EUROPEAN COURT OF AUDITORS
ISSN 1684-0739
ANNUAL ACTIVITY
REPORT
2009
EN
Euro pe a n Co u r t
o f Au di to r s
ANNUAL ACTIVITY REPORT
2009
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers
to your questions about the European Union
Freephone number (*):
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.
More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu).
Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2010
ISBN 978-92-9207-638-2
doi:10.2865/27832
© European Union, 2010
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Printed in Belgium
PRINTED ON WHITE CHLORINE-FREE PAPER
CONTENTS
4–5
PRESIDENT’S FOREWORD
6–7
MISSION, VISION, VALUES AND STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES
8–13
THE COURT’S ROLE AND WORK
14–17
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
18–28
OVERVIEW OF AUDIT REPORTS AND OPINIONS
29–30
FOLLOW-UP AND IMPACT
31–32
THE COURT’S VIEW
33–35
THE COURT’S PLANNED WORK IN 2010
36–38
PERFORMANCE — MEASURING AND IMPROVING
39
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
40–47
HUMAN RESOURCES AND SUPPORT SERVICES
48–51
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
52
DECLARATION BY THE AUTHORISING OFFICER BY DELEGATION
3
PRESIDENT’S FOREWORD
4
I would like to welcome you to the Annual Ac tivit y Repor t 2009 of the
European Cour t of Auditors. It aims to provide an over view of the key
result s and achievement s of th e Co ur t during th e year as we ll as th e main
deve lopment s in it s au dit enviro nm ent and internal organis ation.
20 0 9 w as a n i m p o r t a nt ye a r o f re n ew a l f o r th e EU m a r ke d by th e e l e c ti o n
of a new Euro p ean Parliament , th e entr y into force of th e Treat y of Lisb on
and th e s t ar t of th e pro cess for sele c ting a new Europ ean Commission. T h e
n ew Tr e at y r e a f f i r ms th e Co u r t ’s ro l e a n d m a n d ate as we ll as i t s s t at us as
an EU ins titution and intro duces changes to th e way in which EU f unds are
t o b e m a n a g e d a n d s c r u t i n i s e d , s t r e n g t h e n i n g t h e r o l e o f t h e Eu r o p e a n
Parliament and emphasising Member States’ responsibilit y for implementing
th e b u dg e t .
The Cour t anticipates that these developments will bring impor tant
o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r i m p r o v i n g EU f i n a n c i a l m a n a g e m e n t . T h e s e c t i o n ‘ T h e
Cour t ’s v iew ’ summaris es our opinion on th e risk s and challenges that th e
new Commission will face. It identif ies improving the qualit y of EU spending
as a high priorit y.
T h e Co u r t m a d e s i g n i f i c a nt p r o g r e s s d u r i n g t h e ye a r i n i m p l e m e nt i n g i t s
Au d i t Str ate g y 20 0 9 –12 a n d tow a r ds th e g o a ls o f i m p rov i n g th e i m p a c t o f
our work and making bet ter use of our resources. A major step was the
Cour t ’s de cision to ask th e Council of th e Euro p ean Union to approve new
Rules of Pro ce dure to help s treamline our pro ce dures for adopting rep o r t s
an d o p inio ns .
I n a d d i ti o n , th e num b e r o f re p o r t s p ro du ce d by th e Co u r t ros e f ro m 42 i n
20 0 8 t o 57 i n 20 0 9. I a m a l s o p l e a s e d t o b e a b l e t o r e p o r t t h a t o u r m a i n
p r o d u c t , t h e a n n u a l r e p o r t o n t h e i m p l e m e nt at i o n o f t h e EU b u d g e t , w as
o n ce a g a i n w e l l r e ce i ve d b y o u r p r i n c i p a l i n s t i t u t i o n a l s t a ke h o l d e r s w h o
endor s e d many of it s re co mmendations.
D u r i n g 20 0 9 th e Co u r t co nti nu e d to co o p e r ate a c ti ve l y w i th th e Su p re m e
Audit Institutions (SAIs) of the Member States to develop common approaches
for the audit of EU funds and in considering how SAIs can assist governments
in resp onding to th e f inancial - e conomic crisis .
T h e C o u r t ’s a c h i e v e m e n t s d e p e n d o n t h e q u a l i t y a n d m o t i v a t i o n o f i t s
88 0 s t af f. T h eir s atis f ac tion is a key indicato r of th e ins titution’s abilit y to
succe e d, and one which is include d in this rep or t for th e f ir s t time. I would
like to thank them for their enthusiasm and commitment in helping the
Cour t f ulf il it s mission.
Víto r Manu el da Silva Caldeira
President
5
MISSION, VISION, VALUES AND
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES
MISSION
6
The European Court of Auditors is the EU institution established by Treaty to carry out
the audit of EU finances. As the EU's external auditor, it contributes to improving EU
financial management and acts as the independent guardian of the financial interests of
the citizens of the Union.
VISION
An independent and dynamic Court of Auditors, recognised for its integrity and impartiality, respected for its professionalism and for the quality and impact of its work, and
providing crucial support to its stakeholders to improve the management of EU
finances.
VALUES
VALUES
INDEPENDENCE,
INTEGRITY
& IMPARTIALITY
PROFESSIONALISM
ADDING VALUE
Independence, integrity
and impartiality for the
institution, its Members
and staff
Keeping high and
exemplary standards
in all professional
aspects
Providing adequate
output to stakeholders
without seeking
instructions or succumbing to pressure from any
outside source
Being involved in EU
and worldwide public
audit development
Producing relevant,
timely, high-quality
reports, based on sound
findings and evidence,
which address the
concerns of stakeholders and give a strong
and authoritative
message
Contributing to effective
improvement of EU
management and to
enhanced accountability in the management
of EU funds
EXCELLENCE
& EFFICIENCY
Valuing individuals,
developing talents and
rewarding performance
Ensuring effective
communication to
promote a team spirit
Maximising efficiency
in all aspects of work
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES
7
PROFESSIONALISM
OUTPUT
STAKEHOLDERS
LEARNING
& GROWTH
Robust methodology,
appropriate audit
strategy, development
of public audit practice,
common auditing
standards and audit
criteria on EU funds,
collaboration with EU
SAIs, effective
‘Community control
framework’
Selection of appropriate
audit topics, timeliness,
clarity and readability
of reports, quality
of performance audits,
increasing impact
of reports
Increasing relations
with auditees to foster
the understanding
of the audit process and
to achieve a wider
acceptance of the audit
results
Learning from the
peer-review exercise in
order to strengthen and
develop the organisation,
the methods, the
processes and the
output and to maximise
efficiency
Development of
contacts with the
European Parliament
and the Council as
budget and discharge
authorities
Effective
communication with EU
citizens
Implementation of an
effective and dynamic
human resources
policy
High-quality
professional training,
upgrading
infrastructure
Implementation of IT
policies
AUDIT STRATEGY 2009–12 GOALS
Maximising the overall impact of our audits
Increasing efficiency by making best use of resources
THE COURT’S ROLE AND WORK
8
THE EU BUDGET IS THE
S TA R T I N G P O I N T F O R
T H E CO U R T ’ S AU D I T W O R K
T h e Eu r o p e a n U n i o n h a s a b u d g e t (2 010) o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 12 3 b i l l i o n e u r o, a r o u n d
1 % of th e gross national inco m e (G NI) of it s 27 M e mb er St ates . Co mp are d to national
budget s this is a small share. However, for some Memb er States funds from the EU play
an impor tant role in f inancing public activities and the total amount is substantial
co m p a r e d to t h e G N I o f s e ve r a l M e m b e r St a te s . T h e r e ve n u e o f t h e Eu r o p e a n U n i o n
m a i n l y co ns is t s o f co n t r i b u t i o ns f r o m M e m b e r St a te s b a s e d o n t h e i r G N I (76 %) a n d
cus toms and agricultur al duties (s o - c alle d tr aditional ow n resources — 12 %) and of a
co ntr i b u t i o n b as e d o n v al u e a d d e d t a x co l l e c te d b y t h e M e m b e r St a te s ( VAT — 11 %).
The composition of the budget has evolved over time, agriculture and cohesion policies
b e i n g i t s m a j o r co m p o n e nt s (s e e B ox 1).
BOX 1 — WHAT DOES THE EU SPEND ITS MONEY ON?
The EU budget is financed through financial
contributions from Member States (based mostly
on national GNI), customs and agricultural
duties as well as VAT. The EU budget is to a
large extent directed to other objectives than
national budgets, partly due to differences in
responsibilities. The Union is for example not
responsible for social security systems, usually a
large part of national spending.
The largest single element of European Union
spending is agriculture and rural development —
principally in the form of payments to farmers —
accounting for almost half of the budget.
Another significant proportion is spending on
cohesion — regional and social development —
co-financing a wide range of projects, from
road construction in Latvia to courses for the
unemployed in the Netherlands. This constitutes
about a third of the budget.
Citizenship, freedom,
security and justice
The European Union
as a global partner
1,1 %
Administration
6,3 %
6,4 %
Preservation and management
of natural resources
(mainly agriculture)
Sustainable growth
(mainly cohesion)
47,3 %
38,8 %
EU
spending
Source: General Budget of the European Union for the financial year 2010.
The budget is decided annually — within the contex t of seven-year f inancial
framework s — by the Council, i.e. representatives of the Member States, and the direc tly
elec ted European Parliament. The European Commission proposes the budget and is also
resp onsib l e for imp l em enting it . A ve r y signif ic ant prop or tion — not ab l y agricultur al
a n d c o h e s i o n s p e n d i n g — i s i m p l e m e n t e d i n c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h t h e M e m b e r St a t e s .
D ep ending on the sp ending schemes, national adminis trations may b e resp onsible for
set ting spending strategies, selec ting benef iciaries and projec ts and making payments.
A specif ic feature of Communit y expenditure is the high percentage of payments
base d on claims submit te d by the b enef iciaries themselves, b e they f armer s or proje c t
managers throughout the Union.
9
W H AT I S T H E R O L E
O F T H E CO U R T ?
I n d e m o c r a t i c s o c i e ti e s t h e r e is a n e e d f o r a cc u r ate p u b li c l y av a i l a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n a s
a b as is f o r d e b ate a n d d e c is i o n - m a k i n g , b o t h to i m p r ove f i n a n ci a l m a n a g e m e n t a n d
to ensure acco unt abilit y. T h e EU, like it s M e mb er St ates , has an e x te r nal audito r as an
indep endent guardian of the f inancial interes t s of the citizens. A s the e x ternal auditor
of the EU, the European Cour t of Auditors check s that EU funds are correc tly accounted
for and sp ent in co mp liance with th e re levant re gulatio ns , w ith du e co nsid e r atio n fo r
a c h i e v i n g b e s t v al u e f o r m o n ey, i r r e s p e c t i ve o f w h e r e t h e f u n d s a r e s p e nt .
T h e r e s u l t s o f t h e Co u r t ’s wo r k a r e u s e d b y t h e Co m m is s i o n , t h e Pa r l i a m e nt a n d t h e
C o u n c i l , a s w e l l a s b y M e m b e r St a t e s , t o i m p r o v e t h e f i n a n c i a l m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e
EU b u d g e t . T h e C o u r t ’s w o r k p r o v i d e s a n i m p o r t a n t b a s i s f o r t h e a n n u a l d i s c h a r g e
pro ce dure wh ereby th e Parliam e nt , b asing it s de cision on re co mmendations f rom th e
Co uncil, de cides wh e th e r th e Co mmission has m e t it s resp onsibilit y for th e e xe cution
o f t h e p r e v i o u s ye a r ’s b u d g e t . D e s p i te i t s nam e, th e Co ur t has no judicial p ower s .
In the areas of the budget where management is shared, Member States cooperate with
the Commission in set ting up sup er visor y and control s ystems — internal control — to
ensure that funds are sp ent prop erly and in accordance with the rules. Internal control
t h u s h a s a n EU a s w e l l a s a n a t i o n a l d i m e ns i o n . I n a d d i t i o n to t h e wo r k d o n e b y t h e
Co u r t , m a ny n a t i o n a l a u d i t i ns t i t u t i o ns a u d i t Eu r o p e a n f u n d s t h a t a r e m a n a g e d a n d
s p e nt b y n a t i o n a l a d m i n is t r at i o ns .
OVERVIEW OF INTERNAL CONTROL AND EXTERNAL AUDIT OF THE EU BUDGET
EU level
Commission
(DGs,
internal audit
service)
Member States’
Implementing
authorities
European Court
of Auditors
External audit
Internal control
10
National audit
institutions
National level
WHAT DOES THE
COUR T AUDIT ?
T h e C o u r t c a r r i e s o u t t h r e e d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f a u d i t s 1: f i n a n c i a l , c o m p l i a n c e a n d
p e r f o r m a n ce a u d i t s . T h e s e a d d r e ss t h e t h r e e f o l l ow i n g q u e s t i o ns :
1.
Do the accounts present fairly, in all material respec ts, the f inancial position, results
a n d c as h f l ow f o r t h e ye a r, i n a cco r d a n ce w i t h t h e a p p li c a b l e f i n a n ci a l r e p o r ti n g
f r am ewo r k? (FI NAN CIAL AU D I T )
2 . Are transac tions in all material respec ts in compliance with the legal and regulator y
f r a m e wo r k s w h i c h g ove r n t h e m? (CO M PLIAN CE AU D I T )
3. I s t h e f i n a n c i a l m a n a g e m e n t s o u n d , i . e . a r e t h e f u n d s u s e d k e p t t o a m i n i m u m
(e co n o my), a r e t h e r e s u l t s a c h i e ve d w i t h t h e l e a s t p os s i b l e r e s o u r ce s (e f f i c i e n c y)
a n d h ave o b j e c ti ve s b e e n m e t (e f f e c t i ve n e s s)? (PER FO R M AN CE AU D I T )
H O W D O E S T H E CO U R T
R E P O R T I T S R E S U LT S ?
