WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1931/97 by Salvador GARRIGA POLLEDO to the Commission. Structural Funds
C 60/68 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 25. 2. 98 As at the time of the last enlargement (with Austria, Sweden and Finland in 1995), the result is that the principle of strengthening of economic and social cohesion stipulated in Article 2, as well as its methods established in Articles 130 A with E will have to be implemented in the future countries which would adhere to the Union, according to the methods to be agreed in the Treaties of Accession. (98/C 60/102) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1931/97 by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE) to the Commission (4 June 1997) Subject: Structural Funds Does the Commission consider that the procedure for verifying compliance with the additionality principle for the Structural Funds is satisfactory? If not, does the Commission have any plans for reforming this procedure? Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (8 July 1997) The review of the Structural Fund regulations in 1993 reinforced the principle of additionality. Council Regulation (EEC) No 2082/93 of 20 July 1993 amending Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments (1) gives a precise definition of the principle of additionality and indicates the rules to be complied with. Thus, the new Article 9 of Regulation No 4253/88 stipulates that áin order to achieve a genuine economic impact, the Structural Funds and the FIFG appropriations. may not replace public expenditure undertaken by the Member State in the whole of the territory eligible under an objectiveí (paragraph 1). For this purpose,. the Commission and the Member State concerned shall ensure that the Member State maintains, in the whole of the territory concerned, its public structural or comparable expenditure at least at the same level as in the previous programming period. í (paragraph 2). In order to check that this principle has been complied with, Article 8 of the same Regulation, as amended in 1993, also provides for the insertion in the Community Support Frameworks (CSFs) and the single programming documents (SPDs) of procedures for verifying additionality and an initial evaluation of the latter. It also requires the supply of appropriate information concerning the transparency of the relevant financial flows (paragraph 3). The insertion of these various rules in the regulations currently in force has considerably improved implementation of the principle of additionality. All the CSFs and SPDs relating to Objectives 1 and 6 were the subject of a prior appraisal. For Objective 2, this appraisal was also performed in the majority of cases. In the case of the few documents for which there was no prior appraisal at the time of their adoption payments will be suspended as from the second advance if it has still not been carried out. Ongoing assessment was facilitated by the definition, in partnership with the Commission, of checking methods applicable to each Member State. This has enabled the Commission to obtain more relevant financial information, adapted to the individual situation of each. The Commission will examine the future of the principle of additionality and its implementation under the new regulations on the Structural Funds that it is due to propose in the first half of 1998. (1) OJ L 193, 31. 7. 1993