WRITTEN QUESTION E-1962/99

by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission

(5 November 1999)

Subject: Efficiency of award and monitoring mechanisms for the funding of projects

In December 1998 one of the organisers of a conference entitled Zur Sache Schätzchen Die 68er und ihr Einfluß auf die Solidaritäts- und Dritte-Welt-Bewegung (All is revealed: the 1968 generation and their impact on the solidarity and Third World movement) was the Vereinigte Sozialistische Partei (VSP: United Socialist Party), known to the Hamburg Office for the Protection of the Constitution as an extreme left-wing organisation. This event, with a huge presence of left-wing extremists, received funding from the Commission amounting to the equivalent of ATS 35 000.

1. Is it normal practice for events attended by political extremists to receive funding from the Commission?

2. Has funding been given to any other events involving the VSP or other left-wing or right-wing extremist groups?

3. What is the nature of existing award and monitoring mechanisms in respect of examining what groups receive funding?

4. Does the Commission feel that the existing award and monitoring mechanisms are sufficiently efficient to prevent misuse of EU funding?

5. If so, how does the Commission explain the example described above?

6. If not, what progress has been made with reform of such mechanisms?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(7 April 2000)

1. and 2. The Commission could not determine whether Union financing had been granted on the basis of the information contained in the written question. It has contacted the Honourable Member requesting further information and will then be able to reply to the question.

With regard to the Commission's normal practice for funding events in the general interest, the criteria it applies are set out below.

3. In July 1998 the Commission approved a Vademecum on grant management applicable from 1 January 1999. Chapter 4 deals with the Criteria for accepting applications and awarding grants. Among the award criteria that selection committees and authorising officers are enjoined to take into account is 4.5.8:

Proposed operations which, directly or indirectly, conflict with the policies of the Union or may be linked with an unsuitable image must be rejected. For example, all grants for projects that may be contrary to the interests of public health (alcohol, tobacco, drugs), respect for human rights, people's security, freedom of expression, etc, are prohibited.

At present, commitments of appropriations by authorising officers are subject to an ex-ante visa by financial control. Thus, applications for grants are vetted, successively, by the budget line manager, the selection committee, the authorising officers and financial control.

5. To answer this question, the Commission has contacted the Honourable Member to obtain the information referred to in paragraph 1 above.

4. and 6. The new Financial Regulation could include a title covering the award of subsidies, which would define the concept, in particular with respect to contracts, and the conditions of award. For the purposes of openness, the new title would lay down the rules for the award of subsidies (legal basis, programme, ex-ante publication and ex-post information, need for a written contract).

In addition to checks on recipients of subsidies by the Court of Auditors, it will organise checks by the institution which granted the subsidy (the authorising department will be required to monitor the use made of it, make sure the recipient maintained the conditions of eligibility, assess whether the results are in conformity with the objectives, and carry out an overall assessment of results).

These rules are intended to ensure proper and transparent use of Community funds in compliance with procedures.