WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2589/97 by Hilde HAWLICEK to the Commission. Cultural Capitals of Europe and European Cultural Month
C 82/114 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 17. 3. 98 › the level of analysis of data and exploitation and dissemination of results of research undertaken in the Member States and at European level. This is the level of intervention of the European centre for the development of vocational training (CEDEFOP) which, according to its founding regulation, supports initiatives facilitating a concerted approach to vocational training issues in the Community. These studies enable the Commission and all those involved in this policy area (such as decision-makers in Member States, social partner organisations, practitioners) to have a clearer understanding of the developments taking place across the Community and to identify trends in order to draw conclusions for future action. In addition, in the context of the Communityís structural policy, the European social fund (ESF) also finances research into education and training, in particular in the less developed areas of the Community. This includes special measures in the operational programmes such as Teaching and initial trainingí and Research and developmentí. The Communityís Human resourcesí initiatives, in the framework of the Employmentí and Adaptí programmes, also allow for the carrying out of survey and studies related to the programmesí priorities and objectives. It is clear that thematic linkages exist between these activities. That is why the Commission attaches great importance to co-ordination in order to avoid duplication of efforts and to generate the best possible synergy. Although the Commission is striving for greater concentration, rationalisation and flexibility in the preparation of the 5th R&D framework programme and in its preliminary thoughts on the future of the Leonardo da Vinci programme, the three levels of intervention highlighted above remain separate and serve clearly distinct objectives. Decision-makers, social partners, promoters, researchers and research institutes involved and interested in research on education and training are well aware of these distinctions and of the various funding possibilities. Given these elements, the Commission does not think there is an immediate need for regrouping of the financial resources allocated for this purpose. (98/C 82/188) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2589/97 by Hilde Hawlicek (PSE) to the Commission (29 July 1997) Subject: Cultural Capitals of Europe and European Cultural Month After the year 2000, Cultural Capitals of Europe and the European Cultural Month will lapse. What action is to be taken thereafter with regard to these two institutions? Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (22 September 1997) The Commission has stated that at the beginning of next autumn it will present a proposal for specific action based on Article 128 of the EC Treaty to enhance the European dimension of this event and to involve more operators and artists from the various Member States in joint projects. Moreover, the Commission would draw Parliament’s attention to the special situation prevailing in the year 2001. Given the time required to adopt a proposal based on Article 128 and the need to give organisers sufficient time to make the necessary preparations, the Commission feels it would be preferable for its proposal for a decision to cover the year 2002 to 2006, with the Council of Ministers (culture) designating this event for the year 2001 for the last time in accordance with existing procedure