the providing Party. The receiving Party shall protect and safeguard the classified information to a degree no less stringent than the provisions set out in its own security rules and regulations for information or material holding an equivalent security classification, as specified in Article 6;

                  (c)

                  ensure that classified information received from the other Party is not downgraded or declassified without the prior written consent of that Party;

                  (d)

                  not use such classified information for purposes other than those established by the originator or those for which the information is provided or exchanged;

                  (e)

                  not allow access to classified information to individuals unless they have a need-to-know in order to perform their official duties and where access is required to CONFIDENTIEL UE/EU CONFIDENTIAL or OCCAR CONFIDENTIAL or to SECRET UE/EU SECRET or OCCAR SECRET, have been granted a security clearance in accordance with the security rules and regulations of the receiving Party; and

                  (f)

                  ensure that all individuals having access to classified information are informed of their responsibilities to protect the information in accordance with the applicable security rules and regulations.

            2.   The EU shall not disclose classified information provided by OCCAR under this Agreement to third parties, or to any EU institution or entity not mentioned in Article 3, without the prior written consent of OCCAR.
      OCCAR shall not disclose classified information provided by the EU under this Agreement to third parties without the prior written consent of the EU. Such consent shall be given by the Council, acting unanimously.
      Article 8
      1.   The Parties shall ensure that all persons who, in the conduct of their official duties require access, or whose duties or functions may afford access, to classified information provided or exchanged under this Agreement are appropriately security-cleared before they are granted access to information classified CONFIDENTIEL UE/EU CONFIDENTIAL or OCCAR CONFIDENTIAL or to SECRET UE/EU SECRET or OCCAR SECRET.
      2.   The security clearance procedures shall be designed to determine whether an individual may, taking into account his or her loyalty, trustworthiness and reliability, have access to classified information.
      Article 9
      The Parties shall provide mutual assistance with regard to the security of classified information provided or exchanged under this Agreement. Reciprocal security consultations and assessment visits shall be conducted by the authorities referred to in Article 12 to assess the effectiveness of the security arrangements established within their respective responsibilities for protecting such classified information.
      Article 10
      1.   For the purpose of this Agreement:

                  (a)

                  As regards the EU, all correspondence shall be sent through the Chief Registry Officer of the Council and shall be forwarded by him to the Member States and to the entities referred to in Article 3, subject to paragraph 2.

                  (b)

                  As regards OCCAR, all correspondence shall be sent to the Registry Control Officer of OCCAR-EA and if necessary shall be forwarded by him to the relevant Classified Registries of OCCAR-EA, subject to paragraph 2 of this Article.

