WRITTEN QUESTION E-2544/99 by Samuli Pohjamo (ELDR) and Mikko Pesälä (ELDR) to the Commission. Implementation of TACIS projects in disarray.
3. 10. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 280 E/71 (2000/C 280 E/070) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2544/99 by Samuli Pohjamo (ELDR) and Mikko Pesälä (ELDR) to the Commission Subject: Implementation of TACIS projects in disarray (4 January 2000) The TACIS projects, launched with great expectations, have not necessarily been implemented as hoped, partly as a result of the EUís unwieldy bureaucracy. It is now proposed as an option that the EU should not grant any further TACIS funds to its neighbouring regions until the old programmes have been implemented. The implementation of the programmes is hampered by the fact that the opportunity to make direct investments is disproportionately small. Under the current regulation only 10 % of the funds allocated may be used for investment. Partly for this reason, many of the TACIS programmes already approved are still on ice. If the threat to halt the allocation of new resources was carried out, this would detract from the TACIS CBS programmes, which seek inter alia to improve border security and in particular eliminate development problems arising from the remote situation of border areas. The most serious shortcoming of the CBS programmes is felt to be their separateness from the Interreg programme, which also seeks to alleviate the problems caused by border location and to increase cross- border cooperation. The TACIS funds, unlike the Interreg funds, are intended for the use of our Russian partners. However, the majority of the euros spent under TACIS have been channelled by Western planning and consultation agencies into their own pockets. Within the framework of TACIS more money should be spent on direct investment rather than on consultations. 1. What measures does the Commission propose to take to ensure that TACIS projects can continue uninterrupted and operate as smoothly as possible? 2. What measures has the Commission taken / is the Commission still taking to ensure the compat- ibility and coordination of the TACIS and Interreg programmes, which was already proposed at an earlier stage? How does the Commission propose to improve the making of direct 3. excessive consultations? investments and reduce Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission (1 February 2000) The Commission would first of all assure the Honourable Members that it has no plans to suspend current TACIS projects or stop funding of new projects. This applies equally to the cross-border co-operation programme. On the contrary, the new Regulation (1), which has just entered into force, underlines the priority given by the Commission to the TACIS programme. The investment ceiling of 10 % in the old Council Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 1279/96 of 25 June 1996 (2) has not had a negative impact on the implementation of the programmes. It is also important to recall that the Interreg and the cross-border co- operation programmes have different objectives and legal bases. This has a bearing on the co-ordination between the two programmes. The answers to the three questions are: 1. There is no question of suspending the co-operation as a whole. Instead, the new Regulation marks a new start for the important co-operation between the Community and the partner states in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. The new Regulation strongly emphasises regional and cross-border co- operation, with particular attention to enlargement. Measures are also foreseen to increase efficiency, by concentrating on fewer areas of activities and selecting fewer but larger actions. 2. Co-ordination between Interreg and TACIS is already taking place and will continue at the project level, both through the design of projects and by giving high priority to those projects which are supported by matching funds of the relevant programmes. This has proved successful in the context of the support for the Finnish/Russian border crossing points. Moreover synergy between the two programmes will be improved through increased co-ordination at the programming level, in the definition of objectives and areas of co-operation. C 280 E/72 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3. 10. 2000 3. The main aim of the programme as set out in the new Regulation remains know-how transfer. However, up to 20 % of the budget may now be used for investment promotion subject to certain conditions. The Commission believes that this increased ceiling creates significant scope for more investment prospects. (1) OJ L 12, 18. 1. 2000. (2) OJ L 165, 4. 7. 1996. (2000/C 280 E/071) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2545/99 by Maurizio Turco (TDI) and Marco Cappato (TDI) to the Commission Subject: Five-year EU action plan to combat drugs: information and evaluation (4 January 2000) The European Union allocates a considerable amount of funding to the fight against drugs, as is indicated in the Communication from the Commission on a European Union action plan to combat drugs, which gives the figures for 1998. Multiple budget lines are involved, covering more than a single pillar, ranging from prevention to the funding of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, and from the Phare and Tacis programmes to North-South cooperation and cooperation with the countries of Latin America. While the Commission Communication referred to above sketches an overall picture of EU activity in the fight against drugs, it does not provide more specific information about the individual projects which have been or are to be funded. Moreover, by contrast with the wishes expressed by the European Parliament and with the undertakings given by the Commission itself in the 1995-1999 five-year plan, there is no full and exhaustive evaluation of the preceding five-year action plan. Will the Commission therefore provide the European Parliament with a brief but detailed picture giving the following information in respect of each budget line involved in the fight against drugs, for previous years and for the current financial year: ü the projects which have been funded and the amount of funding received, ü the recipients and managers of the funds allocated, ü the objectives that it was intended to achieve, ü the means deployed to achieve the objectives, ü the results actually obtained, ü the checks and evaluations of individual projects or programmes carried out by the European Union. Will the Commission also state when it will issue an overall analysis evaluating the projects undertaken as part of the 1995-1999 five-year action plan. Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission (16 February 2000) The Commission agrees that evaluation should play an important role in all activities in the field of drugs. In its communication on a European Union action plan to combat drugs (2000-2004) (1) the Commission proposed that external experts should evaluate Community activities during this period and that the Commission should conduct a mid-term review of the action plan which would be presented to the Council and the Parliament. However, the action plan acknowledged that efforts at the Community level in the period 1995-1999 in the field of evaluation had been insufficient. The Commission is not therefore able to respond fully to the question. Nevertheless, the main programmes to combat drugs have either already been evaluated or are in the process of being evaluated. The Commission sent to the Parliament on 14 October 1999, an interim report on the implementation of the programmes of Community action on the prevention of cancer, AIDS and certain other communicable diseases, and drug dependence within the framework for action in the