Acta literal de los debates

Miércoles 26 de octubre de 2016 - Estrasburgo

17. Aprobación de la gestión 2014: presupuesto general de la UE - Consejo Europeo y Consejo - Aprobación de la gestión 2014: Empresa Común ENIAC - Aprobación de la gestión 2014: Empresa Común Artemis - Aprobación de la gestión 2014: Empresa Común para el ITER y el Desarrollo de la Energía de Fusión (debate)

  La Présidente. – L'ordre du jour appelle la discussion commune sur la décharge 2014:

- le rapport de Ryszard Czarnecki, au nom de la commission du contrôle budgétaire, concernant la décharge sur l'exécution du budget général de l'Union européenne pour l'exercice 2014, section II – Conseil européen et Conseil [COM(2015)0377 - C8-0201/2015 - 2015/2156(DEC)] (A8-0271/2016),

- le rapport de Marian-Jean Marinescu, au nom de la commission du contrôle budgétaire, concernant la décharge sur l'exécution du budget de l'entreprise commune ENIAC pour l'exercice 2014 [COM(2015)0377 - C8-0247/2015 - 2015/2202(DEC)] (A8-0264/2016),

- le rapport de Marian-Jean Marinescu, au nom de la commission budgétaire, concernant la décharge sur l'exécution du budget de l'entreprise commune Artemis pour l'exercice 2014 [COM(2015)0377 - C8-0244/2015 - 2015/2199(DEC)] (A8-0276/2016), et

- le rapport de Marian-Jean Marinescu, au nom de la commission du contrôle budgétaire, concernant la décharge sur l'exécution du budget de l'entreprise commune pour l'ITER et le développement de l'énergie de fusion pour l'exercice 2014 [COM(2015)0377 - C8-0241/2015 - 2015/2196(DEC)] (A8-0275/2016).

  Ryszard Czarnecki, rapporteur. – Madam President, the discharge for the European Council is the main issue of the discharge procedure. The difficulties repeatedly encountered in the discharge procedures to that date, which were due to a lack of cooperation from the Council, led to a refusal to grant discharge to the Secretary-General of the Council. Parliament, in relation to the financial years 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013, postponed its decision on granting the Secretary-General of the Council discharge in relation to the financial year 2014.

The Council continues to be silent in relation to the remarks made by Parliament in its discharge resolution of 28 April on the trend from previous years of increasing underspending and carryovers of commitments, the high underspending rate and the very high number of appropriations, as well as major transfers within budget lines. These problems could be avoided with better budgetary programming. Moreover, the Council has still not adopted a code of conduct, which is indispensable to the transparency, accountability and integrity of the institution.

Whistle-blowing rules should be implemented by the Council by introducing them into the code of conduct without further delay. The Council definitely should disclose the relevant documents and put in place a clear reporting system that will enable the public to follow the legislative procedures in an open and transparent manner. The Council definitely has to increase transparency and integrity with regard to the negotiations.

Lack of transparency with regard to the legislative process of negotiations, Member States’ positions and meetings with the Council, trilogues and conciliation meetings above all undermines the right of citizens of the Union to information and transparency and it is becoming a cause of concern reflecting, as it does, a certain democratic deficit within the Union institutions.

The Council should join the European Union Transparency Register to ensure transparency and accountability of the institution. Moreover, the Council should provide information on its process of administrative modernisation. Has the Council already introduced the process of organisation aimed at using modern management methods to be efficient? We call for the information on the process and we would like to see the anticipated impact on the Council’s budget. We also call on the Council to develop detailed anti-corruption guidelines and independent policies within its structures.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu, Raportor. – Doamna președintă, este al doilea raport referitor la ARTEMIS și ENIAC. În primăvară, am amânat descărcarea bugetară, pentru că Curtea de Conturi a emis o opinie calificată. După cum știți, cele două întreprinderi mixte nu mai există în acest moment, sunt unite într-una singură, în ECSEL, care va continua activitatea. Motivul Curții de Conturi a fost că, datorită regulamentelor diferite ale acestor două întreprinderi mixte, nu se poate calcula o rată de eroare care să fie validă din punct de vedere al regulilor Uniunii Europene, pentru că calculul ratei de eroare se face după regulile naționale. După părerea mea, acest argument nu era cel mai bun de luat în considerare. Prin urmare, am amânat acordarea descărcării bugetare, în schimb, am cerut curților de conturi naționale să certifice dacă activitatea celor două întreprinderi mixte a fost corectă sau nu din punct de vedere financiar. Și s-au primit astfel de documente oficiale de la toate curțile de conturi din statele care au lucrat cu aceste două întreprinderi mixte, așa că putem acum să acordăm această descărcare bugetară fără niciun fel de emoție, pentru că există documente care să probeze că activitatea a fost corectă din punct de vedere financiar.

