title: 2013/582/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 17 April 2013 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology 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 Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2011

text:
               16.11.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 308/248

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 17 April 2013
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2011
   (2013/582/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2011,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2011, together with the Institute’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 294/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2008 establishing the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (4), and in particular Article 21 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 (A7-0108/2013),

               1.

               Grants the Director of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology discharge in respect of the implementation of the Institute’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 Director of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology, 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. 110.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

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

      (4)  OJ L 97, 9.4.2008, p. 1.

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

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

                  —

                  having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2011,

                  —

                  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology for the financial year 2011, together with the Institute’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 294/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2008 establishing the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (4), and in particular Article 21 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 (A7-0108/2013),

                  A.

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

                  B.

                  whereas the Institute, which is located in Budapest, was established by Regulation (EC) No 294/2008,

                  C.

                  whereas the Commission granted financial autonomy to the Institute on 8 June 2011,

                  D.

                  whereas 2011 was the Institute’s first year that the Court of Auditors published a report on its annual accounts; whereas the audited period runs from 8 June to 31 December 2011,

                  E.

                  whereas the Institute’s overall budget for 2011 was EUR 64 294 640,

                  F.

                  whereas grants represent about 90 % of the Institute’s budget and their impact on budget execution is, therefore, significant; whereas the Knowledge and Innovation Communities grants (KIC grants) were EUR 56 847 080,

                  G.

                  whereas in accordance with its Foundation Regulation, the Institute’s 2011 budget was financed by a subsidy granted by the Union, a contribution granted by the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries and a contribution granted by the host Member State,

                  H.

                  whereas the Institute signed a host agreement with the Government of the Republic of Hungary on 23 March 2010,

                  I.

                  whereas at the end of 2011, the Institute recorded a negative budget outturn of EUR 1 824 955,81 (6); whereas the Institute recognises the outturn as a contingent asset; whereas according to the guidelines issued by the accounting services of the Commission, the negative budgetary outturn should not be booked as receivable against the Commission since the amounts carried forward are usually cancelled partially,

                  J.

                  whereas in 2010 and 2011, the Institute and its partner DG, Directorate-General for Education and Culture (DG EAC), worked together to set up the appropriate internal structures and procedures to enable the Institute to manage Union funds in accordance with the principles of sound financial management and to fulfil the minimum conditions for its financial autonomy; whereas those conditions (7) were defined as establishing:

                              —

                              an effective segregation of duties of the authorising officer and the accounting officer,

                              —

                              an operational accounting system enabling the use of the funds to be verified and reflected in Union accounts,

                              —

                              an adequate procedure for payments to ensure sound financial management of Union funds,

                  1.

                  Welcomes the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the Institute for the financial year 2011;

         Budgetary and financial management

                  2.

                  Recalls from the annual accounts that the Institute’s overall budget for 2011 amounted to EUR 64 294 640;

                  3.

                  Acknowledges from the annual accounts that the Institute’s budget in 2011, for the period of financial autonomy (June-December), was EUR 9 794 873,70;

                  4.

                  Takes note from the annual accounts that the Union’s contribution was EUR 8 234 873,70 for the period of financial autonomy; notes, furthermore, that that contribution includes EUR 191 433,87 granted by the EFTA countries, a contribution which is collected by the Commission who transfers it to the Institute, together with the Union’s subsidy;

                  5.

                  Recalls that the Institute signed a host agreement with the Government of the Republic of Hungary on 23 March 2010; recalls that according to the agreement, the host Member State undertakes to contribute to the Institute’s staff costs to cover the wage costs of 20 employees for five years; notes, furthermore, that the contribution from 2011 is due in five annual instalments of EUR 1 560 000;

         Accounting system

                  6.

                  Acknowledges from the annual accounts that on 8 June 2011, the Institute introduced accrual based accounting (ABAC) workflow, the accounting system used by the Commission for budgetary accounting; notes, furthermore, that on 8 June 2011, the contract management system was provided by ABAC contract;

                  7.

                  Notes from the annual accounts that for general accounting, the Institute implemented SAP on 8 June 2011, which is the system used by the Commission, a system directly linked to ABAC; notes, furthermore, that between 1 January and 7 June 2011, the Institute used the accounting system of its partner DG;

                  8.

                  Takes note from the annual accounts that from 19 December 2011, the assets management system was provided by ABAC assets;

         Commitments

                  9.

                  Observes from the annual accounts (8) that the execution rate for the entire year stands at 97,21 % for commitment appropriations, 83,83 % for payment appropriations and 67,33 % for payments against commitment;

                  10.

                  Takes note that the execution rate for the period of financial autonomy stands at 92,81 % for commitment appropriations, 24,70 % for payment appropriations against commitment and 11,48 % for payment against the commitment; calls on the Institute to inform the discharge authority of the actions it will take to address this deficiency as the low execution rates show difficulties in budget planning and implementation;

                  11.

                  Acknowledges that the execution rate of commitments for Title I (‘Staff Expenditure’) for the entire year represents 73,28 % and the execution rate of payments against committed appropriations stands at 92,79 %;

                  12.

