REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the follow-up to the discharge for the 2015 financial year (Summary)
Date: 2017-07-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Budget, European Commission
Subjects: EU control, EU expenditure, EU financial instrument, audit, budgetary control, budgetary discharge, financial management, financial year, general budget (EU), management audit

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 10.7.2017  
COM(2017) 379 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

on the follow-up to the discharge for the 2015 financial year (Summary) 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
REPORT ON THE FOLLOW-UP TO THE REQUESTS MADE BY THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT IN 
ITS DISCHARGE RESOLUTIONS AND THE COUNCIL IN ITS DISCHARGE RECOMMENDATION FOR 
BUDGETARY YEAR 20151  

0. 

INTRODUCTION 

On  27  April  2017,  the  European  Parliament  –  on  a  recommendation  by  the 
Council  –  granted  the  Commission  discharge  for  the  financial  year  2015. 
Discharge  is  the  process  by  which  the  European  Parliament  and  Council  scrutinise 
the  implementation  of  the  EU  budget  and hold  the  Commission  accountable  for  its 
financial management. The Annual report and special reports of the European Court 
of  Auditors  are  key  inputs  along  with  the  Commission's  own  reporting  on  the  EU 
accounts as well as the management and performance of the EU budget. 

The discharge procedure for the financial year 2015 was throughout marked by 
a  fruitful  interinstitutional  exchange  of  views  on  how  to  improve  the 
management  of  EU  funds  for  the  benefit  of  the  EU  citizens.  During  the  closing 
debate in the European Parliament in April 2017, the key actors from the European 
Parliament and the Council supported a stronger focus on results, confirming that 
achieving results with the EU budget is as important as ensuring that formal rules are 
complied  with.  This  is  fully  in  line  with  the  Commission's  initiative  'EU  Budget 
Focused  on  Results'  which  aims  at  strengthening  the  systematic  focus  upon 
performance  and  results,  while  making  it  easier  for  citizens  and  stakeholders  to 
understand  the  objectives  and  impacts  of  the  EU  budget.  The  European  Court  of 
Auditors also pledged to continuously develop its annual report and focus more on 
performance aspects.  

Discharge is a continuous process which provides an opportunity to learn from 
the past to improve future EU spending. During the plenary debate, Mr Zeller, as 
rapporteur  for  the  Commission's  discharge,  expressed  a  wish  that  the  discharge 
resolution would be properly followed up. In order to provide faster feedback on the 
key priorities of the European Parliament and the Council, the Commission decided 
this year to proceed with this follow-up report already in July.  

This  report  follows  up  on  the  key  requests  made  by  the  European  Parliament 
and  the  Council  in  the  discharge  and  is  part  of  the  EU  Budget  Integrated 
Financial Reporting Package 2016. It focusses in particular on: 1) The future of EU 
finances, 2) Budgetary and financial management, 3) Getting results from the Union 
budget, and 4) The management of the African Peace Facility. 

The  detailed  replies  to  the  specific  discharge  requests  made  by  the  European 
Parliament and Council, including requests made in relation to special reports of the 
European  Court of  Auditors also covered by the 2015  discharge  procedure, will be 
published at a later stage. 

1. 

KEY REQUESTS RELATED TO THE FUTURE OF EU FINANCES 

The rapporteur, Mr Zeller, noted that the EU budget in 2015 had to support longer 
term  political  objectives  such  as  the  political  priorities  of  the  Commission  and  the 

1 Pursuant to Article 319(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Article 166 of the Financial Regulation, and 
Article 119(5) of the 9th European Development Funds (EDF) Financial Regulation and Article 144 of the 10th EDF Financial Regulation.  

EN 

2 

 EN 

 
                                                 
Europe  2020  strategy  while  also  having  to  respond  to  crisis  situations  in  various 
policy areas, including migration. In this context, he raised the questions of how to 
achieve  a  better  balance  between  political  priorities  and  budgetary  resources  in  the 
future  as  well  as  how  to  ensure  parliamentary  control  with  all  funds  linked  to  EU 
strategies.  

Mr Zeller also expressed concern about the use of financial mechanisms 'not directly 
financed by the EU budget or recorded in the Union balance sheet' and the possible 
risks associated to an increased use of financial instruments. 

These  issues  were  discussed  extensively  during  the  discharge  proceedings  and  will 
form part of the overall reflection process to prepare the next Multiannual Financial 
Framework  (MFF).  The  Commission's  White  Paper  on  the  Future  of  Europe 
published in March 2017 launched the overall debate on Europe in 2025, including 
Europe's financial outlook, set out in detail in a reflection paper on the future of EU 
finances of 28 June 2017. 

