Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-05-11-Speech-3-636-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110511.36.3-636-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I believe that we need to discuss all issues like this without any taboos. If we find weaknesses or waste, we have to address them.
I addressed the question of the functional overlap between two agencies – the ETF and Cedefop – in my introductory speech, but I would like to stress again that the contribution of these agencies can be crucial, especially in the context of increasing employment in line with the 2020 objectives. The ETF, particularly in the light of the recent changes in the Mediterranean area, can play a very strong role in bringing prosperity to the regions neighbouring the European Union.
I have one more point to make concerning Parliament’s capacity to see the development of strategies. The objectives of the agencies are defined in the Financial Regulation which, as you know, is published in the Official Journal. An agency’s strategy is usually set by the director in agreement with the governing board, and these strategies are presented to Parliament each year and are reflected in the annual work programme.
The four agencies concerned presented their annual work programmes to Parliament’s Committee on Employment and Social Affairs at the end of January this year.
Finally, I would like to say that I also believe it would be useful to involve the Council Presidency in such discussions. I can assure you I will follow this up with them, and I am sure I will find a common language with the Presidency on this issue as well.
However, it is also very important that we do not misrepresent reality and we do not overstate the weaknesses we find just so as to make a strong point.
I regret that some of the colleagues who spoke have actually left, but I would like to answer them very specifically. For example, I very strongly reject the notion that some of these agencies just do PR and work of a very superficial nature. They actually do very concrete analytical and policy work, including the exchange of experience, and help deliver European policies, in these particular instances, in the area of employment and social issues.
I think these agencies are instrumental in delivering the Europe 2020 strategy and progress towards the headline targets we have agreed. I very much agree that developing skills and vocational training is one of the key challenges we are facing, as was stressed in the discussion. This is one of the key structural causes of unemployment in the European Union, and we need the contribution of these agencies more than ever.
It is true, however, that we have to see whether the costs are justified or not, and we need to approach this on a very concrete basis.
In principle, the efficiency and performance criteria of an agency are set out in its annual work programme, together with an indication of the ways in which such criteria are to be addressed. An agency’s annual work programme has to be approved by its governing board, and is presented to the relevant European Parliament committee. The Commission representatives on the governing boards of agencies take the need for quantitative and qualitative performance criteria very seriously and make every effort to ensure that they are applied.
On the question of how the agencies perform against the criteria that are set, I have to say that it is the role of the governing board of each agency to assess its performance against those criteria. As a rule, agencies carry out external evaluations of their work programmes at regular intervals, and these take such performance indicators into account.
Agencies usually report on the results of external evaluations in the director’s annual activity report, which is submitted to the budgetary authority. As part of the budgetary authority, Parliament may also request agencies to justify their performance. Agencies are also subject to evaluation by the Court of Auditors in connection with the annual discharge procedure, the results of which are discussed in the Committee on Budgetary Control.
Commission representatives on the governing boards of agencies make every effort to ensure that the recommendations stemming from external evaluations, and those from the Court of Auditors and the Commission’s internal audit service, are followed up appropriately."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples