WRITTEN QUESTION E-2424/01

by Michiel van Hulten (PSE) and Ieke van den Burg (PSE) to the Commission

(4 September 2001)

Subject: Implementation of the ESF in the Netherlands from 1994 to 1996

On 20 July 2001 Director-General Quintin wrote to the Netherlands government informing it of the commencement of the procedure provided for in Article 24 of Council Regulation (EEC) 4253/88(1) of 19 December 1988 in respect of the implementation, in the Netherlands, of projects financed by the European Social Fund over the period 1994 to 1996.

1. For 33 of the 45 projects selected an investigation has been carried out on the basis of the project administration that is still in place. In the case of seven projects, owing to the absence of a project administration, a review has been conducted on the basis of accountants' reports. Of these seven projects, in five cases the ESF subsidy was qualified as regular, and in 2 cases as uncertain. Nonetheless, all seven projects were taken as being in the category uncertain/irregular by extrapolation. As a result, the adjustment proposed by the Commission amounts to 41 % instead of 25 %. Does the Commission not consider that in cases where the accountants' reports indicate a positive outcome the project should be given the benefit of the doubt, and should, in any case, not be considered negative as a result of extrapolation?

2. Up until the spring of 1997 there was uncertainty regarding the exact rules relating to the allocation of ESF resources. On 11 March 1996 the Ecofin Council asked the Commission to eliminate all sources of uncertainty regarding the eligibility of expenditure so as to guarantee that the best possible use be made of Community resources, in accordance with the regulations in force. On the basis of that request, the Commission adopted Decision 97/320/EC(2) in respect of the Netherlands. Article 1(2) of that decision says that to the extent that the provisions of the Annex impose new or complementary charges or conditions on Member States or beneficiaries, they shall apply only to investments, operations, measures and projects comprising part of the forms of assistance mentioned in the first paragraph and selected after 1 May 1997. Can the Commission indicate whether the regularity of expenditure relating to the 45 projects selected has been assessed in the light of the provisions of Article 1(2)?

(1) OJ L 374, 31.12.1988, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 146, 5.6.1997, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(25 October 2001)

1. In 1997, the Netherlands authorities decided, in agreement with the Commission, to replace declarations certified by external accountants with controls carried out by the Control Department of Arbeidsvoorziening. The reason for this transfer was that earlier controls carried out by the Commission had revealed that these accountants' declarations were of no use with respect to the actual compliance of the projects with the European Social Fund (ESF) rules. The same declarations that were found to be of no use for the ESF in 1996 can of course not be used as evidence for compliance with ESF rules five years later.

Moreover, according to the report of the accounting department of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, also all projects qualified as irregular had received a positive accountants' declaration.

2. The accounting department of the Netherlands Ministry conducted the control of the 45 projects, in order to verify the legitimacy and the correctness of their declarations. The Commission is convinced that this investigation was based on the regulations and decisions in force at the time that the projects were carried out.