A.

Whereas the Financial Regulation adopted on 25 June 2002 and the Rules of Procedure of Parliament amended on 23 October 2002 apply with effect from 1 January 2003 as regards procedural rules governing the discharge procedure.

B.

Whereas the substantive provisions of the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1977 and the Rules of Procedure of Parliament applying in 2002 continue to govern the responsibilities of financial actors in 2002.

C.

Whereas Parliament's Rules of Procedure were amended on 23 October 2002 to stipulate that discharge shall be given to the President rather than to the Secretary-General.

D.

Whereas, however, that amendment cannot be applied retrospectively as it concerns a substantive rule governing responsibility; for the 2002 financial year discharge must therefore continue to be given to the Secretary-General,

1.

Takes note of the figures with which the European Parliament's accounts for the 2002 financial year were closed, namely:

2.

Congratulates the Secretary-General on the efficient use of the budgetary appropriations made available by Parliament; thanks all Parliament staff for the effective support provided to Members during the 1999 to 2004 term;

3.

Notes that the principal changes to the appropriations in the 2002 budget as originally adopted concerned:

4.

Notes that in 2002 the European Parliament received revenue of EUR 67 256 006 (2001: EUR 68 415 805);

5.

Takes cognisance of the note forwarded by the Court of Auditors on 17 November 2003 in accordance with Article 39(3) of the Financial Regulation evaluating the four withholdings of approval during 2002;

6.

Points to the overall opinion expressed in the section of the Court of Auditors' annual report for 2002 on administrative expenditure (paragraph 9.14), concerning the results of testing carried out at the European Parliament on a sample of transactions in the financial year 2002, to the effect that, apart from specific findings set out in the annual report, no material errors were noted in the sample of transactions tested;

7.

Persists in the view that the error-identification service hitherto provided by Financial Control must now be at least matched by the detection and correction capacity of the authorising officers' own services;

8.

Applauds the improved readability of the analysis of budgetary management accompanying the accounts, as called for in previous annual reports by the Court of Auditors;

9.

Repeats its request to the Secretary-General, contained in paragraph 16 of the 2001 discharge resolution of 8 April 2003 (7), for a report on the feasibility of publishing Parliament's accounts together with the analysis of budgetary management on Parliament's website;

10.

Takes note of the Secretary-General's reply to question 37 of the 2002 discharge questionnaire (PE 338.137) that ‘formal management and control procedures within Parliament up to the end of 2002 (Advisory Committee on Procurement and Contracts (ACPC), Financial Control, Legal Service) and the importance attached to sound financial management both by Parliament's Administration and by its control authorities, make it unlikely that situations similar to that found at Eurostat could have occurred within Parliament’;

11.

Recalls the statement contained in paragraph 3 of the abovementioned 2001 discharge resolution that ‘the scope of the discharge procedure should cover not only the management activities of Parliament's Secretary-General and Administration, but also the decisions taken by its governing bodies, i.e. its President, Bureau and Conference of Presidents’;

12.

Notes that in accordance with Rule 93a, first indent, of the Rules of Procedure, discharge will in future be given to the President of the European Parliament rather than to the Secretary-General;

13.

Believes that in the context of current debates on corporate and institutional governance there is a convincing case for strengthening the degree of accountability prevailing not only at the level of authorising officers in respect of the commitment and disbursement of budget appropriations, but also at the level of the political authorities in cases where they take decisions having significant financial consequences;

14.

Points out that, under the Financial Regulation, an authorising officer is liable to disciplinary action and payment of compensation for his acts or omissions in his official capacity (Article 65(2)); notes further that an authorising officer by delegation must in future report to the Institution by way of an annual activity report (Article 60(7));

15.

Notes that according to the list of their responsibilities (8) certain Members of the Bureau now oversee specific sectors of the Administration's activities and may participate in that capacity in negotiations with third parties and give undertakings on behalf of the Institution (in accordance with a mandate determined by the Bureau) in such a way as to create legal and/or financial commitments in matters potentially having significant budgetary consequences;

16.

