The Committee on Budgetary Control adopted the report
by Tamás DEUTSCH (EPP, HU) in which it called on the European
Parliament to grant discharge to the High Representative of the
Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy in respect of the
implementation of the European External Action Service's budget for
the financial year 2012.
Members noted that on the basis of its audit work, the
Court of Auditors concluded that the payments as a whole for the
year ended on 31 December 2012 for administrative and other
expenditure of the institutions and bodies were free from material
error.
Financial and budget implementation: Members are concerned that in 2012, the Payment Of
Individual Entitlements (PMO) system was not yet fully operational,
leading to the incorrect payment of social allowances to staff
members.
They also noted that at the
end of 2012, the final budget for EEAS headquarters was EUR 184.1
million, with an execution of commitments rating of 99.35% and was
EUR 304.5 million for the delegations, with a commitments rating of
99.45%. They also noted that the budget of the delegations had to
be supplemented by the Commission for a total of EUR 268
million.
Concerned with the carrying over of appropriations in
2012, Members recalled that the EEAS is a recently created
institution, resulting from the consolidation of different
services, and that 2011 was its first year of operation with
numerous technical challenges to be overcome, particularly in
procurement and recruitment.
If overall Members were satisfied with the progressive
setting up of this institution, they are concerned, however, that
the Chief Operating Officer of the EEAS has maintained his
reservations concerning some of the security contracts of Union
Delegations and several Union Delegations have issued reservations
as well.
Future framework for discharge
exercises: Members noted the
importance of the current discharge in establishing the framework
for future discharge exercises and believed that it will reinforce
the expectations of future developments and improvements in the
effectiveness of the EEAS and its operations.
Taking note of the difficulties in implementing a
budget with various sources that lack equilibrium,
Members:
- believed that the current structure of the EEAS
budget, with contributions from the Commission's 26 different
budget lines and the European Development Fund makes it impossible
to have a clear overview of the real costs and expenses of the work
of the EEAS and its Delegations: they supported the simplification
proposal made by the EEAS in 2013 and asked the Commission to
implement the changes proposed and to examine the further
simplification of the EEAS's current financing;
- observed the over-representation of diplomats from the
new Member States and called on the EEAS to strengthen the
geographical balance;
- noted the over-representation and quick in the higher
grades;
- requested clarification as regards the
responsibilities of the Union Special Representatives
(EUSRs) and the review of this statute given that the High
Representative was planning to do away with EUSRs in 2010. They are
concerned that the EUSR budget was raised from EUR 15 million in
2011 to EUR 27 million in 2012 and that the travel budget for 2012
was tripled;
- called to introduce a requirement that newly appointed
EEAS staff give a declaration of honour stating that they have
not worked for intelligence services in the
past;
- called for improvements to be made in the financial
management of security contracts;
- pointed to the need for parliamentary scrutiny to be
brought to bear on INTCEN, EUMS INT, the Situation Room, and the
Satellite Centre, which produce analyses for decision-makers, based
on national intelligence service information;
- called for the publication of how many classified
documents the EEAS has received from or sent to individual
institutions, other bodies, Member States, and third
parties;
- demanded clarification of the housing policy of those
employed in Union delegations given that in year 2012 the housing
costs paid for the accommodation of 675 officials in Union
Delegations had a total cost of EUR 30 million;
- asked that the EEAS's building policy be attached
to the annual activity report and for the EEAS to provide the
discharge authority with the list of building contracts concluded
in 2012, including the details of the contracts, the country where
the contract is entered in and the length of the contract. In
addition, Members called on the EEAS to compile a summary – to
be submitted to Parliament – showing how many embassies and
consulates of Member States in countries with Union delegations
have been closed since the EEAS was set up or specifying the
countries where the establishment of the EEAS has served to create
synergies. Efforts should be made to increase savings in this
area.
Lastly, Members invited the EEAS to explain why it
was necessary to create the post of Deputy Head of Delegation for
Afghanistan and they emphasised once again the need for the
Union to create a delegation in Panama.