Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-04-Speech-3-024"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021204.2.3-024"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I too welcome the Court of Auditors' report but I wonder about the statement just made by Mr Fabra Vallés. It has a very interesting spin on the words you have actually written within your report. You mention in your statement a lack of balance in what is being said in the public arena at the moment and I agree with this. I would have liked to equal that balance out from the 300 Commission spin-doctors that have been saying things about Marta Andreassen recently and point Members of Parliament's attention to the fact that she was gagged by that very same Commission this morning.
But what did you write? You wrote: 'Since the first statement of assurance in respect to the financial year 1994, the Court has repeated its reservations in respect to the reliability of the accounts. These reservations most often have their roots in the weakness of the accounting system and in the low awareness of the Commission's operational DGs etc.'. You also said: 'In the absence of a comprehensive accounting system, the year-end financial statements are drawn up largely on the basis of records which are not part of the accounts. I would say these are actually two quite shocking statements and, oddly enough, I would also say they back up exactly some of the things that Marta Andreassen, the Commission's former chief accountant, had been saying.
If, as you just said in your statement, the accounts are so reliable, then why write those things in your report? If the accounts are so good, why did so many heads of departments refuse to sign their own accounts off without reservations? If your checks are so thorough, why do you not give us, the Parliament, a figure that we have requested for many years now, which is the percentage of money lost through fraud, mismanagement and waste – a figure you used to give us to allow us to have a benchmark to see if things are materially getting better.
Finally, I have one or two questions for the Commissioner because I am quite sure that you are a wise political manoeuvrer, Commissioner Schreyer. I think you have probably heard a host of political speeches in this Parliament today about the Court of Auditors' reports and how people are framing themselves, looking forward to discharge. I believe you have a whole host of problems coming forward and, should you read the political tea-leaves correctly, you will be keen to get your reforms under way even quicker than you have done.
So please, with that sort of political nous that you have, could you just answer a handful of very short questions for me? Who did sign off within the Commission the accounts in 2001? I think I have tabled this question to you and also a whole host of journalists have asked you this. We would really like that answer. Was it the Chief Accountant at the time? Was it the Director-General of Budgets? Was it you? Was it some secretary? Was it the commercial engineer you have employed as the Chief Accountant of the Commission presently? What is going on within your systems?
We want reform. This Parliament urges you to reform, and if you do not quickly reform the system, then please leave and let someone who will do the job do it properly."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples