Court of auditors

In accordance with the provisions of the Treaties (Article 45c(4) of the ECSC Treaty, Article 248(4) of the EC Treaty and Article 160c(4) of the EAEC Treaty) and Articles 143 and 181(2) of the Financial Regulation of 25 June 2002 applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, and Articles 116 and 135(2) of the Financial Regulation of 27 March 2003 applicable to the European Development Funds, the Court of Auditors of the European Communities, at its meeting of 8 and 9 October 2003, adopted its

ANNUAL REPORT

concerning the financial year 2002

(2003/C 286/01)

The report, together with the institutions' replies to the Court's observations, was transmitted to the authorities responsible for giving discharge and to the other institutions.

Juan Manuel FABRA VALLÉS

(President)

Giorgio CLEMENTE

Hubert WEBER

Aunus SALMI

François COLLING

Maarten B. ENGWIRDA

Jean-François BERNICOT

Robert REYNDERS

Máire GEOGHEGAN-QUINN

Vítor Manuel da SILVA CALDEIRA

Lars TOBISSON

Hedda von WEDEL

David BOSTOCK

Morten Louis LEVYSOHN

Ioannis SARMAS

CONTENTS

>TABLE>

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

Structure and content of the report

0.1. In recent years the Statement of Assurance has become an increasingly important element of the Court's Annual Report. This year's Report places the Statement, together with the information supporting it, in chapter 1. For the first time the Statement is also published with the consolidated accounts(1) of the European Community in a separate edition of the Official Journal of the European Union.

0.2. A further change to the Report is the consolidation of the Court's observations on budgetary management into a separate chapter (chapter 2). In previous years these observations were presented in the individual chapters dealing with the European Union's revenue and spending.

0.3. The chapters covering revenue and the major areas of spending, which reflect the headings of the financial perspective(2), have as their main element detailed analyses and results of the audit work carried out in the context of the Statement of Assurance for the respective area. In the terminology of Article 248(1) of the EC Treaty, as amended by theTreaty of Nice, these sections are described as "specific assessments". These assessments form the main basis for the Statement of Assurance, as described in paragraphs 1.1 to 1.6 of this Report. The chapters also contain the results of reviews following up progress made on implementing the recommendations made by the Court in previous Special and Annual Reports. Summaries are given of the 13 Special Reports published by the Court since the last Annual Report(3). There is also a chapter covering financial instruments and banking activities. The Annexes to chapters 3 to 9 provide monitoring elements for evaluating financial management of the EU budget.

0.4. As the European Development Funds are financed outside the EU budget, the Court's observations, including a Statement of Assurance, are presented in a separate section of this report.

0.5. The Commission's replies, and, where appropriate, those of the other institutions, are published alongside the observations of the Court.

0.6. This 26th Annual Report is being published at a time when there are two major developments affecting the financial management of the European Union. The first is the continuing reform of the Commission in general, and of financial management in particular, and the second is the accession in May 2004 of 10 new Member States.

The reform of the Commission

0.7. The reform of the Commission, begun in 2000(4), comprises a number of ambitious and fundamental measures aimed at improving both financial and operational management and control. Progress continued to be made during 2002, building on that begun in 2001. In particular positive steps were taken in respect of readying the Commission for implementation of certain provisions of the new Financial Regulation from 1 January 2003. These included the increase in the responsibility of authorising officers by delegation, especially regarding internal control, and the introduction of a central internal audit service, complemented by internal audit capabilities within each Directorate-General.

0.8. Other highlights of the reform include establishing and applying internal control standards, establishing key performance indicators, undertaking accounting reform, the introduction of activity-based management, and the devolution of much of the responsibility for the management of external actions to delegations. The Commission itself recognises that whilst progress has been made, much remains to be done and cites difficulties in recruiting sufficient numbers of staff with the required financial experience, and establishing and promoting the necessary risk-management culture.

0.9. Of critical importance for ensuring sound financial management within the Commission are the internal control standards(5). These represent the minimum level of tools and procedures designed to help in defining the internal control systems within the Commission's Directorates-General. By the end of 2002 these standards were not being applied to the minimum level throughout all Directorates-General, despite the fact that they were intended for full implementation one year earlier. The Court can only underline the necessity of ensuring the effective and complete application of the standards, as they, together with the principle of the responsibility of Directors-General, represent the cornerstone for much of the reform within the Commission.