T h e Co u r t p u b lish e s t h e r e s u l t s o f i t s a u d i t wo r k i n t h e f o l l ow i n g t y p e s o f r e p o r t :
Annual rep o r t s — p r e s e nt i n g t h e r e s u l t s o f f in a n c i a l a u d i t s i n t h e f o r m o f s t a te m e nt s
o f a s s u r a n c e o n t h e g e n e r a l b u d g e t 2 a n d t h e Eu r o p e a n D e v e l o p m e n t Fu n d s 3 . T h e s e
t wo r e p o r t s a r e p u b lish e d to g e t h e r i n N ove m b e r.
S p e ci f i c a n n u a l r e p o r t s — p r e s e nt i n g t h e r e s u l t s o f f i n a n c i a l a u d i t s o n t h e a g e n c i e s
o f t h e Eu r o p e a n U n i o n a n d d e ce nt r al is e d b o d i e s .
Special repor ts — presenting the results of selec ted per formance and compliance
audit s . Sp e cial rep o r t s c an b e p u b lish e d at any tim e during th e ye ar.
In addition, the Cour t is called upon to provide its opinion on new or updated legislation
w i t h a f in a n c i a l i m p a c t .
1
For more information about the Court’s methodology please consult the manuals on the Court’s website
(www.eca.europa.eu).
2
The TFEU Treaty requires the Court to give a statement — or opinion — on the reliability of the accounts and the legality and
regularity of underlying transactions. In this context, underlying transactions are typically payments from the EU budget to final
beneficiaries. The annual Statement of Assurance is generally known by its French acronym DAS (‘ Déclaration d’Assurance’ ).
Contrary to practice in Member States, the Court gives such a statement on the entirety of the EU budget.
11
HOW DOES THE
CO U R T AU D I T ?
12
T h e C o u r t ’s a u d i t o f t h e EU a c c o u n t s i s c a r r i e d o u t i n l i n e w i t h i n t e r n a t i o n a l a u d i t
standards, which are applied by the public and the private sec tor. E xisting international
s t andards on audit do not howeve r cove r th e k ind of co mp liance au dit under t aken by
the Cour t. The Cour t takes an ac tive par t in the development of international standards,
b y s t a n d a r d - s e t t i n g b o d i e s (I nto s a i , I FAC ) 4 a l o n gsi d e n a t i o n a l au di t ins ti tu ti o ns .
In order to provide assurance as to whether the payments comply with legal and
regulator y framework s, the Cour t draws on the results both of its examination of
s u p e r v is o r y a n d co nt r o l s y s te m s , i nte n d e d to p r e ve nt o r d e te c t a n d co r re c t e r r o r s o f
legalit y and regularit y, and of a sample of the transac tions (payments) themselves (see
Box 2). When systems are tested and found to be reliable, then fewer transac tions need
to b e audite d by th e Cour t in order to com e to a valid conclusion on th eir le galit y and
r e g u l a r i t y. O th e r s o u r ce s , s u c h a s m a n a g e m e nt re p res e nt atio ns in th e fo r m of annual
ac tivit y repor ts of the Direc tors General of the Commission and the work of other
a u d i to r s , a r e a ls o u s e d to s u p p o r t t h e Co u r t ’s co n c l u s i o ns .
In per formance audit, the Cour t uses a variet y of audit methodologies to assess
management and monitoring s ystems and information on p er formance against criteria
d e r i ve d f ro m l e g is l a t i o n a n d t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f s o u n d f in a n c i a l m a n a g e m e nt .
When selec ting which per formance audits to carr y out, the Cour t aims to identif y
audit subje c t s which are like l y to y i e l d high imp a c t in te r ms of iden tif y in g p ote n t i a l
i m p r ove m e nt s i n t h e e co n o my, e f f i c i e n c y a n d e f f e c ti ve n e s s o f EU s p e n d i n g .
3
The European Development Funds (EDFs) are the result of both international conventions and agreements between the
Community and its Member States, and certain African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States, and Council decisions on association
of overseas countries and territories (OCT). The Commission manages most of the expenditure in association with ACP countries,
partly through EuropeAid (see the policy area group ‘External relations, development and enlargement’) and partly through
delegations in the recipient countries. The investment facility part of the EDFs is managed by the European Investment Bank
(EIB) and is not included in the Court’s audit mandate.
4
Intosai (International Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions); IFAC (International Federation of Accountants).
BOX 2 — THE COURT’S TESTING OF A SAMPLE OF PAYMENTS FROM THE EU BUDGET
The Court does not have the resources to audit
all the transactions of the EU budget in detail.
It therefore uses statistical sampling techniques
to provide a result which is representative of the
population as a whole. This involves randomly
selecting a representative sample of underlying
transac tions from, for example, cohesion
for detaile d testing. T he Cour t traces these
transactions down to the final beneficiaries of
the aid, for example a project promoter in Italy.
The Cour t then per forms check s to verif y the
compliance of the claim with realit y, in many
cases on the spot.
The representative nature of the Court’s sample
means the result s can b e e x trap olated over
the total population, i.e. a specific revenue or
expenditure area, and, together with information
arising from the evaluation of management and
control systems and other sources, be used as a
basis for an overall audit opinion.
SAMPLING OF TRANSACTIONS
Random selection
of a representative sample
Payment
to a project
promoter in Italy
Population of all cohesion payments
13
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 5
GOVERNANCE AND
O R G A N I S AT I O N
14
T h e Co u r t o f Au d i t o r s o p e r a t e s a s a co l l e g i a t e b o d y o f 27 M e m b e r s , o n e f r o m e a c h
M e m b e r St a t e a n d a p p o i n t e d b y t h e C o u n c i l , a f t e r c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h t h e Eu r o p e a n
Parliam e nt , for a ren ewab l e te r m of si x year s . T h e M e mb er s e l e c t on e of th eir numb er
a s p r e s i d e nt f o r a r e n ew a b l e te r m o f t h r e e ye a r s .
Fi ve a u d i t g r o u p s , to w h i c h M e m b e r s o f t h e Co u r t a r e a s s i g n e d , p r e p a r e r e p o r t s a n d
o p i n i o ns f o r a d o p t i o n b y t h e Co u r t . A s t h e o r g a n is a t i o n c h a r t s h ow s , t h e r e a r e f o u r
s e c tor al groups covering dif f erent p ar t s of th e b u dge t and on e group resp onsib l e for
‘ h o r i z o nt a l ’ m a t te r s . I n a d d i t i o n a n Ad m i n is t r a t i ve Co m m i t te e o f M e m b e r s p r e p a r e s
t h e Co u r t ’s a d m i n is t r at i ve d e c is i o ns .
At the end of 2009, the Court sent to the
Council a proposal for a revision of its Rules of
Procedure to allow certain categories of the
Court’s opinions and reports to be adopted by
Chambers, rather than the entire Court. These
changes will streamline the Court’s decisionmaking, making it more efficient partly by
decreasing the amount of time needed to adopt
decisions.
participate in the meetings of any Chamber, but
may vote only in the one to which they have
been assigned by the Court.
Each Chamber has two areas of responsibility —
firstly, to adopt special reports, specific annual
reports and opinions; secondly, to prepare
draft observations for the annual reports on
the general budget of the EU and the European
Development Funds, and draft opinions for
adoption by the Court as a whole. As for the
Court, decisions are taken by a majority of
the Members of the Chamber. Members may
The role of the Administrative Committee will
be enhanced. It is chaired by the President of
the Court and the Deans of the Chambers are
its Members. Administrative matters requiring
a Court decision and decisions on matters of
policy, principle or strategic importance will be
prepared by the Committee for approval by the
Court.
Naturally, the full Court will continue to convene
to discuss and adopt the documents for which
it is solely responsible, such as the annual
reports on the general budget of the EU and the
European Development Funds.
Apar t f rom b eing par t of the colle ge, tak ing the f inal de cisions on audit s and opinions
as we ll as on bro a der s tr ate gic and adminis tr ative issues , each M e mb er is resp onsib l e
f o r h is o r h e r ow n t as k s , p r i m a r i l y w i t h i n a u d i t i n g . T h e a u d i t wo r k i t s e l f is i n g e n e r al
c ar rie d out by th e auditor s in th e audit unit s co ordinate d by th e M emb er resp onsib le,
w i t h t h e a s s i s t a n ce o f a p r i v a t e o f f i ce . H e o r s h e t h e n p r e s e n t s t h e r e p o r t a t g r o u p
a n d C o u r t l e v e l a n d , o n c e a d o p t e d , t o t h e Eu r o p e a n P a r l i a m e n t , C o u n c i l a n d o t h e r
re l ev ant s t ake h o l der s .
5
For further details, please see the Court’s website (www.eca.europa.eu).
T H E CO U R T ’ S S TA F F
T h e Europ ean Co ur t of Au dito r s had in th e 20 0 9 b u dge t a tot al of 8 8 0 allo c ate d p os t s
(o n 31 D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 9). T h e C o u r t ’s a u d i t s t a f f h av e a b r o a d r a n g e o f p r o f e s s i o n a l
backgrounds and experience from both the public and private sec tors, including
a cco u nt an c y, f in a n c i a l m a n a g e m e nt , i nte r n a l a n d e x te r n a l a u d i t , l aw a n d e co n o m i c s .
Like all oth e r EU ins titutions th e Co ur t emp l oys nationals f rom all M e mb er St ates and
th ey are subje c t to th e EU ’s St af f R e gulations .
T he Cour t ’s audit s taf f plan and p er form audit s and prepare the draf t rep or t s to which
this work leads. They work in teams, var ying from four or f ive for some specialised
audit s to 20 or more for some of the larger audit s which the Cour t under takes (e.g. the
f i n a n c i a l /co m p l i a n ce a u d i t s o f a g r i c u l t u r a l a n d co h e s i o n e x p e n d i t u r e f o r t h e a n n u a l
St atement of A ssurance). Ty pically an audit will re quire them to se ek audit evidence in
a v arie t y of ways: by desk wo rk in Lu xe mb ourg, by v isit s to th e Europ ean Co mmission
a n d b y e x a m i n i n g w h a t h a p p e n s ‘o n t h e g r o u n d ’ i n M e m b e r St a t e s , w h e r e r e v e n u e
f o r t h e EU b u d g e t is g e n e r ate d a n d w h e r e t h e a c t i v i t i e s w h i c h a r e f in a n ce d f ro m t h e
EU b u d g e t t ake p la ce .
T h e Co ur t ’s rep o r t s and opinions mus t b e accessib l e to reader s throughout th e Union
and, in its audit work , the Cour t must maintain contact with public authorities and others
throughout the Union. None of this could happ en without the Cour t ’s translator s, who
translate the Cour t ’s repor ts and opinions (almost always prepared in English or French)
i nto 2 2 o f t h e U n i o n’s o f f i c i a l l a n g u a g e s a n d a s n e ce s s a r y t r a ns l a te co r r e s p o n d e n ce
passing to and from the Cour t. Cour t translators also sometimes assist auditors in
c ar r y in g o u t a u d i t v is i t s to M e m b e r St a te s .
The Cour t ’s administrative staf f are responsible for the wide variet y of suppor t func tions
w h i c h a r e n e ce s s a r y i n a m u l t i n a t i o n a l o r g a n is at i o n o p e r a t i n g w i t h i n t h e f r a m e wo r k
o f t h e EU: f i n a n ce , a cco u n t i n g , t h e b u d g e t , b u i l d i n g s , I T, t r a n s p o r t , s e c u r i t y a n d s o
on . T h e S e cre t ar y - G e n e r al is th e m os t s e nior m e mb er of s t af f in th e ins titution and is
r e s p o ns i b l e f o r t h e m a n a g e m e nt o f t h e Co u r t ’s s t a f f a n d a d m i n is t r at i o n .
15
EUROPEAN COURT
OF AUDITORS 2009
President
16
Vítor Manuel
da SILVA CALDEIRA (PT)
Hubert
WEBER (AT)
Maarten B.
ENGWIRDA (NL)
Máire
GEOGHEGAN-QUINN (IE)
David
BOSTOCK (UK)
Morten Louis
LEVYSOHN (DK)
Ioannis
SARMAS (EL)
Július
MOLNÁR (SK)
Vojko Anton
ANTONČIČ (SI)
Gejza
HALÁSZ (HU)
Jacek
UCZKIEWICZ (PL)
Josef
BONNICI (MT)
Irena
PETRUŠKEVIČIENĖ (LT)
Igors
LUDBORŽS (LV)
Jan
KINŠT (CZ)
Kersti
KALJULAID (ET)
Kikis
KAZAMIAS (CY)
Massimo
VARI (IT)
Juan
RAMALLO MASSANET (ES)
Olavi
ALA-NISSILÄ (FI)
Lars
HEIKENSTEN (SE)
Karel
PINXTEN (BE)
Ovidiu
ISPIR (RO)
Nadejda
SANDOLOVA (BG)
Michel
CRETIN (FR)
Harald
NOACK (DE)
Henri
GRETHEN (LU)
This organisation chart reflects the situation on 1 February 2010.
For an updated organisation chart, please visit the Court’s website
(www.eca.europa.eu).
