committee on budgetary control 22 january 2008 das 2006 european court of auditors
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Committee on Budgetary Control 22 January 2008 DAS 2006 European Court of Auditors](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022083009/5697bfd11a28abf838cab348/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Committee on Budgetary Control22 January 2008
DAS 2006DAS 2006
European Court of European Court of AuditorsAuditors
![Page 2: Committee on Budgetary Control 22 January 2008 DAS 2006 European Court of Auditors](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022083009/5697bfd11a28abf838cab348/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Specific assessments of the 2006 Annual Report
Functioning of supervisory and control systems
Error range
Own Resources
Common Agricultural Policy
IACS Overall for CAP
IACS
non-IACS non-IACS
Structural operations
Internal policies
External actionsHeadquarters and Delegations
Implementing organisations
Pre-accession strategy
Phare/ ISPA
SAPARD
Administrative expenditure
DAS 2006 - Specific assessments concerning legality and DAS 2006 - Specific assessments concerning legality and regularity of underlying transactionsregularity of underlying transactions
Satisfactory
Functioning of supervisory and control systems
Partially satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Less than 2% (below materiality threshold)
Error range
Between 2% and 5%
Greater than 5%
![Page 3: Committee on Budgetary Control 22 January 2008 DAS 2006 European Court of Auditors](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022083009/5697bfd11a28abf838cab348/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Functioning of supervisory and control systems
SatisfactoryPartially satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Erro
r rang
e
Less than 2%
(not material)
Between 2% - 5%
More than 5%
Agriculture IACSAgriculture IACS
RevenueRevenue
AdministrationAdministration
Pre-accessionPre-accessionPHARE/ISPAPHARE/ISPA
External Actions ECExternal Actions EC
AgricultureAgriculture non-IACSnon-IACS
External ActionsExternal ActionsImpl. org.Impl. org.
Pre-accessionPre-accessionSAPARDSAPARD
Structural Structural ActionsActions
AgricultureAgriculture
DAS 2006 – Legality and regularity of underlying DAS 2006 – Legality and regularity of underlying transactionstransactions
![Page 4: Committee on Budgetary Control 22 January 2008 DAS 2006 European Court of Auditors](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022083009/5697bfd11a28abf838cab348/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
What can the Commission do to improve the What can the Commission do to improve the situation?situation?
• ensure that supervisory and control systems address the risks effectively, both at the level of the Commission and of the Member States;
• strengthen in particular the Commission’s ability to mitigate the risk that the control systems in the Member States fail to prevent reimbursement of overstated or ineligible expenditure;
• improve mechanisms for recoveries;
• improve the quality of DGs’ Activity Reports and the Commission’s Synthesis Report; address the detected deficiencies adequately and ensure continuity in the way information is presented;
![Page 5: Committee on Budgetary Control 22 January 2008 DAS 2006 European Court of Auditors](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022083009/5697bfd11a28abf838cab348/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
What can the Commission do to improve the What can the Commission do to improve the situation?situation?
• implement the Commission’s Action Plan;
• ensure suitable indicators assisting the management and helping to gauge improvements over time;
• ensure that rules and regulations are clear and sufficient enough to meet Community objectives, while avoiding
unnecessary complexity.
![Page 6: Committee on Budgetary Control 22 January 2008 DAS 2006 European Court of Auditors](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022083009/5697bfd11a28abf838cab348/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
””80% of EU-funds in shared management: 80% of EU-funds in shared management: what can Member States do to improve the what can Member States do to improve the
situation?”situation?”
Structural FundsStructural Funds:
• improvement of the day to day management and implementation of sound closure procedures for the programming period 2000 –
2006;
• implementation of the legal framework with respect to the new programming period 2007 – 2013.
CAP expenditureCAP expenditure:
• specific attention to Cross Compliance requirements;
• due consideration to the pertinence of eligibility conditions with the objective of reducing the error rate in the field of Rural
Development .
![Page 7: Committee on Budgetary Control 22 January 2008 DAS 2006 European Court of Auditors](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022083009/5697bfd11a28abf838cab348/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
• The Court’s revised DAS approach provides clear recognition of improvements in supervisory and control systems. As these improve, more of the assurance is derived from them.
• The new definition and treatment of errors updates the methodology so as to take into consideration the latest developments in the legal framework (cross compliance, financial corrections).
• The Court’s conclusions and audit results have become more robust and provide a clearer assessment of where weaknesses exist and what is contributing to any error found.
The Court’s contributionThe Court’s contribution
![Page 8: Committee on Budgetary Control 22 January 2008 DAS 2006 European Court of Auditors](https://reader036.vdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022083009/5697bfd11a28abf838cab348/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Conclusion:Conclusion:
What will make the crucial difference is whether the management’s control mechanisms will be shown to have improved sufficiently and rules simplified enough to bring about a reduction in errors found.