WRITTEN QUESTION E-1831/99

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 October 1999)

Subject: Allocation of funds for agricultural development for 2000-2006

The Commission has fixed the level of resources to be made available for each Member State for the new generation of agricultural development programmes for the period from 2000-2006, taking as the criterion the average funds approved over the last three years for each Member State. As a result of this distribution system, Greece will receive a mere 3 % of total funds to be made available for agricultural development, despite the fact that agriculture in Greece is particularly disadvantaged owing to the large agricultural population, the small size and family character of agricultural holdings and the particularly low agricultural income.

According to the Greek Government, it is the Brussels bureaucracy which is responsible for the reduced take-up rate over the last three years, since it has not allowed Greek programmes submitted to be adopted, and as a result the final percentage of funds for Greece has fallen.

Will the Commission say:

1. Does it intend to review the allocation of funds, so that this can take place on the basis of the real situation and needs of the agricultural sector in each Member State?

2. Who is responsible for the failure to adopt Greek programmes that have been submitted and what measures will be taken to avoid delays which, inter alia, affect future allocations of resources?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 November 1999)

The Commission underlines that out of 22 measures for rural development under Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European agricultural guidance and guarantee fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations(1), in Greece only four (the three existing accompanying measures, and the aids to less-favoured areas) are concerned by the financial allocations of EAGGF-guarantee section. In fact, Greece, as part of the objective 1 regions for the whole of its territory will benefit in the period 2000-2006 from an additional and important financial assistance from the guidance section of EAGGF, within the total amount of 20,96 million of the structural funds attributed to Greece. This will enable this Member State to implement the remaining 18 measures for rural development. Indeed, the Guidance section of EAGGF is reserved to objective 1 regions.

1. The Commission draws the attention of the Honourable Member to the flexibility which exists in the framework of the financial allocations. Firstly, the Commission is prepared to adjust within three years the decision on financial allocations by Member State, in accordance with the provisions of Article 46(3) of the above Regulation and within the overall limits of the resources available. Secondly, the implementation rules for the rural development programmes adopted by the Commission in July 1999 make clear that where resources unused by Member States in a given year reach a particular level, compared to their original planning figure, they can be re-cycled to Member States with additional needs that conform with their programming documents. This will help to meet contingency pressures, although over the whole period the Member States would have to remain within their allocation set out in the Commission decision in force.

2. The Commission does not attribute responsibilities to anyone in relation to the approval of Greek programmes for rural development.

It should be recognised however that the accompanying measures in the period 1994-1999, due to their innovative and relatively complex character, faced some difficulties in the starting period, thus their implementation was not as speedy as initially expected.

The rate of absorption of credits from the Guidance section between 1994-1999 in Greece was however extremely high and successful. Thus globally the policy for rural development in this Member State during the above period was satisfactorily implemented.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.