Resolution of the European Parliament of 29 April 2015 with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2013
Date: 2015-04-29
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Environment Agency, budgetary discharge, financial year, general budget (EU)








L_2015255EN.01022901.xml










30.9.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 255/229








            RESOLUTION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
         
of 29 April 2015
         
with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2013


THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,






—


having regard to its decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2013,










—


having regard to Rule 94 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A8-0083/2015),










A.


whereas, according to its financial statements, the final budget of the European Environment Agency (‘the Agency’) for the financial year 2013 was EUR 49 270 722, representing an increase of 18,16 % compared to 2012; whereas the increase is mostly related to operating expenditure for strategic actions,










B.


whereas according to its financial statements, the contribution of the Union to the Agency's budget for 2013 amounted to EUR 34 886 367, representing a decrease of 1,35 % compared to 2012,










C.


whereas the Court of Auditors, in its report on the annual accounts of the European Environment Agency for the financial year 2013 (‘the Court's report’), has stated that it has obtained reasonable assurances that the Agency's annual accounts are reliable and that the underlying transactions are legal and regular,






Follow-up of 2012 discharge









1.


Notes from the Court's report that the status of the two comments from the Court's 2012 report are marked as ‘Ongoing’;












2.


Acknowledges from the Agency that:






—


the high level of mission expenses incurred by its Executive Director in 2012 was due to the participation in the ‘Rio+20’ conference in Brazil, as well as related Brussels-based missions, and that the number of the Executive Director's missions has significantly decreased since 2012,










—


one of the means of communicating its work results and direct impact on Union citizens is through multimedia material available on its website;









Budget and financial management









3.


Notes that budget monitoring efforts during the financial year 2013 resulted in a budget implementation rate of 98,66 % and that he payment appropriations execution rate was 88,92 %;





Commitments and carry-overs









4.


Acknowledges that the Court's annual audit has found no notable issues as regards the level of carry-overs in 2013; takes note of the Agency's compliance with the principle of annuality and the timely execution of its budget;





Procurement and recruitment procedures









5.


Acknowledges from the Agency that it produced a multiannual staff policy plan for 2013-2015, in line with the Commission's guidelines, which was approved by its Management Board; observes that the Agency had 209 staff in 2013, consisting of officials, temporary agents, contractual agents and seconded national experts, representing a decrease of eight posts in comparison with 2012;












6.


Welcomes the fact that the Agency is committed to reviewing its staffing and organisational structure on a continual basis in order to ensure that the Agency carries out its work and addresses its challenges as effectively as possible; welcomes, in this respect, the fact that in 2013, two AD posts were added to the establishment table to cover new tasks related to two important topics: climate change mitigation and quality air reporting;












7.


Notes that the Agency dedicates 71 % of its human resources to operational tasks and that this represents a slight increase compared to the situation in 2012; encourages the Agency to make further progress in this direction;





Prevention and management of conflicts of interests and transparency









8.


Acknowledges from the Agency that following the assessment of its exposure to conflicts of interests and the mapping of the existing rules and practices in the Agency, as well as the assessment of the implementation of those rules, it finalised a policy on management and prevention of conflicts of interests which was adopted by its Management Board at its meeting held in June 2014;












9.


Notes that that policy specifies that staff members and the members of the Scientific Committee must sign declarations of interests; acknowledges that the declarations of interests of the members of the Scientific Committee are made publically available; deeply regrets that the declarations of interests of the members of the Management Board, the Executive Director and senior management are not publicly available; does not agree with the decision of the Management Board that the CVs and declarations of interests of its members must not be published on the Agency's website; calls once again on the Agency to remedy this issue as a matter of urgency;





Internal controls









10.


Takes note from the Court's report that the Agency has awarded grants under five grant programmes to consortia consisting of environmental institutions and bodies in Europe, United Nations organisations and national environment organisations; observes that the total grant expenditure in 2013 was EUR 13 900 000, representing 31 % of the total operating expenditure; acknowledges that following the Court's comment of 2014, the Agency intensified its checks on the eligibility and accuracy of staff costs claimed under the grant programmes, as these represent the major part of total costs;












11.


Observes that the Agency's ex ante verifications consist of a desk analysis of cost claims, while on the spot verifications at beneficiary level are rare; notes with concern that existing controls provide only limited assurances as to the eligibility and accuracy of the costs claimed by beneficiaries; acknowledges however that for the transactions audited by the Court, supporting documentation was obtained which provided reasonable assurances as to their legality and regularity;












12.


Acknowledges from the Agency that in 2014, it offered detailed explanations and training to the beneficiaries regarding the criteria for eligibility of costs, and in particular, the acceptable methodologies for calculating staff costs, all described in a written manual; notes furthermore that the Agency conducted four on-the-spot verifications with the objective of verifying the calculation of the claimed costs based on relevant documentation and analysing the reliability of the internal control systems put in place; takes note that the verifications included checking the payments made in 2013, which covered 20,45 % of beneficiaries' total staff costs, and notes furthermore that 0,12 % of the controlled costs were considered as ineligible; calls on the Agency however to further improve the level of its ex ante verifications to ensure the eligibility of beneficiaries and to inform the discharge authority on further progress in this regard;





Internal audit









13.


Notes from the Agency's annual activity report that its Internal Audit Capability (IAC) finalised the audit report on the management of earmarked funds, with the objective of assessing the overall impact on the Agency of the projects financed with external assigned revenue; acknowledges furthermore that the IAC actively supported the team of external auditors commissioned by the Commission to look at the financial cost statements for 2010-2011;












14.


Takes note from the Agency that the Commission's Internal Audit Service (IAS) followed up on the implementation of its earlier recommendations through a desk review, and that all open recommendations were closed on 31 December 2013;





Other comments









15.


Calls on the Agency to make clear in its future internal and external communications that it receives funds made available from the Union budget (Union subsidy) instead of a Commission or Community subsidy;












16.


Refers, for other observations of a cross-cutting nature accompanying its decision on discharge, to its resolution of 29 April 2015 (1) on the performance, financial management and control of the agencies.






(1)  Texts adopted of that date, P8_TA(2015)0130 (see page 431 of this Official Journal).