title: 2012/612/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2012 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines for the financial year 2010

text:
               17.10.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 286/334

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2012
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines for the financial year 2010
   (2012/612/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines for the financial year 2010,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2010, together with the replies of the Joint Undertaking (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 21 February 2012 (06086/2012 - C7-0050/2012),

               —

               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 Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2008 of 20 December 2007 setting up the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines (3), and in particular Article 11(4) thereof,

               —

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

               —

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

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0108/2012),

               1.

               Grants the Executive Director of the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines discharge in respect of the implementation of the Joint Undertaking’s 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 Executive Director of the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines, 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 368, 16.12.2011, p. 17.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 30, 4.2.2008, p. 38.

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

               17.10.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 286/335

         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 budget of the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines for the financial year 2010
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines for the financial year 2010,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2010, together with the replies of the Joint Undertaking (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 21 February 2012 (06086/2012 - C7-0050/2012),

               —

               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 Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2008 of 20 December 2007 setting up the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines (3), and in particular Article 11(4) thereof,

               —

               having regard to the Financial Rules of the Joint Undertaking for the implementation of the Joint Technology Initiative on Innovative Medicines adopted by Decision of its Governing Board on 2 February 2009,

               —

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

               —

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

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0108/2012),

               A.

               whereas the Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking (‘the Joint Undertaking’) was set up in December 2007 for a period of 10 years to significantly improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the drug development process with the long-term aim that the pharmaceutical sector produces more effective and safer innovative medicines,

               B.

               whereas the Joint Undertaking started to work autonomously on 16 November 2009,

               C.

               whereas the Court of Auditors states that it has obtained reasonable assurances that the annual accounts of the Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2010 are reliable and that the underlying transactions are legal and regular,

               D.

               whereas the maximum contribution for the period of 10 years from the Union to the Joint Undertaking is EUR 1 000 000 000 to be paid from the budget of the Seventh Research Framework Programme,

               E.

               whereas the budget of the Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2010 amounted to EUR 107 150 584,

      Budget and Financial Management

               1.

               Notes with concern that the budget of the Joint Undertaking for the financial year 2010 and the implementation plan were adopted by the Governing Board only on 16 March 2010 and therefore, for almost the entire first quarter of the year, the Joint Undertaking was obliged to use provisional twelfths budget rule to make payments;

               2.

               Is concerned that the members of the Joint Undertaking could not establish and agree in due time the scientific priorities to be included in the annual implementation plan which delayed the launch of the 2010 annual call for proposals until 22 October 2010;

               3.

               Notes that the 2010 final budget of the Joint Undertaking included commitment appropriations of EUR 107 150 584 and payment appropriations of EUR 29 009 840; notes that the utilisation rates for available commitment and payment appropriations were as low as 6 % and 35 %, respectively;

               4.

               Is concerned about the low implementation rate of the budget and, moreover, about the underlying activities of the Joint Undertaking; underlines that the cash balance at year-end stood at EUR 70 731 612,03 representing 65 % of the available payment appropriations in 2010;

               5.

               Notes that the Joint Undertaking argued that the low utilisation rates for commitment and payment appropriations and the high level of the cash balance were due to:

                           —

                           the delays in the definition of the Joint Undertaking’s scientific priorities and call topics, which led to delays in the publication of calls for proposals and in the related evaluation and selection process,

                           —

                           the pre-financing payments to successful Call 3 collaborative projects which were made in 2011 instead of 2010 as originally budgeted because of delays within the selected consortia which affected the signature of grant agreements,

                     calls, nevertheless, on the Joint Undertaking and its members to take appropriate actions to ensure a timely definition of the scientific priorities and call topics and to enable the budget to be balanced in future financial years;

      Evaluation of contributions in kind

               6.

               Recalls that the Joint Undertaking was set up in December 2007 and started to work autonomously on 16 November 2009; expresses its grave concern that the methodology for evaluating contributions in-kind to be defined in the Joint Undertaking’s internal rules and procedures in compliance with its financial rules has not yet been approved by the Governing Board and therefore the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) members of the Joint Undertaking were unable to report on the costs incurred during the first reporting period as established in the grant agreements;

               7.

               Notes from the Joint Undertaking’s reply that there are ongoing consultations on the methodology to be used for the evaluation of in-kind contributions by member companies of EFPIA in the Joint Undertaking’s projects and that individual reports on the in-kind contributions will be submitted following the approval by the Governing Board of the revised model grant agreement; urges the Joint Undertaking and its Governing Board to update the discharge authority about this matter;

      Procurement Procedures

               8.

               Establishes from its Annual Activity Report (AAR) that the Joint Undertaking has adopted in 2010 the ‘IMI Guidelines for low-value procurement procedures’ which aim to facilitate its compliance with the General Guide for Public Procurement of the European Commission and reflects the Public Procurement threshold levels set in its Financial Rules for Procurement Procedures;

               9.

               Notes, in addition, that during 2010, the Joint Undertaking had two high-value Procurement Procedures, for the IT infrastructure and ex-post audits respectively, which led to framework contracts being published in the Official Journal; underlines that these procedures were launched jointly with other Joint Undertakings; finds the Joint Undertakings’ initiative to issue joint procurement procedures interesting; believes that it would enable the Joint Undertakings to realise economies of scale and to save taxpayers’ money; encourages the Joint Undertakings, therefore, to resort as often as possible to joint procurement procedures;

               10.

               Acknowledges that the Joint Undertaking launched low value procurement procedures for the development of its website, for the organisation of communication events held during the year, and for the purchase of office furniture in the new premises;

               11.

               Notes that as part of its legal obligations, the Joint Undertaking made available on its website a list of awarded contracts; notices that the list presents the contracts awarded from the creation of the Joint Undertaking until 31 October 2010; urges the Joint Undertaking to regularly update its list of contracts awarded;

      Call for Proposals and Projects Negotiations

               12.

               Recalls that the Joint Undertaking issued a third call for proposals which was launched on 22 October 2010;

               13.

               Acknowledges that in 2010 the Joint Undertaking finalised the negotiation process for the second call for proposals and started to receive and pay cost claims from the beneficiaries participating in the projects funded under the first call for proposals, managed by the Commission, and launched on April 2008;

               14.

