ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Official Journal of the European Union

Special Report 24/2020

‘The Commission’s EU merger control and antitrust proceedings: a need to scale up market oversight’

(2020/C 400/04)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report 24/2020 ‘The Commission’s EU merger control and antitrust proceedings: a need to scale up market oversight’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu
Official Journal of the European Union

Special Report 15/2020

‘Protection of wild pollinators in the EU – Commission initiatives have not borne fruit’

(2020/C 227/07)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report 15/2020 ‘Protection of wild pollinators in the EU – Commission initiatives have not borne fruit’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu
Special report No 6/2021

Financial instruments in cohesion policy at closure of the 2007-2013 period: verification work yielded good results overall, but some errors remained

(2021/C 164/03)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that special report No 6/2021 ‘Financial instruments in cohesion policy at closure of the 2007-2013 period: verification work yielded good results overall, but some errors remained’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu
Official Journal of the European Union

Special report No 24/2021

Performance-based financing in Cohesion policy: worthy ambitions, but obstacles remained in the 2014-2020 period

(2021/C 439/04)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that special report No 24/2021 ‘Performance-based financing in Cohesion policy: worthy ambitions, but obstacles remained in the 2014-2020 period’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu
Special report No 14/2021

Interreg cooperation: The potential of the European Union’s cross-border regions has not yet been fully unlocked

(2021/C 262/04)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that special report No 14/2021 ‘Interreg cooperation: The potential of the European Union’s cross-border regions has not yet been fully unlocked’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ website: http://eca.europa.eu
Official Journal of the European Union

Special report No 4/2022

Investment funds: EU actions have not yet created a true single market benefiting investors

(2022/C 85/05)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that special report No 4/2022 ‘Investment funds: EU actions have not yet created a true single market benefiting investors’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors’ Internet: http://eca.europa.eu.
Official Journal of the European Union

Special report 22/2022:

‘EU support to coal regions – Limited focus on socio-economic and energy transition’

(2022/C 428/03)

The European Court of Auditors has published its special report 22/2022: ‘EU support to coal regions – Limited focus on socio-economic and energy transition’.

The report can be consulted directly or downloaded at the European Court of Auditors’ website: https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=62373
Official Journal of the European Union

Special report 15/2022:

“Measures to widen participation in Horizon 2020 were well designed but sustainable change will mostly depend on efforts by national authorities”

(2022/C 236/06)

The European Court of Auditors has published its special report 15/2022:

“Measures to widen participation in Horizon 2020 were well designed but sustainable change will mostly depend on efforts by national authorities”.

The report can be consulted directly or downloaded at the European Court of Auditors’ website: https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=61346
XI.

The Court notes that in the other areas, payments are still materially affected by errors and the Commission and the Member and other beneficiary states need to make an increased effort to implement adequate supervisory and control systems, so as to improve the handling of the attendant risks. These areas are listed below, namely: Common Agricultural Policy, Structural measures, Internal policies and External actions. (a) In CAP expenditure, the Court found evidence that expenditure which is not subject to IACS, or where IACS is not properly applied or where it has only been recently introduced poses greater risk because control systems are not as effective. In addition, IACS inspection results are insufficiently verified and validated by an independent body and claims for EU aid are not usually checked on the spot by the latter. Clearance systems and post payment checks for CAP subsidies not covered by IACS do not provide reasonable assurance as to compliance with Community legislation. The Court concluded that CAP expenditure, viewed as a whole, was still materially affected by errors. (b) In structural measures, the Court again found that the Commission does not maintain effective supervision to mitigate the risk that the controls delegated to Member States fail to prevent reimbursement of overstated or ineligible expenditure. For both programming periods (1994 to 1999 and 2000 to 2006), the Court found that expenditure was not free of material irregularities. Some programs for the 1994 to 1999 period were closed without a sound basis. (c) In internal policies, despite the progress made in certain areas, the Court's audit revealed weaknesses in the supervisory and control systems which led to a material incidence of errors in payments to beneficiaries. Errors arise mainly from complicated cost reimbursement systems and unclear procedures and instructions governing the different programmes. (d) In external actions, the improvements of the Commission's supervisory and control systems have not yet had an impact at the implementing organisation level, where a material level of errors still exists, which can be attributed to the lack of a comprehensive approach to the supervision, control and audit of these organisations.
OPINION OF THE  EUROPEAN MONETARY INSTITUTE
on a consultation from HM Treasury of the United Kingdom under Article 109f(6) of the Treaty
establishing the European Community and Article 5.3 of the Statute of the EMI
on a Proposal for amendments to the Building Societies Act 1986 through an Order made under Section
1 of the Deregulation and Contracting Out Act 1994.
CON/94/12
1. The present consultation was initiated on 23rd December 1994 by HM Treasury of the United
Kingdom which, for this purpose, transmitted  to the EMI the text of the proposed amendments
and an explanatory memorandum. The submission of the EMI´s opinion on this consultation is
subject to a time limit of one month in accordance with Article 4 of the Council Decision of 22nd
November 1993 on the consultation of the EMI by the authorities of the Member States on draft
legislative provisions (93/717/EC).
 