La E for Energy este o situație diferită. Organizația Internațională ITER a prezentat un plan de acțiune pe următoarea perioadă, plan de acțiune care a fost refuzat de Comisie și s-a cerut o evaluare a unui expert extern. Este motivul pentru care am amânat descărcarea bugetară - pentru a vedea rezultatul acestei evaluări. Această evaluare s-a efectuat, rezultatul a fost pozitiv, planul de acțiune a fost foarte puțin corectat, a fost aprobat de Consiliul Organizației Internaționale ITER și, în acest fel, am putut și noi să propunem acordarea descărcării bugetare pentru agenția domestică a Uniunii Europene din această organizație internațională. Cred că ITER este un proiect pe care trebuie să-l urmărim și să-l sprijinim în continuare, pentru că poate aduce beneficii foarte mari întregii societăți chiar dacă, poate, va cere puțin mai mulți bani.

  Ivan Lesay, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, I am grateful to have the opportunity to intervene in this debate on behalf of the Council. The divergence between our two institutions on how to organise the discharge in relation to the Council’s budget is not new. However, I believe that there are a number of recent developments which, at least in the medium term, would allow us to move forward. According to Article 319 of the Treaty, ‘the European Parliament, acting on a recommendation from the Council, shall give a discharge to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the budget’.

The Treaty and the Financial Regulation enumerate the documents to be examined during the discharge procedure. The Council has always rigorously respected these provisions. The Treaty procedure is specific to the EU institutional system. Nevertheless, in keeping with procedures in Member States, discharge is not given between the different arms of a budgetary authority. The Parliament has over the years developed a political practice of voting separate discharge resolutions for individual institutions and organs. In 2010 the Council proposed a memorandum of understanding between the two institutions in order to organise our cooperation. This standing invitation to a discussion has not been taken up by Parliament so far.

Let me turn to the more positive and encouraging recent developments. This year we have made a big step towards increased transparency of the financially-relevant activities of all EU institutions. Since June, the annual activity reports of all authorising officers by delegation are publicly available on each institution’s website, including, of course, the Council. This is the result of last year’s agreement between Parliament and the Council to amend the financial regulation. Everybody now has access to core documents, which analyse the activities on which the institutions spend money. That is why the Council was a bit surprised to see, in your draft resolution, the reference to Parliament not having received the Council’s annual activity report. I guess that this is probably left over from previous years. A number of other suggestions formulated in Parliament’s draft resolution have also already become reality, for example the existence of rules concerning whistleblowing, integrity and ethics of officials in the General Secretariat of the Council.

I would like to underline that, in the spirit of the proposed memorandum of understanding between our institutions that I mentioned before, the Council is open to dialogue with Parliament on concrete issues. I hear that in the area of building policy there have already been some contacts in the past. Let us work together on these positive experiences.

Allow me a word on budget scrutiny. Your report says that the expenditure of the Council must be scrutinised in the same way as other institutions, and on occasion, statements made by some Members of the European Parliament have created the impression that the Council budget would escape all control. This is not true. It is as if the Treaty procedure, the Court of Auditors’ scrutiny and all the other documents and reports I mentioned before, did not exist. This is not helpful. It is even misleading. European citizens expect us to ensure the regularity, legality and efficiency of EU finances, and in this we either succeed together or we fail together. Citizens are not interested in quarrels between the EU institutions.

I am confident that we are going in the right direction. As far as the implementation of the Council budget 2014 is concerned, the Court of Auditors has once again confirmed that no significant weaknesses were detected. The Council’s accounts did not give rise to any observations. I think it is important to have that in mind in this debate and when you cast your vote.

