WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3829/98 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Costly consultancy and employment repercussions
21. 5. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 142/155 Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (18 January 1999) The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible. (1999/C 142/211) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3822/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission (22 December 1998) Subject: Subsidies for the Indian leather sector Can the Commission list the projects funded by the Commission to the benefit of the Indian leather sector (leather, footwear, leather goods), specifying the date on which each of the projects in question was approved and its objectives? Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (18 January 1999) The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible. (1999/C 142/212) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3829/98 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (22 December 1998) Subject: Costly consultancy and employment repercussions 1. Is it true that in May 1996 DG V concluded an annual contract with the woman director of the ASSI company for a study of the situation of elderly women in Europe, and that the Commission contributed a total of ECU 243 100 to the cost of the inquiry, estimated at ECU 374 000? If so, does the Commission not consider such expenditure to be excessive for a study that is to the measures to combat unemployment being 2. admittedly important but certainly not crucial implemented by national governments and Commission alike? 3. Is it true that the project leader is the wife of a Commissioner in office and that ASSI is located in the same building in which they live? If so, has the Commission considered the advisability, even while formally complying with the rules in force, of handing over such a sum to the wife of one of its Members when it itself is facing serious charges of fraud and embezzlement? 4. What moral principles and principles of sound management underline the Commission’s decision to grant such an exorbitant subsidy to a project that has no influence on job creation prospects? 5. Is the Commissioner in question the same person who, according to the press of the time, authorised massive expenditure in less than transparent circumstances for supervision of the construction of the Hochtief building in Luxembourg?