Cost of Controll - operational programme employment in Austria 2007-2013 - European Social Fund (ESF) and European Rural Development Fund (ERDF) (Working Group on the Structural Funds)

Report ID: 10

Bericht des Rechnungshofes

Kosten der Kontrolle – Operationelles Programm Beschäftigung in Österreich 2007 bis 2013

Prüfungsziele

Ziele der Überprüfung waren die Erhebung der Kosten der Umsetzung des Kontrollsystems für das Operationelle Programm Beschäftigung Österreich 2007 bis 2013 (OP Beschäftigung; kofinanziert durch den Europäischen Sozialfonds (ESF) und nationale Mittel) sowie die Beurteilung, ob die österreichischen Behörden die Vorgaben und Vorschriften der Europäischen Union (EU) bezüglich der Einrichtung des Kontrollsystems eingehalten haben.

Die Ergebnisse dieser Überprüfung fließen auch in die koordinierte Prüfung der Arbeitsgruppe Strukturfonds IV des Kontaktausschusses der Präsidenten des Europäischen Rechnungshofes und der Obersten Rechnungskontrollbehörden (ORKB) der EU–Mitgliedstaaten ein, an der die ORKB von zwölf EU–Mitgliedstaaten teilnahmen.

Kosten der Kontrolle – ein EU–weites Thema

Bei der zwischen der Europäischen Kommission (Kommission) und den Mitgliedstaaten geteilten Mittelverwaltung ist der Mitgliedstaat — ungeachtet der Gesamtverantwortung der Kommission — auf Basis der gemeinschaftsrechtlichen Vorgaben für die Verwaltung und Kontrolle der EU–Mittel auf staatlicher Ebene zuständig.

Da der Europäische Rechnungshof — beginnend mit 1994 — insgesamt stets nur eingeschränkte jährliche Zuverlässigkeitserklärungen zum Rechnungsabschluss der EU abgab, setzte die Kommission in den letzten Jahren zahlreiche Maßnahmen zur Stärkung der nationalen Verwaltungs– und Kontrollsysteme. Die gesetzten Maßnahmen erhöhten die Komplexität der Verwaltung und der Kontrolle der Förderungsmaßnahmen. Dies führte zu Diskussionen über die damit verbundenen Kosten, insbesondere im Hinblick auf deren Verhältnismäßigkeit zum Förderungsvolumen.

Im April 2009 forderte das Europäische Parlament eine Bewertung der Kontrollkosten aller Ausgabenbereiche der EU – auch unter Einbeziehung der Kosten der Mitgliedstaaten. Diese Bewertung sollte als Basis für einen interinstitutionellen Dialog zwischen Europä- ischem Parlament, Kommission und Rat über das „hinnehmbare Risiko“ (also jene Risikoschwelle, ab der die Kontrolle mehr kostet, als sie bringt) dienen.

Kosten der Kontrolle des OP Beschäftigung

Im Rahmen der Kontrolle des OP Beschäftigung entstanden bisher Kosten aus der Ex–ante–Evaluation, der Einrichtung des Verwaltungs– und Kontrollsystems, der Projektauswahl, der Kontrolle der Projekte an Hand von Unterlagen und vor Ort (First Level Control), dem Monitoring des OP, der Bescheinigung der Ausgaben und der Ex–post–Prüfungstätigkeit (Second Level Control). Für alle diese Felder fielen in erster Linie Personalkosten an, weiters direkte Sachkosten (z.B. IT) sowie Gemeinkosten (z.B. Mieten, Verwaltungs– Overheads).

Funds earmarked for development of motorway D8

Report ID: 34

In 2005 and 2006, the two supreme audit institutions of the Federal Republic of Germany and the Czech Republic, the Bundesrechnungshof (BRH) and the Nejvyšší kontrolní úřad (NKÚ) conducted parallel audits of expenditure on the construction of the motorway Prague – Dresden (D 8 motorway in the Czech Republic and the A 17 motorway in the Federal Republic of Germany). The motorways are connected by a border bridge co-financed by the two countries. By working together with the NKÚ, the BRH was able to audit in depth the efficiency of the funds used for building the border bridge. As a result of working closely with the BRH the NKÚ was furnished for comparative purposes with the necessary data of German cost levels of bridges and tunnels.

As part of the joint audit effort motorway bridges on the D 8 and A 17 were compared based on the prices per square meter of area of the bridge structure. The statistical analysis of prices made it possible to identify bridges that came at a high cost per square meter. This analysis revealed that the border bridge was the most expensive bridge as compared to other large bridges having a length of over 100 meters. The price increase could also be attributed to the delays occurred in the tender procedure.

When auditors analyzed the costs of tunnel structures, they found that the prices of tunnels are considerably higher on the D 8 motorway than the prices of comparable tunnels in Germany.

The BRH and NKÚ now possess a database of prices for bridges and tunnels on which they can rely in future audit missions into the efficiency of the funds used for transport infrastructure purposes.

Concerning the construction of bridges the two audit institutions recommend the following:

• standardizing bridge constructions and
• using composite steel-concrete and special structures only if pre-stressed steel-concrete bridges are not adequate.

The main features of the cooperation were teamwork and informality. Throughout the parallel audit, the auditors shared their specific knowledge and skills.

Parallel audit of the use of public funds for motorway construction

Report ID: 65

The European motorway network forms the backbone of the passenger and freight transport in the European Union. As this situation will remain unchanged for the time being, investments in the expansion and maintenance of the European Motorway network are very important. Thus, examining the use of public funds for financing motorway construction projects is a key responsibility of Supreme Audit Institutions.

This report informs about the findings produced by the parallel audit missions regarding the funds spent on building the A 73 motorway (A 73) in Germany (section Thuringia/Bavaria satate border - Lichten - fels) and the D 1 motorway (D 1) in the Slovak Republic (section Vrtizer - Hricovske Podhradie). The audit missions focused on the public procurement procedure and a comparison of building standards and costs relative to the A 73 and the D 1. In the years 2009 to 2011, the audits were performed by the German SAI and the Slovak SAI in their respective country in order to share their findings and make comparisons.

The parallel audits found that by awarding the public works contract concerning the D 1 to a general contractor, competition was restricted placing small and medium sized enterprises at a disadvantage.

The expenses on building the two motorways increased considerably owing to the general increase in construction costs, the hike in value added tax (VAT) and, above all, the inadequate preparatory works performed by the respective national road works administrations. The two administrations did not or not adequately invite tenders for required work and services, with the result that supplementary agreements had to be subsequently concluded. Since the costs stipulated in these agreements were fixed in an environment with reduced or even no competition the contractors were able to enforce higher prices.

Building of the Litschberg Basic tunnel and the Szekszrd Danube bridge

Report ID: 76

In the summer of 2002, the Swiss Federal Audit Office (SFAO) celebrated the 125th anniversary of its founding. Friendships among the invited foreign guests were strengthened and there was a resolve to
continue the successful cooperation. An agreement was made with Hungary to organise a parallel audit
on investments in the area of transport infrastructure and to focus on the following topics:

• The Szekszárd bridge construction investment within the context of motorway investments in Hungary
• Tunnel construction investments within the context of the New Rail Link through the Alps (NRLA).

Apart from reinforcing and intensifying relations, the joint activities are intended to contribute to enhancing the specialist knowledge of both audit authorities.

In order for this approach to take place, delegations visited Hungary in the summer of 2003 and visited Switzerland in the spring of 2005. The revised work is now published in a joint report which will be released by both audit authorities within the scope of EUROSAI and EU activities.

Parallel audit on disaster rehabilitation and reconstruction phase

Report ID: 86

The objective of the parallel audit is to test out the draft ISSAI 5520. Therefore, it is expected to provide a list of feedback to enhance the draft ISSAI 5520 on Audit of Disaster-related Aid: Guidance for Supreme Audit Institutions.

Based on their experiences during the parallel audit program, the participating SAIs found that the following matters might need to be considered so as to help improve ISSAI 5520:

a. Risk evaluation associated with disaster management and disaster-related aid management. Post-disaster management, as described in ISSAI 5520, may need to include planning and housing recovery activities.

b. An audit process should be divided into three main activities, namely, planning, execution, and reporting. Furthermore, the details and expected output of each activity should be explained.

c. An audit design matrix is a very useful audit tool and serves as a platform for the conducting of audit work in the field. It can be applied to both performance and compliance audits.

d. Audit case studies should be updated to include more disaster-related audits.