PRESIDENCY
Vítor Manuel da SILVA CALDEIRA
President
Supervision
p
of the p
performance
of the Court’s work
Relations with the institutions of the
European Union
AUDIT GROUP I
AUDIT GROUP II
PRESERVATION AND MANAGEMENT
OF NATURAL RESOURCES
STRUCTURAL POLICIES, TRANSPORT,
RESEARCH AND ENERGY
Gejza HALÁSZ, Dean
Hubert WEBER
Július MOLNÁR
Kikis KAZAMIAS
Olavi ALA-NISSILÄ
Michel CRETIN
David BOSTOCK, Dean
Kersti KALJULAID
Massimo VARI
Ovidiu ISPIR
Harald NOACK
Henri GRETHEN
EAGF — Financial audit
Structural policies — Financial audit
EAFRD — Financial audit
Transport, research and energy — Financial
audit
Performance unit A
Transport and energy — Performance audit
Relations with SAIs and
international audit organisations
Performance unit B
Legal matters
Performance unit C
Internal audit
Fisheries, Environment, Health
AUDIT GROUP III
For further details and an updated organisation chart, please visit the Court’s website (www.eca.europa.eu).
O R G A N I S AT I O N C H A R T
EXTERNAL ACTIONS
Environment, society and welfare, tourism and
culture — Performance audit
Human capital, technology and innovation,
enterprises, ICT and information society,
technical assistance — Performance audit
AUDIT GROUP IV
REVENUE, BANKING ACTIVITIES,
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE,
INSTITUTIONS AND BODIES OF THE EU
AND INTERNAL POLICIES
Jan KINŠT, Dean
Maarten B. ENGWIRDA
Máire GEOGHEGAN-QUINN
Jacek UCZKIEWICZ
Karel PINXTEN
Irena PETRUŠKEVIČ
Š
ČIENĖĖ, Dean
Morten Louis LEVYSOHN
Ioannis SARMAS
Igors LUDBORŽS
Juan RAMALLO MASSANET
Nadejda SANDOLOVA
Cooperation with developing countries
(general budget of the EU)
Revenue of the European Union
Pre-accession and neighbourhood policies
Administrative expenditure of the institutions
of the European Union
European Development Funds (African,
Caribbean and Pacific States)
Internal policies of the European
Union
Borrowing, lending and banking activities
Agencies of the European Union
CEAD GROUP
COORDINATION, COMMUNICATION,
EVALUATION, ASSURANCE
AND DEVELOPMENT
Josef BONNICI
Member responsible for the DAS, Dean
Vojko Anton ANTONČIČ
Member responsible for ADAR
Lars HEIKENSTEN
Member responsible for Communication
Olavi ALA-NISSILÄ (AG I)
Kersti KALJULAID (AG II)
Jacek UCZKIEWICZ (AG III)
Morten Louis LEVYSOHN (AG IV)
SECRETARIATGENERAL
Eduardo RUIZ GARCÍA
Í
Secretary-General
Audit methodology and support
Human resources
Quality control
Finance and Support
Communication and reports
Information Technology
Audit supervision and support for financial
and compliance audit
Translation
Reliability of the accounts and of
management representations
17
OVERVIEW OF AUDIT REPORTS
AND OPINIONS6
In 20 09 the numb er of sp e cial rep or t s has increase d comp are d to previous year s while
th e numb er of opinions has de creas e d. T h e annual rep or t s on th e gen er al b u dge t and
t h e Eu r o p e a n D eve l o p m e nt Fu n d w e r e a d o p te d a s p la n n e d .
18
FINAL OUTPUTS
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Number of special reports
6
11
9
12
18
Annual reports (EDF included)
1
1
1
1
1
Specific annual reports
20
23
29
29
37
Opinions
11
8
9
5
1
A N N UA L R E P O R T S O N T H E
20 0 8 F I N A N C I A L Y E A R
Eve r y ye a r t h e Co u r t a u d i t s t h e EU ’s a cco u nt s a n d EU i n co m e a n d e x p e n d i t u r e . T h e
r e s u l t s o f t h is a u d i t a r e p r e s e nte d to t h e p o l i t i c al a u t h o r i t i e s o f t h e EU, t h e Par l i a m e nt
and th e Co uncil, in th e Co ur t ’s annual rep o r t s .
6
The intention of this section is to introduce, rather than to provide a summary of, the Court’s reports and opinions.
Readers are requested to refer to the full tex ts as adopted by the Cour t — available on the Cour t ’s website
(www.eca.europa.eu) — for further details.
AN N UAL R EP O R T O N T H E I M PLEM EN TAT I O N O F T H E EU B U D G E T:
SIX K E Y M E SSAG E S
•
T h e a cco u nt s f o r t h e Eu r o p e a n U n i o n g ave a t r u e a n d f ai r v i e w o f t h e f in a n c i a l
p os i t i o n a n d r e s u l t s .
•
T h e ove r a l l r e s u l t s o n l e g a l i t y a n d r e g u l a r i t y o f t r a ns a c ti o ns f o r 20 0 8 r e f l e c te d
t h e i m p r ove m e nt s i n t h e m a n a g e m e nt o f t h e b u d g e t i n r e ce nt ye a r s .
•
T h e ove r a l l i m p r ove m e nt i n 20 0 8 is a co ns e qu e n ce p r i m a r i l y o f t h e b e t te r r e s u l t s
i n t h e l a r g e s t p o l i c y g r o u p ‘Ag r i c u l t u r e a n d n a t u r al r e s o u r ce s ’. W i t h i n ‘ R u r a l
d e ve l o p m e nt ’, t h e e s t i m a te d l e ve l o f e r r o r, t h o u g h s ti l l m a te r i a l , is l ow e r t h a n i n
p rev ious ye ar s . Fo r ‘Agriculture and natu r al r e s o u r ce s ’ a s a w h o l e t h e Co u r t f o r
t h e f ir s t t i m e d o e s n o t g i ve a n a d ve r s e o p i n i o n .
•
‘ Co h e s i o n’, w h i c h is t h e s e co n d - la r g e s t p o li c y g ro u p, r e p r e s e ntin g a lm o s t a thi r d
o f t h e b u d g e t , r e m a i n e d p r o b l e m a t i c a s t h e a r e a m os t a f f e c te d b y e r r o r s . T h e
Co u r t es t imate d t hat at l ea s t 11 % of th e tot al am ount r eimb u r s e d sh ould n ot h ave
b e e n p ai d o u t .
•
Pas t r e co m m e n d a t i o ns m a d e b y t h e Co u r t to i m p r ove s u p e r v is o r y a n d co nt r o l
s y s te ms s till re m ain v ali d . T h ey mus t b e s e e n as p ar t s o f an o n g o in g p ro ce ss
w h e re th e re l ev ant m e asu re s w ill t ake tim e b e f o re th ey c an b e d e e m e d to b e
e f f e c ti ve.
•
Par ti c u l a r a n d a d d i t i o n a l a t te n t i o n n e e d s to b e dire c te d at th os e e x p e n di tu re
a r e a s w h e r e t h e Co u r t co nti n u e s to r e p o r t a h i g h l e ve l o f e r r o r. I n m a ny s i t u a t i o ns
t h e e r r o r s a r e a co ns e qu e n ce o f to o co m p l e x r u l e s a n d r e g u l a t i o ns . Sim p l i f i c at i o n ,
t h e r e f o r e, r e m a i ns a p r i o r i t y.
19
20
Unqualified opinion on the reliability
of the accounts
The Court concluded that the 2008 annual
accounts of the European Communities present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of the European Communities and the
results of their operations and cash flows.
Unqualified opinions
For 2008 the Court gave unqualified opinions for
‘ Revenue ’ , commitments for all policy groups
and payments in the policy groups ‘ Education
and citizenship ’ and ‘ Administrative and other
expenditure ’ .
Qualified opinions
Payments for the policy group ‘ Agriculture and
natural resources ’ , except for ‘Rural development’
were in all material respects legal and regular.
Payments for the policy group ‘ Economic and
financial affairs ’ , except for expenditure in this
policy group concerning the Sixth Framework
Programme for research and technological
development (FP6), were in all material respects
legal and regular.
Adverse opinions
The Court gave adverse opinions for the policy
groups ‘ Cohesion ’ , ‘ Research, energy and
transport ’ , as well as ‘ External aid, development
and enlargement ’ . Payments in these policy
groups were materially affected by errors,
although at different levels.
Improvements needed in supervision and
control systems
The supervisory and control systems for the
policy groups ‘ Research, energy and transport ’ ,
‘ External aid, development and enlargement ’
and ‘ Education and citizenship ’ were partially
effective in providing assurance as to the
prevention or detection and correction of the
reimbursement of overstated or ineligible costs.
For the policy group ‘ Agriculture and natural
resources ’ , the Court also concluded that the
supervisory and control systems were partially
effective. However, it noted that the Integrated
Administrative and Control System (IACS)
generally continued to be an effective control
system. Issues need to be addressed in certain
areas, in particular for ‘Rural development’,
where there were weaknesses.
For the policy group ‘ Economic and financial
affairs ’ the supervisory and control systems
were found to be effective in two of the three
areas assessed. In the third one, ‘ Enterprise ’ , the
systems were judged as only partially effective,
mostly due to weaknesses concerning FP6.
For the policy group ‘ Cohesion ’ , the Court found
that the systems in Member States for correcting
errors found by national controls were in most
cases at least partially effective.
The Commission, the Member States and other
beneficiary states need to make further efforts
to implement the necessary improvements
concerning these policy groups, so as to ensure
an adequate management of the risk of irregular
expenditure.
21
BOX 3 — INTERPRETING AUDIT OPINIONS
Auditors can give the following kinds of
opinions:
•
•
an unqualified opinion (also called ‘clean’ )
when there is evidence that the accounts are
reliable or the underlying transactions, i.e.
payments, are legal and regular in all material
aspects;
an adverse opinion when the level of error in
the underlying transactions is material and
pervasive, or the accounts are not reliable;
•
a disclaimer of opinion if auditors are unable
to obtain suf f icient appropriate audit
evidence on which to base an opinion, and
the possible ef fects are both material and
pervasive;
•
a qualif ied opinion when an unqualif ied
opinion cannot be expressed but the effect
of any disagreement or limitation on scope is
not so material or pervasive as to require an
adverse opinion or a disclaimer of opinion.
22
BOX 4 — SUMMARY OF THE LEGALITY AND REGULARITY OF UNDERLYING
TRANSACTIONS BY AREA OF EXPENDITURE
The table below summarises the overall
assessment of supervisory and control systems,
as outlined in the relevant chapters of the 2008
Annual Report, and gives the broad results of
the Cour t ’s testing of representative samples
of transac tions. The table highlights the key
ASSESSMENTS
OF SYSTEMS
elements but cannot present all of the relevant
detail (in particular concerning weaknesses of
super visor y and control systems and types of
error), for which it is necessar y to refer to the
main report.
ERROR
RATE RANGE
Revenue
Agriculture
and natural resources:
55 billion euro
Cohesion:
36,6 billion euro
Research,
energy and transport:
7,5 billion euro
External aid, development
and enlargement:
6,2 billion euro
Education and citizenship:
1,7 billion euro
Economic and financial affairs:
0,6 billion euro
Administrative
and other expenditure:
8,5 billion euro
Assessment of supervisory
and control systems
Not effective
Partially effective
Effective
Range in which the estimate
error rate (ER) is situated
ER > 5 %
2 % ≤ ER ≤ 5 %
ER < 2 %
(below materiality)
T H E 2 0 0 8 AU D I T O P I N I O N —
THE EDFs
T h e Co u r t co n c l u d e d t h a t t h e 20 0 8 a cco u nt s o f t h e ED Fs p r e s e nt f ai r l y, i n a l l m a te r i a l
respec ts, the f inancial position of the EDFs. As regards the legalit y and regularit y of the
tr ans ac tions th e Cour t gave an un qualif ie d opinion for th e revenue and commitm ent s
o f t h e E D Fs . T h e Co u r t a l s o c o n c l u d e d t h a t p ay m e n t s o f t h e E D Fs w e r e a f f e c t e d b y
m a te r i a l e r r o r. T h e Co u r t ’s a s s e s s m e nt o f t h e s u p e r v is o r y a n d co nt r o l s y s te m s f o r t h e
ED Fs w as that th ey we re p ar tiall y e f fe c ti ve.
S P E C I F I C A N N UA L R E P O R T S
A f u r t h e r 37 sp e ci f i c a n nu a l r e p o r t s , p e r t a i n i n g to t h e Eu r o p e a n a g e n ci e s a n d o t h e r
d e ce nt r al is e d b o d i e s o n t h e 20 0 8 f in a n c i a l ye a r, w e r e a d o p te d i n 20 0 9.
The Union’s agencies cover a wide variet y of task s in dif ferent locations throughout the
Union. Each agenc y has a sp e cif ic mandate and manages it s own budget. Audit s of the
Europ ean Union’s ag encies and oth e r de ce ntr alis e d b o dies are th e subje c t of sp e cif ic
annual rep or t s which are p ub lish e d s ep ar ate l y. T h e Cour t issue d un qualif ie d opinions
on the reliabilit y of the accounts and the legalit y and regularit y of the underlying
t r a ns a c ti o ns f o r a l l a g e n c i e s e xce p t for th e Eu rop e an Po lice Co lle g e.
23
SPECIAL REPORTS7
24
T h e Co u r t s e l e c t s a n d d e s i g ns i t s p e r f o r m a n ce a n d co m p l i a n ce a u d i t t as k s b as e d o n
criteria including the risk s to per formance or compliance for a par ticular area of income
o r e x p e n d i t u r e, t h e l e ve l o f s p e n d i n g i nvo l ve d , t h e t i m e e l a p s e d s i n ce a ny p r e v i o u s
au dit , for thcoming deve l o p m ent s in th e re gulator y or op erational f r amework s as we ll
as p o litic al and p u b lic inte res t .
T h e co m p l e x a n d d e t ai l e d n a t u r e o f p e r f o r m a n ce a n d co m p l i a n ce a u d i t s m e a ns t h e y
g e n e r a l l y r e q u i r e , f r o m t h e t i m e o f a p r e l i m i n a r y s t u d y to t h e f i n a l r e p o r t i n g , m o r e
t h a n o n e ye a r to co m p l e te.