The political process will be complemented by a review of the spending programmes' 
efficiency, effectiveness and EU added value. This will support the preparation of the 
next generation of funds and the modernisation of the EU budget. 

In addition, the Commission is continuously improving its reporting on performance 
as part of its strategy 'Budget Focused on Results'. The 2018 draft budget provides 
programme statements which show what the programmes have achieved to date and 
what  is  expected  of  them  in  terms  of  results,  progress,  and  challenges  ahead.  This 
supports a performance based budgeting approach. 

Sections  1.1  and  1.2  comment  in  more  detail  on  the  two  main  concerns  of  the 
European Parliament.  

1.1.  

A NEW BALANCE MUST BE STRUCK BETWEEN POLITICAL AGENDA SETTING, POLICY 
IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCIAL FRAMEWORKS (§§ 9-17): 

The  European  Parliament  (EP)  endorsed  the  suggestions  made  by  the  European 
Court  of  Auditors  (ECA)  in  its  "Briefing  paper  on  the  mid-term  review"  of 
28.10.2016 that 'it is time for the Commission to explore options such as: 

-  a  rolling  budgeting  programme  with  a  five  year  planning  horizon,  clause(s)  of 
revision by objectives and policies and a rolling evaluation programme; 

- determining the duration of programmes and schemes on policy needs rather than 
basing  it  on  the  length  of  the  financial  planning  period;  requiring  Member  States 
and  the  Commission  to  present  well-justified  needs  for  (a)  Union  funding  and  (b) 
results to be achieved, before spending is set;" 

The Commission will indeed examine the most suitable duration of the next MFF 
with a view to striking the right balance between the duration of the respective terms 
of office of the members of the EP and the Commission and the need for stability for 
programming cycles and investment predictability.  

The MFF is discussed and agreed as a package with the legislation on own resources. 
As this determines the annual ceilings on commitment appropriations corresponding 
to  the  Union's  major  sectors  of  activity  and  the  annual  ceilings  on  payment 
appropriations, the legislation  on  spending  programmes  is proposed so as to reflect 
and comply with the political and budgetary choices made in the context of the MFF. 

EN 

3 

 EN 

 
Therefore,  that  legislation  includes,  in  general,  review  clauses  aligned  with  the 
respective MFF period. 

The EP also requested to put the suggestions made by the ECA in its briefing paper 
on  the  mid-term  review  and  the  recommendations  of  the  High-level  group  on  own 
resources on the agenda of the next expert meeting on Budget Focused on Results. 
The Commission will propose to the group to discuss the issues raised by the EP. On 
the elements directly linked to the performance of the budget, general considerations 
on  issues  like  reporting  on  performance  and  the  use  of  performance  information  in 
the  decision  making  process  for  the  budgetary  cycle  have  already  been  and  will 
continue to be part of the discussions in the expert meetings. The Commission will 
analyse  how  to  integrate  the  recommendations  of  the  High-level  group  of  own 
resources  in  the  work  of  the  expert  group.  The  experiences  shared  in  the  expert 
meetings  will  be  taken  into  account  when  preparing  the  2017  annual  EU  Budget 
Focused on Results Conference. 

The  EP  also  calls  on  the  Commission  to  take  into  account  the  Paris  agreement  to 
increase the Climate-related spending target in the EU budget from 20% to 30%. 
The Commission has explained its position on the feasibility of major changes in the 
current MFF in its replies to the ECA Special report no. 31/20162, which assesses the 
Commission's  progress  towards  achieving  climate  spending  of  20  %  of  the  budget, 
thus making the EU budget a pioneer in fostering mainstreaming.  

The Commission will seek to further align the budget spending to EU policy targets 
in the context of the existing legislative framework. With its mid-term review of the 
current MFF, the Commission already took steps to reinforce the budget's ability to 
address  EU  priorities.  The  Commission  proposals  for  future  EU  budgets  (and  the 
future MFF) will take due account of the Union's political priorities and international 
commitments.  The  aim  for  the  MFF  after  2020  is  to  have  an  aligned,  efficient  and 
effective set of EU programmes delivering on political priorities. 

1.2. 

