Talousarvion valvontavaliokunta

Transkriptio

1 Euroopan parlamentti Talousarvion valvontavaliokunta TYÖASIAKIRJA Euroopan tilintarkastustuomioistuimen erityiskertomuksesta nro 11/2016 (vastuuvapaus 2015): Entisen Jugoslavian tasavallan Makedonian hallinnollisten valmiuksien vahvistaminen: edistyminen oli vaikeassa tilanteessa vähäistä Talousarvion valvontavaliokunta Esittelijä: Tomáš Zdechovský DT\ doc PE v01-00 Moninaisuudessaan yhtenäinen

2 Introduction The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has been a candidate for EU membership since 2005, however the Council until now has not decided on a framework for opening negotiations. During the period, the EU allocated 615 million euros under the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA I) to help the country prepare for accession. The country also received financial support under multilateral programmes covering the whole of the Western Balkans. The Court audited projects financed from IPA I in three major sectors: public administration reform (12 % of the total allocation), transport (18 %) and environment (16 %). ECA findings The ECA arrived at the conclusion that: there was relatively limited progress in strengthening administrative capacity in key areas during the audited period. Working in a difficult context, the Commission did not, for many of the projects examined, sufficiently ensure the effectiveness of their contribution towards strengthening administrative capacity; all of the projects audited included activities designed to strengthen administrative capacity but they did not succeed in addressing sufficiently many weaknesses. For some key areas in which strong legislation already existed there was little assistance under IPA during the period audited and there was no significant progress on implementing that legislation. In other key areas IPA projects had little impact in the absence of active support from the national authorities; the projects audited were generally sound and well-managed, but results were often only partially achieved or not adequately followed up. Most projects delivered the planned outputs, but these were often not fully exploited. Frequently the projects achieved only limited impacts and were not always sustainable. Impact was also weakened because the projects were ambitious and spread across a wide range of priorities; the audited projects did not always fit into a coherent, cohesive and coordinated approach towards strengthening administrative capacity. Some projects did not follow on from previous assistance in the same sector and were not adequately followed up with further support. There was often a gap of 4 years or more between establishing the need for assistance and the delivery of project results; decentralised management of IPA funds has allowed for a valuable transfer of knowledge. However, there would have been fewer delays and de-commitments if decentralisation had been implemented more gradually. While strengthening administrative capacity was not included as an objective of decentralising management, the experience gained could have been used more effectively by the national authorities to contribute towards an overall improvement in administrative capacity in the public administration; the mechanisms for political dialogue were well-suited to support reform in the country, but did not contribute significantly towards strengthening overall administrative capacity during the audited period. This is because of the lack of political will in the country to PE v /2 DT\ doc

3 tackle some of the obstacles to reform, and reduced leverage for the Commission to encourage reform in sensitive areas in the absence of the framework for dialogue provided by accession negotiations. ECA recommendations In light of its findings, the ECA recommended that the Commission should: concentrate its assistance for strengthening administrative capacity on ranked priorities that take account of significant weaknesses in key areas. Examples of areas in which the ECA noted a need for improvement are: (i) (ii) (iii) efficiency of the public procurement system, for example by further developing electronic procurement; transparency of public spending, for example by improving the availability and quality of data on corruption cases reported in order to allow scrutiny by civil society and the wider public; internal control, for example by improving the standing and professional skills of internal auditors. intensify efforts in the transport and environment sectors to strengthen administrative capacity to contract, implement and manage projects, for example by providing tailored training for contracting authorities, better promoting learning by doing activities and providing wider access to JASPERS and secure strong commitment from the national authorities to bring national legislation into line with EU legislation and strengthen the link between capacity-building and EU support; make better use of policy instruments to reinforce the commitment by the national authorities to the reform process, including a prolonged and active follow-up of outputs and impacts. This should be closely followed up in the IPA monitoring committees; when planning projects, better rank priorities in sequential steps and reflect this when programming and implementing IPA funds and use a larger part of the IPA allocation to provide fast-track, flexible and targeted support on urgent and sensitive issues of policy and acquis; use the decentralised management mode more selectively with regard to the volume of funds and the complexity and sensitivity of projects to decentralise. Once examples of good practice have been established in the operating structures set up for decentralised management, the Commission should encourage the national authorities to extend these practices to other parts of the administration, for example, to encourage the delegation of decision- making to the appropriate level and to strengthen internal control systems; in the context of the renewed opportunity for strengthening administrative capacity to better implement reform, use political dialogue to: (i) secure a firm commitment to strengthening the capacity to tackle corruption and improve transparency; DT\ doc 3/3 PE v01-00