T h e Co u r t a d o p te d a to t a l o f 18 s p e c i a l r e p o r t s i n 20 0 9. S p e c i a l r e p o r t s a r e d i r e c t l y
available from the Cour t ’s website (w w w.eca.europa.eu) and their publication is notif ied
in the O f f icial Journal of the European Union. A s in previous years the rep or ts e xamined
f i n a n c i a l m a n a g e m e n t i s s u e s i n a w i d e r a n g e o f a r e a s — f r o m , f o r e x a m p l e , t h e EU
f o o d a i d f o r d e p r i ve d p e r s o ns (SR 6/ 20 0 9) to t h e Co m m is s i o n’s t r e a s u r y m a n a g e m e nt
(SR 5/ 20 0 9).
The Court’s work identifies many different types of problems, with diverse consequences,
and formulates recommendations aiming at improving financial management, efficiency
a n d effect iveness.
B e s i d e s t h e 18 s p e c i a l r e p o r t s , t h e Co u r t a l s o i n 20 0 9 a n a l y s e d t h e u s e o f EU f u n d s
in mak ing the Chernobyl site environmentally safe. Recommendations, helping to
i m p r o ve t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e EU f u n d s c h a n n e l l e d t h r o u g h t h e E B R D, h ave b e e n
t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e Pr e s i d e n t o f t h e Co m m i s s i o n i n t h e f o r m o f a m a n a g e m e n t l e t t e r
(n ot p u b lish e d ).
The special repor ts adopted by the Cour t in
2009 are presented below under f inancial
f r a m e wo r k h e a d i n gs . To i l l u s t r ate t h e k in d o f
issues dealt with and conclusions drawn, a brief
presentation is given of one repor t under each
h e a din g .
7
Special reports are available from the Court’s website or by filling in an electronic order form on ‘ EU Bookshop ’ .
SUS TAINAB LE G R OW T H
•
•
•
•
•
25
SR 3/ 20 0 9 T h e e f f e c ti ve n e ss o f St r u c tu r al M e asu re s sp e n din g o n w as te w ate r
t r e a t m e nt f o r t h e 19 9 4 – 9 9 a n d 20 0 0 – 0 6 p r o g r am m e p e r i o ds
SR 7/ 20 0 9 M an a g e m e nt o f t h e G al i l e o p r o g r am m e ’s d e ve l o p m e nt a n d v al i d a t i o n
p has e
SR 8 / 20 0 9 ‘ N e t wo r k s o f e xce l l e n ce ’ a n d ‘ I nte g r ate d p r o j e c t s ’ i n Co m m u n i t y
R e s e a r c h p o l i c y : d i d t h e y a c h i e ve t h e i r o b j e c ti ve s?
SR 13/ 20 0 9 D e l e g atin g i m p l e m e ntin g t as k s to e xe cu t i ve a g e n c i e s : a s u cce s s f u l
o p ti o n?
SR 17/ 20 0 9 Vo c at i o n a l t r a i n i n g a c t i o ns f o r wo m e n co - f i n a n ce d b y t h e Eu r o p e a n
S o cial Fu n d
The management of the Galileo programme’s development and validation phase
The Court audited the development and
validation phase of the Galileo programme,
aiming at establishing a European Global
Navigation Satellite System. In doing this it
looked at which factors accounted for the
failures.
The Court concluded that management of
the development and validation phase was
inadequate. If the mid-2007 redirection of the
EGNOS (European Geostationary Navigation
Overlay Service) and Galileo programmes
is to succeed, the Commission must
considerably strengthen its management of
the programmes. This report includes a number
of recommendations aimed at supporting the
Commission in this task. Finally, should the EU
resolve to engage in other large infrastructure
programmes, the Commission must use the
appropriate management tools.
PR E SERVAT I O N AN D M ANAG EM EN T O F NAT U R AL R E S O U R CE S
•
•
•
•
SR 6/ 20 0 9 Eu ro p e an Uni o n f o o d ai d f o r d e p r i ve d p e r s o ns: an ass e ssm e nt o f th e
o b j e c ti ve s , t h e m e a ns a n d t h e m e t h o ds e m p l oye d
SR 10/ 20 0 9 I n f o r m a t i o n p r ov isi o n a n d p r o m o t i o n m e a s u r e s f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l
p ro du c t s
SR 11/ 20 0 9 T h e s u s t a i n a b i l i t y a n d t h e Co m m is s i o n’s m a n a g e m e nt o f t h e L I FE N at u re p roj e c t s
SR 14/ 20 0 9 H ave t h e m a n a g e m e nt i ns t r u m e nt s a p p li e d to t h e m a r ke t i n m i l k a n d
m i l k p r o du c t s a c h i e ve d t h e i r m a i n o b j e c ti ve s?
26
Have the management instruments applied to the market in milk and milk products achieved
their main objectives?
The Court reviewed the operation of the market
in milk and milk products since the introduction
of milk quotas in 1984, and analysed how the
Commissio n was managing th e p ro gressive
dere gulation of the milk se c tor initiate d in
2003.
Based on the situation at the end of 2008, the
Court makes recommendations to the Commission:
it should avoid a return to overpro duc tion,
monitor price formation within the food chain
and intensif y ref lec tion on the prospec ts for
producers in less favoured regions and on the
environmental consequences of a geographical
concentration of pro duc tion. Also it should
reorient milk production towards the needs of
the European domestic market and towards high
added value products, which can be exported
without budgetary assistance.
CI T IZENSH I P, FR EED OM , SECUR I T Y AN D J US T I CE
•
SR 2 / 20 0 9 T h e Eu r o p e a n U n i o n’s Pu b li c H e a l t h Pro g r am m e (20 03 to 20 07 ): a n
e f f e c ti ve w ay to i m p r ove Eu r o p e a n c i t i z e ns ’ h e a l t h?
The European Union’s Public Health Programme (2003 to 2007): an effective way to improve
European citizens’ health?
The Court analysed the European Union’s Public
Health Programme (PHP) for 2003–07. In doing
this it asked whether the right conditions were
set for projects f inanced from the EU budget
to complement the measures taken by Member
States to protect and improve public health.
The report details conclusions and
recommendations in programme design,
implementation and management. In view of its
findings, the Court calls into question the utility
of certain components of European public health
programmes such as the PHP. The Commission
and the Member States are invited to reconsider
the EU’s funding approach in the field of public
health.
EU A S A G LO BAL PL AY ER
•
•
•
•
•
•
27
SR 1/ 20 0 9 B ank ing m e asures in th e M e dite r r an e an area in th e co nte x t of th e M EDA
p r o g r am m e a n d t h e p r e v i o u s p r o to co ls
SR 4/ 20 0 9 T h e Co m m issi o n’s m ana g e m e nt o f N o n -St ate Ac to r s ’ invo l ve m e nt in EC
D eve l o p m e nt Co o p e r ati o n
SR 12 / 20 0 9 T h e e f f e c ti ve n e s s o f t h e Co m m is s i o n’s p r o j e c t s i n t h e a r e a o f J u s ti ce
and H o m e Af f air s for th e wes ter n B alk ans
SR 15/ 20 0 9 EU a s s is t a n ce i m p l e m e nte d t h r o u g h U n i te d N a t i o ns o r g a n is at i o ns :
d e c is i o n - m a k i n g a n d m o n i to r i n g
SR 16/ 20 0 9 T h e Eu ro p e an Co mmissi o n’s mana g e m e nt of p re - acce ssi o n assis t an ce
to Tu r key
SR 18/ 20 0 9 E f f e c ti ve n e s s o f ED F s u p p o r t f o r R e g i o n a l Eco n o m i c I nte g r a t i o n i n
E as t Af ric a and We s t Af ric a
The European Commission’s management of pre-accession assistance to Turkey
The
Court
analysed
the
Commission’s
management
of
pre-accession
financial
assistance to Turkey.
Particularly the first pre-accession assistance
period 2002–06 suffered from many weaknesses
common to pre-accession programmes. The
Commission had not set sufficiently specific
objectives for its funding to allow assessment of
the project outcomes and did not have sufficient
information to demonstrate the effectiveness
of its pre-accession assistance. However, the
projects visited did deliver their intended
outputs and the results of the projects are likely
to be sustainable. While the Commission has
already made some significant improvements,
the Court makes several recommendations for
further corrective measures. The most critical
areas for improvement are the setting of
strategic objectives for the financial assistance,
the development of more realistic timescales
for the objectives and the monitoring of actual
project performance and results based on clear
objectives and appropriate indicators.
ADM IN IS T R AT I O N
28
•
•
SR 5/ 20 0 9 T h e Co m m is s i o n’s Tre a s u r y M an a g e m e nt
SR 9/ 20 0 9 T h e e f f i c i e n c y a n d e f f e c ti ve n e s s o f t h e p e r s o n n e l s e l e c ti o n a c t i v i t i e s
c ar r i e d o u t b y t h e Eu r o p e a n Pe r s o n n e l S e l e c ti o n O f f i ce
The efficiency and effectiveness of the personnel selection activities carried out by the
European Personnel Selection Office
T he Cour t fo cuse d on how EPSO (Europ ean
Personnel Selection Office) coped with the large
increase in the number of competitions due to
enlargement. It also looked at whether EPSO
provided lists of laureates in a timely manner,
ensuring the required numbers and geographical
balance.
The Court concluded that EPSO had successfully
managed the increase in the number of
competitions needed for the enlargement of the
European Union. However staffing needs of the
institutions were not communicated to EPSO in
a timely manner; the duration of the personnel
selection process was too long; competitions only
produced, on average, two thirds of the targeted
number of laureates (successful candidates).
F i n a l l y, m a n a g e m e n t i n f o r m a t i o n w a s n o t
consistently reliable or comprehensive.
OPINIONS
A n o t h e r co ntr i b u t i o n by t h e Co u r t to i mprov ing the f inancial management of EU
funds is provided via opinions on proposals on f inancial management issues. These
o p inio ns are re quire d as p ar t of th e p ro ce ss o f a d o p tin g f in a n cial l e g islati o n 8 , o r
can be delivered at the request of any of the EU institutions 9 . The Cour t of Auditors
may also pro duce opinions on it s ow n initiative.
In 20 09 the Cour t adopted one opinion on a proposal for an amended regulation of
the budget commit tee of the O f f ice for Harmoniz ation in the Internal Market laying
down the f inancial prov isions a p p l i c a b l e to t h e O f f ice ( ‘ Finan cial R e gulatio n ’ ).
8
Article 322 of the TFEU Treaty.
9
Article 287(4) of the TFEU Treaty.
FOLLOW-UP AND IMPACT
T h e Co ur t ’s audit s prov ide infor mation dire c tl y to de cision - maker s in th e ins titutions
co n ce r n e d — i n t h e Eu r o p e a n co nte x t , p r i m a r i l y t h e Co m m is s i o n , t h e Par l i a m e nt , t h e
C o u n c i l a n d t h e M e m b e r St a t e s . T h e y c a n t a k e a c t i o n o n t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n , w i t h o r
w i t h o u t r e f e r e n ce to t h e Co u r t ’s a u d i t co n c l u s i o ns .
While the main impac t of the Cour t ’s audit is through its published repor ts and opinions,
t h e r e i s a l s o i m p a c t d u r i n g t h e a u d i t p r o c e s s . I n p a r t i c u l a r, a l l a u d i t s i n v o l v e t h e
p r e s e nt at i o n o f d e t a i l e d f i n d i n gs , s e nt to t h e a u d i te e to co n f i r m t h e ve r a c i t y o f t h e
Cour t ’s obser vations. The f inal repor t tex t is also subjec t to a ‘contradic tor y procedure’.
T h e r e p li e s o f t h e a u d i te e — m a i n l y t h e Co m m is s i o n — a r e p u b lish e d to g e t h e r w i t h
t h e r e p o r t s . I n m a ny o f t h e s e r e p li e s t h e a u d i te e r e co g n is e s t h e p r o b l e m s i d e nt i f i e d
b y t h e Co u r t a n d s e t s o u t s te p s t h a t i t i nte n d s to t ake to a d d r e s s t h e m .
O n ce th e auditing wo rk is f inish e d and a rep o r t has b e en p ub lish e d it is anal ys e d and
use d by the Parliament and Council, in e xercising their p olitical over sight over the use
o f t h e b u d g e t . T h e Co u r t ’s r e p o r t s p r ov i d e a b as is f o r t h e Co u n c i l ’s r e co m m e n d a t i o n
a n d Par l i a m e nt ’s d e c is i o n o n t h e a n n u a l d is c h a r g e o f t h e b u d g e t .
A few examples of the impact of the Court’s work can be found in actions taken by the Commission
as a result of the discharge resolution on the 2007 budget (mainly impact in 2009):
In the area of Agricultural expenditure
The management and control system for expenditure under the newly created Rural Development
Fund (EAFRD) has been aligned with the EAGF guarantee system, and will thus benefit from the
widely recognised advantages of the latter. (See Court’s AR (Annual Report) 2004, paragraph 5.54
and AR 2007, paragraph 5.57).
In the area of Cohesion
The Commission is continuing to revise the 2007–13 rules in order to simplify the system for reporting
irregularities; it is committed to reporting in early 2010 on actions carried out in 2009 and on the
first impact of all actions taken within its action plan to strengthen the Commission’s supervisory
role for structural actions. (See AR 2007, paragraph 1.53 and paragraph 6.36(a)).
In the area of External Actions
In order to reinforce the controls at the level of implementing organisations, the Commission plans
to develop specific guidance to help implementing organisations manage EU funds better and
comply with EC rules. (See AR 2007, paragraph 8.33(a)).