                  Notes that the execution rate of commitments for Title I (‘Staff Expenditure’) for the period of financial autonomy represents 63,36 % and the execution rate of payments against the committed appropriations stands at 88,56 %; calls on the Institute to inform the discharge authority of the actions it will take to address this deficiency as the low execution rates show difficulties in budget planning and implementation;

                  13.

                  Acknowledges from the annual accounts that the execution rate of commitments for Title II (‘Operating Expenditure’) was 72,41 % at the end of 2011 and that for payment appropriations the execution rate was 47,77 %; calls on the Institute to inform the discharge authority of the actions it will take to address this deficiency as the low execution rates show difficulties in budget planning and implementation;

                  14.

                  Notes that the execution rate of commitments for Title II (‘Operating Expenditure’) for the period of financial autonomy represents 70,32 % and the execution rate of payments against the committed appropriations stands at 42,13 %; calls on the Institute to inform the discharge authority of the actions it will take to address this deficiency as the low execution rates show difficulties in budget planning and implementation;

                  15.

                  Takes note that the execution rate of commitments for Title III (‘Operational Expenditure’) for the entire year represents 99,32 % and the execution rate of payments against the committed appropriations stands at 66,39 %; notes, furthermore, that the execution rate of commitments for both KIC grants and the Institute’s Foundation stands at 100 % and that the ratio of 66,39 % for payments against commitments for operational expenditure is a result of the fact that no pre-financing payment was executed for the additional grants coming from the second transfer in August;

                  16.

                  Acknowledges that the execution rate of commitments for Title III (‘Operational Expenditure’) for the period of financial autonomy represents 98,09 % and that the execution rate of payments against the committed appropriations is very low at 3,46 %; calls on the Institute to inform the discharge authority of the actions it will take to address this deficiency as the low execution rates show difficulties in budget planning and implementation;

                  17.

                  Takes note from the Court of Auditors that grant agreements resulting in payments in 2011 were systematically signed by the Commission (DG EAC) and the Institute after most of the activities had already been implemented; notes, furthermore, that between September and December 2011, the Institute made final payments amounting to EUR 4 200 000 related to three grant agreements that were signed well after the start of activities; calls on the Institute to inform the discharge authority of the actions it will take to address this deficiency as this represents an issue in terms of good financial management;

         Carry-overs

                  18.

                  Acknowledges that an amount of EUR 4 500 000 of payment appropriations was carried over on budget line 3 100 (KIC grants) from 2010 to 2011; notes, furthermore, that EUR 3 780 634,25 was paid which amounted to an execution rate of payments against the committed appropriations of 84,01 % at the end of 2011;

                  19.

                  Takes note that EUR 21 903 441,85 of appropriations were automatically carried over from 2011 to 2012 as follows: 0,97 % for staff expenses, 2,25 % for administrative expenses and the major part of it, 96,79 %, for operational expenses; calls on the Institute to inform the discharge authority of the actions it will take to address this deficiency as the high level of carry-over is at odds with the budgetary principle of annuality;

                  20.

                  Observes that EUR 3 778 942,31 of payment appropriations was carried over non-automatically from 2011 to 2012, as at the end of 2011, the Institute had several commitments corresponding to obligations duly contracted for which no payment or partial payment was executed in 2011; calls on the Institute to inform the discharge authority the actions it will take to address this deficiency;

         Recruitment procedures

                  21.

                  Notes from the Annual Activity Report that by the end of 2011, 40 posts (23 temporary agents and 17 contract agents) were filled, which shows an increase of 66 %, compared to 24 posts filled by the end of 2010;

                  22.

                  Acknowledges that in addition to the staff increase, a new organisational structure was established in September 2011 to allocate a sufficient number of effectives to reinforce, in particular, administrative and horizontal tasks, budget planning and implementation, human resources management, and accounting and internal audit tasks, thus creating a solid supportive service base for the Institute;

                  23.

                  Acknowledges from the Annual Activity Report that the new Director joined the Institute on 1 July 2011;

                  24.

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

         (1)  OJ C 388, 15.12.2012, p. 110.

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

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

         (4)  OJ L 97, 9.4.2008, p. 1.

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

         (6)  Annual accounts 2011, p. 23.

         (7)  Commission Decision C (2009) 10145 of 17 December 2009.

         (8)  Annual accounts 2011, p. 34.

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


title: 2012/620/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2012 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2010#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 European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2010

text:
               17.10.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 286/367

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2012
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2010
   (2012/620/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2010,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2010, together with the Authority’s replies (1),

               —

               having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 21 February 2012 (06083/2012 – C7-0051/2012),

               —

               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 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) establishing a European Food Safety Authority, and in particular Article 44 thereof,

               —

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

               —

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

               —

               having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0106/2012),

               1.

               Postpones its decision on granting the Executive Director of the European Food Safety Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority’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 European Food Safety Authority, 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 366, 15.12.2011, p. 106.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      (3)  OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.

