WRITTEN QUESTION E-2683/01 by Stefano Zappalà (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Life — Environment 2000 Programme — commune of Sabaudia (Italy).
Date: 2001-10-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU programme, Latium, eligibility criteria, environmental protection, exchange of information

C 134 E/78

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2002

More specifically Civil Protection has been focussed on the following objectives:

(cid:26) to support and supplement efforts at national, regional and local

level with regard to disaster
prevention, the preparedness of those responsible for civil protection and the intervention in the event
of disaster;

(cid:26) to contribute to the information of the public in view of increasing the level of self-protection of the

European citizens;

(cid:26) to establish a framework for effective and rapid cooperation between national civil protection services

when mutual assistance is needed;

(cid:26) to enhance the coherence of actions undertaken at international level in the field of civil protection
especially in the context of cooperation with the candidate Central and Eastern European countries in
view of enlargement and with the partners in the Mediterranean region.

At its meeting on 20 September 2001, the Justice and Home Affairs Council welcomed the imminent
adoption of the Commission proposal for setting up a Council Decision establishing a Community
mechanism to facilitate reinforced co-operation in Civil Protection assistance intervention (1). Through this
mechanism, it will be possible in case of natural, technological and environmental disasters, to mobilise the
necessary operational resources to provide prompt support and assist a country (inside and outside the
Community) in need of help.

At the same meeting, the Council also asked the Civil Protection General Directors to focus, at their
extraordinary meeting in October 2001 in Knokke, on the response to major terrorist attacks inside and
outside the Community, in order to identify issues for further work, areas requiring increased co-operation,
etc.

Supplementary information on the Community civil protection activity is available under the following
address: http://europa. eu. int/comm/environment/civil/.

(1) OJ C 29 E, 30.1.2001.

(2002/C 134 E/081)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2683/01

by Stefano Zappalà (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 October 2001)

Subject: Life (cid:26) Environment 2000 Programme (cid:26) commune of Sabaudia (Italy)

In October 2000 the commune of Sabaudia (Italy (cid:26) Lazio Region) submitted a project (Sab-acqua) under
the Life (cid:26) Environment 2000 Programme. On 16 August 2001, the Environment Directorate-General
informed the commune that its project had not been selected (letter DG ENV. D.1. D511917).

Will the Commission state:

(cid:26) what was lacking in the project, the applicants or the documents submitted?

(cid:26) what selection criteria were used, to what extent they were objective or at the selectors’ discretion?

(cid:26) which projects were selected and which were rejected, together with the marks given to each of them

and the reasons for each decision?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 2001)

The project did not get sufficiently high score in selection criteria No 2 ‘Demonstration character and
dissemination’ and No 3 ‘Soundness and reliability of the participants’.

For criterion No 2, the following arguments were given:
‘Scale appropriate, results inadequate. The
expected results are neither quantified/qualified, nor validated. The beneficiary does not explain according
to which criteria it has selected the core actions and it does not set forward a clear thesis to be validated
through the implementation of the project. No specific methodology emerges from the proposal and no

6.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 134 E/79

indicators enabling a qualitative/quantitative assessment of the results are proposed. Dissemination partly
satisfactory:
target groups not identified, weak funding of dissemination activities, no coherent and
structured strategy is set forward.’

‘Technical soundness poor. The reliability of
For criterion No 3, the following arguments were given:
partnership is questionable. One of the partners has been previously involved in a LIFE project and its
performance has been rated as poor by the Commission. Partners’ contributions are very reduced whilst
they sustain significant personnel costs. Financial soundness average: some relevant data are missing about
one of
the partners has confirmed its financial
commitment for only half of the amount indicated in the budget.’

the partners. Funding plan partly sound: one of

A copy of the following volume is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat
‘Guide for the evaluation of LIFE Environment proposals 2000-2001’. This includes the general instructions
and detailed criteria used by the Commission for the evaluation of projects. The instructions are sufficiently
detailed to render the evaluation as objective as possible. However, as the process is not automatic but
carried out by officials and experts, a margin of discretion exists.

In 2000 the Commission financed 113 LIFE Environment projects. The information requested by the
Honourable Member would require a document of several hundred pages. A list of financed projects is sent
direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat. However, the Commission is available to
give detailed information relating to specific projects, if necessary.

(2002/C 134 E/082)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2693/01

by Mario Mauro (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 October 2001)

Subject: Funding from Employment and Social Affairs DG

Will the Commission provide a list of the projects which, in 2000 and 2001, were submitted by the Italian
Regions of Liguria, Lombardy, Piedmont and Valle d’Aosta for financing from the funds administered by
the Employment and Social Affairs Directorate-General, and the names of those which were subsequently
approved?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(31 January 2002)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that, according to the principle of subsidiarity,
and in line with the relevant Community legislation, sole responsibility for project selection and follow-up
lies with the regional authorities.

The Commission is not aware of which projects have been chosen.

All the information requested can be provided by the authorities responsible for running the regional
operational programmes.

In this particular case, these authorities are as follows:

(cid:26) Regione Lombardia

Assessorato Formazione Professionale
Via Soderini, 24
I-20146 Milano
Capo Servizio FSE: dott. ssa Silvana Ravasio