'SHADOW  BUDGETS’  SHOULD  BE  BROUGHT  UNDER  THE  ROOF  OF  THE  UNION 
BUDGET (§§ 24-27) 

The  Commission  is  requested  to  propose  measures  to  make  Union  funding 
arrangements  for  implementation  of  the  EU  budget  better  equipped  to  ensure 
transparency  and  accountability;  to  submit  an  assessment  of  the  impact  of  the 
European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) on other programmes and financial 
instruments; to ensure that financial instruments are compatible with the EU strategy; 
and to prepare a communication on the so-called 'shadow budgets'. 

The Commission notes that some of these mechanisms were created to respond to the 
Euro  area  crisis  and  are  of  an  intergovernmental  nature.  For  this  reason,  they  are 
outside  the  framework  of  the  EU  budget.  Other  instruments  such  as  EFSI  and  the 
European Investment Fund complement the more traditional delivery mechanisms of 
the EU budget, enhancing its outreach and leverage effect. 

Consequently, the current EU financial architecture has allowed for the mobilisation 
of funds for new needs and for doing more with less. The impact of the instruments 

2 Available at the following address: http://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR16_31/SR_CLIMATE_EN.pdf 

EN 

4 

 EN 

 
                                                 
 
in  the  EU  budget  is  explained  in  the  EU  annual  accounts  which  are  audited  by  the 
ECA.  Specific  reports  on  financial  instruments,  trust  funds  and  the  Facility  for 
Refugees in Turkey are also provided, ensuring transparency and accountability. 

As for the communication on this issue requested by the EP, the Commission notes 
that the White Paper on the Future of Europe in 2025 launched an overall debate and 
reflection  process  preceding  the  preparations  of  the  next  MFF.  In  this  context,  the 
Commission  has  just  adopted  a  reflection  paper  on  the  future  of  EU  finances.  The 
issue of the EU financial architecture will form part of the overall reflection process 
to prepare the next MFF. 

Concerning the compatibility of financial instruments  with the EU  strategy, the 
Commission  underlines  that  financial  instruments  are  a  tool  at  the  service  of  EU 
policies. They do not jeopardise agreed policies and should not be seen as a threat for 
any policy. Their use in future years will depend on the level of ambition placed on 
the EU budget and policies and whether they constitute an appropriate instrument to 
serve these policies. 
With  its  proposal  for  revision  of  the  Financial  Regulation/Omnibus3,  the 
Commission  already  aims  at  bringing  the  different  Union  funding  arrangements, 
particularly  trust  funds,  strategic  investment  funds,  guarantee  funds,  facilities, 
financial  instruments  and  macro-financial  assistance  within  the  single  regulatory 
framework of the Financial Regulation and in particular Title X. Moreover, rules on 
structural  and  investment  funds  and  on  funds  managed  by  the  Commission  are 
streamlined  to  the  extent  possible.  The  proposal  is  currently  under  discussion  with 
the  EP  and  the  Council.  The  Commission  therefore  welcomes  any  proposal  by  the 
Parliament that aims to further improve the way these problems are addressed. 

On  the  request  to  re-evaluate  the  ex-ante  assessment  for  the  Connecting  Europe 
Facility  (CEF)  debt  instrument  in  the  light  of  the  creation  of  the  EFSI  and  to 
submit an assessment of the impact of EFSI, the Commission considers that market 
developments occurring after the launch of a financial instrument should be assessed 
during the mid-term review process of this instrument.  

This  being  said,  the  Commission  accepts  to  assess  the  coherence  of  the  CEF  Debt 
Instrument  with  other  EU  initiatives,  including  EFSI,  in  the  CEF  mid-term  review 
which  is  ongoing  and  expected  to  be  concluded  in  late  2017,  following  the 
finalisation  of  the  evaluation  report  by  external  consultants.  Furthermore,  an 
addendum to the CEF ex-ante assessment, which reflects upon the investment needs 
post EFSI launch and the potential for an equity instrument in the CEF sectors will 
become public.  

Moreover,  the  Commission  may  present  an  assessment  of  the  impact  of  EFSI  on 
other financial instruments in the context of the evaluation of EFSI, as appropriate. 

2. 

BUDGETARY AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT (§§ 40-42) 

The  EP  and  the  Council  have  put  forward  three  main  requests  concerning 
respectively  the  monitoring  regarding  outstanding  commitments;  the  establishment 
of  an  annually  updated  long-term  cash-flow  forecast;  and  the  need  to  consider  the 
capacity  constraints  in  some  Member  States  and  provide  them  with  technical 

3 COM(2016) 605final, 14.09.2016 

EN 

5 

 EN 

 
                                                 
assistance  in  order  to  increase  the  absorption  rates  especially  in  the  area  of  the 
European Structural and Investment Funds. 