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

      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 European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2010
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

                  having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2010,

                  —

                  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2010, together with the Authority’s replies (1),

                  —

                  having regard to the Council’s recommendation of 21 February 2012 (06083/2012 – C7-0051/2012),

                  —

                  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 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3) establishing a European Food Safety Authority, and in particular Article 44 thereof,

                  —

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

                  —

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

                  —

                  having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0106/2012),

                  A.

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

                  B.

                  whereas on 10 May 2011 Parliament granted the Executive Director of the European Food Safety Authority discharge for implementation of the Authority’s budget for the financial year 2009 (5), and in its resolution accompanying the discharge decision, inter alia:

                              —

                              called on the Authority to strengthen the budget processes relating to its differentiated appropriations and the planning and monitoring of multiannual implementation,

                              —

                              urged, in addition, the Authority to improve its budget management in order to reduce its high carry-over amounts,

                              —

                              invited the Authority to initiate a survey on the potential conflicts of interest of its leading scientists, its Management Board and its panel members, so that possible omissions in the declarations of interest can be detected and followed by action in a timely manner,

                  C.

                  whereas the overall budget of the Authority for 2010 was EUR 74 700 000 compared with EUR 71 400 000 in 2009, which represents an increase of 4,6 %; whereas the initial contribution of the Union to the budget of the Authority for 2010 was EUR 69 041 000, which represents an increase of 4,36 % compared with its initial contribution in 2009 (6),

                  D.

                  whereas the workload continues its growing trend both in volume and in complexity with the adoption of more than 560 scientific outputs,

         Budget and financial management

                  1.

                  Recalls that the initial Union contribution to the Authority for 2010 amounted to EUR 69 041 000; notes however that EUR 3 950 000 coming from the recovery of surplus, was added to that amount which, as a result, makes a total Union contribution of EUR 72 991 000 for 2010;

                  2.

                  Acknowledges from its Annual Activity Report (AAR) that, in 2010, the Authority had a budget execution rate of 98,8 % in terms of committed appropriations and of 83,5 % in terms of payment appropriations; takes note that under Title 1 (Staff) and Title 2 (Infrastructure) the budget was fully executed while under Title 3 (Operations) the execution rate reached 96,5 %;

                  3.

                  Notes, however, from the AAR that in 2010 the Authority had a budget execution rate of only 83,5 % in terms of payment appropriations, which is 11 % below the target set by the Authority; finds from comments by the Authority that the execution rate in terms of payment appropriations is lower than expected for the following main reasons:

                              —

                              major data processing and IT operational support projects were initiated in November 2010 and therefore triggered payments for an amount of EUR 4 300 000 only in 2011,

                              —

                              delays in contracting scientific cooperation activities and lower payment levels under the existing grant and procurement programme led to an underspend of the related differentiated credits amounting to EUR 1 300 000,

                              —

                              payments for an amount of EUR 1 100 000 for specific projects in administration and communication were postponed to 2011;

                  4.

                  Acknowledges from the Authority that budget execution was reported to the Management Board on a monthly basis, deviations from the budget execution targets by activity or in relation to the scientific cooperation programme were pointed out and corrective action taken;

                  5.

                  Urges, however, the Authority to take further action to enable a satisfactory budget execution in terms of both commitment and payment appropriations and to inform the discharge authority of the progress achieved;

                  6.

                  Notes from the Authority that in line with the schedule of the Commission, migration to the accrual-based accounting (ABAC) system was scheduled for September 2011 and implemented accordingly;

                  7.

                  Finds it unacceptable that while the Management Board of the Authority consists of only 15 members, each meeting costs on average EUR 92 630, which represents an amount of EUR 6 175 per member; underlines that this amount is nearly three times higher than the second most expensive Management Board of a decentralised agency; is of the opinion that the Management Board meetings costs are excessive and should be reduced drastically; calls on the Authority and its Management Board to remedy the situation immediately and to inform the discharge authority of the measures undertaken by 30 June 2012;

         Carry-overs and contract management process

                  8.

                  Acknowledges from the Authority that 6 % (EUR 270 000 000) of commitments for operational activities carried over from 2009 had to be cancelled; notes that this is an improvement compared with the previous year in which 19 % of commitments for operational activities were carried over from 2008, 37 % of such commitments were carried over from 2007 and 26 % of such commitments were carried over from 2006;

                  9.

                  Urges, once more, the Authority to improve its budget management in order to reduce its high carry-over amounts; notes, in particular, that this situation demonstrates weaknesses in the Authority’s contract management and monitoring of the remittance of reports and cost statements;

                  10.

                  Calls on the Authority to develop and implement a common monitoring system for the management of all its contracts; acknowledges, in particular, the absence of a central and coordinated capacity at directorate level responsible for the monitoring of contracts; underlines that this entails a risk of inefficient use of resources and uncoordinated monitoring of contracts and therefore asks the Authority to centralise these responsibilities at the level of each directorate;

                  11.

                  Urges, in addition, the Authority to improve the reporting on contract implementation in order to guarantee effective supervision and management of its operational activities;

         Procurement

                  12.