  Corina Crețu, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, let me first thank the rapporteurs, Mr Czarnecki and Mr Marinescu, for their reports.

The Commission takes note of the proposal submitted by the Committee on Budgetary Control to the plenary to grant discharge to the joint technology initiative and embedded computing system ARTEMIS Joint Undertaking. the joint technology initiative on nan electronics ENIAC Joint Undertaking, the international thermonuclear experimental reactor Fusion for Energy Joint Undertaking and to refuse discharge to the European Council and Council for the financial year 2014.

As for the discharge to the European Council and Council, the Commission notes with regret this dispute between the two arms of the budgetary authorities, which has lasted for seven years now, thus preventing a suitable solution from being reached. The Commission can only encourage them to cooperate with a view to ironing out all their difficulties and to work towards a smooth functioning of the discharge procedure in full respect of the relevant provisions in the Treaty and in related secondary law.

The Commission is happy to note that Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control agrees that the ECSEL Joint Undertaking, which is the successor of ARTEMIS and ENIAC, as Mr Marinescu just said, has in a satisfactory manner implemented actions to address the remarks of the budgetary authorities and therefore proposes to grant discharge for the year 2014.

The Commission reiterates that in the ECSEL Joint Undertaking a structural solution is found for verification and ex post audit of any new expenditure related to Horizon 2020. In fact, Parliament already granted discharge to ECSEL on 28 April 2016. The Commission will, as a member of the Governing Board of ECSEL, continue to closely monitor the actions undertaken by the Joint Undertaking, inter alia to gain sufficient data on the quality of the control systems in place by the Member States and on the individual transactions. The Commission will also continue to share its experience in audit matters.

Finally, the Commission reiterates that the public-private partnership, using a tripartite model that pools Member State and EU funding with industrial investments, as implemented in ARTEMIS and ENIAC and now in ECSEL, gives Europe a competitive edge in the domain of electronic components and systems.

The Commission also welcomes the proposal to grant discharge to the Joint Undertaking Fusion for Energy. ITER is a major international scientific collaboration in the energy field, in which the European Union has assumed a strategic leading role. Looking back at developments since 2006, when the ITER organisation was set up to jointly implement this project at international level, it should be recognised that ITER has faced many challenges, in particular in terms of technology, ITER being the first of a kind, project management, and risk of schedule slippage and cost increase. But, these challenges aside, ITER is one of the most promising solutions to future energy demand that can contribute to addressing global warming and climate change.

It is for this very significant reason that the international partners, with the major thrust of the European Union, have spared no efforts to change the way the project has been managed and implemented. During recent years radical changes have been jointly decided and successfully applied to stabilise the project and address the concerns on delays and cost overruns. A new management has been put in place in the ITER organisation and in Fusion for Energy and coordinated action plans have been endorsed to ensure a closer corporation.

Progress is now evident on the site, in particular in the construction of buildings under European responsibility. In addition and following the initiative of the European Union, this progress is now reviewed against a set of identified milestones for the activities with clear deadlines. A robust risk management system is also in place to reduce risk and address possible problems.

One of the partners’ main efforts has been the revision of the project’s schedule and its associated costs in June 2016. This revision set up solid and reliable grounds to complete the ITER construction successfully and enable the European Union to respect the budget for the construction phase of ITER until 2020, EUR 6.6 billion in 2008 values.

The improvements brought to the project are now reversing the project’s past trend. They enable ITER to remain one of the major international energy research projects and allow the European Union to keep its support and leadership of this project. These improvements, in particular since 2015, have also been confirmed by a different independent review in mid-2016. At European level Fusion for Energy is now also in a better shape to deliver the EU contribution to the project.

Let me add that through its contracts and grants European industry is fully involved in designing, building and delivering thousands of first of a kind technological components and carrying out research projects in support of the construction of this unique device. Already in its current construction phase ITER is therefore creating jobs and growth for European industry. With your favourable vote on the discharge you will enable the Joint Undertaking to continue providing, on behalf of Europe, a key contribution to the success of ITER.

I thank you for your support and look forward to the continued dialogue between the Commission and Parliament to make ITER a success and a win for securing a sustainable energy source for the future.

