De Groene Fractie, waar de GroenLinks Europarlementariërs deel van uitmaken, heeft het rapport van de rekenkamer over de besteding van de gelden, met een commentaar, ter beschikking gesteld van journalisten.

De Europese Rekenkamer heeft deze week een rapport uitgebracht over de besteding van de gelden die de fracties in het Europees parlement ontvangen ter financiering van hun parlementaire activiteiten en de ondersteuning door beleidsmedewerkers en administratief personeel.

De Groene Fractie, waar de GroenLinks Europarlementariërs deel van uitmaken, heeft het rapport van de rekenkamer over de besteding van de gelden, met een commentaar, ter beschikking gesteld van journalisten.

Hieronder volgt de Engelse tekst van dit commentaar.

(Het rapport van de Rekenkamer is alleen in het Frans beschikbaar en nog niet in digitale vorm. Hoewel de informatie op deze manier nog niet volledig is , willen we dit commentaar toch nu al publiceren.Daar waar in de tekst sprake is van Chapters en/of Articles, wordt verwezen naar de betreffende paragrafen in het rapport van de Rekenkamer. Ter voorkoming van misverstanden zij opgemerkt dat het rapport van de Europese Rekenkamer alleen betrekking heeft op de gelden van de fracties. De besteding van de gelden die de GroenLinks delegatie ontvangt vallen buiten dit rapport. Over de besteding van die gelden publiceert GroenLinks in de Europese Unie ieder jaar een verantwoording op de website.)

Greens/EFA Response to the Report of the Court of Auditors

Brussels, 29th, March 2000

On the 15th of March, the Court of Auditors officially forwarded its report to Mrs Nicole FONTAINE, President of the European Parliament, on the financial management of the political Groups. 1998 had been selected as the reference year for this control. In our case, due to the delay observed in the presentation of our accounts, the Court of Auditors also examined the accounts for 1997.

In the report of the Court of Auditors, the Green Group is criticized because of several failures in the bookkeeping of the Group's finances. We recognize that these critics are correct. But we regret that its presentation in the annexed table creates a wrong impression because it does not distinguish between minor and substantial errors.

We underline that the Court of Auditors has not criticized the Group concerning party financing and that no indication of illegal procedures are mentioned.

The Group was aware of a large number of irregularities concerning the accountancy, linked partially to the health problems of the former accountant.Nevertheless it has to be acknowledged that the Group did not take sufficient measures to face the situation.

Concerning the Recommendations of the Court of Auditors

The Group is supporting the recommendations proposed by the Court of Auditors such as the strong harmonization between the bookkeeping methods and rules between the political groups, the introduction of inventories, the enhancement and more detailed regular information of the President of the Parliament about the financial functioning of the groups, the establishment of a common audit of the groups as well as an harmonisation in the field of the external contracts and contracts for provision of services.

It must be noted that the Green/EFA Group acted without delay to introduce the following new measures when it became aware of the problems notified by the Court of Auditors:

* Under the responsibility of the Group's two Presidents and Treasurer, the Group changed the staff members responsible for Bookkeeping. Clear and precise responsibilities have been attributed to one of the Group's two Secretaries-General and a transparent system has been established.

* The external Audit Company has been changed.

* The bookkeeping for 1997 and 1998 has been re-established. Audits for these two years have been effected. Precise figures have been supplied at the request of the President. The book-keeping for the first half of 1999 will be completed shortly and the figures corresponding with this first half of the year will be sent to the President within the deadline envisaged by the European Parliament.

* In December, the Group improved its general rules on the management of Finances. Supplementary, more detailed rules are being drawn up. These new rules will be adopted with the Budget for the year 2000 which will be presented to the Group in the coming weeks.

* On the basis of recommendations received, the Group has decided to put an end to the salary circuit and to the social compensations associated therewith, as from 1 January 2000.

* As from 1 January 2000, the European Federation of Green Parties will no longer benefit from any temporary posts allocated to the Group and all contributions to the latter will be drawn from 3707/2, which is envisaged for the financing of the political initiatives of the Groups.

Additional remarks

In the notes which follow we shall try to provide some explanations for the criticisms set forth in the report and which concern us either directly or indirectly.