            2.   Exceptionally, correspondence from one Party which is accessible to only specific competent officials, organs or services of that Party may, for operational reasons, only be addressed to and be accessible by specific competent officials, organs or services of the other Party specifically designated as recipients by the providing Party, taking into account their competencies and according to the need-to-know principle.
      As far as the European Union is concerned, such correspondence shall be transmitted through the Chief Registry Officer of the Council, the Chief Registry Officer of the European Commission or the Chief Registry Officer of the EEAS, as appropriate.
      As far as OCCAR is concerned, such correspondence shall be transmitted through the Registry Control Officer of OCCAR-EA.
      3.   All classified information shall be transmitted through channels agreed by the security authorities of the Parties.
      4.   Classified information transmitted by electronic means shall be encrypted in accordance with the providing Party’s requirements as outlined in its security rules and regulations. The providing Party’s requirements shall be met when transmitting, storing and processing classified information in internal networks of the Parties.
      Article 11
      The Director of OCCAR-EA shall oversee the implementation of this Agreement by OCCAR. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the Member of the European Commission responsible for security matters and the Secretary-General of the Council shall oversee the implementation of this Agreement by the EU.
      Article 12
      1.   In order to implement this Agreement, security arrangements shall be established between the four authorities designated in paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 in order to outline the standards for the transmission, reciprocal protection of classified information and visits under this Agreement.
      2.   The Security Section of OCCAR-EA, under the direction and on behalf of the OCCAR-EA Director, acting for OCCAR and under its authority, shall draw up security arrangements for protecting and safeguarding classified information provided to OCCAR under this Agreement in accordance with the OCCAR security rules and regulations.
      3.   The Security Office of the General Secretariat of the Council, under the direction and on behalf of the Secretary-General of the Council, acting in the name of the Council and under its authority shall draw up security arrangements for protecting and safeguarding classified information provided to the EU under this Agreement in accordance with the Council’s security rules.
      4.   The European Commission Security Directorate, acting under the authority of the Member of the Commission responsible for security matters, shall draw up security arrangements for protecting classified information provided under this Agreement within the European Commission and its premises in accordance with the Commission’s security provisions.
      5.   The European External Action Service Security Directorate, acting under the authority of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, shall draw up security arrangements for protecting classified information provided under this Agreement within the EEAS and its premises in accordance with the security rules for the EEAS.
      6.   For the EU, the security arrangements mentioned in paragraph 1 shall be subject to approval by the Council Security Committee.
      7.   For OCCAR, the security arrangements mentioned in paragraph 1 shall be subject to approval by the OCCAR Security Committee.
      Article 13
      In the event of a security breach resulting in the loss or compromise of classified information received from the providing Party or suspicion that such classified information has been disclosed to unauthorised persons, the receiving Party shall immediately inform the providing Party.
      An immediate investigation shall be carried out by the receiving Party (with assistance from the providing Party if required) in accordance with its security rules and regulations for the protection of classified information. The receiving Party shall inform the providing Party about the circumstances, measures adopted, and outcome of the investigation as soon as is practicable and of the corrective action taken to prevent recurrence. The authorities referred to in Article 12 may establish procedures to that effect.
      Article 14
      Each Party shall bear its own costs incurred in implementing this Agreement.
      Article 15
      Before classified information is provided or exchanged between the Parties under this Agreement, the responsible security authorities referred to in Article 12 shall agree that the receiving Party is able to protect and safeguard the information in a way consistent with the arrangements to be established pursuant to that Article.
      Article 16
      This Agreement shall not prevent the Parties from concluding other Agreements relating to the provision or exchange of classified information provided that they do not conflict with the provisions of this Agreement.
      Article 17
      Any disputes between OCCAR and the EU arising out of the interpretation or application of this Agreement shall be addressed by negotiation between the Parties. Pending settlement of any disputes, the Parties shall continue to fulfil all their responsibilities under this Agreement.
      Article 18
      1.   The present Agreement shall enter into force on the date of signature by the Parties.
      2.   Each Party shall notify the other Party of any changes in its rules and regulations that could affect the protection of classified information referred to in this Agreement.
      3.   This Agreement may be reviewed for consideration of possible amendments at the request of either Party. It shall be reviewed in the event of any non-EU State becoming a member of OCCAR.
      4.   Any amendment to this Agreement shall only be made in writing and shall be signed by each of the Parties to the present Agreement.
      Article 19
      This Agreement is concluded for an indefinite period of time. It may be denounced by one Party by written notice of denunciation given to the other Party. Such denunciation shall take effect six months after receipt of notification by the other Party, but shall not affect obligations already contracted under the provisions of this Agreement. In particular, all classified information provided or exchanged pursuant to this Agreement shall continue to be protected in accordance with the provisions set forth herein.

         In witness whereof the undersigned, respectively duly authorised, have signed this Agreement.
         Done at Brussels, this twenty-seventh day of July 2012 in two copies each in the English language.

            For OCCAR

            For the European Union


title: 2013/572/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 17 April 2013 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Environment 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 Environment Agency for the financial year 2011

text:
               16.11.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 308/216

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 17 April 2013
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2011
   (2013/572/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

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

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Environment 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 401/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network (4), and in particular Article 13 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 the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0070/2013),

               1.

               Grants the Executive Director of the European Environment 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 Environment 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. 80.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

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

      (4)  OJ L 126, 21.5.2009, p. 13.

      (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 Environment Agency for the financial year 2011
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

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

                  —

                  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Environment 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 401/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the European Environment Agency and the European Environment Information and Observation Network (4), and in particular Article 13 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 the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0070/2013),

                  A.

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

                  B.

                  whereas the budget of the Agency for the financial year 2011 was EUR 62,2 million,

                  C.

                  whereas the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) opened an internal investigation concerning the Agency,

         Budgetary and financial management

                  1.

                  Takes note from the final annual accounts that the Commission’s subsidy to the Agency for 2011 amounted to EUR 35 445 155,69, compared to EUR 34 674 450,58 in 2010, and that the total revenue was EUR 44 447 489,45 (EUR 45 550 051,50 in 2010); is satisfied that 132 of 134 available posts had been occupied and notes that 82 contract agents and seconded national experts were employed by the end of 2011;

                  2.

