WRITTEN QUESTION P-2533/01 by Theodorus Bouwman (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Interpretation of the European Social Fund rules in the Member States of the EU and the Commission investigations into the implementation of ESF projects in the Member States.
Date: 2001-09-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, European Social Fund, Netherlands, financial control, management, report

C 115 E/110

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

16.5.2002

(2002/C 115 E/113)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2533/01

by Theodorus Bouwman (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(11 September 2001)

Subject: Interpretation of the European Social Fund rules in the Member States of the EU and the
Commission investigations into the implementation of ESF projects in the Member States

A report on the investigation into European Social Fund subsidies for the 1994-1999 programming period
by H. E. Koning was recently published in the Netherlands (27 August 2001). This investigation was
carried out on behalf of the Netherlands Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment.

1.
Does the Commission share the report’s findings that in the vast majority of cases the irregularities
found related to understandable and unintentional misunderstandings of the Commission rules, which are
sometimes complex and not always obvious by Dutch standards, rather than to real differences of opinion
with the Commission on the interpretation of ESF rules?

2.
Over the period from 1991 to the present have there been other misunderstandings and differences
of opinion on the interpretation of ESF rules between the Commission and EU Member States other than
the Netherlands?

If so, can the Commission indicate:

(a) which Member States were involved,

(b)

in which Member States this led to measures being taken and/or financial claims being made by the
Commission, and

(c) what was the nature and scale of the measures and/or claims and how were the relevant cases settled?

3.
Over the period from 1991 to the present, has the Commission had investigations carried out in
Member States other than the Netherlands into the spending of ESF funds as a result of alleged
irregularities, suspicion or evidence of fraud involving ESF funds, or for other reasons?

If so, can the Commission provide full details indicating, in each case:

(a)

in which Member States investigations were carried out,

(b) what was the reason for this,

(c) whether the Anti-Fraud-Office OLAF was involved in the investigation,

(d) what the outcome of the investigation was,

(e) what conclusions and or financial claims resulted from the investigation,

(f) whether, and if so how, the relevant cases were settled?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 2001)

1.
The report of Mr Koning was adressed to the Dutch Minister of Social Affairs and Employment, and
has been submitted to the Commission for information. The Commission will deal with the disclosed
irregularities in the Netherlands on the basis of the regulations and decisions applicable at the time when
the relevant events took place. Such regulations and decisions are directly applicable in all Member States
and are published in the Official Journal when they are adopted. Furthermore, all relevant provisions were
well known to the Dutch authorities, and have been recalled to their attention at the occasion of earlier
controls and meetings of the competent Monitoring Committees. The Commission is always ready to give
further clarification where necessary.

2.
Irregularities in the implementation of the European Social Fund (ESF), which co-financed many
thousands of projects all over Europe to the tune of on average € 7 000 million a year in the period 1994-
1999, are found in all Member States. Corrective actions are prepared in partnership with Member States.
If, however, an irregularity is not satisfactorily corrected by the Member State, the necessary correction is

16.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 115 E/111

carried out by the Commission pursuant to Article 24 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 of
19 December 1988 (1). A report on financial corrections in the context of the application of Article 24 is
prepared on a yearly basis. A copy of the most recent report is transmitted direct to the Honourable
Member and to the Secretariat General of the Parliament. Consolidated data with respect to measures
undertaken by the Member States which have not been the subject of a procedure in application of the
aforementioned article 24 of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88, are not available.

3.
The Commission performs control missions in all Member States, in the framework of an annual
control plan, as follow-up missions with respect to findings in earlier control reports, or on the basis of
indications of irregularities.

Investigations are referred to the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) on the basis of the systemic nature or
the extent of the revealed irregularities, or because of indications or evidence of fraud.

When these controls reveal irregularities and the Member State and the Commission are in agreement as to
the consequences to be drawn from them, a corresponding sum is deducted by the Member State in
question from its annual declaration of expenditure. However,
if the Member State disagrees with the
Commission, the latter carries out the correction itself under article 24 of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88, as
described above.

(1) Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 of 19 December 1988, laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC)
No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and with
the operations of
instruments (OJ L 374,
lastly amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 3193/94 of 19 December 1994 (OJ L 337,
31.12.1988),
24.12.1994).

the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial

(2002/C 115 E/114)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2541/01

by Ioannis Souladakis (PSE) to the Commission

(19 September 2001)

Subject: Reconstruction of destroyed road and rail networks

The Nato bombings of Yugoslavia destroyed the road network which used to connect Greece to central
Europe; this begins in Thessaloniki and traverses FYROM, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Croatia,
Slovenia, Hungary and Austria, but is now only functioning along 53 % of its total length. The railway
network has also suffered the same damage, with only 52 % of its total track length in operation.

Has the Commission examined the damage suffered by the Member States of the European Union because
of the destruction of the network, and the resulting transport difficulties?

Has it estimated the cost of reconstructing the destroyed road and rail networks and, if so, where will these
appropriations be taken from?

Has it drawn up a timetable for putting right the damage done to the networks?

Answer given by Ms de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 2001)

The Commission is aware of the major damage done to road and rail infrastructure in the Balkans during
the conflict in Yugoslavia, in particular the Pan-European Transport Corridor which crosses the region,
linking Greece to Austria and Hungary. The Commission has also been informed of the significant
economic consequences of this, for certain Member States in particular.

A Memorandum of Understanding on the Corridor in question was signed by countries in the region on
15 March 2001 in Thessaloniki. It was signed by the Vice-President of the Commission responsible for
transport and energy on 5 April 2001.