WRITTEN QUESTION P-1678/97 by Helena Torres Marques (PSE) to the Commission (7 May 1997)

Subject: Authorizations and payments in respect of the NOW Initiative

In view of the wholly inadequate answer given by the Commission to my Oral Question H-0251/97 ((Verbatim report of proceedings of the European Parliament (April 1997). )), about which I have already lodged a complaint with the President of the European Parliament, I should like to ask the Commission duly to inform me about the following matter:

According to information supplied by the Commission at a meeting of the European Parliament's Committee on Women's Rights on the implementation of the 1995 budget, the reason for the reduced usage of the NOW Initiative was the absence of counter-concessions made at national level. However, this does not appear to be true.

I have also learned that, at least as far as Portugal is concerned, the Commission proposed cuts of the order of 75% in respect of all projects, on the grounds that this would allow the implementation of a greater number of projects and involve more promoters. Even so, only forty projects have been realized, despite the interest shown in this Initiative, as evidenced by the fact that 286 projects were submitted. I believe that the extent of budgetary cuts (75% of the amounts considered necessary by promoters to realize the projects) will inevitably have had an adverse effect on implementation.

Will the Commission explain its attitude and give a specific answer to Question H-0251/97, providing data on each of the twelve Member States which then made up the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (30 June 1997)

The selection of projects for participation in Employment-NOW, both in the first phase (1994-1997) and in the second phase (1997-1999), falls within the competence of the Member States. The criteria for selection, thus, have varied from one Member State to another, but the basic parameters set, on the one hand, by the guidelines for operational programmes ((Communications of the Commission Nos 94/C 180/10 and 96/C 200/06. OJ C 180, 1.7.1994. OJ C 200, 10.7.1996. )) and, on the other hand, by the operational programmes submitted by the Member States, agreed by the Commission and subsequently adopted by Commission decision, have provided the framework for these criteria.

The Commission, as a member of the monitoring committee in each Member State, is able to make its views known concerning the selection of projects. In this regard the Commission expressed a preference that projects selected should be of a sufficient size to ensure their functioning and the incorporation of their results into the mainstream of national and Community policy formation. The Commission's view is not binding on the Member State.

In Portugal approximately 290 applications were received following the call for proposals for the first phase of Employment-NOW. A number of these proposals were not eligible for funding under the programme. Others were inadmissible. The Portuguese authorities finally selected 43 projects in accordance with the priorities expressed in their operational programme. This ratio of selected to proposed projects is broadly in line with the other Member States.

The procedure for selection in all Member States in both phases of Employment-NOW is identical to that described above, and the number of projects that commenced operation in the first phase of Employment-NOW in each Member State is as follows:

>TABLE>

The Community funding for Employment-NOW in Portugal from 1994-1999 was set in the Commission decisions approving the operational programmes, as follows:

Original operational programme (1994)

ECU 7 803 103 (ESF contribution) ECU 2 080 559 (ERDF contribution)

Modified operational programme (1996)

ECU 8 081 852 (ESF contribution) ECU 2 123 670 (ERDF contribution)

These envelopes are available to the Member States regardless of the number of projects that are selected. The view of the Commission, however, as expressed above, is that projects are more likely to succeed if they are adequately funded. Thus the Commission has consistently encouraged the Member States to limit their selection to a number at which sufficient funding will be available to each project, whilst trying to fund as great a number of projects as is practical. The effect of this would be to avoid both micro-projects, which would have less chance of survival or possibilities of mainstreaming, and extremely large projects, which, although valuable, would absorb an inordinately large proportion of the available funding.

Member States allocate their budget for Employment-NOW in order to maximise the effectiveness of the initiative. This may mean, in practical terms, that selected projects are not allocated the budget that they requested, in order to allow the selection of other projects. This while reducing some projects' overall capacity, has the beneficial effect of increasing the range of projects selected and thus the variety of actions assisted. In addition, individual projects may not have received their original requests due to the ineligibility of certain of the actions that they proposed to undertake.