WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2961/97 by Marjo MATIKAINEN-KALLSTRÖM to the Commission. Reducing bureaucracy involved in the EU's research policy and regional policy
C 134/44 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 30. 4. 98 Answer (22 December 1997) The Council regrets the incidents referred to by the Honourable Member and would stress that it attaches the greatest importance to respect for human rights and democracy in Turkey and has no hesitation about condemning any abuses in this area in its contacts with the Turkish authorities. In the case of the peace envoy, the President of the Council brought up the matter of the treatment of this convoy, on 1 September 1997 in Ankara. The Turkish Government justified such treatment, including the refusal to allow the convoy access to Ankara, on grounds of public order. There is no doubt that the Turkish authorities have handled this whole affair badly. They are aware of the legitimate consternation which their action has prompted in the European Union. (98/C 134/52) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2961/97 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallstro¤m (PPE) to the Commission (17 September 1997) Subject: Reducing bureaucracy involved in the EUís research policy and regional policy The European Union seeks to reduce disparities in the development of its regions by means of regional and structural policy. However, in many cases regions fail to receive EU aid, especially because of the EUís excessive bureaucracy and complicated application procedures rather, for example, than because projects are of poor quality. A similar situation exists with regard to the Communityís research programmes: the application procedure is very troublesome. What practical measures will the Commission adopt to take account of the need to reduce EU bureaucracy, for example in the forthcoming reform of the Structural Funds for regional policy, to ensure that aid is allocated more effectively at regional level? How does the Commission ensure that those whose applications are eliminated receive feedback on their applications, so that they can learn from their experiences? Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (27 October 1997) As far as the future reorganisation of the Structural Funds is concerned, the Commission has already stated, in its communication Agenda 2000í (1), that it wishes to simplify the arrangements for their implementation, principally by clarifying the responsibilities of the Member States, the regions and the Commission. It will set out the operational arrangements to apply to the Structural Funds during the next programming period when it adopts its proposals for new regulations early in 1998. With regard to geographical eligibility, the Commission will explain, as it does now when it is asked, the reasons why it does not accept the regions proposed by the Member States. In the case of specific projects, it is up to the authorities of the Member States to provide the information required in line with existing national systems. As far as the research and technological development (RTD) programmes of the Community are concerned, the procedures for obtaining support are fundamentally different, as they involve direct funding decisions by the Commission itself, following the opinion of programme committees of Member State representatives. Over the years, the Commission has steadily improved the transparency of its procedures and the time taken to reach decisions on funding. Every proposer, whether successful or not, receives written confirmation of the Commission’s evaluation decision. This notification, which is sent out immediately after the decision, gives briefly the reasons for the decision and the possibility to seek further explanations from the Commission. (1) COM(97) 2000 final