Opinion No 1/2011 on a proposal for a regulation of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 215/2008 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European Development Fund, as regards the European External Action Service (pursuant to Article 287(4), TFEU)
Date: 2011-03-01
Institutions: European Court of Auditors
Subjects: EU office or agency, European Development Fund, financial regulation








C_2011066EN.01000101.xml










1.3.2011   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 66/1





OPINION No 1/2011
on a proposal for a regulation of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 215/2008 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European Development Fund, as regards the European External Action Service
(pursuant to Article 287(4), TFEU)
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE COURT OF AUDITORS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 287(4) thereof,
Having regard to the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part, signed in Cotonou on 23 June 2000 (1) and revised in Luxembourg on 25 June 2005 (2) hereinafter referred to as the ‘ACP-EC Partnership Agreement’,
Having regard to Council Decision 2001/822/EC of 27 November 2001 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Community (3), amended by Decision 2007/249/EC (4),
Having regard to the Internal Agreement between the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on the financing of Community aid under the multiannual financial framework for the period 2008 to 2013 in accordance with the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement and the allocation of financial assistance for the Overseas Countries and Territories to which Part Four of the EC Treaty applies hereinafter referred to ‘the Internal Agreement’, and in particular Article 10(2) thereof (5),
Having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1081/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 amending Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, as regards the European External Action Service (6),
Having regard to the Court's Opinion No 4/2010 on a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, as regards the European External Action Service (7),
Having regard to the Commission's proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 215/2008 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European Development Fund, as regards the European External Action Service, of 20 December 2010 (8),
Having regard to the Council's request for an opinion on the abovementioned proposal received at the Court on 14 January 2011,
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION:


General comments








1.


The proposal for a Council Regulation on which the Court of Auditors’ opinion is requested aims to amend the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th European Development Fund (hereinafter ‘EDF’) in order to adapt its rules to the specific nature of the European External Action Service whose existence is foreseen in Article 27(3) of the Treaty on the European Union, as modified by the Lisbon Treaty which entered into force on 1 December 2009.










2.


While taking into account the specificity of the EDF, the changes proposed by the Commission are in line with the modifications brought to the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget for the same purpose by Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1081/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 amending Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, as regards the European External Action Service.










3.


The new structure of the EEAS and the duties of the Head of Union Delegation will mean that he will report to two different bodies. As already mentioned in its Opinion No 4/2010, the Court notes that care will need to be taken in managing the new structure, inter alia, to avoid conflicts of priorities. The Court also has the same concerns as regards (a) the significant derogations to the Financial Regulation applicable to the 10th EDF, since subdelegations of the Commission powers of EDF implementation will be granted to authorising officers (Heads of Delegation) who will no longer belong to Commission departments; (b) the increased complexity in the financial management and reporting missions and operations of the Delegations; (c) the considerable uncertainty regarding the implementation by Union Delegations of the resources foreseen for support expenditure linked to the EDF under Article 6 of the Internal Agreement, an issue which is not clarified in the proposal.






Specific comments








4.


In order to ensure alignment with the provisions of the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget, the following sentence should be added to the proposed last paragraph of Article 17: ‘Those arrangements shall not contain any derogation from the provisions of the Financial Regulation’.










5.


As regards the subparagraph which the Commission proposes to add in Article 39(1), the Court draws attention to the risk of ambiguity in the term ‘the entire implementation of EDF resources’ in relation to the part of the EDF resources which is managed by the European Investment Bank.





This Opinion was adopted by Chamber III, headed by Mr Jan KINŠT, Member of the Court of Auditors, in Luxembourg at its meeting of 1 February 2011.


For the Court of Auditors

Vítor Manuel da SILVA CALDEIRA

President





(1)  OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 3.

(2)  OJ L 287, 28.10.2005, p. 4.

(3)  OJ L 314, 30.11.2001, p. 1 and OJ L 324, 7.12.2001, p. 1.

(4)  OJ L 109, 26.4.2007, p. 33.

(5)  OJ L 247, 9.9.2006, p. 32.

(6)  OJ L 311, 26.11.2010, p. 9.

(7)  OJ C 145, 3.6.2010, p. 4.

(8)  COM(2010) 795 final.