European Parliament resolution on the European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 6/2005 on the Trans-European Network for Transport (TEN-T) (2006/2238(INI))
Date: 2007-02-14
Institutions: Committee on Budgetary Control, European Parliament
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, European Court of Auditors, cross-border cooperation, management audit, report, trans-European network, transport network

C 287 E/342

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

29.11.2007

Wednesday 14 February 2007

P6_TA(2007)0037

The Court of Auditors' Special Report No 6/2005 on the Trans-European
Network for Transport

European Parliament resolution on the European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 6/2005 on
the Trans-European Network for Transport (TEN-T) (2006/2238(INI))

The European Parliament,

— having regard to the European Court of Auditors' Special Report No 6/2005 on the Trans-European

Network for Transport (TEN-T), together with the Commission's replies (1),

— having regard to Article 248(4), second subparagraph, Article 276(3) and Article 280(5) of

the

EC Treaty,

— having regard to the Committee on Budgetary Control working document on the issue (2),

— having regard to its resolution of 26 October 2006 on the draft general budget of the EU for the

financial year 2007 (3),

— having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure,

— having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee

on Transport and Tourism (A6-0022/2007),

1. Welcomes the close and constructive cooperation between the Commission and the Court of Auditors
on the programme for a TEN-T;

2. Welcomes the accurate analysis and clarity of the Special Report, and notes that it shares most of the
European Court of Auditors' concerns and endorses most of its suggestions;

Notes the corrective actions taken by the Commission by, inter alia, modifying the governing Council
the European Court of Auditors' early findings being taken into

3.
regulations in 2004, with some of
consideration;

4.
Points out that the new 2007-2013 financial framework will have a considerable impact on the
TEN-T, as the amount agreed upon is approximately 40 % of that contained in the original Commission
proposal of 14 July 2004 (COM(2004)0475), which proposed an amount of EUR 20 350 million for TEN-T
for the period 2007 to 2013, whereas the financial framework made only EUR 8 013 million available;
believes that, as a consequence, selecting, prioritising and ensuring efficient implementation of the projects
will become even more important;

5.

6.

Regrets the meagre increase in the appropriations available for TEN-T;

Is concerned about the slow speed of implementation of the priority TEN-T projects;

Is of the opinion that the Commission has to further improve cooperation with Member States when

7.
priority projects at national and EU level are selected;

8.
Considers it important for projects which are not completed on schedule to be subject to more strin-
gent checks, with a possibility for subsidies under the multi-annual indicative programme to be transferred
to projects which are progressing more rapidly;

(1) OJ C 94, 21.4.2006, p. 1.
(2) PE 374.326v02-00.
(3) Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2006)0451.

29.11.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 287 E/343

Wednesday 14 February 2007

Stresses the importance of appropriate monitoring of the projects, including on-site checks by the

9.
Commission;

in this context, the first annual activity reports of the European coordinators (1), and
10. Welcomes,
agrees with the Commission's finding that failure to complete the trans-European transport network as a
whole would lead to a loss of economic competitiveness;

Calls on the Member States to develop an integrated transport network policy to ensure the proper
11.
functioning of the trans-European transport network and the efficiency of national networks and to support
a European added-value approach rather than fighting for the principle of ‘fair share’;

Emphasises that the selection of European transport projects has to be based on comprehensive

12.
studies assessing the need for any particular project at a very early stage;

13.
Notes that the presence of a European coordinator has in general had a positive impact on strength-
ening coordination between Member States and has highlighted the need to set up common planning and
management structures;

Emphasises, therefore, that the money available under the 2007-2013 financial framework should be
and

European coordinators'

comments,

taken of

analyses

the

14.
allocated with account being
recommendations;

Asks the Commission to clarify the procedure for the appointment of the European coordinators

15.
when setting up the regulatory framework for the content of their reports;

16.
Is of the opinion that in the current financial environment preference should be given to cross-
border sections of priority projects with high Community added-value and to certain major ‘bottlenecks’
in order to contribute significantly to the completion of a trans-European, interconnected and interoperable
transport network; welcomes in this context the cooperation agreement with the European Investment Bank
(EIB);

