Following a decision adopted today by the European Commission, Romania has to return EUR 41.7 million to the EU budget for non-compliance with EU rules or inadequate control procedures on agricultural expenditure. Romania was charged for weaknesses in the LPIS-GIS system (the system for identifying agricultural land and the geographical information system), administrative controls and sanctions application. Member States are responsible for paying out and checking expenditure under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and the Commission is required to ensure that member states have made correct use of the funds.
A total of EUR 578.5 million of EU farm money unduly spent by member states is claimed back as a result of a decision adopted today by the EC.
Commenting on the decision, Dacian Ciolos, Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, said: “We are working hard to achieve the best possible control of farm spending in order to verify that taxpayers money is not being misspent.”
Under this latest decision, funds will be recovered from Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Ireland, Lithuania Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, the Netherlands, and United Kingdom.
EUR 210.9 million is charged to Greece for poor LPIS-GIS and deficiencies in on-the spot controls in respect of claim year 2006 for area-aids expenditure, including area-based rural development measures.
EUR 54.7 million is charged to Greece with regard to dried grapes for reductions in the minimum yield, plot specialisation, ineffective vineyard register and weaknesses in scheme management and control for the financial years 2003 -2007.
EUR 50.16 million is charged to Greece for failure to reduce aid payments for non respect of veterinary requirements regarding the maintenance of sheep registers, for deficiencies in on-the-spot and administrative checks and for absence of specific risk criteria for Less Favoured Area additional premium controls;
EUR 40.69 million is charged to Portugal for weaknesses in the LPIS-GIS, deficiencies in the risk analysis for control, insufficient number and quality of on-the-spot checks, incorrect application of sanctions, inadequate guidelines and deficiencies in administrative checks for area-aids expenditure including area-based rural development measures.