Foreign exchange — the ECA cooperating with other SAIs through staff secondment
ECA auditors can participate in an exchange programme offering them the opportunity to work at the SAI of an EU Member State. During their stint abroad, which usually lasts two years, they gain valuable experience and learn about different working methods and products. Michael Pyper profiles some of the ECA auditors who have participated or are currently participating in the programme to find out what motivated them to sign up for this exchange.
By Michael Pyper, Translation, Language Services and Publication Directorate
Lars Markstroem — Skiing to work
Lars Markstroem, a Swedish auditor in the External action, Security and Justice Directorate, had always been satisfied with life at the ECA and in Luxembourg, and had never been tempted to return to his homeland on a permanent basis. However, in 2015 the opportunity for a temporary homecoming arose in the form of secondment to the Swedish Riksrevisionen: ‘I thought: ‘Yes, why not?’ Our children had gone for university studies and my wife was accepting to start a ‘commuting relationship’ since she did not want to move from Luxembourg.’
Lars started his secondment in 2016, succeeding fellow interviewee Horst Fischer, and went to the Swedish SAI expecting a robust organisation with stable management. What he arrived to, however, was an organization experiencing a period of upheaval, which had begun during Horst’s stay. ‘When I started, the EU liaison officer was replaced, the head of HR was vacant, my head of unit was there on a temporary basis, etc. Rumours about nepotism and lack of independence were floating around. Over the summer, these allegations were leaked to the press and it resulted in the almost simultaneous resignation of all three Auditors General.’
‘Friends from the outside asked what I had done, but I had of course nothing to do with this turmoil!’ However, Lars saw the situation improving during his stay. ‘Due to this crisis, the Swedish SAI became more interested in how other supreme audit institutions were working, including the ECA.’ By the beginning of 2017 three new Auditors General were in office and the organisation was recovering. The new management started off very prudent with a focus to reassure and respect the professional knowledge of the staff. Back to basic audit work and value proper civil servant behaviour. ‘Eventually, confidence was coming back to the institution.’
Lars was assigned to the financial audit department, where the audit work is focused on the annual report for around 240 government agencies within Sweden’s highly decentralised system of public administration. Compared to the ECA, financial audit at the Swedish Riksrevisionen differs in many ways:
- its audit work focuses on the financial statements of the audited agency;
- it issues annual audit opinions for each of the 240 agencies;
- there is no discharge procedure in Sweden, so annual audit opinions do not serve this purpose;
- the Swedish Parliament has a rather restrained role in dealing with the audit reports from the Swedish SAI, which addresses its financial audit reports primarily to the government;
- compliance audit work is limited and almost no audit work is done at beneficiary level.
Around half of Swedish SAI’s staff work in performance audit. Lars did not work on any performance audit tasks there, but his impression was that the institution’s performance audits did not differ much from the ECA’s. Another observation concerns the employment status of its staff: ‘There are no specific statutes for civil servants in Sweden, and it is not unusual for staff to switch between private and public sector.’
Lars has plenty of good things to say about life in his country of origin, notwithstanding some extreme weather: ‘Overall, the working environment is very pleasant in Sweden, and Stockholm is such a beautiful city to live and work in. But you must be able to survive the dark and cold winter period. One morning when I woke up in early November it had snowed more than half a metre — I had to put on my skis to get to work! On the other hand, this summer everyone was looking for a swim in the water to cope with the extreme heat.’
After 18 years working in the EU institutions, Lars was used to hearing complaints about their shortcomings, democratic deficits and so on. But the opportunity to look at the EU from the outside allowed him to see many things in its system of managing a public budget and democratic control as a model worth emulating: “It made me proud to be an EU official!’ Lars returned to Luxemburg and the ECA in the autumn of 2018, highly positive about his experience.
Loulla Puisais-Jauvin — Working with the elite of the French public administration
In 2014, the ECA decided to establish an exchange with the French Cour des comptes. Loulla Puisais-Jauvin was the first ECA official to be seconded to the Cour des comptes, taking up her duties on 1 March 2015 for an initial period of two years, which was extended until the end of August 2018. She recalls: ‘I was rather excited to have the opportunity to work in an institution that recruits the elite of the French public administration — like the Council of State and the General Inspectorate of Finance — and is very well regarded.’ Loulla looked forward to the challenge of working in a new environment, in both institutional and geographical terms. Her first surprise was the flatter organisational structure: the French Cour des comptes does not have secretaries, heads of task, principal managers or directors. ‘You just have audit teams, generally of 2–4 people, who report directly to a senior member of the Court and to the president of the Chamber.’
Loulla was assigned to the 5th Chamber , which deals with social issues such as employment, professional training and social housing. She worked on new thematic areas that pose challenges for the EU today and worked on several reports leading to publications. She recalls: ‘I was sent with colleagues to several countries (Denmark, the Netherlands and Switzerland) to perform a benchmark on how the problem of youth unemployment was dealt with in countries other than France.’ She also worked on fraud prevention in the area of professional training, which was reflected in the French SAI’s 2017 Annual Public Report. ‘I also worked on several evaluations on the use of European Structural and Investment Funds in France, with a particular focus on the five outermost regions: La Réunion, Mayotte, Guadeloupe, Martinique and Guyane. Overall, Loulla found it a really challenging but rewarding experience and would encourage colleagues to do something similar. ‘In current times, with the EU and its institutions facing criticism, it is important to spend some time in the Member States and explain what EU does and what it does not.’
Emese Fesus –Delighted with both her adopted institution and living in Paris
Emese Fesus, an auditor from Hungary in the ECA’s Sustainable use of Natural Resources Directorate, is currently on a two-year secondment to the French SAI in Paris, inspired to do so by the very positive experiences of ECA colleagues who participated in the secondment programme before her. ‘A secondment helps you to expand your network, which will help to improve cooperation with other SAIs in the future. Moreover, I had studied at the Ecole Nationale d’Administration (ENA) and lived in France, which meant adapting would be easier.’ Indeed, it comes across clearly that Emese is delighted with both her adopted institution and living in Paris.
In her 14 years at the ECA, Emese’s work encompassed both performance and financial audits on areas including agriculture, rural development, climate change, fisheries, environment, health, and consumer protection. She feels that her experience and knowledge, not least in auditing EU funds, has enabled her to fit into her new working environment, which was made even easier by the warm welcome she received from senior management, including the First President, the President of the 2nd Chamber, the Secretariat General, the International Department and colleagues upon her arrival in Paris in September 2018. Emese works in the Chamber devoted to her specialist areas, agriculture and the environment, and the French Cour des comptes has been keen to tap into her expertise in auditing EU funds.
She has already been invited to give a presentation to her colleagues on the ECA’s working methods and approach to audit, and attended the annual bilateral meeting between the two SAIs in Paris on 11 October (see page 102). ‘This was very interesting for me and I hope to contribute further developing our bilateral technical cooperation.’ She explains that, at first glance, the French public audit system appears very different from the EU’s audit system. The most obvious difference is that the French Cour des comptes, set up by Napoleon in 1807, has judicial powers, which the ECA does not. It has a specific organ to publicly judge and sanction individuals managing public funds. However, as Emese points out, ’both institutions are based on similar values: independence and a collegial system’. The French SAI undertakes financial, compliance and performance audits just as the ECA does, based on regulations, proceedings and methods in accordance with international standards.
The French court has a wide range of publications deriving from its four missions: issuing rulings (by financial judges) on the accounts of public accounting officers, auditing the proper use of public funds (legality and regularity, as well as performance), evaluating public policies and certifying the accounts of the State (including Parliament’s accounts) and the social security system. It publishes various types of reports (not only audit reports), given its role and mission in controlling the government and assisting the Parliament. However, publication, including direct communication with citizens and the media, is at the core of its mandate, as explicitly stated in the French Constitution.
Emese has drawn inspiration from the way the French Cour des comptes does things. One example is the cross-chamber investigation on EU funds in France in which she is participating. This involves team members drawn from different chambers, including some delegated from regional chambers, set up as a matrix organisation to produce this report to the French Parliament.
Another useful element is a means of quality control called a ‘contre-rapporteur,’ which greatly interests Emese. ‘For this function, a senior member follows the team as an observer but does not take part in the investigation process, delivering an independent assessment at each stage of the process to improve the quality of the report.’
Emese is very grateful to have been selected for the secondment programme. During her secondment, she intends to maintain close contact with Luxembourg and the ECA and hopes to act as a useful link between the two institutions to further develop cooperation and exchange between them.
Rafal Gorajski — Customer service mentality
Rafal Gorajski, an auditor at the Investment for Cohesion, Growth and Inclusion Directorate originating from Poland, has been seconded at the UK’s National Audit Office (NAO) since January 2018. Having participated most recently in the performance audit of the Commission’s and EIB’s Joint Assistance to Support Projects in European Regions (JASPERS) initiative, among other things, Rafal decided it was time for something a bit different. That was when the opening at the UK NAO came up, which immediately interested him.
Going across the Channel was not a culture shock for Rafal. He also emphasises how friendly and supportive his British colleagues have been. There were, however, subtle cultural differences between the ECA and the UK NAO that, he admits, threw him a little off balance initially. For example: ‘In the UK NAO, unlike at the ECA, people don’t say hello or good morning to each other in the corridor or in the lift, unless it’s someone they work with directly.’ A colleague then explained to him that this was a British thing, and particularly a London thing.
Differences also became noticeable due the UK NAO having open-plan offices. Rafal’s experiences in this regard have been rather positive: ‘It works.’ He finds it a way of working which is more conducive to teamwork and has, for example, rendered many meetings unnecessary. ‘This created a nice team dynamic.’
Another difference between the UK NAO and the ECA, and one which has a more direct impact on the actual audit work, is what Rafal describes as the UK’s ‘customer service mentality.’ At the NAO, they refer to their auditees — government departments and executive bodies — as clients and treat them accordingly, placing great emphasis on maintaining good relations. As nice as this might sound, Rafal explains, it is not necessarily conducive to open, direct communication in the context of pointing out weaknesses, which, after all, is often the whole point of the audit. Moreover, it is difficult to demand information from clients with quite the same urgency as one would from auditees.
At the UK NAO, Rafal is part of the Central Investigation Team, which coordinates and carries out ‘investigations.’ These form a different type of audit product similar to the ECA’s rapid case reviews. Compared to performance audits (or ‘value-for-money audit’) as they do not present conclusions or recommendations, just the facts. One major advantage of this, he explains, is that it cuts out the need to debate these conclusions and recommendations during an adversarial procedure, which saves time. However, this does not diminish the impact of such investigations: auditors leading investigations undergo hearings before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and, based on the facts presented, the PAC can directly make recommendations.
In addition, unlike the recommendations arising from a value-for-money audit, such recommendations made by the PAC are legally binding. Rafal has been leading one such investigation since July, although he is not yet at liberty to disclose what it is about. In his early days at the UK NAO, he was also involved in an investigation into the collapse of Carillion, a major UK government contractor. Rafal is impressed by the dynamic ethos of his team, with a healthy competition between his colleagues to go above and beyond the call of duty and volunteer for extra responsibility. ‘Working in the Central Investigation Team is a pleasure. They are full of ideas and have no problem expressing them.’ As a seconded auditor, Rafal has also been given plenty of opportunity, in meetings with the leadership team and the Comptroller & Auditor General, to share his views on how the UK NAO does things, based on his ECA experience.
Horst Fischer — Taking your work outdoors to enjoy the sunshine
Horst Fischer of the Audit Quality Control Committee Directorate and German national, spent two years at the Swedish SAI, from 2014 to 2016. After several years in Luxembourg and at the ECA, he was eager for the opportunity to really get to know another European country through the secondment programme.
Sweden was a natural choice for Horst, as he already knew the language and had spent many summers on the West coast of Sweden. The Swedish NAO, the Riksrevisionen, is, however, based in Stockholm — a metropolis by Swedish standards with two million inhabitants and, on the face of it, a very international capital city. It turned out that it is one thing to visit a country but quite another to live there. Horst admits: ’We thought we knew the country but, once we moved there, we realised that this was not the case.’
During his secondment, Horst (and his whole family) had an immersion in a truly Swedish experience. Horst noticed the effects of this immersion above all at a linguistic level, as he was thrust into an environment where native Swedish speakers spoke to other native speakers, and the onus was on him to adapt to the everyday subtleties of Swedish as spoken among the Swedes: ‘Language was not an issue for anyone but me!’
Asked about striking cultural differences he encountered in Sweden, Horst emphasises the egalitarian nature of Swedish society. At a professional level, he says, this egalitarianism is reflected in the way that, in meetings, everyone is given the chance to say their piece and each opinion is valued. Moreover, if a meeting was scheduled to last an hour, it lasted no longer than that, and participants kept their contributions correspondingly short. Once the hour was up, it was fine to excuse oneself and leave. Furthermore, what mattered was producing results and meeting deadlines, not where people chose to work. Teleworking was very common: ‘Once, a colleague left a note on her door saying she had taken her work out to the park for the afternoon to enjoy the sunshine. This was perfectly acceptable. It worked!’ At the same time, Horst found that Swedish culture’s emphasis on consensus and avoiding conflict was sometimes an impediment to efficient decision-making.
In Sweden, Horst worked in quality control in performance audit, in the team examining the national social security system. He was also involved in the parallel performance audit of public procurement in the Western Balkans, together with auditors from Riksrevisionen, the ECA and the SAIs of various Balkan countries. Because quality control at Riksrevisionen follows international standards, and ISSAI 40 in particular, just as it does at the ECA, Horst found it easy to adjust to his new role. However, there was one particularly notable difference, which has its basis in Swedish law: ‘In Sweden, even the working documents of public authorities are, in principle, considered to be public documents. This means that any citizen could go into Riksrevisionen and demand to see the working documents for a particular audit, which makes thorough documentation even more important.’
An obvious difference is the lack of audit visits on the spot — something rather central to life as an ECA auditor. Horst only rarely had to leave Stockholm to visit auditees. In addition, the Swedish SAI makes great use of external experts and invites academics to discuss issues, asking for reviews of particular issues or entire draft reports and using them as experts during audits.
As much as he initially craved immersion in an entirely national experience, his secondment made him realise that after 16 years in the EU institutions, his outlook was an incorrigibly international one. ‘This was something new for me, this national perspective on everything. For example, I attended a huge conference on the Millennium Development Goals, organised by the Swedish development agency. I went there with my ‘European’ mind and was amazed to see how you can approach a problem like development aid from a purely national perspective.’ In his second year, he started spending half his time working in the SAI’s international office, which cooperates not only with INTOSAI but also on a bilateral basis with several other SAIs.
While he learned a lot from his Swedish immersion, he returned, after two years looking at it from the outside, with a renewed appreciation of the ECA and his colleagues in Luxembourg.
This article was first published on the November-December 2018 issue of the ECA Journal. The contents of the interviews and the articles are the sole responsibility of the interviewees and authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Court of Auditors.