2. Building societies in the United Kingdom are mutual credit institutions. Their principal function is
to lend to their members (who fund the societies) for the purpose of purchasing property for the
members’ residential use. They operate, and are supervised, under the Building Societies Act
1986, under separate legislation from banks. The proposed amendments to this Act aim in
particular at increasing the proportion of funds which a building society may raise in the wholesale
market, changing certain capital requirements of building societies and obligations concerning their
subsidiaries, as well as removing certain procedural obligations for building societies.
 
3. The EMI´s competence to deal with this consultation is based on Article 1, section 1, fifth indent
of Council Decision 93/717/EC as the proposed amendments may have an impact on the stability
of financial institutions and markets.
 
4. The EMI reviewed the proposed amendments to the Building Societies Act and concluded that the
features of the envisaged changes to the legal and economic structure of building societies do not
appear to have negative consequences for the stability of financial institutions and markets and
therefore do not call for remarks from the EMI´s side.
17th January 1995
OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN MONETARY INSTITUTE
on a consultation from the Austrian Ministry of Finance under Article 109f (6) of the Treaty
establishing the European Community (the “Treaty”) and Article 5.3 of the Statute of the
EMI concerning a Federal Law amending the Stock Exchange Law of 1989, the Stock
Exchange Fund Law of 1993, the Law to Introduce the Code of Civil Procedure, the
Securities Supervision Law, the Joint Stock Companies Law and the Banking Act (the “draft
law”)
(CON/97/21)
1. On 10 September 1997 the EMI received a request for an opinion on the draft law, which aims at
restructuring the organisation of the Austrian Stock Exchange and adjusting the admission
requirements for membership of the Austrian Stock Exchange. The draft law was submitted to the
EMI, together with an explanatory memorandum, in German.
 
2. The EMI’s competence to deliver an opinion is based on Article 1.1, second indent, of the Council
Decision (93/717/EC) of 22 November 1993, as the draft law eliminates an obligation to consult the
Oesterreichische Nationalbank.
 
