WRITTEN QUESTION E-1929/00 by Bartho Pronk (PPE-DE) to the Commission. ESF-3 single planning document for the period 2000-2006.
Date: 2000-06-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Social Fund, Netherlands, document, employment policy, expenditure, municipality, principle of additionality, regional planning

13.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/111

The close season in the Valencia region enjoys direct funding from the Autonomous Community of
Valencia, with earmarked resources virtually amounting to nothing.

Does the Commission intend to authorise set periods in which fishing activity would cease and make them
compulsory in the Mediterranean basin?

Is it considering allocating financial resources to assist fishermen and fishermen(cid:146)s associations during the
close season, so as to ensure that fishing grounds in the Mediterranean are properly maintained and
replenished?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 July 2000)

Seasonal closure of fishing activities is a technical measure that might benefit fishery resources assuming
that it is suited to the target species, with respect to the temporal coverage and the geographical area. Thus
it is always required to state which species are meant when dealing with such measures. In addition it must
not be considered as a panacea since like other measures it has limits (e.g. increase of effort out of the
closed season). Seasonal closures must be part of an overall integrated management system which includes
other measures.

Within Council Regulation (EC) No 1626/94 of 27 June 1994 laying down certain technical measures the
fishery resources in the Mediterranean (1) and successive amendments (in particular
conservation of
Regulation (EC) No 812/2000 (2)) there is a temporal closure for the bluefin tuna fishery with encircling
nets from 1 to 31 May in the Adriatic Sea, and from 16 July to 15 August in the whole Mediterranean
excluding the Adriatic Sea.

At present the Commission does not intend to implement other seasonal closures within the Mediterra-
nean basin. However Member States may continue to legislate by adopting measures supplementary to, or
going beyond the minimum requirements of the system established by Regulation 1626/94, provided such
measures are compatible with Community law and in conformity with the common fishery policy.

Seasonal closure of fishing activities, as part of the ongoing management of fisheries, being a recurrent
seasonal suspension of activity cannot be supported by Community funds.

(1) OJ L 171, 6.7.1994.
(2) OJ L 100, 20.4.2000.

(2001/C 81 E/133)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1929/00

by Bartho Pronk (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 June 2000)

Subject: ESF-3 single planning document for the period 2000-2006

The Commission is at present in the concluding stage of negotiations with the Netherlands on the ESF-3
single planning document for the period 2000-2006. The Netherlands Government is proposing that two
priorities, namely Pro-active employment policy and Lifelong learning, should be the only ones entitled to
apply for ESF funds.

Is this approach not likely to result in the ESF in effect taking charge of regular expenditure for

1.
employment and the Netherlands vocational training system?

How will the Commission ensure that the ultimate recipients, including local authorities, not only the
2.
communes belonging to the G25 but also the other communes where the projects are actually being
carried out, do not receive less funding?

Is it possible to safeguard transparency and additionality in the proposals of

3.
Government?

the Netherlands

C 81 E/112

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.3.2001

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 2000)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that it has reached agreement with the Dutch
authorities to have a single programming document (SPD) with four priorities (the respective budgetary
shares are indicated in brackets):

(cid:129) Priority 1: Prevention according to guideline 2 (36 %)

(cid:129) Priority 2: Employability of the labour force (45 %)

(cid:129) Measure 2.1: Reintegration of long-term unemployed (36 %)

(cid:129) Measure 2.2: Training of workers (8 %)

(cid:129) Measure 2.3: Article 4.2 of the ESF regulation (1 %)

(cid:129) Priority 3: Life long learning in vocational education (16 %)

(cid:129) Priority 4: Technical assistance (3 %).

European social fund-Netherlands (ESF-NL) is a new unit, recently established within Arbeidsvoorziening
(ARBVO), that will act as managing authority. ESF-NL has created a network of six regional clusters to
maintain contacts with the final beneficiaries. Apart from ARBVO it has been decided, for the moment,
that there will be five other types of final beneficiaries: the 25 largest cities (G25), the 40 sectoral training
funds, the Landelijk Instituut Sociale Verzekeringen (LISV), the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
for priority 3, and ESF-NL as the sole final beneficiary for technical assistance.

1.
The SPD contains a specific chapter on additionality with a detailed table showing how much the
Netherlands has been spending in the past. The Commission will ensure that the Netherlands does not use
ESF funds simply to replace existing expenditure. The additionality principle is checked three times by the
Commission during the programming period: ex ante, before the end of 2003 and before the end of 2005.

2.
The G25 are individually recognised as final beneficiaries, the smaller municipalities will have to
apply to ARBVO for ESF support. The budget given to ARBVO for this purpose will be closely monitored.
The European employment strategy has given a new role to the ESF which requires a shift in policy
emphasis away from curative to preventive. The new SPD has taken this into account which means that a
large part of the ESF budget has been set aside for the comprehensive approach according to guideline 2 of
the national action plan (NAP) in which the municipalities are to play an important role. The Commission
has asked the Netherlands to give the comprehensive approach more visibility in its new SPD.

Once the new SPD has been approved,

3.
forward a copy directly to the
Parliament. The Commission is confident that the Honourable Member will find that transparency and
additionality have been respected in the proposals of the Netherlands government.

the Commission will

(2001/C 81 E/134)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1933/00

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 June 2000)

Subject: Budget Item A-3036

€ 250 000 is allocated to the Jean Monnet House from Item A-3036. Could the Commission indicate what
work is carried out by the Jean Monnet House and how this money is used?