I dispute the fact that it is not working; the Court of Auditors does its job very well. Members of the Committee have already commented on the fact that this is the 13th year in succession that we have not had what I would describe as a clean bill of health. We are not happy about that—we are concerned. However, this is not equivalent to finding fraud. Most of the irregularities that the court has found have been genuine errors which are later rectified. As in previous years, the court has said that the transactions underlying the financial statements for 2006 were legal and regular in respect of revenue, commitments and administrative payments. Further, there has been some improvement from the 6 per cent of accounts that it signed off in 2003, the 35 per cent signed off in 2004 to just over 40 per cent in 2006. Much of its difficulty in giving a positive statement arises from the areas of expenditure which are jointly managed by the EC and member states. This was almost 80 per cent of the EU budget funding in 2006.
We are talking in large part about making sure that those procedures function effectively and not about allegations of fraud. The fact that so many errors are rectified later does not mean that the court is not able to do its job properly. That is incredibly important.
European Union (Amendment) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Ashton of Upholland
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 29 April 2008.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on European Union (Amendment) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
701 c184 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 00:41:11 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_468241
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_468241
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_468241