                  Notes from its AAR that, in 2010, the Authority finalised 24 procurement procedures in Communication and Administration for an amount of EUR 48 800 000, as well as 75 procurement contracts and 10 grant agreements as part of the scientific cooperation programme with values of EUR 5 700 000 and EUR 2 100 000 respectively;

                  13.

                  Notes that the Authority has had a Practical Procurement Guide since 2008 to provide practical guidance to its staff in preparing and implementing procurement procedures and the resulting contracts, and that the Guide is regularly updated; notes moreover that the Guide is being revised to take into account the rules recently adopted by the Commission on public procurement and revision of the Financial Regulation;

         Human resources

                  14.

                  Notes from the Authority that 99 % of planned posts were either filled or under offer by the end of 2010;

                  15.

                  Calls on the Authority to address its weaknesses in recruitment procedures, which put at risk the transparency of the procedures; acknowledges, in particular, from the Court of Auditors that the Authority did not ensure the anonymity of the written tests and decided pass marks for the various stages of the selection process after the evaluation process had already started;

                  16.

                  Is concerned that the Authority delayed for over 12 months the Internal Audit Service (IAS)’s ‘very important’ recommendation which called on the Authority to define contract renewal processes and ensure the transparency of decision-making; calls, therefore, on the Authority to explain to the discharge authority the reasons behind this delay and to rapidly address this deficiency;

         Conflict of interest and ‘revolving door’ cases

                  17.

                  Notes, in particular, that in September 2010 the Chair of the Management Board was reported to have direct links to the food industry, and to be a member of the Board of Directors of the International Life Science Institute (ILSI) — Europe;

                  18.

                  Considers that, while a dialogue with industry on product assessment methodologies is legitimate and necessary, this dialogue should not undermine the independence of the Authority nor the integrity of risk assessment procedures; asks therefore the Authority to consider as a conflict of interest the current or recent past participation of its Management Board, panel and working group members or staff in ILSI activities such as taskforces, scientific committees or chairs for conferences;

                  19.

                  Urges the Court of Auditors to finalise and present its audit of conflict of interest in the Authority;

                  20.

                  Recalls that the current Chair of the Management Board failed, in 2010, to declare her membership of the Board of Directors of the ILSI; notes that ILSI is financed by firms in the food, chemical and pharmaceutical sectors;

                  21.

                  Considers, therefore, that a thorough case-by-case analysis of these reports and of possible and actual conflicts of interest should be carried out in order to evaluate the objectivity and impartiality of the Authority at all levels and the work it carries out; calls, moreover, on the Authority to undertake a thorough screening of the declarations of interest submitted by its staff, experts and members of the Management Board, followed by concrete measures to end conflicts of interest and to provide information to the public; calls on the Authority to inform the discharge authority of the screening process and the concrete measures adopted, by means of a detailed written report by 30 June 2012;

                  22.

                  Notes that the Court of Auditors has observed that the review process of the declarations of interests of the members of the Management Board is insufficiently rigorous and detailed and puts the completeness and transparency of the procedure at risk;

                  23.

                  Considers that product assessment should not be based solely on industry data, but should duly take into account independent scientific literature published in peer-reviewed journals; stresses that extra caution should be exercised in relation to industry influence in the development of guidelines and assessment methodologies, which should not favour industry-sponsored studies on speculative grounds and which should be developed in an open, transparent and balanced manner;

                  24.

                  Reminds the Authority that the rules governing declarations of interests should be accompanied by a set of consequences applied when those rules are breached; further, notes that the Authority should, in addition, focus on public interest in its independent decision-making by taking into account all relevant data and information;

                  25.

                  Notes that in March 2010 a German NGO turned to the European Ombudsman, complaining that the Authority did not adequately address a potential conflict of interest concerning the move of its Head of Genetically Modified Organisms Unit to a biotechnology company in 2008 less than two months after the staff member in question left the Authority, without a ‘cooling off’ period;

                  26.

                  Underlines that the Ombudsman concluded that the Authority had not carried out a thorough assessment of the alleged potential conflict of interest and called on the Authority to improve the way in which it applies its rules and procedures in future ‘revolving door’ cases; stresses, moreover, that the Ombudsman also observed that negotiations by a serving member of staff concerning a future job which could amount to a ‘revolving door’ situation would themselves constitute a conflict of interest and recommended that the Authority should strengthen its rules and procedures accordingly; calls on the Authority to inform the discharge authority of the concrete measures adopted, and their respective deadlines, to properly address the conclusions of the Ombudsman;

                  27.

                  Once more, urges the Authority to take appropriate measures in cases of conflict of interests and ‘revolving door’ cases, including when cases occur within the Management Board, and to inform both the discharge authority and the public promptly of the measures taken;

                  28.

                  Notes from its AAR that in 2010 the Authority took several initiatives in the area of prevention and management of conflict of interests:

                              —

                              the commissioning of an independent report to assess the implementation by the Authority of its 2007 policy on declaration of interests,

                              —

                              the commissioning of an independent report to benchmark the Authority’s independence system against those of both national and international peer organisations,

                              —

                              the conclusion of an external independent review of its declaration of interest assessments;

                  29.

