Traduction de «Rapport d'erreurs du réviseur - Modèle » (Français → Anglais) :

Reviewer's Error Report - Data Analysis Group

One can therefore only conclude that the electoral boundary commission member, David Marit, was correct to conclude in his dissenting report to the commission that moving away from a blended rural-urban model of electoral representation in Saskatchewan is a mistake.

5. Given that budget support constitutes 34 % of 2010 EDF payments, is concerned that the Court of Auditors found that budget support payments in the first half of 2010 were affected by a high frequency of non-quantifiable errors due to the lack of a structured assessment of the progress of public finance management (PFM) reforms by the recipient governments; in this respect, welcomes the introduction in June 2010 of a new format for Delegations’ annual reporting on PFM reforms in recipient countries and urges Delegations to apply th ...[+++]is new framework consistently; urges the Commission to address the remaining weaknesses in the methodology and management of its general budget support programmes, in particular the lack of a sound risk management framework and an evaluation methodology to estimate the impact on poverty reduction, as well as insufficient coordination with the Member States on budget support contracts and payments; considers the Green Paper launched in 2010 a positive contribution to the reflection on how to turn budget support into a more efficient and effective instrument for poverty reduction;

48. Is concerned by the excessive administrative burden of FP7; stresses that simplification measures that do not require a change of regulation should be implemented as soon as possible, while respecting simplicity, stability, consistency, legal certainty, transparency, excellence and trust, and encourages the Commission to explore further simplification measures, including contributions in kind by applicants, as well as a further alignment with calculation and accounting methods used in national funding systems; calls on the Commission to take urgent measures to significantly shorten the time from application to grant, reduce bureaucratic procedures for preparing, submitting and assessing project (including through the use of an EU appl ...[+++]ication portal based on the equivalent U.S. model), reduce the number of periodic financial status reports and auditing documents per reporting period, and find a better balance between research risk and control; stresses that a risk-averse culture of EU research funding would prevent financing of high-risk research ideas with the highest potential for breakthroughs, and therefore suggests that a trust-based approach with higher tolerance for risk and failure should be taken, as opposed to a purely results-based approach which could hamper innovative research; recommends a simplified interpretation and further clarification of the definition of eligible costs; supports the proposal to review the Financial Regulation to simplify procedures and calls for the revision and/or extended interpretation of the EU Staff Regulations on the issue of personal liability; calls for more precise, consistent and transparent procedural rules for audits, including by using less random sampling and more realistic criteria, such as the experience of participants and the background of errors and compliance;

48. Is concerned by the excessive administrative burden of FP7; stresses that simplification measures that do not require a change of regulation should be implemented as soon as possible, while respecting simplicity, stability, consistency, legal certainty, transparency, excellence and trust, and encourages the Commission to explore further simplification measures, including contributions in kind by applicants, as well as a further alignment with calculation and accounting methods used in national funding systems; calls on the Commission to take urgent measures to significantly shorten the time from application to grant, reduce bureaucratic procedures for preparing, submitting and assessing project (including through the use of an EU appl ...[+++]ication portal based on the equivalent U.S. model), reduce the number of periodic financial status reports and auditing documents per reporting period, and find a better balance between research risk and control; stresses that a risk-averse culture of EU research funding would prevent financing of high-risk research ideas with the highest potential for breakthroughs, and therefore suggests that a trust-based approach with higher tolerance for risk and failure should be taken, as opposed to a purely results-based approach which could hamper innovative research; recommends a simplified interpretation and further clarification of the definition of eligible costs; supports the proposal to review the Financial Regulation to simplify procedures and calls for the revision and/or extended interpretation of the EU Staff Regulations on the issue of personal liability; calls for more precise, consistent and transparent procedural rules for audits, including by using less random sampling and more realistic criteria, such as the experience of participants and the background of errors and compliance;