5.12.2008   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 311/136

1-2

3-6

7-15

1.

The European Police College (hereinafter called the College) was established by Council Decision 2000/820/JHA, as repealed in 2005 and replaced by Council Decision 2005/681/JHA (1). The College's task is to function as a network and bring together the national police training institutes in the Member States to provide training sessions, based on common standards, for senior police officers.

2.

Table 1 summarises the College's competences and activities. Key data taken from the financial statements drawn up by the College for the financial year 2007 are presented in Tables 2 and 3for information purposes.

3.

This Statement is addressed to the European Parliament and the Council in accordance with Article 185(2) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 (2); it was drawn up following an examination of the College's accounts, as required by Article 248 of the Treaty establishing the European Community.

4.

The College's accounts for the financial year ended 31 December 2007 (3) were drawn up by its Director, pursuant to Article 11 of Council Decision 2005/681/JHA, and sent to the Court, which is required to give a Statement of Assurance on their reliability and on the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions.

5.

The Court conducted its audit in accordance with the IFAC and ISSAI (4) International Auditing Standards and Codes of Ethics, in so far as these are applicable in the European Community context. The audit was planned and performed to obtain reasonable assurance that the accounts are reliable and that the underlying transactions are legal and regular.

6.

The Court has thus obtained a reasonable basis for the Statement set out below:

Reliability of the accountsExcept for the situation described in paragraphs 9 and 10, the College's accounts for the financial year ended 31 December 2007 are, in all material respects, reliable. Furthermore, the Court draws attention to the observation in paragraph 7.Legality and regularity of the underlying transactionsExcept for the situations described in paragraphs 14 and 15, the transactions underlying the College's annual accounts, taken as a whole, are legal and regular. Furthermore, the Court draws attention to the observation in paragraph 13.

7.

The 2007 College's budget amounted to 6,5 million euro, as compared to 5,1 million euro the previous year. The increase in the budget was due to the expansion of the College's activities. This budget amount did not include a contribution of 1,5 million euro received from the Commission in 2007 to implement a MEDA (5) programme. This situation was at odds with the principle of unity and accuracy of the budget.

8.

Only 5,6 million euro of the 2007 commitment appropriations (6) were used, of which 1,7 million euro were carried over. More than 20 % (0,5 million euro) of the appropriations carried over from the preceding year were cancelled. The high level of carry-overs and cancellations of appropriations shows difficulties in budget management.

9.

As in 2006, the College did not have, for most of the year, a proper commitment accounting system. For example, for operating expenditure, decisions to spend were taken by the Director on the advice of the Governing Board. Commitments were only recorded against budget lines after payments had been made. The absence of internal control standards (7) and ineffective budget monitoring led to spending in excess of the amount foreseen on some budgetary lines. This then led to either ex-post transfers to correct the overdrawn positions or the creation of new budgetary lines ex nihilo.

10.

In November 2007, a commitment accounting system was put in place for operating activities. It explicitly provided for the creation of budgetary commitments before any legal commitment or any check on the availability of appropriations. The form of the standard legal commitment in this new procedure does not provide sufficient legal guarantees. It consists of a simple sheet providing some administrative information on the project plus a breakdown of its total cost between the relevant budgetary lines. No contractual conditions are detailed. This approach is not in line with the principle of transparency.

11.

Contrary to the College's Financial Regulation (8), neither the provisional accounts nor the report on the budgetary and financial management had been prepared.

12.

The recoverable VAT for the 2007 financial year, amounting to 102 281 euro, had not been reclaimed by the year end. VAT should be recovered at regular intervals during the year. This situation is not consistent with sound financial management.

13.

The College's Financial Regulation foresees the need for detailed rules for the implementation (9) of the regulation. The College has not yet adopted any detailed implementing rules, including those ensuring the transparency of the College's procurement procedures. This had already been commented on in the 2006 audit report (10).

14.

The system of procurement did not comply with the provisions of the Financial Regulation. There was no documentation available to justify the need to purchase particular items and to explain recourse to a particular supplier. This had already been commented on in the 2006 audit report (11).

15.

Cases were identified where appropriations were used to finance the private expenditure of some of the College's staff. As it was not feasible for the auditors to review all payments made during the year it is not possible to quantify either the amount that was irregularly spent on private use or all the different types of private expenditure made. This use of public funds for private purposes is material by nature. Steps should be taken to ensure complete reimbursement of these funds.