                  Welcomes the fact that the Authority has adopted a new definition of conflicts of interests, based on the OECD definition, but warns that further improvements are necessary to strengthen the Authority’s policy on independence; stresses in particular that the criteria that define a conflict of interests should be clarified and widened, and include current and recent past activities;

                  30.

                  Takes note from the Authority that a review of its policy on declarations of interest took place in 2011 and that its Management Board adopted a new policy on independence and scientific decision-making processes;

                  31.

                  Observes that the Authority is repeatedly challenged over alleged cases of conflicts of interest involving members of the experts’ panels, especially in the case of the panels on ‘Food additives and nutrient sources added to food’ (ANS) and ‘Genetically modified organisms’ (GMO); underlines that eight of the Authority’s panels and its scientific committee were due for renewal in March 2012 and that the Authority’s capability of implementing the new policy is under scrutiny; calls therefore on the Authority to inform the discharge authority in writing by 30 June 2012 of the steps undertaken to implement the new policy on independence and scientific decision-making processes and to conform to the OECD definition of conflict of interest when renewing its panels and its scientific committee; at the same time, calls on the Authority to inform the discharge authority of the new composition of the panels and of the scientific committee by 30 June 2012;

                  32.

                  Takes note of the revision of the Authority’s procedures in December 2010 to ensure the implementation of the obligations deriving from Article 16(2), and Articles 17 and 19 of the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union, laid down in Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 (7); was informed that in 2010, 20 staff members left the Authority, all of whom received a letter on departure reminding them of their obligations vis-à-vis the Authority; calls on the Authority to further improve the way in which it applies its rules and procedures to avoid the ‘revolving door’ cases recently highlighted by the European Ombudsman; considers that any problems with the enforcement of staff rules and declarations of interests undermine the Authority’s credibility;

                  33.

                  Notes that the Authority has been audited by the Court of Auditors in the framework of the Special Report on conflicts of interest management in the Union Agencies and acknowledges from the Court of Auditors that the Special Report is due to be published by the end of June 2012;

                  34.

                  Acknowledges from the Special Report that the Commission is considering a modification of the future funding of the Authority and proposed that the discharge authority and the Council consider a partial fee-based financing structure for the Authority; notes that the Commission is conducting an impact assessment on the matter; expresses, however, concerns that the new funding scheme proposed by the Commission could affect the independence of the Authority;

         Performance

                  35.

                  Notes from its AAR that a review of its efficiency, led by external consultants, began in 2010 with the launch of the e3 programme; acknowledges that the inception phase of the programme concerned the establishment of the programme portfolio, structure and governance in preparation for the structural reorganisation that would be implemented in 2011; invites the Authority to inform the discharge authority of the conclusions drawn by the review and of the measures it has adopted and implemented to address them;

                  36.

                  Welcomes the Authority’s plans to enhance its medium-term planning with a view to better involving the Member States in the Authority’s work and better pool its resources across Europe; supports the Authority in strengthening its cooperation with Member States in the area of risk assessment;

                  37.

                  Underlines the need for the Authority to ensure that its advice is of a high quality and is independent, in order to guarantee compliance with Union safety standards, scientific excellence and independence on all matters with a direct or indirect impact on food and feed safety, and plant protection; recommends, particularly in the interests of transparency, measures to further foster and monitor internal rules on declarations of interest by staff of the Authority and by experts working for the Authority;

                  38.

                  Considers that the main tasks of the Authority are the provision of independent scientific advice on matters with a direct or indirect impact on food safety, the conduct of risk assessments to provide Union institutions, Member States and policy-making bodies with a sound scientific basis for defining policy-driven legislative or regulatory measures and the collection and analysis of scientific data;

         Internal audit

                  39.

                  Acknowledges that six ‘very important’ recommendations from the IAS still need to be implemented and that three of them have already been delayed for over 12 months; notes in particular that these delays concern: information security management, the contract renewal process and transparency of decision-making, and filing and archiving policy; calls, therefore, on the Authority to rapidly address these deficiencies, and to inform the discharge authorities of the results achieved;

                  40.

                  Draws attention to its recommendations from previous discharge reports, as set out in the Annex to this resolution;

                  41.

                  Refers, in respect of the other observations accompanying its Decision on discharge, which are of a horizontal nature, to its resolution of 10 May 2012 (8) on the performance, financial management and control of the Agencies.

         (1)  OJ C 366, 15.12.2011, p. 106.

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

         (3)  OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p. 1.

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

         (5)  OJ L 250, 27.9.2011, p. 162.

         (6)  OJ L 64, 12.3.2010, p. 991.

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

         (8)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2012)0164 (see page 388 of this Official Journal).

      ANNEX

         EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RECOMMENDATIONS OVER PAST YEARS

                  European Food Safety Authority

                  2006

                  2007

                  2008

                  2009

                  Performance

                  No risk assessment or defined appropriate performance indicators, or documented systems or internal control procedures governing its activities

                  n.a.

