ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
7.

Recommends that the Commission and the Member States should focus their networking activities on the following in particular: (a) improving the monitoring and evaluation of the impact of EGF support on individual participants in the following ways: — the budget for monitoring and evaluation should be used to assess the longer term impact on EGF beneficiaries; — the EGF application form and the template for the final report on the execution of a contribution from the EGF should clearly recall the obligation on the EGF coordinator and the Member State to provide data on employment outcomes of beneficiaries twelve months after the implementation of the measures, and data regarding the employment rate in the last 12 months, since the implementation of the EGF in the area concerned, in order to have a broader view of the EGF’s impact; — more detailed information on the measures accessed by individual participants should be recorded and clearly communicated to allow, for instance, for a clearer cost-benefit assessment of different measures; — the approval of final case reports and the final case closure should be coupled with the provision of complete beneficiary outcome information (at an aggregate level). Previously beneficiary outcome data has been incomplete; (b) further streamlining the application process in the following ways: — at the national level the process of providing assistance to dismissed workers should be further encouraged to start without waiting for the approval of applications; — where this is not possible, the Commission and the Member States should consider counting the EGF implementation period from the date an application is approved. This would allow for the full funding period of 24 months to be exploited; (c) providing greater flexibility during the delivery period in the following ways: — the Commission should provide greater flexibility for Member States to provide additional measures as new opportunities/demand arises during the delivery period beyond the measures described in the application form; — the reference period required to count redundancies for the EGF application is perceived as a straightjacket affecting the aim of solidarity and the success of EGF assistance and this period could be reviewed to allow flexibility in the form of an addendum to the application form where it can be demonstrated that the redundancies are due to the same reasons and are linked to the redundancies presented in the application;
C.

whereas the adoption of the EGF Regulation reflects the agreement reached between the Parliament and the Council to reintroduce the crisis mobilisation criterion, to increase the Union financial contribution to 60 % of the total estimated cost of proposed measures, to increase efficiency for the treatment of EGF applications in the Commission and by the Parliament and the Council by shortening the time for assessment and approval, to widen eligible actions and beneficiaries by introducing self-employed persons and young people and to finance incentives for setting up own businesses;
4.

Notes that Ireland specialised in the Maintenance Repair and Overhaul (MRO) sector in the 1990s, which served it well at that time, but made it particularly vulnerable to the recent trend to locate MRO activity near centres of global aviation expansion, i.e. Asia, and to the adverse impacts of global trade deals; considers the existence of two other Irish EGF applications in the ‘repair and installation of machinery and equipment’ sector (5) as proof of this vulnerability; notes also that MRO activities have been seriously affected in Europe, in particular Ireland, with the closure of SR Technics in 2009 and the closure of Lufthansa Technik Airmotive Ireland in 2014 which resulted in the loss of approximately 1 520 jobs;
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 349/88

P8_TA(2015)0330

Mobilisation of the EU Solidarity Fund: disasters in Bulgaria and Greece in 2015

European Parliament resolution of 6 October 2015 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund, in accordance with point 11 of the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (disasters in Bulgaria and Greece in 2015) (COM(2015)0370 — C8-0198/2015 — 2015/2151(BUD))

(2017/C 349/19)

The European Parliament,

— having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2015)0370 — C8-0198/2015),

— having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund (1),

— having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 of 2 December 2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014-2020 (2), and in particular Article 10 thereof,

— having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2 December 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management (3), and in particular point 11 thereof,

— having regard to the letter from the Committee on Regional Development,

— having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A8-0253/2015),

1. Approves the decision annexed to this resolution;

2. Instructs its President to sign the decision with the President of the Council and arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;

3. Instructs its President to forward this resolution, including its annex, to the Council and the Commission.

(1) OJ L 311, 14.11.2002, p. 3.

(2) OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 884.

(3) OJ C 373, 20.12.2013, p. 1.
1.

Acknowledges the fact that the Office: — introduced a detailed monthly monitoring procedure which resulted in improved budgetary implementation rates in order to ensure proper implementation of its budget as well as of its annual work programme, — amended its Information Security Policy in order to address the identified shortcomings further to the follow-up audit of the implementation of the Internal Control Standards (‘ICS’) made by the Commission’s Internal Audit Service (‘IAS’); notes with satisfaction the preparation of a Service Level Agreement (‘SLA’) between the Office and the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security (‘ENISA’), which should mitigate the risks related to the Office’s information security, — has taken multiple actions in order to improve the process of reimbursing the experts and mitigate the identified shortcomings related to late payments; welcomes the introduction of Key Performance Indicators in all steps of the process and the additional training of the actors in the financial circuit and in particular; notes with satisfaction the outsourcing of a part of the process to the Commission’s Office for the Administration and Payment of Individual Entitlements (‘PMO’), which accelerated the overall reimbursement procedure;
24.

Reiterates that the Council ought to be transparent and fully accountable to Union citizens for the funds entrusted to it by taking part fully and in good faith in the annual discharge procedure just as other Union institutions do; considers, in this regard, that effective supervision of the Union’s budget implementation requires cooperation between Parliament and the Council through a working arrangement; regrets the difficulties encountered in the discharge procedure to date; stresses the need to improve the capacity for dialogue between the two institutions in order to find a solution as soon as possible that will enable compliance with the Treaties’ mandate and accountability to citizens;
4.

Notes that, according to the Court's report, with regard to the exploitation of the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service (‘EGNOS’), the Agency awarded an eight-year service provision contract (‘ESP contract’) with an initial contract value of EUR 436 000 000; takes note of the fact that in 2014, following a direct negotiated procedure, the Agency amended the service contract for an amount of EUR 6 300 000 for the purchase and maintenance of 14 satellite signal receivers, 14 signal generators and other equipment relating to EGNOS; notes with concern that an arrangement between the contractor and its two subcontractors was set up, as under the initial contract, which led to an accumulation of overheads and profits, with only EUR 3 200 000 of the EUR 6 300 000 relating to direct costs, EUR 1 400 000 to overheads and other costs and EUR 1 700 000 to profits and remuneration of (sub)contractors;
23.

Notes that the Court of Justice has 75 official vehicles in its fleet at a cost of EUR 1 168 251; notes that the drivers' salaries amounted to EUR 2 434 599 in 2014; considers this to be an excessively high expense, which is in contradiction with the overall trend in the Union institutions to limit the usage of official vehicles; reiterates its call on the Court to reduce the number of official cars at the disposal of its Members and staff; stresses that the cost of the extensive private services provided by drivers is borne by Union taxpayers; recommends that the Court examine these matters in an inter-institutional context and urges it actively to promote green mobility;
3.

Notes that, due to the challenges currently faced by the ITER Project, the new Director General of the ITER Organisation presented to the ITER Council an action plan including specific measures to address the main constraints that are currently affecting the development of the ITER project; notes, furthermore, that, as regards the Joint Undertaking, its new acting director prepared an action plan for the Joint Undertaking which largely supports the ITER Organisation action plan; acknowledges that the Joint Undertaking's acting director presented the action plan to the Joint Undertaking's Governing Board in March 2015, when it was fully endorsed, and that the Joint Undertaking's action plan complements the ITER Organisation action plan in a number of respects and identifies further improvements in the Joint Undertaking's own operations; observes that at the time of the audit, the practical measures for the implementation of both action plans were still being established; notes, moreover, that since March 2015, those action plans have been implemented and closely followed by the ITER Organisation and the Joint Undertaking and that they are expected to bring improvements; calls for a report on the implementation of those action plans to be presented in good time;
20.

Acknowledges that during 2014, the Joint Undertaking performed two major reviews to re-assess the main programme risks and related mitigation actions; notes that the review resulted in a list of 33 Programme and Joint Undertaking risks, of which nine were considered ‘top risks’ owing to their criticality level; considers that a number of external factors in 2014 led to uncertainty in the future of the programme and to the identification of a higher number of risks than usual (uncertain economic forecasts, a new multiannual financial framework as well as organisational changes in the Joint Undertaking and in the DG of reference, etc.); welcomes the fact that specific remedial actions have been, or are being, implemented by the Joint Undertaking;
B.