0.10. The year 2002 is the second that Directors-General have been required to produce annual activity reports and accompanying declarations. These set out their own assessment of compliance with financial management requirements such as operating adequate internal control systems, and to what extent they provide assurance that Union finances are soundly managed. As noted in this Annual Report, the Court found some improvements in the quality and consistency of these reports, many of which are based on the recommendations made in its 2001 Annual Report. However, further progress is needed, particularly in the definition and quantification of reservations, and in the consistency of the approach followed by the different Directorates-General.

0.11. As the Court has pointed out repeatedly in the past, the areas of the budget for which management is shared, for example with Member States, pose particular challenges due to their complexity and the many layers of administration involved. The expenditure concerned represents the vast bulk of the budget by value and comprises notably agriculture and structural measures. In these areas the Directors-General have many reservations on the systems in place in Member States and their ability to assure the legality and regularity of underlying transactions.

0.12. The scale of the task facing the Commission in these areas is considerable and it is likely to take several years before significant progress is made. Some Directorates-General are only at the stage of obtaining a detailed description of systems in Member States. Furthermore, it was only in 2002 that the Commission sought a legal opinion clarifying the respective rights and responsibilities of the Commission and the Member States in the area of shared management. The Court will continue to follow this closely.

0.13. The need for progress in the management of funds where responsibilities are shared should not, however, divert attention away from improvements still needed in the management of expenditure for which the Commission is directly responsible.

0.14. The Commission is seeking to apply a comprehensive and systematic approach to managing and monitoring the reform process. Identified weaknesses are accompanied by practical action plans agreed by the Commission, against which progress is subsequently measured. However, as pointed out in chapter 1(6), there is a need to consolidate all the various action plans and updates of the White Paper, in order to make it easier to monitor progress of the reform and ensure that it is being applied coherently and consistently throughout the whole organisation. This would enhance the open and transparent approach to which the Commission is committed.

Enlargement

0.15. In late 2002 the European Union agreed upon the largest wave of enlargement in its history. The accession of the 10 countries concerned requires significant efforts for them in terms of adopting and implementing the acquis communautaire, setting up the necessary management and control structures to administer EU aid and coping with the challenges arising from decentralisation. From the outset the Commission has operated a policy of decentralisation for the administration of the EU funds, albeit starting with a high level of ex ante Commission control often exercised through its delegations. As accession has approached, the level of decentralisation has increased in order to provide a good basis for administering shared management schemes - agriculture and structural measures - when the accession countries become full Member States.

0.16. As this report describes, delays in setting up the required structures for financial management and control have meant that EU funds have been made available more slowly than initially planned to potential beneficiaries in the countries concerned. The Court has also found weaknesses in the Commission's monitoring of the systems being put into place. Efforts are therefore still required by both the accession States and the Commission to ensure efficient and effective management of EU funds, and timely delivery of aid to beneficiaries.

0.17. The period following enlargement will see other significant changes such as the implementation of activity-based management and accrual accounting together with the full application of the provisions of the new Financial Regulation. It is imperative that the Commission devotes adequate resources to these tasks to help assure a quality of management that meets the legitimate expectations of the citizens of the Union.

0.18. By the time the Court's next annual report is published, the Union will have welcomed 10 new Member States. Enlargement will add both to the size of the Union's budget and the scale and complexity of the management challenge faced by the Commission and Member States. It will also increase the scope of the Court's work as external auditor of the budget of the enlarged EU. The Court, as a fully independent audit institution, is preparing for this challenge.

(1) Article 129(4) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1).

(2) The financial perspective, which is determined by an interinstitutional agreement between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, sets limits on expenditure for each of seven categories (headings) of expenditure for commitment appropriations, and on total expenditure for payment appropriations. The Court does not present a separate chapter for the Reserves heading, as its resources are only used through transfer to one of the other headings.

(3) A full list of the reports and opinions adopted by the Court in the last five years is included in Annex II to this Report.

(4) White Paper on reforming the Commission issued on 1 March 2000 (COM(2000) 200 final).

(5) Communication to the Commission of 18 December 2001 (SEC(2001) 2037/4).

