WRITTEN QUESTION E-0951/00 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. The Objective 2 region of Hainaut.
Date: 2000-03-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU regional policy, Province of Hainault, Province of West Flanders, aid to undertakings, regional aid, regional development, transfer of businesses

C 330 E/220

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.11.2000

(2000/C 330 E/256)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0933/00

by Helmuth Markov (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 March 2000)

Subject: Commission investigations against the German Land of Thuringia

1. What investigation procedures in connection with subsidies under EU programmes and directives
have been or are being carried out by the Commission against the Land of Thuringia, and when did these
begin?

2. What has been the outcome of the investigations under competition law which have already been
completed? What is the financial scope of the procedures under investigation, and into what particular
areas can they be broken down?

3.
Has the Land government been involved in the investigation process or informed about the outcome,
and have any specific demands for changes on specific matters been made? If so, when, and on what
matters?

4. What are the possible consequences for the Land of Thuringia, and what is the Commission(cid:146)s
assessment of these?

5. Which investigation procedures have not yet been completed, when is this likely to happen and to
what matters do they relate?

Is there a need to alter the customary procedures for the implementation of EU programmes and

6.
directives in Thuringia; if so, which, and in which areas?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 2000)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2000/C 330 E/257)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0951/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(29 March 2000)

Subject: The Objective 2 region of Hainaut

The awarding of Objective 2 aid to the Walloon province of Hainaut is leading to the relocation of firms
which have been established for many years in the neighbouring province of Western Flanders. The
businesses operators in question acknowledge that the removal of their activities to Hainaut is entirely
dependent on their obtaining Objective 2 subsidies. If these business operators do not obtain any European
aid, they will keep their operations in Western Flanders. In order to be considered for such aid they have
to have their company headquarters in Hainaut.

How many applications have been made since 1 January 2000 for Objective 2 aid for new economic

1.
operations in Hainaut, and to what do they relate?

2. When and where were the company headquarters of these firms registered?

3.

(a) How many of these firms were formerly operating in the province of Western Flanders?

(b) How many of these firms are currently operating in Western Flanders?

21.11.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 330 E/221

Have the firms in question expressly been asked whether their relocation from Western Flanders to

4.
Hainaut is dependent on the award of Objective 2 aid?

(a)

(b)

If so, how many (cid:145)West Flanders(cid:146) operators would choose to move their operations to Hainaut without
Objective 2 aid?

If not, will the Commission ask these business operators to what extent their relocation is dependent
upon Objective 2 aid?

Is the Commission prepared to take measures to prevent the relocation of West Flanders firms to

5.
Hainaut?

(a)

If so, what measures?

(b)

If not, why not?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(12 May 2000)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2000/C 330 E/258)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1027/00

by Marietta Giannakou-Koutsikou (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 March 2000)

Subject: Programme for combating unemployment and exclusion from the labour market

EUR 230 million from the Social Fund appropriations allocated to the Second Community Support
Framework for Greece which is now expiring had originally been approved for the programme to combat
unemployment and the exclusion of vulnerable social groups, such as persons with special needs,
rehabilitated drug addicts and immigrants. Owing to delays in the implementation of the programme for
which this sum was intended, it was reduced by EUR 60 million which has been transferred to other
programmes, although it is far from certain that this sum will in fact be taken up.

Given the urgent need to channel the funds in question to the vulnerable social groups for which they are
intended,
i.e. persons with special needs, rehabilitated drug addicts and immigrants, with a view to
integrating these groups in the labour market, will the Commission say how it intends to address this
matter and what is the reason for the delay (the excessively low take-up rate of appropriations)
in
implementing the programme so that it achieves to the intended objectives?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2000)

According to recent information provided by the Greek authorities, the programme take-up rate for the
period 1994-1999 was approximately 55 % in terms of expenditure incurred. The total of programme
credits had been committed by the end of December 1999 and it is expected that there will be 100 %
credit absorption within the deadlines imposed by the financial regulations in force.

The very low take-up experienced in particular during the 1994-1997 period was mainly due to the
inadequate administrative and management structures, absence of
programme(cid:146)s innovative approach,
appropriate implementing structures and the accreditation shortcomings.

In the meantime, significant progress has been achieved in comparison with the 1994-1997 period. The
national accreditation agency was re-established and is at present functioning in a satisfactory way. There
have also been improvements in programme monitoring.