WRITTEN QUESTION E-1256/96 by Umberto Bossi (ELDR) to the Commission (24 May 1996)

Subject: Languages used for the drawing up and translation of the programmes to safeguard the European artistic and cultural heritage

In Official Journal C67 of 5 March 1996, the Commission published a series of calls for proposals for cooperation or for activities designed to safeguard the European architectural heritage and for the mobility of professionals in the field of European cultural heritage conservation. The closing dates for applications were fixed between 15 May and 15 June 1996.

The application forms were not available in some Community languages until 10 days later and it was a full three weeks before they appeared in Italian, while the deadline for the submission of duly completed applications remained unchanged.

Moreover, the section of the form intended for the summary description of the project had to be completed in French or English (as specified in point 11 of the extract from OJ C67/B and OJ C67/A, point 13 of the extract from OJ C67/AE, point 16 of OJ C67/T, point 10 of OJ C67/M).

Does the Commission not consider that the considerable delay in the publication of the forms in Italian disadvantages applicants whose national language is Italian and creates a situation of unfair competition between the various Member States?

Does the Commission believe that the deadline for applications should at least be extended, in view of the disparity in the treatment accorded to the various Member States?

If the delays are due to translation problems, how and when will the Commission remedy this problem?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (2 August 1996)

The Commission has the following comments on the question put by the Honourable Member:

i) Calls for proposals, such as the four published in Official Journal C 67 of 5 March 1996, are targeted not only at national, regional and local authorities, but also at private establishments, small businesses, associations and individuals. In this context, the Commission is committed to maintaining equality of opportunity for all these different types of candidates.

ii) The Commission would point out that for three of the four calls for proposals in question the arrangements for submitting applications were the same as they usually are for calls of this type, i.e. applications must be submitted on the standard forms available from the Commission and exclusively in line with the objectives and on the terms set out in the Official Journal. This means that the objectives and the terms are available in all official Community languages.

iii) For one of the four calls for proposals an additional stipulation was made, i.e. that the application dossier should make reference to the criteria listed in the technical form enclosed with the participation form.

iv) The Commission feels that in such circumstances the technical form should be available simultaneously in all the Community languages, so that candidates from all Member States are on an equal footing. The Commission regrets that this did not happen in this particular case, owing to delays in producing certain language versions.

v) The Commission would, however, emphasize that full account will be taken of this situation when the applications are considered. No allowance can be made for formal errors of presentation in applications from candidates who did not have the technical forms available in their own language at the same time as other candidates, but where this is the case, the people concerned will be contacted so that they can re-do their applications in the correct way and these can then be evaluated on the same footing as all the other applications.

vi) Under Article 2 of Regulation No 1 laying down the rules governing the languages of the institutions of the Community, candidates may submit applications in whichever official Community language they choose.