P6_TA(2007)0037

The Court of Auditors' Special Report No 6/2005 on the Trans-European Network for Transport

European Parliament resolution on the European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 6/2005 on the Trans-European Network for Transport (TEN-T) (2006/2238(INI))

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 6/2005 on the Trans-European Network for Transport (TEN-T), together with the Commission's replies [1],

- having regard to Article 248(4), second subparagraph, Article 276(3) and Article 280(5) of the EC Treaty,

- having regard to the Committee on Budgetary Control working document on the issue [2],

- having regard to its resolution of 26 October 2006 on the draft general budget of the EU for the financial year 2007 [3],

- having regard to Rule 45 of 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 (A6-0022/2007),

1. Welcomes the close and constructive cooperation between the Commission and the Court of Auditors on the programme for a TEN-T;

2. Welcomes the accurate analysis and clarity of the Special Report, and notes that it shares most of the European Court of Auditors' concerns and endorses most of its suggestions;

3. Notes the corrective actions taken by the Commission by, inter alia, modifying the governing Council regulations in 2004, with some of the European Court of Auditors' early findings being taken into consideration;

4. Points out that the new 2007-2013 financial framework will have a considerable impact on the TEN-T, as the amount agreed upon is approximately 40 % of that contained in the original Commission proposal of 14 July 2004 (COM(2004)0475), which proposed an amount of EUR 20350 million for TEN-T for the period 2007 to 2013, whereas the financial framework made only EUR 8013 million available; believes that, as a consequence, selecting, prioritising and ensuring efficient implementation of the projects will become even more important;

5. Regrets the meagre increase in the appropriations available for TEN-T;

6. Is concerned about the slow speed of implementation of the priority TEN-T projects;

7. Is of the opinion that the Commission has to further improve cooperation with Member States when priority projects at national and EU level are selected;

8. Considers it important for projects which are not completed on schedule to be subject to more stringent checks, with a possibility for subsidies under the multi-annual indicative programme to be transferred to projects which are progressing more rapidly;

9. Stresses the importance of appropriate monitoring of the projects, including on-site checks by the Commission;

10. Welcomes, in this context, the first annual activity reports of the European coordinators [4], and agrees with the Commission's finding that failure to complete the trans-European transport network as a whole would lead to a loss of economic competitiveness;

11. Calls on the Member States to develop an integrated transport network policy to ensure the proper functioning of the trans-European transport network and the efficiency of national networks and to support a European added-value approach rather than fighting for the principle of "fair share";

12. Emphasises that the selection of European transport projects has to be based on comprehensive studies assessing the need for any particular project at a very early stage;

13. Notes that the presence of a European coordinator has in general had a positive impact on strengthening coordination between Member States and has highlighted the need to set up common planning and management structures;

14. Emphasises, therefore, that the money available under the 2007-2013 financial framework should be allocated with account being taken of the European coordinators' comments, analyses and recommendations;

15. Asks the Commission to clarify the procedure for the appointment of the European coordinators when setting up the regulatory framework for the content of their reports;

16. Is of the opinion that in the current financial environment preference should be given to crossborder sections of priority projects with high Community added-value and to certain major "bottlenecks" in order to contribute significantly to the completion of a trans-European, interconnected and interoperable transport network; welcomes in this context the cooperation agreement with the European Investment Bank (EIB);

17. Calls on the Commission to continue its efforts to establish clear legal frameworks and procedures, to guarantee rigorous monitoring and thorough evaluation of projects and programmes, and to draw up a comprehensive list of clear criteria which allow for the prioritisation of projects in a transparent manner;

18. Stresses the need to clarify the definitions of the terms "studies" and "works" by harmonising the structure for the description of works and by standardising technical and financial reporting;

19. Considers it essential, when selecting and assessing projects, to draw on the experience of external experts and the EIB and to promote the exchange of experience and information with DG REGIO;

20. Urges the Commission to establish a clear and transparent division of institutional responsibilities and to define a framework for the coordination of activities between DG REGIO and DG TREN with a view to avoiding double-financing of the same projects; considers it good practice to have clear agreements in place between the Member States and the Commission on the separation of funding from different EU sources;

21. Advocates a single entity for managing projects by focusing on the main activity, in the process maintaining centralised information, facilitating better monitoring by the Commission and improving the coordination of the different legal, administrative and technical issues between the Member States involved; believes that a single entity responsible for managing projects could reduce the risk of double funding;

22. Notes that payments from the Commission have taken excessive time to reach the final beneficiary; calls therefore for money to be paid out swiftly and efficiently; is of the opinion that in this context a direct payment flow from the Commission to the beneficiary could be a better solution;

23. Considers the coordination of TEN-T projects to be essential, particularly in the case of cross-border projects, and hopes that the establishment of the TEN-T Executive Agency, which has now been announced by the Commission, may contribute to the implementation of the TEN-T projects; points out that the Commission should present a progress report on the activities and the possible future added value of the TEN-T Executive Agency to Parliament before the first reading of the 2008 Budget;

24. Points out that Council Regulation (EC) No 58/2003 of 19 December 2002 laying down the statute for executive agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community programmes [5] requires, in its Article 3(1) a cost-benefit analysis, taking into account a number of factors, before the establishment of an executive agency can be requested; regrets that the Commission was not in a position to present the European Court of Auditors with a satisfactory cost-benefit analysis of the establishment of an executive agency at the outset; remains, together with the European Court of Auditors, doubtful with regard to the quality of the revised version of the cost-benefit analysis concerning the externalisation of the management of Community financial support to the TEN-T networks; for the future, calls on the Commission to seek a positive opinion on cost-benefit analyses from the European Court of Auditors before forwarding a request for the establishment of an executive agency to the budgetary authorities;

25. Regrets that DG TREN's establishment plan does not reflect more adequately the fact that 54 % of its budget concerns TEN-T, but that only 5% of its staff work in that area;

26. Stresses the use of modern project monitoring systems (GPS) and the sharing of best practices for project implementation monitoring systems;

27. Notes, in this context, the projected creation of an executive agency in 2007 which, according to the Commission, will be staffed by eight seconded officials from the Commission, 32 temporary staff (agency) and 48 contract staff; also notes that the cost of setting up the agency is estimated at EUR 78600000;

28. Underlines the fact that (co-)financing of TEN-T should take place transparently and that therefore regular information to Parliament and citizens should be guaranteed;

29. Calls on the European Court of Auditors to verify, at the appropriate time before 2009, the effectiveness of executive agencies and report back to the Committee on Budgetary Control;

30. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the European Court of Auditors.

[1] OJ C 94, 21.4.2006, p. 1.

[2] PE 374.326v02-00.

[3] Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2006)0451.

[4] http://ec.europa.eu/ten/transport/coordinators/index_en.htm.

[5] OJ L 11, 16.1.2003, p. 1.

--------------------------------------------------