                  Notes from the Court of Auditors’ report that the Agency made a payment to an international environmental organisation amounting to EUR 6 061 which was related to the participation of Agency staff in expeditions organised by that organisation in February and May 2011; notes that no procurement procedure had taken place and no contract had been drawn up for those expeditions; notes that the Agency bore the travel costs, amounting to EUR 11 625; notes the Court of Auditors’ findings that the Agency’s Executive Director was a member of the international environmental organisation’s board of trustees until April 2011 and that this could constitute a conflict of interest;

                  3.

                  Acknowledges that the Executive Director resigned from the board of trustees of the other organisation on being informed, in April 2011, of a potential perception of a conflict of interests by the Court of Auditors;

         Public procurement

                  4.

                  Received for further clarification on the Agency’s contractual relationships with Ace&Ace, a Danish video production company situated in Copenhagen; notes that in 2011, the Agency awarded Ace&Ace a video-production contract (EEA/COM/10/001 – lot 5) with a budget ceiling up to EUR 1 000 000 following an open tendering procedure; emphasises that the awarding criteria differed greatly from those used for the previous tender on video-production (EEA/CCA/07/001 – lot 1) and included narrowed criteria such as ‘access to editing services in the EEA vicinity’; acknowledges the Executive Director’s statement (6) that 16 companies located in the Agency’s vicinity applied to this tender procedure and that 15 fitted all criteria; received from the Agency a list of all applicants, including names and addresses, to the call for tender EEA/COM/10/001;

                  5.

                  Notes that following an open call for tenders, a framework contract was awarded in 2007 to N1 Creative, a London-based company which subcontracted some services to Ace&Ace; points out that already between 2007 and 2008, two service contracts were concluded between the Agency and Ace&Ace for a total value of EUR 101 000, without passing through a public procurement procedure, but in line with the implementing rules of the Financial Regulation (exclusive rights); takes note of the details on the number and type of projects performed under this contract by N1 Creative on the one hand and by Ace&Ace on the other hand as received by the discharge authority;

                  6.

                  Has been informed by the Agency’s Executive Director (7) that OLAF is currently investigating these video-production contracts;

         Transparency

                  7.

                  Notes the Court of Auditors’ observation that the Agency had improved the transparency of recruitment procedures over the years; notes, however, that the Court of Auditors’ report still found confusion between eligibility and selection criteria as regards the relevant years of professional experience required; notes, furthermore, that there was no evidence that the content of, and the thresholds for, written tests were determined before applications were examined;

                  8.

                  Notes that the Agency had initiated the process to implement the Court of Auditors’ recommendations;

         Performance

                  9.

                  Emphasises that the Commission must exercise its supervisory role though its participation in the Management Board and Bureau of the Agency, within the limits set by Regulation (EC) No 401/2009 and with due respect to the Agency’s legal autonomy; emphasises that Parliament is to be kept regularly informed;

                  10.

                  Welcomes the fact that the Agency staff and management activities, quality control processes, products and services, administrative and building services are brought together under the strategic area in the ‘EEA Strategy 2009-2013’;

         Conflicts of interest

                  11.

                  Acknowledges that the Management Board and the Agency’s administration have strengthened the Agency’s conflicts of interest policy in order to avoid any problems in the future; notes the introduction of an ex ante approval by the Management Board for the Executive Director’s acceptance of membership on external boards and advisory bodies;

                  12.

                  Notes the introduction of a form to be signed by consultants and contractors on their rights and obligations, whereby they acknowledge that they refrain from any behaviour or action that may impair their independence or reflect adversely upon their position, their work or the image of the Union;

                  13.

                  Welcomes the new procedures, as approved by the Agency’s Management Board at its 65th meeting on 12 December 2012, and in particular:

                              —

                              training on the prevention of conflicts of interest in the induction programme for new staff,

                              —

                              a requirement for signature of the form A1 ‘Obligations of European Environment Agency officials and other servants under the Staff Regulations and Conditions of Employment’ and acknowledgment of receipt of a copy of the Staff Regulations and Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union,

                              —

                              training on ethics and integrity regarding staff obligations and duties and a procedure for reporting improprieties (a ‘whistleblower’ mechanism),

                              —

                              receipt by staff members of a copy of the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour and a copy of the Decision of the Management Board of 22 June 2004 for the implementation of that Code in the Agency,

                        acknowledges the information received from the Agency on the implementation of the abovementioned procedures, as well as on any further developments as regards the management of conflicts of interest;

                  14.

