WRITTEN QUESTION P-1270/02

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(26 April 2002)

Subject: Substandard work on projects jointly funded under the CSF and measures by the Greek authorities to tackle the problem

In its answer to my questions E-3197/01 and P-2890/01(1), the Commission informed me that it had no fresh information on substandard work on jointly funded projects in Greece. The Commission also pointed out that the Greek Government had not replied to either of its letters sent on 29 January 2001 and 2 July 2001 and that it would, therefore, send another letter to the Greek authorities.

Does the Commission have any more recent information regarding the number of instances of substandard work since April 2000?

Has the Commission received information about the practical action taken in the cases falling within categories 2 and 3 as described in Question E-3197/01?

Have the Greek authorities forwarded in reply to the European Anti-Fraud Office any communication (apart from that referred to in the answer to Written Question E-1894/01(2)) on the basis of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1681/94(3) of 11 July 1994 concerning irregularities and the recovery of sums wrongly paid in connection with the financing of the structural policies and the organisation of an information system in this field? If not, what will be the consequences and what measures does the Commission intend to take?

(1) OJ C 309 E, 12.12.2002, p. 2.

(2) OJ C 134 E, 6.6.2002, p. 5.

(3) OJ L 178, 12.7.1994, p. 43.

Supplementary answerby Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(7 August 2002)

At the last meeting of the Monitoring Committee, in Athens on 25 and 26 April 2002, the Greek authorities informed the Commission that up to July 2001 the company ESPEL had carried out a total of 2 726 inspections covering 1 816 public works contracts.

Of these inspections, 64,5 % rated the projects in category 1, defined as projects that are running smoothly or which have shortcomings of a secondary nature that need to be addressed by the contractors in question. A total of 33,6 % of the inspections rated the projects in category 2 projects with major defects that, although they do not compromise the integrity of the project, are likely to lead to higher running costs (which must be deducted from the payments to the contractors concerned). Finally, 1,9 % of the inspections were rated category 3 projects with serious defects that cannot be remedied. Projects in this category have to be either wholly or partially restarted by the contractors, at their own expense.

These figures show an improvement in the situation since December 1999, when the respective percentages for the three categories were 48,6 %, 47,9 % et 3,5 %. So far, the Commission has received no information from the Greek authorities on the outcome of the steps taken to remedy the defects on category-2 and 3 projects. It has, however, recently reminded them of the need to apprise it of these results as soon as possible so it can draw up the closing files on the various programmes under the 1994-1999 Community Support Framework.

For its part, the European Anti-Fraud Office has not received any information pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1681/94(1) other than that contained in the reply to written question 1894/01 by the Honourable Member(2).

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1681/94 of 11 July 1994 concerning irregularities and the recovery of sums wrongly paid in connection with the financing of the structural policies and the organisation of an information system in this field.

(2) OJ C 134 E, 6.6.2002.