WRITTEN QUESTION P-1466/98

by Helena Torres Marques (PSE) to the Commission

(7 May 1998)

Subject: Portuguese consumer policy projects

In response to the invitation published in the Official Journal on 12 September 1997 (issue C 277), the Portuguese General Union of Consumers (UGC) submitted three consumer policy projects to the Commission. Although they matched the priorities laid down by the Commission for 1998, the projects were rejected.

To provide a clearer explanation to the UGC for the refusal of funding, could the Commission answer the following questions:

1. How many consumer policy projects to be carried out in Portugal in 1998 were approved by the Commission? What is the nature of those projects?

2. Which Portuguese bodies sponsored the projects selected?

3. On what key criteria was project selection based?

4. How are the available budget funds shared out among the different Member States?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1448/98, E-1463/98 and P-1466/98 given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(19 June 1998)

1. and 2. The Commission has received 378 applications for funding in response to the call for submission of projects published in the Official Journal(1). Sixty projects have been selected to receive financial support, three of which are from Portugal, namely Edideco-Editores para defesa do Consumidor, Lda (joint project aimed at doing away with three types of unfair clause in travel contracts - ECU 35 610 of funding), Associacão de arbitragem de conflitos de consumo do distrito de Coimbra (simplification of methods for settling consumer disputes - ECU 26 788 of funding) and Deco-Associacão portugues para a defesa do consumidor (drawing-up of specimen contracts - ECU 17 077 of funding). In addition, a project concerning the work of the Instituto do Consumidor, the body responsible for settling disputes, in the field of car distribution services and involving funding of ECU 116 960 has been placed on a reserve list, and a decision will be taken next June according to the availability of funds from the budget.

3. The criteria referred to in the call for submission of projects published in the Official Journal were applied during the selection process (priority themes in the context of consumer policy and the protection of consumers' health; Community-orientation; costs versus benefits; magnitude of the multiplier effect at Community level; the ability to ensure effective cooperation between the various partners involved in the projects; the means employed to develop lasting transnational cooperation, notably via the pooling and joint exploitation of experience in raising the awareness of consumers and economic operators; the means employed to ensure the widest possible dissemination of the results of the actions and projects carried out).

4. The total amounts allocated, broken down by Member State, are as follows:

>TABLE>

These figures should be treated with care. The projects often relate to consumers in more than one Member State, as provided for in the selection criteria (see point 3). Furthermore, the geographical location of a consumer organisation does not necessarily imply that consumers in that Member State will benefit from a particular project. For example, four of the nine projects relating to organisations in the United Kingdom involve Consumers International or International Testing, and the aims of these projects are not restricted to consumers in the UK.

In addition to financial aid, consumer organisations in the Member States also benefit from other Commission measures financed from the consumer-policy budget.

(1) OJ C 277, 12.9.1997.