  Tomáš Zdechovský, za skupinu PPE. – Paní předsedající, vážená paní komisařko, vážení zástupci Evropské rady, já jsem moc rád za to, že jste tady přítomni a jsem moc rád za ta slova, která jste pronesli. Ale na druhou stranu, když to tak poslouchám, my tady tři roky chceme spolupráci a chceme najít řešení ohledně Rady. Ale my tady tři roky jenom posloucháme to, jak Rada nemůže, nechce a nechce nic udělat v tom, co my kritizujeme.

Důvěra Evropského parlamentu a evropských občanů, které my tady zastupujeme, to nejsme tady jenom my, politici, ale sedí tady zástupci evropských občanů, se získává velmi těžko, když jedna strana nekomunikuje a jedna strana toho procesu nedůvěřuje druhé. Za předpokladu, že bude Evropská rada a Rada EU velice otevřená a vstřícná, pak může být odpovědná i občanům Evropské unie.

Bohužel zítra Evropský parlament znovu neudělí absolutorium o správnosti čerpání evropského rozpočtu, to znamená, že vyslovuje Radě svoji nedůvěru. Bohužel jsme totiž neslyšeli žádnou reakci ze strany Rady na naše komentáře a doporučení. Ano, Rada učinila řadu opatření, které ji, řekli bychom, činí více transparentní. Ale obecně bychom mohli říci, že ten pokrok je velmi minimální a chybí komunikace. Já budu, pane Lesayi, strašně rád, když se zasadíte o to, ať se za 14 dní sejdeme v Bruselu na neformálním setkání a prodiskutujeme tuto otázku. A ať můžeme říct v příštím roce, že v roce 2015 Rada získává absolutorium. A to je moje poselství pro Vás i pro všechny Vaše kolegy a doufám, že ho budete tlumočit. Paní komisařce bych chtěl říci, že to není konflikt mezi dvěma institucemi, mezi Evropským parlamentem a Radou. Evropský parlament chce Radu transparentní.

  Miroslav Poche, za skupinu S&D. – Paní předsedající, pane komisařko, pane zpravodaji, já velmi oceňuji, že společné podniky ITER, ENIAC a ARTEMIS vzaly v potaz všechny požadavky a pochybnosti, které jsme měli na jaře, a že zítra budeme pravděpodobně schopni jim udělit rozpočtové absolutorium. Vzhledem k tomu, že k těm výsledkům od roku 2014 již není mnoho co říci, tak bych rád jenom otevřel debatu o rozpočtovém absolutoriu za rok 2015, kde bych měl být zpravodajem pro společné podniky.

V pondělí jsem měl možnost navštívit sídlo podniku ITER v Cadarachi u Marseille. Každý, kdo toto sídlo navštívil, se nemůže ubránit dojmu o monstróznosti tohoto projektu, o jeho technologickém vývoji a o tom, jak je důležité pokračovat v jeho výstavbě. Na druhou stranu je určitě velmi náročné dodržovat rozpočtový plán a plán prací. Já si myslím, že ITER bude i v následujícím období velmi důsledně kontrolován. Já velmi očekávám sdělení Rady, sdělení Komise ohledně nové fáze financování Iteru po roce 2020, které bychom rádi viděli někdy na přelomu roku, a potom bude projednáno Radou i Evropským parlamentem. Také musíme velmi důsledně, jak zmínila paní komisařka, vyhodnocovat dodržování těch technologických milníků, které jsou opravdu velmi důležité pro všechny zúčastněné strany v rámci Iteru.

  Igor Šoltes, v imenu skupine Verts/ALE. – Na začetku seveda bi se lahko v celoti strinjal z gospodom Zdechovskym, ki je odlično opisal to relacijo med Parlamentom in pa seveda tudi Svetom. Žalosti me, da v vseh teh letih nekako nismo našli poti, kako bi Svet bolj transparentno poročal Parlamentu o svojem delovanju.

In žalosti tudi to, da Svet ni bil pripravljen tudi letos sporočiti CONT-u (Odboru za nadzor proračuna) svojih podatkov niti ni želel biti prisoten pri samem zaslišanju. To, kar so storili vsi ostali, tudi Komisija in sam Evropski parlament.

