WRITTEN QUESTION E-0239/00 by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Territorial employment pacts.
C 374 E/42 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 28. 12. 2000 (2000/C 374 E/048) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0238/00 by Jillian Evans (Verts/ALE) to the Commission (7 February 2000) Subject: Structural fund additionality The legal definition of additionality requires that the appropriations of the Funds may not replace public or other equivalent structural expenditure. However, in the UK, this only needs to be demonstrated on a UK basis. The European component of structural funds for Wales is paid from the EU into the UK Treasury. The annual budget allocation awarded to the National Assembly for Wales is calculated by the Treasury using a mechanism which has not been adjusted to take into account the additional sums which will be available to West Wales and the Valleys under the Objective 1 programme from January 2000. What this means in effect is that EU schemes in Wales have been paid for out of the Wales budget for education, health, social services and so on. Given the stated intention of the Commission to target the Structural Funds in a more effective and concentrated way between 2000 and 2006, would the Commission consider introducing a mechanism that would reveal to what extent additionality was implemented on a regional basis within the Member States and therefore to what extent the funds were being used to maximum benefit in the targeted areas? Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission (31 March 2000) There is no requirement under the regulation for Member States to apply the principle of additionality on a regional basis. The rules are set out in the general regulation on the structural funds (1) that was agreed by the Council in June of last year and which establishes the frame of reference for the Commission and the Member States for the implementation of the programmes for the period up until the end of 2006. Apart from the provisions with regard to additionality, the regulations also required the Member States, firstly, to ensure that Community resources are spent only in the eligible regions to which they have been allocated and, secondly, that these resources are cofinanced by national resources within the limits provided. The programming document adopted by the Commission contains the necessary confirmation on both of these aspects. (1) Regulation EC No 1260/1999 of 21. 6. 1999 ü OJ L 161, 26. 6. 1999. (2000/C 374 E/049) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0239/00 by Jorge HernÆndez Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission (7 February 2000) Subject: Territorial employment pacts Following the adoption of the territorial employment pacts, can the Commission say: 1. Exactly how many pacts have been established in the cohesion countries? 2. Give an assessment of their progress hitherto in each of the cohesion countries? 3. Set out the underlying principles of the new pacts for the period 2000-2006? 28. 12. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 374 E/43 Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission (23 March 2000) A detailed list and an initial assessment of the 89 territorial employment pacts launched in 1997 on the initiative of the Commission was published in the Second interim progress report on the Territorial Employment Pactsí (1). The basic approach which the Commission intends to follow during the next programming period is to encourage the consolidation of the territorial pacts and their dissemination through the operational programmes of the Structural Funds. Detailed guidelines to that end may be found in the Commissionís Guide to Territorial Employment Pacts 2000-2006í (2). (1) SEC(1999) 1932. (2) SEC(1999) 1933. (2000/C 374 E/050) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0242/00 by Michiel van Hulten (PSE) to the Commission (31 January 2000) Subject: Appointment of a new Commission Director-General for Agriculture In an article headlined Cynics flag up doubts over farm jobí in its issue of 13-19 January 2000, the European Voice suggests that political pressure may have been applied to secure the appointment of Mr JosØ Domingos Silva to the post of Commission Director-General for Agriculture. Can the Commission confirm that Mr Silva was appointed on the basis of individual merit and that 1. no political pressure was applied? 2. Did Members of the Commission or their services have any formal or informal contacts, written or otherwise, with any Member State government in relation to the appointment of a new Director-General for Agriculture? If so, what were the nature and contact of these contacts? When did these contacts take place? 3. Can the Commission confirm the assertion made by the European Voice that, upon his appointment, Mr Silva circulated a letter to the staff of the Directorate-General for Agriculture thanking the Vice- President of the Commission, Mrs Palacio, for her support in securing his appointment? If so, will the Commission communicate the contents of this letter to Parliament and indicate what the nature of this support was? 4. Can the Commission indicate whether the post of Director-General for Agriculture was externally advertised? Can it indicate how many applications for the post it received from internal and external applicants, and how many applicants were invited for interview? Since taking office, has the Commission adhered fully to the set of rules governing the appointment 5. of high officials? Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (10 March 2000) 1. The procedure for filling the post of Director-General for Agriculture was in accordance with the provisions of the Staff Regulations and the Commission decision of 18 September 1999 on appointments to grades A1 and A2 at the Commission. The Commission can consequently confirm that the appointment of Mr Silva Rodriguez to the post of Director-General for Agriculture was due entirely to the fact that the applicantís merit, qualifications, agricultural for Agriculture since 1987 completely matched the requirements of the post. training and experience of work in the Directorate-General