As  regards  outstanding  commitments,  the  Commission  will  continue  taking 
measures  vis-à-vis  the  Member  States  to  reduce  these  and  make  wider  use  of  net 
corrections in cohesion while respecting the regulatory framework. 

On the support to Member States, the Commission has already put in place a Task 
Force  for  Better  Implementation  in  order  to  improve  the  implementation  of  the 
European Structural and Investment Funds in certain Member States, while ensuring 
full respect of legality and regularity of expenditure within the framework set out by 
the  MFF  and  the  relevant  legislation.  The  Commission  intends  to  ensure  that  full 
benefit  is  drawn  from  the  work  of  the  Task  Force  and  will  focus  on  delivering  a 
proactive  and  targeted  approach  to  Member  States  in  order  to  support  the 
implementation of the Cohesion policy funding in 2014-2020. 

Concerning an updated long-term cash-flow, in the communication on the mid-term 
review/revision  of  the  MFF,  the  Commission  has  presented  a  payment  forecast 
assessing  the  sustainability  of  the  current  ceilings  and  including  an  estimate  of  de-
commitments  and  the  evolution  of  the  reste  à  liquider  (RAL)  until  the  end  of  the 
current MFF. 

The  Commission  will  continuously  monitor  the  implementation  and  update  its 
forecast accordingly.  

Furthermore,  in  2017,  the  Commission  will  update  the  forecast  for  payment 
appropriations  after  2020,  according  to  point  9  of  the  Inter-institutional  Agreement 
on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial 
management. 

3. 

GETTING RESULTS FROM THE UNION BUDGET (§§ 83, 85, 97, 99, 101) 

The  EP  has  put  forward  several  requests  concerning  respectively  the  Annual 
Management and Performance Report (AMPR) and Horizon 2020. 

Over the years, the Commission has introduced performance reporting mechanisms 
designed to explain spending programmes operations and demonstrate how EU funds 
are being used to achieve policy goals.  

All legal and implementing basic acts of the spending programmes under the 2014-
2020  MFF  contain  performance  frameworks  defining  objectives  and  setting  out 
indicators  to  measure  progress,  as  well  as  monitoring,  reporting  and  evaluation 
arrangements. Implementation of the performance framework is updated once a year 
in  the  working  document  accompanying  the  draft  budget  i.e.  the  Programme 
Statements.  The  AMPR  brings  together  information  on  both  the  performance 
and management of the EU budget and provides a holistic view on how the EU 
budget is being used to support the Union's political priorities.  

As of 2016, the Commission's AMPR combines two former reports: the Evaluation 
Report produced in accordance with Article 318 of the Treaty on the Functioning of 
the  European  Union;  and  the  Synthesis  Report  required  by  Article  66(9)  of  the 
Financial  Regulation.  The  report  draws  on  the  Annual  Activity  Reports  (AARs)  of 
the  Commission  departments  and  also  on  other  sources  of  detailed  performance 
information  such  as  the  Programme  Statements  presented  with  the  annual  budget, 
evaluation  reports  of  the  EU  budget  programmes,  and  the  General  Report  on  the 

EN 

6 

 EN 

 
Activities  of  the  Union.  Bringing  together  information  on  the  performance  and 
management  of  the  EU  budget,  the  AMPR  provides  a  comprehensive  overview  of 
how the EU budget supports the Union’s political priorities. 

The achievements in the AMPR are described in accordance with the different 
levels  of  maturity  of  the  programmes,  ranging  from  input  data  for  the  early 
phase  of  the  programme  to  results  for  finalised  programmes.  The  Commission 
presents  information  which  is  available  at  the  time  of  the  AMPR  preparation.  It  is 
normal  that,  in  the  early  phase  of  programme  implementation,  this  information 
concerns inputs (financial allocation) and, when possible, outputs. This information 
presents  a  good  indication  of  the  EU  budget  spending  and  the  EU  budget 
contribution  to  the  political  priorities.  Once  programme  execution  is  more  mature, 
information  on  results  and  impacts  will  become  available.  Reporting  on  the 
performance of the current MFF programmes will continue to be provided in future 
editions of the AMPR.  

The EP calls on the Commission for an earlier publication of the AMPR. It also calls 
on the Commission to better evaluate in its next performance reports the outputs and 
the  outcomes  of  all  policies,  and  to  clearly  and  synthetically  show  the  contribution  of 
European policies to Union objectives and to evaluate their respective contribution to the 
Europe 2020 targets.  

