EU Financial Management

I need say no more than that I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. I should like to do some textual analysis. It is always welcome that those who can do so try to synthesise the various documents. We try to read them, but they are long on words and short on meaning. I welcome the recently revealed National Audit Office document on the financial management of the European Union. With the best will in the world, it is hardly a glowing endorsement of the EU. It says of the Court of Auditors:"““The Court did not give a positive opinion on the legality and regularity of the transactions for the following expenditure headings: the Common Agricultural Policy””," which is 40 per cent.-plus of the budget, ““Structural Measures””—how much more of the budget does that include?—"““internal policies; external actions; and pre-accession aid.””" What is left? That is our own NAO putting the boot in, not terribly subtly, but necessarily overtly. That is the sensible way in which it has to deal with these matters, and I commend it for doing so. This is not just down to the EU itself but down to the way in which it works with its member states. However, it is of course the EU’s responsibility to deal with these problems. I had a go at OLAF in an intervention on my hon. Friend the Economic Secretary. As he said, OLAF is in its infancy. My hon. Friend the Member for North-West Leicestershire (David Taylor), who is no longer in his place, reminded me that OLAF was set up in 1999. I know that it is easy to criticise Governments for failing to deliver and for always coming up with good intentions but being unable to follow them up with the detailed plans that we would want. However, we are now seven years into the operation of OLAF. It may have a long way to go, but if it has not got very far in seven years, I hate to think how long it will take before it really cracks the whip and begins to bear down on the corruption and anti-fraud measures that it needs to bring in.