EU Cookie Law
If you wish to visit this site, you are hereby informed, in line with EU Directive 2009/136/ECexternal link, that a cookie will be activated when you access the system. If you are not willing to accept this, do not enter the site. The cookie concerned will be used to store your language preference but will not retain any personal data. It will expire after one year.

Browse publications

14/12/2017

Report of the Task Force on European Banking Union to the Contact Committee of Supreme Audit Institutions of the European Union and the European Court of Auditors


The report is based on a parallel audit on the “prudential supervision of medium-sized and small (’less significant’) institutions in the European Union after the introduction of the Single Supervisory Mechanism”. In the audit, 5 Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) assessed the regulatory framework governing small and medium-sized banks in the EU as well as the design and conduct of prudential supervision. Two overarching findings emerged:
(1) The way in which banking regulation is transposed, and banking supervision of Less Significant Institutions (LSIs) is designed and conducted, varies across different EU Member States.
(2) Since the introduction of the Single Supervisory Mechanism – the first pillar of the European Banking Union – gaps in SAIs’ ability to audit banking supervision have emerged. This applies to national SAIs as well as the European Court of Auditors.
The Contact Committee urges actors at European and national level to strengthen the external audit of the public task of banking supervision. In a policy area where trillions of euros are at stake, accountability and democratic control should not be compromised.
20/11/2017

The Working Group on Structural Funds VII presented its final report to the Contact Committee 2017.


The report is based on a parallel audit on “Contribution of the Structural Funds to the Europe 2020 Strategy in the areas of Employment and/or Education”. For the audit, 11 SAIs evaluated the design of Operational Programmes and analyzed the implementation of projects. They found that, overall, Operational Programmes provide an appropriate basis to contribute to the Europe 2020 strategy. However, they found weaknesses in the design of the Operational Programmes and implementation process which should be addressed by the Commission and the Member States.“
24/10/2017

Underlying Risks to Sustainable Public Finances


The Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) of Finland, Latvia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia and Sweden have co-operated in a parallel audit on underlying risks to sustainable public finances. The project was endorsed by the Contact Committee at its meeting in June 2015 and the Swedish National Audit Office has chaired the group. The aim of the parallel audit was to draw attention to risks to sustainable public finances and to audit how governments deal with such issues within three similar processes involving recommendations from international organisations. This audit is based on reviews of countryspecific reports and recommendations from the European Union (EU), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) issued in the period 2011–2015, (the audited period). The participating SAIs have mapped the various recommendations to their respective country as well as the government responses to these recommendations. They have furthermore audited the public availability of the recommendations at national level as well as national follow-up procedures. A number of SAIs have moreover assessed the effectiveness of government measures.
19/01/2017

Status Outline - October 2016


Status Outline of EU SAI Contact Committee Activities - October 2016
13/01/2016

Final report on the Analysis of (types of) errors in EU and national public procurement within the Structural Funds programmes


The Working Group carried out the parallel audit in order to understand why detected errors in Structural Funds are often associated with public procurement rules. The findings show that ‘lack of knowledge’ is the most common reason for errors in public procurement, followed by ‘interpretation difficulties’. The participating SAIs concentrated on the errors reported by national authorities and SAIs. They assessed the national applications of the relevant COCOF guidelines and scrutinised national systems aimed at detecting and preventing errors in public procurement procedures. Furthermore, they analysed the types and causes of errors and identified similarities and differences across the Member States.


Search


This site is managed by the European Court of Auditors.