WRITTEN QUESTION P-1455/96 by Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (31 May 1996)

Subject: Irregular use of the ESF in the Murcia region and the Valencia autonomous community (Spain)

I have received official information from the Delegation of the Ministry of Finance in Murcia about two instances of irregular use of the ESF via the INEM in the Murcia region and in the Valencian Autonomous Community between 1991 and 1995: (a) Mercadona contracting aids for non-specified contracting with the request that the entire amount granted (1299 million pesetas) be returned and (b) training courses for unemployed workers organized by Murcia and Cartagena City Councils, Murcia Region Development Institute and the Unión General de Trabajadores (General Workers' Union) and the Comisiones Obreras (Workers' Committees), with the request that amounts varying from 50% to 100% to be reimbursed.

Can the Commission tell me:

- whether it is aware of these facts, and if so, what steps has it taken to ensure that they do not recur?

- whether it has verified that these European funds are being correctly assigned in the rest of Spain and throughout the EU, and what measures have been taken?

- whether it has actively checked that these funds have been properly assigned by the various bodies (private and public bodies, trade unions, etc)?

- if so, can the Commission explain why these bodies continued to receive aid in 1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996, subsequent to the audit by the Murcia Finance Ministry Delegation referred to above?

- whether it has carried out an assessment of the effectiveness of the utilization of the ESF in enabling a significant percentage of workers following these training courses actually to find jobs?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (24 June 1996)

First of all the Commission wishes to emphasise that inspection is primarily a matter for the Member States, which must also keep the Commission abreast of the results of these inspections.

The Commission has conducted several checks both in Spain in the Community as a whole (approximately 400 visits from 1991 to 1995, for example see the Report of the Court of Auditors for 1993, points 8.13 to 8.18) with a view to determining whether the various bodies (public, private, trade union and other) that benefit from the European Social Fund (ESF) have used these funds properly.

If this use has not been in conformity or even unjustified, the Commission will block the funds or possibly reduce them ((Report of the Court of Auditors 1994, points 5.42 to 5.44). )).

However, it should be remembered that financial participation in the ESF takes the form of operational programmes and that it is the Member States themselves that select the various bodies to be funded. In the cases under consideration a possible financial correction can only be carried out after analysis of the motives which might justify a reduction or withdrawal of the contribution unduly paid.

In the framework of monitoring committees the Commission regularly conducts ongoing or ex post evaluations to verify the effectiveness of the ESF interventions. The fact that a body receives ESF funds does not mean that it has to guarantee that jobs will be created.

The Commission has recently been apprised of an inspection report carried out by the Autonomous Community of Valencia, but it cannot tell whether there is a link between this report and the facts described in the question. The Commission will request the responsible Spanish authorities to send it all the relevant particulars.