whereas additional financial needs are likely to arise in 2017, in relation to the internal security crises and the current humanitarian, migratory and refugee challenges; acknowledges that these needs could significantly exceed the funding available under heading 3; recalls that no more margin is available under the ceiling of heading 3; therefore, requests the Commission to clarify if and how additional funds could be possibly mobilised using the Contingency Margin to respond to possible additional financial needs for heading 3 during the course of 2017;
C.

whereas the adoption of the EGF Regulation reflects the agreement reached between the Parliament and the Council to reintroduce the crisis mobilisation criterion, to set the Union financial contribution to 60 % of the total estimated cost of proposed measures, to increase efficiency for the treatment of EGF applications in the Commission and by the Parliament and the Council by shortening the time for assessment and approval, to widen eligible actions and beneficiaries by introducing self-employed persons and young people and to finance incentives for setting up own businesses;
23.

Notes that the Authority signed a 12-year-lease with an end date of 8 December 2026 and that, under normal contractual conditions, there is a liability to pay the full rent for the entire period; observes, however, that the Authority negotiated a break-out clause at the midway point of the contract, meaning that if the clause is exercised, the Authority would be relieved of the obligation to pay the rent for the final six years; further notes that if the break-out clause is activated, the Authority has an obligation to repay half of an incentive (32 month rent-free period), which it had already received and which was based on the full 12 years of the contract; notes that the Authority is liable to restore the property to its original condition when leaving, in this case the Authority is obliged to pay for taking out the office fit-out that it had installed in the premises; notes that the exact amount is subject to expert estimates and further negotiations; asks the Authority to inform the Parliament on the amount once it is known;
2.

Takes note that the carry-overs from 2015 to 2016 were at EUR 4 944 739, representing a similar figure compared to the previous year; notes that of the amount carried over in Title III (operational expenditure), 57 % refers to the final payment of the contribution for 2015 to the European Topic Centres which was to be paid after the fourth quarterly progress report was presented in 2016; notes that carry-overs may often be partly or fully justified by the multiannual nature of the agencies' operational programmes, do not necessarily indicate weaknesses in budget planning and implementation and are not always at odds with the budgetary principle of annuality, in particular if they are planned in advance by the Agency and communicated to the Court;
14.

Acknowledges the fact that, since the adoption of its 2011 policy on independence, the Authority assesses and validates 100 % of the declarations of interest submitted by its experts, which on average corresponds to a grand total ranging from 6 000 to 7 000 declarations of interest per year that are assessed and validated by the Authority's staff, in accordance with its policy on independence and its rules on declarations of interest; takes note that the Authority additionally, twice per year, performs additional compliance and veracity checks by staff not involved in the ordinary checks mentioned above; calls on the Authority to publish the results of its checks as an annex to its yearly report; notes that a review of the 2011 policy is ongoing with a public consultation planned for spring 2017 and a target date of adoption of the new independent policy by summer 2017; notes with concern that the Authority's policy on prevention and management of conflicts of interest is not applied to its interim staff;
18.

Notes that the Court's report refers to the fact that the Joint Undertaking set up ex-ante control procedures based on financial and operational desk reviews, and is developing a programme of ex-post audits of grant beneficiaries to be implemented from 2017 onwards; observes that those checks are key tools for assessing the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions, including the cash and IKOP to the Joint Undertaking by its members other than the Union;
9.

Acknowledges from the Agency that its revised policy on the handling of declarations of interests of scientific committees' members and experts entered into force in 2015; welcomes the fact that the declarations of interests of experts involved in the Agency's activities after the policy implementation date were evaluated against the revised policy; notes that the Agency performed systematic ex ante controls on the declarations of interests of new experts; notes moreover the conclusion of the annual ex post control on the handling of declarations of interests of committee members and experts participating in meetings; observes that the Agency updated the policy in October 2016 to further clarify the restrictions applied when an expert takes up a job in industry and to align the restriction applied in the case of close family members of committee, and working party members with interests in the industry, with those already applied to management board members; calls on the Agency to provide the discharge authority with a summary of the impact assessment of the revised policy;
11.