               Notes from the Joint Undertaking’s AAR that, in the framework of the second call for proposals, independent experts participated in the evaluation panels except for final assessment and without voting rights and that in addition the Executive Office of the Joint Undertaking invited independent observers to the two-stage evaluation process; calls on the Joint Undertaking to inform the discharge authority about the verification mechanisms that it implements to ensure the full independence of experts and observers and therefore to mitigate the risks of conflict of interests during the evaluation of tenders;

               15.

               Takes note from the AAR that the independent observers are responsible for issuing a report for each stage of the evaluation process; notes also that an action plan based on the Independent Observers’ Report of the Evaluation of Stage Two was published in September 2010 and that the Executive Office of the Joint Undertaking is implementing these actions for the third call for proposals; asks the Joint Undertaking to inform the discharge authority of the level of implementation of each of the measures included in the action plan;

               16.

               Acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking that several implementing measures have been put in place in its operational processes to prevent conflicts of interest; notes in particular that any individual involved in the activities of the Joint Undertaking has to comply with well-established and enforced prescriptive rules; calls on the Joint Undertaking to develop an Action Plan with concrete measures and deadlines to prevent conflicts of interest and strengthen transparency and to provide it to the discharge authority;

      Internal control systems

               17.

               Urges the Joint Undertaking to complete its internal controls and financial information systems; calls on the Joint Undertaking in particular, to establish and document important elements of its internal control system like the accounting procedures and controls relating to the closure of accounts and the recognition and measurement of the operational expenditure;

               18.

               Calls, in addition, on the Joint Undertaking and in particular its Accounting Officer to formalise and validate the underlying business processes in due time as required by the financial rules; notes the Joint Undertaking’s response that validation of the underlying business processes supporting the accounting system was concluded in June 2011; calls on the Joint Undertaking to explain this delay to the discharge authority;

               19.

               Notes the Court of Auditors’ finding that the Joint Undertaking has an adequate level of IT governance and practice for its size and mission; stresses, however, that the formalisation of policies and procedures in strategic IT planning and monitoring cycle, IT Risk management and Business Continuity Plan and Disaster Recovery Plan is lagging behind; urges the Joint Undertaking to develop an Action Plan with concrete measures and deadlines to speed up the formalisation of policies and procedures in the aforementioned areas and to report the progress achieved to the discharge authority;

               20.

               Points out that the ex-post audit strategy of the Joint Undertaking was adopted by a Governing Board decision on 14 December 2010; urges the Joint Undertaking to implement the strategy without delay by carrying out on-the-spot checks and financial audits among the participants of the Research Activities funded by the Joint Undertaking and to submit to the discharge authority an annual report drawn up by its Executive Director with the conclusions of such audits, the recommendations made and the financial corrections imposed;

      Internal Audit

               21.

               Takes note that the Joint Undertaking’s Financial Rules have not yet been amended to include the provision referring to the powers of the Commission’s internal auditor regarding the general budget as a whole;

               22.

               Notes, however, that the Commission and the Joint Undertaking have taken action to ensure that the respective operational roles of the Commission’s Internal Audit Service (IAS) and the Joint Undertaking’s internal auditing function are clearly defined;

               23.

               Notes comments from the Joint Undertaking that the need to further clarify the role of the IAS in the Joint Undertaking’s Financial Rules will be assessed after the finalisation of the on-going revision of the Framework Financial Regulation;

               24.

               Ascertains from the Joint Undertaking’s 2010 AAR that it established its own Internal Audit Capability (IAC) in November 2010;

               25.

               Acknowledges from the Joint Undertaking’s reply to the Court of Auditors that the roles of the Joint Undertaking’s internal audit function and the IAS were clarified and formalised through the approval, in March 2011, of the IAS and IAC Audit Charters; also takes note that a coordinated strategic audit plan for the period 2012-2014 is also being prepared to ensure that the impact of planned audits is optimised and any duplication of audit work between the IAS and IAC is minimised; calls therefore on the Joint Undertaking to inform the discharge authority about the state of preparation and implementation of the strategic audit plan for the period 2012-2014;

      Performance

               26.

               Notes that the Commission commissioned an interim review pursuant to Article 11(2) of the Joint Undertaking’s Founding Regulation (EC) No 73/2008 and that the review focused on the quality, efficiency and contribution of the Joint Undertaking towards the achievement of set objectives;

               27.

               Acknowledges that the interim evaluation identified certain weaknesses:

                           —

                           internal governance structures are not yet working optimally,

                           —

                           proactive communication activities have been lacking,

                           —

                           the advisory potential of several stakeholders is not fully exploited,

                           —

                           the lack of identified and used key performance indicators by the Joint Undertaking risks making the output of the whole initiative diffuse,

                     notes that the interim evaluation was concluded in December 2010 and that it formulated seven recommendations; duly takes note that the Joint Undertaking has committed to address and follow-up on the conclusions of the interim evaluation;

               28.

               Requires the Joint Undertaking, therefore, to communicate to the discharge authority the measures adopted, with their implementation timeframe, to address the recommendations of the interim review and to provide regular updates on the progress achieved;

      Lack of host State agreement

               29.

               Reiterates that the Joint Undertaking should rapidly conclude a host agreement with Belgium concerning office accommodation, privileges and immunities and other support to be provided by Belgium to it as provided by its Founding Regulation (EC) No 73/2008;

      Horizontal observations on the Joint Undertakings

               30.

               Underlines that seven Joint Undertakings have so far been established by the Commission under Article 187 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; notes that six Joint Undertakings (IMI, Artemis, ENIAC, Clean Sky, FCH and ITER-F4E) are in the research area under the Commission’s DGs RTD and INFSO and one is charged with developing the new air traffic management system (SESAR) in the transport domain whose activities are supervised by DG MOVE;

               31.

               Notes that the total indicative resources deemed necessary for the Joint Undertakings for their period of existence amounts to EUR 21 793 000 000;

               32.

               Notes that the total Union contribution deemed necessary for the Joint Undertakings for their period of existence amounts to EUR 11 489 000 000;

               33.

               Notes that, for the financial year 2010, the overall Union contribution to the budget of the Joint Undertakings amounted to EUR 505 000 000;

               34.

               Calls on the Commission to provide the discharge authority annually with consolidated information on the total annual funding per Joint Undertaking made from the general budget of the Union in order to ensure transparency and clarity on the use of the Union’s funds and restore trust among the European taxpayers;

               35.

               Welcomes the initiative of Artemis to include information in its AAR on the monitoring and review of its ongoing projects; believes this is a practice that should be followed by the other Joint Undertakings;

               36.

