Resolution (EU) 2020/1974 of the European Parliament of 14 May 2020 with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2018, Section VII — Committee of the Regions
Date: 2020-05-14
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: European Committee of the Regions, budgetary discharge, financial year, general budget (EU)








L_2020417EN.01043701.xml










11.12.2020   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


L 417/437






RESOLUTION (EU) 2020/1974 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
of 14 May 2020
with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2018, Section VII — Committee of the Regions
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,






—


having regard to its decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2018, Section VII — Committee of the Regions,










—


having regard to Rule 100 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0071/2020),










A.


whereas in the context of the discharge procedure, the discharge authority wishes to stress the particular importance of further strengthening the democratic legitimacy of the Union institutions by improving transparency and accountability and implementing the concept of performance-based budgeting and good governance of human resources;





1.   

Notes with satisfaction that in its 2018 annual report, the Court of Auditors (the ‘Court’) identifies no significant weaknesses with respect to the audited topics relating to human resources and procurement for the Committee of the Regions (the ‘Committee’);



2.   

Welcomes the Court’s conclusion that the payments as a whole for the year ended 31 December 2018 for the Committee’s administrative expenditure were free from material error and that the supervisory and control systems examined were effective;



3.   

Regrets, as a general observation, that chapter 10 ‘Administration’ of the Court’s 2018 Annual Report has a rather limited scope and conclusions, notwithstanding the fact that the Multiannual Financial Framework Heading 5 ‘Administration’ is considered to be low risk;



4.   

Notes that the Court selected a sample of 45 transactions from Multiannual Financial Framework Heading 5 ‘Administration’ of all Union institutions and bodies; notes that the sample was designed to be representative of the range of spending under Heading 5, which represents 6,3 % of the Union budget; notes that the Court’s work indicates administrative expenditure to be low risk; considers, however, the number of transactions selected in relation to the ‘other institutions’ to be insufficient and asks the Court to increase the number of transactions to be examined by at least 10 %;



5.   

Notes that in 2018 the Committee’s budget amounted to EUR 96 101 000, compared to EUR 93 295 000 in 2017, corresponding to an increase of 3 %; notes that 99,3 % of all appropriations were committed by the end of 2018 (compared to 98 % in 2017 and 98,7 % in 2016) and that 91 % were paid in 2018 (compared to 89,9 % in 2017 and 89,6 % in 2016);



6.   

Welcomes the overall prudent and sound financial management of the Committee in the 2018 budget period; welcomes the fact that the commitment rate for Title 1, ‘Expenditure relating to persons working with the Committee’, was 99,1 % and for Title 2, ‘Buildings, equipment and miscellaneous operating expenditure’, 99,6 %;



7.   

Notes the Committee’s answer related to the payment execution rates (76,9 % in 2018, 77,1 % in 2017 and 74,5 % in 2016) for Title 2; notes that invoices mainly for maintenance and energy consumption arrive only at the beginning of the following year; asks the Committee to improve the situation, where possible by setting balanced payment terms over the year in the relevant service contracts;



8.   

Notes the unused appropriations for several budget lines, such as 59,0 % for courses for members (item 1 0 5), 33,3 % for missions for staff (item 1 6 2), 77,9 % for medical services (item 1 6 3 4) and 92,7 % for fitting-out premises (item 2 0 0 7); recalls the need for measures to minimise budget overestimates;



9.   

Stresses that notwithstanding the Committee’s political activities, its budget is considered to be purely administrative and accounts for 1 % of the Administrative Heading 5 of the Union Budget; welcomes the Committee’s efforts in applying performance-based budget principles in its daily operations and its willingness to improve further together with other Union institutions and bodies; notes the successful tools, such as the budget execution reviews, in order to monitor and help to improve the Committee’s budget execution rates; welcomes overall the Committee’s performance-oriented approach;



10.   

Notes that the Committee maintains a central register of reporting exceptions related to non-compliance with internal procedures and corrective measures; welcomes that the overall number of financial exceptions decreased by 6,8 % (compared to 2017);



11.   

Welcomes the Committee’s efforts to reduce the average time for payment (under the Financial Regulation payments must be made within 30 days) to 16 days on average in 2018 which is the best rate for 10 years (compared to 23 days in 2017, 26 days in 2016 and 20 days in 2015); notes that no case of payment of mandatory default interest was recorded in 2018;



12.   

Notes that the Committee launched an exercise for the 16 internal control standards (ICS) by means of a questionnaire, designed to evaluate compliance and effectiveness of the requirements specified for each ICS; notes the positive outcome of that evaluation and its conclusions to focus strongly on ICS 3, staff allocation, ICS 10, business continuity, and ICS 12, information and communication, due to the future challenges, such as a new mandate and the 25-year anniversary of the Committee;



13.   

Recognises that the monitoring of the internal audit function is provided by an audit committee composed of one member per political group of the Committee’s Commission of Financial and Administrative Affairs and one high-level external advisor; notes that the 2018 target to close 75 % of very important recommendations after six months was achieved at a rate of 50 %, and the target to close 100 % of very important recommendations after 12 months was achieved at a rate of 100 %;



14.   

Reiterates the importance of interinstitutional cooperation, such as service-level agreements for human resources and other administrative agreements; calls on the Committee to inform Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control of the amounts paid under such agreements in the next annual activity report;



15.   

Stresses the importance of promoting the involvement of regional and local authorities given their role in the implementation of Union policies;



16.   

Notes that the administrative cooperation agreement entered into between the Committee, the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and Parliament in 2014 came to end on 31 December 2019; notes that to date the 2014 agreement has not been renegotiated or extended; is of the opinion that the 2014 agreement was very unbalanced for the Committee and the EESC (the ‘Committees’), which transferred a total of 60 translators to Parliament (24 from the Committee) and in exchange obtained only the use of the services of the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS); notes with concern that as a consequence the Committees had to hire contract staff and outsource their translation services; notes with concern that to compensate for the reduction in translation staff, Parliament has provided additional funds (EUR 1 200 000 from 2015 to 2016) to the Committees to cover the outsourcing of translation services and that these funds can be reallocated to other policy areas if they are not fully used for outsourced translation; is of the opinion that these circumstances are not in line with the criteria of overall prudent and sound financial management and should be reviewed in the event of an extension of the present agreement or in the negotiation of a new agreement; recognises that, from a political point of view, the agreement must be updated to face current challenges, such as the new Multiannual Financial Framework or the new cohesion policy rules;



17.   

Welcomes the ‘Reflecting on Europe/Future of Europe’ campaign amounting to more than 209 events carried out in total (until February 2019); notes that the Committee is following up on this success by developing a model, together with other Union institutions and bodies, for the ongoing consultation of Union citizens with the aim of combining local debates with a feedback mechanism to inform decision-makers at Union level; calls on the Committee to report back on the results achieved in its next annual activity report;



18.   

Welcomes for transparency reasons the list of events for 2017 and 2018 in the context of the ‘Reflecting on Europe/Future of Europe’ campaign in the Committee’s annual activity report; notes the names of the Committee members involved, the title, date and place of each event, and the overall cost, amounting to EUR 41 747,87 in 2018 (compared to EUR 45 505,93 in 2017);



19.   

Appreciates the Committee’s success on social media with 12 658 page likes on Facebook in 2018 (compared to 9 013 in 2017) and 3 727 followers on Twitter in 2018 (compared to 3 425 in 2017); acknowledges the successful use of the online survey/mobile app ‘Have your say on Europe!’ across the Union; congratulates the Committee on its new website with 101 983 page views in 2018 (compared to 43 748 in 2017); welcomes the open online course in January 2018 under the headline ‘make the most of EU resources for your region or city’ with almost 15 000 participants (compared to 8 500 in 2015 and 5 500 in 2016);



20.   

Welcomes the Committee’s achievement in increasing its publication of studies, amounting to 27 and surpassing the target of 15; notes that all of those studies have been published on the Committee’s website;



21.   

Notes that the agreement between the Committees and the Commission on the exchange of the Commission’s VMA building for the Committees’ BEL68/TRE 74 buildings was signed on 28 August 2019; notes that the exchange will become effective on 16 September 2022; notes with concern that the main priority identified by the Committees’ buildings policy is the geographical concentration of the buildings; notes with concern that this exchange results in a loss of office space of 10 440 m2 for the Committees and, thus, a need to find extra offices to accommodate around 200 members of staff after the exchange, which need cannot be entirely offset by alternative measures in the short-term, such as a more intensive use of space in the other buildings or an increased use of teleworking, but will necessitate the purchase of another adjacent building to compensate for this reduction; notes also the need to renovate the VMA building in the short to medium term; fears the consequences that this agreement will have not only for the finances of the Committee but also for the wellbeing of the staff concerned; regrets that the legal service has not been consulted on a matter of such scope and importance for the Committee;



22.   

Notes that the Committees have recently established a joint working group for the purpose of preparing a further analysis in order to find adequate solutions; notes that another working group is tasked with reflecting on new ways of working; stresses that the wellbeing, manner of work and work space of staff must suffer no negative consequences arising from the exchange of buildings; recalls the requirement that members of staff be consulted about the exchange of buildings and that their opinion be taken into account; calls on the Committees to inform Parliament’s Committees on Budgetary Control and on Budgets on any results achieved;



23.   

Expresses serious concerns about the confirmation of the presence of asbestos in critical places of the VMA building including the parking area; deplores the fact that an inventory realised by a specialised external contractor was carried out in September 2019, only one month after the signature of the agreement with the Commission; deplores the fact that the agreement was signed without informing all stakeholders in due time about the possibly presence of asbestos in the VMA building; also deplores the fact that members and staff have not been informed about the situation and considers it not to be sufficient that the information has been published on the Committee intranet where it is difficult to find;



24.   

Notes that the Committees received an asbestos-safe certificate for the VMA building in September 2019 and that this certificate specifies that the building contains asbestos without risk for normal use of the building; taking into account especially that the next use of the building will not be normal use, but a situation of construction, is deeply concerned about the future developments relating to this issue;



25.   

Notes that the effects of prolonged and unsafe asbestos exposure on human health are well documented and are always a source of concern and alarm among the population in general; asks the Committees to carry out a policy of total and proactive transparency and information about the management of the situation before and after the effective occupation of the VMA building while at the same time avoiding alarmism;



26.   

Acknowledges the Committee’s building strategy approved on 29 November 2017 with the priority of ‘geographical concentration’ and ‘physical connection’ to the Committees’ main building, Jacques Delors, which provides significant financial and non-financial benefits; notes that the VMA building will require a minor refurbishment at the earliest moment possible (2020 to 2022) and a more thorough renovation once the Committees have complete proprietorship of the VMA building in 2028; notes that the costs will be covered by the Committees according to the sharing key applicable under the administrative cooperation agreement;



27.   

Welcomes all the measures implemented so far to ensure adequate (cyber-)security standards; notes that, following the installation of the new equipment for access control and the IT Security actions, the related security standards have reached the same level as the standards of Parliament and the Commission;



28.   

Regrets the fact that the Committee does not yet have a legal framework with which to deal with harassment cases involving its members; reiterates the European Ombudsman’s call on the Union institutions to adopt rules on harassment applicable to their members; asks the Committee to urgently adopt such rules, along the lines of Parliament’s Bureau Decision of 2 July 2018 on harassment complaints; calls on the Committee to report back on its follow-up actions to Parliament;



29.   

Urges the Committee to strengthen its efforts related to the planned code of conduct for its members related to the prevention and fight of conflict of interests; asks the Committee to ensure the publication of the concerned rules and procedures on its websites;



30.   

Recognises the robust mechanism that the Committee has in place to tackle harassment cases involving members of staff only with internal rules that implement the relevant provisions of the Staff Regulations; welcomes the provision of training for all members of staff on the topic of the prevention of harassment, which focuses on the rules, provisions and procedures in place regarding harassment complaints; notes that the Committee has a functioning team of confidential counsellors (currently six are appointed and two have been placed on a reserve list) who have all received training before taking up their function;



31.   

Notes that the appropriations for translation outsourcing increased in the context of the cooperation agreement signed with Parliament and the resulting reduction in translation staff; notes that in 2018 the outsourcing of translation reached 20,2 %, slightly above the 20 % target, also partly caused by the high workload (21 % higher than the same period in 2017); notes further that the total cost of outsourced translation in 2018 was EUR 3 251 855 (compared to EUR 5 263 108, which would have been the total cost of in-house translation);



32.   

Recognises the Committees’ efforts that resulted in a significant reorganisation under a new strategy for a more resource efficient multilingualism; regrets that from 2014 to 2017 transfers of posts from the linguistic services to the services of Parliament needed to be compensated for by an increased number of contractual staff; calls on the Committee to inform Parliament regularly of the related developments;



33.   

Notes the evaluation report on the pilot project for the common management of some translation units, which identified, apart from a reduction in management overheads, additional synergies at translation assistance level once all translation units are merged and all necessary technical conditions are in place; notes that the Committee’s bureau gave a mandate to its secretary-general to draw up and propose a new establishment plan, in cooperation with the EESC’s secretary-general; notes that the merger of the pilot units is confirmed and that two more mergers are due to take place in 2019; calls on the Committee to report back to Parliament on all actions taken to make translation output sustainable;



34.   

