Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-11-22-Speech-4-053-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20121122.7.4-053-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, let me first thank the honourable Members for their kind words to me and to those working in the Court of Auditors. Rest assured that we do our utmost to contribute to the effort that addresses the key priority we face today: to ensure sound financial management of public finances in the European Union.
I have been asked whether, if receipts are missing, an auditor can accept a reply of ‘So what?’ I would say probably in some instances the receipts are not there, and you can go to our report and see that we have identified the problem and said there is a missing receipt and we have to draw the consequences. An auditor cannot accept ‘So what?’ as a reply.
Those responsible, like those in this House, also have a role to play in addressing the underlying courses of the problems. Many Members have stressed the need to improve from where we are. But we should remember where we were at the beginning of this framework programming period and note where we are today. This shows improvement: what the Court is saying is that to make the best use of the funds available, there is scope to use them more efficiently and in a better targeted way. But here, indeed, the national authorities have a key fundamental role to play, because they are the first line of defence in terms of the best use of these funds. Of course, if you add complexity because you devolve to national authorities the eligibility conditions for payments to be made, then you may end up with 27 different sets of eligibility conditions. That will certainly lead to complexity.
But now, whilst we are addressing the future regulations for the next framework period, we have a golden opportunity to address the causes of the problems. Systems are there for a period, so we would not expect that error rates or the most likely error will move from 0 to 10 or from 1 to 100. No: systems are there; if you do not solve the causes of the problems we cannot expect huge changes afterwards.
Our recommendation, honourable Members, is clear: for a long time we have been calling for simpler schemes for using the funds, and for action on defining them and assigning to them clear objectives and cost-effective control systems. We should also aim to be in a position to see whether we want to tolerate the risk of error in some situations. That is a task this House and the Council were invited to reflect upon by the Court of Auditors in 2004.
Our task, as auditors, is to address the risk areas. This is a matter of priority for us. We draw up clear recommendations for improvements. That is our role and we are doing that as much as we can. We are also aware, Mr Vaughan, that administrative errors may occur and if they are there they indicate that we have a potentially high risk in the system that will materialise afterwards in quantifiable situations which may put all of the money at risk.
I fully share the view of Mrs Gräßle that Member States and the Commission need to work together to make things revolve when they have a shared responsibility, and I want to reassure Mr Audy that I have taken good note of his suggestion of the Court’s
. There is scope to make an effort to bring problems to the attention of this House. My colleagues and I will duly consider that request."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"rôle d’alerte"1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples