Joint final report on the audit of environmental monitoring and fisheries management and control in the Baltic Sea 2009

Report ID: 44

In 2008 the Supreme Audit Institutions of Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, and Sweden conducted an audit of environmental monitoring and fisheries management and control in the Baltic Sea.

The audit was divided into two parts: Germany, Latvia, Poland, and Denmark participated in the first part which is about environmental monitoring in the Baltic Sea. Estonia, Finland, Lithuania, Russia, Sweden, and Denmark participated in the second part about fisheries management and control in the Baltic Sea.

The overall objective of the first part was to assess whether the signatory states of the Helsinki Convention are complying with the standards of the Cooperative Monitoring in the Baltic Marine Environment (COMBINE) and how the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) will affect national monitoring.

The overall objective of the second part was to conduct a review of fisheries management and control in the Baltic Sea.

Report on implementation of the NATURA 2000 NETWORK in Europe

Report ID: 50

Characteristics of the Natura 2000 network

Natura 2000 is an EU wide network of nature protection areas established under the 1992 Habitats Directive.
As stated in the European Commission strategy to protect Europe's most important wildlife areas, the aim of the network is to assure the long-term survival of Europe's most valuable and threatened species and habitats. It comprises Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) designated by Member States under the Habitats Directive, and Special Protection Areas (SPA) designated under the 1979 Birds Directive.

The establishment of protected areas also fulfils a Community obligation under the UN Convention on Biological Diversity.

The selection of Natura 2000 sites is based exclusively on scientific criteria, such as the size and density of populations of target species and the ecological quality and area of target habitat types present on the site.

The Directive does not lay down rules regarding the consultation process to be followed in selecting the
sites. This is for Member States to determine.

The directives do not say how much land and marine areas are to be included in Natura 2000 network. This will depend on the biological richness of the different regions. If, for example, a Member State is particularly rich in specific species and habitats, it is expected to designate sites in proportion to this wealth of biodiversity.

Although the establishment of Natura 2000 is not yet complete, an area equivalent to more than 15% of EU territory has now been proposed for conservation under the network.

Natura 2000 is not a system of strict nature reserves where all human activities are excluded. Human activities can continue on Natura 2000 sites, provided the future management is compatible with the objectives of biodiversity protection.

New activities or developments within Natura 2000 sites are not prohibited a priori, but are to be judged on a case by case basis. Procedure is defined in the Habitats Directive for assessment and subsequent decisions relating to development proposals that are likely to have an impact on designated sites.

Member States must ensure full compliance with the legal requirements of Natura 2000, regardless of whether they are in receipt of structural funds. However, it is particularly important to ensure compliance in situations that involve Community funded programmes.

In the light of this concern the Commission has already informed Member States that failure to present lists of Natura 2000 sites could result in the suspension of payments under certain structural funds programmes.

The threat of suspension of payments from such programmes was a precautionary measure to ensure that
Community funded programmes would not contribute to irreparable damage to sites before they have been officially proposed for protection under Natura 2000 policy.

Coordinated International Audit on Climate Change Key Implications for Governments and their Auditors (UNFCCC Kyoto Protocol)

Report ID: 53

Scientific research suggests that climate change has the potential to affect ecosystems, water resources, food production, human health, infrastructure, and energy systems, among other things. Scientific evidence from around the world suggests that climate change has already affected natural and human environments.
Countries around the world have identified climate change as a pressing worldwide issue by adopting the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and its Kyoto Protocol. They are collectively and individually taking actions to limit greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to the current and potential impacts of climate change. Substantial sums of money have been spent to date and will be spent in future to address this issue.

Supreme audit institutions (SAIs) play a major role in auditing government accounts and operations. They have different mandates but share a common responsibility to provide legislatures and their citizens with the
information they need to hold governments accountable for prudent financial management, and to varying degrees for compliance with domestic laws and international agreements, policy implementation, and program performance. The work of SAIs is independent, non‐political, and fact‐based, with the aim of promoting effective management and good governance within government.

Effectiveness of measures for improving the status of Lake Peipus

Report ID: 54

The National Audit Office of Estonia audited whether the state is aware of the sources of pollution influencing the status of Lake Peipus and whether the measures implemented for the protection of the lake have helped to reduce the pollution load and will ensure the good status of Lake Peipus by 2015.

According to the NAO the current activity of the Estonian state does not ensure the reduction of the pollution load of Lake Peipus so that it would help to achieve the lake’s good status by the year 2015 to meet the requirements of the European Union, or by the next deadline in 2021.

Report on auditing the flood control preparedness in the Upper Tisza region

Report ID: 73

The area of the basin of the Upper Tisza is one of Europe’s wettest regions, at high risk from floods. The fundamental cause of the frequent and sizeable floods characteristic of the region, is the hydrometeorological and sinoptic situation, as well as the special location and structure of the beds of mountain rivers, soils and mountain rocks. Floods cause major damage to Ukraine and Hungary alike, and this determines to a large extent the parties’ cooperation in preventing the damaging effects of water and averting the consequences of floods.

The execution of a parallel audit covering the flood control preparedness in the Upper Tisza Region was preceded by an agreement signed in Budapest, on 4 March 2004, by the Presidents of the State Audit Office of Hungary and the Accounting Chamber of Ukraine aimed to monitor the implementation of the contents of the Transboundary Water Agreement signed between their respective countries in 1999, which serves as international legal basis for the cooperation between Hungary and Ukraine in respect of transboundary waters.

The parallel audit was integrated, in case of the Hungarian State Audit Office, in the performance audit task entitled “Audit of Preparations for the Prevention of Natural Disasters”, while in the case of the Accounting Chamber of Ukraine it was a part of the task entitled “Analysis and Audit of the Execution of the State Programme Covering the Complex Flood Control Preparedness of the Catchment Area of the Tisza River and the Sub-Carpathian Region for the Period 2002 to 2006 and the Forecast until 2015”. The audit offices submitted their respective reports to the legislative bodies of their countries.

The joint report presents the summary of the findings made on the Hungarian and Ukrainian sides, as well as the details of the joint conclusions concerning the fields of cooperation, which cover the transboundary waters.

SOURCE: https://rp.gov.ua/IntCooperation/IntAudits/?id=47&lang=eng