3. Taking into consideration the principle of free movement of capital,  the EMI has no objection to the
deletion of the obligation to consult the Oesterreichische Nationalbank before determining the
trading hours in the event that trading with foreign currencies is affected. The EMI welcomes the
fact that the draft law foresees the possibility for entities located in the EEA which fulfil certain
criteria to become members of the Austrian Stock exchange. The draft law does not contain any
provision which could have a negative affect on the stability of financial institutions and markets.
The EMI has no objection to this opinion being made public.
22 October 1997
6 February 1998
OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN MONETARY INSTITUTE
at the request of the Bank of England under Article 109f(6) of the Treaty establishing the
European Community (the “Treaty”) and Article 5.3 of the Statute of the EMI concerning
the Financial Markets and Insolvency (Definition of Money Market Contract) Regulations
1997
(CON/97/28)
1. On 31 October 1997 the EMI received from the Bank of England a request for an opinion on a
proposed statutory instrument, the Financial Markets and Insolvency (Definition of Money
Market Contract) Regulations 1997 (the “proposed regulations”).
2. The EMI’s competence to deliver an opinion is based on Article 1.1, fourth and fifth indents, of
the Council Decision of 22 November 1993 (93/717/EC) on consultation of the EMI by the
authorities of the Member States on draft legislative provisions, as the Regulations contain
provisions concerning clearing and payment systems and rules applicable to financial institutions
which might influence the stability of financial institutions and markets.
3. The purpose of the Regulations is to expand the existing definition in the relevant part of UK law
of a money market contract, as it currently appears in the Financial Markets and Insolvency
(Money Market) 1995 Regulations, (SI 1995/2049), at regulation 2. That definition states that a
money market contract means a contract for the acquisition or disposal of currency of the
United Kingdom or of any other country or territory. The proposed regulations expand that
definition by adding reference to the ECU, which does not currently fall within the definition
because the ECU is a unit of account, rather than a currency.
4. The general views of the EMI on the 1995 regulations referred to above were set out in the
EMI’s opinion CON/95/10 dated 21st July 1995. In that opinion the EMI expressed its support
for the overall scope and purpose of those regulations, which is to improve the security and
- 2 -
stability of the UK financial markets, in this case by applying special rules that take precedence
over the normal provisions of UK insolvency law in relation to the default of a member of certain
key clearing houses and exchanges.
5. The EMI understands that the purpose of the proposed regulations is to ensure that spot and
forward contracts in ECU are capable of being within the netting and settlement scheme of
ECHO, the only foreign exchange clearing system to which the 1995 regulations so far apply,
and welcomes the proposed regulations accordingly.
6. The EMI has no objection to its op inion being made public.
6 February 1998.
OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN MONETARY INSTITUTE
at the request of the Banca d’Italia under Article 109f (6) of the Treaty establishing the
European Community (the “Treaty”),  Article 5.3 of the Statute of the EMI and Council
Decision 93/717/EC of 22 November 1993, concerning further draft amendments to some
provisions of the Statute of Banca d’Italia (the “Draft Statute Amendments”)
(CON/98/13)
1. On 26 February 1998, the EMI received a request for an opinion on the Draft Statute
Amendments from the Governor of Banca d’Italia. An Explanatory Memorandum was also
submitted to the EMI. This opinion is based on the English translation of the draft submitted to
the EMI by the consulting authority.
2. The EMI’s competence to deliver an opinion is based on Articl e 1.1, second indent, of the
Council Decision (93/717/EC) of 22 November 1993 on the consultation of the EMI by the
authorities of the Member States on draft legislative provisions, as the Draft Statute
Amendments contain provisions concerning the status and powers of the national central bank.
3. The EMI has analysed the proposed amendments to the Statute of Banca d’Italia (the
“Statute”). Such amendments aim at further enhancing the independence of the Bank by
suppressing the need for the approval of the Minister of Treasury for the establishment of
special funds and extraordinary reserves, for the manner and the form of the Bank’s investments
and for the distribution of dividends instalments. The EMI welcomes these changes, which
achieve the objective of enhancing the independence of the Bank. The EMI takes note that
repeal of Article  58 will also simplify the Bank’s accounting commitments.
The EMI confirms that it has no objection to this opinion being made public by the competent Italian
authorities at their discretion.
6 March 1998
Opinion of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank

of 1 April 2004

on a recommendation from the Council of the European Union on the appointment of a member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank

(CON/2004/11)

(2004/C 87/11)

1. By letter of 30 March 2004, the Council of the European Union requested the Governing Council of the European Central Bank (ECB) to deliver its opinion on Council Recommendation 2004/296/EC of 30 March 2004 on the appointment of a member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank(1).

2. The above-mentioned recommendation, which will be submitted for decision to the Heads of State or Government of the Member States which have adopted the euro after consultation of the Governing Council of the ECB and the European Parliament, recommends that Mr. José Manuel González-Páramo be appointed as member of the Executive Board of the ECB for a term of office of eight years with effect from 1 June 2004.

3. The Governing Council of the ECB is of the opinion that the proposed candidate is a person of recognised standing and professional experience in monetary or banking matters as required by Article 112(2)(b) of the Treaty establishing the European Community.

4. The Governing Council of the ECB has no objection to the Council's recommendation on the appointment of the proposed candidate as member of the Executive Board of the ECB.

5. The Governing Council of the ECB has adopted this opinion in accordance with Article 112(2)(b) of the Treaty and Article 11.2 and Article 43.3 of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank.

Done at Frankfurt am Main on 1 April 2004.

On behalf of the Governing Council of the ECB

The President of the ECB

Jean-Claude Trichet

(1) OJ L 97, 1.4.2004, p. 65.
2.

The ECB's competence to deliver an opinion is based on the first indent of Article 105(4) of the Treaty establishing the European Community and on Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2494/95 of 23 October 1995 concerning harmonised indices of consumer prices (1). In accordance with the first sentence of Article 17.5 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Central Bank, the Governing Council has adopted this opinion.
1.2