               Recalls that Joint Undertakings are public-private partnerships and that as a consequence public and private interests are intertwined; is of the opinion that under the circumstances the likelihood of conflicts of interest should not be dismissed but addressed properly; calls therefore on the Joint Undertakings to inform the discharge authority on the verification mechanisms which exist in their respective structures to enable a proper management and prevention of conflicts of interest;

               37.

               Notes, with the notable exception of the Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy, that Joint Undertakings are relatively small structures and geographically-concentrated; believes therefore that they should pool their resources where possible;

               38.

               Calls on the Court of Auditors to provide the discharge authority with a follow-up on the comments it has made for each of the Joint Undertakings in their respective report on the annual accounts for the financial year 2011;

               39.

               Invites the Court of Auditors to provide, within a reasonable deadline, a special report to Parliament, on the added value of the establishment of the Joint Undertakings for the efficient execution of Union research, technological development and demonstration programmes; further notes that the same report should include an assessment of the effectiveness of the Joint Undertakings’ establishment.

      (1)  OJ C 368, 16.12.2011, p. 17.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 30, 4.2.2008, p. 38.

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


title: 2011/99/EU: Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 February 2011 on the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (application EGF/2010/012 NL/Noord Holland ICT from the Netherlands)

text:
               15.2.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 41/8

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
   of 3 February 2011
   on the mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, in accordance with point 28 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (application EGF/2010/012 NL/Noord Holland ICT from the Netherlands)
   (2011/99/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (1), and in particular point 28 thereof,
   Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 establishing the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2), and in particular Article 12(3) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) was established to provide additional support for workers made redundant as a result of major structural changes in world trade patterns due to globalisation and to assist them with their reintegration into the labour market.

               (2)

               The scope of the EGF was broadened for applications submitted from 1 May 2009 to include support for workers made redundant as a direct result of the global financial and economic crisis.

               (3)

               The Interinstitutional Agreement of 17 May 2006 allows the mobilisation of the EGF within the annual ceiling of EUR 500 million.

               (4)

               The Netherlands submitted an application on 8 April 2010 to mobilise the EGF, in respect of redundancies in two enterprises operating in the NACE Revision 2 Division 46 (‘Wholesale trade, except of motor vehicles and motorcycles’) in the NUTS II region of Noord Holland (NL32) and supplemented it with additional information up to 5 August 2010. This application complies with the requirements for determining the financial contributions as laid down in Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1927/2006. The Commission, therefore, proposes to mobilise an amount of EUR 2 557 135.

               (5)

               The EGF should, therefore, be mobilised in order to provide a financial contribution for the application submitted by the Netherlands,

         HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   For the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2010, the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund shall be mobilised to provide the sum of EUR 2 557 135 in commitment and payment appropriations.
   Article 2
   This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.

      Done at Brussels, 3 February 2011.

            For the European Parliament

            The President

         J. BUZEK

            For the Council

            The President

         FELLEGI T.

      (1)  OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ L 406, 30.12.2006, p. 1.


title: 2009/223/EC: Decision of the European Parliament of 22 April 2008 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2006

text:
               31.3.2009

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 88/201

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 22 April 2008
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2006
   (2009/223/EC)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
   having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2006 (1),
   having regard to the Court of Auditors' report on the final annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2006, together with the Agency's replies (2),
   having regard to the Council's recommendation of 12 February 2008 (5843/2008 — C6-0084/2008),
   having regard to the EC Treaty, and in particular Article 276 thereof,
   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 (3), and in particular Article 185 thereof,
   having regard to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 February 2008 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency (4), and in particular Article 60 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 (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,
   having regard to Rule 71 of and Annex V 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 (A6-0118/2008),

               1.

               Grants the Executive Director of the European Aviation Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency's budget for the financial year 2006;

               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 Aviation Safety Agency, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

            The President

         Hans-Gert PÖTTERING

            The Secretary-General

         Harald RØMER

      (1)  OJ C 261, 31.10.2007, p. 16.

      (2)  OJ C 309, 19.12.2007, p. 47.

      (3)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 79, 19.3.2008, p. 1.

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

               31.3.2009

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 88/202

         RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 22 April 2008
   with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2006
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
   having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2006 (1),
   having regard to the Court of Auditors' report on the final annual accounts of the European Aviation Safety Agency for the financial year 2006, together with the Agency's replies (2),
   having regard to the Council's recommendation of 12 February 2008 (5843/2008 — C6-0084/2008),
   having regard to the EC Treaty, and in particular Article 276 thereof,
   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 (3), and in particular Article 185 thereof,
   having regard to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 February 2008 on common rules in the field of civil aviation and establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency (4), and in particular Article 60 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 (5), and in particular Article 94 thereof,
   having regard to Rule 71 of and Annex V 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 (A6-0118/2008),

               A.

               whereas the Court of Auditors stated that it has obtained reasonable assurance that the annual accounts for the financial year 2006 are reliable, and the underlying transactions are legal and regular,

               B.

               whereas on 24 April 2007 Parliament granted the Executive Director of the European Aviation Safety Agency discharge in respect of the implementation of the Agency's budget for the financial year 2005 (6), and in its resolution accompanying the discharge decision, inter alia:

                           —

                           noted the low rate of implementation of commitment and payment appropriations (69 % and 32 % respectively) for operating expenditure and the high cancellation rates for appropriations carried over from the previous year,

                           —

                           noted the failure to introduce activity-based management, even though the Agency's financial regulation provides for it, along the lines applied to the general budget, so as to allow better monitoring of performance,

                           —

                           regretted the fact that the Management Board had not adopted minimal internal control standards by the end of 2005, and that at the end of 2005 the Agency still did not have a system for ensuring that the fees which it charges its clients for the services it provides are sufficient to cover the cost of those services;

   General points which relate to horizontal issues affecting the EU agencies and which therefore also have a bearing on the discharge procedure for each individual agency

               1.

               Notes that the budgets of the 24 agencies and other satellite bodies audited by the Court of Auditors totalled EUR 1 080,5 million in 2006 (the biggest being that of the European Agency for Reconstruction at EUR 271 million and the smallest being that of the European Police College (CEPOL) at EUR 5 million);

               2.

               Points out that the range of external EU bodies subject to audit and discharge now includes not only traditional regulatory agencies but also executive agencies set up to implement specific programmes, and will in the near future also extend to joint undertakings set up as public-private partnerships (joint technology initiatives);

               3.