(6) Paragraph 1.115.

Report on the activities financed from the general budget

Chapter 1

The Statement of Assurance and supporting information

TABLE OF CONTENTS

>TABLE>

STATEMENT OF ASSURANCE

I. Pursuant to the provisions of Article 248 of the Treaty, the Court has examined the consolidated annual accounts(1) of the European Communities for the financial year ended 31 December 2002. It carried out its audit in accordance with its own audit policies and standards, which are based on international standards that have been adapted to the Community context. Through its audit, the Court has obtained a reasonable basis for the opinion expressed below. In the case of own resources the scope of the Court's audit work was limited(2).

Reliability of the accounts

II. In the Court's opinion, the consolidated annual accounts of the European Communities and the notes to them were drawn up in accordance with the provisions of the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1977 and with the accounting principles, rules and methods set out in the annexes to the consolidated financial statements(3). Except for the effects of the observations in paragraphs (a) to (d) and the remark in paragraph III, they faithfully reflect the revenue and expenditure of the Communities for the year and their financial position at the year-end:

(a) in the absence of sufficient budgetary appropriations, 820 million euro of legal commitments are included amongst the off-balance sheet commitments;

(b) the called-up part (240 million euro) of the Commission's commitment (520 million euro) to the capital of the Galileo joint undertaking does not appear as such on the assets side of the balance sheet;

(c) the transitional accounts entered on the assets side of the balance sheet in the sum of 91,1 million euro and in the sum of 714,9 million euro on the liabilities side should be redistributed amongst the various other balance sheet or revenue and expenditure (operating) account headings according to the nature of their individual components;

(d) in the absence of effective internal control procedures for miscellaneous revenue and advances, the Court cannot be certain that the transactions relating to the sundry debtors item have been correctly and completely recorded.

III. As has been the case in the past, the origin of the Court's observations lies in the Community accounting system, which was not designed to ensure that the assets are fully recorded. In this context, the Court notes that on 17 December 2002 the Commission adopted an action plan for the modernisation of the European Communities' accounting system. The action plan is supposed to become fully effective as from the 2005 financial year.

Legality and regularity of the underlying transactions

IV. In view of the results of its audits, the Court is of the opinion that the transactions underlying the consolidated annual accounts of the European Communities, taken as a whole, are legal and regular in respect of the revenue, commitments, administrative expenditure and pre-accession aid, although in the latter case the supervisory systems and controls are particularly in need of strengthening.

V. As regards other payments, the Court established that:

(a) in the case of EAGGF Guarantee Section, the payments were, again, materially affected by errors. Arable crops are less exposed to the risk of error than animal premiums, whereas the other categories of expenditure, which are not subject to the integrated administration and control system (IACS), are exposed to greater risk, as well as being subject to less efficient controls;

(b) in the case of the structural measures, in spite of an improvement in the supervisory systems and controls, especially at Commission level, the same types of error occurred at Member State level with the same frequency as in previous years;

(c) in the case of internal policies, the transactions are still affected by significant errors in terms of legality and regularity. In the case of the research framework programmes, these errors are likely to persist if the rules governing the programmes are not revised;

(d) in the case of the external actions, the irregularities noted in the past are persisting at local level. As a result of a process of management decentralisation that is still ongoing, the supervisory systems and controls do not yet provide the Commission with assurance of the legality and regularity of the payments at the level of the bodies responsible for implementing development projects.

8 and 9 October 2003

Juan Manuel Fabra Vallés

President

European Court of Auditors 12, rue Alcide De Gasperi, L-1615 Luxembourg

>TABLE>

Table 1.1 - Main unfinished actions in Chapter V "Audit, financial management and control" of the White Paper (Situation at 31 December 2002)

>TABLE>

Source:

Court of Auditors.

>TABLE>

Table 1.2 - Implementation of the action plan annexed to the synthesis of the annual activity reports and declarations of the directors-general for 2001, actions still in progress on 31 December 2002

>TABLE>

Source:

Court of Auditors.

>TABLE>

Table 1.3 - Introduction of internal control standards: situation at 31 December 2002

>TABLE>

Note:

directorates-general having effected payments of more than 100 million euro in 2002.

Source:

Commission.