                  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 (8) on the performance, financial management and control of the agencies.

         (1)  OJ C 388, 15.12.2012, p. 80.

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

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

         (4)  OJ L 126, 21.5.2009, p. 13.

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

         (6)  See replies of the Executive Director of the European Environment Agency at the hearing on the 2011 discharge of the EU decentralised agencies organised by the Committee on Budgetary Control on 24 January 2013.

         (7)  Ibid.

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


title: 2012/556/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2012 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2010, Section VI — European Economic and Social Committee#Resolution of the European Parliament of 10 May 2012 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 2010, Section VI — European Economic and Social Committee

text:
               17.10.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 286/109

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2012
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2010, Section VI — European Economic and Social Committee
   (2012/556/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2010 (1),

               —

               having regard to the annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2010 (COM(2011) 473 – C7-0261/2011) (2),

               —

               having regard to the European Economic and Social Committee’s annual report to the discharge authority on internal audits carried out in 2010,

               —

               having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2010, together with the institutions’ replies (3),

               —

               having regard to the statement of assurance (4) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2010 pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to 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 (5), and in particular Articles 50, 86, 145, 146 and 147 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 (A7-0092/2012),

               1.

               Grants the Secretary-General of the European Economic and Social Committee discharge in respect of the implementation of the Economic and Social Committee budget for the financial year 2010;

               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

         Martin SCHULZ

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ L 64, 12.3.2010.

      (2)  OJ C 332, 14.11.2011, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ C 326, 10.11.2011, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ C 332, 14.11.2011, p. 134.

      (5)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
      of 10 May 2012
      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 2010, Section VI — European Economic and Social Committee
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

                  having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2010 (1),

                  —

                  having regard to the annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2010 (COM(2011) 473 – C7-0261/2011) (2),

                  —

                  having regard to the European Economic and Social Committee’s annual report to the discharge authority on internal audits carried out in 2010,

                  —

                  having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2010, together with the institutions’ replies (3),

                  —

                  having regard to the statement of assurance (4) as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions, provided by the Court of Auditors for the financial year 2010 pursuant to Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

                  —

                  having regard to 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 (5), and in particular Articles 50, 86, 145, 146 and 147 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 (A7-0092/2012),

                  1.

                  Notes that in 2010 the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) had commitment appropriations available amounting to a total of EUR 127 200 000 (EUR 122 000 000 in 2009), and that the utilisation rate of these appropriations was 98 % (98 % in 2009); stresses that the EESC budget is purely administrative: 70 % relates to expenditure on persons working with the institution, and 30 % on buildings, furniture, equipment and miscellaneous operating expenditure;

                  2.

                  Calls on the EESC to limit increases to its budgets in the coming years to an absolute minimum and to finance new and extended activities primarily though savings;

                  3.

                  Reiterates the call made in its Resolution of 10 May 2011 (6) on discharge to the EESC for the financial year 2009 to undertake with urgency a comprehensive spending review of all areas of activity to ensure that all expenditure delivers value for money, and in order to identify possible savings which would allow pressure on the budget to be reduced given the period austerity currently being experienced in the Union;

                  4.

                  Welcomes the fact that in its annual report, the Court of Auditors concluded, based on its audit work, that the payments for the financial year ended 31 December 2010 for administrative and other expenditure of the institutions and bodies were, on the whole, free from material error; the most likely rate of error in the category of ‘administrative and other expenditure’ in general, was estimated at 0,4 % (points 7.9 and 7.10);

                  5.

                  Points out that the Court of Auditors included observations in its 2010 annual report concerning the reimbursement of travel expenses to EESC members and the awarding of procurement contracts based on a restricted procedure;

                  6.

                  Notes with satisfaction that the EESC Bureau decided, on 6 December 2011, to undertake a reform of the system for reimbursing expenses to members, which is aimed, in particular, at reimbursement of transport tickets on the basis of real costs only, which brings daily allowances and travel allowances into line with those paid by Parliament, and provides for allowances to compensate for the time spent by members in performance of their duties and for related administrative costs, taking into account the fact that EESC members do not receive any form of remuneration or pension from the EU budget;

                  7.

