WRITTEN QUESTION E-1934/01

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 June 2001)

Subject: Danube Summit

The Commission's assurance that existing EU sources can be utilised for supporting the outcomes of the Summit Declaration on Environment and Sustainable Development in the Carpathian and Danube Region of 30 April 2001 is of great importance, since these are crucial for the conservation of biodiversity in these regions. However, there are allegations that several procedures on the use of EU pre-accession funds hinder the deployment of these funds for supporting the Summit's outcomes.

These procedures include, inter alia:

1. the EUR 5 million lower limit (criterion for ISPA projects) which prevents support for localised, smaller-scale, stakeholder-driven projects that are often the most effective for stimulating sustainable approaches;

2. the entrance-ticket (requirement for LIFE Nature) which dissuades many accession countries from participating in this programme;

3. and the current Sapard procedures (such as the financial eligibility criteria for applicants) and plans (focusing largely on agricultural infrastructural development) which discriminate against small farmers and the non-farming rural population, vital targets for (and potential drivers of) sustainable rural development, in favour of large commercial interests.

Taking into account all of the above, will the Commission state how it intends to address these concerns in the further review and development of these three important EU funding mechanisms for the current funding programme 2000-2006?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2001)

ISPA (Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-accession) is one of the three pre-accession instruments providing Community assistance to the ten Candidate Countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Between 2000 and 2006 about 7 billion will be made available to help Candidate Countries comply with the requirements of the acquis in the field of the environment and the objectives of the Accession Partnerships, and to finance transport infrastructure which promotes sustainable mobility.

Investment financed under ISPA should be of a sufficient scale to have a significant impact in the field of environmental protection or on the development of transport infrastructure networks. Given these objectives, Council regulation (EC) No 1267/1999 of 21 June 1999 establishing ISPA(1) requires that the cost of the investment is not less than 5 million. In duly justified cases, however, the total cost may be less than this threshold.

Moreover, Article 2(1) of the above-mentioned regulation provides for groups of projects to be financed under ISPA. Although the total investment of the different sub-projects of the groups should in principle be above the threshold, the cost of each individual sub-project may be well below 5 million. Keeping the objective of maximising the Community assistance in mind, groups of projects need to meet certain criteria. For example, they need to follow a strategic approach and meet common objectives, such as enhancing the water quality in a catchment area (river basin approach), or belong to the same transport corridor. This approach is encouraged by the Commission; beneficiary countries will in due course present applications that follow these principles.

The Commission's efforts to encourage candidate countries to take part in LIFE, and in particular the PHARE contribution towards the cost of entry, have this year enabled the principal countries concerned to join LIFE. Romania, Hungary and Slovenia have already joined, and Slovakia should soon follow. This demonstrates their awareness of the issues of nature conservation in the Danube region and the Carpathians. Only Bulgaria (6 % of the Danube catchment area) seems currently unable to take part in LIFE. Though this situation is regrettable, the Commission does not see it as grounds for concluding that entry costs are dissuasive or for sharing the Honourable Member's pessimism.

As regards the concern that the procedures laid down for the Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development (Sapard) focus largely on agricultural infrastructural development, this is not borne out by facts. As can be seen from the Commission report on Sapard for 2000 (Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Sapard annual report Year 2000(2)) the spectrum of potential beneficiaries, including small farmers and the non-farming rural population, is very wide. As can also be seen from the report, about one-third of the Sapard funds are devoted to investments in agricultural holdings and in diversification of activities, providing alternative income in rural areas, while close to half of the funds are devoted to investments in rural infrastructure and improving the processing and marketing of agriculture and fishery products.

One of the fundamental objectives of the Sapard instrument is to contribute to the sustainable adaptation of the agricultural sector and rural areas in the applicant countries. An essential element of this is to further the restructuring of the economies of these sectors to

enable them to sustain the competitive pressure in an enlarged Community. In keeping with this objective, with the principles of sound financial management and with the terms of the basic Council regulation, all beneficiaries must be able to demonstrate the economic viability of the project and to finance their part of total cost of the investment. As a consequence, the focus is on the viability and sustainability of the investments, not on the scale of the commercial interest.

In view of the above considerations the Commission considers that the pre-accession instruments already address the concerns specified in the question.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2) COM(2001) 341 final.