----

(2004/C 65 E/282)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3125/03

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(17 October 2003)

Subject:   Structural aid for Valencia

The Commission's reply to my question E-2398/03 (1) on structural aid for Valencia and the diversion of water from the Ebro, stated that on 26 March 1999 the Commission only had statistical data for GDP in the Valencian Autonomous Community for 1994, 1995 and 1996. When Objective 1 regions were selected, calculations on the basis of the data for those three years put Valencia below the 75 % threshold. However, the Commission acknowledges that the data were subsequently revised, and Valencia moved above the 75 % for the same three years. The issue is therefore more serious than what the Court of Auditors describes in its Special Report No 7/2003. The Court says that if the most recent statistics (1996, 1997 and 1998) had been used, the Valencian Autonomous Community would not have been entitled to Objective 1 subsidies from the Structural Funds for 2000-2006, since the GDP was above 75 % of the Community average, while the Commission is now stating that a revision of those same years 1994, 1995 and 1996, showed Valencia already above the 75 %.

How can such a mistake have been made in calculating GDP for 1994, 1995 and 1996? Why, on 26 March 1999, were no data more recent than 1996 available?

Can the Commission verify whether the data were manipulated so as to place Valencia below the 75 % limit on 26 March 1999?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(14 November 2003)

Following reform of the Structural Funds in 1988 the list of regions lagging behind in development qualifying for Objective 1 was twice adopted by the Council acting on a Commission proposal, on the first occasion for the 1989-1993 and on the second for the 1994-1999 programming period.

It was for the 2000-2006 programming period that the Commission was for the first time charged, by the Berlin European Council, with determining the list of Objective 1 regions.

The rules (2) on determination of these regions are very precise:

It was by applying these rules that in July 1999 the Commission, immediately after adoption of the new Structural Fund Regulations, determined the list of Objective 1 regions (3). The GDP per capita figures used were those available on 26 March 1999, which covered the years 1994 to 1996. Eurostat's practice in agreement with the national statistical institutes is to calculate preliminary data for the year T at the end of month T+12 and final data at the end of month T+24. Thus in March 1999 the latest figures available were for 1996. These time lags are included in the rules in force for compilation of the national accounts.

As are the very great majority of statistics, the sets of statistics in question are periodically revised. This is standard procedure and not a consequence of error, Valencia not excepted.

There are three reasons for such changes:

There is no legal basis for reexamining any region's Objective 1 eligibility. To provide stability for planning structural assistance Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 maintains the Objective 1 region list unchanged until 31 December 2006. Since the Regulation makes no provision for reexamining the list during the 2000-2006 programming period the Commission is unable to envisage any rescheduling of Comunidad Valenciana or any other region lagging behind in development covered by Objective 1.

----

(1)  OJ C 58 E,6.3.2004, p. 164.

(2)  Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(3)  Commission Decision of 1 July 1999 drawing up the list of regions covered by Objective 1 of the Structural Funds for the period 2002-2006.

----