In the area of Internal Policies including Research
The Commission has devised a multiannual control strategy for Framework Programme 6, based on the
detection and correction of any errors which could not be identified by desk checks before a payment
was made. In order to simplif y the procedures under Framework Programme 7, the Commission
introduced a participants’ guarantee fund, considerably reducing the number of ex ante financial
checks and the use of protective measures. (See AR 2007, paragraph 7.43(b), paragraph 10.34 and
paragraph 2.42(a)).
Source: Repor t from the Commission to the European Parliament on the follow-up of the discharge 2007
decisions.
29
30
Special repor ts are also taken into consideration during the discharge procedure.
D u e to th e f a c t that th ey are p u b lish e d thro u g h o u t th e year th ey have n o r m all y b e e n
p r e s e nte d a n d d is c u s s e d a t a n e a r l i e r s t a g e a t Par l i a m e nt a n d Co u n c i l m e e ti n gs .
The impac t of audit repor ts can be increased if they are taken up by the relevant
m e dia , s timulating wider at te ntion and deb ate. T h e Co ur t ’s annual rep o r t will usuall y
g e t s i g n i f i c a nt m e d i a cove r a g e . T his w a s t h e c as e i n 20 0 9 w h e n t h e i nte r e s t o f m e d i a
primarily focused on the improvements in agriculture expenditure. Several of the
s p e ci a l r e p o r t s h ave a ls o b e e n f o l l owe d w i t h i nte r e s t b y t h e p r e s s .
For instance, the repor t on the milk market (SR 14/20 09), which assessed to what ex tent
t h e m a n a g e m e nt i ns t r u m e nt s o f t h e m i l k m a r ke t a c h i e ve d t h e i r m a i n o b j e c ti ve s , w a s
i n t e n s i v e l y d i s c u s s e d i n t h e Co u n c i l a n d P a r l i a m e n t , a n d w i d e l y t a ke n u p b y m e d i a
and professionals concerned, at a time when the sec tor is facing a wide range of
dif ficulties.
The Cour t is fur ther developing it s analysis of the impac t of it s work . In 20 09 the Cour t
b e g a n d e v e l o p i n g a s y s t e m a t i c f o l l o w - u p p r o ce d u r e f o r t h e Co u r t ’s s p e c i a l r e p o r t s
a i m i n g a t i d e nt i f y i n g a n d d o c u m e nt i n g p r o g r e s s m a d e b y t h e a u d i t e e i n a d d r e s s i n g
weaknesses identif ied and recommendations made. This will provide additional
f e e d b a c k t o t h e Co u r t o n t h e i m p a c t o f i t s w o r k , a s w e l l a s t o Pa r l i a m e n t a n d o t h e r
s t ake h o l d e r s .
THE COURT’S VIEW
OPINION 1/2010 —
IMPROVING THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF THE
E U R O P E A N U N I O N B U D G E T: R I S K S A N D C H A L L E N G E S
I n Fe b r u a r y 2010 t h e Co u r t p r o du ce d , f o r t h e f ir s t t i m e, a n o p i n i o n o n w h a t co u l d b e
d o n e to r e d u ce t h e l e ve l o f i r r e g u l a r p ay m e nt s a n d i m p r ove t h e q u a l i t y o f s p e n d i n g
(e co n o my, e f f i c i e n c y a n d e f f e c ti ve n e s s) i n t h e EU b u d g e t .
The Cour t concluded that building on recent progress in reducing the level of irregular
p ay m ent s will dep end on simp lif y ing the le gislative f r am ework s in the high - risk areas
a s w e l l a s i n t r o d u c i n g m o r e co s t- e f f e c t i ve co n t r o l s y s t e m s . S u c h r e f o r m s s h o u l d b e
u n d e r t a ke n i n t h e b r o a d e r co nte x t o f t h e c u r re nt r e v i e w o f t h e a r r an g e m e nt s f o r EU
sp ending. In the Cour t ’s view, improving the qu alit y of sp ending is a high priorit y that
c an b e a c h i e ve d b y a p p l y in g t h e co n ce p t o f Eu r o p e a n a d d e d v al u e w h e n s e t t i n g t h e
priorities for e xp enditure and by addressing the sp e cif ic problems the Cour t identif ies
i n t h e s e l e c ti o n , d e s i g n a n d o p e r a t i o n o f e x p e n d i t u r e p r o g r am m e s a n d s c h e m e s .
TA R G E T T H E A R E A S W I T H
THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF
I R R E G U L A R PAY M E N T S
A l t h o u g h t h e o v e r a l l l e v e l o f i r r e g u l a r p a y m e n t s f r o m t h e EU b u d g e t h a s f a l l e n , i t
r e m a i ns h i g h i n Co h e s i o n a n d E x te r n a l a i d , D eve l o p m e nt a n d En l a r g e m e nt , as we ll as
f o r t h e Fr a m e wo r k Pro g r a m m e f o r R e s e a r c h a n d Te ch n o l o g i c a l D eve l o p m e nt a n d f o r
Rur al D eve lopm ent E x p enditure. T h e m os t comm on ir re gularities are in e ligib le claims
b y b e n e f i c i a r i e s , o v e r- d e c l a r a t i o n o f co s t s a n d n o n - co m p l i a n ce w i t h co n d i t i o n s f o r
p ay m e n t s , e . g . p r o c u r e m e n t r u l e s . T h e y r e s u l t l a r g e l y f r o m t h e co m p l e x i t y o f r u l e s
a n d p ay m e nt co n d i t i o ns a s w e l l a s d e f i c i e n ce s o f s y s te m s to co nt r o l t h e r is k s a t t h e
f inal b e n e f i ciar y l eve l .
S I M P L I F Y T H E R E L E VA N T L E G A L
FRAMEWORKS AND IMPROVE
S U P E R V I S I O N A N D CO N T R O L
T h e Co mmission should address th e sp e cif ic s ys tems weak n ess es th e Co ur t has found
in th e high - r isk areas and improve it s sup e r v isio n . H oweve r, as co ntro ls in creas e an d
er ror r ate s f all, th e co ntro l cos t s b e gin to out weigh th e b e n e f i t s . T hus , simp lif ic ation
s h o u l d r e m a i n a p r i o r i t y. R u l e s a n d r e g u l a t i o ns t h a t a r e c l e a r to i nte r p r e t a n d s i m p l e
to a p p l y n o t o n l y d e c r e a s e t h e r is k o f e r r o r b u t c an a ls o r e d u ce co nt r o l cos t s .
31
32
IMPROVE THE DESIGN
OF EXPENDITURE
PROGRAMMES
In a d ditio n to simp lif ic atio n, w h e n rev ising e x is ting inte r venti ons and desi gning new
ones, the Commission should ensure that clear objec tives are set. There is of ten a need
for more realism as well as increase d transp arenc y and account abilit y. To achieve this,
the Commission´s existing processes for developing policies — in par ticular its prac tice
o f e x a nte e v a l u a t i o n a n d i m p a c t a s s e s s m e nt s — co u l d b e f u r th e r s t r e n g t h e n e d .
FOCUS ON EUROPEAN
A D D E D VA LU E W H E N C H O O S I N G
EXPENDITURE PRIORITIES
T he Cour t sugges t s that the concept of Europ ean adde d value should b e ar ticulate d in
a s u i t a b l e p o l i t i c al d e c l a r a t i o n o r i n t h e EU l e g is l a t i o n . T his s h o u l d p r ov i d e g u i d a n ce
to t h e EU´s p o l it ic al aut ho rit ies to b e us e d w h e n c h o os i n g e x p e n d i t u r e p r i o r i t i e s .
SEIZE THE OPPORTUNITY
O F B U D G E T R E F O R M TO I M P R O V E
T H E Q UA L I T Y O F S P E N D I N G
I n t h e C o u r t ’s v i e w, t h e C o m m i s s i o n s h o u l d c o m p l e t e t h e b u d g e t r e v i e w a s s o o n
as possible. The relevant results should be taken into account when preparing the
f i n a n c i a l f r a m e w o r k s t a r t i n g i n 2 014 . I m p r o v i n g t h e q u a l i t y o f s p e n d i n g s h o u l d b e
a h i g h p r i o r i t y f o r t h e Eu r o p e a n U n i o n ’s i n s t i t u t i o n s . I t s h o u l d , t h e r e f o r e , b e a k e y
o b j e c ti ve f o r t h e n ew Co m m is s i o n .
THE COURT’S PLANNED WORK IN
201010
Ever y year the Cour t outlines its future audit work in a work programme which is
presented to the Budgetar y Control Commit tee of the European Parliament and available
to the public on the Cour t ’s website. T he work pro gramme informs s takeholder s ab out
n ew a n d o n g o i n g a u d i t s a s w e ll as up co min g r ep o r t s .
T h e Co u r t d e ve l o p e d a n a u d i t s t r ate g y f o r t h e p e r i o d 20 0 9 to 2012 w h i c h is d e s i g n e d
around t wo priorit y goals: maximising the overall impac t from its audits; and increasing
e f f i c i e n c y b y m a k i n g b e s t u s e o f r e s o u r c e s . T h e s e g o a l s g u i d e t h e C o u r t ’s w o r k
p r o g r am m e f o r 2010 a n d i t s e f f o r t s to co nti n u o u s l y i m p r ove .
T h e Co ur t inte nds to m a x im is e t h e ove r a l l i m p a c t o f i t s a u d i t s ove r t h e p e r i o d b y :
•
s e l e c ti n g a n d d e s i g n i n g a u d i t s w h i c h f o c u s o n to p i c s re late d to are as o f r isk an d
w h i c h a r e o f g r e a te s t i nte r e s t to s t a ke h o l d e r s;
•
co nti n u i n g to p r o du ce r o b us t a u d i t co n c l u s i o ns a n d u s e f u l r e co m m e n d a t i o ns f o r
i m p rove m e nt , a n d f o ll ow i n g th e m u p;
•
carr ying out a broader range of audits and producing new audit products to
co m p l e m e nt t h e c u r re nt a n n u a l a n d s p e ci a l r e p o r t s;
•
i n c r e a s i n g t h e n u m b e r a n d i m p r ov i n g t h e t i m e l i n e s s a n d u s e r- f r i e n d l i n e s s o f i t s
sp e cial re p o r t s;
•
fur ther developing its relations with key stakeholders, including the relevant
Parliam e nt ar y Co mmit te es , m e dia and p u b lic at large.
T h e Co u r t i nte n d s to i n c r e a s e e f f i c i e n c y by m a k i n g b e s t us e o f re s o u rce s du r i n g th e
p e r i o d by :
10
•
i m p rov i n g g ove r na n ce;
•
i m p l e m e nt i n g e f f e c ti ve a n d d y n a m i c h u m a n r e s o u r ce s p o l i c i e s;
•
r at i o n a l isi n g a u d i t t as k s;
•
e n h a n c i n g I T to o ls;
•
d eve l o p i n g p ro f e ssi o n a l sk i lls;
•
d eve l o p i n g r e l ati o ns w i th au d i te e s .
For a more complete and detailed account of the Court’s future work please refer to the Court’s 2010 work
programme and audit strategy available on our website (www.eca.europa.eu).
33
34
CEREMONY TO MARK THE LAYING OF THE FIRST STONE OF A NEW BUILDING
On 1 July 2009, the first stone of a new building, the European Court of Auditors’ second extension,
was laid in Luxembourg.
Mr Vítor Caldeira, the President of the European Court of Auditors, Mr Claude Wiseler, Luxembourg’s
Minister for Public Works, Mr Patrick Gillen, President of the ‘ Fonds d’urbanisation et d’aménagement
du Kirchberg ’ and Mr Eduardo Ruiz García, the Court’s Secretary-General, did the first symbolic
spadework to mark the start of the project.
With this extension, the Court of Auditors’ complex, which already comprises two buildings, will be
able to accommodate staff recruited following successive enlargements of the European Union.
T h e Co u r t h a s i d e nt i f i e d s p e ci f i c p r i o r i t y to p i c s f o r t h e 2010 wo r k p r o g r am m e, w h i c h
inclu d e:
•
th e multiannual nature of mu ch of th e e x p en diture, inclu ding f lat r ate co r re c tio ns
a n d r e cove r i e s;
•
i n n ov at i o n a n d t h e i nte r n a l m a r ke t ;
•
human c ap i t al;
•
sus t a i n a b l e e n e r g y ;
•
th e Co mmissi o n’s s t r ate g y to simp li f y th e re gulato r y f r am ewo r k f o r b usin e ss an d
citize ns .
T he Cour t aims to widen the range of it s audit- b ase d pro duc t s during the p erio d 20 0 9
to 2012 . T his will b e achieve d in consult ation with key e x ternal s t akeholder s to ensure
that th ere is a clear under s t anding of th ei r dive r s e n e e ds and how th e Co ur t c an b e s t
m e e t t h eir e x p e c t at io ns w hil e f u lf illin g it s Treat y man date.
A s i g n i f i c a n t p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e C o u r t ’s a v a i l a b l e r e s o u r c e s i s d e v o t e d t o f i n a n c i a l
audit resulting in the St atement of A ssurance. T his involves e xamining and tes ting the
a cco u nt s a n d t r a ns a c ti o ns o f t h e EU g e n e r a l b u d g e t f o r e a c h f in a n c i a l ye a r. S e p ar ate
St a te m e nt s o f A ss u r a n ce a r e p r e p a r e d f o r t h e Eu r o p e a n D eve l o p m e nt Fu n d s a n d f o r
e a c h o f 4 0 Eu r o p e a n a g e n c i e s a n d b o d i e s . T h e a u d i t wo r k t a ke s p l a ce b e t we e n J u n e
o f ye a r n t h r o u g h to J u n e o f ye a r n+1, to a l l ow t h e a n n u a l r e p o r t s to b e p u b lish e d i n
N ove m b e r ye a r n+1 i n l i n e w i t h t h e Fin a n c i a l R e g u l a t i o n . D u r i n g 2010, t h e Co u r t w i l l
t h u s wo r k o n t h e co m p l e t i o n a n d p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e St a te m e nt o f A s s u r a n ce f o r t h e
20 0 9 f in a n c i a l ye a r, a n d s t a r t wo r k i n g o n t h e 2010 f in a n c i a l ye a r 11 .
