Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
RESOLUTION OF  THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
of 23 
April 2009
with observations forming an integral part of the Decisions on discharge in respect of the 
implementation of the Eu ropean 
Union general bu dget 
for the financial year 2007, Section III — 
Commission and execu tive 
agencies
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,
—having reg ard to the European Union general budget for the fin ancial year 2007
(1) OJ L 77, 16.3.2007. (1), 
—having 
regard 
to the final 
annual 
accounts 
of the European 
Communities 
for the fin ancial 
year 2007 — 
Volume I 
(SEC(2008) 
2359 — C6-0415/2008)
(2) OJ C 287, 10.11.2008, p. 1. (2), 
—having 
regard 
to the Commission ’s 
annual 
reports to the E uropean 
Parliamen t 
and 
to the Coun cil 
on 
the 
follow-up to 2006 discharg e 
decisions 
(COM(2008) 629, COM(2008) 628), and to the Commission  
staff 
working 
documents 
accompan ying 
those reports (SE C(2008) 
2579, SEC(2008
) 2580), 
—having 
regard 
to the Commission  
communication 
entitled ‘
Synthesis 
of the Commission ’s 
management 
achievemen ts 
in 
2007’ (COM(2008) 338), 
—having 
regard 
to the Commission ’s 
annual 
report to the discharg e 
authority on  
internal 
audits carried out 
in 
2007 (COM(2008) 499), an d 
to the Commission  
staff work ing 
document 
accompan ying 
that report 
(SEC(2008) 
2361), 
—having 
regard 
to the Commission ’s 
report on 
Member 
States’ replies to the Court of Auditors’ 2006 ann ua
l 
report (COM(2008) 112), 
—having 
regard 
to the Green  
Paper on 
the European 
transparency 
initiative
, adopted b y 
the Commission  
on
3 May 2006 (COM(2006) 194), 
—having 
regard 
to Opinion 
No 2/2004 of the Court of Auditors on  
the ‘single 
audit’ model (an d 
a proposal 
for a Commun ity 
internal 
control 
framework )
(3) OJ C 107, 30.4.2004, p. 1. (3), 
—having 
regard 
to the Commission  
communication 
on 
a roadmap to an  
integrat
ed internal 
control 
frame­
work 
(COM(2005) 252), 
—having
 regard
 to the Commission action plan towards an in tegrated
 inter
nal cont
rol framework 
(COM(2006) 9), the report from the Commission  
to the Coun cil, 
the European 
Parliamen t 
and 
the Court 
of Auditors on  
the progress 
of the Commission  
action 
plan 
towards an  
integr
ated internal 
control 
frame­
work (COM(2007) 86), an d
 the Commission staff work ing
 documen t
 accompan y
ing
 that report 
(SEC(2007) 
311), 
—having 
regard 
to the first half-yearly report on  
the scoreb oard 
for the application  
of the Commission  
action 
plan 
towards an  
integrated 
internal 
control 
framework  
published 
on 19 
July 2006 (SE C(2006) 
1009), pur­
suant 
to Parliamen t’s 
request in  
its resolution  
accompan ying 
the discharg e 
decision 
in 
respect of the fin an­
cial 
year 2004, 
—having 
regard 
to Opinion 
No 6/2007 of the Court of Auditors on  
the annual 
summaries of Member States;
‘national 
declaration s
’ of Memb er 
States; and 
audit work  
on 
EU 
funds 
of nat
ional 
audit bodies
(4) OJ C 216, 14.9.2007, p. 3. (4), 
—having
 regard
 to the Commission ’s
 action plan to stren gthen
 the Commission ’s
 supervisory role un der
 
shared man agement 
of structural action s 
(COM(2008) 97),N E 6 3 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/37
 —having 
regard 
to the commun ication 
from Commission ers 
Hübner 
and 
Špidla to the Commission  
giving 
an 
interim 
progress 
report on  
the action  
plan 
to strengthen 
the Commission’s supervisory role un der 
shared 
management 
of structural action s 
(SEC(2008) 
2756), an d 
to the Commission  
staff work ing 
docu­
ment 
accompan ying 
that commun ication 
(SEC(2008) 
2755), 
—having 
regard 
to the report from the Commission  
to the Coun cil, 
the Europe
an 
Parliamen t 
and 
the Court 
of Auditors on  
the Commission  
action 
plan 
towards an  
integrated 
internal 
control 
framework  
(COM(2008) 
110), and 
to the Commission  
staff work ing 
document 
accompan ying 
that report (SE C(2008) 
259), 
—having 
regard 
to the An nual 
Report of the Court of Auditors on  
implemen tat
ion 
of the budget 
for the 
financial 
year 2007, tog ether 
with the in stitutions’ 
replies
(1) OJ C 286, 10.11.2008, p. 1. (1), and to the Court of Auditors’ special reports, 
—having 
regard 
to the statemen t 
of assuran ce 
as to the reliab ility 
of the accoun ts 
and 
the legality 
and 
regu­
larity 
of the underlying 
transactions, 
provided b y 
the Court of Auditors pursuan t 
to Article 248 of the E C 
Treaty
(2) OJ C 287, 10.11.2008, p. 111. (2), 
—having 
regard 
to the Commission  
communication 
of 16 Decemb er 
2008 on 
a common  
understanding 
of 
the concept 
of tolerab le 
risk 
of error (COM(2008) 866), an d 
to the Commission  
staff work ing 
document 
accompan ying 
that commun ication 
(SEC(2008) 
3054), 
—having 
regard 
to the Coun cil’s 
recommen dation 
of 10 February 
2009 on 
the discharg e 
to be 
given 
to the 
Commission  
in 
respect of the implemen tation 
of the budget 
for the fin ancia
l year 2007 (5587/2009 — 
C6-0055/2009), 
—having 
regard 
to the Coun cil’s 
recommen dation 
of 10 February 
2009 on 
the discharg e 
to be 
given 
to the 
executive ag encies 
in 
respect of the implemen tation 
of the budget 
for the fin ancial 
year 2007 (5589/2009 
— C6-0056/2009), 
—having 
regard 
to Articles 274, 275 an d 
276 of the E C 
Treaty and 
Articles 179a an d 
180b 
of the Euratom 
Treaty,
 
—having 
regard 
to Articles 246 et seq. of the E C 
Treaty, on  
the Court of Auditors, 
—having 
regard 
to international 
audit stan dards 
and 
international 
accounting 
standards, 
in 
particular those 
applying 
to the pub lic 
sector, 
—having 
regard 
to the International 
Peer Review of the Court of Auditors, 
—having 
regard 
to Council 
Regulation 
(EEC, 
Euratom, 
ECSC) 
No 259/68 of 29 February 
1968 layin g 
down 
the 
Staff Regulations 
of Officials an d 
the Conditions 
of Employment 
of Other Servan ts 
of the European 
Communities
(3) OJ L 56, 4.3.1968, p. 1. (3), in particular Title V, Chapter 3, dealin g with old-ag e and invalidity pensions, and 
Annex 
XII, 
which lays down  
the implemen ting 
provisions 
for Article 83a of the Staff Reg ulations,
 
—having 
regard 
to Council 
Regulation 
(EC, 
Euratom) 
No 1605/2002 of 25 June 
2002 on 
the Financial 
Regu­
lation 
applicable 
to the general 
budget 
of the European 
Communities
(4) OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1. (4), and in particular Articles 145, 
146 
and 
147 thereof, 
—having 
regard 
to Council 
Regulation 
(EC) 
No 58/2003 of 19 Decemb er 
2002 layin g 
down 
the statute for 
executive ag encies 
to be 
entrusted 
with certain  
tasks 
in 
the management 
of Commun ity 
programmes
(5) OJ L 11, 16.1.2003, p. 1. (5), 
and 
in 
particular Article 14(2) an d 
(3) thereof, 
—having 
regard 
to Rule 70 of, an d 
Annex 
V to, its Rules of Procedure, 
—having 
regard 
to the report of the Committee on  
Budgetary 
Control 
and 
the opinions 
of the other com­
mittees con cerned 
(A6-0168/2009),N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
A. whereas Article 274 of the E C Treaty estab lishes that respon sibility for implemen tation of the Commu­
nity 
budget 
lies with the Commission  
and 
must be 
exercised with reg ard 
to the prin ciples 
of sound
 finan­
cial management, 
in 
cooperation  
with the Memb er 
States,
B. whereas the Commission  has a duty to do its utmost to provide full support for measures to improve 
financial 
management 
with a view to ob taining 
a positive statemen t 
of assuran ce 
(DAS) from the Court 
of Auditors (E CA),
C. whereas Article 184 of Reg ulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 provides for a revision  of the Financial 
Regulation 
whenever 
it proves n ecessary, 
and 
at least every three years, an d 
whereas the curren t 
three-
year period will en d 
on 1 
January 
2010; whereas the same article stipulates that Parliamen t 
may request 
the conciliation 
procedure,
D. whereas the political power of the E uropean Communities over the n on-executive agencies, which is a 
condition 
for the inclusion 
of the accoun ts 
of such ag encies 
in 
the consoli
dated accoun ts 
of the Euro­
pean
 Commun ities,
 seems to b e
 widening
 from year to year, an d
 whereas their place in the political 
organigramme 
of Commun ity 
operation al 
bodies 
is gradually 
being 
obscure
d,
E. whereas the implemen tation of some E U policies is characterised b y the ‘ shared man agement ’ of the 
Community 
budget 
by 
the Commission  
and 
the Memb er 
States, un der 
which some 80 % of Commu­
nity 
expenditure 
is administered 
by 
the Memb er 
States,
F. whereas in  its Resolution  of 24  April 2007
(1) OJ L 187, 15.7.2008, p. 25. (1) on discharge in respect of the fin ancial year 2005, it con ­
sidered
 that each Memb er
 State must b e
 abl
e to take
 responsibility
 for the man agement
 of EU
 funds
 
received, either throug h 
a single 
national 
management 
declaration  
or in 
the form of several declaration s 
within 
a national 
framework ,
G. whereas in  its annual report on the financial year 2007 the E CA stressed, in  connection with its assess­
ment 
of progress 
in 
establishing 
an 
integrated 
internal 
control 
framework , 
that ‘the nature 
of EU 
spend­
ing 
means 
that the main  
risk 
of error resides at the level of the fin al 
beneficiary
’ (paragraph 
1.47),
H. whereas the sub mission by the Memb er States of an nual summaries of audits an d declaration s available 
in 
the shared man agement 
field, pursuan t 
to paragraph 
44 of the I nterinsti
tutional 
Agreement 
of 17 May 
2006 between 
the European 
Parliamen t, 
the Council 
and 
the Commission  
on 
bu
dgetary 
discipline 
and 
sound 
financial 
management
(2) OJ C 139, 14.6.2006, p. 1. (2) (IIA) should be a first step towards n ational management declaration s 
and 
should mak e 
a major con tribution 
to improvin g 
management 
of the Community b udget, 
with the 
common 
fundamental 
goal 
of obtaining 
a positive DAS for all E U 
expenditure
,
I. whereas the con cept of tolerab le risk of error was first in troduced at EU level by the ECA in its Opinion 
No 
2/2004 on  
the ‘single 
audit’
(3) Opinion No 2/2004 of the Court of Auditors of the E uropean Communities on the ‘single audit’ model (an d a proposal
for a Commun ity 
internal 
control 
framework ) 
(OJ C 107, 30.4.2004, p. 1). (3), and whereas the E CA has stated that ‘ any control system is a trade-
off between 
the cost of operatin g 
the defined 
intensity 
of checks 
on 
the one 
hand, 
and 
the benefit 
these 
procedures b ring 
on 
the other. I n 
the Commun ity 
context 
the benefit 
involv
es reducin g 
the risk 
that 
funds 
are wasted an d 
containing 
the risk 
of error to a tolerab le 
level’,
J. whereas in  its annual report for 2007 the E CA takes the view that ‘ costs of con trol are an important 
issue, 
both 
for the EU 
budget 
and 
Member 
[States]’ an d 
that ‘the balance 
bet
ween 
cost and 
residual risk  
for 
individual 
spending 
areas is of such importan ce 
that it should b e 
approved b y 
the political level (i.e. 
by 
the budget/discharge 
authorities) in  
the name 
of the citizen s 
of the Uni
on’ (paragraph 
1.52(b) 
and 
(c)), 
and 
whereas in  
paragraph 
2.42(c) of the report, the E CA 
recommen ds 
that progress 
be 
made in 
taking 
forward 
the concept 
of tolerab le 
risk,
K. whereas in  paragraph 5 of its con clusions of 8  November 2005 the E COFIN Council took  the view that 
it was of fun damental 
importance 
to introduce 
an 
integrated 
internal 
cont
rol system an d 
simplify the 
legislation 
on 
controls 
and 
requested ‘that the Commission  
assess the cost of con trols 
by 
area of 
expenditure
’,N E 8 3 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/39
L. whereas in  June 2008 the Sloven ian Presidency of the Coun cil took the view that ‘ in line with the 2005 
Council 
conclusions 
(…) a common  
understanding 
between 
the European 
Parliamen t 
and 
the Council 
should
 be
 reached reg arding
 the residual risk to b e
 tolerated in the un derl
ying
 transactions,
 having
 
regard 
to the costs an d 
benefits 
of controls 
for the differen t 
policy areas an d 
the value of the expen di­
ture 
concerned
’
(1) Council of the E uropean Union, note from the Presiden cy to the deleg ation s — ‘An improved soun d financial manage­
ment 
of EU 
funds 
10284/08 FI N 
217’, 3.6.2008 (availab le 
in 
English 
only). (1),
M. whereas, however, while dialog ue between the extern al auditor (the E CA) and the audited party (the 
Commission ) 
is necessary, 
it cannot 
be 
disputed that, in  
accordance 
with international 
audit stan dards, 
which 
must continue 
to provide the g eneral 
framework  
for budgetary 
contro
l, it is for the extern al 
audi­
tor to assess the risk s 
on 
the basis 
of which he forms a judg ment 
as to the choice of audit procedure,
N. whereas, furthermore, the cost of an  audit depen ds not just on the tolerab le level of error b ut also on 
the 
complexity of the org anisational 
set-up of the en tity 
being 
audited and the quality of its in ternal 
con­
trol 
system,
O. whereas, in accordan ce with international  audit stan dards, the extern al auditor chooses appropriate 
methods 
for the selection  
of the items to b e 
checked 
with a view to ob taining 
the eviden ce 
required in  
order 
to achieve the g oals 
of his audit tests; whereas, furthermore, while the choice of methods depen ds 
on 
the circumstan ces, 
the main 
criteria are the audit risk  
and 
the objectiv
e of carryin g 
out effective 
checks; 
whereas, lastly, the extern al 
auditor must ensure that the methods used produce sufficien t 
appro­
priate eviden ce 
for the ob jectives 
of the audit to b e 
achieved,
P. whereas, in  the new generation of programmes, the Directorate-Gen eral for Education and Culture has 
harmonised 
the action  
programmes, 
in 
particular b y 
introducing 
the singl
e audit approach; whereas, in  
that 
context, 
the ex-ante 
and 
ex-post declaration s 
made by 
the Memb er 
States con stitute 
new, 
additional 
factors 
in 
the supervision  
and 
control 
of systems,
Q. whereas the an nual discharge procedure en ables Parliamen t to remain in direct con tact with the k ey 
stakeholders
 in charge
 of such man ag
ement,
 and,
 on the b asis
 of the fin ding
s of the E CA
 audit, to 
improve man agement
 of EU
 expenditure
 for the pub lic
 benefit
 and
 thereby
 create a more reliab le
 
decision-making 
basis,
R. whereas Article 83 of Reg ulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 stipulates that pen sions are charged 
to
 the budget
 and
 that the Memb er
 States must join tly
 guarantee
 payment
 of such b enefits
 in accor­
dance 
with the scale laid down  
for financing 
such expen diture; 
whereas staff pay b ack 
to the general 
budget 
10,25 % of their salaries as their con tribution 
to the fun ding 
of the pen sion 
scheme,
S. whereas Article 83 of Reg ulation (EEC, Euratom, ECSC) No 259/68 lays down  that the Memb er States 
must 
jointly 
guarantee 
the pension 
fund, 
which signifies 
that this g uaran
tee may tak e 
effect should on e 
or 
more Memb er 
States default, b ut 
does not 
imply that the Commun ities 
do no
t have a claim ag ainst 
the 
Member 
States which en tered 
into 
that commitmen t,
T. whereas 2007 was the first year of the implemen tation of the Developmen t Cooperation  Instrument,
U. whereas 2007 was the E uropean Year of Equal Opportun ities for All, which g ave special atten tion to 
the 
multiple forms of discrimin ations 
that women  
often 
face,
V. whereas b ecause of persisten t inequalities between women and men the utilisation  of budgetary 
resources 
has differen t 
effects on  
the two g enders,
W. whereas durin g the next budgetary procedure the Coun cil should tak e due accoun t of the 2007 dis­
charge 
results an d 
recommen dations 
and 
support proposals for reform seekin g 
to give 
the Memb er 
States 
greater 
responsibility, 
with a view to resolvin g 
once 
and 
for all prob lems 
which the E CA 
has been 
flagging 
up for years,N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
X. whereas the Commission , the Council and Parliamen t should, in  cooperation  with the E CA, set them­
selves 
the common  
goal 
of obtaining 
a positive DAS,
MAIN CONCLUSIONS
1. Welcomes the further prog ress  made by  the Commission an d  some of the Memb er  States towards a 
more efficien t 
use of EU 
funds 
and 
the overall con trol 
environment, 
which is reflected b y 
the improve­
ments 
in 
the DAS of the E CA;
2. Welcomes 
the considerable 
progress 
made in 
the management 
of the Seven t
h Framework  
Programme 
by 
the Commission ’s 
research family in  
comparison  
with former Framework  
Programmes; 
reiterates that 
common 
agricultural 
policy (CAP) fun ds 
management 
has further improved, in  
particular than ks 
to the 
functioning 
of the integrated 
administrative 
control 
system (IACS); 
deeply reg rets 
that in 
2007 Greece 
was still n ot 
meeting 
its obligations 
to implemen t 
IACS;
3. Notes 
that 2007 was the first year of closure of the 2000-2006 multian nua
l programmes 
and that man y
 
funds 
were recovered;
4. Notes con siderable 
improvemen ts 
in 
the field of research an d 
technolog
ical developmen t 
(RTD) finan­
cial 
management 
where error rates were reduced b y 
more than  
50 % in 
the space of three years; in vites 
the 
Commission  
to continue 
its simplification  
efforts in 
order to improve the use of prog rammes 
by 
final 
beneficiaries;
5. Welcomes 
the efforts made b y 
the Commission  
in 
the field of fun ds 
allocated to cohesion  
policy in 
its 
implemen tation 
of the action  
plan 
to strengthen 
the Commission ’s 
supervisory role un der 
shared man ­
agement 
of structural action s 
which was adopted in  
the context 
of the 2006 discharg e; 
hopes that the 
first results of the ab ovementioned 
action 
plan 
and 
the simplification  
efforts will b e 
seen 
in 
the 2008 
ECA 
Annual 
Report;
6. Remains 
concerned 
about 
the lack 
of EU 
capacity in  
crisis man agement; 
considers 
that the Un ion 
is los­
ing 
its political compass, visib ility 
and 
accountability 
when 
using 
inte
rnational 
trust funds 
which could 
have been 
managed 
by 
the Commission  
if it had respected discharg e 
reports 2005 an d 
2006 and 
built 
up 
its own 
post-crisis in strument; 
is greatly 
concerned 
at the lack  
of cont
rol of EU 
funds 
implemen ted 
by
 certain UN ag encies
 and
 the unwillingness
 of UN ag encies
 to follow up on fraud cases where E U
 
funds 
are involved;
HORIZONTAL ISSUES
Statement of assu rance
7. Notes 
the improvemen ts 
in 
the individual 
parts which comprise the DAS; reg rets, 
however, that, for the 
14th year in  
succession , 
the DAS issued b y 
the ECA 
in 
its annual 
report for 2007 in cludes 
a qualified 
opinion 
on 
the legality 
and 
regularity 
of the tran sactions 
underlying 
the accoun ts; 
notes 
that the E CA 
takes 
the view that, in  
a large 
number 
of expenditure 
areas (agriculture 
and natural 
resources, cohesion , 
research, 
energy 
and 
transport, 
external 
aid, developmen t 
and 
enlargeme
nt, 
education  
and 
citizenship), 
payments 
are still materially affected b y 
errors, alb eit 
to differin g 
degrees;
8. Welcomes the fact that, accordin g 
to the ECA’s 
report, reven ue, 
adminis
trative expen diture, 
expendi­
ture
 relating
 to economic
 and
 financial
 affairs an d
 expenditure
 relating
 to the European
 Agricultural
 