These notes will not cover the general problems mentioned in the Court of Auditors' report which relate to the rules in force and which cover different aspects like the excessive autonomy of the political Groups, as well as the absence of an independent legal identity : the strict non-subordination of the finances of the political Groups to the finances of the Union, the lack of insufficient regulations concerning the budgetary lines 3705 & 3706 (new 3707) and other remarks which concern the majority of the Groups.

Financing of European Parties (Article 46 = 0, 47 = 0, 48 = 0, 49 = 1 & 50 = 0 )

In the Report there is no particular criticism concerning us on the financing of european parties, point. It seems important to point out that :

* We have always interpreted Article 191 (formerly 138) of the Treaty of Amsterdam to be an article which gives a certain legitimacy to European Parties and a justification for contributions from political groups to their parties. It may be remarked that this interpretation is not accepted by all legal schools. In accordance with this interpretation, we have effected limited contributions to the European Federation of Green Parties from 3707/6 (currently 3707/2).

* We have rigorously prohibited all direct aid towards the financing of national Green parties from the Group's funds.

* We participated actively in the preparation of the statute draft for the European Parties sent to the President of the Commission, Romano Prodi in order to create adequate instruments for the existence of European parties, including their funding and transparency of their finances in full respect of the budgetary neutrality.

* For the transitional period as proposed by the Court of Auditors, we have been trying to convince the other political groups in order to activate the budget line 3710 foreseen for European party funding.

Bookkeeping Delays (Articles 28, 33 & 40)

One of the articles that concerns us criticizes the fact that we have not introduced the accounts on time. In effect, the books for 1997 and 1998 were not completed within the deadlines laid down by the European Parliament. One reason for this delay was the serious illness of the Group's bookkeeper.

Nevertheless, we must recognise that delays in the codification of justifications were apparent from 1997 onwards.

External Audit Companies ( Articles 27, 29 & 30)

* In respect of external audits, which are obligatory according to the rules, we can only deplore the lack of responsibility shown by the company employed for the audit, which ought to have formally notified the Group that the audits of Budget lines 3705-06 had not been done for 1998, following a delay in the Group's bookkeeping. An alarm signal would have been more than necessary.

* The audits relating to budget line 3708, notably for 1998, appeared to have been done in a superficial and perfunctory fashion. This did not help the Group's Bureau or budgetary authorities to evaluate the management problems referred to in the Court of Auditors' report. This leads us to say that the the auditors did not fulfil their function, which is precisely to alert the Group authorities to all irregularities and delays. Last september we changed our external audit company .

National Delegations ( Articles 25 & 43 )

The Report refers to confusion between the monies placed at the disposal of the Group and the monies placed at the disposal of national delegations. We can clearly state: that all of the Group's book-keeping was centralised; that no right of signature was delegated to the national delegations; that liquid cash was never transferred from the Group to these delegations, and; that all payments were made on production of vouchers.

Salary Circuit-Harmonisation of Salaries (Articles 40 & 58)

The Court of Auditors' Report refers to the "lack of a proper basis" of our salary circuit. In another context reference is made to a "voluntary", and "irregular" system. We cannot deny that the salary circuit lacked a solid legal basis.

But, bearing in mind that the structure of posts granted by the EP (A, B and C Posts) present significant salary differentials which do not provide for identical remuneration for equal tasks and equal work, the salary circuit permitted a harmonisation of the whole structure. The creation of additional posts provides a social benefit which does not require an explanation.

In the report, it is left understood that the salary compensation among the temporary positions in the European Parliament (higher wages and lower wages) provided by the salary circuit might provide an incentive for "tax evasion".

All external contracts were made according to Belgian law or respective national laws in full respect of tax and social security regulations as explained in the next point.

External work contracts

A recurring criticism found in the report relates to external contracts. As far as we are concerned, all external contracts were established correctly, either with management offices recognised within the framework of Belgian employment legislation, or within the framework of national legislation. To our knowledge, the employment contracts established by the national delegations were also concluded in due and proper form.

In one case a staffmember as a transitional solution worked 3/4 for the Group and 1/4 as assistant to an MEP.

Internal Rules ( Article 24 )

The Report refers to the fact that certain Groups did not have internal rules. The Green Group, for its part, had established a series of special internal rules, notably relating to staff missions the Working Groups' rights to commitments, as well as rules for other specific domains. The fact is that we missed a single consolidated set of rules.

Brussels, March 29th, 2000 / Juan Behrend / Eliane del Do