In per forming its work the Cour t aims to provide clear conclusions on the state of
a cco u nt i n g a n d f i n a n c i a l m a n a g e m e nt f o r t h e d i f f e r e nt a r e a s o f t h e b u d g e t , a s w e l l
a s t o m a k e p r a c t i c a l , c o s t- e f f e c t i v e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s w h e r e i m p r o v e m e n t s c a n b e
m a d e.
T h e Co u r t ’s A n n u a l R e p o r t o n t h e g e n e r a l b u d g e t f o r 20 0 9 w i l l co nt i n u e to b u i l d o n
the new struc ture f irst introduced for the 20 07 repor t, which ref lec ts the change in the
way the budget is organise d 12 . T he f indings are presente d in chapter s covering lo gic al
g r o u p s o f p o l i c y a r e a s w h i c h a r e c l o s e l y, b u t n o t co m p l e t e l y, a l i g n e d w i t h t h e n e w
f in a n c i a l f r a m e wo r k h e a d i n gs . T h e Co u r t w i l l co nti n u e to p ay p ar ti c u l a r a t te nti o n to
improving the clarit y and consistenc y of the presentation of its results and conclusions,
s o a s t o a i d co m p r e h e n s i o n a n d r e a d a b i l i t y a s w e l l a s t o f a c i l i t a t e co m p a r i s o n w i t h
a n d b e t we e n p o l i c y g r o u p s , a n d b e t we e n ye a r s .
11
Further information on the DAS approach can be obtained on the Court’s website (www.eca.europa.eu).
12
The Court has set up a DAS think-tank to reflect various aspects of DAS audit design, including the issue of
redefinition of domains of specific assessments.
35
PERFORMANCE — MEASURING
AND IMPROVING
36
KEY PERFORMANCE
I N D I C ATO R S
I n 20 0 8 t h e Co u r t d e c i d e d to s e t u p a s y s te m o f Key Pe r f o r m a n ce I n d i c ato r s (K PIs) f o r
i t s a u d i t a n d n o n - a u d i t a c t i v i t i e s to m e a s u r e p e r f o r m a n ce o n t h e a c h i e ve m e nt o f t h e
strategic objec tives of the Cour t and the objec tives set in the annual work programmes.
K PI s a i m t o e n h a n ce i n t e r n a l a n d e x t e r n a l a cco u n t a b i l i t y a n d t o i n c r e a s e e f f i c i e n c y
a n d q u a l i t y o f t h e wo r k .
WHY KEY PERFORMANCE
I N D I C ATO R S ?
•
To inf o r m m ana g e m e nt o n h ow th e Co u r t , as an o rg anis ati o n , is d o in g re lati ve to
w h a t i t h a d s e t o u t to d o.
•
To supp or t the decision - mak ing process, focusing the at tention of the organisation
o n e f f i ci e n c y issu e s a n d f o s te r i n g i m p rove m e nt .
•
To p r ov i d e i n f o r m a t i o n to s t a ke h o l d e r s o n r e l e v ant Co u r t p e r f o r m a n ce iss u e s .
K PI s f o c u s o n t h e a c h i e ve m e nt o f t h e Co u r t ’s s t r a te g i c o b j e c t i ve s b y cove r i n g a u d i t
q u a l i t y, o u t p u t , i m p a c t a n d t h e s o u n d m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e C o u r t ’s r e s o u r c e s . K P I s
r e p o r t o n t h e C o u r t ’s ‘c o r p o r a t e ’ p e r f o r m a n c e a n d t h e y a r e a n i n t e g r a l p a r t o f t h e
Co u r t ’s m a n a g e m e nt s y s te m .
THE COURT’S KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
37
KPI 1
Appraisal by the principal users of the Court’s reports of the quality and impact
of the Court's audit
KPI 2
Appraisal by the auditee of the quality and impact of the Court’s audits
KPI 3
Score granted by a panel of external experts on the content and presentation
of the Court’s reports
KPI 4
Percentage of audit recommendations:
(a) accepted by the auditee
(b) implemented by the auditee within a certain number of years
KPI 5
Number of reports adopted compared to planned adoptions
KPI 6
Number of reports adopted on time
KPI 7
Percentage of Statements of Preliminary Findings issued on time
KPI 8
External appraisal of the Court’s financial management:
(a) opinion of the external auditor
(b) decision of the discharge authority
KPI 9
Degree of satisfaction of the Court’s staff
KPI 10
Average professional training days per person
Quantit y and qualit y of audit work can also be improved when looking at the impac t that
the Cour t ’s rep or ts and opinions have on f inancial management. Four key p er formance
indic ato r s (1 to 4) are t arge te d at m e asuring th e imp a c t of th e Co ur t ’s wo rk . T h ey are
i n c lude d in t h e Co u r t ’s 2010 an n ual wo r k pr o g r amm e.
38
N u m b e r o f r e p o r t s a d o p te d co m p a r e d to p l an n e d
In 20 0 9, th e Co ur t adopte d 91 % of th e p lann e d numb er of rep o r t s . T h e annual rep o r t
and all specif ic annual repor ts were adopted according to plan. As for the special
rep or t s , 18 were adopte d comp are d with th e p lanne d 24. T he si x remaining ones were
in th e f inal rep o r ting p has e at 31 D e ce mb er 20 0 9.
N u m b e r o f r e p o r t s a d o p te d o n tim e
I n 20 0 9, t h e Co u r t a d o p te d 67 % o f i t s r e p o r t s w i t h i n t h e s e t t i m e f r a m e . T h e a n n u a l
rep or t and all sp e cif ic annual rep or t s were adopte d in time. Due to delays with sp e cial
rep o r t s , th e Co ur t did not m e e t th e t arge t s e t for K PI 6 . Fur th e r e f for t s are n e e d e d to
i m p r ove t h e t i m e l i n e s s o f t h e a d o p t i o n o f s p e ci a l r e p o r t s .
M e asu r i n g t h e p e r ce nt a g e o f key p r e l i m i n ar y f i n d i n gs issu e d o n tim e
The Cour t notif ies the auditee about its initial audit results in a Statement of Preliminar y
Fin d i n gs (SPF ). T h e Co u r t i nte n d s to s p e e d u p t h e d e l i ve r y o f SPFs b y 10 % e ve r y ye a r
w i t h a l o n g - te r m t a r g e t o f 8 0 % o f SPFs to b e is s u e d w i t h i n t h e s e t t i m e f r a m e (t wo
months af ter the f inal audit visit). In 20 09 the amount of SPFs issued on time increased
by 16 % co mp are d to 20 0 8 .
E x t e r n a l a p p r a i s a l o f t h e C o u r t ’s f i n a n c i a l m a n a g e m e n t : (a) o p i n i o n o f t h e
e x te r n a l au d i to r an d (b) d e cisio n o f t h e d i s c h a r g e au t h o r i t y
The Cour t ’s ex ternal auditor gave a clean/unqualif ied opinion on the f inancial statements
a n d o n t h e u s e o f r e s o u r ce s , a n d t h e Eu r o p e a n Pa r l i a m e n t g r a n te d d is ch a r g e a f te r a
p ositi ve re co mm e n datio n f ro m th e Co un cil.
D e g r e e o f s atis f ac tion o f t h e Co u r t ’s s t af f
F o l l o w i n g a n i n t e r n a l s u r v e y i n 20 0 9 o n s t a f f s a t i s f a c t i o n , 8 6 % o f t h e Co u r t ’s s t a f f
were generally satisf ied with their job (target of 80 %) while the overall degree of staf f
s at is f a c t i o n r e a c h e d a s co r e o f 2 , 8 o n a s c a l e o f 4 (t a r g e t o f 2 , 5).
Ave r a g e p r o f e ssio n al trai ni n g d ay s p e r au d i to r s (n o n - l an g u a g e)
F o l l o w i n g g u i d e l i n e s p u b l i s h e d b y I FAC ( I n t e r n a t i o n a l F e d e r a t i o n o f A c c o u n t a n t s),
t h e Co u r t t r i e s t o p r o v i d e 4 0 h o u r s (f i v e d ay s) o f av e r a g e p r o f e s s i o n a l t r a i n i n g p e r
a u d i to r. I n 20 0 9 t h e ave r a g e w a s f o u r d ay s . E f f o r t s w i l l b e s te p p e d u p to e nsu r e t h e
t a r g e t is m e t i n 2010.
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
T h e Co u r t co n t i n u e d t o p l ay a f u l l a n d a c t i v e p a r t i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l co o p e r a t i o n
in:
•
the Contac t Commit tee, which brings together the heads of supreme audit
ins titutions in the EU M e mb er St ates and the Co ur t ’s President;
•
t h e n e t wo r k o f su p r e m e au d i t i ns t i t u t i o ns o f co u nt r i e s w h i c h a r e c a n d i d ate s
for EU memb er ship;
•
the Europ ean O rganis ation of Suprem e Au dit Ins titutions (Euros ai); and
•
the Inte rnational O rganis ation of Supreme Au dit Ins titutions (Intos ai).
As well as contributing to these organisations’ annual meetings and to the
improvement of international auditing s tandards and prac tices, the Cour t ac tively
par ticipate d in commit te es and work ing par ties establishe d by them. In par ticular
th e Co ur t :
•
chaired the Contac t Commit tee’s working groups on common auditing standards
a n d o n VAT;
•
p ar ticip ate d in the Co nt ac t Co mmit te e’s wo rk ing groups on national supreme
au dit ins titution rep o r t s and the Struc tural Funds;
•
was represente d in Euros ai ’s work ing groups on the environment and IT, in the
Eu r o s a i g r o u p w h i c h is p r e p a r i n g a g o o d p r a c t i ce g u i d e to a c h i e v i n g q u a l i t y
and in the Eurosai training commit tee and in the Eurosai task force on the audit
o f f un ds a l l o c ate d to d is as te r s a n d c at as tr o p h e s;
•
c h a i r e d I n t o s a i ’s w o r k i n g g r o u p o n a cco u n t a b i l i t y f o r a n d a u d i t o f d i s a s t e rre late d aid;
•
participated in Intosai’s subcommittees on financial, compliance and per formance
au dit and in it s t ask force on the glob al f inancial crisis .
39
HUMAN RESOURCES AND
SUPPORT SERVICES
40
T h e C o u r t ’s m a i n a s s e t i s i t s s t a f f . O n 31 D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 9 , t h e C o u r t h a d a s t a f f
co m p l e m e nt o f 8 8 0 (o f f i c i a ls a n d te m p o r a r y s t a f f, b u t e xc l u d i n g M e m b e r s , co nt r a c t
s t a f f, s e co n d e d n a t i o n a l e x p e r t s a n d t r a i n e e s). T h e s t a f f co m p l e m e nt co m p r is e s 52 5
e m p l o y e d w o r k i n g w i t h a u d i t- r e l a t e d t a s k s ( i n c l u d i n g 115 i n p r i v a t e o f f i c e s o f t h e
M e m b e r s), 163 i n t r a ns l a t i o n , 171 i n a d m i n is t r at i ve s u p p o r t a n d 21 i n t h e Pre s i d e n c y.
T h e y h ave a b r o a d r a n g e o f a c a d e m i c a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l b a c kg r o u n d s a n d t h e q u a l i t y
o f t h e i r wo r k a n d t h e i r co m m i t m e nt is r e f l e c te d i n t h e i ns ti t u t i o n’s o u t p u t .
BREAKDOWN OF COURT POSTS AT 31 DECEMBER
(filled and vacant p
posts))
2008
2009
Audit-related task
501
525
Translation
163
163
Administrative support
173
171
Presidency
20
21
857
880
Total
The Cour t is commit ted to the achievement of its strategic goal of increasing ef f icienc y
by m a k i n g b e s t us e o f r e s o u rce s . H e n ce, a ll a c t i v i t i e s i n 20 0 9 co nt i nu e d to s e e k a n d
introduce potential ef f icienc y gains through the simplif ication of procedures and
s t r e a m l i n i n g o f s e r v i c e s . I n p a r t i c u l a r s u p p o r t r e s o u r c e s m a d e av a i l a b l e f o l l o w i n g
th e e f f i ci e n c y g ains we re re d e p l oye d w h e n eve r p ossib l e to au di t . T his is an o n g o in g
p r o ce s s w h o s e e f f e c t s w i l l b e co m e m o r e a p p ar e nt i n 2010.
Fo r h u m a n r e s o u r ce s t h e Co u r t h a s s e t a ke y p e r f o r m a n ce i n d i c ato r (K PI 9) to a s s e s s
the de gre e of s atis f ac tion of the Cour t ’s s t af f (se e p age 37). A s t af f s atis f ac tion sur vey
was launche d to provide information on this topic and to supp or t the de cision - mak ing
process in this area. The Cour t is currently implementing ac tions to take full advantage
o f o p p o r tu n i t i e s i d e nt i f i e d to a c h i e ve h i g h e r r e s u l t s i n t h e co m i n g ye a r s .
PROPORTION OF
MEN AND WOMEN
41
T h e s t a f f w a s m a d e u p o f m e n a n d wo m e n i n a l m os t e qu a l p r o p o r t i o ns .