Calls on the Commission to continue its efforts to establish clear legal frameworks and procedures,
17.
to guarantee rigorous monitoring and thorough evaluation of projects and programmes, and to draw up a
comprehensive list of clear criteria which allow for the prioritisation of projects in a transparent manner;

Stresses the need to clarify the definitions of the terms ‘studies’ and ‘works’ by harmonising the

18.
structure for the description of works and by standardising technical and financial reporting;

Considers it essential, when selecting and assessing projects, to draw on the experience of external

19.
experts and the EIB and to promote the exchange of experience and information with DG REGIO;

20.
Urges the Commission to establish a clear and transparent division of institutional responsibilities
and to define a framework for the coordination of activities between DG REGIO and DG TREN with a view
to avoiding double-financing of the same projects; considers it good practice to have clear agreements in
place between the Member States and the Commission on the separation of funding from different EU
sources;

Advocates a single entity for managing projects by focusing on the main activity, in the process
21.
maintaining centralised information, facilitating better monitoring by the Commission and improving the
coordination of the different legal, administrative and technical issues between the Member States involved;
believes that a single entity responsible for managing projects could reduce the risk of double funding;

22.
Notes that payments from the Commission have taken excessive time to reach the final beneficiary;
calls therefore for money to be paid out swiftly and efficiently; is of the opinion that in this context a direct
payment flow from the Commission to the beneficiary could be a better solution;

(1) http://ec.europa.eu/ten/transport/coordinators/index_en.htm.

C 287 E/344

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

29.11.2007

Wednesday 14 February 2007

23.
Considers the coordination of TEN-T projects to be essential, particularly in the case of cross-border
projects, and hopes that the establishment of the TEN-T Executive Agency, which has now been announced
by the Commission, may contribute to the implementation of the TEN-T projects; points out that the
Commission should present a progress report on the activities and the possible future added value of the
TEN-T Executive Agency to Parliament before the first reading of the 2008 Budget;

24.
Points out that Council Regulation (EC) No 58/2003 of 19 December 2002 laying down the statute
for executive agencies to be entrusted with certain tasks in the management of Community programmes (1)
in its Article 3(1) a cost-benefit analysis, taking into account a number of factors, before the
requires,
establishment of an executive agency can be requested; regrets that the Commission was not in a position
to present the European Court of Auditors with a satisfactory cost-benefit analysis of the establishment of
an executive agency at the outset; remains, together with the European Court of Auditors, doubtful with
regard to the quality of the revised version of the cost-benefit analysis concerning the externalisation of the
management of Community financial support to the TEN-T networks; for the future, calls on the Commis-
sion to seek a positive opinion on cost-benefit analyses from the European Court of Auditors before for-
warding a request for the establishment of an executive agency to the budgetary authorities;

Regrets that DG TREN's establishment plan does not reflect more adequately the fact that 54 % of its

25.
budget concerns TEN-T, but that only 5 % of its staff work in that area;

Stresses the use of modern project monitoring systems (GPS) and the sharing of best practices for

26.
project implementation monitoring systems;

27.
Notes, in this context, the projected creation of an executive agency in 2007 which, according to the
Commission, will be staffed by eight seconded officials from the Commission, 32 temporary staff (agency)
and 48 contract staff; also notes that the cost of setting up the agency is estimated at EUR 78 600 000;

Underlines the fact that (co-)financing of TEN-T should take place transparently and that therefore

28.
regular information to Parliament and citizens should be guaranteed;

Calls on the European Court of Auditors to verify, at the appropriate time before 2009, the effec-

29.
tiveness of executive agencies and report back to the Committee on Budgetary Control;

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the European

30.
Court of Auditors.

(1) OJ L 11, 16.1.2003, p. 1.

P6_TA(2007)0038

Climate change

The European Parliament,

European Parliament resolution on climate change

— having regard to the twelfth session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 12) to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the second session of the Conference of the
Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (COP/MOP 2) held in Nairobi, Kenya,
from 6 to 17 November 2006,

— having regard to its previous resolutions relating to climate change, and in particular those of
16 November 2005 on ‘Winning the Battle against Global Climate Change’ (1) and of 26 October
2006 on the European Union strategy for the Nairobi Conference (COP 12 and COP/MOP 2) (2),

(1) OJ C 280 E, 18.11.2006, p. 120.
(2) Texts Adopted, P6_TA(2006)0460.