Guarantee 
Fund 
(EAGF) 
are free from material error;
9. Notes that the situation  
— in 
particular as reg ards 
control 
systems — is improvin g, 
but 
not 
to a suffi­
cient 
extent 
nor 
sufficiently 
quickly;N E 0 4 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/41
Reliability of the accounts
10. Welcomes the E CA’s
 statemen t
 to the effect that the an nual
 accounts
 of the European
 Commun ities
 
present
 fairly, in all material respects, the fin ancial
 position of the Commun ities
 as of 31 Decemb er
 
2007, and 
the results of their operation s 
and 
cash flows for the year then  
ended (Chapter 1, DAS, para­
graph 
VII); 
calls on 
the Commission  
nevertheless 
to pay due atten tion 
to the commen ts 
presented 
by 
the 
ECA 
in 
order to improve the comprehen siveness 
and 
accuracy of the b asic 
accounting 
data;
11. Considers 
it abnormal 
for the an nual 
accounts 
to show n et 
assets of E UR – 
58 600 000 000 an d 
won­
ders 
whether the amoun ts 
to be 
requested from Memb er 
States should n ot 
be 
entered as assets, g iven 
that 
the estimated E UR 33 
500 000 000 in  
staff pensions
 is clearly a commitmen t; 
asks 
for further speci­
fication 
concerning 
the annexed 
notes 
on 
the other amoun ts 
to be 
called from Memb er 
States, totallin g 
EUR 27 
900 000 000; n otes 
the explan ations 
provided b y 
the Commission ’s 
Accounting 
Officer to the 
effect that in ternational 
accounting 
standards 
applicable 
to the pub lic 
sector have b een 
complied with; 
proposes that con sideration 
be 
given 
to establishing 
a Commun ity 
pension 
fund 
in 
order to extern alise 
these 
financial 
commitmen ts 
vis-à-vis staff;
12. Fails to un derstand 
why the assets received b y 
the European 
Communitie
s in 
connection 
with the Gali­
leo programme 
were not 
entered 
in 
the annual 
accounts, 
given 
that, accordin g 
to the ECA’s 
report, the 
agreements 
were signed 
in 
late 2007 b etween 
the European 
Space Agency, 
the Galileo Join t 
Undertak­
ing 
and 
the GNSS (Glob al 
Navigation 
Satellite Systems) Supervisory Authority, which was set up in  
2004 
and 
given 
responsibility 
for taking 
over the activities of the former Galileo Join t 
Undertaking 
on 1 
Janu­
ary 
2007; accordin gly, 
calls on 
the Commission  
to put forward a proposal con cerning 
the major E uro­
pean 
projects (Galileo or TE Ns) 
which require fun ding 
which goes 
beyond 
the scope of the multian nual 
financial 
framework  
and 
which it can not 
therefore con trol;
13. Calls 
for consideration 
to be 
given 
to the possib ility 
of including 
in 
the annual 
accounts 
provisions 
for 
major main tenance 
and 
refurbishment 
work 
on 
the European 
Communities’ 
bu
ildings 
stock, 
given 
the 
lack 
of a buildings 
depreciation  
schedule b roken 
down 
by 
specific compon e
nt 
and 
setting 
out the main  
tangible 
fixed assets to b e 
replaced at reg ular 
intervals; 
takes 
the view that such provision s 
for major 
maintenance 
or refurbishment 
works 
should be 
backed 
by 
multiannual 
upkee
p programmes 
designed 
to 
keep 
buildings 
in 
a good 
state of repair without prolon ging 
their life;
14. Calls for proper verification  
that, in 
the absence 
of a capital tie-up, the E uropean 
Communities’ 
level of 
political authority in the ag encies
 included
 in the con solidated
 account
s complies with in ternational
 
public-sector 
accounting 
standards;
15. Expresses 
concerns 
and 
doubts 
about 
the possib ility 
of appoin ting ‘
no
n 
category
’ senior 
officials, un less 
specifically 
mentioned 
in 
the staff estab lishment 
plans, 
in 
the last step of the AD16 g rade 
under 
any 
cir­
cumstances, 
and 
asks 
the Commission  
to clarify the possib ilities 
under 
the Staff Reg ulations 
in 
the light 
of 
this specific b udgetary 
position;
Legality 
of the underlying transactions
16. Notes with satisfaction  
that the areas in  
which the Commission  
has applied appropriate supervisory and 
control 
systems (reven ue, 
commitmen ts 
and 
payments 
concerning 
administ
rative and 
other expen di­
ture, 
and 
economic 
and 
financial 
affairs) are free from material errors as to the leg ality 
and 
regularity 
of 
the underlying 
transactions 
(Chapter 1, DAS, parag raph 
IX);
17. Deplores 
the fact, n one 
the less, that in  
extremely importan t 
Communit
y spending 
areas (agricultural 
spending
 excluding
 the EAGF,
 cohesion ,
 research, en ergy
 and
 transport,
 external
 actions,
 education 
and 
culture), the E CA 
notes, 
once 
again, 
that complicated or un clear 
legal 
requiremen ts 
result firstly in  
a 
large 
number 
of errors at fin al-beneficiary 
level and 
secondly 
in 
only 
partially effective mon itoring 
and 
control 
systems an d 
that that complexity is in strumental 
in 
preventing 
the ECA 
from issuin g 
a positive 
DAS (Chapter 1, DAS, parag raphs 
X and 
XI); 
calls on 
the Commission , 
therefore, to con duct 
an 
analysis 
to 
determine 
the extent 
of, and 
possible 
solutions 
to, the prob lems; 
stresses therefore the n eed 
for sim­
plification  
of the underlying 
rules and 
regulations 
in 
order to achieve a positive DAS;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
18. Calls on the Commission  to further step up its mon itoring of controls delegated to Member States and 
to 
give 
them clear g uidance 
on 
how to preven t, 
identify 
and 
correct errors, an d 
insists 
that, where Mem­
ber 
States’ con trol 
systems remain  
ineffective, 
the Commission  
do everythin g 
in 
its power to compel 
the Memb er
 States to meet their ob ligation
s and mak e
 the necessary
 improvemen ts,
 in particular b y
 
imposing 
payment 
suspensions 
and 
financial 
correction s;
Budgetary 
management — financial corrections
19. Notes the fact that the E CA
 found
 that in 2007, the first year of the n ew
 2007-2013 prog ramming
 
period, the use of commitmen t 
appropriation s 
had markedly 
improved b y 
comparison  
with the start of 
the previous prog ramming 
period;
20. Considers
 with regard
 to shared or decen tralised
 management,
 however, that the Commission must 
apply Reg ulation 
(EC, 
Euratom) 
No 1605/2002 in  
full and 
assume its ultimate respon sibility 
for budget 
implemen tation, 
and 
emphasises the n eed 
to make 
financial 
correction s 
as soon 
as irregularities 
uncor­
rected 
by 
Member 
States are detected, without waitin g 
for the en d 
of the multian nual 
cycle;
Amounts 
recovered
21. Notes with con cern 
the problems 
surrounding 
recovery of irreg ularly 
disbursed 
Community 
funds 
and 
the 
poor quality of the data supplied on  
the correction  
mechanism 
applied at Memb er 
State level, which, 
on 
occasion, 
are contradictory 
and 
incomplete 
as regards 
cohesion 
policies, an d 
the fact that, with reg ard 
to
 agriculture,
 the ECA
 has doub ts
 as to the reliab ility
 of the in formation
 supplied (parag raphs
 3.26 
and 
5.44 of the 2007 an nual 
report);
22. Points
 also to the importan ce
 of the fin al
 decisions
 and
 corrective measures tak en
 with the aim of 
excluding
 from Commun ity
 funding
 expenditure
 which has n ot
 been
 carried out in con formity
 with 
Community 
legislation, 
and 
restates its call for the precise b udget 
heading 
and 
the year to which in di­
vidual 
recoveries relate to b e 
specified, in  
keeping 
with standard 
practice in  
the agriculture 
and 
natural 
resources 
sector;
23. Calls on 
the Commission  
to enhance 
the efficien cy 
and 
effectiveness 
of multian nual 
recovery systems, 
including 
at Member 
State level, an d 
to consolidate 
data on 
recoveries an d 
financial 
correction s, 
in 
par­
ticular in 
the areas covered b y 
the Structural Fun ds, 
in 
order to provide reliab le 
figures 
which can  
be 
compared 
between 
the various policy areas an d 
fund 
management 
procedures; calls on  
the Commis­
sion 
to report to Parliamen t 
in 
the notes 
accompan ying 
the annual 
accounts
, so that an  
overview can  
be 
obtained;
24. Calls, 
in 
view of the persisten ce 
of recovery-related prob lems, 
for the system to b e 
evaluated;
Suspension 
of payments
25. Assures the Commission  
of its full support in  
the rigorous 
application  
of the legislation 
on 
suspension 
of 
payments, 
and 
welcomes the measures already in itiated 
for the non-tran
sfer of fun ds 
where the Com­
mission 
has no 
absolute 
guarantee 
of the reliab ility 
of the man agement 
and 
control 
systems of the Mem­
ber 
State which is the b eneficiary 
of those fun ds;
Annual 
summaries 
of audits 
and declarations available in the shared- mana
gement field, and 
national management declarations
26. Welcomes the fact that an nual 
summaries of audits b y 
the Memb er 
States are b eing 
made availab le 
as 
from 2008, alon g 
with the evaluation  
and 
declaration s 
presented 
in 
the 2007 an nual 
activity reports of 
the directorates-g eneral 
dealing 
with Structural Fun ds, 
and 
calls on 
the Commission  
to make 
efforts to 
ensure 
that these an nual 
summaries can  
be 
published 
together 
with the Commission ’s 
reply; takes 
the 
view that the an nual 
summaries drawn  
up by 
the Memb er 
States are pub lic 
documents 
and 
should there­
fore also b e 
forwarded to Parliamen t’s 
committee respon sible 
in 
the course of the discharg e 
procedure;N E 2 4 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/43
27. Notes with con cern that, owin g to disparities in  presentation and to a lack of added value, the E CA con­
siders 
that those an nual 
summaries do n ot 
yet constitute 
a reliable 
appraisal of the operation  
and 
effec­
tiveness 
of the con trol 
systems; welcomes in  
this light 
the Commission ’s 
revised guidance 
note 
aimed at 
ensuring 
higher 
quality in 
the annual 
summaries for 2008 an d 
is of the opin i
on 
that mean ingful 
annual 
summaries 
will reduce the n umber 
of on-the-spot 
audits;
28. Calls on 
the Commission , 
in 
that connection, 
to analyse 
the summaries received in  
2009 with the aim 
of optimisin g 
their added value in  
terms of the assuran ce 
they provide reg a
rding 
the operation  
of the 
internal 
control 
systems employed b y 
the Memb er 
States; also calls on  
the Commission  
to include 
an 
analysis 
of the an nual 
summaries sub mitted 
by 
Member 
States in 
the annual 
report pursuan t 
to 
Article 86(4) of Coun cil 
Regulation 
(EC, 
Euratom) 
No 1605/2002, usin g 
as benchmarks 
the provision s 
of 
the Interinstitutional 
Agreement 
on 
budgetary 
discipline 
and 
sound 
financial 
management 
(IIA);
29. Deplores 
the Commission ’s 
failure to act on  
the call made in  
the Resolution  
of 22 April 2008 on  
dis­
charge 
for the fin ancial 
year 2006
(1) OJ L 88, 31.3.2009, p. 25. (1) for a specific documen t to be drawn up, and forwarded to the Par­
liament 
and 
to the Coun cil, 
which analyses, 
on 
the basis 
of the annual summaries received, the stren gths 
and 
weaknesses 
of each Memb er 
State’s national 
system for the admin istrat
ion 
and 
control 
of Commu­
nity 
funds 
and 
the results of the audits con ducted; 
deplores also the fact that, to date, it has n ot 
received 
detailed in formation
 from the Commission on an assessmen t
 and
 comparative an alysis
 of the in itial
 
annual 
summaries presen ted; 
considers 
it of utmost importan ce 
that the quality of those an nual 
sum­
maries be 
reported on  
in 
order to en sure 
that value is added to the process b y
, among 
other thin gs, 
iden­
tifying 
common 
problems, 
possible 
solutions 
and 
best 
practices;
30. Calls on 
the Commission  
regularly 
to present 
this qualitative an d 
quantitative evaluation  
of the annual 
summaries 
in 
the activity reports an d 
to make 
this information 
available 
to all the parties con cerned, 
and 
to the pub lic, 
during 
the discharg e 
procedure; expects to receive the first of these assessmen ts 
by 
September 
2009 and 
asks 
that, in 
addition 
to an 
annual 
formal presen tation 
to Parliamen t, 
this analysis 
of 
annual 
summaries should also b e 
circulated to all n ational 
parliamen ta
ry public 
accounts 
committees;
31. Calls on 
the Commission  
to carry out, after three years, a comprehen siv
e evaluation , 
analysing 
the added 
value of the an nual 
summaries for the soun d 
financial 
management 
of EU 
fund
s in 
the Memb er 
States, 
as well as the deg ree 
of independence 
of the auditors in volved;
32. Considers 
that the an nual 
summaries which Memb er 
States have to provide of availab le 
audits and 
dec­
larations, 
pursuant 
to Point 
44 of the I IA, 
ought 
to be 
a first step towards the in troduction 
of national 
management 
declaration s 
in 
all Member 
States; ask s 
the Commission  
to declare what it has don e 
in 
this 
respect, tak ing 
into 
account 
previous discharg e 
resolution s, 
and 
urgent
ly to mak e 
all necessary 
efforts 
to upgrade 
the annual 
summaries so that they carry the same political weig h
t as the national 
manage­
ment 
declaration s; 
is of the opin ion 
that the Commission  
should use its right of in itiative 
to propose a 
Council 
decision 
to make 
national 
declaration s 
compulsory;
33. Welcomes the in itiative
 taken
 by
 some Memb er
 States (Den mark,
 the Netherlan ds,
 Sweden an d
 the 
United 
Kingdom) 
to approve the adoption  
of a national 
declaration  
on 
the management 
of Commun ity 
funding,
 but
 regrets
 the fact that, despite those in itiatives,
 most other Memb er
 States are resistin g
 its 
introduction, 
and 
deplores the fact that Belg ium, 
Bulgaria, 
the Czech Repub lic, 
Germany, 
Estonia, 
Ire­
land,
 Greece, Spain ,
 France,
 Italy,
 Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuan ia,
 Luxembou
rg,
 Hungary,
 Malta, Austria, 
Poland, 
Portugal, 
Romania, 
Slovenia, 
Slovakia 
and 
Finland 
have not 
yet taken 
steps to develop an  
effec­
tive system of n ational 
declaration s;
34. Calls, 
pursuant 
to Article 248(3) of the E C 
Treaty, as reg ards 
shared-man agement 
controls, 
for coop­
eration 
to be 
stepped up b etween 
national 
audit bodies 
and 
the ECA; 
proposes examin ation 
of the pos­
sibility 
of national 
audit bodies, 
in 
their capacity as in dependent 
external 
auditors, an d 
with due reg ard 
for 
international 
audit stan dards, 
issuing 
national 
audit certificates for the man agement 
of Commun ity 
funds, 
which would b e 
submitted 
to Member 
State governments 
with a view to bein g 
produced durin g 
the 
discharge 
process in  
accordance 
with an 
appropriate in terinstitutio
nal 
procedure to b e 
introduced;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
Control systems
The Action Plan for an integrated internal control framework
35. Notes with satisfaction  
the overall prog ress 
made in 
the developmen t 
of the Action  
Plan 
and 
the fact 
that a majority of action s 
have been 
implemen ted 
and 
most of the g aps 
identi
fied in 
the Action  
Plan 
filled;
36. Voices 
its concern 
over the E CA’s 
repeated criticism of the in adequate 
quality of con trols 
in 
Member 
States; 
Notes with con cern 
the complain ts 
by 
beneficiaries 
and 
national 
control 
bodies 
about 
the num­
ber 
of controls 
and 
the cost thereof;
37. Also notes
 with con cern
 beneficiaries’
 criticism of the n umber
 of manu
als, guidance
 notes,
 working
 
documents 
and 
participation  
rules applicab le 
to grant
s; calls for those documen ts 
to be 
consolidated 
and 
for 
discussion  
with Parliamen t 
on 
simplifyin g 
the implemen ting 
rules;
38. Emphasises 
that control 
systems are a reflection  
of the complexity of reg ulations 
and 
rules on 
the vari­
ous, sometimes overlappin g 
levels; urg es 
therefore the Commission  
to accelerate the simplification  
exer­
cise whilst fully in volving 
Parliamen t; 
asks 
Member 
States and 
regions 
to undertake 
the same efforts;
39. Calls on 
the Commission  
to review the con ditions 
for using 
the flat-rate method so as to in crease 
reli­
ability 
in 
beneficiaries’ 
interest; 
regards 
it as unacceptable 
to dispute — after the even t 
— the flat rates 
opted for;
40. Deplores the fact that Action  
4 of the Action  
Plan, 
concerning 
the launc
hing 
of an 
interinstitutional 
ini­
tiative 
on 
the basic 
principles 
to be 
considered 
regarding 
the risks 
to be 
tolerated in  
the underlying 
trans­
actions, 
is being 
implemen ted 
late;
41. Points 
also, in 
this context, 
to the importan ce 
of Action 
10 of the Action  
Plan, 
which proposes mak ing 
an ‘
analysis 
of the costs of con trols
’, in 
view of the ‘need 
to reach an  
appropriate b alance 
between 
the 
costs and 
benefits 
of controls
’;
42. Also expects the an nual 
activity reports of the directorates-g eneral 
to include, 
again, 
information 
on 
the 
quality of, an d 
improvemen t 
in, 
controls 
in 
the Memb er 
States, and 
calls on 
the Commission  
to grade 
all 
payment 
agencies 
and 
certification  
bodies;
43. Calls 
on 
the Commission  
to present 
regular 
assessmen ts 
of the integrat
ed internal 
control 
system, an d 
calls 
for even 
better 
coverage 
— in 
the annual 
activity reports an d 
the synt
hesis report — of Commis­
sion 
departmen ts’ 
and 
Member 
States’ shared-man agement 
systems, in  
particular as reg ards 
technical 
quality 
and 
ethical con siderations, 
e.g. 
the level of in dependence 
of nat
ional 
audit authorities;
44. Calls on 
the Commission  
to carry out a more complete an d 
exhaustive evaluation  
of the resources g iven 
over 
to control 
systems, b y 
spending 
area, for all Un ion 
spending 
areas, as called for b y 
Parliamen t 
in 
its 
discharge 
resolution s 
in 
previous years an d 
in 
view of the ‘getting 
results’ con cept;
45.
 Calls on the Commission in addition ,
 on the b asis
 of the an nual
 summaries received, to analyse the 
strengths 
and 
weaknesses 
of each Memb er 
State’s national 
system for the admin istration 
and 
control 
of 
Community 
funds, 
together 
with an 
estimate of the cost of n ational 
systems for the con trol 
of Com­
munity 
funds; 
reminds 
the Commission  
of its commitmen t 
to improve the quality of the an nual 
sum­
maries of the Memb er 
States in 
order to mak e 
them useful in struments 
to mitigate 
the risk 
of errors for 
the years to come; ask s 
the Commission  
to live up to its commitmen t 
in 
this respect;
46. Considers 
that that comparative an alysis 
should be 
forwarded to Parliamen t, 
the Council 
and 
the ECA 
in 
late 2009 or early 2010 an d 
should serve as a b asis 
for interinstitutiona
l dialogue 
on 
tolerable 
risk 
of 
error;N E 4 4 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/45
47. Notes that while ‘tolerable risk of error’ is, in  an integrated interna l control framework , a fundamental 
concept 
to be 
taken 
into 
consideration 
by 
the ECA 
when 
it issues its DAS, it should, accordin g 
to ECA 
Opinion
 No  4/2006 on the draft Coun cil
 regulation
 amending
 Regulation
 (EC, Eura
tom) 
No 1605/2002
(1) OJ C 273, 9.11.2006, p. 2. (1), be stipulated exactly how to determin e tolerable risk of error;
Tolerable 
risk of error
48. Welcomes the Commission  
communication 
of 16 Decemb er 
2008 on 
a common  
understanding 
of the 
concept 
of tolerab le 
risk 
of error as a soun d 
methodolog ical 
basis 
for an 
economic 
analysis 
of accept­
able 
level of risk , 
and 
expects the Commission  
to take 
this work 
further when  
preparing 
its proposal on  
tolerable 
level of risk  
by 
budgetary 
area; recog nises, 
in 
this context, 
the importan ce 
of that commun i­
cation 
as an 
initial 
basis 
for discussion , 
from a strictly econ omic 
perspective, on  ‘
tolerable 
level of risk ’ 
for two Un ion 
spending 
areas, i.e. the Structural Fun ds 
and 
the EAFRD; 
calls, however, for this dialog ue 
between 
external 
auditor an d 
audited party to con tinue 
to comply with in te
rnational 
auditing 
standards 
which 
stipulate that it is for the extern al 
auditor to decide which risk s 
he should tak e 
as the basis 
for his 
judgment 
as to the choice of audit procedure;
49. Deplores the fact that, in  
the abovementioned 
communication, 
the Commission  
exposes the prob lems 
encountered 
in 
obtaining 
sufficiently 
reliable 
information 
from Memb er 
States, and 
regards 
this as det­
rimental 
to the Un ion’s 
image;
50. Has 
doubts 
as to the reliab ility 
of data provided b y 
Member 
States and 
therefore calls on  
the Commis­
sion 
to compile fresh statistics, plus an  
in-depth 
analysis 
thereof, on ce 
the impact of the 2007-2013 
rules becomes 
clear and 
to forward that an alysis 
to Parliamen t 
and 
the Council b efore 
the end 
of 2011;
51. Considers 
that determin ing 
tolerable 
level of risk  
is most importan t 
and 
highly 
complex; tak es 
the view 
that there should b e 
a close tie-in  
between 
tolerable 
level of risk  
and 
an 
in-depth study in to 
the cost-
effectiveness 
of Commission  
and 
Member 
State control 
systems for each Commun ity 
spending 
area;
52. Calls, given 
the pressin g 
need 
to continue 
to analyse 
the costs an d 
bene
fits of con trol, 
calls on 
the Com­
mission, 
with the techn ical 
support of the E C
A, to carry out an  
in-depth 
ana
lysis in 
the areas of research, 
external 
relations 
and 
administrative 
expenditure, 
and 
to submit 
a report on  
the findings 
before 
the end 
of 
2010;
53. Considers 
that the volume of Commun ity 
funds 
lost because 
of errors should also b e 
taken 
into 
con­
sideration  
when 
a tolerable 
error rate is determin ed;
54. Takes 
the view that tan gible 
proposals should b e 
produced with reg ard 
to improvin g 
the management 
and 
control 
of Commun ity 
spending 
and, 
indeed, 
for some aspects, a deg ree 
of harmon isation, 
and 
pro­
poses that, durin g 
the forthcomin g 
budgetary 
procedure, Parliamen t 
should give 
the Commission  
the 
resources n eeded 
to undertake 
a study;
55. Calls on 
the Commission  
without delay to sub mit 
its proposals for achievin g 
the objective 
of a positive 
DAS;
Transparency
56. Recalls the Commission ’s 
decision 
to start with a volun tary 
register 
for lobbyists 
and 
to evaluate the sys­
tem after on e 
year; is aware of the leg al 
basis 
for a man datory 
register 
provided b y 
the Treaty of Lisb on; 
recalls 
that Parliamen t’s 
current 
register 
is already man datory 
and 
that a possib le 
common 
register 
would 
be 
de facto man datory, 
since 
registering 
is, in 
either case, a prerequisite for g aining 
access to Parliamen t;
57.
 Deplores the fact that its call for a n e
w code of con duct
 for Memb ers
 of the Commission ,
 so as to 
improve an d 
define 
more clearly their in dividual 
and 
collective political respon sibility 
and 
accountabil­
ity 
for their decision s 
and 
for the implemen tation 
of their policies b y 
their services, has n ot 
been 
fol­
lowed up;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
58. Recalls on ce  again  the Commission ’s  responsibility  for ensuring  the completen ess,  searchab ility  and  
comparab ility 
of data provided on  
the beneficiaries 
of EU 
funding 
and 
regr
ets that this ob jective 
has still 
not 
been 
achieved;
59. Recalls on ce 
again 
the importan ce 
of complete tran sparency 
and 
public
ity with reg ard 
to the cab inet 
staff 
of Members 
of the Commission  
not 
recruited in  
accordance 
with the Staff Reg ulations;
60. Notes 
that, since 
the financial 
year 2007, it has b een 
compulsory to publish the n ames 
of recipien ts 
of 
European 
funds; 
notes 
with regret 
that Parliamen t 
has no 
overview either of pub lication 
or of the details 
of recipien ts 
and 
their projects; calls on  
the Commission  
to assess the usefuln ess 
of the inform
ation pub­
lished by 
the Memb er 
States in 
the light 
of the policy ob jectives 
set forth;
61. Expresses 
surprise at the fact that the Commission  
has offered a E UR 1 
500 000 con tribution 
to Par­
liament’s 
fitness 
centre 
from its ex-E conomat 
off-budget 
bank 
accounts 
(COM(2008) 692) an d 
disagrees 
with 
this way of seek ing 
the agreement 
of Parliamen t 
to use mon ey; 
recalls parag raph 
6 of its ab ove­
mentioned 
Resolution  
of 24 April 2007 on  
discharge 
in 
respect of the fin anc
ial year 2005 an d 
para­
graphs 
6 and 
7 of its Resolution  
of 27 April 2006 on  
discharge 
in 
respect of the fin ancial 
year 2004
(1) OJ L 340, 6.12.2006, p. 5. (1); 
calls on 
the Commission  
to enter 
the money 
from the ex-E conomat 
off-budget 
bank 
accounts 
in 
the 
ordinary 
budget 
before 
making 
proposals for its use;
62. Reminds 
the Commission  
of the fact that a comprehen sive, 
easily accessib le 
public 
database 
containing 
information
 on all fin al
 beneficiaries
 of EU
 funding
 should b e
 available
 before the n ext
 European
 
elections;
Financial 
Regulation
63. Notes 
with satisfaction  
that the simplification  
begun 
when 
Regulatio
n 
(EC, 
Euratom) 
No 1605/2002 was 
last revised has had the desired effects as reg ards 
public 
procuremen t;
64. Points 
out, however, that the measures tak en 
on 
grants 
have demon strat
ed their effectiven ess 
only 
in 
part; 
asks 
that the Commission  
present 
to it by 1 
January 
2010 proposals for a revised an d 
fully con­
solidated 
Financial 
Regulation 
with chapters specific to in d
ividual expenditure prog rammes 
which bring 
together 
all the requiremen ts 
which a b eneficiary 
of a programme 
must fulfil in  
one 
single 
comprehen ­
sive 
source an d 
with further simplification s 
as regards 
the award an d 
cont
rol of grants; 
calls, pursuan t 
to 
Article 184 of Reg ulation 
(EC, 
Euratom) 
No 1605/2002, for the n ext 
three-yearly review of Reg ula­
tion 
(EC, 
Euratom) 
No 1605/2002 to b e 
carried out b y 
means 
of the con ciliati
on 
procedure;
65. Invites 
the Commission  
to engage 
at a very early stag e 
in 
consultations 
with the other in stitutions 
sub­
ject 
to Regulation 
(EC, 
Euratom) 
No 1605/2002;
Anti-Fraud 
Office (OLAF )
66.
 Notes with con cern
 OLAF’s work ing
 conditions;
 calls on the Commission to g ive
 OLAF immediate 
access to its datab ases 
if this is n ecessary 
in 
connection 
with an 
investig
ation, 
so that investigations 
can 
be 
opened 
and 
conducted 
without delay;
67. Calls also for action  
to ensure 
that beneficiary 
third coun tries 
give 
OLAF all n ecessary 
assistance 
during 
on-the-spot 
inspections 
and 
checks, 
together 
with all relevan t 
informat
ion 
on 
follow-up to in vestiga­
tions 
carried out; ask s 
the Commission  
to ensure 
that all future con tracts 
stipulate that the authorities 
of the coun tries 
concerned 
must fully cooperate with OLAF;
68. Is 
greatly 
concerned 
at the fact that on ly 
6,7 % of OLAF’s ‘judicial follow-up’ recommen dations 
gave 
rise 
to actual judicial proceedin gs; 
is aware that in  
2007 60 % of all OLAF in vest
igations 
gave 
rise to ‘judi­
cial follow-up’ recommen dations; 
regards 
this state of affairs, which undermin es 
the rule of law an d 
citi­
zens’
 confidence
 and
 from which on ly
 presumed fraudsters can b enefit,
 as unacceptable;
 therefore 
strongly 
urges 
the Commission  
to use all the powers availab le 
to it under 
the Treaties to b ring 
about 
effective 
cooperation  
among 
national 
authorities in  
the fight 
against 
Community 
fraud;N E 6 4 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/47
69. Notes with con cern that between 2006 and  2008 only 37 out of 222 in ternal investigations gave rise 
to disciplin ary
 proceedin gs
 and
 that, of these 37 in vestigations,
 only
 two produced g enuine
 conse
­
quences, 
three were halted for lack  
of evidence 
and 
the other 32 — i.e. 87 % — have yet to produce 
results; calls on the Commission to un dertake
 to pursue in ternal
 investig
ations
 just as vig orously
 as 
external 
investigations 
and 
to ensure 
that those in vestigations 
which have n ot 
yet given 
rise to effective 
disciplinary 
follow-up produce results;
70. Calls once 
again 
on 
the Commission  
to establish 
a mechan ism 
for exchan g
es of information 
between 
OLAF 
and 
the Memb er 
States con cerning 
the follow-up to Commun ity 
anti-fra
ud investigations; 
in 
par­
ticular, calls on  
the Commission  
to ensure 
that national 
judicial authorities k eep 
OLAF reg ularly 
informed, 
by 
means 
of progress 
reports, on  
the outcome of the judicial action  
taken 
in 
the fight 
against 
Community 
fraud, followin g 
the forwardin g 
of OLAF files;
SECTORAL ISSUES
Own resou rces
71. Notes 
that, accordin g 
to information 
provided b y 
the Commission  
(see the an swer 
to Written  
Question 
E-5221/08), 
in 
September-October 
2008 for the first time all 27 Memb er 
States included 
the allocation  
of 
financial 
intermediation 
services in directly 
measured (FI SIM) 
in 
their national 
accounts 
data; on 
the 
basis 
of that data, the in crease 
in 
the gross 
national 
income 
(GNI) 
of the EU
-27 as a result of FI SIM 
allo­
cation 
amounts 
to EUR 149 
200 000 000 in  
2007 (i.e. 1,2 % of E U-27 
GNI); 
this ne
w statistical 
approach thus serves to in crease 
GNI 
by 
an 
amount 
substantially 
greater 
than 
the volume of the en tire 
Union 
budget;
72. Draws 
attention 
to paragraph 
93 of its ab ovementioned 
Resolution  
of 24 April 2007 on  
discharge 
in 
respect 
of the financial 
year 2005 an d 
paragraphs 
6 and 
7 of its Resolution  
of 27 April 2006 on  
dis­
charge
 in respect of the fin ancial
 year 2004, in which it poin ted
 out that allocated FI SIM
s will auto­
matically b e 
included 
in 
the own 
resource decision , 
for GNI 
own 
resource purposes, sin ce, 
in 
its proposal 
for a Coun cil 
decision 
on 
the system of the E uropean 
Communities’ 
own 
resources (COM(2006) 99), 
the Commission  
entered 
no 
limiting 
reservation  
in 
that respect;
73. Notes that the Coun cil, 
when 
adopting 
Decision 
2007/436/E C, 
Euratom 
of 7 June 
2007 on 
the system 
of the European 
Communities’ 
own 
resources
(1) OJ L 163, 23.6.2007, p. 17. (1) on the basis of the Commission  proposal (COM(2006) 
99), 
likewise 
entered 
no 
limiting 
reservation  
concerning 
FISIM; 
expects, therefore, that when  
the new 
own 
resources decision  
comes into 
force, and 
backdated 
to 1 January 
2007, GNI  
data including 
FISIMs 
will 
be 
used to calculate Commun ity 
own 
resources an d 
that, on 
that basis, 
past and 
future paymen ts 
by 
the Memb er 
States will b e 
calculated afresh;
Agriculture 
and natural 
resources
74. Notes 
with concern 
the ECA’s 
conclusion 
that the tran sactions 
underly
ing 
this policy g roup, 
taken 
as a 
whole, are affected b y 
a material level of error of leg ality 
and/or 
regular
ity (paragraphs 
5.12 and 
5.13 of 
the annual 
report for 2007), an d 
also takes 
note 
of the prob lems 
found 
by 
the ECA 
at final-beneficiary 
level 
and 
of the fact that ab out 
20 % of paymen ts 
audited at that level ag ain 
turned 
out to be 
incorrect; 
notes,
 however, the decreasin g
 frequency
 of errors an d
 the limited fin anc
ial impact of these errors 
(0,83 % of the expen diture 
concerned);
75. Agrees 
with the E CA’s 
acknowledgement 
that rural developmen t 
expendi
ture, and 
in 
particular expen ­
diture 
on 
agri-environmental 
measures, is particularly pron e 
to a higher 
incidence 
of errors an d 
that the 
controls
 have once
 again
 been
 found
 to be
 deficient
 because
 of the complex nature of the rules an d
 