               Observes as regards the Parliament that the number of agencies subject to the discharge procedure has evolved as follows: financial year 2000: 8; 2001: 10; 2002: 11; 2003: 14; 2004: 14; 2005: 16; 2006: 20 regulatory agencies and two executive agencies (not including two agencies which are audited by the Court of Auditors but subject to an internal discharge process);

               4.

               Concludes therefore that the auditing/discharge process has become cumbersome and disproportionate compared to the relative size of the agencies'/satellite bodies' budgets; instructs its competent committee to undertake a wide-ranging review of the discharge process as regards agencies and satellite bodies with a view to devising a simpler and more rational approach, bearing in mind the ever-growing number of bodies each requiring a separate discharge report in future years;

         Fundamental considerations

               5.

               Requests that the Commission provide clear explanations regarding the following elements before the creation of a new agency or reform of an existing agency: agency type, objectives of the agency, internal governance structure, products, services, key procedures, target group, clients and stakeholders of the agency, formal relationship with external actors, budget responsibility, financial planning, and personnel and staffing policy;

               6.

               Requests that each agency be governed by a yearly performance agreement which is formulated by the agency and the responsible DG and which should contain the main objectives for the coming year, a financial framework and clear indicators to measure performance;

               7.

               Requests that the performance of the agencies be regularly (and on an ad-hoc basis) audited by the Court of Auditors or another independent auditor; considers that this should not be limited to traditional elements of financial management and the proper use of public money, but should also cover administrative efficiency and effectiveness and should include a rating of the financial management of each agency;

               8.

               Takes the view that in the case of agencies which are continually overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should be made on the basis of vacant posts; is of the opinion that this will lead in the long run to less assigned revenue for the agencies and therefore also to lower administrative costs;

               9.

               Notes that it is a serious problem that a number of agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement, the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations, etc.; considers that the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial Regulation are designed for bigger institutions and that most of the small agencies do not have the critical mass to be able to cope with these regulatory requirements; therefore asks the Commission to look for a rapid solution in order to enhance the effectiveness by grouping the administrative functions of various agencies together, in order to achieve this critical mass (taking into consideration the necessary changes in the basic regulations governing the agencies and their budgetary independence), or urgently to draft specific rules for the agencies (in particular implementing rules for the agencies) which allow them to be in full compliance;

               10.

               Insists that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget, take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the individual agencies in former years, in particular in year n-1, and revise the budget requested by the particular agency accordingly; invites its competent committee to respect this revision and, if not undertaken by the Commission, to revise itself the budget in question to a realistic level matching the absorption and implementation capacity of the agency in question;

               11.

               Recalls its decision on discharge in respect of the financial year 2005, in which it invited the Commission to present every five years a study on the added value of every existing agency; invites all relevant institutions in the case of a negative evaluation of the added value of an agency to take the necessary steps by reformulating the mandate of that agency or by closing it; notes that there has not been one single evaluation undertaken by the Commission in 2007; insists that the Commission should present at least five such evaluations before the decision on discharge in respect of the financial year 2007, starting with the oldest agencies;

               12.

               Is of the opinion that recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with their real cash requirements; considers further that the amendments to the general Financial Regulation should be incorporated into the agencies' framework financial regulation and into their various specific financial regulations;

         Presentation of reporting data

               13.

               Notes that there is no standard approach among the agencies with regard to the presentation of their activities during the financial year in question and of their accounts and reports on budgetary and financial management, nor to the question as to whether a declaration of assurance should be drawn up by the agency's director; observes that not all agencies clearly distinguish between (a) presenting the agency's work to the public; and (b) technical reporting on budgetary and financial management;

               14.

               Notes that while the Commission's standing instructions for the preparation of activity reports do not expressly require the agency to draw up a declaration of assurance, many directors have none the less done so for 2006, in one case including an important reservation;

               15.

               Recalls paragraph 26 of its resolution of 12 April 2005 (7), inviting the directors of the agencies from now on to accompany their annual activity report, which is presented together with financial and management information, with a declaration of assurance concerning the legality and regularity of operations, similar to the declarations signed by the Directors-General of the Commission;

               16.

               Asks the Commission to amend its standing instructions to the agencies accordingly;

               17.

               Suggests in addition that the Commission should work with the agencies towards producing a harmonised model applicable to all agencies and satellite bodies clearly distinguishing between:

                           —

                           an annual report intended for a general readership on the body's operations, work and achievements,

                           —

                           financial statements and a report on implementation of the budget,

                           —

                           an activity report along the lines of the activity reports of the Directors-General of the Commission,

                           —

                           a declaration of assurance signed by the body's director, together with any reservations or observations which he considers it appropriate to draw to the attention of the discharge authority;

         General findings by the Court of Auditors

               18.

               Notes the Court's finding (Annual Report, paragraph 10.29 (8)) that the disbursement of subsidies paid by the Commission from the Community budget is not based on sufficiently justified estimates of the agencies' cash requirements and that this, combined with the size of carry-overs, leads them to hold sizeable cash balances; notes further the Court's recommendation that the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be in line with their real cash requirements;

               19.

               Notes that at the end of 2006 14 agencies had still to implement the ABAC accounting system (Annual Report, footnote to paragraph 10.31);

               20.

               Notes the Court's remark (Annual Report, paragraph 1.25) concerning accrued charges for untaken leave which are accounted for by some agencies; points out that the Court of Auditors has qualified its statement of assurance in the case of three agencies (European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (Cedefop), CEPOL and the European Railway Agency) for the financial year 2006 (2005: Cedefop, European Food Safety Authority, European Agency for Reconstruction);

         Internal audit

               21.

               Recalls that in accordance with Article 185(3) of the Financial Regulation the Internal Auditor of the Commission is also the internal auditor of the regulatory agencies receiving grants charged to the EU budget; points out that the Internal Auditor reports to each agency's management board and director;

               22.

               Draws attention to the reservation entered in the Internal Auditor's Annual Activity Report for 2006 as follows:
               ‘The Internal Auditor of the Commission is not in a position to properly fulfil his obligation assigned by Article 185 of the Financial Regulation as internal auditor of the Community bodies due to a lack of staff resources’;

               23.

               Notes, however, the Internal Auditor's remark in his activity report for 2006 that as from 2007, with the additional staff resources granted by the Commission to the Internal Audit Service (IAS), all regulatory agencies in operation will be subject to internal audit work on an annual basis;

               24.