>TABLE>

(1) Namely "Revenue and expenditure account: execution of the budget" and "Consolidated balance sheet", which make up Volume I of the annual accounts of the European Communities, 2002 financial year.

(2) Firstly, the Court's audits focus on macroeconomic statistics for which the underlying data cannot be audited directly, and secondly, they cannot possibly cover the imports that have not been subject to customs supervision.

(3) See Annex 1, Volume 1, of the final accounts of the European Communities, financial year 2002.

Chapter 2

Budgetary management

TABLE OF CONTENTS

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

Table 2.1 - Implementation of the 2002 budget by financial perspective heading

>TABLE>

Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure account.

>TABLE>

Table 2.2 - Composition of surplus 2002 (and 2001)

>TABLE>

Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure account.

>TABLE>

Chapter 3

Own resources

TABLE OF CONTENTS

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

Table 3.1 - Revenue for the financial years 2001 and 2002

>TABLE>

Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure account.

Graph 3.1 - Breakdown of actual revenue in 2002

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.007701.TIF">

(1)Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure account.

Graph 3.2 - Evolution of sources of actual revenue 1989 to 2002

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.007702.TIF">

(2)Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure account.

>TABLE>

ANNEX 1

Own resources - Development of key observations

>TABLE>

ANNEX 2

Supervisory systems and controls

Area: Own resources

System: Traditional own resources and VAT/GNP resources

>TABLE>

A Works well, few or minor improvements required.

B Works but improvements necessary: more direct verification of GNP data and standardisation of checks required. It is also noted that there exists a general reservation for all GNP data for the years since 1995 and that France and Luxembourg have failed to provide inventories.

Notes:

- The supervisory systems predate the Commission's reform.

- The assessments are based on detailed review of the monitoring units and of their reports.

(1) Customs and agricultural duties and sugar levies are shown after deduction of the collection costs of 2002 and of the repayment, made in 2002, of collection costs of 2001 (see paragraph 2.16)

(2) Contains surplus from previous financial year and miscellaneous revenue.

Chapter 4

The common agricultural policy

TABLE OF CONTENTS

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

Graph 4.1. - Breakdown of EAGGF-Guarantee expenditure by economic type - financial year 2002

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.010001.TIF">

(1)(2)NB:

This breakdown by economic type was calculated on the basis of gross figures before factoring in negative expenditure (recoveries, clearance and suspension of advances and milk levies).

Source:

The Commission's annual accounts for 2002 - Volume II - Gross data.

Graph 4.2 - Breakdown of EAGGF-Guarantee expenditure by sector - financial year 2002

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.010002.TIF">

Source:

The Commission's annual accounts for 2002 - Volume II.

>TABLE>

Table 4.1 - Area aid, forage areas and other crops. Results of IACS field inspection and remote sensing in 2001, relating to claims paid in 2002

>TABLE>

NB 1:

Remote sensing involves the use of satellite or aerial photography to check IACS application

NB 2:

Differences in percentage of errors detected may be explained both by differences in the number of inaccurate claims submitted and differences in the efficiency of detection.

Source:

DG AGRI - IACS 2001 Statistics, summarising inspection results provided by the Member States.

>TABLE>

Graph 4.3 - Area aid. Results of IACS field inspections: percentage of applications inspected which were overstated(3)

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.011001.TIF">

(4)Source:

DG AGRI - IACS 2001 Statistics relating to claims paid in 2002.

Graph 4.4 - Area aid. Results of IACS field inspections: average overstatement(5) in claims inspected

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.011002.TIF">

(6)Source:

DG AGRI - IACS 2001 Statistics relating to claims paid in 2002.

>TABLE>

Table 4.2 - IACS inspections for suckler cow premiums. Results of on-the-spot checks in 2001, relating to claims paid in 2002

>TABLE>

NB 1:

Differences in percentage of errors detected may be explained both by differences in the number of inaccurate claims submitted and differences in the efficiency of detection.

NB 2:

A claim is fully rejected when a difference higher than 20 % is found between the number of animals declared and that determined to be eligible or when the difference is the result of irregularities committed intentionally.

Source:

DG AGRI - IACS 2001 Statistics, summarising inspection results provided by the Member States.