imprecise defin itions
 included
 in the elig ibility
 rules in some n ational
 legislation,
 problems
 which 
adversely affect the quality of con trols; 
urges 
the Commission  
to simplify, stren gthen 
and 
consolidate 
the 
control 
rules;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
76. Notes, however, the E CA’s conclusion that the Integrated Administrat ion and Control System con tinues 
to 
be 
effective in  
limiting 
the risk 
of irregular 
expenditure 
where the system is properly implemen ted 
and 
data are accurate an d 
reliable 
as regards 
Single 
Payment 
Scheme payments b ased 
on 
allocated 
entitlements 
(paragraphs 
5.20 and 
5.21 of the an nual 
report for 2007);
77. Is 
concerned, 
however, at the E CA’s 
criticisms of errors in  
interpreti
ng 
the provision s 
of the regulations 
and 
at the finding 
that the cumulative effect of all such errors, over a n umb
er of years, will b e 
signifi­
cant 
if they are n ot 
corrected, an d 
calls on 
the Commission  
to take 
the appropriate measures, con sisting 
of 
at least simplifyin g 
the policy tog ether 
with ensuring 
clearer an d 
cons
istent 
control 
systems, to cor­
rect the errors as quick ly 
as possible 
and 
to inform 
Parliamen t 
in 
late 2009 ab out 
the measures tak en;
78. Considers 
unacceptable 
the existen ce 
of problems, 
identified 
once 
again 
by 
the ECA, 
in 
implemen ting 
the 
Integrated 
Administration 
and 
Control 
System in  
Greece an d 
supports the Commission ’s 
intention, 
as 
stated to the parliamen tary 
committee respon sible, 
to apply curren t 
legislation 
on 
suspension 
of pay­
ments 
rigorously 
if the Greek  
Government 
does not 
remedy the existin g 
problems within  
the stated time 
limits; calls for paymen ts 
to be 
suspended 
if the Greek  
authorities are un a
ble 
to prove that the prob lems 
have 
been 
resolved b y 31 
December 
2009;
79. Notes with con cern 
the major weak nesses 
identified 
by 
the ECA 
in 
many 
Member 
States’ con trol 
sys­
tems relatin g 
to rural developmen t 
which result from the fact that a n umber 
of eligibility 
conditions 
are 
unclearly 
defined 
in 
national 
law and 
that, in 
many 
instances, 
the rules are complex, adversely affectin g 
the 
quality of con trols;
80. Deplores 
in 
particular the fact, as reg ards 
Single 
Payment Scheme man a
gement 
and 
control, 
that the ECA 
exposes 
inadequacies, 
in 
several ‘old’ Memb er 
States, affectin g 
control 
systems in  
this area (in  
the Neth­
erlands, 
Portugal, 
the United 
Kingdom, 
France 
and Spain ;
 paragraph 
5.26 of the an nual 
report for 2007) 
and 
a number 
of systemic shortcomin gs 
with regard 
to area-aid elig ibility 
checks 
in 
Greece, Italy, 
Spain, 
the 
United 
Kingdom, 
France 
and 
the Netherlan ds 
(see Annexes 
5.1.1 and 
5.1.2 to the an nual 
report for 
2007); notes 
the Commission ’s 
replies, which challen ge 
the ECA’s 
depiction 
of the situation ;
81. Urges 
the Memb er 
States, in 
cooperation  
with the Commission , 
to step up their check s, 
in 
particular as 
regards 
beneficiaries’ 
compliance 
with eligibility 
requiremen ts; 
calls on 
the Commission  
to clarify an d 
simplify 
those requiremen ts 
as far as possib le;
82. Deplores 
the fact that the same shortcomin gs 
inherent 
in 
the clearan ce 
system were ag ain 
found 
by 
the 
ECA 
in 
2007, such as the retroactive an d 
multiannual 
nature 
of conformity 
clearance 
and 
the fact that 
no 
valid link 
can 
be 
made between 
the amoun ts 
recovered an d 
the real amoun t 
of irregular 
payments 
(paragraph 
5.47 of the an nual 
report for 2007);
83. Considers 
that, after a n umber 
of years of the same serious criticisms of the same prob lem 
by 
the ECA, 
the 
Commission  
must propose measures to reform the system to mak e 
it possible to estab lish 
clear and 
valid 
links 
between 
amounts 
recovered an d 
the amoun t 
of irregular 
payment
s and 
ensure, 
as far as pos­
sible, 
that the cost of fin ancial 
correction s 
is met by 
the final 
beneficia
ries and 
not 
by 
the taxpayer an d 
that 
flat-rate correction s 
are applied to those Memb er 
States which fail to meet their ob ligations;
Fisheries 
subsidies
84. Welcomes 
the disclosure b y 
selected Memb er 
States of the n ames 
of benef
iciaries, the n ames 
of the 
operation s 
concerned 
and 
the amoun ts 
of public 
(EU 
and 
national) 
funding 
and 
the inclusion 
on 
the 
Commission ’s 
website 
of links 
to Member 
States’ sources of in formation;N E 8 4 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/49
85. Requests, however, the Commission  to ensure that all Memb er States comply with the requiremen ts of 
Article 53(b ) 
and 
Article 53b (2)(d) 
of Regulation 
(EC, 
Euratom) 
No 1605/2002 an d 
the requiremen ts 
of 
Article 31, secon d 
paragraph, 
point 
(d) of Reg ulation 
(EC) 
No 498/2007
(1) Commission Reg ulation  (EC)  No 498/2007 of 26 March 2007  laying  down detailed rules for the implementation of
Council 
Regulation 
(EC) 
No 1198/2006 on  
the European 
Fisheries Fun d 
(OJ L 120, 10.5.2007, p. 1). (1);
86. Welcomes the proposal for a Coun cil 
regulation 
establishing 
a Commun i
ty control 
system for en suring 
compliance 
with the rules of the common  
fisheries policy (COM(2008) 721), which seek s 
to make 
it 
legally 
possible 
to suspen d 
or reduce fin ancial 
assistance 
from the E urop
ean 
Fisheries Fun d 
to Member 
States 
which fail to implemen t 
the rules of the common  
fisheries policy (CFP) adequately;
87. Requests, however, that the Commission  
should also propose to exclude Memb er 
States which fail to 
implemen t 
adequately the rules of the CFP from Fisheries Partn ership 
Agre
ements;
88. Requests 
the Commission  
to introduce 
EU 
legislation 
that excludes all vessel own ers 
convicted 
of seri­
ous infringements 
in 
accordance 
with Coun cil 
Regulation 
(EC) 
No 1447/199 9
(2) Council Reg ulation (EC) No 1447/1999 of 24 June 1999 estab lishing a list of types of b ehaviour which seriously in fri nge
the 
rules of the common  
fisheries policy (OJ L 167, 2.7.1999, p. 5). (2) from receivin g Com­
munity 
aid under 
the European 
Fisheries Fun d 
and/or 
benefiting 
from Fisheries Partn ership 
Agreements;
89. Requests 
the Commission  
to ensure 
that Commun ity 
aid is not 
used to modern ise 
fleet segments 
char­
acterised b y 
overcapacities;
90. Reminds 
the Commission  
of its commitmen ts, 
within 
the framework  
of the EU 
Sustainable 
Develop­
ment 
Strategy 
approved b y 
the European 
Council 
in 
Göteborg 
in 
June 
2001 and 
revised by 
the Euro­
pean 
Council 
in 
Vienna 
in 
June 
2006, to ab olish 
environmentally 
damaging 
subsidies 
and 
to put forward 
by 
2008 a roadmap for the reform, sector b y 
sector, of these sub sidies 
with a view to elimin ating 
them;
Cohesion
91. Notes with g reat 
concern 
the ECA’s 
estimate that at least 11 % of the total amoun t 
reimbursed 
in 
con­
nection 
with structural policy projects should n ot 
have been 
reimbursed;
92. Notes 
that the Commission  
does not 
dispute that rate of 11 %;
93. Notes that the n umber 
of audits carried out b y 
the ECA 
seems low when  
set against 
the number 
of pay­
ments 
to final 
beneficiaries 
(for example, in  
the area of cohesion  
policy the E CA 
audited 180 in terim 
payments, 
according 
to paragraph 
6.21 of the an nual 
report for 2007, out of several hun dred 
thousand 
payments 
to final 
beneficiaries), 
but 
notes 
that this audit methodolog y 
is consistent 
with international 
audit 
standards 
in 
the light 
of the opin ion 
contained 
in 
the report on  
the International 
Peer Review of 
the ECA
 undertaken
 by
 a team of experien ced
 financial
 and
 performan ce
 auditors from the supreme 
audit institutions 
of Austria, Can ada, 
Norway an d 
Portugal;
94. Deplores, 
whilst appreciatin g 
the improvemen ts 
in 
the overall assessmen t 
of the supervisory an d 
con­
trol 
system noted 
in 
the ECA’s 
Annual 
Report, the fact that, in  
spite of the Commission ’s 
unremitting 
efforts,
 management
 and
 control
 systems both at Memb er
 State level an d
 at supervisory level at the 
Commission are n ot
 yet sufficien tly
 effective to limit risk s
 of error, an d
 calls on the Commission to 
report to Parliamen t 
in 
early 2010 on  
the further action s 
carried out in  
2009 and 
on 
the initial 
impact 
of the action s 
under 
the abovementioned 
action 
plan;
95. Notes 
with the g reat 
concern 
that the reg ional 
and 
cohesion 
funds 
take-
up has reached un acceptably 
low 
levels, and 
urges 
the Commission  
to continue 
the revision  
procedure and to simplify existin g 
regu­
lations 
without delay;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
96. Also remin ds the Commission  of the ECA’s recommen dation to make as much use of possib le, without 
undermining 
the effectiven ess 
of spending, 
of the scope for simplification  
provided for b y 
the spending 
rules,
 and
 calls on it to laun ch
 a discussion exercise on n ew
 simplification measures that mig ht
 be
 
adopted, in cluding 
computerisation  
of the system; welcomes in  
this light 
the Simplification  
Working 
Group 
set up by 
the Commission  
and 
expects the Commission  
to come forward with con crete 
simpli­
fication 
proposals for the period 2007-2013 b ased 
on 
the outcome of the proceedin gs 
of the Simpli­
fication 
Working 
Group;
97. Calls also on  
the Commission  
to make 
an 
estimate of the positive impact of cohesion  
policy, by 
Mem­
ber 
State, and 
to submit 
to it a report on  
its Union-level 
added value;
98. Notes with con cern 
that, under 
the European 
Regional 
Developmen t 
Fund 
(ERDF) 
from 2000 to 2006, 
95,47 % of fin ancial 
correction s 
were accoun ted 
for by 
Spain 
(59,07 %), I ta
ly (31,97 %) an d 
the United 
Kingdom 
(4,43 %); n otes 
that 22 Memb er 
States are respon sible 
for 4,53 % of fin ancial 
correction s; 
calls 
on 
the Commission  
to bring 
its control 
requiremen ts 
into 
line 
with the frequen cy 
and 
seriousness 
of 
errors in 
the Memb er 
States most affected; calls also on  
the Commission  
to inform 
Parliamen t 
about 
its 
response 
to these hig h 
rates of error in  
the three Memb er 
States con cerned;
99. Notes 
with concern 
that, under 
the Cohesion  
Fund 
from 2000 to 2006, 95,92 % of fin ancial 
correc­
tions 
were accoun ted 
for by 
Greece (53,06 %) an d 
Spain 
(42,86 %); n otes 
that 23 Memb er 
States are 
responsible
 for 4,08 % of fin ancial
 correction s;
 calls on the Commission to b ring
 its control
 require­
ments 
into 
line 
with the frequen cy 
and 
seriousness 
of errors in  
the Memb er 
States most affected; calls 
also on 
the Commission  
to inform 
Parliamen t 
about 
its respon se 
to these high rates of error in  
the two 
Member 
States con cerned;
100. Notes 
with concern 
that, under 
the European 
Social Fun d 
(ESF) 
from 2000 to 2006, 84,28 % of fin an­
cial 
correction s 
were accoun ted 
for by 
Spain 
(46,42 %) an d 
Italy 
(37,86 %); n ote
s that 23 Memb er
 States 
are respon sible 
for 15,72 % of fin ancial 
correction s; 
calls on 
the Commission  
to bring 
its control 
require­
ments 
into 
line 
with the frequen cy 
and 
seriousness 
of errors in  
the Memb er 
States most affected; calls 
also on 
the Commission  
to inform 
Parliamen t 
about 
its respon se 
to these high rates of error in  
the two 
Member 
States con cerned;
101.
 Welcomes the quarterly reports the Commission has provided throug hout
 2008 on fin ancial
 correc­
tions
 resulting
 from its own or the E CA’s
 audit work ;
 calls on the Commission to con tinue
 to apply 
financial 
correction s, 
in 
conformity 
with the reg ulation 
in 
force, in 
order to remove an y 
irregular 
items 
of expenditure
 declared at an earlier stag e
 and
 to employ rig orous
 closure procedures for the 2000-
2006 ERDF, 
Cohesion 
Fund 
and 
ESF 
programmes 
so that, when  
the accoun ts 
are closed, such items of 
expenditure 
have been 
largely 
eliminated; 
calls on 
the Commission , 
further, to con tinue 
to provide it 
with detailed in formation 
about 
the financial 
correction s 
applied an d, 
once 
the closure procedure has 
started, to provide an  
estimate of the residual error rate in  
the programme
s closed in  
this way;
102. Calls for the Commission  
to continue 
to identify, 
in 
annual 
activity reports, con trol 
problems 
relating 
to 
shared man agement 
in 
the Memb er 
States, including 
at paymen t 
authority level, so as to iden tify 
the 
specific weak nesses, 
by 
Member 
State and 
by 
programme, 
and 
for there to b e 
a direct tie-in  
between 
reservation s 
and 
those prob lems; 
calls on 
it to produce an  
annual 
grading 
of Member 
States, for each 
European 
fund, 
and 
to forward it to Parliamen t, 
specifying 
the error rate estab lished, 
and 
calls on 
the 
ECA 
to establish 
the same list on  
the basis 
of its audits;
103. Calls on 
the Commission  
— in 
its capacity as the b ody 
ultimately responsib le 
for the soun d 
financial 
management 
of Commun ity 
funds 
— to apply strictly the Commun ity 
rules on 
the suspen sion 
of pay­
ments 
where a Memb er 
State fails to provide the g uarantees 
sought;
104. Notes 
that the ECA’s 
annual 
report for 2007 still covers on ly 
2000-2006 projects, sin ce 
2007 has essen ­
tially 
been 
a preparatory phase for the implemen tation 
of 2007-2013 prog r
ammes; stresses, therefore, 
that the effect of the n ew 
rules set out for the 2007-2013 prog ramming 
period, which are simpler an d 
stricter 
than 
those in 
force until 
2006, can not 
as yet be 
assessed;N E 0 5 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/51
105. Stresses that cohesion  policy remain s one of the main  policies of the Un ion; underlines its importan t 
role 
in 
the Union’s 
response 
to the financial 
crisis and 
its key 
place in 
the European 
Economic 
Recovery 
Plan; 
welcomes, therefore, the action s 
proposed b y 
the Commission  
which are aimed at facilitatin g 
and 
acceleratin g 
the implemen tation 
of cohesion  
programmes;
106. Notes 
that such simplification  
procedures are k ey 
in 
reducing 
admini
strative b urdens 
at national, 
regional 
and 
local level; however, stresses the importan ce 
of ensuring 
that such simplification  
proce­
dures con tribute 
to a reduction  
in 
the error rate in  
the future;
107. Approves of the Commission ’s 
declared position  
on 
financial 
correction s, 
namely 
that irregularities 
are 
likely
 to be
 detected an d
 corrected b y
 the multian nual
 corrective system; n otes
 that the Commission 
continuously 
verifies the data provided b y 
Member 
States as to its completen ess 
and 
accuracy an d 
that 
there has b een 
real progress 
in 
providing 
reliable 
evidence 
for correction s 
by 
Member 
States;
108. Notes the level of error foun d 
by 
the ECA 
and 
the remark s 
on 
the difference of in terpretation 
by 
the 
ECA 
and 
the Commission  
as to the amoun t 
that should n ot 
have been 
reimbursed 
(especially the dif­
ference 
of interpretation 
concerning 
rules relatin g 
to the elig ibility 
of expenditure); 
stresses the n eed 
for 
further clarification  
and 
calls for the in terpretation 
of the rules as to the application  
of financial 
correc­
tions 
to be 
harmonised; 
also calls on  
the Memb er 
States which have n ot 
done 
so yet to provide as soon  
as 
possible 
annual 
national 
declaration s 
on 
expenditure 
under 
shared manag ement;
109. Expresses 
some satisfaction  
at the apparen t 
statistical improvement in  
Member 
States’ con trol 
systems 
but 
criticises the fact that that man y 
control 
systems in  
Member 
States remain  
open 
to the risk  
of irregu­
larity 
in 
reimbursements; 
considers 
that further improvemen ts 
in 
the effectiven ess 
of first-level con trol 
at 
national 
and 
sub-national 
level are n eeded; 
stresses in  
this respect the importan t, 
supervisory role of 
the Commission ;
110. Stresses 
that the level of errors outlin ed 
in 
the ECA 
report does n ot 
ne
cessarily imply fraud an d 
there­
fore calls on  
the Commission  
and 
the ECA 
to make 
a clear distin ction 
in 
this respect in  
future documen ts;
111. Deplores 
the most frequen t 
errors, which related to the E SF 
and 
were, firstly, failure to supply eviden ce 
that 
overheads or staff costs were relevan t 
to the project in  
question 
and, 
secondly, 
overestimation  
of 
staff costs or overheads; therefore stron gly 
supports the n ew 
rules under 
the financial 
framework  
for 
the period 2007-2013 that simplify procedures an d 
allow overheads to b e 
declared on  
a flat-rate b asis 
as 
a proportion  
of direct costs; furthermore, calls on  
the Memb er 
States to step up their in formation 
activities
 directed at b eneficiaries
 and
 to improve day-to-day man ageme
nt
 checks
 in order to reduce 
errors;
Internal policies
112. Deplores the fact that accordin g
 to the EC
A, while the Commission man a
ges
 internal
 policy action s
 
directly, the same prob lems 
from previous years are persistin g 
(cost reimb ursement 
errors, complexity 
of the rules applied, an d 
lack 
of an 
effective pen alising 
mechanism), 
and 
calls on 
the Commission  
to con­
tinue
 its efforts to simplify, an d
 further clarify, the proportion ality
 rules applicab le
 to shared-cost 
programmes;
Research
113. Welcomes 
the developmen t 
in 
the RDT area leadin g 
to a reduction  
in 
the annual 
error rate from 8,03 % 
in 
2006 to 2,39 % in  
2007; this major achievemen t 
reflects the successful implemen tation 
of the 2005 
discharge 
recommen dations 
by 
the Commission ’s 
Research Family in  
close cooperation  
with the Com­
mittee on  
Budgetary 
Control 
and 
the Court of Auditors;
114. Notes that in  
2007 the audit certificates system b rought 
down 
the error rate to 2,5 % for projects un der 
the 
Sixth Framework  
Programme, 
by 
comparison  
with 4,06 % for projects un de
r the Fifth Framework  
Programme, 
which are n ot 
subject 
to the audit certificates system;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
115. Welcomes Commission  staff work ing document SEC(2008) 3054, which provides an  initial analysis of 
control 
costs, inter 
alia, for the Directorate-Gen eral 
for Research an d 
the Directorate-Gen eral 
for Infor­
mation 
Society an d 
Media, with the aim of relaun ching 
the interinstitutio
nal 
debate 
in 
order to reach a 
common 
agreement 
on 
tolerable 
risk 
of error in  
the field of E uropean 
research policy;
116. Calls on 
the Commission  
to continue 
to exploit the reimb ursement 
possibilities 
offered by 
the Seven th 
Framework  
Programme, 
in 
particular to an alyse 
further the appropriaten e
ss of the rules of the pro­
gramme 
on 
flat-rate paymen t 
procedures, an d 
to inform 
the parliamen tary 
committee respon sible 
in the 
context 
of the mid-term review of its con tribution 
to the simplification  
of the rules for b eneficiaries 
and 
to 
the necessary 
improvemen ts 
to the system;
117. Is 
concerned 
about 
Seventh 
Framework  
Programme 
rules which deviate from the common  
nationally 
and 
internationally 
acknowledged 
and 
certified accoun ting 
and 
calculation  
methods an d 
which do n ot 
accept 
the results of the n ational 
audit authorities con cerning 
the natio
nally 
certified averag e 
hourly rates 
per cost cen tre; 
regards 
the Seven th 
Framework  
Programme 
rules as clearly con tradicting 
the modern  
accounting
 and
 calculation stan dards
 of European
 industry
 in asking
 for individual
 costs of person s
 
