WRITTEN QUESTION E-2756/02

by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 October 2002)

Subject: Politically motivated appointments in the Polish Sapard paying agency

According to recent reports, key officials in the Polish paying agency for the Sapard programme have been replaced by others on political grounds. The reports about these political appointments of members of the Polish Peasants' Party indicate that the Commission have contacted the Polish authorities about this matter.

1. Have the recent appointments in Poland in any way breached the agreements between Poland and the EU on Sapard?

2. Does the Commission take the view that the current paying agency can operate independently, and is its staff able and qualified to carry out the job according to the agreements with the European Communities? How does the Commission monitor the activities of the Sapard agency before enlargement?

3. Has the Commission received information about similar political appointments in Sapard paying agencies in other candidate countries?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(11 November 2002)

Although the issue of staff appointments is not explicitly addressed in the Multiannual Financing Agreement (MAFA), Article 5(4) in Section A requires that any proposed changes in the implementing or paying arrangements of the Sapard Agency after its accreditation are submitted by the Competent Authority to the Commission for examination in advance of their implementation.

Given the high level of autonomy the regional office directors have in Poland (which includes signing contracts with beneficiaries), it is reasonable to consider them as key staff, and thus effectively subject to Article 5(4). The Polish authorities were reminded that, in future, the Commission would expect to be informed in advance of such changes, and were asked for detailed information about the reports of personnel changes.

The decision conferring management of aid to Poland was taken in June 2002. Based on visits to regional offices and the Sapard Agency headquarters, and additional written representations from the Polish authorities, the Commission concluded at that time that there were sufficient staff in situ to administer the programme, both at regional and central levels.

The Commission has since received additional written assurances from the National Authorising Officer that, of the sixteen regional office directors, two have been dismissed and two have resigned. The same statistics apply for the thirty-two deputy directors. The Polish authorities have also provided (as requested) detailed lists with the names of individuals at each regional office. These facts were verified during a recent mission.

As far as monitoring is concerned, the Commission has several tools at its disposal. Typically, the first step post-accreditation is to follow up the points raised in the Letter of Observations, which usually refer to suggested control improvements. There is also a requirement for the Internal Audit departments of each Sapard Agency to reperform the application selection and claim authorisation processes for the first batch of submissions, to ensure the soundness of the decision making. The results of this exercise are reported to the Commission, thereby providing an early signal of any potential problems. In addition, prior to the acceptance and payment of a quarterly expenditure declaration, the Commission needs evidence that such a report has been received and that it is considered satisfactory.

Over the longer term, there are three additional monitoring processes:

- The accredited Sapard agencies are subject to the same financial and conformity clearance exercises as the paying agencies of Member States under the European Agriculture Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF).

- Per Article 7 (Annex, Section B) of the MAFA, each candidate country must set up a Monitoring Committee, the purpose of which is, inter alia, to review progress made towards achieving the objectives set out in the Programme, and to propose modifications to that programme if appropriate.

- The agencies are also required by the MAFA (q.v. the Annex, under Article 8 of Section B), to submit annual programme implementation reports for review.

The Commission is concerned with the technical competence and procedural knowledge of those recruited both pre- and post-accreditation, not their political affiliations. A similar situation arose in Bulgaria, where one of the two deputy directors of the Sapard Agency was removed without prior notification to the Commission, and there were allegations that many other people in situ at the time of accreditation were facing the same fate.

A claim for payment was suspended until the facts of the case were established, achieved via a request for information. The information was duly supplied, enabling the payment to be made, and further audit comfort was obtained through a follow-up mission, the findings of which were satisfactory.