>TABLE>

Graph 4.5 - Suckler Cow Premium. Percentage of claims inspected with errors

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.011401.TIF">

(7)(8)(9)NB 1:

Differences in percentage of errors detected may be explained both by differences in the number of inaccurate claims submitted and differences in the efficiency of detection.

NB 2:

A claim is fully rejected when a difference higher than 20 % is found between the number of animals declared and that determined to be eligible or when the difference is the result of irregularities committed intentionally.

Source:

DG AGRI - IACS 2001 Statistics, relating to claims paid in 2002

>TABLE>

Table 4.3 - Olive oil inspection agencies: checks on mills (2000 and 2001), relating to claims paid in 2002

>TABLE>

Source:

Annual reports for 2000 and 2001 of the Greek, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese olive oil agencies.

Table 4.4 - Olive oil inspection agencies: checks on producers (2000 and 2001), relating to claims paid in 2002

>TABLE>

Source:

Annual reports for 2000 and 2001 of the Greek, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese olive oil agencies.

>TABLE>

Table 4.5 - Paying agencies by expenditure declared in 2002

>TABLE>

NB:

The exchange rates for Member States outside the euro zone: Denmark: 7,4282, Sweden: 9,1458, United Kingdom: 0,6842.

Source:

Summary report of the Commission on the financial clearance of the EAGGF Guarantee Section accounts for 2002.

>TABLE>

Table 4.6 - Corrections in clearance of accounts decisions in respect of budget years 1991 to 2002

>TABLE>

NB:

Total amount of corrections per EAGGF year:

There are still conformity decisions to be taken to clear the expenditure of EAGGF years from 1997 onwards.

Exchange rates:

Those used by the Commission in its summary reports.

Source:

All Commission's clearance of accounts decisions covering EAGGF years 1991 to 2002.

Graph 4.6 - Corrections in conformity decisions (1999 to 2002) per Member State

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.013201.TIF">

Source:

Clearance of accounts decisions 1 to 11 taken from 1999 to 2002.

Graph 4.7 - Corrections in conformity decisions (1999 to 2002) per market

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.013202.TIF">

Source:

Clearance of accounts decisions 1 to 11 taken from 1999 to 2002.

>TABLE>

ANNEX 1

Evolution of key observations - Agriculture

>TABLE>

ANNEX 2

IACS Indicators

>TABLE>

Source:

Court of Auditors review of paying agency IACS systems

(1) Other direct aid: production as well as processing or consumption aid paid to producers or organisations of producers or processors.

(2) Intervention: public and private storage, fruits and vegetables withdrawal arrangements, compulsory and voluntary distillation.

(3) 54542 applications were overstated, i.e. 20,7 % of the total number of applications inspected by Member States. This represents a reduction of nearly 27 % compared with the year 2000.

(4) Greece: data not sent to the Commission.

(5) Total overstatement amounted to 134440 ha, i.e. 1,2 % of the total area checked by the Member States. This represents a reduction of nearly 50 % compared with the year 2000. Italy alone explains 78,5 % of this reduction.

(6) Greece: data not sent to the Commission.

(7) Germany and Spain: summary table at paying agency level.

(8) France: data for claims rejected include sanctions following both administrative and on-the-spot controls.

(9) United Kingdom: summary table of England, Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland.

Chapter 5

Structural measures

TABLE OF CONTENTS

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

Graph 5.1 - Breakdown of commitments by budgetary area in 2002

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.015801.TIF">

Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure accounts.

NB:

For more detailed information see Diagrams III and IV of Annex I.

Graph 5.2 - Breakdown of payments by budgetary area in 2002

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.015802.TIF">

Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure accounts.

NB:

For more detailed information see Diagrams III and IV of Annex I.

>TABLE>

ANNEX 1

Follow-up of key observations

>TABLE>

ANNEX 2

Structural measures

Management and control systems

>TABLE>

For details see paragraphs 5.26 to 5.33.

Chapter 6

Internal policies, including research

TABLE OF CONTENTS

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

Graph 6.1 - Breakdown of commitments by budgetary area in 2002

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.019501.TIF">

Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure accounts.

NB:

For more detailed information see Diagrams III and IV of Annex I.

