Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-12-Speech-3-294"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030312.10.3-294"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, honourable Members, I have noted your last point once again, and we can talk about that immediately after this debate. It is of course always very difficult to achieve a universally acceptable and uniform basis for the arrangements for the A30 budget headings. Nevertheless, I am more than willing to have another look at this.
I would now like to turn to the statistics on cases reported by the Member States of irregularities as regards own resources and EAGGF and Structural Fund monies. The general trend is one of a reduction in the amounts involved in 2001 as compared with the previous year. However, we cannot draw any significant conclusions about general trends from the figures for just one year, especially because it was not possible in the report to differentiate between fraud and more general irregularities, because in this respect the Member States do not yet report in a uniform way.
The Commission is working with Member States through the Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Fraud Prevention, known as Cocolaf, to achieve a uniform reporting system. A working document on this subject was presented to the Committee on Budgetary Control last December. We hope to make significant progress in this field this year.
The rapporteur attaches particularly importance to cooperation on fraud prevention with the candidate countries. With enlargement in mind the Commission has devoted considerable effort to ensuring that each of the candidate countries has an administrative organisation or structure that is clearly responsible for protecting the financial interests of the Communities and for preventing fraud against the Community budget. This organisation also needs to be in a position to work directly with OLAF and I believe that is in accordance with the rapporteur's proposal regarding branch offices.
In Poland these structures were extended in 2001 and 2002 with the support of an OLAF official working there, and the Commission made EUR 15 million from the Phare programme available to Poland in order to develop those structures and increase efficiency.
When it comes to fraud prevention in order to protect the EU's finances, however, it is not just a question of cooperation between the Member States and cooperation with the Commission, nor are we just talking about the candidate countries. We are also talking about cooperation with third countries, for instance Switzerland. In this case negotiations on the fraud prevention agreement are still going on. As you know, this is connected with the agreement on the taxation of interest and Switzerland has recently made it clear once again that its view remains that all agreements relating to the ten current sets of bilateral negotiations should be concluded simultaneously. We will continue to endeavour to achieve a different outcome, but that is Switzerland's position and it is very difficult to make progress on this given that one point relating to the Schengen Agreement is a very important issue still under negotiation.
Lastly, I would like to touch upon one final but important point. We have now reached a decisive stage as regards criminal law protection of the financial interests of the Community, by which I mean work in the Convention. This is a key moment. Significant progress towards the creation of a European Public Prosecutor may be achieved, and that is a proposal that has the support of both Parliament and the Commission. I urge the Convention to give its active support to this important idea. We really are at a turning point now.
The Commission will also be adopting the follow-up report on its Green Paper next week or by the latest the following week. The report assesses the results of the public consultation and demonstrates once again how important the creation of a European Public Prosecutor is for the fight against fraud as a whole. I also hope that the report by Mrs Theato which was adopted here in the plenary will be given due weight in the Convention's deliberations.
The fight against fraud in the Community budget is at the top of the Commission's agenda in all areas of policy. All the Commission's services are obliged to act accordingly. The establishment of OLAF, the European Fraud Investigation Office, has been an enormous step forward at Community level in protecting the Community's finances.
In response to a proposal I made in July 2000, the Prodi Commission agreed on an overall strategy for protecting the Community's financial interests and an Action Plan for 2001-2003. Of the measures for which it provided, 75% have already been implemented, and I regard that as a good outcome.
Mr Bösch's report relates primarily to the Commission's report on the fight against fraud in 2001. However, it also covers other OLAF documents, measures and investigations. You are renowned for your critical attitude, Mr Bösch, but you are also known for your thoroughness and for the enormous amount of time and effort you devote to your reports. You are also well known for actually giving your full support to those measures you say you will support. I would therefore like to thank the rapporteur, and I would particularly like to thank him for supporting the Commission's action against tobacco smuggling and for his whole-hearted support for the proposal to create a European Public Prosecutor.
The Commission report emphasises the need for close cooperation with the Member States; it includes a review of the measures taken by the Member States in 2001 with a view to enhancing protection of the Community's financial interests. That relates to controls on Community funds. Structural Fund monies and agricultural expenditure are administered by the Member States. That also relates to the reporting of any irregularities uncovered and to the recovery of funds that have not been correctly used or even where fraud is alleged.
The Member States are also obliged to recover agricultural subsidies or Structural Fund monies from beneficiaries in the event of irregularities. Mr Bösch's report quite rightly emphasises the importance of recovering Community funds. In order to make the process more effective, the Commission has redefined responsibilities in its departments. Its December 2002 communication on the recovery of Community support funds goes into further detail on the distribution of tasks and on procedures, proposes preventive measures and enhances the responsibility of authorising officers.
A task force has been set up to deal with costs arising from the past in relation to the EAGGF, and this task force has already started its work. I do of course need to say at this juncture that many cases are disputed in the courts, because the final beneficiaries often defend themselves – as do indeed some Member States – against recovery by bringing actions in court.
OLAF has continued to develop means of improving its cooperation with the Member States. OLAF now has intelligence capacity, which assists in the process of setting priorities and establishing strategies for fraud prevention, and it also has a unit consisting of judges and public prosecutors.
You mentioned the OLAF progress report drawn up under Article 15 of the OLAF Regulation. This is due to be completed shortly. It will appear on the Commission's agenda within the next four weeks and will then be presented to the Supervisory Committee. I am of course pleased that it has finally been possible to find a solution here. All five members of the Supervisory Committee have informed us that they are willing to be appointed for a second period of office. I regard that and the continuity it will provide in consolidating OLAF's work as being very positive."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples