[ritchiebaby]

But they didn't give it an adverse opinion which is what some are saying they are trying to hide. This 'they haven't had the accounts signed off in 20 years' is a total lie.

The most recent report gives a qualified opinion that “A significant part of the 2016 expenditure audited was not affected by a material level of error”.

They stress around 3% of their budget was not used according to the rules,but that is "not a measure of fraud, inefficiency or waste"

Jim, your selective quotes are accurate, but it doesn't alter the fact that my selective quotes are equally correct.

In fact the report says that "About half of 2016 expenditure is free from material error". What it conveniently omits to say is that just over half is not free from material error. The report also states that there is a materiality error of 4.8% (approx. 3bn Euros) in re-imbursement payments and it also goes on to give examples of such errors and the reporting of 11 fraud cases directly discovered by their audit.