The  Commission  adopted  the  2016  AMPR  on  13  June  2017,  before  the  legal 
deadline  of  15  June  in  application  of  article  66(9)  of  the  Financial  Regulation.  A 
significantly earlier publication of the AMPR would however not be compatible with 
the  current  legal  deadlines  for  Member  States'  transmission  of  relevant  data  to  the 
Commission.  These  data  are  a  key  input  to  AARs  for  DGs  responsible  for  funds 
under shared management. 

From 2016 onwards and based on the Strategic Plans produced by each Commission 
department,  the  AARs  will  explain  how  the  specific  objectives  contribute  to  the 
political priorities and will further clarify the links with Europe 2020. 

Both EP and Council made requests concerning better performance of reporting and 
management framework of Horizon 2020. 

On performance reporting, the Commission will report in the Horizon 2020 Interim 
Evaluation  Report  and  in  the  AMPR  on  progress  under  Horizon  2020  and  the 
programme's contribution to Europe 2020 based on the latest available performance 
information.  Moreover,  it  will  assess  the  performance  of  work  programmes  which 
will be implemented for the Work Programmes 2018-2020.  

As  for  the  performance  management  framework,  the  Commission  will  ensure 
consistent  use  of  the  terms,  input,  output,  result  and  impact  in  line  with  the 
better regulation guidelines. It will continue to promote a consistent application of 
these guidelines by raising awareness and appropriate training. 

4. 

MANAGEMENT ACHIEVEMENTS AND COMMISSION INTERNAL GOVERNANCE TOOLS 
(§§ 62, 70-73, 215E, 306) 

The EP and the Council welcome the clean opinion by the ECA on the EU accounts, 
and that revenue was free from material error. The ECA also found commitments to 
be legal and regular in all material aspects. However, although both EP and Council 
notes  that  the  overall  estimated  level  of  error  for  payments  has  improved  in  recent 
years, they are still disappointed that payments were materially affected by error.  

EN 

7 

 EN 

 
The  EP  stresses  the  need  to  use  all  available  information  to  prevent,  detect  and 
correct  errors.  It  calls  on  the  Commission  to  issue  a  "Statement  of  Assurance" 
based on the AARs of the Directors-General, to produce an own statistical estimate 
of  the  level  of  error  and  to  evaluate  separately  the  amount  of  EU  money  the 
Commission  envisages  to  recuperate  through  recoveries  /  financial  corrections 
linked to the financial year 2015. 

The Council invites the Commission and the ECA to work together in order to 
converge their approaches in the valuation of the impact of financial correction on 
the estimated amount at risk at closure and to provide comparable data. It also calls 
on the Commission to provide the budgetary authority with a comprehensive report 
on the areas where the estimated level of error identified is persistently high and 
outline its root causes. 

As  the  manager  of  the  EU  budget,  the  objective  of  the  Commission  is  to  ensure 
sound financial management of the EU budget by applying preventive and corrective 
controls,  taking  account  of  the  multi-annual  nature  of  programmes.  It  takes 
preventive  measures  such  as  ex  ante  controls,  suspension  and  interruption  of 
payments as well as corrective measures such as financial corrections and recoveries. 

The Commission reports on these measures in the AMPR, drawing on the AARs of 
the Commission departments. As requested by the Council, it will continue working 
together with the ECA in order to further improve reporting. 

Following requests of the EP in previous discharge procedures, the amount at risk at 
closure  was  introduced  in  the  2015  AMPR  to  estimate  the  amount  of  expenditure 
potentially  at  risk  once  the  multiannual  control  cycle  is  concluded  and  corrective 
measures have been applied. It is based on the Commission's best and conservative 
estimate of the amount at risk for the budget and the corrections which are expected 
to be implemented. Relevant data from Member States is also taken into account.  

The Commission will continue to report on the overall amount at risk in the AMPR. 
The  amount  at  risk  closure  for  the  financial  year  2016  is  estimated  to  be 
between  0.65%  and  1.07%  of  total  2016  expenditure.  This  shows  that  the 
Commission  effectively  manages  the  risks  related  to  the  legality  and  regularity  of 
expenditure in a multi-annual perspective.  

By adopting the AMPR for the EU Budget, the College of the Commission takes 
overall  political  responsibility  for  the  management  of  the  EU  Budget.  The 
Commission  considers  that  this  encompasses  accountability  for  the  work  of  its 
services.  