               Notes the ever-growing number of regulatory and executive agencies and joint undertakings required to be audited by the IAS under Article 185 of the Financial Regulation; asks the Commission to inform its competent committee as to whether the staff resources at the IAS's disposal will be sufficient to conduct an annual audit of all such bodies in the coming years;

               25.

               Observes that Article 72(5) of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 requires each agency to send each year to the discharge authority and the Commission a report drawn up by its director summarising the number and type of internal audits conducted by the internal auditor, the recommendations made and the action taken on these recommendations; asks the agencies to indicate whether this is done and, if so, how;

               26.

               Takes note, as regards internal audit capability, especially in relation to the smaller agencies, of a proposal made by the Internal Auditor before Parliament's competent committee on 14 September 2006 that smaller agencies should be authorised to buy in internal audit services from the private sector;

         Evaluation of agencies

               27.

               Recalls the joint statement by the Parliament, the Council and the Commission (9) negotiated at the conciliation before the Ecofin budget Council of 13 July 2007 calling for (i) a list of agencies which the Commission intends to assess; and (ii) a list of the agencies already assessed, together with a summary of the major findings;

         Disciplinary procedures

               28.

               Notes that, because of their size, individual agencies have difficulty in setting up ad-hoc disciplinary boards composed of staff at the appropriate career grade and that the Commission's IDOC (Investigation and Disciplinary Office) is not competent for agencies; calls on the agencies to consider an inter-agency disciplinary board;

         Draft Interinstitutional Agreement

               29.

               Recalls the draft Interinstitutional Agreement on the operating framework for the European regulatory agencies presented by the Commission (COM(2005) 59), which was intended to create a horizontal framework for the creation, structure, operation, evaluation and control of the European regulatory agencies; notes that the draft represents a useful initiative in the effort to rationalise the creation and running of agencies; notes the statement in the Commission's 2006 synthesis report (paragraph 3.1, COM(2007) 274) that although progress in negotiations stalled after publication of the draft, discussions on substance were relaunched in the Council at the end of 2006; regrets that it has not been possible to make further progress towards adoption;

               30.

               Welcomes therefore the Commission's commitment to bring forward a communication on the future of the regulatory agencies during the course of 2008;

         Self-financed agencies

               31.

               Recalls that for the two self-financing agencies, discharge is given to the director by the administrative board; notes that both have significant accumulated surpluses from fee income carried over from previous years figures, as follows:

                           —

                           Office for Harmonization of the Internal Market cash and cash equivalents: EUR 281 million (10),

                           —

                           Community Plant Variety Office cash and cash equivalents: EUR 18 million (11);

         Specific points

               32.

               Notes the finding in the Court of Auditors' report for 2006 that at the end of 2006, the appropriations carried over for title II (administrative expenditure) were about 40 % of commitments and for title III (non-differentiated operational expenditure) were about 50 %, and that for the same titles, more than 15 % of appropriations were cancelled;

               33.

               Acknowledges the Agency's reply that the level of carry-overs was high in 2006 because the Agency still had to outsource more than half of its work to the Member States' National Aviation Authorities and a considerable part of the invoices had not been received by the end of the year;

               34.

               Expresses concern at the Court's further finding that for its 2006 certification activities, the Agency's cost analysis system showed costs of about EUR 48 million as against revenue of about EUR 35 million;

               35.

               Notes that the Agency had EUR 31,9 million in commitment and payment appropriations from the general budget of the European Union budget for the financial year 2006;

               36.

               Notes the Court's insistence that the Agency, in cooperation with the Commission, must review the current fees scheme in order to ensure that the Agency's costs for certification activities are justified and covered by its fees;

               37.

               Calls on the Agency and the Commission to review the Agency's fee structure to bring costs and revenue for certification activities into balance;

               38.

               Notes the Agency's reply that the fees and charges regulation (Commission Regulation (EC) No 593/2007 (12), which entered into force on 1 June 2007, should generate revenue sufficient to cover the cost of certification activities;

               39.

               Points out that in the Agency's balance sheet, short-term receivables amounted to approximately EUR 14 million, of which 20 % were more than three months old; calls on the Agency to implement an effective claim management system, possibly including interest for late payments;

               40.

               Notes from the accounts that EUR 5,05 million, corresponding to the 2006 budget outturn, has been recorded as a debt to be reimbursed to the Commission;

               41.

               Takes note of the statement by the Authorising officer in his Declaration of Assurance that the appropriate measures have been taken since the audit by the IAS in July 2006 to meet its main recommendations;

               42.

               Notes the statement in the Agency's Annual Activity Report that the uncertainty affecting the operating budget for the Agency has continued, due chiefly to low income from fees and charges; the deficit was covered by the Community contribution, but this has had consequences for the activities of the Agency financed by that contribution;

               43.

               Notes, however, that in 2006 the Agency had a significant number of vacant posts at grades AD 6 and AD 7.

      (1)  OJ C 261, 31.10.2007, p. 16.

      (2)  OJ C 309, 19.12.2007, p. 47.

      (3)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 79, 19.3.2008, p. 1.

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

      (6)  OJ L 187, 15.7.2008, p. 156.

      (7)  Resolution of the European Parliament containing the comments accompanying the decision on the discharge to the Executive Director of the European Aviation Safety Agency in respect of the implementation of its budget for the financial year 2003 (OJ L 196, 27.7.2005, p. 145).

      (8)  OJ C 273, 15.11.2007, p. 1.

      (9)  Council document DS 605/1/07 Rev1.

      (10)  Source: report on the annual accounts of the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market for the financial year 2006, together with the Office's replies (OJ C 309, 19.12.2007, p. 141).

      (11)  Source: report on the annual accounts of the Community Plant Variety Office for the financial year 2006, together with the Office's replies (OJ C 309, 19.12.2007, p. 135).

      (12)  OJ L 140, 1.6.2007, p. 3.


title: Commission Decision of 13 January 2017 on the appointment of certain members of the Scientific Council of the European Research Council

text:
               14.1.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 13/2

         COMMISSION DECISION
   of 13 January 2017
   on the appointment of certain members of the Scientific Council of the European Research Council
   (2017/C 13/02)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to the Council Decision 2013/743/EU of 3 December 2013 establishing the specific programme implementing Horizon 2020 – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) and repealing Decisions 2006/971/EC, 2006/972/EC, 2006/973/EC, 2006/974/EC and 2006/975/EC (1), and in particular Article 7(1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               By Decision C(2013) 8915 (2) (as subsequently modified by Decision C(2015) 58 (3)) the Commission established the European Research Council (ERC) for the period from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020 as the means of implementing the actions under Part I ‘Excellent science’ which relate to the specific objective ‘The European Research Council (ERC)’, referred to in point (a) of Article 3(1) of Decision 2013/743/EU.

