WRITTEN QUESTION E-2149/01

by Freddy Blak (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 July 2001)

Subject: Time-wasting bureaucracy at the Commission

The European Union's popularity with the public depends on whether the EU can make a practical positive difference to people's lives. Many of the small cultural and educational projects which the EU supports provide a positive experience of the European Union, and it is therefore incredibly annoying if work on such projects ends up producing exactly the opposite effect.

Unfortunately, many people applying for funding for small projects become very disappointed and frustrated as a result of their encounters with the EU system. This is because of the long delays they experience in having their applications dealt with. Such delays are especially serious for small projects which do not have big financial backing, as the applicants cannot afford to wait as long as 5-6 months for an answer. Many small projects unfortunately do not get off the ground if it takes so long, and EU funding therefore goes mainly to those already in a financially strong position.

The delays in question are probably due to a very bureaucratic approvals procedure within the Commission. Many Directorates-General are involved in taking the decisions, and sometimes small projects involving as little as EUR 10 000 have to be approved by the whole college of Commissioners.

Does the Commission have any plans to change the procedure so as to avoid unnecessary bureaucracy and reduce the time needed to process applications?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(15 October 2001)

The Commission is fully aware of the need to reduce the period of time needed to inform applicants for grants of the result of their applications.

This period is necessary, however, because the Commission has to examine a very large number of applications submitted in response to its calls for proposals. Consequently, in the case of programmes which directly concern the public, like those in the field of education and culture mentioned in the question, the number of grant applications to be vetted vastly exceeds the number of grants available. (Thousands of grants are awarded each year. For a given budget heading, the ratio of the number of grants awarded to the number of applications examined can be 1:6, or even more.)

The evaluation and selection procedure is itself in stages and they cannot be easily condensed as they cover the physical processing of the applications received (encoding, acknowledgement of receipt, etc.); the evaluation of the applications by the various Commission departments and where appropriate, by independent external experts; interdepartmental consultation within the Commission; the consultation of a committee that might need to be convened for legal reasons; allowing, where necessary, for the period within which the Parliament can exercise its right of inspection; formal adoption of the list of projects selected by the Commission. Only at this stage can the Commission inform the applicants whether their applications have been approved.

These stages are far from being simple bureaucratic hurdles since they guarantee that the fundamental principles of the grant award procedure are observed transparency, equal treatment of applicants and sound financial management.

The Commission is nevertheless seeking to shorten the time required for processing applications. To this end, the Commission wishes to keep to an absolute minimum the number of directorates-general to be consulted on the projects for selection.

The last stage in the procedure, which is the formal adoption of the list of projects selected by the Commission, has in the past most often resulted in the College adopting a decision by written procedure or empowering a Commissioner to adopt the decision. A change to the Commission's rules of procedure has produced a new decision-making procedure for the Commission whereby the power to adopt a decision is delegated to the Directors-General. Work is under way to ensure that decisions relating to financing the field of education and culture can be taken in this way. This change will help to reduce the period needed for processing applications from the time they are submitted to the time when the Commission can notify applicants of the results.