The coordinated audit conducted by the SAIs of Denmark and Poland covered the years 2007-2009 and comprised resources designated in the EU budget for the years 2007-2013. By the end of 2009, Denmark allocated almost half of the funds from the ERDF and spent them on, among other things, environmental programmes. Similarly, Poland also spent almost half of the sum from the ERDF in the Pomorskie region (while the result for the whole country stands at 30 percent of the allocated funds).
However, Denmark and the Pomorskie region alike have problems with meeting the requirements of the n+2 principle, which provides that subsidies must be paid to beneficiaries not later than three years after they are granted. Otherwise, certain amounts of funds allocated by the EU are automatically cancelled and returned to the EU budget. This is one of the basic principles governing assistance funds in the European Union. Why do the two countries have problems with paying the money? In Poland, EU regulations with regard to environmental protection have not been implemented on time, while in Denmark there are problems with the programme implementation and administrative procedures on applications assessment.
While environmental programmes are evaluated, their impact on the nature is one of the most important criteria. Both SAIs verify this impact with the use of environmental indicators. However, Rigsrevisionen claims that in Denmark these indicators are not clearly defined, therefore information provided by beneficiaries may happen to be incorrect. In the Pomorskie region in Poland, in turn, environmental indicators are defined in detail, which allows for their effective and precise verification and can be considered a good practice.
Both the Rigsrevisionen and the NIK have given a positive opinion on the system for project administration and concluded that the authorities responsible for projects administration meet their duties appropriately.
