Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-12-13-Speech-1-094"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"1999-12-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Annual Report of the Court of Auditors2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.19991213.4.1-094"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:1999-12-13-Speech-1-0952
lpv:speaker	lp:Rijk van Dam2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EDD (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; AFCO (1999-07-21--2000-06-12)3 vice-chair; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Estonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with Israel (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij - Gereformeerd Politiek Verbond - Reformatorisch Politieke Federatie (1999-07-20--2002-03-17)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Mr Karlsson, this Annual Report demonstrates that the supervision of EU expenditure still leaves a great deal to be desired. To a large extent, the problem lies with the Member States, but the Commission should not hide behind this fact. The Court of Auditors is right to point out that the Commission must ensure that any shortcomings on the part of the Member States are properly dealt with. What is more, the Commission’s housekeeping has a lot to answer for too. It is most revealing that the highest percentage of material incidences of error has been detected within the internal management department. After all, it is the Commission itself that has exclusive responsibility for financial management within this department. The Annual Report underlines once again that we must work out, in structural terms, what the added value of the various European programmes amounts to. Up until now, the Commission has focused too heavily on high levels of expenditure. There has been little or no testing of effectiveness on the basis of clearly measurable policy objectives. The Commission must also keep a closer eye on whether individual projects abide by general community objectives. Accordingly, we must call an immediate halt to financing from structural funds projects that are at odds with objectives relating to environmental protection. The Court of Auditors is right to put its finger on this serious problem. Finally, the whole state of affairs with regard to the leaking of the draft report raises questions as to the independence of the Court of Auditors. It is right that the Commission should be allowed to inspect the Annual Report before publication so as to correct any factual errors beforehand. But did the Commission confine itself to this? Or is it true that the Court of Auditors toned down the report under pressure from the Commission? In order to clear this up, the European Parliament ought, in the process of the discharge procedure, to analyse the differences between the draft report and the definitive report in detail and assess them on their merits."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph