Top Banner
www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities Axel Volkery Senior Fellow and Head Environmental Governance 5 September 2013 Committee of the Regions, Brussels
13

Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

Feb 24, 2016

Download

Documents

Jeroen

Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities. Axel Volkery Senior Fellow and Head Environmental Governance. 5 September 2013. Committee of the Regions, Brussels . Background. File note was commissioned by COR to - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

www.ieep.eu @IEEP_eu

Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

Axel VolkerySenior Fellow and Head Environmental Governance5 September 2013Committee of the Regions, Brussels

Page 2: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

2

File note was commissioned by COR to

1. Review recommendations of relevance to local and regional authorities (LRAs) included in official EU reports on implementation of EU budget in the period 2007-2013

2. Analyse development of pending claims and Reste à Liquider (RAL) in the period 2007-2013 and their implications for LRAs

Background

Page 3: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

3

• The following sources of information were utilised:– Last five annual financial reports from European Court of Auditors

(ECA)– Comments / requests from Parliament & Council as part of the

discharge process for the same period– Response from Commission as part of the discharge process for the

same period– Other relevant EU documents

• Note:– ECA reports are factual documents– Reports do seldom contain any statements or recommendations

addressing LRAs directly

Information sources

Page 4: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

4

Synopsis of ECA reports: key areas of concern

Error rates• Budget implementation has been regularly found to be affected by

material level error of legality and regularity• Cohesion Policy stands out: > 5per cent for Cohesion, between 2 and 5 per

cent for employment and social affairs• Eligibility errors are the most frequent errors in ERDF, ESF, EMFF, but error

rate is decreasing • Accuracy errors are most frequent errors under EARDF • Cohesion Policy is also affected by public procurement errors

Withdrawal practice• Eligibility errors should not result in new irregular expenditure being

declared

Commitments• High level of outstanding commitments is repeatedly criticised

Page 5: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

5

Synopsis of ECA reports: root causes

Root causes

Lack of sufficiency and transparency in information

and evaluation systemsDifficult to apply eligibility rules

Lack of effective evaluation and audit systems (particularly for

first level checks)

Incoherent requirements for reporting and monitoring

Lack of effective sanctioning systems

Page 6: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

6

Synopsis of ECA reports: key recommendations

Cohesion Policy

Simplify eligibility rules and ensure strict compliance

Strengthening sanctions (interruptions, suspensions)

Align reporting periods for annual control reports

Better guidance and training for managing and audit

authorities

Apply corrective mechanisms on operational programmes

Improve feedback between authorities

Improve withdrawal

practice

Page 7: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

7

Synopsis of ECA reports: key recommendations

Rural development

and EMFF

More rigorous administrative and on-the-spot checks

Better control of beneficiaries in terms of keeping obligations

Simplify rules and conditions Take a more systemic approach towards addressing weaknesses in EMFF

Page 8: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

8

Parliament• Reiterates many of ECA’s conclusions – emphasizes differences in Member

State management and control systems• Criticises lack of incentives for norm compliance, part. Cohesion Policy• Reiterates need for simplification, uniform auditing standards and greater

cooperation between Commission and authorities• Calls for greater supervisory role of Commission and strengthening of

sanctions

Parliament and Council responses

Council• Urges national authorities to apply ex-ante controls more effectively• Improve management and control systems, simplify rules and apply

correction mechanisms more rigorously• Points to the relevance of supervision and action by European Commission

Page 9: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

9

Outstanding commitments 2012

Source: European Commission

Page 10: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

10

RAL as per main programme of funding

Source: European Commission

A much larger than thought proportion of 2013 payment appropriations will need to be used to

honour 2012 claims – already the additional EUR 11.2 bn claimed by the Commission were at risk of falling short but Council approved only EUR 7.3 bn so far

-Gap in meeting 2013 commitments remains present

after draft amending budget 06/2013, putting greater pressure on annual budgets from 2014 onwards

RAL is projected to grow to EUR 250 bn by 2020

Page 11: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

11

• RAL normally increased towards ends of MFF periods, but RAL in 2013 is much higher compared to RAL in 2006

• Underlines the need for greater flexibility, as discussed in budget negotiations

RAL over time

Page 12: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

12

• Main implications arise under funds under shared management– for example, support from Cohesion Policy amounts to – on average –

around 55 per cent of expenditure on environment or 25 per cent on transport, energy, telecom.

Member State implications

• RAL differs between Member States (MS)• MS with largest pending claims are Poland, Italy, Spain• Ireland, Denmark, Cyprus and Luxembourg have lowest amount

• Differences in RAL often have a specific domestic connotation• Change in economic context conditions, administrative capacities,

incoherence between programme planning and project selection• Quality and capacity of authorities seem to be much more relevant

influencing factors compared to other factors (level of decentralisation)

Page 13: Execution of annual budgets 2007-2013: recommendations for regional and local authorities

13

Thank you!

Contact: Axel Volkery

[email protected]. +32 2111090

For more information about IEEP’s, please visit: http://www.ieep.eutwitter @ieep_eu

London office Brussels office11 Belgrave Road, Hooikaai 55/ Quai au Foin 55IEEP Offices, Floor 3 1000 BrusselsLondon Tel: +32 (2) 738 74 82SW1V 1RB Fax: +32 (2) 732 40 02Tel: +44 (0) 20 7799 2244Fax: +44 (0) 20 7799 2600