The development of product-specific standards for quality adjustment methods promises important improvements. The ECB endorses the approach adopted by the draft regulation for setting standards for quality adjustment on a case-by-case basis, and for the classification of alternative methods for quality adjustment according to their appropriateness. Nevertheless, such standards may still leave room for divergent practices between national HICPs, so the full harmonisation of quality adjustment methods should be the ultimate aim. Moreover, as the implementation of agreed and effective standards is crucial, the ECB strongly recommends accompanying the implementation of the draft regulation by regular reporting on the progress of its implementation by the Member States and by strict compliance monitoring by the European Commission. This monitoring should aim at urging Member States to effectively apply A-methods for quality adjustments, since this is the best way to enhance both the HICP's accuracy and its comparability across Member States. If it were to be shown that such measures are not sufficient to lead to the required degree of comparability, the ECB would welcome the adoption of measures, as foreseen in Article 1(3) of the draft regulation, to make product-specific standards for quality adjustment legally binding.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 180/1

OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 3 July 2008

at the request of the Council of the European Union on a proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 974/98 as regards the introduction of the euro in Slovakia and on a proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 2866/98 as regards the conversion rate to the euro for Slovakia

(CON/2008/28)

(2008/C 180/01)

Introduction and legal basis

On 20 May 2008, the European Central Bank (ECB) received a request from the Council of the European Union for an opinion on a proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 974/98 as regards the introduction of the euro in Slovakia (1). On 30 June 2008, the ECB received a request from the Council of the European Union for an opinion on a proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 2866/98 as regards the conversion rate to the euro for Slovakia (2).

The ECB's competence to deliver an opinion is based on Article 123(5) of the Treaty establishing the European Community. In accordance with the first sentence of Article 17.5 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Central Bank, the Governing Council has adopted this opinion.

Observations

1. The proposed regulations will enable the introduction of the euro as the currency of Slovakia following the abrogation of Slovakia's derogation in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 122(2) of the Treaty.

2. The ECB welcomes the proposed regulations.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 3 July 2008. The President of the ECB Jean-Claude TRICHET

(1) COM(2008) 250 final.

(2) SEC(2008) 2107 final.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 246/1

OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 29 September 2009

on a proposal for a Council Regulation on the introduction of the euro

(codified version)

(CON/2009/76)

2009/C 246/01

Introduction and legal basis

On 15 July 2009, the European Central Bank (ECB) received a request from the Council of the European Union for an opinion on a proposal for a Council Regulation on the introduction of the euro (codified version) (1) (hereinafter the ‘proposed regulation’).

The ECB’s competence to deliver an opinion is based on Article 123(4), third sentence, of the Treaty establishing the European Community. In accordance with the first sentence of Article 17.5 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Central Bank, the Governing Council has adopted this opinion.

The ECB generally welcomes codification of the acquis communautaire, and in particular in the field of economic and monetary union, which contributes to a clear, effective and transparent legal framework.

A specific drafting proposal is set out in the Annex accompanied by explanatory text to this effect.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 29 September 2009. The President of the ECB Jean-Claude TRICHET

(1) COM(2009) 323 final.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 213/21

OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 4 July 2011

on a proposal for a Council decision on the signature and conclusion of the Monetary Agreement between the European Union and the French Republic on keeping the euro in Saint-Barthélemy following the amendment of its status with regard to the European Union

(CON/2011/56)

2011/C 213/07

Introduction and legal basis

On 29 June 2011, the European Central Bank (ECB) received a request from the Council of the European Union for an opinion on a proposal for a Council decision on the signature and conclusion of the Monetary Agreement between the European Union and the French Republic on keeping the euro in Saint-Barthélemy following the amendment of its status with regard to the European Union (1) (hereinafter the ‘proposed decision’) and on the text of the Monetary Agreement attached to the proposed decision.

The ECB’s competence to deliver an opinion is based on Articles 127(4) and 282(5) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union since the proposed decision relates to a monetary agreement falling under Article 219(3) of the Treaty. In accordance with the first sentence of Article 17.5 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Central Bank, the Governing Council has adopted this opinion.

General observations

The ECB welcomes the proposed decision as the text of the attached Monetary Agreement duly reflects the ECB’s observations and drafting proposals in ECB Opinion CON/2011/22 of 11 March 2011 on a recommendation for a Council decision on the arrangements for the negotiation of a monetary agreement with the French Republic, acting for the benefit of the French overseas collectivity of Saint-Barthélemy (2) and the ECB’s position expressed during the negotiation process.

Nevertheless, the ECB has specific drafting proposals related to the proposed decision aimed at ensuring consistency between the Council Decision on the arrangements for the negotiation of a monetary agreement with the French Republic, acting for the benefit of the French overseas collectivity of Saint-Barthélemy (3), and the proposed decision.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 4 July 2011. The President of the ECB Jean-Claude TRICHET

(1) COM(2011) 360 final.

(2) Published simultaneously with this opinion.

(3) Not yet published.