# CE2004065EN.01002201.xml

| 13.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 65/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/22

---

(2004/C 65 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0260/03

by Giovanni Pittella (PSE) to the Commission

(29 January 2003)

Subject:   ‘Compatible’ projects

Subject:

Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (1):

1

| — | the reason for strengthening cohesion policy (which is supported by means of the Structural Funds) is to reduce disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least-favoured regions or islands; |
| --- | --- |

—

the reason for strengthening cohesion policy (which is supported by means of the Structural Funds) is to reduce disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least-favoured regions or islands;

| — | decentralised implementation of Structural Fund operations by the Member States should provide sufficient guarantees as to the details and quality of implementation and to results and the evaluation thereof; |
| --- | --- |

—

decentralised implementation of Structural Fund operations by the Member States should provide sufficient guarantees as to the details and quality of implementation and to results and the evaluation thereof;

| — | achievement of such objectives is ensured through the observance of certain principles (programming, concentration, integration and additionality) which justify the existence of an EU cohesion policy. |
| --- | --- |

—

achievement of such objectives is ensured through the observance of certain principles (programming, concentration, integration and additionality) which justify the existence of an EU cohesion policy.

Furthermore:

| — | the first year in which the rule on automatic decommitment applied ended on 31 December 2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

the first year in which the rule on automatic decommitment applied ended on 31 December 2002;

| — | in the case of Italy, only 70-80 % of the expenditure certifications submitted by the regions by the above date relate to so-called ‘support’ projects (i.e. ones consistent with the programmes). |
| --- | --- |

—

in the case of Italy, only 70-80 % of the expenditure certifications submitted by the regions by the above date relate to so-called ‘support’ projects (i.e. ones consistent with the programmes).

In view of the above, would the Commission answer the following questions?

| — | For each Italian Objective 1 programme and for each of the Structural Funds, what was the exact amount of the expenditure certified to the Commission in respect of projects which were not selected on the basis of a call launched in connection with a RGP or a NGP, and will the expenditure relating to such projects nonetheless be reimbursed under the ERDF, the ESF, the EAGGF and the FIFG? |
| --- | --- |

—

For each Italian Objective 1 programme and for each of the Structural Funds, what was the exact amount of the expenditure certified to the Commission in respect of projects which were not selected on the basis of a call launched in connection with a RGP or a NGP, and will the expenditure relating to such projects nonetheless be reimbursed under the ERDF, the ESF, the EAGGF and the FIFG?

| — | What additions to the programming have been amended in order to make expenditure which has already been disbursed outside the operational programmes retroactively admissible for the sole purpose of avoiding the rule on automatic decommitment? Is the Commission prepared to accept such a practice? |
| --- | --- |

—

What additions to the programming have been amended in order to make expenditure which has already been disbursed outside the operational programmes retroactively admissible for the sole purpose of avoiding the rule on automatic decommitment? Is the Commission prepared to accept such a practice?

| — | Does the Commission intend to ascertain in what way the funds which may be released through the implementation of ‘consistent’ projects are used? If so, what conditions will it impose? |
| --- | --- |

—

Does the Commission intend to ascertain in what way the funds which may be released through the implementation of ‘consistent’ projects are used? If so, what conditions will it impose?

| — | Does the regions' recourse to such a high percentage of projects selected on the basis of calls which where not launched pursuant to the measures contained in the programmes adopted by the Commission not seriously jeopardise the achievement of the development objectives laid down in the Objective 1 CSF for Italy, and does it not also contravene Community rules on additionality, partnership, programming and information, in addition to thwarting the objectives themselves and undermining the cohesion policy? |
| --- | --- |

—

Does the regions' recourse to such a high percentage of projects selected on the basis of calls which where not launched pursuant to the measures contained in the programmes adopted by the Commission not seriously jeopardise the achievement of the development objectives laid down in the Objective 1 CSF for Italy, and does it not also contravene Community rules on additionality, partnership, programming and information, in addition to thwarting the objectives themselves and undermining the cohesion policy?

---

(1)  OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1.

1

---