WRITTEN QUESTION P-0535/01 by Wilhelm Piecyk (PSE) to the Commission. Problems encountered in the funding of town-twinning schemes.
Date: 2001-02-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, European Commission, administration of the Institutions, deepening of the European Union, twinning, youth exchange scheme

21.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235 E/221

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2001)

1.
The Commission is aware of this new discipline. However, no precise information is available on the
newly set up International Society of Plastic and Aesthetic Dermatology, nor on the spread of this
discipline across Europe in terms of research. The Commission would appreciate it if this information
could be passed on by the Honourable Member.

Even though there is no specific provision made in the current Quality of Life programme, relevant
research proposals can be submitted to area 7.2 iii + iv of Generic Research and technological
development (RTD) Activities (clinical trials, retrospective and prospective studies) (1).

2.

It is not for the Commission to publicise a particular medical discipline or practice.

3.
The Commission cannot give an opinion as it does not have access to the relevant information to do
so. In regards to research on combating the effects of ageing, reference is made to the specific key Action 6
on (cid:145)The Ageing Population and Disabilities(cid:146) of the Quality of Life programme.

(1) http://www.cordis.lu/life/home.html.

(2001/C 235 E/259)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0535/01

by Wilhelm Piecyk (PSE) to the Commission

(16 February 2001)

Subject: Problems encountered in the funding of town-twinning schemes

Under the town-twinning scheme involving Scharbeutz in Germany and Navajas in Spain, pupils from
a secondary school in Scharbeutz paid a visit to the Spanish town from 9 to 18 October 2000. The close
relationship between the two towns, which has existed for 14 years and which has involved regular visits,
has largely been funded by Commission grants. As part of the preparations for the visit in 2000, an
application for a grant was submitted to the appropriate Commission department in the spring of 2000.
Since experience has shown that decisions on applications are taken at a relatively late stage (cid:129) although
they had been approved in all previous cases (cid:129) the organisers worked on the principle that the same
procedure would apply this time as well. The application for a grant submitted by the Navajas authorities
was eventually rejected, but not until 20 September 2000 (cid:129) i.e. at a very late stage, given the scheduled
dates referred to above and the commitments already made. The visit did, however, take place, because of
the commitments made and despite the lack of a grant, but the organisers are now finding it difficult to
balance the books because of the Commission(cid:146)s failure to award the expected grant.

Partly with regard to the plans to reorganise this sector, I should like the Commission to answer the
following questions:

1.

Is it true that the appropriations entered in the budget to promote visits as part of town-twinning
schemes and conferences and seminars in 2000 had already been exhausted by the spring of 2000? If
so, why was the application not rejected earlier, so that alternative arrangements might have been
made for the visit referred to above?

2.

Is there any possibility of a grant being awarded retrospectively to fund this youth-exchange visit?

Answer given by Ms Reding on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2001)

The Commission initiative to fund town-twinning projects has, in a sense, been the victim of its own
success because the interest shown by local players in this initiative has far exceeded the budget available.
In August 2000, the Commission informed those concerned of this situation through a notice published in
the Official Journal (1).

C 235 E/222

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.8.2001

Furthermore, certain difficulties with human resources in the relevant departments of the Commission
(limited number of staff in comparison with the rapid increase in the number of applications) have meant
that it has taken longer to process applications in recent years, which could go some way to explaining
why applicants have received a late reply.

In order to rectify this situation and improve the management of this initiative at all levels (cid:129) selection,
spreading of the grants throughout the year, rapid processing of applications (cid:129) the Commission has
decided, in consultation with the partner organisations in the area of town-twinning (the representatives of
29 national sections of the Council of European Municipalities and Regions of Europe (CEMR) and the
United Towns Organisation), to introduce in 2001 the call for proposals procedure, which is widely used
in managing the Commission(cid:146)s grants.

It is not possible to grant retrospective funding for the initiative referred to by the Honourable Member,
because the budget for 2000 has been used up and the budgetary resources for 2001 are earmarked for
new projects and will be granted under the new procedure of a call for proposals.

(1) Notice on town-twinning grants (OJ C 238, 22.8.2000).

(2001/C 235 E/260)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0537/01

by John Hume (PSE) to the Commission

(16 February 2001)

Subject: Agriculture in Northern Ireland

Given that agriculture is the largest industry in Northern Ireland, and given the impact of the current
serious crisis, will the Commission carry out a study into the agricultural situation in Northern Ireland
with a view to finding ways of resolving the crisis?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 2001)

The Commission is indeed aware of the difficulties in the Northern Ireland agricultural sector and its
importance in the regional economy. As regards a study of the sector, the Commission attaches great
importance to integrated regional development with well founded initiatives supported by studies and
evaluation involving the participation of public authorities and economic and social partners.

The Commission approved the rural development plan for Northern Ireland on the 4 December 2000.
This plan is funded out of the Guarantee Section of the European Agriculture Guarantee and Guidance
Fund (EAGGF) and covers the so-called (cid:145)accompanying(cid:146) measures (aid for less favoured areas, agri-
environment and afforestation of agricultural land). This plan includes an (cid:145)ex-ante(cid:146) assessment of these
measures and a description of the current situation and the strengths and weaknesses of the agricultural
sector in Northern Ireland. The appropriateness of these measures should again be examined at the mid-
term and ex-post evaluations for this plan.

On the 20 December 2000 the Commission also approved the Community support framework (2000-
2006) for Northern Ireland on the basis of a structural development plan (SDP). The rural development
measures within this framework will be co-funded out of the Guidance Section of the EAGGF. This SDP
was accompanied by an ex-ante evaluation (prepared jointly by the Northern Ireland Statistics & Research
Agency and a private sector consulting organisation) also covering briefly the strengths and weaknesses of
Agriculture and the Rural Economy.

The Commission is also aware of several agriculture-specific studies carried out in the recent past. Given
the number of recent relevant studies, the importance of including local actors and the finance available
for such studies from the Structural Funds, the Commission does not think it appropriate for itself to
undertake such a study at this time.