HL Deb 15 June 1990 vol 520 cc532-3

11.20 a.m.

Lord Bruce of Donington asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will propose changes in the European Community financial regulations to ensure that all reports by the European Court of Auditors are dated and that they are published as soon as may be after completion, without the delays occasioned by the incorporation in such reports of the observations of the European Commission.

The Paymaster General (The Earl of Caithness)

My Lords, the Commission's right to reply to the Court of Auditors annual report is enshrined in Article 206 a(4) of the treaty. Under a timetable set out in Article 88 of the financial regulation, the court must transmit the annual report by 15th July, the Commission must respond by 31st October and the report must be submitted in final form by 30th November.

As regards the court's special reports, Article 90(2) of the financial regulation provides for the relevant institution to reply within two and a half months. Both annual and special reports bear the date on which they were adopted by the court.

Lord Bruce of Donington

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Earl for that reply. Is he aware that the last report of the European Court of Auditors, dealing with the accounts of the Community to 31st December 1988, was not finally published until 12th December 1989? Is he further aware that the practice of permitting institutions themselves to reply to observations made by the Court of Auditors holds up the publication of the report itself, which should stand on its own feet? I trust that the noble Earl will agree that that is a position which is almost the same as if a report of a Select Committee of your Lordships' House, or indeed of another place, were not to be submitted until after the Government had made their replies. Will he confirm that that position is intolerable and ought to be changed at the earliest possible opportunity?

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, the noble Lord has a point with regard to the most recent report on export refunds, where the Commission's behaviour was perhaps ill considered in that it had the chance to give its comments with the report and then gave a press release at the same time. However, the practice of allowing the report or the institutional body's comments to be fed to the Court of Auditors before publication means that there is an opportunity to correct factual errors, which only serves to enhance the value of the report. Perhaps more important is that the inclusion of comments from the Commission or the institution or body being reported on puts more information before the Council. I feel that the noble Lord will agree with me that that leads to better informed scrutiny and conclusions.

Lord Molloy

My Lords, is the Minister aware that those noble Lords who were Members of the European Parliament in the mid-1970s were patently aware that the commissioners had very little time for the board—as much as they do now—of the Court of Auditors? They have never shown any real interest in supporting the principle.

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, I am grateful for what the noble Lord has told us. The reforms that the United Kingdom instituted recently, whereby the reports are taken up to ECOFIN, as was the case with the recent report on export refunds which was done specifically at the request of my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, show that everybody takes the report seriously.

Lord Bruce of Donington

My Lords, will the Minister give the House an undertaking that he or one of his colleagues will raise this whole question with ECOFIN at its next meeting and, in view of the fact that there is to be an inter-governmental conference later this year, will also give consideration to effecting an amendment of the treaty? Such an amendment would get rid of the practice whereby reports by responsible institutions such as the Court of Auditors can be held up or their effect minimised by a right given to the institutions to hold them up while they make their comments upon them.

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, I do not believe that the effect of the report is minimised, but the noble Lord has a point which perhaps could best be dealt with by a code of practice rather than a change to the treaty or amendment of the financial regulations. As the noble Lord will know, the last amendment to the financial regulations took some 10 years to agree. Therefore a code of practice might better serve his purposes.