                  Calls on the Authority to set SMART objectives and RACER indicators, as well as to make a Gannt diagram → promoting a results-oriented approach

                              —

                              Advises the Authority to strengthen the planning and monitoring of budget processes relating to differentiated appropriations

                              —

                              Underlines the need for the authority to ensure that its advice is of a high quality and is independent. Recommends measures to further foster and monitor internal rules on declarations of interest by staff or the authority and by experts working for the Authority

                              —

                              Requests that the Court of Auditors undertake performance audits on the Authority

                  Budgetary and financial management/Procurement

                              —

                              The annuality principle was not strictly observed: A large number of transfers were made with a high concentration of them at the year-end (31 of the 49 transfers)

                              —

                              Weaknesses in the procurement procedures: the selection criteria were not stated; the price-evaluation method not defined till the evaluation procedure was under way; vague description of the quality criteria

                              —

                              The annuality principle was not strictly observed: weaknesses in the programming, the programming and the budgeting of the planned activities

                              —

                              Weaknesses in the budgetary management: in respect of the contributions given by the Commission to Croatia and Turkey (pre-accession strategy), they should have been treated as assigned revenue in the budget. None the less, they were treated as if they were part of the normal Community subsidy

                              —

                              The annuality principle was not strictly observed: weaknesses in programming, monitoring contractual deadlines and the Authority’s budget →

                                          (1)

                                          Calls on the Authority to improve its budget management in order to reduce its carry-over amount: 23 % in 2008; 16 % in 2007; 20 % in 2006;

                                          (2)

                                          A high amount of commitments had to be cancelled (37 % of commitments for operational activities carried over from 2007 and 26 % from 2006)

                              —

                              Calls on the Commission to examine ways of ensuring that the principle of needs-based cash management is implemented in full → high cash reserves (EUR 19 990 492,26)

                              —

                              Calls on the Authority to strengthen the budget processes related to its differentiated appropriations and planning and monitoring of its multiannual implementation

                              —

                              Urges the Authority it improves its budget management in order to reduce its high carry-over amounts, stresses that the Court of Auditors has flagged up carry-overs of appropriations to the following year, this situation demonstrates weaknesses in the Authority’s contract management and monitoring of the remittance of reports and cots statements

                              —

                              Court of Auditors pointed out that commitments for operational activities carried over from the previous year had to be cancelled, urges the Authority to remedy this situation and to notify the Court of Auditors of the measures taken

                              —

                              Notes that the Court of Auditors reported difficulties in the implementation of the 2009 work programme, calls on the Authority to take the necessary measures to remedy these deficiencies

                  Human resources

                  No realistic recruitment objectives

                              —

                              The Authority was able to achieve its recruitment objectives and fill 273 of the 300 posts in its establishment plan: the audit of the recruitment procedures showed that in general neither the weightings of the selection criteria to be applied nor the threshold scores for going on to the next stage of the competitions had been decided upon by the selection board before the deadline fixed in the vacancy notice

                  n.a.

                  n.a.

                  Internal audit

                  n.a.

                  n.a.

                  20 out of the 25 recommendations (80 %) made by the IAS and the IAC have been implemented

                              —

                              Is concerned that out of the 48 recommendations, one is considered critical, 27 very important and 20 important but no information has been given to the discharge authority on the content of these recommendations, urges the Executive Director of the Authority to provide this information

                              —

                              Reiterates its demand for the Authority to take appropriate measures in cases of conflicts of interest, invites the Authority to initiate a survey of the potential conflicts of interest of its leading scientists, board, and panel members, so that possible omissions in the declarations of interest can be detected and followed by action in a timely manner


title: 2013/586/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 17 April 2013 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction 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 Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2011

text:
               16.11.2013

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 308/261

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 17 April 2013
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2011
   (2013/586/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2011,

               —

               having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2011, together with the Centre’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 1920/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (4), and in particular Article 15 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 Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0071/2013),

               1.

               Grants the Director of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction discharge in respect of the implementation of the Centre’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 Director of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, 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. 123.

      (2)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

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

      (4)  OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 1.

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

      RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
      of 17 April 2013
      with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2011
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

                  having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2011,

                  —

                  having regard to the Court of Auditors’ report on the annual accounts of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction for the financial year 2011, together with the Centre’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 1920/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (4), and in particular Article 15 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 Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A7-0071/2013),

                  A.

                  whereas the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (‘the Centre’), which is located in Lisbon, was established by Council Regulation (EEC) No 302/93 (6),

                  B.

                  whereas the Court of Auditors has stated that it has obtained reasonable assurances that the annual accounts of the Centre for the financial year 2011 are reliable and that the underlying transactions are legal and regular,

                  C.

                  whereas on 10 May 2012, Parliament granted the Director of the Centre discharge for implementation of the Centre’s budget for the financial year 2010 (7), and in its resolution accompanying the discharge decision, inter alia:

                              —

                              called on the Centre to take immediate action to increase the execution rate for payment appropriations in the future and to keep the discharge authority informed of the progress achieved,

                              —

                              called on the Centre to consolidate its financial management; recognises that drug-related issues should be adequately represented in the new multiannual financial framework (2014-2020),

                              —

                              urged the Centre to implement five ‘very important’ recommendations of the internal audit service (IAS) without delay and inform the discharge authority of the progress made,

                  D.

                  whereas the overall budget of the Centre for the year 2011 was EUR 16 274 205,07 compared to EUR 15 900 323 in 2010, which represents an increase of 2,35 %,

                  E.

                  whereas the contribution of the Union to the Centre’s budget for 2011 was EUR 15 400 000,

                  F.

                  whereas the 2011 economic outturn account had a negative result of EUR – 203 404,85,

         Budgetary and financial management

                  1.