Notes Eurojust's reaffirmation that clear rules for the protection of whistleblowers play an integral part in achieving a culture of trust and in the fight against fraud, as provided for in Article 22c of the Staff Regulations; notes that Eurojust is in the process of drafting new rules for the protection of whistleblowers; points out that a preliminary discussion regarding the draft rules already took place in the College of Eurojust on 4 October 2016; invites Eurojust to further report on the process and on the subsequent adoption of its rules for the protection of whistleblowers;
8.

Notes that the persons who became unemployed from Nokia Oy in 2016 are all either university graduates (40 %) or have a secondary degree (60 %) and had been working in programming and designing, with their professional skills in many cases outdated; notes that 21 % of the targeted beneficiaries are over 54 years old, an age where re-employment in the job market is remarkably difficult; notes, in addition, that the unemployment rates have long been above the national average in two of the three concerned regions and that unemployment of the highly educated is overall at a high level in these regions, with the situation particularly difficult for employees over 50;
27.

Considers that the minutes of meetings of the board of supervisors and of the stakeholder groups, which are publicly available, should be published more swiftly to further reduce the current time lag as well as to provide better insight into the discussions held, what stances members have taken and voting behaviour; stresses that it is essential for the Authority, in view of the nature of its assignments, to exhibit transparency, not only to Parliament and the Council, but to Union citizens; believes that outreach to the public could be enhanced by web streaming events; points out that access to documents and information relating to internal meetings should also be facilitated; recalls the importance of the protection of whistle-blowers for enhancing transparency, democratic accountability and public control.
27.

Notes with satisfaction that, in order to ensure a cost-effective and environmentally friendly working place and to reduce or offset CO 2 emissions, the Agency is working towards improving its environmental footprint by installing an environmentally friendly datacentre cooling system, which will enhance the heating system and result in lower consumption, by contracting an alternative electricity provider which uses renewable sources, by promoting alternative ways for employees to commute to work through the provision of bicycle parking spaces, by promoting and implementing green public procurement in certain tendering procedures like ICT equipment acquisition and cleaning services, by promoting recycling and the use of recycled paper and other materials and by the introduction of LED technology lights;
16.

Notes that the latest calls for new knowledge and innovation communities (KICs), for which the thematic areas were defined in the strategic innovation agenda of the Institute for the years 2014 to 2020 showed limited competition; notes that the 2016 call for two additional KICs (food and added-value manufacturing) received three proposals, whereby the single proposal for added-value manufacturing KIC was not selected for quality reasons; notes that an excellent partnership has been designated except for EIT Manufacturing; notes with satisfaction that the Institute has concluded on several mitigating measures, which will reduce the risk of receiving only one proposal for a theme in the future; calls on the Institute to report to the discharge authority on the content and efficiency of those measures; notes that the Commissioner for Research, Science and Innovation introduced in 2015 the concept of ’Open Innovation’ as the key policy concept to frame innovation policy at Union level; considers that it is not clear which role the Institute plays in this concept; emphasises that this concept does not provide a clear framework for the development of a coherent and coordinated action by the Commission, given the number of policies and instruments in the mix and number of Directorate-Generals involved in supporting the innovation; calls on the Commission to ensure a coordinated and efficient innovation policy, in which the responsible Directorate-Generals tune up the activities and instruments, and to inform Parliament on those efforts; understands the Institute’s mission to promote cooperation among higher education, research and innovation; takes the view that companies may be in the end the main beneficiary as being the legal owner of the innovate product being brought to the market and have the financial profits; stresses the need in this situation to incorporate in the cooperation-model a structure in which given funds will flow back to the Institute;
7.

Welcomes the action already undertaken by the ad interim executive director in order to improve the governance structure of the Office, restore transparency and build trust; underlines the importance of counteracting the previously detected deficiencies in the legality and regularity of transactions; calls on the Office to prepare a comprehensive and detailed roadmap presenting the way forward; furthermore, calls on the Office in this respect to include in the roadmap a clear plan for restoring trust in management, especially bearing in mind that competent and effective management is key in view of the challenges the Office is facing in general, and, in particular, to make sure that the recruitment and training of the significant number of new staff foreseen for 2018 and 2019 is of such a level that the Office will have well-motivated and high quality personnel at its disposal and that there will be less turn-over of staff and its knowledge and experience are retained;