                  Encourages and expects a swift implementation of the above mentioned decision of 6 December 2011;

                  8.

                  Expresses surprise at the high number of flights invoiced by members of the EESC in 2010, and at their long distance (average: 2 000 km); requests the EESC to provide a detailed list of all flights invoiced in 2010, indicating the departure airport, stops en route, destination, length of flight and the costs incurred by the European taxpayer;

                  9.

                  Welcomes the fact that changes were made at the EESC Bureau meeting of 21 February 2012 with regard to confirmation of attendance, and reimbursement for taking part in video conferences, in compliance with the guidance of Parliament (stricter documentary evidence in order to justify entitlement to the allowance referred to in Article 12 of the Decision of the Bureau of the European Economic and Social Committee of 21 February 2012 on the reimbursement of expenses incurred and the allowances received by the Committee members and consultative commission delegates, as well as their respective alternates, and deletion of the point relating to videoconferencing); looks forward to the results of the negotiations between the EESC and the Council with a view to reaching a definitive and satisfactory solution to all these issues, in respect of which the decision depends on the Council;

                  10.

                  Notes with satisfaction the decision by the EESC Bureau providing for publication of the declarations of financial interests of its members; welcomes the fact that this decision has already been implemented;

                  11.

                  Welcomes the recent and increased interest on the part of EESC members in financial and budgetary matters, in particular within the budget group, which includes a full commitment as regards both the drafting of the budget and the monitoring of its implementation; would like to see a strengthening of cooperation between EESC members and Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control;

                  12.

                  Welcomes the fact that the two committees – the Committee of the Regions and the EESC – finally managed to obtain certification under the EU Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) on 27 December 2011; would like to be informed on an annual basis of the progress which is anticipated and/or made to reduce further the negative impact of the Committees’ activities on the environment;

                  13.

                  Expresses satisfaction with the results revealed by the mid-term evaluation of the functioning of the administrative cooperation agreement between the Committee of the Regions and the EESC; notes, primarily, that the establishment of joint services has allowed the two Committees to make budget savings; would like the Committees to implement the recommendations made relating to the areas of staff (greater harmonisation of rules), social and medical services and internal services;

                  14.

                  Suggests a strengthening of accounting procedures in relation to the priority budget lines of the two Committees; believes that this will in turn lead to an increase in savings and to additional strengthening of inter-institutional cooperation;

                  15.

                  Welcomes the decision taken by the EESC on 24 April 2012 to organise an assessment of its work, as the Committee of the Regions has already done (CAF (7): Common Assessment Framework), following the recommendation contained in this resolution, as adopted by the Committee on Budgetary Control on 27 March 2012;

                  16.

                  Notes with satisfaction also that the EESC has taken good note of the observations of the Court of Auditors and that a reminder of the important elements to be observed in procurement procedures has been sent to all authorising officers by sub-delegation; notes, too, that the EESC will step up efforts to ensure that the necessary public procurement expertise is available in the evaluation committees;

                  17.

                  Calls on the EESC to improve the quality of the summary of the internal audit service’s activities in order for Parliament to be able to assess the monitoring and control mechanisms within the EESC; stresses that the summary should be both informative and relevant; calls on the EESC to send a re-drafted version to its competent committee without delay;

                  18.

                  Found Annex D to the annual activity report, containing activity and performance indicators, to be very useful; is concerned by the fact that 12,3 % of the interpreting service requested was cancelled, at a cost of EUR 913 344; would like to be informed of which urgent measures are taken to remedy this problem;

                  19.

                  Calls for better financial planning and budgetary management in order to avoid similar situations in the future;

                  20.

                  Expects that the annual activity report will, in future, also include an exhaustive table of all the human resources at the EESC’s disposal, broken down by category, grade, gender, participation in professional training, and nationality;

                  21.

                  Reiterates its call for the Ombudsman to inform the Committee on Budgetary Control of the results of the investigations into staff promotion procedures;

                  22.

                  Calls for all opinions issued by the EESC to be attached to the relevant files.

         (1)  OJ L 64, 12.3.2010.

         (2)  OJ C 332, 14.11.2011, p. 1.

         (3)  OJ C 326, 10.11.2011, p. 1.

         (4)  OJ C 332, 14.11.2011, p. 134.

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

         (6)  OJ L 250, 27.9.2011, p. 98.

         (7)  Common Assessment Framework, European Institute for Public Administration, Maastricht 2006.