Notes the efforts to further simplify human resources processes, in particular through the gradual introduction of paperless workflows, such as invoices, missions and files; calls on the Committee to strengthen its efforts in the modernisation of its procurement processes related to IT tools, setting-up an electronic workflow to permit a paperless mode; notes the good progress made with e-invoicing which is now fully operational from an IT point of view;



35.   

Notes an establishment plan of 538 members of staff in 2018 (compared to 533 in 2017); welcomes the lower vacancy rate of posts in 2018 (less than 2 %) than in 2017 (approximately 2,5 %); welcomes the fact that a workload assessment exercise was initiated in 2018 to have an overview of the efficient use of human resources within the Committee and to identify possible gaps; notes that the final report was delivered in spring 2019; requests a detailed follow-up in the Committee’s next annual activity report;



36.   

Welcomes the introduction of a new appraisal system focusing on individual performance and a new promotion scheme based on merit which were the subject of an intensive social dialogue in 2018; recognises that the implementation of an action plan following a staff satisfaction survey organised late 2016 resulted in a management programme for both middle and junior managers covering topics which are linked to staff satisfaction;



37.   

Welcomes the fact that the rate of absenteeism has decreased over the years (from 4,86 % in 2015, 4,6 % in 2016 and 4,5 % in 2017, to 4,29 % in 2018); notes, however, that 23 members of staff were on sick leave for more than 90 days in 2018, including three cases of sick leave with a duration, respectively, of 352, 296,5, and 280,5 days, and corresponding to serious illnesses; acknowledges the Committee’s comprehensive policy on absence management, including the follow-up of absences and the implementation of a structured return-to-work policy;



38.   

Welcomes, with regard to equal opportunities all the measures taken with respect to disability, diversity and gender balance, such as the network of the local equal opportunities contact points in the respective directorates to raise awareness and implement actions within all Committee departments; welcomes the Committee’s efforts with respect to flexible working conditions in order to allow colleagues of both genders to carry out managerial duties by better reconciling their family and their professional responsibilities;



39.   

Notes with interest that the Committee adopted an integrated talent management strategy covering a wide range of areas and policies for ultimately contributing to staff performance and staff commitment; notes that the level of deputy heads of unit, heads of sector and team leaders has been officially recognised as a new management level and that the Committee organised related in-house training courses;



40.   

Recognises the Committee’s efforts to achieve geographical balance for the Committee’s managers, in particular with respect to the Member States that joined the Union in or after 2014, which have led to the percentage of managers from those Member States to reach 22,2 % (compared to the target of 20 %), which is slightly above the proportion of their population in the Union;



41.   

Notes the Committee’s difficulties in increasing the proportion of women in middle and senior management positions (35,6 % women in management positions); acknowledges the fact that the Committee is an institution of limited size with a relatively young group of middle managers; notes the efforts such as the Guide to Good Practice relating to Recruitment, reworked into a service instruction, introducing a binding rule to include both male and female panel members in every recruitment panel; calls on the Committee to strengthen further its efforts and to report back to Parliament on any improvements achieved;



42.   

Reiterates the need to streamline and accelerate the discharge procedure; proposes in this regard to set a deadline for the submission of the annual activity reports of 31 March of the year following the accounting year; welcomes the Committee’s readiness to follow this best practice which should help to support the request to shorten the timeline for the discharge procedure;



43.   

Welcomes the fact that overall the mid-term assessment completed in early 2018 concluded that the interinstitutional cooperation agreement between the Committees is working well; notes that the joint services serve both Committees in the fields of translation, infrastructure, logistics and IT; notes that together with the salary related expenditures concerned, the annual monetary value of the joint services exceeds EUR 100 million;



44.   

Notes that the cooperation agreement between the Committees, signed in 2016, establishes a firm legal framework for long-term, efficient and effective cooperation, and demonstrates that the Committees are acting in partnership while respecting each other’s powers and prerogatives; notes that the agreement ended on 31 December 2019 and that it was decided to extend it for one year while a new agreement is being negotiated; asks the Committees to make the necessary efforts to conclude a new agreement as soon as possible in order to allow further synergies and savings;



45.   

Recalls that once again the Committees dedicated less than 3 % of their total budget to IT and that IT projects and equipment have suffered from structurally underfinancing for several years; notes with concern that in order to address their backlog with respect to IT projects and systems, the Committees continue to use mopping-up exercises at the end of the year to finance IT projects; asks the Committees to implement as soon as possible the new digital strategy and multiannual IT expenditure plan;



46.   

