The Committee on Budgetary
Control adopted the report by Hans-Peter MARTIN (NI, AT) recommending
that the Parliament grant the executive Director of the European GNSS
Supervisory Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of its
budget for the financial year 2006.
First of all, the parliamentary
committee recalls that the final annual accounts of the European GNSS
Supervisory Authority are as annexed to the Court of Auditors report and approves
the closure of the accounts of the Authority for the financial year 2006.
MEPs make a series of general
comments on the EU agencies before focusing on the individual case of the
GNSS Supervisory Authority.
- General comments on the
majority of EU agencies: MEPs note that the budgets of the 24
agencies and other satellite bodies audited by the Court of Auditors
totalled more than EUR 1 billion and that the number of agencies
is constantly increasing. The number of agencies subject to the
discharge procedure evolved from 8 in 2000 to 20 in 2006. They conclude
therefore that the auditing/discharge process has become cumbersome and
disproportionate compared to the relative size of the agencies and that,
in the future, this type of procedure should be simplified and
rationalised for decentralised agencies.
On the basis of the financial
analysis, MEPs are of the following opinion:
- Fundamental considerations:
given the constantly increasing number of agencies, MEPs request that, before
the creation of a new agency, the Commission provide clear explanations
regarding agency type, objectives of the agency, internal governance
structure, products, services, clients and stakeholders of the agency,
formal relationship with external actors, budget responsibility,
financial planning, and personnel and staffing policy. They also request
that each agency be governed by a yearly performance agreement which
should contain the main objectives for the coming year and that the performance
of the agencies be regularly audited by the Court of Auditors (and
extend the financial analysis of expenditure to also cover
administrative efficiency and effectiveness). More generally, MEPs take
the view that, in the case of agencies which are continually
overestimating their respective budget needs, technical abatement should
be made on the basis of vacant posts in order to reduce the assigned
revenue for the agencies and therefore also lower administrative costs
of the EU. They recall that it is a serious problem that a number of
agencies is criticised for not following rules on public procurement,
the Financial Regulation, the Staff Regulations etc., and consider that
the principal reason for this is that most regulations and the Financial
Regulation are designed for bigger institutions rather than for small
agencies. Therefore, it is necessary to seek a rapid solution in order
to enhance the effectiveness of the legislation by grouping the
administrative functions of various agencies together or by establishing
implementing rules which are better adapted to the agencies. MEPs also
insist that the Commission, when drafting the Preliminary Draft Budget,
take into consideration the results of budget implementation by the
individual agencies in former years and revise the budget requested by
the particular agency accordingly. If this revision is not undertaken is
not undertaken by the Commission, MEPs invite the competent committee to
revise, itself, the budget in question to a realistic level. At the same
time, MEPs recall that they expect the Commission to present every five
years a study on the added value of every existing agency and to not
hesitate to close an agency if it is deemed useless by the analysis.
Such an assessment is expected as soon as possible given that this type
of assessment has yet to be presented. Furthermore, MEPs insist that
recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be promptly implemented
and the level of subsidies paid to the agencies should be aligned with
their real cash requirements.
- Presentation of reporting
data: noting that there is no standard approach among the agencies
with regard to the presentation of information, MEPs recall that they
already invitedthe directors of the agencies to accompany their
annual activity report with a declaration of assurance concerning the
legality and regularity of operations, similar to the declarations
signed by the Directors General of the Commission. They therefore ask
the Commission to amend its standing instructions to the agencies and to
produce a harmonised model for presenting information, including: i) an
annual report intended for a general readership on the body's
operations, work and achievements; ii) financial statements and a report
on implementation of the agency’s budget; iii) an activity report of the
Directors of the agency (as requested by the Parliament since 2005); iv)
a declaration of assurance signed by the body's director.
- General findings by the
Court of Auditors: MEPs refer to certain recurring findings by the
Court, including the disbursement of subsidies paid by the Commission (not
sufficiently justified estimates of the agencies' cash requirements),
the non implementation of the ABAC accounting system by some agencies or
the accrued charges for untaken leave which are accounted for by some
agencies. They call for rapid measures in these areas as well as
improvements to the internal audit procedures of the agencies. MEPs also
calls on the agencies to consider an inter-agency disciplinary board, as
some individual agencies have difficulty in setting up their own
disciplinary boards due to their size.
- Draft inter-institutional
agreement: MEPs recall the Commission's draft Interinstitutional
agreement on the operating framework for the European regulatory agencies
(see ACI/2005/2035),
which intended to create a framework for the creation, structure,
operation, evaluation and control of the European regulatory agencies
and insist that it be completed as soon as possible. They particularly
welcome the Commission's commitment to bring forward a Communication on
the future of the regulatory agencies during the course of 2008.
Specific points concerning
the GNSS Authority: MEPs regret that the Court of Auditors identified
weaknesses in the operation of the management and control systems of the GNSS
Authority. They take note that, from 1 January 2007, the Authority has been
the owner of all tangible and intangible assets of the Galileo Programme and
recall that the handover of activities from the Galileo Joint Undertaking to
the Authority started in December 2006 with the transfer of several sums and rights
related to the previous administrative and financial structure. Furthermore,
they note from the Council conclusions adopted following its meeting of 3
December 2007 that the estimated cost for the GNSS programmes for the period
2007-2013 amounts to EUR 3.4 billion and that the project will be financed by
public funds. They conclude therefore that, although an EU agency, the
Authority as the owner of all the Galileo assets will carry out a role quite
unlike that of any other regulatory agency, and that by virtue of the
substantial amounts in its balance sheet will, in future, require
particularly closer scrutiny than other bodies. In this respect, they note
that the winding-up of the Galileo Joint Undertaking will be the subject of a
specific report by the Court during 2008.