WRITTEN QUESTION E-1962/99 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission. Efficiency of award and monitoring mechanisms for the funding of projects.
C 330 E/4 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21. 11. 2000 Supplementary answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission (18 February 2000) According to information from the Italian authorities, this project was submitted by the Soprintendenza per i beni Ambientali, Architettonici, Artistici e Storici della Pugliaí (Department for the environmental, architectural, artistic and historic assets of Apulia), not by the municipality of Andria (Bari). The project, entitled Castles routeí, includes an exhibition area, a restaurant, a ticket office and a bookshop, and the placing of direction signs. The programme does not, however, include the provision of a car park. The project has been part-financed by the Structural Funds under the Objective 1 programme, specifically measure 5a of sub-programme I the tourism multiregional operational programme. Community part-financing from the European Regional Development Fund amounted to ITL 899 million, 50 % of the total cost. tourismí, which forms part of Cultural From the information supplied, there is nothing which leads the Commission to call into question the financing of the project by the Structural Funds. (2000/C 330 E/004) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1962/99 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission (5 November 1999) Subject: Efficiency of award and monitoring mechanisms for the funding of projects In December 1998 one of the organisers of a áconferenceí entitled Zur Sache Schätzchen ü Die 68er und ihr Einfluß auf die Solidaritäts- und Dritte-Welt-Bewegungí ( All is revealed: the 1968 generation and their impact on the solidarity and Third World movementí) was the Vereinigte Sozialistische Partei (VSP: United Socialist Party), known to the Hamburg Office for the Protection of the Constitution as an áextreme left- wing organisationí. This event, with a huge presence of left-wing extremists, received funding from the Commission amounting to the equivalent of ATS 35 000. Is it normal practice for events attended by political extremists to receive funding from the 1. Commission? Has funding been given to any other events involving the VSP or other left-wing or right-wing 2. extremist groups? 3. What is the nature of existing award and monitoring mechanisms in respect of examining what groups receive funding? Does the Commission feel that the existing award and monitoring mechanisms are sufficiently 4. efficient to prevent misuse of EU funding? 5. 6. If so, how does the Commission explain the example described above? If not, what progress has been made with reform of such mechanisms? Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission (7 April 2000) The Commission could not determine whether Union financing had been granted on the basis 1. and 2. of the information contained in the written question. It has contacted the Honourable Member requesting further information and will then be able to reply to the question. With regard to the Commissionís normal practice for funding events in the general interest, the criteria it applies are set out below. 21. 11. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 330 E/5 In July 1998 the Commission approved a Vademecum on grant managementí applicable from 3. 1 January 1999. Chapter 4 deals with the Criteria for accepting applications and awarding grantsí. Among the award criteria that selection committees and authorising officers are enjoined to take into account is 4. 5. 8: Proposed operations which, directly or indirectly, conflict with the policies of the Union or may be linked with an unsuitable image must be rejected. For example, all grants for projects that may be contrary to the interests of public health (alcohol, tobacco, drugs), respect for human rights, peopleís security, freedom of expression, etc, are prohibited. At present, commitments of appropriations by authorising officers are subject to an ex-ante visa by financial control. Thus, applications for grants are vetted, successively, by the budget line manager, the selection committee, the authorising officers and financial control. To answer this question, the Commission has contacted the Honourable Member to obtain the 5. information referred to in paragraph 1 above. The new Financial Regulation could include a title covering the award of subsidies, which 4. and 6. would define the concept, in particular with respect to contracts, and the conditions of award. For the purposes of openness, the new title would lay down the rules for the award of subsidies (legal basis, programme, ex-ante publication and ex-post information, need for a written contract). In addition to checks on recipients of subsidies by the Court of Auditors, it will organise checks by the institution which granted the subsidy (the authorising department will be required to monitor the use made of it, make sure the recipient maintained the conditions of eligibility, assess whether the results are in conformity with the objectives, and carry out an overall assessment of results). These rules are intended to ensure proper and transparent use of Community funds in compliance with procedures. (2000/C 330 E/005) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2065/99 by Umberto Bossi (TDI) to the Commission (12 November 1999) Subject: Proposal to amend the directive on honey intended for human consumption For several years now, the Commission has been discussing new Community and extra-Community rules governing the marketing of honey, but has failed to make any meaningful progress on the matter despite the fact that the current legislation contains various shortcomings as regards the productís commercial description. The basic provisions of the latest proposal to amend the directive on honey are extremely unsatisfactory in that they do not promote quality, do not lay down minimum requirements to be met in order for a product to be given the name áhoneyí, do not protect consumers against possible adulteration, do not lay down stringent rules governing honey derived from genetically modified substances and do not promote Community honeys and typical local honeys. What is more, the proposal does not even consider honey to be a characteristically agricultural product. Given the above, would the Commission state: 1. whether, given the fact that honey clearly is of agricultural origin, it does not feel it appropriate to make the Directorate-General for Agriculture responsible for this sector; 2. whether it would not agree that honey should be regulated by means of a separate COM laying down clear rules governing its production; 3. whether it would not agree that minimum quality standards should be laid down and that only products which comply with those standards should be entitled to bear the name áhoneyí;