12.2001
12.2009
54 %
46 %
51 %
49 %
The char t s b elow shows the prop or tion of men and women by level of resp onsibilit y at
31 D e ce mb er 20 0 9. Like th e oth e r Europ ean ins titutions , th e Co ur t app lies a p o lic y of
e qu a l o p p o r tu n i t i e s i n i t s h u m a n r e s o u r ce s m a n a g e m e nt a n d r e c r u i t m e nt . T h e Co u r t
re co gnis es th e n e e d to b e m o re ac tive in prom oting e qual treatm ent wh en re cruiting
to higher management levels. 17 of the 6 4 Direc tors and Heads of Division/Unit (26, 5 %)
a r e wo m e n , w h i c h is a s l i g ht i n c r e a s e s i n ce 20 0 8 (24 %). M o s t o f t h e m a r e, h ow e ve r,
e m p l oye d i n t h e Tr a ns l a t i o n D ir e c to r a te a n d i n t h e a d m i n is t r at i ve d e p ar t m e nt s .
The increase in the number of women at AD level ref lects the latest recruitment
c am p aig n . 43 % o f t h e s t af f ar e female at AD5 to AD 8 leve ls .
Directors and head of units
2008
76 %
24 %
2009
73,5 %
26,5 %
42
Auditors — administrators (AD level)
67 %
2008
33 %
63 %
2009
37 %
Assistants — secretaries (AST level)
27 %
2008
73 %
33 %
2009
67 %
AGE PROFILE
T h e a g e p r o f i l e g r a p h b e l ow o f t h e 8 62 s t a f f i n a c t i ve s e r v i ce a t t h e
31 D e ce m b e r 20 0 9 s h ow s t h e Co u r t a s a ‘ yo u n g ’ i ns ti t u t i o n , w i t h 61 % o f s t a f f
a g e d 4 4 ye a r s o r l e s s . T h e 9 9 Co u r t e m p l oye e s w h o a r e 55 o r o l d e r i n c l u d e
6 4 D ir e c to r s a n d H e a d s o f D i v is i o n / Un i t , w h i c h m e a ns e x te nsi ve r e n ew a l
m a n a g e m e nt i n t h e n e x t f i ve to te n ye a r s .
170
161
150
131
103
63
47
34
1
2
20–24 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44 45–49 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–
Co u r t a t
members
24 o u t o f
of senior
RECRUITMENT
The Cour t ’s recruitment polic y follows the general principles and employment conditions
of th e EU ins titutions , and it s wo rk force co mpris es b oth p e r man ent civ il s e r v ant s and
s t af f on te mp or ar y co ntr ac t s . O p en co mp e titions for p os t s at th e Co ur t are organis e d
by the European Personnel Selec tion Of f ice (EPSO). The Cour t also provides traineeships
to a l i m i te d n u m b e r o f u n i ve r s i t y g r a d u a te s f o r p e r i o ds o f t h r e e to f i ve m o nths .
I n 2 0 0 9, t h e C o u r t r e c r u i t e d 112 e m p l o y e e s : 6 9 o f f i c i a l s , 14 t e m p o r a r y s t a f f a n d
29 co nt r a c t s t a f f. R e c r u i t m e nt d e p e n d s o n t h e av a i l a b i l i t y a n d s u f f i c i e n c y o f r e s e r ve
l is t s f ro m EPS O co m p e ti t i o ns .
T h e C o u r t w a s s u c c e s s f u l i n r e c r u i t i n g a s u i t a b l e n u m b e r o f n e w s t a f f i n 2 0 0 9. T h e
7 3 v a c a n t p o s t s a t 31 D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 9 w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e d u c e d b y 33 % t o 49 b y
26 Janu ar y 2010 an d w ill co ntinu e to f all shar p l y in th e co m in g m o nths as a re su l t o f
audit staf f entering into ser vice pursuant to a recent recruitment campaign. There
we re 6 8 v a c ant p os t s at 31 D e ce mb er 20 0 8 .
The Cour t was also successful in shor tening its average recruitment time period in 20 09.
For staf f recruited from the EPSO AD/126/08 competition, the reser ve list was published
in August and the f irst successful candidates joined the Cour t at the beginning of
N ove mb er, jus t thre e m o nths af te r.
PROFESSIONAL TRAINING
T h e a u d i t p r o f e s s i o n r e q u i r e s co n t i n u o u s t r a i n i n g . Fu r t h e r m o r e , t h e s p e c i f i c i t i e s o f
t h e Co u r t ’s a u d i t e nv ir o n m e nt c r e a te a n e e d f o r a u d i to r s w i t h g o o d l i n g u is ti c s k i l ls .
In 20 09, the Cour t ’s staf f each received an average of nine days of professional training.
L an g u a g e co u r s e s r e p r e s e nte d 6 4 % o f t h e tot a l n u m b e r o f d ay s d e vote d to t r a i n i n g
in 20 09, comp are d to 4 8 % in 20 0 8 . W ithout t ak ing into account the language cour ses,
a u d i to r s d e vo te d f o u r d ay s to p r o f e s s i o n a l t r a i n i n g i n 20 0 9 (s e e K PI 10 o n p a g e 38).
T h is f i g u r e is e x p e c te d to i n c r e a s e i n 2010, f o l l ow i n g t h e co m p u ls o r y t r a i n i n g to b e
d e l i ve r e d to n ew a r r i v als . E f f o r t s a r e a ls o b e i n g m a d e to i nt r o du ce r e f re s h e r t r a i n i n g
co ur s e s in key audit areas .
B as e d on th e long -ter m s tr ate gic obje c tive ‘ Lear ning and grow th’ and th e dire c tional
plan for training for 20 08 –11 as well as on the 20 09 adopted training paths, the training
u n i t h a s i m p r ove d t h e co nte nt o f t r a i n i n g a n d d e ve l o p e d n ew co u r s e s f o l l ow i n g t h e
priorities decided by the Cour t. In addition, the cooperation with the other institutions
a n d i n t e r i n s t i t u t i o n a l b o d i e s s u c h a s t h e Eu r o p e a n A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S c h o o l h a s b e e n
su cce ss f ull y co ntinu e d .
B ox 5 present s the s t af f of one audit group unit within the Cour t, prov iding an insight
i nto t h e wo r k c ar r i e d o u t a n d t h e p e o p l e co n ce r n e d .
43
44
BOX 5 — WESTERN BALKANS JUSTICE AND HOME AFFAIRS TEAM
The western Balkan countries have been affected
by violence in the past. The European Union’s
interest in the region is to promote security and
long-term stability. The rule of law, secure borders
and fighting corruption are prerequisites for EU
accession and a major challenge in the western
Balkans. The European Commission is financially
the most signif icant donor in the region. The
Court’s 2009 report on the effectiveness of the
Commission’s projects in the area of justice and
home af fairs for the western Balkans (Special
Report No 12/2009) provided an insight into this
particularly important area.
T he auditors analyse d b oth investment and
i ns ti t u t i o n - b u i l d i n g p r o j e c t s i n f o u r a r e a s :
asylum, integrated border management, judiciary
and police. Thirty-three finalised projects were
audited on the spot including an asylum centre
and a prison in Albania and a human rights and
war crimes cour t in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Also several EU-financed border crossing points
in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Montenegro and Serbia were visited to assess
whether EU intervention made a difference.
The team behind the audit worked in close cooperation with the reporting Member, Mr Maarten
B. Engwirda. The heads of unit responsible for
the sup er vision of the audit were Mr s Raija
Peltonen and Mr Ossi Louko, the team leader
was Mr Jussi Bright. The auditors involved were
Mr Enrico Grassi and Mr Miroslav Matej with
Mr Horst Fischer and Mr Jan Pieter Lingen from
Mr Maar ten B. Engwirda’s private of f ice also
playing a significant role.
From left to right, Raija PELTONEN, Head of Unit, Jan Pieter LINGEN, Head of Private Office, Horst FISCHER,
Private Office attaché, Jussi BRIGHT, Team leader auditor, Maarten B. ENGWIRDA, Member of the Court,
Ossi LOUKO, Head of Unit, Enrico GRASSI, Auditor, Miroslav MATEJ, Auditor.
TR ANSL ATION
Tr a n s l a t i o n i s a n i m p o r t a n t a u d i t s u p p o r t a c t i v i t y w h i c h e n a b l e s t h e Co u r t t o f u l f i l
i t s m i s s i o n a n d t o m e e t i t s co m m u n i c a t i o n o b j e c t i v e s . I n 2 0 0 9, t h e t o t a l v o l u m e o f
translated work increased by 5, 2 %, as compared to 20 08. The percentage of translation
s e r v i ce s p e r f o r m e d o n t i m e w a s a b ove 95 % .
Linguistic assistance to auditors for conduc ting audit visits and for draf ting the repor ts
has increased. Suppor t was also provided to Intosai working groups and for other
sp e cif ic n e e ds re late d to th e Co ur t ’s audit ac tiv i ties . In Januar y 2010 a n ew co mp uter
a p p l i c a t i o n ( A r t e m i s) w a s i n t r o d u c e d t o m a n a g e m o r e e f f i c i e n t l y t h e t r a n s l a t i o n
wo r k .
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
I n f o r m a t i o n te c h n o l o g y p r ov i d e s key to o ls a n d s e r v i ce s to t h e a u d i to r s . I n 20 0 9, t h e
f o l l ow i n g m a i n d e ve l o p m e nt s w e r e a c h i e ve d:
•
Process simplif ication and continuation of migration to a paperless of f ice
environment through the implementation of automatic approval (visa) and electronic
forms solutions, introduction of electronic signature and initiation of work on
i m p l e m e nt i n g a r e co r d s m a n a g e m e nt s y s te m .
•
The securit y of the Cour t ’s IT infrastruc ture was strengthened with the establishment
o f a d i s a s t e r r e co v e r y c e n t r e a n d u p g r a d i n g o f t h e L o t u s N o t e s p l a t f o r m , w h i c h
constitutes the backbone of the Cour t ’s critical messaging and audit documentation/
a r c h i v i n g s y s te m s .
•
A l o n g - te r m I T p l a n 2010 –12 w a s a d o p te d to e n a b l e t h e a l i g n m e nt o f I T w i t h t h e
C o u r t ’s c o r e a u d i t s t r a t e g i c o b j e c t i v e s a n d t h e c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e p u r s u i t o f
e xce l l e n ce i n t h e d e l i ve r y o f s e r v i ce s .
45
46
ADMINISTRATION AND
FACILITIES
T h e Fin a n ce a n d S u p p o r t D ir e c to r a te p r ov i d e s a d m i n is t r at i ve s e r v i ce s a n d f a c i l i t i e s .
T his in clu d e s inte r nal co nt ro ls an d a cco u ntin g m e chanisms , a dm inis t r ati ve an d
l o g is ti c s e r v i ce s .
I n 20 0 9, t h e d i r e c to r a te f o c u s e d o n a r e o r g a n is at i o n o f i t s s e r v i ce s s o a s to i m p r ove
e f f i c i e n c y a n d e f f e c ti ve n e s s a n d to r e l e a s e r e s o u r ce s f o r r e d e p l oy m e nt to a u d i t . T his
r e o r g a n is at i o n l e d to a r e d u c ti o n o f t h e n u m b e r o f u n i t s i n t h e d i r e c to r a te (f r o m f i ve
to t h r e e) a n d t h e r e d e p l oy m e nt o f a n u m b e r o f p os t s to t h e a u d i t s e r v i ce s .
A m a j o r a c t i v i t y o f t h e d i r e c to r a te h a s i nvo l ve d t h e co ns t r u c t i o n o f a n ew b ui l d i n g f o r
t h e Co u r t (th e K 3 b ui l d i n g). I n 20 0 9, f o l l ow i n g a c al l f o r te n d e r s , a p r o j e c t m a n a g e r
w as ap p o inte d . Co ns t r u c ti o n wo r k w ill co m m e n ce in M arch 2010 an d is e x p e c te d to
b e co n c l u d e d i n 2013. T h e p r o j e c t r e m a i ns o n t i m e a n d w i t h i n b u d g e t .
AUDIT VISITS
47
T h e Co u r t ’s au di t wo r k re quire s au di to r s to m ake v isi t s to M e m b e r St ate s an d oth e r
r e c i p i e nt co u nt r i e s o f EU f u n d s to o b t ai n a p p r o p r i a te a u d i t e v i d e n ce.
T h e s e v is i t s a r e n o r m a l l y to ce nt r al a n d l o c al a d m i n is t r at i o ns i nvo l ve d i n t h e
p r o ce s s i n g , m a n a g e m e nt a n d p ay m e nt o f EU f u nds and to th e f inal b e n e f i ciaries that
r e ce i ve t h e m . Au d i t te a m s g e n e r al l y co m p r is e t wo o r t h r e e a u d i to r s a n d t h e l e n g t h
of an audit mission is usuall y up to t wo w e e k s , d e p e n d i n g o n t h e t y p e o f a u d i t a n d
t r ave ll i n g d is t a n ce.
W i thin th e EU, th e audit v isit s are of te n m a d e i n l i a is o n w i t h t h e s u p r e m e a u d i t
i ns ti t u t i o ns o f t h e M e m b e r St a te s v is i te d , w h i c h p r ov i d e u s e f u l l o g is ti c a l a n d p r a c t i c al
sup p o r t .
T h e f o l l ow i n g g r a p h p r ov i d e s a s u m m a r y o f t h e n u m b e r o f a u d i t v is i t s u n d e r t a ke n
by th e Co ur t within EU M e mb er St ates (30 0) in 20 0 9. T h ere were also 36 audit v isit s
o u t si d e t h e U n i o n i n 20 0 9.
AUDIT VISITS — MEMBER STATES (TOTAL: 300)
50
48
40
34
30
30
23
20
4
3
3
3
2
2
Ireland
Lithuania
Slovakia
Czech Republic
Austria
Sweden
Hungary
Denmark
Belgium
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Greece
United Kingdom
Italy
Spain
France
Germany
0
2
2
1
1
Malta
6
Estonia
6
Bulgaria
6
Luxembourg
7
Finland
7
Cyprus
8
Romania
8
Latvia
10
Slovenia
17 17 16
15 15 14
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
48
I M P L E M E N TAT I O N
OF THE 2009 BUDGE T
T h e u s e o f t h e b u d g e t a r y a p p r o p r i a t i o ns a l l o c ate d to t h e Co u r t f o r t h e f in a n c i a l ye a r
20 0 9 is s u m m a r is e d i n t h e t a b l e b e l ow.
