17. 12.87 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 339/17 
extend the time limit for the clearance decision to 
financial year N + 2 and thus to defer the date on 
which the financial out-turn is entered in the accounts; 
Whereas the Court, in Opinion No 3/87 (') has already 
expressed its disapproval of one proposal which would 
have the effect of postponing the clearance decisions 
beyond the time limits introduced by current regulations, 
in asmuch as a delay of this kind would be tantamount 
to depriving the budgetary timetable of all coherence by 
institutionalizing a regrettable practice which results in 
the discharge authority having to give its opinion on 
provisional figures; 
Whereas, as regards those parts of the proposal which 
contain ad hoc amendments in connection with the pres­
entation of the preliminary draft budget for 1988, the 
Court has already stated its views in Opinion 5/87 (2) 
and reference should therefore be made to this earlier 
statement of the Court's position, 
HAS ADOPTED THIS OPINION: 
a) as regards the provisions which are designed to 
reinforce the principle of annuality, the Court regrets 
the limited scope of the proposal and considers that it 
should be supplemented by the inclusion of precise 
(') OJC 175, 3. 7. 1987, p. 7. 
(2) Opinion of the Court dated 21.9. 1987, not yet published in 
the OJ. criteria setting out the conditions under which pro­
cedures which derogate from this principle are to be 
implemented; 
b) as regards the provisions relating to the establishment 
in a separate section of a 'global reserve' for 
operating appropriations, in the opinion of the Court 
an instrument of this kind could cause considerable 
damage to the technique which the Commission 
proposes to introduce of adopting a strict approach 
when determining the initial allocation, and would be 
incompatible with the principles of budgetary 
discipline unless strict criteria for the creation and use 
of the reserve were defined objectively beforehand; 
c) as regards the provisions relating to amendment of 
the 'Special provisions applicable to the EAGGF, 
Guarantee Section', the Court considers that the 
proposal should be revised in respect of the system for 
clearing the accounts; 
d) as regards the provisions relating to the inclusion of 
ad hoc amendments in connection with the 1988 pre­
liminary draft budget, the Court must refer to its 
Opinion No 5/87 of 21 September 1987. 
This opinion was adopted by the Court of Auditors at 
its meeting of 26 November 1987. 
For the Court of Auditors 
Marcel MART 
President 
OPINION No 8/87 
of the Court of Auditors of the European Communities on a third amendment of the proposal 
for a Council (Euratom, ECSC, EEC) regulation amending the Financial Regulation of 
21 December 1977 applicable to the general budget of the European Communities 
(87/C 339/20) 
THE COURT OF AUDITORS OF THE EUROPEAN 
COMMUNITIES, 
Having regard to the treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community, and in particular Article 209 
thereof, Having regard to the proposal of 12 December 1980 for 
a Council Regulation amending the Financial Regulation 
of 21 December 1977 (3), 
Having regard to the first amendment of the said 
proposal, dated 9 March 1984 (4), 
Having regard to the Single European Act ('), 
Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 21 
December 1977 applicable to the general budget of the 
European Communities (2), Having regard to the Commission proposal dated 30 
September 1987 (5) for a third amendment of the 
proposal amending the Financial Regulation of 21 
December 1977, 
(') OJL 169,29.6. 1987. 
O OJL 356, 31. 12. 1977. O OJC 119,21.5. 1981. 
(4) OJ C 97, 9. 4. 1984. 
(s) Doc. COM(87) 458 final. 
No C 339/18 Official Journal of the European Communities 17.12. 87 
Having regard to the request for consultation of the 
Court of Auditors on the proposal, formulated by the 
Council on 3 November 1987, 
Whereas, the stated object of the proposal is both to 
incorporate into the Community's financial regulations 
the provisions on research and technological 
development introduced into the EEC Treaty by the 
Single European Act, and to amend the Financial Regu­
lation, in the light of the measures that will have to be 
taken (') in order to ensure the success of the Single Act, 
as regards tighter budgetary discipline and transparency 
of appropriations, notably by reinforcing the principle of 
annuality, as well as by creating a new structure for 
appropriations; 
Whereas Article 92 of the proposal is designed to 
separate the staff and administrative appropriations for 
research and technological development by regrouping 
them with other non-differentiated appropriations for 
Commission staff and operating expenditure; whereas 
the effect of this separation would be to abolish the 
allocation of all research appropriations on an individual 
programme basis, as well as the charging of expenditure 
to the budget programme by programme, which 
operations are at present carried out using a budgetary 
nomenclature backed up by an analytical accounting 
system which makes it possible to isolate the expenditure 
on each programme; whereas the proposed solution 
would therefore militate against the declared objective of 
budgetary transparency and, furthermore, would impede 
overall management of the resources allocated to the 
different research and technological development 
programmes provided for in the outline programme; 
whereas this would be a particularly serious 
inconvenience for management of the Joint Research 
Centre, where expenditure is mainly on staff and 
administration; 
Whereas, moreover, this reform would be formally 
incompatible with Article 94 (1) of the amended 1984 
proposal for a financial regulation, which has not been 
affected by the amendments proposed by the 
Commission in 1987 and which expressly provides that 
allocation of expenditure to each programme shall 
continue to be decided in the budget itself, by means of 
the budgetary nomenclature and the analytical 
accounting system; Whereas the proposal would make the operating appro­
priations for research and technological development 
subject to the normal statutory system provided for by 
the proposal concerning the decision procedure for 
carrying over appropriations; whereas this would mean 
the disappearance of the present system of exceptions 
applicable to commitment appropriations for research, 
whereby the appropriations continue in force until such 
time as a decision is taken to cancel them; whereas this 
reform would be a step in the direction of the declared 
objective of budgetary annuality; 
Whereas, however, by providing that operating appro­
priations will 'normally' be the subject of carry-overs, the 
proposal is likely to establish the right to retain these 
appropriations for two years virtually as the norm; 
whereas this formula, which is motivated by the desire to 
take account of the specific requirements of research and 
technological development activity, which is typically of 
a long-term nature, does, however, suffer from being 
insufficiently precisely defined, 
HAS ADOPTED THIS OPINION: 
a) The organic link which exists between the staff and 
administrative appropriations and the operating 
appropriations for the research and technological 
development programmes must be preserved and the 
proposal should accordingly be amended by deleting 
any provision which provides for them to be split into 
two separate sections of the budget. 
b) Provision should be made for an improved definition 
of the circumstances under which operating appro­
priations for research and development may be 
carried over. 
This opinion was adopted by the Court of Auditors at a 
meeting held on 27 November 1987. 
For the Court of Auditors 
Marcel MART 
President 
(') Doc. COM(87) 100 final and COM(87) 101 final.