WRITTEN QUESTION E-0667/96 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) and Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (15 March 1996)

Subject: Communication on cohesion policy and the environment

We are concerned at recent reports that structural funds money may be being wasted on projects which are economically questionable as well as environmentally damaging such as water supply/irrigation. The Commissioner,Mrs Wulf-Mathies, has expressed concern that inappropriate pricing of resources such as water may be causing unnecessary resource use/wastage, which in turn is leading to unnecessary structural funds projects, such as water supply, occurring in Member States.

What are the Commission's plans to tighten up on economic appraisal?

How does the Commission propose investigating the issue of resource pricing with the Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (25 April 1996)

Following the revision of the structural funds regulations in 1993, the current programmes are subject to reinforced socio-economic as well as environmental appraisal, including intensified ex-ante evaluation, monitoring and ex-post evaluation. In this context, the Commission relied on external expertise for ex-ante appraisal of the programming documents submitted by the Member States for the new programming period. The Commission has agreed with each of the Member States that an intermediate evaluation of these programmes will be made by independent evaluators. The Commission has also launched ex-post evaluation studies for the programmes of the previous period. Moreover the Commission is working towards improving methods and indicators for the socio-economic and environmental appraisal of structural funds operations.

As regards individual projects forming part of programmes cofinanced by the structural funds, the responsibility for socio-economic as well as environmental appraisal rests with the Member States. Only for large projects (infrastructure above 25 MECU, productive investment above 15 MECU), do Member States have to submit to the Commission the result of this appraisal (cost-benefit analysis, expected impact on employment, and impact on the environment). Despite this fact, the Commission tries to evaluate all projects when information becomes available. For very important projects, the Commission can always carry out an evaluation on its own initiative.

The Commission acknowledges the need for appropriate pricing of natural resources, emphasing at the same time that this is a general problem not limited to investments cofinanced by the structural funds. The Commission is examining ways of supporting research into the development of adequate methods of environmental pricing and their application in cohesion policy. As regards the environmental quality of projects cofinanced by the structural funds, the Commission insists on a thorough application of environmental legislation such as the environment impact assessment (EIA) Directive. In case of infringements the sanctions envisaged in the provisions in force will be applied, including the reimbursement of the Community financial contribution. Moreover, the Commission is working with the Member States and regions in the monitoring committees towards an intensified appraisal of environmental aspects going beyond pure legal compliance. This issue of resource pricing might be taken up in the context.

Finally, Interreg II C addresses specifically transborder issues of water resource management.