In 2009 the rate of implementation of the overall budget was higher than 92 %. In Title 1
( Pe o p l e w o r k i n g w i t h t h e i n s t i t u t i o n) t h i s r a t e i s 8 8 % , w i t h t h e l o w e s t p e r c e n t a g e
(82 %) i n Ch a p te r 14 (O t h e r s t a f f a n d e x te r n a l s e r v i ce s); t h is is m a i n l y d u e to v a c a nt
a n d u n d e r- o cc u p i e d p os t s a n d s av in gs m a d e . I n T i t l e 2 (B u i l d i n gs , m ov a b l e p r o p e r t y,
e q u i p m e n t a n d m i s ce l l a n e o u s o p e r a t i n g e x p e n d i t u r e), t h e ave r a g e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
r ate is cl o s e to 10 0 % .
T h e a m o u nt o f p ay m e nt s f o r Cha p te r 20 (I m m ov a b l e p r o p e r t y, ‘ b u i l d i n gs’ ) is a f f e c te d
b y t h e co ns t r u c t i o n o f t h e s e co n d e x te ns i o n o f t h e Co u r t , t h e K 3 b u i l d i n g . T h e f i r s t
t r a n c h e o f f i n a n c i n g o f 55 m i l l i o n e u r o f o r t h i s p r o j e c t w a s i n c l u d e d i n t h e 2 0 0 9
b u d g e t ; t h is a m o u nt h a s b e e n co m m i t te d a n d a p a r t o f i t p a i d i n 20 0 9. T h e b a l a n ce
o f a p p r o p r i a t i o n s f o r t h e K 3 b u i l d i n g i s c a r r i e d f o r w a r d t o 2 010 t o c o v e r c o n t r a c t s
signed by the projec t manager on the Cour t ’s b ehalf with construc tion companies. The
a p p ro p r iati o ns w i ll b e u ti lis e d i n a cco r d a n ce w i th th e su b m issi o n m a d e by th e Co u r t
to t h e Eu ro p e an Parl iam e nt an d th e Co un cil towar ds th e en d of 20 0 8 .
2009 FINANCIAL YEAR
Final
appropriations
Commitments
Payments
% use
(commit. approp.)
(in 1 000 euro)
10 — Members of the institution
11 718
11 318
11 205
96,59
12 — Official and temporary staff
91 986
79 903
79 744
86,86
14 — Other staff and external services
4 597
3 800
3 763
82,66
162 — Missions
3 290
2 851
2 148
86,66
161, 163, 165 — Other expenditure relating
to persons working for the institution
2 692
2 314
1 678
85,96
Subtotal Title 1
114 283
100 186
98 538
87,66
62 443
62 425
7 313
99,97
20 — Immovable property
210 — IT & T
6 269
6 259
3 604
99,84
212, 214, 216 — Movable property and
associated costs
901
848
718
94,12
23 — Current administrative expenditure
424
389
275
91,75
25 — Meetings, conferences
878
870
655
99,09
2 446
2 378
1 055
97,22
73 361
73 169
13 620
99,74
187 644
173 355
112 158
92,39
27 — Information and publishing
Subtotal Title 2
Total Court of Auditors
BUDGE T FOR 2010
49
T h e Co u r t ’s 2010 b u d g e t r e p r e s e n t s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 0 ,1 % o f t h e t o t a l EU b u d g e t , o r
a r o u n d 1, 87 % o f t h e E U a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a n d i n s t i t u t i o n a l b u d g e t . T h e t a b l e b e l o w
s h ow s h ow t h e a p p r o p r i a t i o ns a r e d is t r i b u te d b e t we e n d i f f e r e nt b u d g e t l i n e s . St a f f
a p p r o p r i a t i o ns a m o u nt to a p p r ox i m a te l y 76 % o f t h e tot al i n 2010.
T h e 2010 b u d g e t h a s d e c r e a s e d b y 21 % co m p a r e d to 20 0 9, m a i n l y d u e to t h e l ow e r
a p p r o p r i a t i o ns f o r t h e Co u r t ’s n ew b ui l d i n g (K 3).
T h e tot al cos t of th e cons truc tion of th e K 3 b uilding is es timate d at 79 million euro to
b e f inan ce d in f o ur su ccessi ve year s: 55 milli o n e u ro in 20 0 9; 11 milli o n e u ro in 2010 ;
7 m i l l i o n e u r o i n 2011 a n d 6 m i l l i o n e u r o i n 2012 .
BUDGET
2010
2009
2008
(in 1 000 euro)
10 — Members of the institution
13 364
11 718
12 061
12 — Official and temporary staff
94 246
92 086
88 712
14 — Other staff and external services
4 590
4 497
4 248
162 — Missions
3 450
3 290
3 212
161, 163, 165 — Other expenditure relating to persons
working for the institution
2 861
2 684
2 286
118 511
114 275
110 519
18 518
62 891
12 110
6 365
6 269
5 879
212, 214, 216 — Movable property and associated costs
877
981
1 147
23 — Current administrative expenditure
404
439
425
25 — Meetings, conferences
868
868
876
2 389
1 921
1 813
29 421
73 369
22 250
147 932
187 644
132 769
Subtotal Title 1
20 — Immovable property
210 — IT & T
27 — Information and publishing
Subtotal Title 2
Total Court of Auditors
50
I N T E R N A L AU D I T
SERVICE
T h e p u r p o s e o f t h e Co u r t ’s I n te r n a l Au d i t S e r v i ce is to a s s is t t h e Co u r t i n a c h i e v i n g
its objec tives by a systematic and methodological evaluation of risk management,
i nte r n a l co nt r o l a n d m a n a g e m e nt p r o ce du r e s . T h e I nte r n a l Au d i t S e r v i ce a ls o m a ke s
p r o p o s a ls d e s i g n e d to i m p r ove t h e e f f i c i e n c y o f t h e Co u r t . T h is r e q u i r e s a co ns t a nt
e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e i n t e r n a l co n t r o l s y s t e m s w i t h i n t h e Co u r t i n o r d e r t o a s s e s s t h e i r
e f f e c ti ve n e ss .
I n 20 0 9 t h e w o r k o f t h e Co u r t ’s I n t e r n a l Au d i t S e r v i c e f o c u s e d n o t a b l y o n f i n a n c i a l
a u d i t (v e r i f i c a t i o n o f t h e a cco u n t s), a r e v i e w o f e x a nte v e r i f i c a t i o n , a n a u d i t o f t h e
p ay r o l l , a n a u d i t o f t h e s u s p e ns e b u d g e t a r y a cco u nt s , a f o l l ow - u p o n co nt r a c t s a n d
pub lic pro curem ent pro ce dures, as well as an analysis of the s t af f promotion e xercise.
M os t a u d i t r e co m m e n d a t i o ns m a d e i n 20 0 9 b y th e Inte r nal Au dito r were acce pte d by
t h e a u d i te e s a n d i nte g r a te d i nto co r re c t i ve a c t i o n p la ns .
T he Cour t ’s Audit Commit te e monitor s the ac tivit y of the Internal Auditor and ensures
h is / h e r i n d e p e n d e n ce. I t a ls o d is c u s s e s a n d t ake s n o te o f t h e I nte r n a l Au d i to r ’s wo r k
p r o g r am m e a n d r e p o r t s a n d r e q u e s t s (i f n e ce s s a r y) t h e I nte r na l Au d i to r to c ar r y o u t
sp e cial au dit s .
I n 20 0 9 t h e I n te r n a l Au d i t S e r v i ce w a s i n d e p e n d e n t l y a n d p o s i t i ve l y ce r t i f i e d b y a n
e x t e r n a l i n d e p e n d e n t p r o f e s s i o n a l r e v i e w e r, D e l o i t t e S . A . T h e w o r k p e r f o r m e d b y
D e l o i t te l e d to t h e f o l l ow i n g r e s u l t :
‘Overall, the Internal Audit Ser vice of the European Cour t of Auditors generally
conforms with the Institute of Internal Auditors’ def inition of Internal Auditing,
Co d e o f Ethic s an d I nte r national St an dar ds f o r th e Pr o fessional Prac tice o f I nte r nal
Au d i t i n g ’.
A s a result, internal audit ac tivit y may use the conformance phrase ‘conforms with the
I n t e r n a t i o n a l St a n d a r d s f o r t h e P r o f e s s i o n a l P r a c t i c e o f I n t e r n a l Au d i t i n g ’ i n f u t u r e
rep o r t s until a n ew e x te r nal ass e ssm e nt is p e r f or m e d within th e n e x t f i ve ye ar s .
E X T E R N A L AU D I T
O F T H E CO U R T
T he rep or t by the indep endent e x ternal auditor on the Cour t of Auditor s’ account s for
th e f inancial ye ar 20 0 8 was p u b lish e d in th e O f f icial Journal of th e Eu ro p ean Union o n
23 O c to b e r 20 0 9 (OJ C 254, 23.10. 20 0 9).
I n i t s a u d i t o p i n i o n t h e i n d e p e n d e n t a u d i to r o f t h e Co u r t ( Pr i ce w a te r h o u s e Co o p e r s
SAR L) fo r mu l ate d t h e fo l l ow ing co n c lusions:
R e g a r d i n g t h e f i n a n c i a l s ta te m e n t s:
‘ I n o u r o p i n i o n , t h e s e f i n a n c i a l s t a te m e nt s g i ve a t r u e a n d f a i r v i e w o f t h e f i n a n c i a l
p osition of the Europ ean Cour t of Auditors as of 31 Decemb er 20 08, and of its f inancial
p e r f o r m a n ce a n d i t s c a s h f l o w s f o r t h e y e a r t h e n e n d e d i n a cco r d a n ce w i t h Co u n c i l
R e g u l a t i o n ( E C , E u r a t o m) N o 16 0 5 / 2 0 02 o f 2 5 J u n e 2 0 02 , C o m m i s s i o n R e g u l a t i o n
(EC , Eu r ato m) N o 23 42 / 20 02 o f 23 D e ce m b e r 20 02 lay in g d ow n d e t ail e d r u l e s f o r th e
i m p l e m e nt at i o n o f t h e s a i d Co u n c i l R e g u l a t i o n a n d t h e Eu r o p e a n Co u r t o f Au d i to r s ’
Acco u ntin g R u l e s .’
R e g a rd i n g th e u s e o f re so u rce s a n d th e co ntr o l p r o ce d u r e s:
‘ B as e d o n o u r wo r k d e s c r i b e d i n t h is r e p o r t , n o t h i n g h as co m e to o u r at te nt i o n t h at
c aus es u s to b e l ieve t hat in all mater ial r esp e c t s an d b as e d on th e c r iter ia descr ib e d
ab ove: (a) th e resource s assign e d to th e Co ur t have not b e en us e d for th eir inte nde d
purp oses, (b) the control pro ce dures in place do not provide the ne cess ar y guarante es
to ensure the compliance of f inancial operations with the applicable rules and
re gulatio ns .’
51
DECLARATION BY THE AUTHORISING
OFFICER BY DELEGATION
I the undersigned, Secretar y- G eneral of the European Cour t of Auditors, in my capacit y
a s a u t h o r isi n g o f f i ce r b y d e l e g a t i o n , h e r e b y :
52
•
d e c l a r e t h a t t h e i n f o r m a t i o n s u b m i t te d to t h e Co u r t s o a s to e n a b l e i t to d r aw u p
t h is r e p o r t is t r u e a n d a cc u r ate 13 ; a n d
•
s t ate that I have reasonab le assur ance that :
—
the resources assigned to the ac tivities described in this repor t have been
use d for their intende d purp ose and in accordance with the principles of sound
f in a n c i a l m a n a g e m e nt , a n d
—
that the control procedures put in place provide the necessar y guarantees
co n ce r n i n g t h e l e g a l i t y a n d r e g u l a r i t y o f t h e u n d e r l y in g t r a ns a c ti o ns 14 .
T his reasonable assurance is base d on my own judgment and on the information at my
disp os al, such as th e result s of th e e x p ost ch e ck s , th e rep o r t s of th e inte r nal audito r
and th e rep o r t s of th e e x te r nal au d i to r f o r p r e v i o u s f in a n c i a l ye a r s .
I conf irm that I am not aware of any thing not repor ted here which could be detrimental
to t h e inte res t s o f t h e ins tit u tion .
D o n e a t Lu xe m b o u r g , 12 Fe b r u a r y 2010.
Eduardo Ruiz G arcía
S e c r e ta r y - G e n e ra l
13
In this context, ‘ true and accurate’ means a reliable, complete and correct view of the state of aff airs in the service.
14
In this context, ‘underlying transactions’ means the transactions for which I am the authorising officer by delegation.
European Court of Auditors
Annual Activity Report 2009
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union
2010 — 52 pp. — 21 × 29,7 cm
ISBN 978-92-9207-638-2
doi:10.2865/27832
How to obtain EU publications
Publications for sale:
•
via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);
•
from your bookseller by quoting the title, publisher and/or ISBN number;
•
by contacting one of our sales agents directly. You can obtain their contact
details on the Internet (http://bookshop.europa.eu) or by sending
a fax to +352 2929-42758.
Free publications:
•
via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);
•
at the European Commission’s representations or delegations.
You can obtain their contact details on the Internet (http://ec.europa.eu)
or by sending a fax to +352 2929-42758.
www.eca.europa.eu
QJ-AA-10-001-EN-C
European Court of Auditors
12, rue Alcide De Gasperi
1615 Luxembourg
LUXEMBOURG
www.eca.europa.eu
ISBN 978-92-9207-638-2