Examination of Witnesses (Questions 680
- 683)
THURSDAY 6 DECEMBER 2007
Ms Dalia Grybauskaite
Q680 Earl of Dundee:
As you say, we learned that in 2006 about 2% of the total farm
and development budget was not properly justified. If so, how
might the balance between decentralisation and effective supervision
be further improved?
Ms Grybauskaite: We agreed that by 15 February
each year each Member State will present their declarations of
assurance as to how all European financial resources are spent.
For the first time in history, this year we pushed and with the
support of the European Parliament we were able to have an agreement
with Member States that they agreed to transparently present all
beneficiaries of structural funds in 2008 and in 2009 all agricultural
beneficiaries, who receives what and why. This information has
never been public until now. This will mean huge pressure on governments
from the media and the public on how it is used. It is good for
me because it will be the largest pressure to reform agricultural
policy more than any political discussion, I am sure about that.
If somebody asks in Germany why 80% of resources were received
only by 15% of farmers, or not by farmers but by owners, or not
by owners but by industry, that will be perfect pressure for CAP
reform. We are introducing these elements step-by-step in Member
States and for the first time they have to present this assurance
on 15 February next year. It was agreed between the Court of Auditors
and Parliament and we pushed and we have got it in the financial
regulations now which came into force from May of this year. Of
course, 80% of all of the European budget is spent by Member States
and the Court of Auditors is pressing for this. In the Lisbon
Treaty one good thing is today the Commission is responsible for
final management results. We are not doing anything on the land
but we are responsible. In the new Treaty it will be Member States
and the Commission, equal responsibility, so Member States will
not be able to avoid it by claiming that the Commission was not
sufficient enough, the methodology was not enough, these kinds
of things. The responsibility will be equally shared. This will
put pressure on governments to make control more efficient and
more reliable.
Q681 Earl of Dundee:
It is really good to hear what you said about transparency, but
on knowing what people are getting up to and being clear about
it, is that nicely across the board throughout Europe or are there
anomalies and differences between clear results from, say, the
newer countries compared to the older ones, or is that not so?
Ms Grybauskaite: In agriculture especially you
mean?
Q682 Earl of Dundee:
Yes.
Ms Grybauskaite: As I said, and the next Commissioner
will explain a lot more, during one year in the agricultural area
on controls she did a lot and her Directorate did a lot and this
was acknowledged by the Court of Auditors. That was the largest
improvement in the largest spending portfolio. That was not exactly
the case in structural funds. One of the outcomes of this is that
we are very seriously thinking about some restrictions on direct
payment decisions for Romania because they are still not fulfilling
their requirements for this year. We are looking very carefully
into new Member States. For the EU-10 it is less problematic.
I recently heard there were some problems in Greece but in the
EU-10 we do not hear of any large problems. There are problems
in Romania and we may still decide to cut as set out that under
the membership treaty of Romania by 25% of direct payments. The
final decision has not yet been made and Commissioner Fischer
Boel will be able to answer in detail. We are trying to be hard.
Q683 Chairman:
We have talked around this in a way but could you clarify for
us what you consider to be the practical implications of the abolition
of the distinction between compulsory and non-compulsory expenditure.
Ms Grybauskaite: This is only in the Treaty
very generally. During 2010 we will be negotiating between the
Parliament, the Council and us on procedures and how decisions
will be made. We need to change all of the procedures on budget
and on the financial framework. Before the financial framework
was not in the treaties at all, it was a gentleman's agreement,
it was only necessary to agree on the annual budget. Now the multi-annual
budget is in the Treaty and that means it is obligatory. On the
cycle of negotiations we will have for seven or five or whatever
we will have in the future, a seven year budget is about a three
and a half year cycle. During this cycle we still negotiate on
the annual budget each year and the largest impact of this distinction
which is disappearing between compulsory and non-compulsory will
be on annual budgets. It will only be one reading and that means
more scrutiny efforts will need to be taken by all institutions,
the Council, the Parliament and the Commission. All budgets will
be co-decided. If on agriculture Member States were able to keep
some autonomy, that autonomy will now disappear. It will be an
equal balance between the Parliament and the Council on all parts
of the budget. This depends on procedures and goodwill from both
institutions, it can be easier or it can be more complicated.
Each year I negotiate the annual budget, and I have already negotiated
four, and after each year I think, this was the most difficult
one, the next will be easier", but no, every year there is
something new that pops up, new complications, new people, new
tensions and Presidencies. It very much depends on the Presidency's
capability to deliver, what the country is, who the people are
doing the job. Your Presidency was efficient. It was difficult
as a partner to negotiate and deal with but it was very efficient.
After the very stiff and conflicting relations, especially for
me it was not easy and I was critical about the Presidency and
the Presidency was critical about the Commission, we finished
with respect for each other. If the Presidency is able to deliver
and treats you with respect you have good results and that is
important. (There followed a short discussion off the record)
Chairman: Thank you very much indeed.
|