               (2)

               The ERC is composed of the independent Scientific Council provided for in Article 7 of Decision 2013/743/EU and the dedicated implementation structure provided for in Article 8 of that Decision.

               (3)

               Pursuant to Article 2(1) of Decision C(2013) 8915, the Scientific Council is composed of the President of the ERC and 21 members.

               (4)

               Pursuant to the third subparagraph of Article 7(1) of Decision 2013/743/EU, the members of the Scientific Council are appointed for a term of up to 4 years, renewable once. They should be appointed in a manner to ensure the continuity of the work of the Scientific Council.

               (5)

               The second term of office of one member of the Scientific Council will end.

               (6)

               The first term of office of seven members of the Scientific Council will end and three will not be renewed.

               (7)

               Pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 7(1) of Decision 2013/743/EU, the members of the Scientific Council are appointed by the Commission, following an independent and transparent procedure for their identification agreed with the Scientific Council, including a consultation of the scientific community and a report to the European Parliament and the Council. For this purpose, a standing Identification Committee for the selection of members of the Scientific Council of the European Research Council was set up. The committee made recommendations to the Commission for the appointment of four new members of the Scientific Council and for the renewal of the first mandates of four members of the Scientific Council, that were accepted,

         HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
   Article 1
   Professor Paola BOVOLENTA is appointed member of the ERC Scientific Council for a first mandate ending 31 December 2020.
   Professor Eveline CRONE is appointed member of the ERC Scientific Council for a first mandate starting 1 April 2017 and ending 31 December 2020.
   Professor Andrzej JAJSZCZYK is appointed member of the ERC Scientific Council for a first mandate ending 31 December 2020.
   Professor Giulio SUPERTI-FURGA is appointed member of the ERC Scientific Council for a first mandate ending 31 December 2020.
   Professor Klaus BOCK is appointed member of the ERC Scientific Council for a second mandate ending 31 December 2018.
   Professor Athene DONALD is appointed member of the ERC Scientific Council for a second mandate ending 31 December 2018.
   Professor Eva KONDOROSI is appointed member of the ERC Scientific Council for a second mandate ending 31 December 2018.
   Professor Reinhilde VEUGELERS is appointed member of the ERC Scientific Council for a second mandate ending 31 December 2018.
   Article 2
   The members of the ERC Scientific Council are listed in the Annex to this Decision.
   Article 3
   This Decision shall enter into force on 1 January 2017.

      Done at Brussels, 13 January 2017.

            For the Commission

         Carlos MOEDAS

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 965.

      (2)  Commission Decision C(2013) 8915 of 12 December 2013 establishing the European Research Council (OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 23).

      (3)  Commission Decision C(2015) 58 of 17 February 2015 amending Decision C(2013) 8915 establishing the European Research Council (OJ C 58, 18.2.2015, p. 3).

      ANNEX
      Members of the ERC Scientific Council

                  Name and institute

                  End of term of office

                  Klaus BOCK, Danish National Research Foundation

                  31 December 2018

                  Paola BOVOLENTA, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

                  31 December 2020

                  Margaret BUCKINGHAM, Pasteur Institute, Paris

                  30 June 2019

                  Christopher CLARK, University of Cambridge

                  31 December 2019

                  Eveline CRONE, Leiden University

                  31 December 2020

                  Athene DONALD, University of Cambridge

                  31 December 2018

                  Andrzej JAJSZCZYK, AGH University of Science and Technology, Krakow

                  31 December 2020

                  Tomas JUNGWIRTH, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic

                  31 December 2018

                  Eva KONDOROSI, Hungarian Academy of Sciences

                  31 December 2018

                  Michael KRAMER, Max Planck Institute for Radio Astronomy, Bonn

                  30 June 2019

                  Kurt MEHLHORN, Max-Planck Institute for Informatics, Saarbrücken

                  30 June 2020

                  Barbara ROMANOWICZ, Berkeley Seismological Laboratory

                  31 December 2019

                  Nils Christian STENSETH, University of Oslo

                  31 December 2017

                  Martin STOKHOF, University of Amsterdam

                  31 December 2017

                  Giulio SUPERTI-FURGA, Research Centre for Molecular Medicine of the Austrian Academy of Sciences

                  31 December 2020

                  Nektarios TAVERNARAKIS, Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, Foundation for Research and Technology — Hellas

                  30 June 2020

                  Janet THORNTON, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI) European Molecular Biology Laboratory

                  31 December 2018

                  Isabelle VERNOS, Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Barcelona

                  30 June 2019

                  Reinhilde VEUGELERS, Catholic University of Leuven

                  31 December 2018

                  Michel WIEVIORKA, Centre for Sociological Analysis and Intervention, Paris

                  31 December 2017

                  Fabio ZWIRNER, University of Padova

                  31 December 2018


title: Decision (EU) 2017/102 of the European Central Bank of 11 January 2017 amending Decision (EU) 2015/5 on the implementation of the asset-backed securities purchase programme (ECB/2017/3)

text:
               20.1.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 16/55

         DECISION (EU) 2017/102 OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK
   of 11 January 2017
   amending Decision (EU) 2015/5 on the implementation of the asset-backed securities purchase programme (ECB/2017/3)
   THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the first indent of Article 127(2) thereof,
   Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular the second subparagraph of Article 12.1 in conjunction with the first indent of Article 3.1, and Article 18.1 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Decision (EU) 2015/5 of the European Central Bank (ECB/2014/45) (1) established an asset-backed securities purchase programme (ABSPP). Alongside the third covered bond purchase programme, the secondary markets public sector asset purchase programme and the corporate sector purchase programme, the ABSPP is part of the expanded asset purchase programme (APP). The APP aims to further enhance the transmission of monetary policy, facilitate the provision of credit to the euro area economy, ease borrowing conditions for households and firms and contribute to returning inflation rates to levels below but close to 2 % over the medium term, consistent with the primary objective of the European Central Bank (ECB) of maintaining price stability.