In mislim, da je na tem področju potreben celovit napredek, sicer bomo obstali na tem, kar so tudi sami predstavniki Sveta rekli – da to ne vzbuja in ne povečuje zaupanja državljanov v evropske institucije. In to zaupanje se lahko krepi samo z bolj transparentnim delovanjem in bolj – seveda – odprtim odnosom, tudi Sveta, do samega Parlamenta.

Kar se tiče razrešnic. Odložitev razrešnice pomeni na nek način politični rumeni karton, nepodelitev razrešnice pa rdečega. In jutri, ko boste glasovali, imejte pred sabo tudi to misel, da sta pravzaprav ARTEMIS in ENIAC tudi po mnenju računskega sodišča, evropskega, imela kar nekaj težav pri transparentnosti in usklajenosti finančnega poročanja.

In po drugi strani seveda tudi ITER, ki ima že nekaj let zapored težave z razrešnico, torej jutri predlagam, da se mu ne podeli.

  Petri Sarvamaa (PPE). – Madam President, the honourable Commissioner, and the representative of the Council are now here. It was worth measuring the empty corridors of this building all evening drinking too many cups of coffee to keep me awake. Now that I have an audience I will actually give a little traditional speech.

The European Parliament is the only institution that is directly elected by citizens, and therefore we have a crucial role in this business. It is almost needless to say that granting discharge is one of the most, if not the most, important duty of this Parliament. But there are a few aspects of the discharge process where we urgently lack progress.

First, the long-standing practice of Parliament’s right to check the use of money and to grant discharge separately to all institutions and bodies needs to be respected. The fact that the Council is stubbornly sticking to its interpretation of the procedure is a slap in tax payers’ faces, and undermines the reputation of the Union. We need to find a solution to this, and I think we will.

Secondly, in addition to an effective discharge process, Parliament has a right and duty to follow up previous years’ recommendations and their implementation; here also we need effective cooperation from all institutions and bodies.

Thirdly, in order to increase democratic accountability and safeguard the reputation of the Union we need to strengthen the role of the Parliament in the discharge process. All institutions and bodies need to acknowledge their responsibility, and if not, there have to be consequences. It is like raising your kids; they will learn the ways that you let them learn.

Interventions à la demande

  Νότης Μαριάς ( ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, προκειμένου να διασφαλιστεί η διαφάνεια και η δημοκρατική λογοδοσία προς τους φορολογουμένους της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο έχει την εξουσία να χορηγεί, δυνάμει των άρθρων 316, 317, 319 της Συνθήκης για τη λειτουργία της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, απαλλαγή όσον αφορά την εκτέλεση του προϋπολογισμού της Ένωσης, χωριστά, για κάθε τμήμα του προϋπολογισμού. Άρα και για το Ευρωπαϊκό Συμβούλιο και για το Συμβούλιο.

Όμως το Συμβούλιο θεωρεί ότι μπορεί να λειτουργεί ανεξέλεγκτα, αυτόνομα, συνεχίζοντας να μην απαντά στις ερωτήσεις του Κοινοβουλίου και να μην παρέχει την ετήσια έκθεση πεπραγμένων. Επιπλέον δεν έχει προβεί ακόμα σε διαχωρισμό προϋπολογισμών του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμβουλίου και του Συμβουλίου παρά το πρόσφατο ψήφισμα. Οι δαπάνες του Συμβουλίου πρέπει να ελέγχονται με τον ίδιο τρόπο όπως ελέγχονται και οι δαπάνες των υπολοίπων θεσμικών οργάνων της Ένωσης. Όμως το Συμβούλιο επιδεικνύει έλλειψη συνεργασίας. Αρνείται να δώσει πληροφορίες για τα κόστη των κατασκευαστικών έργων, όπως, για παράδειγμα, για το κόστος της καθυστερημένης ολοκλήρωσης του κτιρίου EUROPA.

Στηρίζω λοιπόν την έκθεση του κυρίου Czarnecki που αρνείται να χορηγήσει απαλλαγή στον Γενικό Γραμματέα του Συμβουλίου όσον αφορά την εκτέλεση του προϋπολογισμού του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμβουλίου και του Συμβουλίου για το έτος 2014.