actively in volved 
in 
a specific research prog ramme; 
asks 
the Commission  
to start a procedure mak ing 
Seventh 
Framework  
Programme 
rules compatib le 
with general 
business 
practices that allow for calcu­
lation 
and 
charging 
of average 
hourly rates per cost cen tre 
and 
do not 
ask 
for individual 
costs of per­
sons 
actively in volved 
in 
a specific research prog ramme;
118. As 
regards 
the certificates on  
the methodolog y 
(CoM and 
CoMAv), is concern ed 
at as yet un approved 
certificates 
and 
urges 
the Commission  
to establish 
the necessary 
comprehen sible 
criteria for approvin g 
certificates 
on 
the methodolog y 
for both 
personnel 
and 
indirect 
costs; be
lieves that b eneficiaries 
should 
be 
allowed to use averag e 
personnel 
costs and 
to apply an  
established 
methodolog y 
for calculatin g 
the 
indirect 
cost; calls for a timely start to the process of approvin g 
(or rejectin g) 
the certificates to mak e 
sure 
that the fun ds 
earmarked 
for research can  
be 
used; asks 
the Commission  
to accept such averag e 
hourly 
rates per cost cen tre 
without a certification  
as regards 
the methodolog y 
at least if they are audited 
and 
certified b y 
a national 
authority;
119. Recalls its request, with a view to simplifyin g 
the admin istrative 
procedures an d 
grant 
application s, 
for 
one 
single 
contact 
point 
to be 
set up for b eneficiaries 
with the competen ce 
to decide on  
issues regard­
ing 
the research framework ;
120. Calls 
on 
the Commission , 
as a requiremen t 
for legal 
certainty, 
to refrain 
from re-calculatin g 
the finan­
cial 
statements 
of projects un der 
the Sixth Framework  
Programme 
that it has already approved an d 
settled, 
by 
applying 
new 
interpretations 
to the elig ibility 
criteria for costs estab lished 
in the General Con­
ditions 
(Annex 
II) 
of the FP6 model con tract;
121. Notes 
that the two-stag e 
procedure for the Seven th 
Framework  
Program
me is being 
applied in  
certain 
areas; 
calls on 
the Commission  
to cons
ult with research org anisations 
on 
the appropriaten ess 
of extend­
ing 
this experimen t 
to other types of project where this would result in  
considerab le 
reductions 
in 
the 
preparation  
costs of in itial 
project application s;
122. Points 
out that, in  
the research field, the Commission has in creased 
the number 
of research b odies, 
coop­
eration models an d
 management
 mechanisms;
 recalls that this is due to the con siderable
 increase
 in 
funds 
made availab le 
under 
the financial 
framework  
2007-2013 for research an d 
innovation; 
invites 
the 
ECA 
to assess possib le 
problems 
of transparency 
vis-à-vis the b udgetary 
authority an d 
the differin g 
way 
of dealing 
with beneficiaries 
under 
those models; calls for the Director-Gen eral 
to give 
over a chapter of 
his AAR to each such b ody, 
model and 
mechanism 
in 
order to provide in formati
on 
on 
the use of fun ds 
and 
the outcomes soug ht 
with these pub lic-private 
cooperation  
models;
123. Calls on 
the ECA 
— allowin g 
for the fact that the Commission ’s 
audit strateg y 
covers expen diture 
for a 
framework  
programme 
over a four-year period, while the E CA 
has to report ann ually 
— to submit mul­
tiannual 
tables 
presenting 
the financial 
impact of the errors detected throug h 
its audit work  
in 
a format 
consistent 
with the Commission ’s 
inspection 
methodolog y;N E 2 5 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/53
Environment, public health and food safety
124. Considers 
the overall implemen tation 
rates for the b udget 
headings 
covering 
the environment, 
public 
health 
and 
food safety satisfactory;
125. Underlines 
the overall implemen tation 
rate of 94,6 % in  
the field of the en vironment, 
public 
health and 
food 
safety, which represen ts 
a satisfactory result con sidering 
that 2007 was the first year of the n ew 
financial 
framework  
2007-2013 an d 
saw the adoption  
and 
the entry 
into 
force of n ew 
programmes 
in 
the 
environment 
policy area;
126. Welcomes the implemen tation 
rate for the Commun ity 
Tobacco Fun d, 
which is 100 %; is therefore con ­
vinced 
that this in strument, 
which grants 
financial 
support to projects improvin g 
public 
awareness 
of 
the harmful effects of tob acco 
consumption, 
in 
particular b y 
means 
of info
rmation 
and 
education , 
is 
being 
implemen ted 
effectively;
127. Calls on the Commission to offer further assistan ce
 to applican ts
 in the con text
 of multian nual
 pro­
grammes, 
especially b y 
providing 
specific train ing 
for applican ts 
and 
user-friendly 
guidelines;
128. Welcomes 
the efforts to targ et 
calls for ten ders 
more effectively an d 
to provide more assistan ce 
to appli­
cants, 
especially in  
public 
health prog rammes, 
in 
order to preven t 
the submission  
of project applica­
tions
 which are clearly n ot
 eligible
 for funding
 or are of poor quality, b ut
 no
tes that further work is 
needed 
in 
order to ob tain 
a satisfactory situation ;
129. Points 
out that part of the Health Action  
Programme 
is implemen ted 
by 
the Executive 
Agency 
for Health 
and
 Consumers;
 reminds
 the Commission in this con text
 to use prog ramme
 funds of an operation al
 
nature 
very cost-effectively as they are also used for admin istrative 
tasks;
130.
 Points
 out that complian ce
 with the admin istrative
 and
 financial
 provision s
 of Regulation
 (EC,
 Eura
­
tom) No 1605/2002 should n ot 
lead to un necessary 
delays in 
awarding 
grants 
or selectin g 
projects to 
be 
financed 
and 
calls on 
the Commission  
to continue 
its efforts to improve admin istrative 
procedures 
which have an  
impact on  
the implemen tation 
of commitmen t 
and 
payment 
appropriation s;
Internal 
market and consumer protection
131. Welcomes the remark s 
made in 
the ECA’s 
report, which provides a fair assessmen t 
of internal 
market 
policy, 
customs policy an d 
consumer 
protection  
policy;
132. Calls on 
Member 
States to further improve their in ternal 
control 
systems to preven t 
the placing of unau­
thorised g oods 
on 
the Commun ity 
market; 
calls furthermore on  
the Commission  
to follow up on  
any 
shortcomin gs 
detected in  
the area of con sumer 
protection  
in 
2007;
133. Welcomes the E CA’s 
observation 
that the con trol
 systems in  
customs and accoun ts 
are functioning 
well; 
underlines 
that even 
if customs con trols 
are principally 
the respon sibil
ity of the Memb er 
States, on ly 
reliable 
economic 
operators should b e 
managing 
the customs sector so as to avoid the risk  
of the import 
of goods 
into 
the internal 
market 
without paymen t 
of duties or customs valuation ;
134. Applauds 
the efforts made to reach an  
implemen tation 
rate of 86 % for b u
dget 
line 
12 02 01 (imple­
mentation 
and 
developmen t 
of the internal 
market); 
notes 
that, accordin g 
to the Commission , 
the rea­
son 
for unused 
payments 
is that some study con tracts 
were signed 
late in 
the year an d 
no payments were 
made, as plan ned, 
in 
2007;
135. Points 
out that an  
implemen tation 
rate of 55 % for b udget 
line 
14 04 02 (customs 2007) is n ot 
suffi­
cient 
and 
therefore calls for b etter 
budget 
planning; 
notes 
that, accordin g 
to the Commission , 
the major 
part of this b udget
 line
 relates to lon g-ter
m IT
 contracts
 with products and services delivered ‘on 
demand
’, which mak es 
the estimation  
and 
planning 
of precise fin ancial 
nee
ds difficult; ack nowledges, 
however, 
the positive results for the 2008 b udget, 
with an 
implemen tation 
rate higher 
than 
97 % for 
payment 
appropriation s;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
136. Notes that the implemen tation rate of 77 % for b udget line 17 02 02 (con s umer protection  programme) 
is 
lower than  
in 
previous years; n otes 
further that, accordin g 
to the Commission , 
the reason s 
for this are 
the transfer 
of non-differentiated 
appropriation s 
from the E xecutive 
Agency 
for Health an d 
Consumers 
back 
to the con sumer 
protection  
programme, 
and 
some late commitmen ts 
made durin g 
the year 2007, 
with the result that paymen ts 
planned 
for 2007 were n ot 
made; calls therefore on  
the Commission  
to 
improve b udget 
planning 
in 
this area;
Transport and tourism
137. Notes that in the 2007 b udget,
 as finally
 adopted an d
 amended
 in the course of that year, a total of 
EUR 1 
322 667 000 in  
commitmen t 
appropriation s 
was included 
for transport 
policies, an d 
that 
EUR 743 
111 000 in  
payment 
appropriation s 
was availab le; 
notes 
also that of those amoun ts:
—EUR 933 
578 000 in  
commitmen t 
appropriation s 
and 
EUR 369 
665 000 in  
payment 
appropria­
tions 
was availab le 
for Trans-European 
Networks 
for Transport 
(TEN-T) 
projects, 
—EUR 15 
348 000 in  
commitmen t 
appropriation s 
and 
EUR 14 
500 000 in  
payment 
appropriation s 
was 
available 
for transport 
safety, 
—EUR 56 
890 000 in  
commitmen t 
appropriation s 
and 
EUR 10 
425 000 in  
payment 
appropriation s 
was 
available 
for the Marco Polo prog ramme,
 
—EUR 113 
631 000 in  
commitmen t 
appropriation s 
and 
EUR 114 
716 000 in  
payment 
appropria­
tions 
was availab le 
for the tran sport 
agencies 
and 
the GNSS Supervisory Authority, 
—EUR
 6 000 000  in commitmen t
 appropriation s
 and
 EUR
 6 578 000  in paymen t
 appropriation s
 
was availab le 
for transport 
security, in cluding 
the pilot project on  
security on  
the trans-European 
road 
network;
138. Welcomes 
the continuing 
high 
utilisation  
rates of both 
commitmen t 
and paymen t 
appropriation s 
for 
TEN-T 
projects, b oth 
reaching 
almost 100 %, an d 
calls on 
Member 
States to ensure that adequate fun d­
ing 
is made availab le 
from national 
budgets 
to match this E U 
commitmen t;
139. Notes 
with concern 
the low utilisation  
rate of commitmen t 
appropriation s 
for transport 
security 
(55,95 %) an d 
for the GNSS Supervisory Authority (33,24 % un der 
Title 3), for which a larg e 
part of the 
sum committed in  
2007, drawn  
from the 2006 surplus, was carried over to 2008; n otes 
with concern 
also 
the low utilisation  
rate of paymen t 
appropriation s 
for the internal 
market 
and 
optimisation  
of trans­
port 
systems (47,48 %), for passen ger 
rights 
(58,96 %), due to the delay in  
signing 
contracts, 
and 
for the 
GNSS Supervisory Authority (33,24 % un der 
Title 3);
140. Notes with satisfaction  
that, as a result of reaction s 
to the Court of Auditors’ Special Report No 6/2005 
on the tran s-European
 network
 for transport
(1) OJ C 94, 21.4.2006, p. 1. (1), the maximum rate of fin ancial aid for cross-b order 
projects 
has been 
increased 
to 30 % an d 
the minimum 
funding 
threshold to E UR 1 
500 000; n otes 
fur­
ther that the evaluation  
procedure for the selection  
of projects has b een 
improved an d 
monitoring 
has 
been 
enhanced, 
but 
deplores at the same time the fact that the structure for the description  
of works 
has 
not 
been 
harmonised 
and 
technical 
and 
financial 
monitoring 
has not 
been 
standardised;
141. Notes 
with satisfaction  
that the Court of Auditors’ an alysis 
of inter
nal 
control 
standards 
with a direct 
link
 to the leg ality
 and
 regularity
 of underlying
 transactions
 shows that the Directorate-Gen eral
 for 
Energy 
and 
Transport 
complies with the b aseline 
requiremen ts;N E 4 5 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/55
Culture and education
142. Notes that, in  
its annual 
report for 2007, the E CA 
comments 
on 
the error rate detected in  
the education  
and 
culture policy area (parag raph 
9.11 and 
Annex 
9.1; error rate b etween 
2 % and 
5 %), but 
provides 
no 
explanation 
either of how the various n at
iona
l agencies 
and 
executive ag encies 
operate or of the qual­
ity of their work  
or why these ag encies 
are necessary;
143. Asks 
the ECA 
to analyse 
in 
greater 
detail, in 
its next 
annual 
report, the question  
of the effectiven ess 
and 
continued 
existence 
of the various ag encies 
in 
the education  
and 
culture policy area;
144. Notes that, in  
the new 
generation 
of programmes, 
the Directorate-General for E ducation 
and 
Culture 
has harmon ised 
the action  
programmes 
and 
introduced 
the single 
internal 
audit approach; in  
that con­
text, 
takes 
the view that the ex-an te 
and 
ex-post declaration s 
made by 
the Memb er 
States con stitute 
new 
factors 
in 
the supervision  
and 
internal 
control 
of systems;
145. Regrets, 
however, the shortcomin gs 
found 
by 
the ECA 
in 
the ex-ante 
declaration  
procedure an d 
the find­
ing 
that the procedure provides n o 
more than  
limited assuran ce 
as to the quality of the man agement 
of 
the expen diture
 concerned
 (paragraph
 9.16 of the an nu
al report for 2007); n otes,
 however, that the 
ex-ante 
declaration  
is only 
one 
of the pieces of eviden ce 
which the E CA 
obta
ins 
in 
the course of its audit 
with a view to deliverin g 
its opinion;
146. Notes 
the ECA’s 
finding 
that the approaches tak en 
by 
the national 
authorities with a view to ob taining 
a 
basis 
for the ex-an te 
declaration  
of assuran ce 
differ and 
that the deg ree 
of disclosure as to the proce­
dures carried out b y 
those authorities varies g reatly; 
calls on 
the Commission  
to commen ce 
an 
exercise 
to harmon ise 
those declaration s 
and 
to keep 
Parliamen t 
and 
the ECA 
informe
d about 
the exercise;
147. Takes
 note
 also of the fact that the ex-post statemen ts
 of assuran ce
 for 2007 had to b e
 provided b y
 
Member 
States’ national 
authorities b y 30 
April 2008; awaits the assessmen t 
to be 
carried out b y 
the 
ECA 
as part of the DAS audit for 2008;
148. Criticises the fact that some n ational 
authorities an d 
agencies 
are not ab iding 
by 
their obligations, 
lead­
ing 
to official remin der 
letters being 
sent 
by 
the Commission , 
and 
gives 
the Commission  
its full backing 
for 
suspending 
grant 
payments 
where final 
reports are n ot 
submitted;
149. Urges 
national 
agencies 
and 
national 
authorities to respect the implemen tation 
rules, as reg ards 
their 
respective respon sibilities,
 established
 by
 the Commission; welcomes the fact that the Directorate-
General 
for Education 
and 
Culture did n ot 
see any 
reason 
to uphold its reservation  
as regards 
the 
national 
agencies’ 
control 
mechanisms, 
and 
supports the con tinuation 
of strict auditin g 
controls;
150. Welcomes 
the fact that the n umber 
of late paymen ts 
in 
the area of education  
and 
culture is decreasin g, 
and 
expects the Commission  
to continue 
its efforts to further reduce them;
151. Expresses 
its hope that the con trol 
system estab lished 
by 
the Directorate-Gen eral 
for Commun ication 
at 
the end 
of 2007 will mak e 
it unnecessary 
to enter 
a reservation  
regarding 
its budget 
management 
in 
the 
future, as was the case for the fin ancial 
year 2007;
152. Requests further in formation
 from the Commission con cerning
 the creation of admin istrative
 struc­
tures in 
Member 
States to assist in  
town-twinning 
activities, especially as reg ards 
the need 
for such struc­
tures, the costs in volved 
and 
their purpose;
153. Requests the Commission  
to examin e 
ways of mak ing 
the Youth Prog ramme 
more capab le 
of reachin g 
new 
groups 
of young 
people, in  
particular those from disadvan taged 
backgr
ounds; 
to this end, 
suggests 
that 
youth org anisations, 
including 
the European 
Youth Forum, in crease 
efforts to targ et 
such groups, 
to 
improve reportin g 
standards 
and 
funding 
criteria an d 
to dissemin ate 
information  
on 
the programme 
itself 
more widely amon gst 
young 
people;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
Civil liberties, justice and home affairs
154. Notes the low level of implemen tation 
of paymen t 
appropriation s 
unde
r the budget 
for the Area of Free­
dom, Security an d 
Justice by 
comparison  
with 2006 (60,41 % in  
2007 and 
86,26 % in  
2006); is aware 
that this is also due to the adoption  
in 
May and 
June 
2007 of the fun ds 
included 
within 
the Solidarity 
and 
management 
of migration 
flows framework  
and 
to delays in  
the implemen t
ation 
of other specific 
programmes 
(e.g.: 
civil justice, drug s 
prevention 
and 
information 
progr
ammes); poin ts 
out the relative 
decrease in the implemen tation
 level of commitmen t
 appropriation s
 in respect of 2006 (90,29 % b y
 
comparison  
with 94,47 % in  
2006); calls on  
the Directorate-Gen eral 
for Freedom, Security an d 
Justice 
to try to maximise the level of implemen tation 
of commitmen t 
and 
payment 
appropriation s 
in 
2008;
155. Takes 
note 
of the Court of Auditors’ assessmen t 
of the supervisory check s 
carried out b y 
the Commis­
sion 
for the European 
Refugee 
Fund 
II 
as being 
partially effective; tak es 
due accoun t 
of the Commis­
sion’s 
replies in 
this respect;
156. Deplores the fact that the description s 
of the Memb er 
States’ supervisory an d 
control 
systems for the 
External 
Borders Fun d 
were provided to the Commission  
only 
in 
the last quarter of 2007, as this pre­
vented 
the Commission  
from assessin g 
the Memb er 
States’ systems b y 
the end 
of 2007;
Women’s rights and gender equality
157. Reminds
 the Commission that, b y
 virtue of Article 3(2) of the E C
 Treaty, the promotion of equality 
between 
men 
and 
women 
is a fundamental 
principle 
of the Un ion 
and 
is an 
objec
tive which has rel­
evance 
across the full ran ge 
of Commun ity 
activities an d 
policies;
158. Reiterates its call to the Commission  
for gender 
equality to b e 
taken 
into 
due consideration 
as an 
ongo­
ing 
priority ob jective 
during 
budgetary 
planning, 
in 
accordance 
with the prin ciple 
of gender 
budgeting, 
as 
it requested in  
its Resolution  
of 3 July 2003 on  
gender 
budgeting, 
buildi
ng 
public 
budgets 
from a 
gender 
perspective
(1) OJ C 74 E , 24.3.2004, p. 746. (1), and criticises the delay in  completin g the Commission ’s feasibility study on the 
topic;
159. Deplores 
the fact that the Court of Auditors An nual 
Report on  
the implemen tation 
of the 2007 b udget 
does 
not 
contain 
information 
as to whether the b udget 
successfully con tri
buted 
to promotin g 
equality 
between 
men 
and 
women;
160. Suggests 
that the Court of Auditors in clude 
the gender 
equality aspect in  
its annual 
and 
special reports, 
in 
particular relevan t 
information 
on 
policies addressin g 
the principle 
of non-discrimination 
between 
women 
and 
men 
and 
on 
availability 
of gender-specific 
data;
External actions
161. Notes, with g reat 
concern, 
the same criticisms b y 
the ECA 
as in 
previous years, in  
particular as reg ards 
payments 
at final-beneficiary 
level;
162. Notes that extern al 
aid was virtually un affected 
by 
the most recen t 
revision 
of Regulation 
(EC, 
Euratom) 
No
 1605/2002, an d
 calls for a revision of Title I V,
 ‘External
 action’, of Regulation
 (EC,
 Euratom)
 