Notes that there is at present no definition of the precise practical meaning of the political responsibility attaching to Parliament's governing bodies as regards the exercise of powers and the taking of decisions with significant financial consequences; instructs its competent committee and Bureau to consider this matter and draw up specific proposals;

17.

Takes the view that in the interest of greater transparency and accountability such proposals might include:

18.

Recalls that in paragraph 11 of its discharge resolution of 10 April 2002 (9) concerning the 2000 financial year, Parliament requested its Secretary-General to provide the Committee on Budgetary Control with the sector letter from the Court of Auditors and the Administration's replies;

19.

Notes that this request was fully complied with in the discharge procedure concerning the 2001 financial year;

20.

Considers that the absence of any corresponding provisions in the internal rules (10) on the implementation of the budget adopted by the Bureau on 4 December 2002 cannot be advanced as a justification for the Administration's failure in the context of the current discharge process to comply with a request contained in an earlier higher-ranking text (Parliament's resolution of 10 April 2002);

21.

Takes the view that there can be no reasonable objection to the disclosure of sector letters to the competent committee, or its rapporteur, on a confidential basis once the Court of Auditors' annual report has been published;

22.

Calls upon the Secretary-General to give clear instructions for the forwarding of the sector letters, in accordance with confidentiality procedures, to the competent committee in the context of the discharge procedure for the 2003 financial year;

23.

Recognises the achievement of the Administration in having successfully completed the steps necessary to put the recast Financial Regulation into practical effect in the short time between the date of its adoption (25 June 2002) and the date of its entry into force (1 January 2003); points out, however, that there should be an in-depth analysis of the effects brought about by applying the detailed rules for implementing the new Financial Regulation so that there is no recurrence of the operational failures which took place in 2003, the Info Points Europe being one example of such lack of foresight;

24.

25.

Notes that the Internal Auditor's work programme for 2003 included an audit of the Parliament's internal control framework, whose main objective is to reassess the level of general compliance with the Institution's minimum standards of internal control; notes that its competent committee will be informed of the results of the audit when the Internal Auditor's annual report is issued;

26.

Notes that the Internal Audit Service is conducting an audit of the procurement process, under the new Financial Regulation, the findings of which are expected during the first half of 2004; insists that the Secretary-General inform its competent committee of those findings and of the follow-up action which he decides on in relation thereto as soon as the procedures laid down in the Internal Rules have been completed;

27.

Welcomes the Secretary-General's undertaking (12) in future to supply the Committee on Budgetary Control on request with copies of the annual activity reports drawn up by the authorising officers by delegation pursuant to Article 60(7) Financial Regulation;

28.

Asks the Bureau to ensure that all appointments at A 1 and A 2 level take place in a fully open, transparent and competitive manner with staff committee representatives with observer status being present on selection committees;

29.

Recalls that in paragraph 28 of the resolution on the 2001 discharge it asked for proposals to be made before 1 July 2003 to remedy the situation of former LA officials who had passed an internal competition and moved to an A-category post before the introduction of ‘décloisonnement’ and were thereby placed at the starting grade (A 7) in the A category irrespective of their seniority in the LA category; notes that, in his reply of 18 February 2004, the Secretary-General recognised that these LA officials had been ‘prejudiced in comparison with other LA officials who benefited from “décloisonnement”’; therefore asks the Secretary-General, in observance of the principle of non-discrimination among officials, to put forward specific proposals aimed at compensating the ‘small number’ of LA officials whose initiative and energy have paradoxically placed them in a very unfavourable position;

30.

Welcomes the model adopted by a number of divisions in the Translation Directorate, by which divisions are split into specialised teams reflecting the terms of reference of parliamentary committees; notes that this system has led to an increase in productivity; calls on the Parliament's Administration to examine whether this system could be extended to all divisions in the translation service;

31.