In  relation  to  the  request  for  a  statistical  estimate  of  the  level  of  error,  the 
Commission considers that such an approach would result in  an additional layer of 
audit,  in  particular  for  funds  under  shared  management  with  Member  States.  The 
Commission  will  continue  to  cooperate  with  Member  States  Audit  Authorities  and 
define in common a statistically valid approach to estimate the level of error, and to 
use  such  error  rates  after  validation.  The  Commission  thus  implements  the  ‘Single 
Audit'  principle  by  focusing  its  activity  on  auditing  the  Member  State  auditors  and 
validating their audit work.  

EN 

8 

 EN 

 
The  Commission  adopted  a  report  on  root  causes  of  errors  and  action  taken  on  28 
February 20174. The report concluded that the Commission and the ECA reach the 
same  conclusions  in  general  about  the  nature  and  root  causes  of  persistently  high 
levels of error: weaknesses in management and control systems which are sometimes 
aggravated  by  a  complex  legal  framework.  The  Commission  therefore continues to 
pursue  its  agenda  of  simplification  of  rules,  e.g.  in  the  context  of  the  proposal  to 
revise the Financial Regulation/Omnibus.  

The EP also calls on  the  Commission to add an  annual statement  on  governance 
and  a  statement  on  mid-  and  long-term  fiscal  sustainability  to  the  financial 
statement.  

The Commission will update and publish its governance arrangements on a regular 
basis. Information on the amounts at risk at closure is presented in the AMPR. 

As regards a mid- and long-term fiscal sustainability statement, due to differences in 
the  debt  dimension  (i.e.  capacity  to  meet  financial  commitments  or  refinance  or 
increase  debt)  and  the  revenue  dimension  (i.e.  capacity  to  vary  existing  taxation 
levels  or  introduce  new  revenue  sources)  the  Union's  Budget  is  not  comparable  to 
national  budgets.  In  the  EU  context,  the  MFF  is  the  tool  for  ensuring  medium  to 
long-term stability and predictability of future payment requirements and budgetary 
priorities. The Commission reports on these aspects later in the year as the budgetary 
cycle does not allow publishing that information together with the annual accounts. 

As for the call by both EP and Council to be proactive concerning the "single audit" 
approach,  the  Commission  confirms  that  this  is  already  the  case  in  the  multilevel 
control  systems  in  the  policy  areas  implemented  in  cooperation  with  the  Member 
States and international organisations. 

Concerning the request related to conduct an analysis of the so-called "retrospective 
projects"  which  should  include  ex-ante  assessments  verifying  that  replacement 
projects  meet  the  planned  objectives,  the  Commission  points  out  that  replacement 
with  such  projects  is  possible  within  the  existing  legal  framework.  Under  shared 
management, it is the responsibility solely of the Member State and it has to respect 
the  eligibility  conditions  of  the  programme  concerned,  as  clarified  by  the 
Commission  in  its  guidance.  The  legislation  allows  this  approach.  It  is  not  the 
Commission's  role  to  perform  ex-ante  evaluations  of  these  projects  under  shared 
management  principles.  However,  the  Commission  regularly  performs  audits  to 
check that Member States fulfil their obligations. 

5. 

THE MANAGEMENT OF THE AFRICAN PEACE FACILITY §§ 92-93 

In the context of the EP resolution concerning the European Development Fund, the 
EP  has  put  forward  two  important  requests  to  the  Commission  concerning  the 
management of the African Peace Facility related to governance and reporting on 
corrective measures in the management of funds. 

On governance, the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) 
signed in January 2017 a new inter-service arrangement setting out a clear division 
of labour between DG DEVCO and the EEAS (Headquarters and Delegation) for the 
management of the African Peace Facility. 

4 (COM(2017)124) 

EN 

9 

 EN 

 
                                                 
As far as corrective measures are concerned, the Director General of DEVCO made a 
presentation in the joint CONT/DEVE Committee on 31 January 2017. It was agreed 
with the Chairs of the Committees that a follow-up presentation would take place in 
due course.  

Furthermore,  a  new  Action  Plan  aiming  at  addressing  further  the  remaining 
weaknesses in the control system was adopted and launched by DG DEVCO in 2016 
following    the  reservations  issued  in  its  2015  Annual  Activity  Report  concerning 
high risk spending areas identified through an error rate analysis. A special focus is 
given  to  the  monitoring  of  operations  with  International  Organisations  as  is  one  of 
the two specific areas associated with a higher risk of error. A third reservation on 
the  African  Peace  Facility  was  raised  separately  and  relates  to  a  series  of  focused 
measures that are being implemented. 

* * * 

EN 

10 

 EN