               (2)

               The purchase of assets under the APP is a proportionate measure for mitigating the risks to the outlook for price developments, as it will further ease monetary and financial conditions, including those relevant to the borrowing conditions of euro area non-financial corporations and households, thereby supporting aggregate consumption and investment spending in the euro area and ultimately contributing to a return of inflation rates to levels below but close to 2 % over the medium term. The APP fully complies with the obligations of the Eurosystem central banks under the Treaties, including the prohibition of monetary financing, and does not impair the operation of the Eurosystem in accordance with the principle of an open market economy with free competition.

               (3)

               On 8 December 2016, the Governing Council decided, in line with its mandate to ensure price stability, that certain parameters of the APP should be adjusted in order to achieve the APP's objectives. The adjustments are in line with the Governing Council's monetary policy mandate, fully comply with the obligations of the Eurosystem central banks under the Treaties and duly reflect risk management considerations.

               (4)

               More specifically, the intended horizon of purchases under the APP should be extended until the end of December 2017, or beyond, if necessary, and in any event until the Governing Council sees a sustained adjustment in the path of inflation that is consistent with its aim of achieving inflation rates below, but close to, 2 % over the medium term.

               (5)

               The liquidity provided to the market through the combined monthly purchases under the APP should continue to amount to EUR 80 billion until the end of March 2017. From April 2017, the combined monthly purchases under the APP should proceed at a pace of EUR 60 billion until the end of December 2017, or beyond, if necessary, and in any case until the Governing Council sees a sustained adjustment in the path of inflation consistent with its inflation aim. If, in the meantime, the outlook becomes less favourable, or if financial conditions become inconsistent with further progress towards a sustained adjustment in the path of inflation, the Governing Council intends to increase the programme in terms of size and/or duration.

               (6)

               To ensure the continued smooth implementation of purchases under the APP over the intended horizon, purchases of securities under the APP with a yield to maturity below the interest rate on the ECB's deposit facility should be permitted to the extent necessary.

               (7)

               Therefore, Decision (EU) 2015/5 (ECB/2014/45) should be amended accordingly,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   Amendment
   In Article 2 of Decision (EU) 2015/5 (ECB/2014/45), the following point (10) is added:

                  ‘(10)

                  Purchases of nominal ABSs at a negative yield to maturity (or yield to worst) equal to or above the deposit facility rate are permitted. Purchases of nominal ABSs at a negative yield to maturity (or yield to worst) below the deposit facility rate are permitted to the extent necessary.’.

   Article 2
   Entry into force
   This Decision shall enter into force on 13 January 2017.

      Done at Frankfurt am Main, 11 January 2017.

            For the Governing Council of the ECB

            The President of the ECB

         Mario DRAGHI

      (1)  Decision (EU) 2015/5 of the European Central Bank of 19 November 2014 on the implementation of the asset-backed securities purchase programme (ECB/2014/45) (OJ L 1, 6.1.2015, p. 4).


title: 2004/929/EC: Commission Decision of 22 December 2004 adjusting the weightings applicable from 1 February, 1 March, 1 April, 1 May and 1 June 2004 to the remuneration of officials, contract staff and temporary staff of the European Communities serving in third countries and of certain officials remaining in post in the 10 new Member States for a maximum period of 15 months after accession

text:
               31.12.2004

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 396/49

      COMMISSION DECISION

   of 22 December 2004
   adjusting the weightings applicable from 1 February, 1 March, 1 April, 1 May and 1 June 2004 to the remuneration of officials, contract staff and temporary staff of the European Communities serving in third countries and of certain officials remaining in post in the 10 new Member States for a maximum period of 15 months after accession
   (2004/929/EC)
   THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
   Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
   Having regard to the Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities and the Conditions of employment of other servants of the Communities laid down by Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 (1), and in particular the second paragraph of Article 13 of Annex X thereto,
   Having regard to the Treaty of Accession of the 10 new Member States, and in particular Article 33(4) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               Pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 13 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations, the weightings to be applied from 1 January 2004 to the remuneration of officials of the European Communities serving in third countries payable in the currency of their country of employment were last laid down, under the old Staff Regulations, by Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1785/2004 (2).

               (2)

               Some of these weightings need to be adjusted in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 13 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations, with effect from 1 February, 1 March, 1 April, 1 May and 1 June 2004, since the statistics available to the Commission show that in certain third countries the variation in the cost of living measured on the basis of the weighting and the corresponding exchange rate has exceeded 5 % since weightings were last laid down or adjusted,

         DECIDES:
   Sole Article
   With effect from 1 February, 1 March, 1 April, 1 May and 1 June 2004, the weightings applied to the remuneration of officials, contract staff and temporary staff of the European Communities serving in third countries and of certain officials remaining in post in the 10 new Member States for a maximum period of 15 months after accession, payable in the currency of the country of employment, shall be adjusted as shown in the Annex hereto.
   The exchange rates used for the calculation of this remuneration shall be established in accordance with the rules for the implementation of the Financial Regulation and correspond to the dates referred to in the first paragraph.

      Done at Brussels, 22 December 2004.

            For the Commission

         Benita FERRERO-WALDNER

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 56, 4.3.1968, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 857/2004 (OJ L 161, 30.4.2004, p. 11).

      (2)  OJ L 317, 16.10.2004, p. 1.

      ANNEX

                  Place of employment

                  Weightings
                  February 2004

                  Dominican Republic

                  33,1

                  Suriname

                  49,3

                  Zimbabwe

                  31,9

                  Place of employment

                  Weightings
                  March 2004

                  Dominican Republic

                  38,9

                  Zimbabwe

                  33,5

                  Place of employment

                  Weightings
                  April 2004

                  Dominican Republic

                  43,8

                  Sierra Leone

                  65,6

                  Zimbabwe

                  38,7

                  Place of employment

                  Weightings
                  May 2004

                  Georgia

                  87,4

                  Malawi

                  71,6

                  Dominican Republic

                  48,6

                  Zimbabwe

                  42,9

                  Place of employment

                  Weightings
                  June 2004

                  Kazakhstan

                  94,0

                  Dominican Republic

                  46,4

                  Sierra Leone

                  71,0

                  Zimbabwe

                  44,7


title: 2011/256/EU: Council Decision of 11 April 2011 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and the Argentine Republic pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the European Union

text:
               29.4.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 110/13

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 11 April 2011
   on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and the Argentine Republic pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the European Union
   (2011/256/EU)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 207(4), in conjunction with Article 218(5) thereof,
   Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 29 January 2007 the Council authorised the Commission to open negotiations with certain other Members of the World Trade Organization under Article XXIV:6 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 in the course of the accessions to the European Union of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania.