(Fin des interventions à la demande)

  Corina Crețu, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I would like to thank you for having given me the opportunity to take the floor during this year’s joint debate on the discharge for the European Council and the Council as well as the joint undertakings.

The Commission, as I said at the beginning, welcomes the proposal submitted by the Committee on Budgetary Control to plenary to grant discharge to the joint undertakings, which have indeed made major improvements as regards their management and control systems. The Commission will continue to provide them with advice and support on their efforts to address the concerns of the European Parliament.

Let me remind you that ECSEL gives Europe a competitive edge in the domain of electronic components and systems and that ITER is one of the most promising solutions to future energy demand and can contribute to addressing global warming and climate change. At the same time, the Commission regrets that no solution could be found as regards the discharge to the Council and European Council.

I can assure the European Parliament and the Committee on Budgetary Control that the Commission remains at their disposal to answer any question which might help to smooth the future discharge procedure and to continue with close and fruitful cooperation.

  Ivan Lesay, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, I have taken note of your remarks in this debate. A few days ago, the new President of the European Court of Auditors rightly remarked that the trust of citizens in the EU is at stake.

The EU institutions can build trust only by working together, not against one another. Parliament can rely on the Council’s sincere commitment to sound financial management. So therefore, let us work together in order to obtain the best possible result.

  Ryszard Czarnecki, rapporteur. – Madam President, thank you for the very comprehensive debate. The issue of the Council of the European Union and the European Council is the most urgent to be dealt with. The Council ought to be transparent and fully accountable to Union citizens for the funds entrusted to it by taking part fully and in good faith in the annual discharge procedure, just as other Union institutions do. Article 15 TFEU stipulates that each institution, body, office or agency is to ensure that its proceedings are transparent. In this regard, the effective supervision of the Union’s budget implementation requires cooperation between Parliament and the Council through a working arrangement. Here we have to clearly say that only three out of some 20 questions submitted to the Council by the Members of the Committee on Budgetary Control in relation to financial year 2014 within the discharge exercise, which means that there is still no proper cooperation and no correct dialogue.

The expenditure of the Council must be scrutinised in the same way as the other institutions until the fundamental elements of such scrutiny have been laid down in its discharge resolutions of the past years. We, the Members of the European Parliament, are using here our competences laid down by the Treaties. Parliament’s prerogative to grant discharge is introduced by Articles 316, 317 and 319 of the Treaty, in line with current interpretation and practice, namely to grant discharge of each budget heading dually in order to maintain transparency and democratic compatibility towards Union taxpayers. Also, under Rule 94 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, the provisions governing the procedure for granting discharge to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the budget shall likewise apply to the procedure for granting discharge to persons responsible for the implementation of the budgets of other institutions and bodies of the European Union, such as the Council as regards its activity as executive. This is nothing new.

Finally, we have to strongly say that the lack of cooperation between the European Council and the Council with the discharge authority constitutes a serious failure to comply with the obligation laid down by the Treaties, and we believe that the relevant stakeholders need to take the necessary steps to address this issue without further delay. It is also a negative sign to the citizens of the Union. It is a big problem and a big challenge for us too.

  Marian-Jean Marinescu, Raportor. – Doamnă președintă, domnule ministru, nu ați făcut niciun comentariu referitor la cele trei întreprinderi mixte, înțeleg că nu aveți niciun comentariu, nici negativ, nici pozitiv. Permiteți-mi să fac și eu un comentariu referitor la descărcarea bugetară a Consiliului: faptul că, de nouă ani, nu se întâmplă absolut nimic, adică faptul că nu există nicio consecință ca urmare a neacordării descărcării bugetare aduce mari prejudicii procedurii de descărcare bugetară. Eu cred că, legat de celelalte instituții, ar trebui să se întâmple. Dacă nu se întâmplă nimic în momentul în care nu se acordă descărcarea bugetară, de ce să o mai facem?

Aș vrea să luați în calcul acest comentariu. Anul acesta, pentru 2015, sunt și eu raportor pentru Grupul PPE. Cred că trebuie să ajungem la o concluzie, pentru că, altfel, nu știu dacă mai are rost să mai facem descărcări bugetare la celelalte instituții.

  La Présidente. – La discussion commune est close.

Le vote aura lieu demain, le jeudi 27 octobre 2016 à 12 heures.