Select Committee on European Legislation Eleventh Report


ANNEX

References by name to the UK apart from entries in various Diagrams and Tables are as follows:-

In relation to the performance of Member States in collecting and remitting entitlements to traditional own resources which have been established, Table 1.3 shows that the UK was the third best (third lowest proportion not recovered) in 1995;

the UK is noted as one of the five Member States reporting write-offs of amounts (of traditional own resources) in excess of 10,000 ECU. Table 1.5 refers;

the UK is noted as one of four Member States where the ECA examined the operation of the inward processing procedure for customs duties, leading to the criticism that the UK was late in making the required declarations and remitting revenues (1.26 and 1.27);

the UK is the only Member State correctly administering a particular aspect of the EEC-Turkey Agreement;

the UK is noted as one of eight Members making errors in administration of the VAT Information Exchange System (VIES);

the UK approach to compilation of VAT statistics about intra-Community trade (Intrastat) is noted in context of divergent practices amongst Members, and (1.84) the UK opinion on the reliability of Intrastat is noted;

use by the UK of VIES to cross-check VAT declarations led to recovery of 1.4 million ECU in 1994;

the ECA notes that the UK (and Italy) report changes in nature or scope of VAT irregularities since the single market was introduced with new intra-Community trade procedure;

the UK is noted as one of seven Members whose national statistics offices contributed to an ECA study on how to measure the reliability of national GNP data. UK and Italy were the only ones able to report conclusions from studies of the accuracy of their national accounts. The UK study (see 1.123) suggests that audit of quality of GNP data may be practicable and further work (1.124) drawing on contributions from UK and Italy is envisaged;

a large increase in the area of the UK on which fibre flax is cultivated (similar increase in Spain) is implicitly criticised in the context of observations about the poor economic rationale for subsidisation of fibre flax production. In its reply, the Commission suspects that this reflects a premium (subsidy) 'hunt', and that the yield per hectare in the UK is 'very much lower' than in the traditional flax cultivation zones;

the ECA criticises 'serious systems weaknesses in the UK' concerning export refund payments on cereals used in the production of whisky which is exported. In 3.108 the ECA says that 'later improvements in the UK control system have not removed the high risk of irregular payments in previous years' and goes on to observe that 'the Commission should therefore because of changes in differential prices between the EC regime and the world market review whether the continuation of EU subsidies for whisky distillers is still justified'. In its reply the Commission argues for continuing the whisky distillation aid;

the Commission acted belatedly to cancel historic commitments for contributing towards national expenditure on fisheries surveillance in a number of States, including the UK, where expenditure was lower than the commitments appropriated. Table 4.3 illustrates that the UK has drawn down a low level of the commitment authorised for pilot projects on satellite monitoring of fisheries vessels;

the UK (and France) failed to make payments due under recovery orders relating to advances from the budget for "specific ('non-quota measures') Community regional development measures" which the UK was unable to justify. Two cases amounting to 4 million ECU relate to the UK;

the EIB has yet to forecast lending under the Community Support Framework for the UK;

UK operational programmes account for the bulk (76 per cent) of unutilised historic commitments of the European Social Fund (ESF) being carried forward against its 1994-99 appropriations;

during 1995 the Commission decided, illegally in the view of the ECA, to extend the deadline for expenditure under the UK's 1990-93 ESF operational programme, with the effect of reopening eight programmes which had been closed at the end of 1993 and paying or committing to them 38.7 million ECU (£32.8 million) which should have been dedicated to the 1994-99 ESF;

the UK is listed as one of six Members where ESF management agencies are found not to be implementing certain aspects of required certification and control procedures;

a subsidy of 200,000 ECU (£169,000) was paid for production in high-definition TV mode of a programme about the 1995 world figure-skating championships in Birmingham which was broadcast only to a small number of viewers in France;

UK TV broadcasters abandoned projects to broadcast coverage of horse racing in widescreen format, despite the Commission making 1.8 million ECU (£1.5 million) of subsidies available. In its reply the Commission regretted the cancellation of the plans.

The Government intends to respond to the ECA's observations, where appropriate, during the procedure for discharging the 1995 budget.


 


© Parliamentary copyright 1997
Prepared 7 February 1997