No 1605/2002 so as to b ring 
it more closely in to 
line 
with the special con ditions 
relating 
to contracts 
and 
grants 
in 
this area;
163. Deplores deeply the fact that the Commission  
has failed to create a truly E uropean 
instrument 
for the 
implemen tation
 of crisis man agement,
 as it had b een
 asked
 to do in the 2005 an d
 2006 discharg es;
 
insists 
that this should b e 
done 
urgently 
and 
calls once 
again 
on 
the Commission  
to give 
itself the pos­
sibility 
of managing 
multi-don or 
trust funds 
itself, where appropriate, when  
it is involved 
in 
such funds;N E 6 5 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/57
164. Calls on the Commission to en sure  full financ ial transparency  in extern al  aid, in accordan ce  with 
Articles 53 to 56 of Reg ulation 
(EC, 
Euratom) 
No 1605/2002, an d 
to honour 
its undertaking 
to Parlia­
ment
 that any
 international
 organisation
 receiving
 Commun ity
 funds
 will be
 required to sub mit
 the 
results of all in ternal 
and 
external 
audits of the use of those Commun ity 
funds 
to the ECA 
and 
to the 
Commission ’s 
Internal 
Auditor; calls also for OLAF to b e 
given 
access to data where fraud is suspected;
165. Notes that, on  
the basis 
of a number 
of hypotheses (b est 
estimates), the total cost of the check s 
carried 
out by 
the Directorate-Gen eral 
for Human itarian 
Aid (DG E CHO) 
has been 
put at EUR 25 
000 000 for 
the financial 
year 2007, this b eing 
equivalent 
to 3,2 % of the total human it
arian 
assistance 
budget 
for 
that year; deplores the lack  
of procedures for risk  
management 
by 
DG ECHO 
and calls for such proce­
dures systematically to b e 
incorporated 
into 
the control 
arrangements;
166. Notes 
that, accordin g 
to information 
from the Commission , 
that estimate covers on ly 
part of the costs 
relating
 to human itarian
 operation s
 funded
 by
 DG ECHO,
 because
 the cost of check s
 carried out by 
humanitarian
 organisations,
 which are in cluded
 in the overall cost of the g rant
 agreement
s, are also 
funded 
by 
DG ECHO;
167. Notes 
that, given 
that the cost of check s 
may be 
split into 
three categ o
ries — namely 
the cost of con trol 
activities 
carried out b y 
the Commission  
at its headquarters an d 
within 
the delegation s, 
the cost of exter­
nal
 audits by
 the Commission ,
 and
 the cost of expen diture
 verification throug h
 audits con tracted
 by
 
recipients 
— the cost of check s 
relating 
to the fun ds 
administered 
by 
the Eu
ropeAid Cooperation  
Office 
is estimated b y 
the Commission  
at some E UR 120 
000 000;
168. Calls on 
the ECA, 
in 
its next 
annual report, to tak e 
account 
of this in 
its calculation s 
and 
to state its posi­
tion 
on 
both 
this estimate an d 
the cost-effectiven ess 
of the relevan t 
cont
rol systems, while also tak ing 
due 
account 
of the special features of an d 
conditions 
applying 
to EU 
external action ;
169.
 Regrets
 that in K enya
 the Commission disb u
rsed budg etar
y support straig ht
 after the election s
 of
27 Decemb er 
2007, thus g iving 
the impression  
of taking 
sides in 
the debate 
on 
the legitimacy 
of the 
election 
results; recalls its Resolution  
of 17 January 
2008 on 
Kenya
(1) OJ C 41 E , 19.2.2009, p. 70. (1), and looks to the Commission  to 
take 
due accoun t 
thereof;
170. Notes the Court’s assessmen t 
that the supervisory an d 
control 
systems for extern al 
relations, 
enlarge­
ment
 and
 humanitarian
 aid are partially effective; accepts that man y
 of the errors detected con cern
 
advance 
payments 
and 
are then 
rectified when  
final 
payments 
are made; n eve
rtheless, in vites 
the Com­
mission 
to make 
the necessary 
improvemen ts 
to its mon itoring 
and 
verification  
procedures, especially 
at the level of implemen ting 
organisations, 
without this leadin g 
to unnec
essary admin istrative 
burdens 
for 
the final 
beneficiaries; 
recognises 
at the same time the prog ress 
made by 
the Commission  
and 
the 
United 
Nations 
to date;
171. Deplores the con tinuing
 lack of tran sparency
 concerning
 the use of Commun ity
 funds
 channelled
 
through
 United
 Nations
 organisations;
 supports the Commission ’s
 efforts to fin d
 a solution an d
 to 
ensure 
that the Court of Auditors receives all requested in formation 
in 
a timely fashion ; 
welcomes the 
increasing
 number
 of verification mission s
 performed by the Commission un der
 the Financial
 and
 
Administrative
 Framework Ag reement
 between
 the European
 Commun ity
 and
 the United
 Nations
 
(FAFA agreement); 
expects these mission s 
to further en hance 
the transpar
ency 
and 
visibility 
of Com­
munity 
contributions 
to UN-led activities;
172. Calls on the Commission to further improve, and to defin e
 more clearly, the con ditions
 and
 perfor­
mance 
indicators 
used for the disb ursement 
of budgetary 
support to third coun tries, 
so as to provide 
for clear, un ambiguous 
and 
measurab le 
assessmen t 
criteria with a specific timetab le, 
if applicab le;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
173. Takes n ote of the Court of Auditors’ assessmen t that urgent steps are required to correct the weak nesses 
in
 the management
 of EU
 funds
 in Bulgar
ia and that the n ecessary
 monitoring
 mechanisms
 must be
 
maintained 
in 
Turkey; 
calls on 
the national 
authorities to in crease 
their efforts in  
order to comply with 
the applicab le 
rules;
174. Looks 
forward to seein g 
tangible 
results from the application  
of new 
terms of referen ce 
for expenditure 
verification  
via extern al 
audits laun ched 
by 
the beneficiaries 
or the Commission ;
175.
 Notes the E CA’S
 Special Report No 5/2007 on the Commission ’s
 manageme
nt
 of the CARDS pro­
gramme
(1) OJ C 285, 27.11.2007, p. 1. (1); emphasises the importan ce of reinforced strategic guidance from the Commission  to ensure, 
in 
close cooperation  
and 
dialogue 
with Parliamen t, 
an 
appropriate focus in  
selecting 
key 
areas of in ter­
vention 
within 
the framework  
of the Instrument 
for Pre-accession  
Assistance; 
calls on 
the Commission  
to 
devise a comprehen sive 
strategy 
to improve local own ership 
of the design  
and 
implemen tation 
of 
projects;
176. Expects 
to be 
kept 
regularly 
informed 
about 
steps taken 
by 
the Commission  
concerning 
the implemen ­
tation 
of the significant 
pledges 
made in 
support of Georg ia’s 
post-confl
ict recovery an d 
future devel­
opment 
at the international 
donors’ 
conference 
held in 
Brussels on  22 
October 
2008;
177. Reiterates its request that the Commission  
regularly 
present 
to Parliamen t 
specific measures to further 
increase 
Union 
ownership 
of its extern al 
actions 
in 
their geographical 
contexts, 
in 
accordance 
with the 
principles 
of efficien cy, 
accountability 
and 
visibility;
Non-governmental 
organisations (NGOs)
178. Takes 
note 
of the role an d 
growing 
number 
of NGOs in  
the admin istration 
of Commun ity 
funds; 
calls 
on 
the Commission  
to evaluate the effectiven ess 
of operatin g 
grants 
for the NGOs’ Brussels headquar­
ters, and 
to apply strictly the prin ciple 
of the deg ressivity 
of operatin g 
grants 
laid down  
in 
the Financial 
Regulation;
179. Asks 
the Commission  
to compile, b y 
the end 
of 2009, a comprehen sive 
list of all NGOs which have 
received E U 
funds;
Development
180. Notes 
that the ECA 
has concluded 
once 
again 
that DG E CHO 
should enhan c
e its audit strategy b y 
ensur­
ing 
better 
coverage 
of operation s 
at implemen ting 
organisation-level 
and, more specifically, in  
the field 
for all types of partn ers 
(paragraph 
8.33(f) of the an nual 
report for 2007);
181. Encourages 
the Commission , 
in 
connection 
with the ob jective 
it set in 
2007 of havin g 
each project vis­
ited at least on ce 
a year by 
an 
expert, except where this can not 
be 
done 
on 
account 
of security con di­
tions 
or access difficulties, to con tinue 
to check 
that human itarian 
aid specialists are perman ently 
in 
the 
field in 
order to facilitate an d 
maximise the impact of the human itarian 
operation s 
financed 
by 
the Com­
mission, 
in 
whatever coun try 
or region;
182. Considers 
that, in 
connection 
with project implemen tation, 
the Commission  
should en sure 
that the 
reporting 
requiremen ts 
agreed 
with the Un ited 
Nations 
in 
April 2007 are strictly applied and that finan­
cial reports are produced in  
accordance 
with those requiremen ts;
183.
 Is
 aware of the risk of in adeq
uate on-the-spot
 checks
 in places which are difficult to reach or where 
humanitarian-aid
 neutrality
 is not
 respected, an d
 in particular of the fact that such risk s
 are to some 
extent 
linked 
to the objectives 
of human itarian 
aid and 
to ‘forgotten 
crises’;N E 8 5 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/59
184. Notes, further, that, accordin g to DG ECHO’s annual activity report for 2007, the Commission ’s humani­
tarian 
assistance 
in 
Iraq 
was delivered exclusively throug h 
the Internat
ional 
Committee of the Red Cross 
in 
the areas of protection  
and 
water and 
sanitation 
and 
amounted 
to EUR 7 
800 000;
185. Considers 
that thoug ht 
should be 
given 
to clarifyin g 
funding 
structures (E uropean 
Developmen t 
Fund 
(EDF),
 Commission ,
 European
 Investment
 Bank,
 etc.) in the developmen t
 and extern al
 actions
 fields, 
with a view to g iving 
greater 
visibility 
to Commun ity 
action 
and 
ensuring 
better auditin g 
of the fun ds 
committed; 
calls for a study to b e 
carried out in to 
the incorporation 
of the EDF 
into 
the Commun ity 
budget, 
in 
preparation  
for a political deb ate 
on 
this subject;
186.
 Draws atten tion
 to the Commission ’s
 commitmen t
(1) Commission  Declaration  concerning Article 5 of the Developmen t Cooperation  Instrument, Annex to the commun ica­
tion 
from the Commission  
of 24 Octob er 
2006 (COM(2006) 628). (1) to take steps to en sure that by 2009 a b ench­
mark 
of 20 % of its allocated assistan ce 
is devoted to b asic 
and 
secondary 
education  
and 
basic 
health; 
calls on 
the Commission  
to provide detailed in formation 
on 
how this b enchm
ark 
will be 
met throug h 
projects, 
programmes 
and 
budget 
support; calls for g reater 
consistency 
between 
the thematic, coun try 
and 
regional 
strategy 
papers in 
the areas of health an d 
education , 
in 
particular when  
aid is provided via 
budget 
support;
187. Stresses that priority must b e 
given 
to the enrolment 
in 
schools of children , 
including 
disabled 
children, 
from 
hard-to-reach g roups 
in 
countries 
with critical MDG in dicators;
188. Urges 
the Commission  
to prioritise support for partn er 
countries 
in 
developin g 
parliamen tary 
control 
and 
audit capacities, in  
particular when  
aid is provided via b udget 
support, an d 
invites 
the Commission  
to 
report reg ularly 
on 
the progress 
achieved;
189. Points
 out that due atten tion
 must be
 paid to the sustain ability
 of the Commission ’s
 interventions,
 
including 
the formulation  
of a clear exit strateg y 
which does n ot 
compromise results an d 
monitoring 
of 
implemen tation; 
considers 
that enhanced 
evaluation  
of results represents a major factor in  
ensuring 
the 
democratic leg itimacy 
of Union 
developmen t 
cooperation ;
190. Welcomes 
the adoption  
in 
2007 of the Un ion 
Code of Con duct 
on 
Complementarity an d 
Division 
of 
Labour 
in 
Developmen t 
Policy, which is g eared 
towards en hancing 
cooperation  
and 
coordination 
between
 the Commission an d
 the Member States; calls on the Commission to redoub le
 its efforts to 
ensure 
genuine 
implemen tation 
of the Code of Con duct, 
including 
by 
addressing 
persisting 
problems 
in 
the 
best 
interests 
of the partn er 
countries;
191. Takes 
the view that the con sultation 
of civil society an d 
local authorities prior to drawin g 
up country 
strategy 
papers (CSPs) un der 
the Developmen t 
Cooperation  
Instrument 
was not 
sufficient 
to satisfy the 
legal 
obligation 
established 
under 
Article 19(3)of Reg ulation 
(EC) 
No 1905/2006
(2) Regulation  (E C)  No 1905/2006 of the E uropean  Parliament an d  of the Coun ci l of 18 Decemb er  2006 establishing  a
financing 
instrument 
for developmen t 
cooperation  
(OJ L 378, 27.12.2006, p. 41). (2), namely that ‘ strat­
egy 
papers shall, in  
principle, 
be 
based 
on 
a dialogue 
with the partn er 
country or reg ion 
which involves 
civil 
society an d 
regional 
and 
local authorities’; con siders, 
in 
this respect, the in volvement 
of national 
parliamen ts 
in 
partner 
countries 
indispensable 
to achievin g 
genuine 
ownership of the process; urg es 
the 
Commission  
to make 
every effort to improve dialog ue
 with these b odies 
at the various stag es 
of the pro­
gramming 
process;
Pre-accession 
strategy
Cooperation and verification mechanism
192. Points 
out that, for the first time followin g 
the accession  
of new 
Member States, the Commission  
has 
introduced 
a cooperation  
and 
verification  
mechanism 
for Roman ia 
and 
Bulgaria to remedy ‘shortcom­
ings 
in 
the areas of judicial reform an d 
the fight 
against 
corruption  
and 
organised 
crime and 
to monitor 
progress 
in 
these areas’ (COM(2008) 63), an d 
wonders 
about 
the effectiveness of that mechan ism, 
as 
well as the relevan ce 
and 
reliability 
of the information 
supplied to the discharg e 
authority;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
193. Notes that a n umber of Commission  directorates-g eneral and offices are respon sible for admin istering 
this 
mechanism, 
under 
the authority of the Secretary-Gen eral; 
considers 
the combined 
efforts of those 
bodies 
to be 
inadequate; 
expects better 
coordination 
and 
the systematic in clusion 
of an 
assessmen t 
of 
all the Commission  
bodies 
concerned 
in 
the progress 
reports; won ders 
what lesson s 
for applican t 
coun­
tries 
and 
potential 
applicant 
countries 
the Commission  
draws from the mechan ism;
European 
funding in Bulgaria and Romania
194. Notes that b etween 
2004 and 
2007 EUR 650 
000 000 in  
Phare funding, 
EUR 22
6 000 000 in  
Sapard 
funding
 and
 EUR
 440 500 000  in ISPA
 funding
 were made availab le
 to Bulgaria,
 while some 
EUR 1 
346 500 000 in  
Phare fun ding, 
EUR 526 
300 000 in  
Sapard fun ding 
and 
EUR 1 
040 500 000 
in 
ISPA 
funding 
were made availab le 
to Roman ia 
over the same period;
195. Recalls that in  
its Special Report No 4/2006 con cerning 
Phare investm
ent 
projects in  
Bulgaria 
and 
Romania
(1) OJ C 174, 26.7.2006, p. 1. (1) the ECA drew atten tion to a large number of problems concerning the management of 
European
 funds,
 including
 irregularities
 regarding
 invitations
 to tend
er and
 the eligibility
 of expen di
­
ture, cases of failure to use in vestment 
monies 
for their in tended 
purpose an d 
a lack 
of administrative 
capacity;
196.
 Voices con cern,
 furthermore, at the fact that the Memb er
 of the Commission with respon sibility
 for 
enlargement 
failed to provide the Committee on  
Budgetary 
Control 
with sufficien tly 
detailed in forma­
tion 
about 
the scale of the shortcomin gs 
in 
good 
time;
197. Voices serious con cern
 at the fact that the Commission suspen ded
 EUR
 200 000 000  in agricultural
 
funding 
for Roman ia 
and 
froze EUR 250 
000 000 in  
Phare funding, 
EUR 105 
000 000 in  
Sapard fun d­
ing 
and 
EUR 115 
000 000 in  
ISPA 
funding 
in 
Bulgaria; 
notes 
that the fin al 
loss for Bulg aria 
under 
Phare 
is EUR 220 
000 000;
198. Is 
aware that the lack  
of reliable 
control 
systems an d
 the management 
problems 
encountered 
pose a risk  
to 
European 
taxpayers’ mon ey; 
acknowledges 
the efforts made in  
the meanti
me to overcome these prob ­
lems; 
urges 
the Memb er 
States to con tinue 
making 
every effort to meet E urop
ean 
requiremen ts;
199. Considers 
that the Commission  
should step up techn ical 
assistance 
to Member 
States to stren gthen 
their 
administrative 
capacity; poin ts 
out that soun d 
management 
of European 
funds 
is an 
obligation 
and 
a 
duty for all Memb er 
States, and 
supports the temporary suspen sion 
of fundi
ng 
by 
the Commission  
in 
cases 
where a Memb er 
State’s man agement 
systems fail to fun ction 
as required;
200. Notes that over the period 2007 to 2013, Bulg aria 
is to receive E UR 6 
853 000 in  
structural fun ding, 
and 
Romania 
EUR 19 
200 000; in  
addition 
to the information 
given 
in 
the annua
l activity report an d 
in 
the reports on  
the Structural Fun ds 
and 
the Cohesion  
Fund, 
calls for respon sible 
and 
effective admin ­
istration 
of these fun ds;
201. Is 
of the opin ion 
that the preparation  
of the absorption 
capacity of Roman ia 
and 
Bulgaria 
for funds 
in 
the 
Agricultural 
and 
Cohesion 
policy fields has n ot 
been 
treated by 
the Commission  
with the n ecessary 
seriousness, 
and 
that statemen ts 
and 
actions 
of the Commission  
in 
this context were misleadin g, 
not 
only 
for Parliamen t 
but 
also for the Bulg arian 
and 
Romanian 
governments, 
and 
were one 
reason 
for the 
loss of fun ds 
by 
those Memb er 
States;
202. Calls on the Commission to k eep
 it informed
 of the practical outcome of judicial reform an d
 anti-
corruption  
efforts and 
to include 
in 
the progress 
reports criteria quan ti
fying 
progress 
in 
these areas;
203. Considers 
that the EU 
institutions 
should apply the prin ciple 
of zero toleran ce 
in 
connection 
with cases 
of misuse of Commun ity 
funds, 
fraud and 
corruption ; 
calls on 
the Commission  
to ensure 
that unduly 
paid 
amounts 
are recovered;N E 0 6 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/61
204. Calls, furthermore, on  OLAF to forward to it the fin dings of its ongoin g enquiries in Member States;
205. Agrees 
with the Commission  
that all action s 
and 
measures recen tly 
taken 
by 
Bulgaria 
need 
to be 
fol­
lowed up b y 
credible, 
structural corrective action s 
and 
a fundamental 
reform of all structures in volved 
in 
the management 
of EU 
funds, 
so as to en sure 
the correct an d 
timely tak e-up 
of funds 
and 
a high 
level 
of transparency; 
calls in 
this context 
on 
the Commission  
to improve coordin ation 
and 
communication 
with 
the national 
authorities an d 
closely mon itor 
the implemen tation 
of the various action  
plans 
sub­
mitted 
to it by 
Bulgaria, 
and 
to keep 
Parliamen t 
informed 
thereof; ask s 
the Commission  
to submit 
to it 
a special report on  
the state of play of the man agement 
and 
control 
of all EU 
funds 
in 
Bulgaria 
covering 
the 
period un til 15 
July 2009;
206. Calls on 
the Commission , 
in 
the light 
of the last prog ress 
report and 
the setback s
 with regard 
to the fight 
against 
corruption , 
to submit 
to it a special report on  
the state of play of the man agement 
and 
control 
of 
EU 
funds 
in 
Romania 
and 
on 
the measures tak en 
and 
the progress 
made in 
the fight 
against 
corrup­
tion 
covering 
the period un til 15 
July 2009;
Turkey, Croatia, Serbia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Kosovo and the other western Balkan countries
207. Points
 out that it is the respon sibility
 of the Commission deleg ation
s in the applican t
 countries
 and
 