Calls on the Committee to analyse further the situation in order to identify additional areas for joint services with the EESC; highlights that this kind of interinstitutional cooperation could significantly reduce the overall expenditure of the Committee; calls on the Committee to inform Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control of any results achieved;



47.   

Congratulates the Committee on its e-learning training with a specific area dedicated to ethics designed mainly for newcomers and placed on the first page of the Committee’s intranet for easy access for all; appreciates, in the interests of transparency, the publication of policies, such as whistleblowing procedures and policies on occupational activities of former senior officials, on the Committee’s website; encourages the Committee to continue a real policy for the digitalisation of its services;



48.   

Recalls that on 23 August 2018 a former internal auditor lodged a complaint with the appointing authority against the Committee on the basis of Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations, following the Committee’s decision of 24 May 2018 to refuse to recognise him as a bona fide whistleblower; deeply regrets the Committee’s decision that is in contradiction with Parliament’s position that the internal auditor is a bona fide whistleblower, confirmed in Parliament’s discharge resolution for 2001 (1); encourages the Committee to fully recognise the internal auditor’s status and to issue a public apology for the mishandling of his case;



49.   

Notes that on 20 December 2019, the Committee made a proposal to the former internal auditor for an out of court settlement subject to a non-disclosure agreement, which proposal was rejected by the former internal auditor based on the lack of transparency; encourages the Committee to revise its proposal in order to formally recognise the former internal auditor as a bona fide whistleblower and to allow any conciliation agreement to be public in the interests of transparency;



50.   

Regrets that the launch of a mediation process between the Committee and the former internal auditor, requested in Parliament’s discharge resolution for 2017 (2), has not yet taken place and is only planned for the beginning of 2020; further regrets that it took over 20 years for the Committee to enter into a mediation process with the former internal auditor; reiterates its strong support, as expressed in numerous Parliament resolutions, for a just and fair settlement with the former internal auditor and a public apology by the Committee for its wrongdoings in handling of the case;



51.   

Notes the decision of the third invalidity committee, which unanimously confirms that the internal auditor was invalided out on occupational grounds and was subjected to bullying by the Committee;



52.   

Notes that on 20 December 2019, the Committee presented a proposal for an out-of-court settlement and a draft public statement, which was rejected by the former internal auditor, who expressed the wish for a mediation process to be activated as the most appropriate vehicle for a fair resolution of the case;



53.   

Welcomes the appointment of Member of Parliament Sophie in t’Veld as mediator in the case with a view to reaching a compromise settlement between the former internal auditor and the Committee; recalls its request that such a mediation should also address the bona-fide whistleblower status of the former internal auditor (as recognised by Parliament in its discharge resolution for 2001) and the fact that he was acting in the interests of the Union by reporting wrongdoings within the Union institutions;



54.   

Requests that the Committee promptly accept the mediation in order to implement the decision by the third invalidity committee, taking all necessary measures to respond to the requests made in Parliament’s previous resolutions;



55.   

Notes that the Committee, in the context of its ‘revolving doors’ policy, ensures that all staff leaving the service, in particular senior managers, are proactively and systematically reminded of their obligation to declare their intention to engage in an occupational activity; welcomes the fact that the Committee also reminds staff leaving the service temporarily for unpaid leave or for invalidity of their obligations under Article 16 of the Staff Regulations and the Committee’s internal decision No 66/2014 on outside activities and assignments;



56.   

Notes that the Council stipulated that from the date that the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the Union becomes legally effective, three out of the 24 seats attributed to the United Kingdom will be attributed to Estonia, Cyprus and Luxembourg; notes that the number of Committee seats is thus reduced by only 21;



57.   

Highlights all the results achieved in the last years in areas such as the performance-based budgeting, the ethical framework with all its related rules and procedures, the enhanced communication activities and the increasing amount of measures to improve transparency; welcomes the significant amount of interinstitutional service and cooperation agreements; underlines the importance of the collaboration and sharing of experience among the Union institutions and bodies; suggests that the Committee analyses the possibility of formalised networking activities in different domains to share best practices and develop common solutions.




(1)  Resolution of the European Parliament of 29 January 2004 containing the comments accompanying the decision concerning the discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the 2001 financial year – Section VII – Committee of the Regions (OJ L 57, 25.2.2004, p. 8).

(2)  Resolution (EU) 2019/1429 of the European Parliament of 26 March 2019 with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2017, Section VII – Committee of the Regions (OJ L 249, 27.9.2019, p. 123).