WRITTEN QUESTION E-3014/01 by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Commission. Funding of information campaigns in the applicant countries.
Date: 2001-10-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, accession to the European Union, information policy, promotion of the European idea, public awareness campaign

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/3

The Commission will repeat
examination of these files when the Community support framework for 1994-1999 is closed.

to those authorities and in all cases undertake a detailed

its request

The Honourable Members are requested to refer
to the answer which the Commission gave to
Written Question E-1894/01 by Mr Hatzidakis (1) concerning communications by the Greek authorities
under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1681/94 concerning irregularities and the recovery of sums
wrongly paid in connection with the financing of the structural policies and the organisation of an
information system in this field (2). Some of the additional information requested has meanwhile been
received under Article 5 of that Regulation.

(1) OJ C 134 E, 6.6.2002, p. 5.
(2) OJ L 178, 12.7.1994.

(2002/C 309 E/004)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3014/01

by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Commission

(29 October 2001)

Subject: Funding of information campaigns in the applicant countries

What resources have been used to fund information campaigns and influence public opinion in each of the
applicant countries since they submitted their applications for EU membership?

Who have been the ten biggest recipients in each country? Will the Commission forward a list of all
recipients separately, stating the amounts received and the purposes for which funding was allocated?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2002)

Up until 1998, the Commission carried out its communication activities in the candidate countries largely
on the basis of funds provided from the budget of the former DGX (information policy). This involved the
Delegations participating in a number of public events, seminars, conferences and similar activities.

In 1998, the Commission launched an enhanced effort to inform the citizens of the candidate countries
about the Union. This communication strategy was implemented via one central contractor, funded by the
PHARE programme (Regulation EC 3906/89) and a series of sub-contracts in each candidate country. This
contract ended in December 2001. The activities have included the establishment of European Union
information centres in all capitals of the candidate countries, staffed by information officers responsible for
dealing with the public, either in person or via web sites that have been established. It also includes
assistance with the establishment by the local authorities of other information points, for example in
libraries, universities or town halls.

These centres are also involved in preparing brochures, fact sheets, and other material to explain the EU to
the citizens. They have helped organise debates, seminars, press conferences and so on, sometimes linked
to the partner countries’ own efforts. While the main focus of this effort was initially to inform the general
public about the EU, the launch of the negotiations has led to an increasing interest in the process and
consequences of enlargement. Hence the Delegations and their information activities have become
increasingly oriented towards explaining the decisions taken in the negotiations and providing information
about Community pre-accession assistance.

In May 2000, as a third pillar of the pre-accession strategy, the Commission launched a comprehensive
communication strategy involving activities in both the present and future Member States. This has
involved a change in the contractual situation, with Delegations assuming direct responsibility for the
contracts with their information companies.

C 309 E/4

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

In addition the communication strategy foresees an increasing role for representations in the Member
States, who have begun during the year 2001 to carry out research into the state of public opinion in
order to orient their Communication strategy to hold seminars and discussions with the public and
interested groups. Some have already begun producing brochures and leaflets explaining enlargement. The
activities in member states will increase over the next few years as enlargement approaches and do not aim
to influence opinion, but to inform the public in the present and future member states on all aspects of the
enlargement process.

(2002/C 309 E/005)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3254/01

by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(23 November 2001)

Subject: Recovery of own resources in connection with combating fraud

i.e.

The Commission’s annual report 2000 on the protection of the Community’s financial interests and the
fight against fraud discusses the financial follow-up measures in the fight against fraud and says that: the
recovery rates,
the repayment of sums that have gone missing is still unsatisfactory. Recovery
procedures in the Member States are frequently too slow. The Commission has therefore introduced a
comprehensive monitoring strategy and, where own resources and indirect expenditure cannot be
recovered because of negligence on the part of the Member State concerned, the Commission can hold the
Member State liable for the relevant amounts.

In connection with this report, can the Commission answer the following questions:

1. To what extent does the Commission exercise its right to claim the amounts concerned from the

Member State?

2.

In how many cases during the past two years has the Commission successfully claimed these amounts
from Member States?

3. How many such cases occurred in which Member States?

4. How high is the sum repaid to the Commission as a result of all recoveries over the past two years

and what proportion of total financial irregularities does it represent?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(4 April 2002)

On the matter of the recovery of traditional own resources, the Honourable Member’s question makes a
distinction between two aspects: the national recovery procedures, which produce the recovery rate, and
the procedure for writing off amounts exceeding EUR 10 000 which Member States consider to be
definitively lost and which they must report to the Commission each year so that the Commission can
decide what action to take.

The Member States must apply the same rigour to the recovery of own resources as they do to the
recovery of national resources. The low rate of recovery recorded (cid:1) and the differences between
Member States in amounts recovered (cid:1) can be accounted for primarily by each Member State’s specific
recovery procedures, especially where administrative and/or judicial appeal procedures, often lengthy and
complex, are initiated by an operator. The Commission has no say in the national provisions governing
recovery. The recovery rate is only of limited significance; it is not an accurate guide to the performance of
the national authorities responsible for recovery.

The writing-off procedure, on the other hand, enables the Commission to assess in each case the diligence
shown by the national authorities in the recovery process.
If, on completion of the procedure, the
Commission believes that the Member State in question has not shown the necessary diligence, it claims
from it the lost revenue by virtue of Article 17(1) and (2) of Regulation No 1150/2000 (1).