               (2)

               Negotiations have been conducted by the Commission within the framework of the negotiating directives adopted by the Council.

               (3)

               These negotiations have been concluded and the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and the Argentine Republic pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the European Union (the Agreement) was initialled on 22 September 2010.

               (4)

               The Agreement should be signed,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The signing of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Union and the Argentine Republic pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 relating to the modification of concessions in the schedules of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania in the course of their accession to the European Union (the Agreement) is hereby approved on behalf of the Union, subject to the conclusion of the Agreement (1).
   Article 2
   The President of the Council is hereby authorised to designate the person(s) empowered to sign the Agreement on behalf of the Union.
   Article 3
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

      Done at Luxembourg, 11 April 2011.

            For the Council

            The President

         PINTÉR S.

      (1)  The text of the Agreement will be published together with the decision on its conclusion.


title: Council Decision of 18 June 2012 appointing half of the members of the Management Board of the European Food Safety Authority and amending the Decision of 24 June 2010

text:
               30.6.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 192/1

         COUNCIL DECISION
   of 18 June 2012
   appointing half of the members of the Management Board of the European Food Safety Authority and amending the Decision of 24 June 2010
   2012/C 192/01
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
   Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (1), and in particular Article 25(1) thereof,
   Having regard to the list of candidates submitted to the Council by the European Commission,
   Having regard to the views expressed by the European Parliament,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               It is vital to ensure the independence, high scientific quality, transparency and efficiency of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Cooperation with Member States is also indispensable.

               (2)

               Half of the members of the EFSA Management Board are to finish their term of office on 30 June 2012. Three of those members have a background in organisations representing consumers and other interests in the food chain.

               (3)

               The list submitted by the Commission has been examined with a view to appointing seven new members of the EFSA Management Board on the basis of the documentation provided by the Commission and in the light of the views expressed by the European Parliament. The aim is to secure the highest standard of competence, a broad range of relevant expertise, for instance in management and in public administration, and the broadest possible geographic distribution within the Union.

               (4)

               In examining the list submitted by the Commission, the Council has taken account of the fact that the Commission is to proceed without delay to replace a member who recently resigned from the EFSA Management Board by way of a separate procedure and is to submit a list of candidates to that effect in accordance with the conditions set out in Article 25(1) of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002.

               (5)

               The Council has also taken account of the fact that one of the current EFSA Management Board members whose mandate is to expire on 30 June 2014 may, due to a change in his professional activities, be regarded as a member with a background in organisations representing other interests in the food chain.

               (6)

               The Decision of 24 June 2010 appointing half of the members of the Management Board of the European Food Safety Authority (2) should therefore be amended accordingly,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
   Article 1
   The following persons shall be appointed as members of the Management Board of the European Food Safety Authority for the period from 1 July 2012 to 30 June 2016:

               Valérie BADUEL

               Sue DAVIES (3)
                   (4)

               Piergiuseppe FACELLI (4)

               Jaana HUSU-KALLIO

               Radu ROATIȘ CHEȚAN

               Jiří RUPRICH (4)

               Tadeusz WIJASZKA

         Article 2
   In Article 1 of the Decision of 24 June 2010, the following sign ‘(**)’ shall be added to the name ‘Jan MOUSING’.
   Article 3
   This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.

      Done at Luxembourg, 18 June 2012.

            For the Council

            The President

         M. GJERSKOV

      (1)  OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.

      (2)  OJ C 171, 30.6.2010, p. 3.

      (3)  Background in organisations representing consumers.

      (4)  Current member of the EFSA Management Board.


Avis juridique important

|

31989D0064

89/64/EEC, Euratom, ECSC: COMMISSION Decision of 22 November 1988 adjusting the weightings applicable from 1 May 1988 to the remuneration of officials of the European Communities serving in non-member countries

Official Journal L 029 , 31/01/1989 P. 0055 - 0056

*****COMMISSION  DECISION  of 22 November 1988  adjusting the weightings applicable from 1 May 1988 to the remuneration of officials of the European Communities serving in non-member countries  (89/64/EEC, EURATOM, ECSC)  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing a Single Council and a Single Commission of the European Communities,  Having regard to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities laid down by Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 (1), as last amended by Regulation (ECSC, EEC, Euratom) No 2339/88 (2), and in particular the second paragraph of Article 13 of Annex X thereto,  Whereas, pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 13 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations, Council Regulation (ECSC, EEC, Euratom) No 2176/88 (3) laid down the weightings to be applied from 1 January 1988 to the remuneration of officials serving in non-member countries payable in the currency of their country of employment;  Whereas, the Commission has made a number of adjustments to these weightings in recent months (4) pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 13 of Annex X to the Staff Regulations;  Whereas some of these weightings should be adjusted with effect from 1 May 1988 given that the statistics available to the Commission show that in certain non-member countries the variation in the cost of living measured on the basis of the weighting and the corresponding exchange rate has exceeded 5 % since the weightings were last laid down or adjusted,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Sole Article  With effect from 1 May 1988 the weightings applicable to the remuneration of officials serving in non-member countries payable in the currency of their country of employment are hereby adjusted as shown in the Annex.  The exchange rates for the payment of such remuneration shall be those used for implementation of the budget of the European Communities during the month preceding the date on which this Decision takes effect.  Done at Brussels, 22 November 1988.  For the Commission  Henning CHRISTOPHERSEN  Vice-President  (1) OJ No L 56, 4. 3. 1968, p. 1.  (2) OJ No L 204, 29. 7. 1988, p. 5.  (3) OJ No L 191, 22. 7. 1988, p. 4.  (4) See page 53 of this Official Journal.  ANNEX  1.2 //  //  // Country of employment  // Weighting   //  //   // Brazil   // 48,20   // Chad   // 147,64   // Congo  // 127,16   // Gambia   // 76,10   // Haiti   // 74,40  // Lebanon   // 48,11   // Lesotho   // 52,99   // Madagascar  // 53,90   // Mexico   // 49,19   // Mozambique   // 24,43  // Sudan   // 69,34   // Tanzania   // 35,87   // Turkey  // 48,54   // Uganda   // 126,71   // Zambia   // 49,79  // Zimbabwe   // 56,32   //    //