4 (ii) (iii) (iv) require the country to further build on its track record of corruption cases so that it becomes a meaningful tool for assessing progress in the fight against corruption; increase the focus on monitoring results in reversing the backsliding on public administration reform, including the implementation of legislation in areas such as public procurement and PIFC; agree targets and deadlines, for a structured approach to tackle obstacles to strengthening administrative capacity to implement key areas of the acquis. Esittelijän suositukset, jotka voidaan sisällyttää mietintöön varainhoitovuotta 2015 koskevan vastuuvapauden myöntämisestä komissiolle 1. pitää myönteisenä tilintarkastustuomioistuimen kertomusta, kannattaa sen suosituksia ja kannustaa komissiota ottamaan nämä suositukset huomioon toimiessaan Makedonian hallinnollisen kapasiteetin vahvistamiseksi; 2. on huolestunut hallinnollisen kapasiteetin vahvistamisessa saavutetun edistyksen vähäisyydestä ja siitä, että ammattitaitoisen ja riippumattoman virkamieskunnan kehittämisen kaltaisia tärkeitä aloja koskevan lainsäädännön täytäntöönpanossa ei ole juurikaan edistytty; 3. toteaa, että korruption torjunnassa ja avoimuuden lisäämisessä on edistytty vain osittain; 4. kehottaa komissiota käynnistämään vuoropuhelun poliittisen kentän eri puolia edustavien poliittisten johtajien, kansallisten viranomaisten ja oikeuslaitokseen ja lainvalvontaan erikoistuneiden asiantuntijoiden kanssa, jotta voitaisiin päästä yhteisymmärrykseen aktiivista korruption torjuntaa ja järjestäytynyttä rikollisuutta koskevassa asiassa sekä sellaisten ankarien toimenpiteiden ja mekanismien täytäntöönpanosta, joilla estetään korruptiota ja talousrikollisuutta maan rikoslainsäädännön mukaisesti; 5. suosittelee painokkaasti, että komissio käyttäisi poliittista vuoropuhelua ja yhteyksiä kansallisiin viranomaisiin, jotta julkisen hankintajärjestelmän tehokkuutta ja julkisten menojen avoimuutta parannettaisiin; 6. kehottaa komissiota asettamaan etusijalle korruption torjunnan ja pitää valitettavana, ettei hallituksella ole konkreettista strategiaa korruption torjuntaan; 7. kehottaa komissiota käyttämään pohjana onnistuneita hankkeita, jotka ovat osoittautuneet kestäviksi, antaneet mitattavissa olevaa lisäarvoa ja jotka on pantu täytäntöön ja toteutettu säädösten mukaisesti IPA II -ohjelman puitteissa; 8. pitää myönteisenä komission käynnistämiä hankkeita kansalaisyhteiskunnan järjestöjen hyväksi; kehottaa komissiota jatkamaan tätä käytäntöä ja luomaan vahvat suhteet paikallisiin kansalaisjärjestöihin; 9. kannustaa komissiota suunnittelemaan hankkeita, joilla vahvistetaan korruptiosta ja petoksista julkisuuteen ilmoittaneiden henkilöiden oikeuksia ja asemaa; 10. panee merkille tilintarkastustuomioistuimen huomion, että vaikka monet hankkeista olivat hyvin hallinnoituja, tulokset eivät aina olleet kestäviä eikä tuloksia aina edes saavutettu; PE v /4 DT\ doc

5 toteaa lisäksi, että hankkeet eivät aina olleet johdonmukaisesti hallinnollista kapasiteettia vahvistavia; kehottaa komissiota parantamaan strategista suunnittelua ja varmistamaan hankkeiden kestävyyden ja toteuttamiskelpoisuuden asettamalla sen hankkeiden ennakkoehdoksi; 11. kehottaa komissiota noudattamaan tinkimättä moitteettoman varainhoidon periaatteita; pyytää komissiota auttamaan sellaisten hankkeiden suunnittelussa, jotka toimisivat ensiaskeleena maahan kohdistuville lisäinvestoinneille; kannustaa komissiota asettamaan etusijalle hankkeita, jotka avaavat mahdollisuuksia tärkeillä aloilla, kuten julkisissa hankinnoissa tai valintaprosesseissa, ja välttämään rahoittamasta merkitykseltään lyhytaikaisia hankkeita; 12. kannustaa komissiota pitämään IPA II -kehyksessä saatavilla varoja, jotka olisivat valmiina kiireellisten asioiden nopeaa ratkaisemista varten. DT\ doc 5/5 PE v01-00