                  Acknowledges from the Annual Activity Report (AAR) that the financial and budget management demonstrated by the Centre led to a budget execution of almost 100 % in commitments and payments as follows:

                              —

                              Title 1: 99,92 % in commitments and 99,40 % in payments;

                              —

                              Title 2: 99,49 % in commitments and 90,08 % in payments; and

                              —

                              Title 3: 97,18 % in commitments and 99,86 % in payments;

                  2.

                  Observes from its final annual accounts that the Centre relies on the following revenue for its budget:

                              —

                              EUR 15 400 000 to be provided by the Commission’s subsidy to the Centre;

                              —

                              EUR 379 934,67 to be provided by Norway for its participation in the Centre;

                              —

                              EUR 400 000 assigned revenue from the Instrument for Pre-Accession 3;

                  3.

                  Establishes from the AAR that an assessment of the procurement and contracting processes was carried out in 2011; takes note of the Centre’s statement that it developed actions based on the results of that assessment, namely on (i) the rationalisation of the tendering procedures and the reduction of negotiated procedures, (ii) the implementation of specific measures to ensure the proper execution of contracts and (iii) the conducting of tendering processes earlier than in 2010;

                  4.

                  Takes note of the comments made by the Court of Auditors regarding the costs of approximately EUR 275 000 for unused office space borne by the Centre; takes note of the Centre’s reply that it ‘is pursuing and increasing its efforts in this field’; requests to be thoroughly updated on further developments on the issue; requests that this matter be solved with urgency;

         Performance

                  5.

                  Acknowledges from the AAR that in 2011, as part of its development of an integrated system for activity-based management and budgeting, the Centre started to implement an analytical accounting system; notes, furthermore, that the Centre increased its capacity for further improving its planning and monitoring system, with special focus on the development of performance indicators, which will be developed further for the 2013 to 2015 programming period;

                  6.

                  Acknowledges that the third external evaluation of the Centre was launched by the Commission in 2011 in accordance with Article 23 of Regulation (EC) No 1920/2006 and was due to be completed in 2012; calls on the Centre to inform the discharge authority on the measures implemented in light of the recommendations made by the abovementioned external evaluation;

         Carry-over appropriations

                  7.

                  Is concerned that the Court of Auditors identified 51 cases, with a total value of EUR 90 053, in which appropriations carried over to 2012 were not related to existing legal commitments and should have been de-committed and paid back to the Commission by the end of 2011; notes that the Centre initiated the process too late and as a consequence, due to restrictions imposed by the IT system, the funds will be blocked for one year and will only be de-committed and paid back at the end of 2012; calls on the Centre to improve its planning in order to avoid such situations in the future;

         Location

                  8.

                  Acknowledges from the Court of Auditors’ report that the Centre currently bears the annual cost of about EUR 275 000 for unused office space in its former building and in the new headquarters; calls on the Centre to continue, in cooperation with the Commission and national authorities, to seek adequate solutions for the unused office space and to keep the discharge authority informed;

         Treasury policy

                  9.

                  Is concerned by the Court of Auditors’ finding that the Centre has not yet adopted and implemented a treasury policy to minimise and spread financial risk while aiming at adequate returns; notes the Centre’s replies announcing action on all those matters; calls on the Centre to take all remedial measures as announced without delay and to inform the discharge authority of the actions taken to address that deficiency;

                  10.

                  Is concerned that the Centre has not yet adopted a comprehensive policy on exceptions and deviations from established processes and procedures; notes the Centre’s replies announcing action on all those matters; calls on the Centre to take without delay all remedies as announced and to inform the discharge authority of the actions taken to address that deficiency;

         Recruitment procedures

                  11.

                  Acknowledges from the Court of Auditors’ report that the Centre could improve the recruitment procedures; calls on the Centre to inform the discharge authority of the actions taken to improve the recruitment procedures; considers that some of the provisions of the Staff Regulations may present a considerable administrative burden; therefore encourages the Commission to allow for a certain degree of simplification under Article 110 of the Staff Regulations in regard to the agencies;

         Accounting system

                  12.

                  Acknowledges from the Final Annual Accounts that the Centre implemented a new income structure created in accrual-based accounting (ABAC) in order to simplify and better manage the recovery orders;

                  13.

                  Notes also that the Centre revised its activity based management system and defined its cost based accounting system; acknowledges in particular that the relevant ABAC and SAP CO applications have been configured accordingly;

         Internal audit

                  14.