potential 
applicant 
countries 
to prepare those coun tries 
to ensure 
proper use of E uropean 
funds; 
calls 
for anti-fraud 
strategies 
to be 
incorporated 
in 
this pre-accession  
process an d 
for the relevan t 
adminis­
trations 
to be 
trained 
under 
a programme 
of exchan ges 
between 
the Commission  
and 
the admin istra­
tions 
of applican t 
countries 
and 
potential 
applicant 
countries;
208. Calls 
on 
the Commission  
to play a more active role in  
connection 
with the expen diture 
control 
systems 
existing 
in 
Turkey, 
Croatia, Serb ia, 
the former Yug oslav 
Republic 
of Macedon ia 
and 
the other western  
Balkan 
countries 
during 
the pre-accession  
stage, 
and 
requests it to provide Parliamen t, 
in 
its report on  
the 
progress 
of those coun tries, 
with more detailed in formation 
on 
this issue, in cluding 
a detailed an aly­
sis 
of the reason s 
for any 
failings; 
calls on 
the Commission  
to introduce 
in 
the progress 
reports a system 
of traffic lig hts 
(green, 
amber 
and 
red lights) 
to denote 
the progress 
made towards achievin g 
the various 
key 
objectives;
209. Deplores 
the cases of fraud an d 
mismanagement 
of European 
funds 
administered b y 
the United 
Nations 
identified 
in 
connection 
with EU 
funding 
of reconstruction 
work 
in 
Kosovo 
and 
the lack 
of follow-up 
by 
the United 
Nations 
of these clearly iden tified 
cases; wishes, however, also to express its g ratitude 
to 
the European 
Agency 
for Recon struction 
and 
its ‘European
’ and 
local staff for the work  
done 
for the 
people of K osovo 
in 
sometimes difficult circumstan ces;
210. Calls 
on 
the ECA 
to produce a special report on  
the effectiven ess 
of the systems put in  
place by the Com­
mission 
to control 
the European 
funds 
received b y 
Kosovo 
and 
of those systems’ performan ce 
as regard 
fraud 
prevention, 
and 
to check 
whether the con ditions 
laid down  
in 
the agre
ements 
on 
the relevant pro­
grammes, 
as well as the rules laid down  
under 
the Instrument 
for Pre-Accession  
Assistance
(1) Council Reg ulation (EC) No 1085/2006 of 17 July 2006 estab lishing an Inst rument for Pre-Accession  Assistance (IPA)
(
OJ L 210, 31.7.2006, p. 82). (1) and Regu­
lation 
(EC, 
Euratom) 
No 1605/2002, have b een 
fully applied to such fun ding
;
211. Proposes that the Commission  
ask 
the Kosovo 
Government 
to supply an  
audit certificate in  
respect of 
European 
funds, 
in 
particular those in cluded 
in 
the budget, 
from the coun t
ry’s audit authorities;
212. Recalls that the I nvestigation 
Task 
Force (ITF) 
established 
to inves
tigate 
financial 
irregularities 
and 
fraud 
concerning 
EU 
funds 
in 
Kosovo 
finished 
its operation s 
in 
August 
2008, that its fin al 
report iden tified 
criminal 
conduct 
on 
the part of, amon g 
others, Un ited 
Nations 
staff, and 
that several in ternational 
war­
rants 
were issued without an y 
results being 
achieved in  
that regard 
by 
the United 
Nations; 
asks 
the Com­
mission 
to press for the execution  
of these warran ts; 
asks 
the Commission , 
further, to presen t 
a report 
on 
the legal 
follow-up to all cases discovered; calls for the estab lishmen
t of a successor org anisation, 
involving 
the Commission  
and 
OLAF, in 
the fight 
against 
fraud and 
irregula
rity;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
Administrative expenditu re
213. Notes 
with satisfaction  
that the ECA’s 
audits brought 
to light 
no 
material errors affectin g
 the legality and 
regularity 
of administrative 
expenditure;
European 
schools
214. Expects 
the Commission  
to ensure 
that the Belg ian 
and 
United 
Kingdom 
governments 
commit to meet­
ing 
their obligations 
under 
the existin g 
intergovernmental 
agreements 
— for Belg ium 
the earliest pos­
sible 
provision 
of a fourth or even  
a fifth European 
school, for the UK  
the secon dment 
of a sufficien t 
number
 of teachers — an d
 expects the curren t
 enrolment
 policy reg arding
 the Berk endael/Lae
ken 
schools to b e 
revised in  
order to avoid lon g 
and 
unacceptable 
travelling 
times for children ;
Impact 
of decentralisation impact on staff
215. Notes with satisfaction  
that, at Parliamen t’s 
request, the Commission  
performed a study of its human  
resources 
in 
2007 (SEC(2007) 
530), focusin g 
on 
administrative 
activities;
216. Voices its disappoin tment 
at the inadequate 
information 
forwarded by the Commission  
in 
2005 
and 
2006 in 
this area, which is extremely importan t 
from a budgetary 
point 
of view; ack nowledges 
the 
efforts made in  
the meantime 
as regards 
transparency 
on 
the Commission  
website an d 
the annual 
staff 
screening 
report;
217. Voices con cern 
at the fact that close to 32 % of the Commission ’s 
staff work  
in 
administrative 
support 
and 
coordination; 
points 
out that that fig ure 
does not 
include 
the 10 % of staff who work  
in 
the budget 
area; 
calls on 
the Commission  
to draw appropriate con clusions 
from these fig ures 
and 
to reorganise 
its 
human 
resources in  
order to reduce the proportion  
of staff work ing 
in 
these areas to 20 %;
218. Notes that staff mob ility 
was originally 
intended 
to cover sen sitive 
posts alon e; 
expresses surprise at the 
Commission ’s 
current 
practice of applyin g 
the mobility 
rule to all staff memb ers 
after five years or, at 
the most, seven  
years; fears that this way of applyin g 
the mobility 
rule could un dermine 
efficiency 
within 
the 
Commission  
and 
prevent 
the necessary 
experience 
and 
know-how 
from bei
ng 
built 
up within  
that 
institution; 
calls on 
the Commission  
to inform 
it how mob ility 
might 
be 
confined 
to sensitive 
posts;
Matters relating to the Community’s buildings
219. Deplores the lack  
of transparency 
shown 
by 
the Commission  
in 
the manag
ement 
of its 61 b uildings 
in 
Brussels 
and 
as regards 
developmen ts 
concerning 
its buildings 
stock;
220. Calls 
on 
the Commission  
to inform 
it of all new 
projects con cerning 
its buildings 
stock 
prior to their 
adoption, 
and 
to notify 
its Committee on  
Budgetary 
Control 
of all initiati
ves and 
new 
decisions 
con­
cerning 
property projects, in cluding 
preparatory work  
and 
invitations 
to tender, 
in 
respect of which it 
is proposed that a ten der 
committee should b e 
established, 
which would in c
lude represen tatives 
from 
Parliamen t;
221. Calls 
on 
OLAF to n otify 
it of any 
cases of fraud b rought 
to light 
in 
the property policy field an d 
to look 
into 
possible 
conflicts 
of interest;
222. Calls 
on 
the Commission  
to conduct 
an 
audit of both 
its own 
buildings 
and the buildings 
of all the other 
Community 
institutions, 
and 
to look 
into 
the idea of a common  
property man a
gement 
structure;N E 2 6 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/63
Follow-up measures in the light of the discharge
223. Deplores 
the fact that, in  
the annual 
accounts 
of the European 
Communi
ties for the fin ancial 
year 
2007
(1) OJ C 287, 10.11.2008, p. 9. (1), the Commission  fails to repeat in  full the provision s of the EC Treaty on  follow-up measures 
in
 the light
 of the discharg e,
 stating
 merely that when g ranting
 discharge
 Parliamen t
 may highlight
 
observations 
it considers 
important, 
often 
recommendin g 
actions 
that the Commission  
should tak e 
con­
cerning 
these matters; n otes 
that, althoug h 
this is correct, the Commission  
fails to men tion 
that 
Article 276 of the E C 
Treaty also requires the Commission  
to take 
all appropriate steps to act on  
the 
observations 
in 
Parliamen t’s 
decisions 
giving 
discharge 
relating 
to the execution  
of expenditure; 
reminds 
the 
Commission , 
therefore, that the calls made in  
its discharg e 
resolution  
are not 
simply non-binding 
recommen dations, 
but 
instructions 
which the Commission  
must act on  
when 
implemen ting 
the budget;
CONCLUSIONS CONCERNING THE SPECIAL REPORTS ISSUED  BY THE COURT OF  AUDITORS
Part I: Special Report No 6/2007 on the effectiveness of technical assistance in the context of 
capacity 
development
224. Considers 
that techn ical 
assistance 
(TA) and 
other types of extern al 
aid, which is still too don or-driven, 
often 
inefficient 
and 
unsustainable, 
urgently 
needs 
to be 
reformed b y, 
among 
other thin gs, 
promoting 
local 
ownership, 
more effectively coordin ating 
the resources b etween 
Member 
States at Un ion 
and 
inter­
national 
level, and 
ensuring 
that there is sufficien t 
time to implemen t 
projects;
225. Notes in 
this context 
the approval b y 
the Commission ’s 
services in  
July 2008 of the Back bone 
Strategy 
and 
the Work  
Plan 
to meet aid effectiven ess 
targets 
on 
Technical 
Cooperation  
and 
Project Implemen­
tation 
Units; 
calls therefore on  
the Commission  
to inform 
Parliamen t 
abou
t the implemen tation 
of this 
strategy 
for the first time b efore 
the end 
of March 2009, an d 
thereafter at six-mon thly 
intervals;
226. Notes 
the belated 
information 
on 
the amoun ts 
spent 
on 
TA recently 
provided b y 
the Commission  
to 
the ECA 
following 
publication 
of the ECA’s 
special report; is surprised that this in formation 
was not 
made 
available 
during 
the preparation  
of the special report; ack nowledge
s that the defin ition 
employed 
by 
the OECD’s 
Developmen t 
Aid Committee is b road 
and 
in 
practice leads to differen ces 
in 
interpreta­
tion; 
hopes that the strateg y 
adopted b y 
the Commission  
will also lead to a more operation al 
definition 
of 
TA;
227. Calls on 
the Commission , 
therefore, to propose the n ecessary 
legisla
tive changes 
before 
the end 
of the 
mandate 
of the curren t 
Commission , 
and 
urges 
Member 
States to tak e 
the nece
ssary steps to en sure 
the 
widespread use of this in strument,
 adapted to particular n eeds,
 in those coun tries,
 and
 to amend
 the 
regulation 
on 
the implemen tation 
of the 10th E DF 
accordingly;
228. Deplores 
the fact that the suspen sion 
clause, allowin g 
an 
accelerated procuremen t 
procedure, is b arely 
used 
by 
the Commission ; 
requests the Commission  
to use this facility wisely in  
order to improve the 
timetable 
for the implemen tation 
of TA operation s;
229. Finds 
it unacceptable 
that some compan ies 
deliberately 
propose experts with g ood 
CVs in 
order to win  
a 
contract 
while knowing 
that the expert in  
question 
will not 
be 
available 
to take 
up the assig nment; 
agrees 
with the E CA 
that the selection  
criteria for TA used b y 
the Commission  
are inappropriate;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
230. Requests therefore that the Commission  take much greater account of other criteria (such as those pro­
posed by 
the ECA), 
rather than  
solely con sidering 
the CV of the team leader expert; sug gests 
that this 
could be 
done, 
for example, b y 
creating 
a database, 
compatible 
with legal 
requiremen ts, 
of firms which 
fail to provide the proposed expert, which should in  
turn 
prevent 
them from participatin g 
in 
procure­
ment
 for a specified period; n otes
 that the Commission has adopted Reg ulat
ion (EC,
 Euratom)
 
No 1302/2008 of 17 Decemb er 
2008 on 
the central 
exclusion 
database
(1) OJ L 344, 20.12.2008, p. 12. (1) and Decision 2008/969/E C, 
Euratom 
of 16 Decemb er 
2008 on 
the Early 
Warning 
System for the use of authorisin g 
officers of the 
Commission  
and 
the executive ag encies
(2) OJ L 344, 20.12.2008, p. 125. (2), but that these n ew instruments do not make it possible to 
exclude 
firms on 
this basis; 
further notes 
that these aspects are part of the Work  
Plan 
(Axis 3, Action s 
13-15), 
and 
calls on 
the Commission  
to apply the related action s 
immediately;
231. Agrees 
with the E CA 
that there is in coherence 
in 
the Commission ’s 
approach reg arding 
the use of part­
ner
 countries’
 public
 financial
 management
 and
 procuremen t
 systems, which stan ds,
 sometimes, in 
direct con tradiction 
to the Un ion’s 
commitmen ts 
in 
the context 
of the Paris Declaration  
on 
Aid Effec­
tiveness 
endorsed 
on 2 
March 2005
(3) Agreed an d adopted at the Hig h-Level Forum on  2  March 2005 in  Paris by developin g and donor countries, the EU, the
African 
Developmen t 
Bank, 
the Asian 
Developmen t 
Bank, 
the European 
Bank 
for Recon struction 
and 
Developmen t, 
the
Inter-American 
Developmen t 
Bank, 
the Developmen t 
Assistance 
Committee of the OE CD, 
the United 
Nations 
and 
the
World Ban k. (3); urges the Commission  therefore to en sure the quick implemen ­
tation 
of these commitmen ts 
on 
the basis 
of the strateg ic 
dialogue 
provided for in  
the framework  
of the 
Accra and 
post-Accra work  
stream an d 
the Work  
Plan 
actions 
(Axis 1, in  
particular Action  
20);
232. Calls on 
the Commission , 
as far as possib le, 
to act in 
a manner 
consiste
nt 
with its tran sparency 
initia­
tives 
and 
to take 
into 
account 
Parliamen t’s 
Resolution  
of 19 February 
2008 on 
transparency 
in 
financial 
matters
(4) Texts adopted, P6_TA(2008)0051. (4), and recommen ds that a datab ase be set up providin g an overview of TA mission s and results 
which 
can 
be 
used for future TA task s 
and 
to preven t 
duplication s;
Part 
II: 
Special Report No 1/2008 concerning the procedu res 
for the preliminary examination 
and evalu ation 
of major investment projects for the 1994- 1999 
and 2000- 20
06 programming 
periods
233. Calls on 
the Commission  
to review the strict approval procedure for major projects, b ut 
recommen ds 
that 
it rationalise 
decision-making 
by 
indicating 
real values, thereb y 
avoiding 
treating 
the procedure as 
an 
excessively ‘administrative 
procedure’, reducin g 
the length 
of the decision -making 
process to a rea­
sonable 
duration, 
and 
establishing, 
as soon 
as possibl
e, an 
independent 
unit 
for major projects with hori­
zontal 
competen ce 
within 
the Directorate-Gen eral 
for Regional 
Policy (DG RE GIO); 
points 
out the 
importance 
of funding 
investment 
in 
software, as this will mak e 
the system more tran sparent 
and 
easier 
to control; 
at the same time, the Commission  
must not 
reduce the n umber 
of on-the-spot check s 
as a 
result of this in vestment;
234. Calls 
on 
the Commission  
to report on  
the practical application  
of the n +  2  a n d  n  +  3  rules for major 
projects, sin ce
 some Memb er
 States have tried to ‘circumven t
’ the ERDF
 rules (more specifically, the 
n + 2 rule) b y
 merging
 a number
 of projects such that the total fig ure
 for these fell just short of the 
threshold values for major projects an d 
then 
waiting 
for the Commission  
decision 
to suspend 
the n + 2 
rule;
235. Points 
out — and 
seeks 
an 
answer 
to — the question  
of how the ‘risk-avers
e’ culture mig ht 
have come 
about 
(with high-quality, 
innovative 
investments 
losing 
prominence), 
a practice which run s 
completely 
counter 
to the Commun ity’s 
efforts as laid down  
in 
the Lisbon 
Strategy; 
considers that the prob lem 
lies 
not 
with funding 
infrastructure 
investments 
but 
with the fact that Memb er 
States have the opportun ity 
to 
avoid innovative 
— ‘risky
’ — investments;N E 4 6 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/65
236. Considers it regrettable that the Commission  is funding education  and training not for its own  staff (DG 
REGIO) 
but 
for a separate g roup 
(Jaspers), which is located within  
the structure of the E uropean 
Invest­
ment
 Bank
 and
 is therefore n ot
 accountable
 to the Commission for its work ;
 points
 out to Memb e
r 
States that, if they fail to provide train ing 
and 
developmen t 
for their pools of experts, they will b e 
depen­
dent 
on 
groups 
of foreign, 
external 
experts, resultin g 
in 
considerable 
indirect expen se 
to the coun try 
in 
question;
237. Supports 
the initiative 
whereby 
the European 
Commission  
undertakes 
to draw up the ex-post evalua­
tion 
of major projects an d 
determines 
what information 
(uniform 
and 
comparab le 
data) — to b e 
gath­
ered 
and 
forwarded b y 
the Memb er 
States by 
the stipulated deadlin e 
— is need
ed; is of the opin ion 
that 
monitoring 
needs 
to be 
focused in  
this way b ecause 
there is curren tly 
no 
tangible 
evidence 
that major 
projects fin anced 
by 
Community 
funding 
are effective an d 
that the Memb er 
States have used the fun ds 
received 
as effectively an d 
productively as possib le;
238. Points 
out that, at presen t, 
information 
on 
major projects is available in  
the Commission ’s 
annual 
report 
on 
the Structural Fun ds 
and 
the Cohesion  
Fund 
only 
after such projects have b een 
approved; calls, there­
fore, on 
the Commission  
to ensure 
that its homepag e 
will enable 
citizens 
to monitor 
the status of an y 
major 
project;
Part III: 
Special Report No 2/2008 concerning binding tariff information (BTI)
239. Urges 
the Commission  
to endeavour 
to resolve the outstan ding 
problem
s and 
shortcomin gs 
as a matter 
of urgency,
 since
 they could result in a loss of reven ue
 for the Un ion
 in the form of tradition al
 own 
resources;
240. Notes the Commission ’s 
replies to the effect that the Modern ised 
Customs Code (MCC), adopted in  
2008
(1) Regulation (EC) No 450/2008 of the E uropean Parliamen t and of the Coun cil of 23 April 2008 layin g down the Com­
munity 
Customs Code (Modern ised 
Customs Code) (OJ L 145, 4.6.2008, p. 1). (1), will mak e BTI binding on the holder, the work  of updatin g the thesaurus will con tinue and 
the 
user interface 
is available 
in 
all EU 
official lan guages;
241. Urges 
the Commission  
to resolve tariff-classification  
disputes b y 
the deadlin es 
laid down  
by 
Commu­
nity
 law and,
 at the latest, within five mon ths
 and,
 in view of the possib le
 loss of own resources, to 
increase 
the number 
of staff work ing 
on 
BTI 
and 
classification  
to four person s 
and 
to ensure 
that those 
persons 
also carry out more risk  
analyses 
and 
exercise more strin gent 
scrutiny 
of Member 
State contri­
butions 
to the system, possib le 
abuses 
of the period-of-g race 
system an d 
BTI ‘
shopping
’;
242. Calls on 
the Commission  
to provide, b y 
the end 
of 2009, in formation 
on 
all the initiatives 
and 
mea­
sures taken 
on 
the basis 
of the ECA’s 
observations, 
together 
with details of their implemen tation;
Part 
IV: 
Special Report No 3/2008 on the Eu ropean 
Union Solidarity F und: 
how rapid, efficient 
and flexible is it?
243. Welcomes the E CA’s 
globally 
positive assessmen t 
of the results achieved b y 
the Commission  
in 
its man­
agement 
of the European 
Union 
Solidarity Fun d;
244. Notes 
that respon sibility 
for the issues raised with reg ard 
to rapidity may n ot 
be 
attributed 
to the Com­
mission alon e,
 given
 that in very larg e
 number
 of cases the prob lems
 stem from man agement
 short­
comings 
on 
the Memb er 
States’ side an d 
the quality of the in formation 
supplied b y 
applicants;
245. Notes, 
furthermore, that in  
its position  
of 18 May 2006
(2) OJ C 297 E , 7.12.2006, p. 331. (2) Parliamen t welcomed the proposal for a reg u­
lation 
of the European 
Parliamen t 
and 
of the Coun cil 
establishing 
the Euro
pean 
Union 
Solidarity Fun d 
(COM(2005) 
108) settin g 
out simpler an d 
clearer criteria for swifter activation , 
and 
that the Coun cil 
has 
yet to mak e 
any 
progress 
on 
the matter;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
Part V: Special Report No 4/2008 concerning the implementation of milk qu otas in the Member 
States 
which joined the Eu ropean 
Union on 1 May 2004
246. Deplores the fact that n ational 
authorities are ob liged 
to carry out a host of in spections, 
which are lik ely 
to 
be 
superficial, thus mak ing 
it impossib le 
to determin e 
the credib ility 
of direct-sales declaration s; 
wel­
comes Commission  
Regulation 
(EC) 
No 228/2008
(1) Commission  Regulation (EC) No 228/2008 of 13 March 2008 amen ding Regulat ion (EC) No 595/2004 with reg ard to
intensity 
of controls 
on 
deliveries an d 
direct sales of milk  
(OJ L 70, 14.3.2008, p. 7). (1) which reduces to 1 % the in spection rate for pro­
ducers 
whose production  
is less than  5 
000 kg;
247. Considers 
that the Commission  
should, un der 
the shared man agement 
arrangements, 
continue 
to take 
all 
steps necessary 
in 
order to en sure 
effective mon itoring 
of the estab li
shment 
and 
management 
of the 
milk 
quotas system;
248. Calls on 
the competen t 
national 
authorities to draw up, on  
the basis 
of a risk 
analysis, 
an 
inspection 
programme 
for each 12-mon th 
period and 
to carry out check s 
during 
and 
after each quota year, b ut 
no 
later 
than 
18 months 
after the en d 
of that year;
249. Takes 
the view that, on  
order to simplify matters, the Commission  
should ask  
the new 
Member 
States 
to adhere to the g eneral 
principle 
that all milk  
marketed 
must be 
recorded;
250. Calls on 
the Commission  
to ask 
the new 
Member 
States to improve their datab ase 
record-keeping, 
as 
requested b y 
the ECA 
in 
its report, an d 
to avoid un necessary 
checks;
251.
 Calls on the Commission to con tinue
 to assess developmen ts
 in the dairy sector, in particular those 
linked 
to its mark et, 
to the situation  
of producers, an d 
to the implications for reg ional 
developmen t, 
in 
particular 
in 
the assessmen t 
reports to b e 
submitted 
before 31 
December 
2010 and 
before 31 
Decem­
ber 
2012 under 
the terms of the political ag reement 
on 
the common  
agricultu
ral policy ‘health check ’ 
concluded 
in 
November 
2008;
252. Calls on 
the Commission  
to abide 
by 
all of the E CA’s 
recommen dations 
in 
connection 
with the ‘health 
check’ and 
to consider 
possible 
adjustmen ts 
to the common  
market 
organisa
tion 
for milk 
and 
the milk 
quota 
scheme, which should focus on :
(a) transitional 
and 
accompan ying 
measures to b e 
envisaged 
in 
regions 
where small producers are still 
very much in  
the majority;
(b) the 
need 
for milk 
producers in  
the new 
Member 
States to have a clear reg ul
atory framework  
and 
clear 
prospects en couraging 
them to mak e 
the investments 
that are vital in  
order for their activity 
to remain  
viable;
Part 
VI: 
Special Report No 5/2008 — The Eu ropean 
Union’s agencies:  
getting resu lts
253. Welcomes 
the ECA 
special report an d 
urges 
the Commission  
to note 
the shortcomin gs 
identified 
in 
it, 
as well as to tak e 
steps in 
line 
with the E CA’s 
recommen dations;
254. Calls 
on 
the Commission  
to develop an d 
implemen t 
a general 
management 
system for the E U ‘
regula­
tory
’ agencies,
 based
 on explicit criteria, such as transparency, econ omy,
 efficiency,
 effectiven ess
 and
 