Graph 6.2 - Breakdown of payments by budgetary area in 2002

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.019502.TIF">

Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure accounts.

NB:

For more detailed information see Diagrams III and IV of Annex I.

>TABLE>

Table 6.1 - Audits by the Commission completed in 2002((Definitions used in generating this table:

- Number of audits completed: number of financial audits where a final audit report was issued during the year.

- Number of open contracts: number of contracts signed in the year that have not yet been completed, plus the total number of contracts that were open at the beginning of the year that were not completed during the year.

The word "contract" denoted both contracts (either a shared-cost action or a contract awarded through the public procurement procedures) and subsidies (where a financial agreement has been reached). A "completed contract" is a contract where the terms of the contract have been fulfilled, all financial and technical reviews have been completed and the final payment has been made.

- Value of audited contracts: the value of only the contractor's share of the contract audited on the spot except TEN-T actions.

- Amount recoverable: amounts calculated in the on-the-spot audits as recoverable and evidenced in the audit reports.))

>TABLE>

Source:

Commission departments.

>TABLE>

Table 6.2 - Summary table of audits closed during 2002 - Research DGs

>TABLE>

Source:

Commission DGs.

Table 6.3 - DG Research (RTD): Statistics on audit reports examined and time-to-audit analysisSource:

Analyses made by the Court based on the Commission's information.

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

ANNEX 1

Internal policies and research - Evaluation of key aspects observed in the internal policies

>TABLE>

ANNEX 2A

Summary of the implementation of the Internal Control Standards in directorates-general according to the AARs for 2002

>TABLE>

ANNEX 2B

Summary of the Court's assessment of the implementation of the selected Internal Control Standards in three directorates-general at the end of 2002

>TABLE>

ANNEX 3

Monitoring systems and controls

Area: internal policies and research

System: TEN-T monitoring systems

>TABLE>

A: "Works well, few or minor improvements required".

B: "Works, but improvements necessary".

Chapter 7

External actions

TABLE OF CONTENTS

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

Graph 7.1 - Breakdown of commitments by budgetary area in 2002

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.022901.TIF">

NB:

for more detailed information see Diagrams III and IV of Annex I.

Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure accounts.

Graph 7.2 - Breakdown of payments by budgetary area in 2002

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.022902.TIF">

NB:

for more detailed information see Diagrams III and IV of Annex I.

Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure accounts.

>TABLE>

ANNEX 1

(a) Court's assessment of supervisory systems and controls in 2002

>TABLE>

(b) Court's assessment of external audits at the level of EuropeAid implementing organisations

>TABLE>

(c) Key areas for follow-up by the Court of Auditors

>TABLE>

"X" means "to be followed up".

Chapter 8

Preaccession aid

TABLE OF CONTENTS

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

Graph 8.1 - Breakdown of commitments by budgetary area in 2002

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.026101.TIF">

NB:

For more detailed information see Diagrams III and IV of Annex I.

Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure accounts.

Graph 8.2 - Breakdown of payments by budgetary area in 2002

>PIC FILE= "C_2003286EN.026102.TIF">

NB:

Sapard 2002 payments were mainly to candidate countries. For more detailed information see Diagrams III and IV of Annex I.

Source:

2002 revenue and expenditure accounts.

>TABLE>

Chapter 9

Administrative expenditure

TABLE OF CONTENTS

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

Table 9.1 - Budgetary year 2002: indicators relating to the quality of the operation of the Directorate-General for Personnel and Administration's supervisory systems and controls

>TABLE>

A: works well, few or minor improvements required.

B: works, but improvements necessary.

C: does not work as intended.

>TABLE>

Table 9.2 - Budgets and staff for 2001 and 2002 - Satellite bodies (SBs)

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

Chapter 10

Financial instruments and banking activities

CONTENTS

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

Table 10.1 - Guarantee Fund situation

>TABLE>

Source:

Commission.

>TABLE>

Table 10.2 - Evolution of the EEA Financial Mechanism

>TABLE>

Source:

Financial Mechanism (differences are due to roundings).

>TABLE>

Table 10.3 - Use of the funds of the EEA Financial Mechanism as at 31 December 2002

>TABLE>

Source:

Financial Mechanism. Provisional data for 2002; rounding differences apply for certain percentages.

>TABLE>