WRITTEN QUESTION No. 813/98 by Glyn FORD to the Commission. North-West of England Programme Monitoring Committee
Date: 1998-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, FORD
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, European Regional Development Fund, North West (England), building subsidy, cultural policy, job creation, museum, project evaluation, tourism

9. 10. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 310/135

That undertaking, which has offices in Belgium, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, presents itself as a
consultant in matters connected with national and European subsidies. It charges BEF 20 000 (excluding VAT)
for its services, which is refunded to the client if no subsidy is granted within six months. If a subsidy is actually
granted, the client must pay 10% thereof to EBS.

Claiming a proportion of subsidies granted is in total breach of all Community rules.We have been informed that
UCLAF has been notified about these practices. Can the Commission say how the inquiry into this matter is
progressing and what measures it is planning to take?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 1998)

The unit on Coordination of fraud prevention (UCLAF)is currently conducting enquiries in Belgium with regard
to  subsidies  granted  by  the  Community.  It  is  too  early  at  this  stage  to  draw  any  conclusions,  in  particular
concerning the practices described by the Honourable Member. The Parliament, and more precisely its budgetary
control committee, will be kept informed, according to the procedures recently proposed to that committee.

(98/C 310/182)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0813/98

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(26 March 1998)

Subject: North-West of England Programme Monitoring Committee

Is the Commission aware of the decision by the North-West of England Programme Monitoring Committee on
15 December to allocate £8.1 million to the scheme for an Imperial War Museum in the North, which by the date
in question had already been turned down for Heritage Lottery Funding, and to place in reserve the Manchester
Museums  Project  requesting  £7.6  million  to  secure  an  already  existing  grant  of  £36 million  from  the  same
Heritage Lottery Fund?

Worthy  as  the  Imperial  War  Museum  in  the  North  scheme  is,  it  now  has  unfortunately  almost  no  chance  of
funding, and is jeopardizing a scheme with a total value of £51 million involving 135 new jobs and 328 indirectly
because of the uncertainties involved.

Will the Commission ask the relevant programme committee to justify their decision?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(14 April 1998)

At its meeting on 15 December 1997 the Greater Manchester, Lancashire and Cheshire objective 2 programme
monitoring committee considered four applications for European regional development fund (ERDF) assistance
under measure 19 of the single programming document (SPD) (cid:145)strategic tourism investment(cid:146). These applications
sought  funding  totalling  about  36  MECU  compared  with  the  19  MECU  available  from  the  ERDF  for  that
measure.

The projects were assessed on the basis of selection criteria agreed by the monitoring committee at the outset of
the programme. These take into account a number of factors, including value for money in terms of attracting
new visitors to the region and creating jobs. The monitoring committee agreed to support two projects: Xanadu
and the Imperial war museum. It justified its decision on the basis that these projects were best able to meet the
goals set out in the SPD. The two projects were given six months to demonstrate their deliverability within the
lifetime of the programme. After this time the monitoring committee will either confirm their approval of the
projects or consider the other two projects › Union Street cultural quarter and then the Manchester museums
project › which have been placed on a reserve list.