InternalAuditwhoisresponsibletoEIB’smanagementandAuditCommitteeforconductinginitial
investigationsintoallegationsofirregularities concerningEIBorEIB-managedfunds.EIB’sInternalAudit(IA)hasreviewedallrelevantdocumentsandproceduresandhasinterviewedstaffconcerned.
TheCommissionhasreceivedthefollowinginformationfromOLAF:
InlateMay2003,theEIBsentacompletedossierregardingthismattertoOLAF.OLAFispresently
analysing this information and will shortly decide on whether it should open an investigationregardingtheallegationsofirregularitiesinconnectionwithEIBloanstoBiopain.
(2004/C58E/096) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1569/03
byErikMeijer(GUE/NGL)totheCommission
(8May2003)
Subject:Creation of a legal distinction between the conflicting roles of accountants as auditors and
consultantsoflargecompanies
1. IstheCommissionawareofthefindingsoftheinvestigationintofinancialdirectorsandchartered
accountantscommissionedbytheFinanciëelDagbladnewspaperandtheNovaTVprogramme,whichquestioned 935 financial directors of the largest companies in the Netherlands and 1000 charteredaccountantsfromtheNivraregisterofAuditors?
2. WhatistheCommission’sviewofthefactthatamajorityoftheaccountantssurveyedsaidthattheir
consultancyandauditingworkforcompanieswascloselyorinextricablylinkedandthattheyevencarriedoutactivitiesrelatingtotheprivateinterestsofdirectors?
3. DoestheCommissionsharemyviewthatthismaygiverisetoaconflictbetweenthepresumed
independenceofauditorsandtheirdependentpositioninthattheyarepartlyresponsiblefortheeffortsofcompanymanagementtoreduceartificiallytheprofitstobedeclaredtothetaxauthoritiesorincreaseartificiallytheprofitforecastsforshareholders,aswellasfortherewardsandgoldenhandshakespaidtodirectors,whicharenotusuallydisclosedtothepublic?
4. DoestheCommissionconsideritdesirablethatthetwoconflictingresponsibilitiesofaccountants
should be strictly separated? Which EU Member States already have legislation separating theseresponsibilities? What does the Commissionthink ofthe proposalin the Netherlands to appoint theFinancialMarketsAuthorityasanindependentandpubliclyfundedsupervisorybodyforaccountants?
5. HowcansuchadistinctionalsobeintroducedinMemberStateswhereitdoesnotalreadyexist?Is
theCommissiontakinganyinitiativesinthisdirection?
AnswergivenbyMrBolkesteinonbehalfoftheCommission
(13June2003)
1. TheCommissionisnotawareofthedetailsofthisinvestigation.2. InMay2002,theCommissionissuedaRecommendationon‘StatutoryAuditors’Independenceinthe
Union(
1).ThestartingpointoftheRecommendationisthatastatutoryauditorshouldnotcarryouta
statutory audit if there are any financial, business or other relationships between him and his client(includingtheprovisionofadditionalservices)thatwouldcompromisehisindependence.6.3.2004EN C58E/79 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
3. FromaEuropeanperspective,theroleofthestatutoryauditordoesnotincludeaspecificdutyin
relationtotaxadviceorotherformsofadvicebutdealsexclusivelywithprovidinganopiniononthetrueandfairviewoffinancialstatements.
4. Theresponsibilityofthestatutoryauditoristoperformthoroughauditsofthefinancialstatements
inthepublicinterest.Businessandfinancialrelationshipsandtheprovisionofnon-auditservicestotheauditclientmaynotunderminethisresponsibility.Thisdoesnotimplyastrictprohibitionofnonauditservices.TheCommissionisawarethatthereispressuretorestrictevenfurtherthepossibilityforanauditor to provide additional services and will conduct a study on the impact of a more restrictiveapproach.
ThisstudyisoneoftheactionsincludedintheCommunicationonreinforcingstatutoryauditinthe
UnionwhichtheCommissionissuedon21May2003.Theprovisionofadditionalservicesisprohibited
inGreece,FranceandItaly(forlistedcompanies).
PublicoversightoftheauditprofessionintheUnionisoneoftheotherprioritiesintheCommunication.
Froma European perspective, it is important that Member States’ oversight fulfilscertain (functional)qualitycriteria.However,thestructureofoversightisprimarilyaresponsibilityforMemberStates.
5. Theaforementionedstudyintotheconsequencesofastrict(er)prohibitionaswellasthepractical
experiencewiththeimplementationoftheCommissionRecommendation,willallowtheCommissiontodecideinduecoursewhetherandwhichfurtheractionmaybeneededinthisarea.
(1) OJL191,19.7.2002.
(2004/C58E/097) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1574/03
byChrisDavies(ELDR)totheCommission
(8May2003)
Subject:Stateaidapprovalforcoalminemethaneextraction
HastheCommissionreceivedanapplicationfromtheUKGovernmentforstateaidapprovaltograntthe
coalminemethaneindustryan80%exemptionfromtheUKclimatechangelevy?
Ifso,whatresponsehastheCommissionmadeorwhenwillitdoso?
AnswergivenbyMrMontionbehalfoftheCommission
(16June2003)
TheCommissionhasnotreceivedanapplicationfromtheBritishGovernmentforstateaidapprovalto
grantthecoalminemethaneindustryan80%exemptionfromtheBritishClimateChangeLevy(CCL).
The Commission has, however, received a notification from the British Government to grant the
productionofelectricityusingcoalminemethaneafullexemptionfromtheBritishCCL.TheCommissionhasopenedtheformalinvestigationprocedureaccordingtoArticle88(2)ECTreatyonthisnotificationasithasdoubts,atfirstsight,thattheaidgrantediscompatiblewithStateaidrules.ThisdecisionwaspublishedintheOfficialJournal(
1),andthirdpartieswereinvitedtosubmitcommentswithinonemonth
fromthedateofpublication.TheCommissionhasreceivedthirdparty’scommentsattheendofAprilC58E/80 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion