WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1854/98 by Maartje van PUTTEN to the Commission. Programme of support for ACP countries' cultural events in Europe
Date: 1998-06-12
Institutions: European Parliament, VAN PUTTEN
Subjects: ACP countries, Community budget, aid programme, budget appropriation, cultural event, economic support













EUR-Lex - 91998E1854 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E1854

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1854/98 by Maartje van PUTTEN to the Commission. Programme of support for ACP countries' cultural events in Europe  


Official Journal C 050 , 22/02/1999 P. 0105 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1854/98by Maartje van Putten (PSE) to the Commission(12 June 1998)Subject: Programme of support for ACP countries' cultural events in EuropeCan the Commission give some account of the implementation of the programme of support for ACP countries' cultural events in Europe?1. (a) What was the budget for the programme in 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998?(b) With what criteria must project applications comply in order to be eligible for financial support under the programme?(c) What is the procedure for dealing with project applications (protocol for applications received as regards processing, appraisal, powers of decision, contacts with the applicant organization, schedule)? Is it customary to send applicant organizations an acknowledgement of their application and a planned schedule for processing it?(d) What projects were granted financial support under the programme in 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998?2. (a) Is it true, as I have heard, that less budget funding was available for the programme in 1998 than in previous years?(b) What were the reasons for this special restriction on the budget?(c) If it was impossible to accept all the applications which met the criteria referred to at 1b), on account of the limited budget, what supplementary criteria were used to assess and compare project applications?Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission(31 July 1998)1. (a) The programme of support for the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries' cultural events in Europe was set up in 1994 with financing from the European Development Fund (EDF). An initial budget of ECU 2 million funded 70 events from September 1994 to May 1996. A further ECU 300 000 was made available by raising the ceiling on the original budget, enabling a further 17 schemes to be financed between November 1996 and May 1997. Lastly, an additional ECU 500 000 programme provided assistance for 38 events from January to June this year. It would therefore be more accurate to speak not of successive annual allocations, but of a lump sum augmented on two occasions pending the entry into force of the 8th EDF.1. (b) From the outset the programme's objective has been to assist events bringing performers, authors, artists, intellectuals and works displaying the creativity and cultural diversity of ACP countries to as wide a European audience as possible, in ways which do most to promote artists and their works while increasing mutual awareness and understanding, and, if possible, to seek market outlets and strengthen a network of those working in the cultural field in ACP countries.For the first two years of the programme, it was possible to finance applications that satisfied the general conditions. The average grant was relatively high, somewhere in the region of ECU 25 000. After November 1996 growing awareness of the programme throughout European brought an increase in the number of applications. This led to tighter selection criteria and a drop in the average level of grants (to about ECU 13 000).The evaluation report submitted late last year offered a starting point for a more searching review. The aim was also to enable all Member States to benefit from the programme, and in particular those which, for cultural and economic reasons, have fewer opportunities for contact with ACP cultures. The programme should also provide equitable assistance for the presentation of work from all regions of the ACP world, especially work by artists who, for such reasons as distance or unfamiliarity, are less readily signed up and promoted by European distributors.The review has produced a system for assessing applications based, in order of weighting, on the following criteria:1. Member State hosting the event: 20 %2. Cultural interest of presenting the performers, artists and works in question: 15 %3. Anticipated impact of the grant on the holding and survival of the event: 10 %4. ACP region of origin of the performers, artists and works presented: 10 %5. Competence and professional standing of the organiser: 10 %6. Expected audience: 10 %7. Existence of a tour throughout the Community: 5 %8. Average unit price of tickets: 5 %9. Efforts to reach, raise the awareness of, and win over, in particular, young people: 5 %10. Complementary activities to seek market outlets and strengthen networks of ACP professionals in Europe: 5 %11. Activities in ACP countries connected with the event: 5 %1. (c) A register of applications has been set up, with five deadlines for submission spaced evenly throughout the year. Applicants now systematically receive notification of receipt along with information on the procedure.An evaluation performed last year by the Observatoire Interarts, copies of which are being sent both to the Honourable Member and Parliament's Secretariat, was full of praise for the choices made. The selection system has made the process even more objective.However, the evaluation also brought to light a growing backlog caused by the rise in applications. This issue will have to be resolved if the programme is renewed.1. (d) A list of projects funded under the programme in 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998 is being sent to the Honourable Member and Parliament's Secretariat.2. (a), (b) and (c) It is still too soon to speak of a new programme beginning this year. That would entail a series of preliminary stages, among them a request for renewal from the ACP authorities. The recently introduced selection system seems comprehensive enough to enable applications to be appraised in depth. As with any system, depending on the budget available, criteria may be tightened or relaxed, and thresholds lowered or raised.