WRITTEN QUESTION P-3467/01 by Samuli Pohjamo (ELDR) to the Commission. Implementation of the EU's objective programmes should be simplified.
Date: 2001-12-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU control, EU programme, Structural Funds, aid system, fund (EU), management

6.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 134 E/235

In view of this situation and in order to ensure that patients receive the treatment most suited to their
needs, can the Commission say:

(cid:23) whether it has powers to harmonise legislation on this subject;

(cid:23) if so, whether it considers it appropriate to draw up standards unifying and establishing criteria for the

prevention and treatment of chronic respiratory insufficiency;

(cid:23) whether it considers that oxygen patients are entitled to dignity and quality of life, even though they

are receiving long-term treatment?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(15 February 2002)

Liquid oxygen equipment, intended to be used for medical purposes, is considered a medical device, and
therefore is covered by Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices (1).
Essential requirements, and a conformity assessment, covering the quality, safety and performance of the
device, must be met, before the device can be put on the market and into service.

Standards for portable liquid oxygen devices, including connectors, are currently being developed by the
European Committee on Standardisation (CEN), following a mandate given by the Commission on the
basis of Directive 93/42/EEC. The adoption of these standards is expected for the second half of 2003. The
Commission is following closely these activities.

According to the EC Treaty, a high level of human health protection shall be ensured in the definition and
implementation of all Community policies and activities. Dignity and quality of life are certainly covered,
as a right, in this definition. However rules governing medical prescription or treatment, fall under the
competence of Member States, as laid down in article 152 of the EC Treaty, Public Health. The same
Treaty’s article applies to the definition of criteria for treatment, which is the responsibility of the medical
profession in each Member State. They define the best policy in diagnosing and in rehabilitating the
patients.

Finally, the use of portable liquid oxygen generating devices for medical use, by aircraft passengers, is
subject
to aircraft operational safety requirements. These are the Joint Aviation Requirements for
Operations (JAR-OPS), adopted by the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) (2). The Commission plans to
convert these requirements progressively into Community legislation.

(1) OJ L 169, 12.7.1993.
(2) The JAA is an associated body of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC), representing the civil aviation
regulatory authorities of the European States who have agreed to co-operate in developing and implementing
common safety regulatory standards and procedures. Currently, 25 states are full member, whereas 11 states are
candidate member or associated member of the JAA.

(2002/C 134 E/249)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3467/01

by Samuli Pohjamo (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 December 2001)

Subject: Implementation of the EU’s objective programmes should be simplified

The monitoring and checking of the implementation of the EU’s objective programmes has been tightened
up. The list of acceptable expenses has been shortened and the administration has become more
complicated. Payments for projects are mainly disbursed on an ex-post basis. This creates problems,
particularly for those carrying out small projects, since the launching stage of projects involves a
disproportionately high proportion of own funding.

In practice this has meant that regional actors, such as universities, research institutes, businesses and
citizens’ organisations, are pulling out of the implementation of EU programmes.

C 134 E/236

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2002

When monitoring and supervision become too tight, instances of maladministration are eliminated, but at
the same time it
for local actors to participate in the implementation of
programmes. The execution of programmes is then concentrated solely on those which have ready-made
know-how and sufficient human and economic resources.

is made more difficult

What does the Commission propose to do to simplify the administration of EU programmes and clarify
them so as to facilitate work under the programmes in practice and to ensure that the citizens’ dimension
and other objectives set for the programmes are attained under the best possible conditions?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2002)

All Community programmes supported by the Structural Funds must be administered in conformity with
the Council Regulations and other rules in force regarding the sound and efficient management of public
funds.

Responsibility for the day to day management of the programmes is decentralised to the authorities in the
Member States and regions in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity. The Commission has
consistently urged these authorities to respect both the letter and the spirit of the regulations and other
rules in ways that help to involve all of the relevant actors in the eligible regions. Thus, these authorities
are encouraged, firstly, to ensure that decisions relating to the programmes are taken as close to the
ground as possible in the context of a widely drawn partnership, and, secondly, to use Technical Assistance
resources in an effort to ensure that as wide a public as possible is able to bring forward project proposals.
Experience has demonstrated that there are wide variations in the degree to which the authorities in the
different Member States and regions approach this task, with the result that in some cases the application
process for aid under the Structural Funds is comparatively complicated while in others it is comparatively
simple.

The Commission will continue to promote exchanges of experience and best practice in this field.

The Honourable Member is also asked to note that while it is true that payments undertaken under
Community programmes are subsequently reimbursed by the Commission, the Commission also makes an
advance payment equivalent to 7 % of the contribution of the Union to the programme. This advance
payment is subject to topping up throughout the life of the programme, so that it can remain at a level
equivalent to 7 % of the programme. Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (1) also insists that ‘The
paying authority shall ensure that final beneficiaries receive payment of their contribution from the Funds
as quickly as possible and in full.’

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds,

Article 32(1), subparagraph 5.

(2002/C 134 E/250)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3475/01

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) and Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: The use of of swap-mechanisms by the last Italian government to camouflage the true size of

Italy’s budgetary deficit

Is the Commission aware of attempts in 1997 by the previous Italian government to use interest swap
transactions (as detailed in an International Securities Market Association (ISMA) report without naming
the country) in order to camouflage the true size of Italy’s budget deficit prior to Italy’s entry to the Single
Currency? If so, does the Commission regard this as bona fide or as contrary to Italy’s obligations in this
area?