                  Acknowledges that in 2011, the IAS performed a compliance audit on ‘Annual Activity Report and building blocks of assurance’; notes that based on the results of the abovementioned audit, the IAS raised eight recommendations, two of which were rated as ‘very important ‘ and six as ‘important’; calls on the Centre to implement the 2011 IAS recommendations, together with those from prior IAS audits which remain open and to keep the discharge authority informed;

                  15.

                  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. 123.

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

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

         (4)  OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 1.

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

         (6)  OJ L 36, 12.2.1993, p. 1.

         (7)  OJ L 286, 17.10.2012, p. 206.

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


title: 2011/562/EU: Decision of the European Parliament of 10 May 2011 on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009, Section VIII — European Ombudsman#Resolution of the European Parliament of 10 May 2011 with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009, Section VIII — European Ombudsman

text:
               27.9.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 250/104

         DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
   of 10 May 2011
   on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009, Section VIII — European Ombudsman
   (2011/562/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

               —

               having regard to the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009 (1),

               —

               having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2009 (SEC(2010) 963 — C7-0218/2010) (2),

               —

               having regard to the European Ombudsman’s annual report to the discharge authority on internal audits carried out in 2009,

               —

               having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2009, together with the institutions’ replies (3),

               —

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

               —

               having regard to Article 272(10) and Articles 274, 275 and 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

               —

               having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (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 (A7-0116/2011),

               1.

               Grants the European Ombudsman discharge in respect of the implementation of its budget for the financial year 2009;

               2.

               Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

               3.

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

            The President

         Jerzy BUZEK

            The Secretary-General

         Klaus WELLE

      (1)  OJ L 69, 13.3.2009.

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

      (3)  OJ C 303, 9.11.2010, p. 1.

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

      (5)  OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

      RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
      of 10 May 2011
      with observations forming an integral part of its Decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009, Section VIII — European Ombudsman
      THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

                  —

                  having regard to the European Union general budget for the financial year 2009 (1),

                  —

                  having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Union for the financial year 2009 (SEC(2010) 963 — C7-0218/2010) (2),

                  —

                  having regard to the European Ombudsman’s annual report to the discharge authority on internal audits carried out in 2009,

                  —

                  having regard to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2009, together with the institutions’ replies (3),

                  —

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

                  —

                  having regard to Article 272(10) and Articles 274, 275 and 276 of the EC Treaty and Article 314(10) and Articles 317, 318 and 319 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

                  —

                  having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (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 (A7-0116/2011),

                  1.

                  Notes that in 2009 the European Ombudsman (the Ombudsman) had commitment appropriations available amounting to a total of EUR 9 000 000 (2008: EUR 9 000 000), with a utilisation rate of 91,98 %, below the average of the other institutions (97,69 %);

                  2.

                  Notes that in the course of preparation of the annual report concerning the financial year 2009, the Court of Auditors performed an in-depth assessment of supervisory and control systems in the Court of Justice, the Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor which included the examination of an additional sample of transactions involving payments relating to human resources and to other administrative expenditure;

                  3.

                  Notes that the Court of Auditors found that the Ombudsman has not adopted general provisions on the procedures for recruitment of temporary staff, although Article 12(5) of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Union (6) requires that each institution shall have done so; moreover, notes with concern that this omission may affect a majority of the Ombudsman’s staff, as 47 out of 63 posts granted under the 2009 budget were temporary posts;

                  4.

                  Welcomes the fact that the Ombudsman has instructed his office to draft provisions on the procedures for recruitment of temporary staff to be adopted in accordance with the observation of the Court of Auditors, and invites the Ombudsman to report on progress in his Annual Activity Report;

                  5.

                  Notes that the Court of Auditors indicated in its annual report that the audit did not give rise to any further significant observations as regards the Ombudsman;

                  6.

                  Notes that in 2009 the Ombudsman was able to help with almost 77 % of all complaints, and that he dealt with 70 % of inquiries in less than 1 year, and welcomes the fact that the average length of inquiry was reduced to 9 months (13 months in 2008);

                  7.

                  Notes that the structure of the Ombudsman’s office was altered as of 1 January 2010, and invites the Ombudsman to report on the effect of those changes in his Annual Activity Report;

                  8.

                  Takes note of the audits carried out by the Internal Audit Service (IAS), in particular its annual report, and of the follow up of the IAS reviews of management and control system for missions and payroll areas, which concluded that all the actions contained in the reviews had been implemented; notes that the audit of the processing of the payment requests has identified several issues to be addressed by the management, and invites the Ombudsman to follow that up in his next Annual Activity Report;

                  9.

                  Welcomes the implementation of the key performance indicators in the Annual Management Plan, as well as the fact that the objectives for 2009 were achieved;

                  10.

                  Welcomes the Ombudsman’s decision to publish the annual declaration of interests of the Ombudsman and the fact that the declaration is published on the Ombudsman’s website;

                  11.

                  Commends the quality of the Ombudsman’s Annual Activity Report, and welcomes the inclusion of the follow-up during the year to Parliament’s earlier discharge decisions.

         (1)  OJ L 69, 13.3.2009.

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

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

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

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

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