exchange 
of best 
practices; tak es 
the view that the Commission  
should be 
in 
active communication  
with 
the Union 
agencies 
and 
should assist man agement 
boards 
in 
the implemen tat
ion 
of activity-b ased 
bud­
geting 
and 
management 
(ABB/ABM);
255. Calls on 
the Commission  
to introduce 
an 
effective mon itoring 
system for the Un ion 
agencies, 
allowing 
internal 
transfer 
of best 
practices an d 
methodolog y 
and 
containing 
a rang
e of both 
general 
and 
specific 
indicators 
for evaluation  
purposes;N E 6 6 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/67
256. Calls on the Commission  to develop g uidelines for improvin g the plann ing, monitoring, reporting on 
and 
evaluation  
of the agencies’ 
activities an d 
fully to implemen t 
the conc
ept of ‘getting 
results’ estab ­
lished 
by 
Regulation 
(EC, 
Euratom) 
No 1605/2002 in  
2002 and 
the framework  
Financial 
Regulation 
for 
the agencies
(1) Commission  Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 23 Decemb er 2002 on the framework  Financial Regulation
for 
the bodies 
referred to in  
Article 185 of Coun cil 
Regulation 
(EC, 
Eurato
m) No 1605/2002 on  
the Financial 
Regulation
applicable 
to the general 
budget 
of the European 
Communities 
(OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72). (1);
Part VII: Special Report No  6/2008 concerning Eu r
opean Commission Rehabilitation Aid 
following the tsu nami 
and Hurricane 
Mitch
257. Calls on 
the Commission  
to draw all n ecessary 
conclusions 
from the experien ces 
following 
Hurricane 
Mitch 
and 
the tsunami 
in 
order to improve future performan ce; 
urges 
the Commission  
to play an  
active 
role at international 
level with a view to remedyin g 
systemic weak nesses 
in 
international 
relief capacity;
258. Calls on the Commission to pay particular atten tion
 to the followin g
 issues in future rehab ilitation
 
actions: 
ensuring 
that funding 
is needs-based, 
that the affected population  
— including 
the poor, women  
and 
children 
— is at the cen tre 
of the aid measures an d 
that detailed an d 
accurate in formation 
about 
the 
outcomes of assistan ce 
is available 
to both 
taxpayers in  
donor 
countries 
and 
the affected population s;
259. Calls 
on 
the supreme audit in stitutions 
and 
the ECA 
to cooperate more closely in  
investigating, 
auditing 
and 
evaluating 
the use of disaster-related relief fun ds;
260. Calls 
on 
the Commission  
to review its list of NGOs in  
order to exclude n o
n-bona 
fide NGOs, an d 
to lay 
down 
procuremen t 
policies that preven t 
misappropriation  
of donated 
fund
s by 
such NGOs;
261. Calls, further, on  
the Commission  
to give 
Union
 aid a sufficien tly 
high profile without, in  
so doing, 
jeop­
ardising 
overall efficien cy 
and 
equity objectives;
262. Calls 
on 
the United 
Nations, 
the Red Cross/Red Crescen t 
and 
all other don ors 
to agree 
upon 
a compre­
hensive 
control 
and 
audit framework  
in 
order to:
(a) step up an d 
improve overall con trol 
of donated 
funds;
(b) eliminate 
duplication  
and/or 
fragmentation 
of checks 
and 
reduce their cost;
263. Expects 
the Commission  
not 
only 
to accept the E CA’s 
recommen dations 
but also to in dicate 
the earliest 
date for their implemen tation;
264.
 Considers,
 moreover, that in con nection
 with human itarian
 aid it is essen tial
 for the Commission to 
assert the criteria g overning 
aid effectiven ess 
as enshrined 
in 
the Paris Declaration  
on 
Aid Effectiveness;
265. Calls 
on 
the Commission  
to set a realistic an d 
firm deadlin e 
for funds 
to be 
made availab le, 
in 
order to 
encourage 
the recipien t 
countries 
to implemen t 
the agreed 
projects in  
a timely man ner;
266. Considers 
that, in 
the event 
of natural 
disasters, human itarian 
aid should b e 
provided with n o 
political 
strings 
attached; tak es 
the view that the Commission  
should none 
the less require recipien t 
countries 
to 
ensure:
(a) unrestricted 
access to victims;
(b) that 
the assistan ce 
is not 
subject 
to taxation , 
customs duty or an y 
other form of fiscal b urden;
(c) that 
there will b e 
no 
delay in 
granting, 
and 
no 
refusal to g rant, 
visas to in ternational 
staff work ing 
for 
relevant 
aid agencies;
(d) that 
beneficiaries 
will not 
be 
required to pay for the don ated 
goods 
and 
services (or that all such 
revenue 
will be 
channelled 
into 
reconstruction 
operation s);N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
267. Calls on the Commission  to consider suspending aid should an y of the above prin ciples be violated;
Part VIII:  
Special Report No 7/2008 on intelligent energy 2003- 2006
268. Welcomes 
the serious work  
carried out b y 
the ECA 
and 
its findings, 
which con tain 
a certain 
amount 
of 
praise but
 also criticisms reg arding
 the management
 by
 the Commission an d
 the Intelligent
 Energy
 
Executive
 Agency
 of the IEE
 2003-2006 prog ramme;
 applauds the close cooperation b etween
 the 
Agency, 
the ECA 
and 
Parliamen t 
and 
the future-orien ted 
cooperation  
of the Agency;
269. Concludes 
from the E CA’s 
analysis 
that costs b orne 
by 
beneficiaries 
(in 
preparing 
proposals an d 
report­
ing) 
are rather hig h 
and, 
although 
it understands 
that those costs are differen t 
from purely admin istra­
tive 
costs, advocates that they should also b e 
taken 
into 
account 
and 
reduced in  
line 
with the prin ciples 
of 
better 
regulation;
270. Considers 
that the ECA’s 
findings 
might 
also be 
useful in 
the case of other executive ag encies; 
looks 
for­
ward to receivin g 
the forthcomin g 
ECA 
Special Report on  
executive ag encie
s;
271. Deplores the fact that, in  
the case of projects or studies related to the prog ramme, 
as well as in  
the case 
of local en ergy 
agencies, 
new 
Member 
States were hardly in volved; 
accepts however that this situation  
can
 in part b e
 explained
 by
 the fact that the prog ramme
 had already started before the accession of 
EU-10;
 requests that the Commission actively pursue its policy of g iving
 priority to the creation of 
energy 
agencies 
in 
the new 
Member 
States in 
order to arrive at a well-b alanc
ed distribution 
across the 
whole Un ion;
Part 
IX: 
Special Report No 8/2008 — Is cross- compliance 
an effective policy?
272. Considers 
that the ob jectives 
of Council 
Regulation 
(EC) 
No 1782/200 3
(1) Council Reg ulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29 Septemb er 2003 estab lishing common rules for direct support schemes
under 
the common  
agricultural 
policy and 
establishing 
certain 
support schemes for farmers (OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 1). (1) should b e developed in  a
‘
SMART’ (specific, measurab le, 
achievable, 
relevant 
and 
timed) man ner 
and 
organised 
in 
a logical 
hier­
archy; on 
this basis, 
Member 
States should defin e 
verifiable 
requiremen t
s and 
standards 
at farm level;
273. Considers 
that the cross-complian ce 
framework  
should be 
simplified b y 
limiting 
it to the prin cipal 
ele­
ments
 of farmin g
 activities where improvemen ts
 are sought an d
 by
 specifyin g
 the expected results, 
requiremen ts 
and 
standards;
274.
 Invites
 the Commission to draw a clear distin ction
 between
 cross-complian ce
 and
 agri-environment;
 
notes 
that elemen ts 
of rural developmen t 
policy, such as the approval of stan dards 
by 
the Commission  
and 
the obligation 
to lay down  
verifiable 
standards, 
should also apply to cross-complian ce;
275. Considers 
that an 
effective con trol 
and 
sanction 
system providin g 
assurance 
of farmers’ complian ce 
should 
be 
implemen ted 
in 
the Memb er 
States; as a min imum, 
1 % of farms applyin g 
each obligation 
should 
be 
covered b y 
controls, 
and 
the sanction 
system should b e 
based 
on 
the principle 
that reduc­
tions 
in 
payments 
are proportion ate 
to, or depen dent 
on, 
the seriousn ess 
of the breach;
276. Invites 
the Commission  
to implemen t 
a sound 
monitoring 
system to measure performan ce 
by 
defining 
relevant 
indicators 
and 
baseline 
levels; Memb er 
States are in vited 
to submit complete an d 
reliable 
data, 
which should b e 
subject 
to closer an alysis 
by 
the Commission ;
277. Invites 
the Commission  
to present 
proposals at the latest in  
the conte
xt of the b udget 
review an d 
the 
next 
reform of the common  
agricultural 
policy;N E 8 6 / 5 5 2 L
Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion L 255/69
278. Invites the ECA to report on  compliance with cross-complian ce condit ions in its annual report (state­
ment 
of assuran ce);
Part 
X: 
Special Report No 9/2008–-  
The effectiveness of EU su pport 
in the area of freedom, 
security 
and justice 
for Belaru s, 
Moldova and Ukraine
279. Urges 
the Commission  
to carry out a full an alysis 
of the reason s 
for the shortcomings and lack of results 
in 
some of the projects in  
Belarus, Moldova an d 
Ukraine, 
and 
to improve the plan ning, 
management 
and 
control 
of Union 
funds 
in 
these coun tries;
280. Insists 
that the Commission  
continue 
to target 
Union 
funds 
to the specific priorities of Moldova, Belarus 
and 
Ukraine, 
bearing 
in 
mind 
the progress 
made in 
previous projects;
281. Calls on 
the Commission  
to make 
EU 
funding 
procedures more flexib le, 
which would allow adjustmen t 
of 
project dossiers, b enchmarks 
and 
goals 
in 
order to reflect chan ges 
in 
the economic 
and 
political situ­
ation 
in 
the countries 
concerned;
282. Requests 
that the Commission  
ensure 
the sustain ability 
of Union-fin
anced 
projects b y 
clearly defin ing 
the 
commitmen ts 
made by 
the recipien t 
government 
at the end 
of each project;
283. Deplores the fact that the effectiven ess 
of Commun ity 
funding 
was ins
ufficient 
in 
cases where, althoug h 
there 
were shortcomin gs 
in 
project man agement, 
grants 
were awarded to the same con tractors 
for new 
projects; 
thus urges 
the Commission  
to define 
clear criteria for selecting  
contactors 
and 
to avoid rep­
etition 
of the unsatisfactory 
management 
of Commun ity 
funds;
284.
 Recommen ds
 that the Commission improve its commun ication
 with the g overnments
 of Ukraine,
 
Moldova an d 
Belarus, an d 
that it tak e 
appropriate steps to en courage 
and 
help recipien t 
countries 
to 
establish 
and 
exercise effective don or 
coordination;
285. Encourages 
the Commission  
to focus more on  
the issue of effective prosecution  
in 
the fight 
against 
orga
­
nised 
crime, and 
to explore possib ilities 
for promotin g 
greater 
public 
involvemen t 
in 
anti-corruption 
policy 
by 
supportin g 
civil society org anisations 
in 
issues relatin g 
to the judiciary an d 
good 
governance;
Part 
XI: 
Special Report No 11/2008 — The management of the Eu ropean 
Union support for the 
public 
storage of cereals
286. Agrees 
with the E CA 
that the Commission  
should tak e 
into 
account 
the ge
ographical 
location 
of the 
stores and 
in 
particular the quality of the cereal lots when  
it sets the min imum 
disposal price;
287. Calls on 
the Commission , 
in 
order to improve the b udgetary 
process, to mak e 
the costs of activities n ot 
directly 
related to the in tervention 
storage 
of cereals more tran sparent
; therefore sug gests 
that the sub ­
sidy 
element 
of programmes, 
such as support for the most deprived person s 
or the bioethanol 
industry, 
be 
directly allocated to the activities con cerned;
288. Requests 
the Memb er 
States and 
the Commission  
to evaluate the costs of con trols 
in 
the field of pub lic 
storage 
operation s 
of cereals; calls on  
the Commission  
to create more in ce
ntives 
for Memb er 
States to 
reduce the storag e 
and 
capital costs of their in terventions 
and 
to optimis e the time of sale of their stocks;
289. Agrees 
with the E CA’s 
opinion 
that the Commission  
should stren gthen 
its review of the costs n otified 
by 
the paying 
agencies 
by 
systematically followin g 
up on 
any 
unusual 
data or tren ds; 
on-the-spot 
inspec­
tions 
should include 
checks 
of the data used; the Commission  
should review its stan dard 
costs for opera­
tions 
without movemen t 
to ensure 
that they do n ot 
exceed actual costs;N E 9 0 0 2 . 9 . 6 2
L 255/70 EN Official Journ alof the EuropeanUnion 26.9.2009
290. Supports the E CA in its opinion that on-the-spot inspections of data on  cost information received from 
the Memb er 
States’ payin g 
agencies 
would be 
useful; stresses however the need to en sure 
that control 
obligations 
are cost-effective;
291. Deplores the fact that there is n o 
strategic 
reserve of cereals should a food shortag e 
occur at Commu­
nity 
level; notes 
that Memb er 
States are allowed to con stitute 
strategic 
reserves of cereals, an d 
that they 
have to in form 
the Commission  
about 
these reserves; deplores, however, the fact that very few Memb er 
States 
make 
use of this possib ility, 
and 
considers 
that the Commission  
should explore the idea of con ­
stituting 
a Commun ity 
strategic 
reserve.