Recalls that security measures were tightened up following the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001; calls on the Secretary-General, in light of recent events and the current international security climate, to review and update all security arrangements, anticipating potential threats and making contingency plans, seeking expert advice and ensuring that properly trained security personnel are employed on Parliament's premises;

32.

Points out that the political groups only partially answered the questionnaire submitted by its Committee on Budgetary Control in the context of the 2002 discharge process;

33.

Welcomes the fact that the annual accounts of the political groups are now published on Parliament's website; regrets, however, that no action has been taken in response to the request contained in paragraph 80(d) of Parliament's resolution of 8 April 2003 calling for the groups' internal financial rules for the use of the budget line 3701 appropriations also to be published on Parliament's website;

34.

Considers it necessary, in order to avoid potential conflicts of interest, to ensure that the same audit firm does not provide related services;

35.

Calls on the Secretary-General to examine a proposal for the rotation of group audit firms (or at least of the person within the audit firm responsible for the group's audit) every five years;

36.

Recalls paragraph 85 of its resolution of 8 April 2003 instructing its competent committee to continue to dedicate a section of its annual discharge report to the accounts of the political groups and non-attached Members giving particular attention to any specific remarks made by the Court of Auditors in the context of the discharge for the 2002 financial year;

37.

Points out that the 2002 annual report by the Court of Auditors contains a section examining the follow-up to its special report No 13/2000 (13) on the expenditure of the European Parliament's political groups;

38.

Notes that in 2002 the appropriations entered in budget heading 3701 were allocated pursuant to the Bureau's decision of 4 February 2002 as follows:

Total available: EUR 34 988 000

Non-attached Members (33): EUR 1 154 604

Amount available for groups: EUR 33 833 396

39.

Recalls that Article 2(1)(6) of the rules (15) governing budget heading 3701 allows the groups and the non-attached Members to carry forward a maximum of 50 % of the annual appropriations received from the European Parliament's budget; notes that no political group exceeded the limit of 50 % on appropriations to be carried forward from 2002 to 2003 (16);

40.

Notes the following remark by the Court of Auditors with regard to the political groups' accounts of 2002 (annual report, paragraph 9.29. et seq.):

41.

Shares the view that the informative value of the groups' annual reports on the utilisation of the appropriations continues to be limited, because the rules do not require, in addition to the financial statements, the provision of information on the objectives, the type and the cost of the main activities financed;

42.

Instructs its Secretary-General to report on the feasibility of establishing a standard format laying down the matters to be covered in both (i) the analysis of budgetary management accompanying the groups' accounts; and (ii) the opinions drawn up by the external auditors;

43.

Instructs its competent bodies in any future review of the rules governing budget heading 3701 to remedy the absence of global reporting on the use of the appropriations;

44.

Agrees that unless and until the political groups acquire a separate legal personality, the amounts of appropriations carried forward by political groups should be shown on the assets side of the balance sheet of the European Parliament;

45.

Notes that expenditure by national delegations represents half of the total expenditure and that compliance with specific provisions requires on-the-spot verification in addition to audits in the central premises of the political groups; suggests that the audit provisions of the relevant rules should be amended accordingly;

46.

Notes that under Article 1(6)(2) of the rules (17) governing budget heading 3701 the political groups may at present give up to 5 % of their annual subsidy to political parties; recalls that according to Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 2004/2003 (18) on political party funding a European political party may not accept donations from the budgets of political groups in the European Parliament; instructs its competent bodies to take note of this provision when next revising the relevant rules;

47.

Notes that not all non-attached Members have submitted the necessary documentation to the Administration concerning the financial year 2002;

48.

Points out that under Article 2(9)(6) of the rules currently in force as regards non-attached Members (19), the Administration is required to draw up a statement of revenue and expenditure and a balance sheet for each Member demonstrating the regularity of the accounts and their consistency with the rules;

49.

Recalls that, until these new rules were adopted, responsibility for submitting the reports and accounts required by the rules governing budget heading 3701 lay with each individual non-attached Member;

50.

Regrets that the Administration has been unable to forward the reports and accounts for 2002 to the competent committee because not all non-attached Members have yet provided a satisfactory account of their use of the relevant appropriations in 2002;

51.

Notes that unlike the political groups the accounts of the non-attached Members are not subjected to an external audit;

52.

Considers that the use by the non-attached Members of budget heading 3701 appropriations falls within the purview of Parliament's internal auditor and that Article 13(8) of Parliament's internal rules on the implementation of the budget should be interpreted accordingly;

53.

Regrets the failure of the Council to approve the Statute for Members which had the support of Parliament and would have been a fair system for all members;

54.

Believes that the introduction of a Statute for Members accompanied by reform of the system of expenses, as supported by the Parliament, would have been the best way of ensuring the fair and equal treatment of all Members; considers, however, that the Council's failure to approve the Statute does not relieve the Parliament of its responsibility for ensuring that EU funds are spent in an honest and transparent manner;

55.

Recalls paragraph 104 of the abovementioned 2001 European Parliament discharge resolution and the recommendations made by the Court of Auditors that there should be no difference between the travel expenses paid by the Parliament and actual costs incurred by a Member, an issue which is being addressed by the Parliament's Bureau as the only body competent to make the appropriate adjustments;

56.

Requests the Bureau and Quaestors to review the whole system of Members' allowances and the manner in which they are applied and controlled with a view to ensuring fair and adequate resources for legitimate parliamentary work based on a transparent and accountable system and an efficient and non-bureaucratic disbursement procedure;

57.

Calls on the Bureau, in the absence of an agreement on a common Statute for Members, to adopt, as a matter of urgency, new rules governing the payment of expenses and allowances using as a basis the decision of the Bureau of 28 May 2003; considers these new rules should enter into force at the beginning of the next parliamentary term and should provide for, inter alia, the reimbursement of travel expenses on the basis of actual costs incurred;

58.

Notes that, according to the European Parliamentary Assistants Association, the Court of Auditors, the Parliament's own Financial Controller and Mr Onesta, the Vice-President responsible for the Statute for Assistants, the new rules on the payment of the secretarial allowance which entered into effect on 1 January 2001 still pose a number of problems, both in terms of ensuring compliance with the Financial Regulation and with relevant national legislation (taxation, social security and so on), and also in terms of user-friendliness; welcomes, therefore, the changes to the rules governing the payment of the secretarial allowance adopted by the Bureau on 9 February 2004; calls on the Secretary-General to ensure that the new rules are strictly enforced; considers, however, that the new requirement that, in the case of service contracts, invoices or fee statements should be accompanied by statements certifying that the staff concerned are duly affiliated to a social security scheme and that tax and social security contributions are duly paid should not be limited to contracts with a duration exceeding six months;

59.

Believes that, as soon as practically feasible, all payments to parliamentary assistants should be made by Parliament's Administration, either directly or through a national paying agent; points out that under such a system the Member would continue to be responsible for decisions such as recruitment, dismissal, leave and level of remuneration, but that Parliament's Administration would be responsible for ensuring that all payments comply with the Financial Regulation and with applicable national legislation; notes that according to Parliament's Administration (20), the cost of such a system should not exceed EUR 120 per Member per month;

60.

Further considers that, in order to ensure maximum transparency in the use of the secretarial allowance, all assistants paid from the secretarial allowance must be accredited with the Parliament and that, if necessary in order to achieve this, the new category of ‘constituency-based accreditation’ should be created; notes that as a consequence, the names of all assistants would have to be included in the public register of assistants;

61.

Calls on the Secretary-General to inform the Court of Auditors, within two weeks of adoption of this resolution by the European Parliament in plenary sitting, of those accredited assistants who were not paid either from the secretarial allowance or from any other source given in the declaration of financial interests in 2002; instructs the Court of Auditors, in the cases forwarded by the Secretary-General, to ascertain which funds these assistants were paid from and whether there was any infringement of Parliament's prevailing Rules of Procedure or of national rules;

62.

Asks the Secretary-General to ensure that the restrictions imposed by current EU Member States on the free movement of workers from the new Member States will not prevent Members from the new Member States from employing assistants from their home country, or impair the ability of those assistants to move freely within the territory of the European Union;

63.

Considers that the attendance registers available for signature by Members must be supervised by a Parliament official at all times; notes that steps have been taken to ensure that this is now the case;

64.

Takes the view that the subsistence allowance is a flat-rate sum intended to cover all personal costs incurred by a Member whilst attending Parliament, including taxis; considers therefore that the separate taxi allowance (requiring receipts) introduced in September 2003 and extended in January 2004 is superfluous and should be abolished;

65.

Points out that Members are entitled to free health insurance cover under Parliament's rules, even when national health care schemes are available to them; considers that Parliament's health insurance cover for Members should be additional to any national scheme, whether public or private, and based on market conditions; further considers that Members who choose to take part in the Parliament's scheme should be required to pay a health insurance premium; believes that a change in the rules to this effect should be introduced with effect from the beginning of the next parliamentary term;

66.

Considers that the existing system of advance payments, whereby Members' expenses claims are reimbursed by Parliament's Administration before the documentary evidence supporting the claim has been verified, should be replaced by a system of individual accounts into which all amounts due to and from each Member would be consolidated, and on the basis of which a single payment to Members would be made once a month;

67.

Considers further that until such a system is introduced, and in order to meet the concerns of the Court of Auditors, Members' contributions to the voluntary additional pension scheme should be deducted from payments of the daily subsistence allowance rather than from the general expenditure allowance;

68.

Calls on Parliament's Administration to continue and intensify the dialogue with local residents in the Quartier Léopold area, adjacent to the Parliament's Brussels buildings, in view of the ongoing construction work on the new D4 and D5 buildings; considers that Parliament's Administration must ensure that living conditions do not fall below an acceptable minimum as a result of the construction work, and that every effort must be made to accommodate the wishes of local residents with respect to the future configuration of, and access to, the area immediately surrounding the Parliament's buildings;

69.

Asks for the comprehensive review of Parliament's internal environmental policy conducted by the consultancy specialising in environmental management and expected (21) to be available at the end of 2003 to be forwarded to its Committee on Budgetary Control;

70.

Points out that according to the World Health Organisation exposure to tobacco causes death, disease and disability;

71.

Notes the Decision of the European Ombudsman of 23 January 2004 on complaint 260/2003 against the European Parliament, which includes a finding of maladministration and concludes that ‘the European Parliament has failed to take adequate measures to promote compliance with its internal rules on smoking in European Parliament premises’;

72.

Believes that the continued failure by the European Parliament to enforce non-smoking measures poses a serious health threat to all users of Parliament's buildings and could lead to significant claims for damages;

73.

Takes note of the decision taken by the Commission to ban smoking throughout its buildings (including bars and restaurants) as from 1 May 2004; calls on Parliament's Administration and on the College of Quaestors to institute a ban on smoking throughout the public spaces in Parliament's buildings in the three working places with effect from 1 May 2004; takes the view that special rooms should be designated for people wishing to smoke;

74.

Notes that many official documents are still being distributed to Members on paper despite their availability online; points out that in many cases, these documents are discarded without ever being used, which results in a huge waste of money and paper; calls on the College of Quaestors to instruct the Administration to cease the automatic and general distribution of the following types of document to the extent that they are also available online and/or can be transmitted electronically:

75.

Asks instead for limited but sufficient numbers of these documents to be available in paper form at the document counter;

76.

Calls for a system of electronic signature to be introduced, whereby a Member's signature can be applied to documents such as amendments and parliamentary questions without having to have recourse to transmission of documents on paper.