WRITTEN QUESTION P-0093/02 by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Irregularities involving ESF funds in North Rhine-Westphalia.
Date: 2002-01-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Court of Auditors, European Social Fund, North Rhine-Westphalia, audit, expenditure, financial control, fraud, management, operational programme, report

C 147 E/240

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2002

The number of licence approvals in a country, whether falling or rising, bears no relation to the number of
clinical trials conducted in that country and there is no evidence that companies are switched from the US
to conduct trials in the EU because of a laxer clinical trial environment.

(2002/C 147 E/257)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0093/02

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 January 2002)

Subject: Irregularities involving ESF funds in North Rhine-Westphalia

The European Court of Auditors states in paragraph 3.39(d) of its annual report for 2000 (1) that an audit
concerning the European Social Fund in North Rhine-Westphalia showed that the 1998 closure of an
operational programme (CI Employment 1994 to 1999, Germany) included a proportion of ineligible
expenditure amounting to 15,7 %.

The Court of Auditors found that advance payments had been declared instead of actual expenditure,
whilst the use of flat rates had also led to overstatement of expenditure and parts of the public co-
financing had not been identified.

In its reply to the Court’s findings, the Commission stated that its Employment DG had contacted the
competent authorities to rectify the situation described by the Court.

Can the Commission say:

6 how much money was wrongfully claimed?

6 how it has rectified the situation?

6 whether the circumstances identified by the Court constitute an isolated case, or whether it must be
assumed that similar errors have occurred in other programmes implemented in North Rhine-
Westphalia?

(1) OJ C 359, 15.12.2001, p. 163.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(26 February 2002)

The European Court of Auditors states in paragraph 3.39 (d) of its annual report for 2000 that an audit
concerning the European Social Fund (ESF) in North Rhine-Westphalia showed that the 1998 closure of an
operational programme (CI Employment 1994-1999, Germany)
ineligible
expenditure amounting to 15,7 %. According to the sampling methodology of the Court of Auditors the
Integra share of North Rhine-Westphalia was selected. The Court decided to make an in depth audit and to
control the expenditure declarations for all 30 projects.

included a proportion of

As a result of the control the Court identified three types of error:

6 Advance payments had been declared instead of actual expenditure

The last advances were paid end 1998. The annual expenditure declarations were only made in
January 1999. In some cases the declared expenditure was lower than foreseen which is caused by
early departures of participants (e.g. after finding of a new job). The promoters reimbursed the
difference in February 1999. This was thus accounted for in the ESF accounting system for 1999.

This situation was considered as an error by the Court because the Declaration of Assurance (DAS)
exercise focuses only on the financial year 1999, but it has no financial impact as it is an adjustment
problem.

20.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 147 E/241

6 The use of flat rates had led to overstatement of expenditure

North Rhine-Westphalia has as all Länder its own Integra Guidelines (Förderrichtlinie). There the use
of flat rates for expenditure items is foreseen without the need to justify of the expenditure incurred
for the project. This method makes administration and control easier and prevents increased costs, but
it is against the principle of real costs. The Court checked the real costs for the projects and found in
some cases an overfinancing. In most cases the real costs were at least as high as the flat rates. The
overfinanced part was correctly treated as an error by the Court and will be corrected by the
Commission at the closure of the programme by a reduction in the 1999 final claim.

6 Parts of the public co-financing had not been identified

This problem of lack of documentation and justification of the so-called passive public cofinancing
was already identified by the Commission as a general weakness in ESF administration. In a recent
interpretation note (1) the need for this documentation was emphasized. In the case controlled by the
Court, the co-financing consisted of social allowances paid to the participants by the municipalities or
allowances paid by the Bundesanstalt für Arbeit. In many cases the payment proofs were not in the
files and confirmations could not even be found at the co-financing administrations involved (e.g. for
documentation on social allowances, the retention period was already over). The non-justification of
expenditure renders it ineligible. This type of error forms the greatest part of the irregularities and will
be corrected at the closure of the federal programme. Only then can the financial impact of the error
on the Community Budget be definitively quantified.

The Commission made her last control visit to North Rhine-Westphalia in 2000. The audit of the
administration of mainstream programmes by the ‘Versorgungsämter’ came to a quite positive judgement.
The use of flat rates and the lack of justification were not detected as audit findings.

(1) Ref.: Council Regulation 1260/1999 6 Article 32 (1) Subparagraph 3.

(2002/C 147 E/258)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0096/02

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 January 2002)

Subject: Child car seats

1. Will the Commission state what EU provisions if any currently apply to the standards set for
children’s detachable car seats?

Do such standards aim for the objective that such seats should be readily attachable in every make of

2.
car?

3. What efforts if any have been made to ensure the widespread standardisation of such child car seat
fixings?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(28 February 2002)

Commission Directive 2000/3/EC of 22 February 2000, adapting to technical progress Council Directive
77/541/EEC relating to safety belts and restraint systems of motor vehicles (1), lays down the technical
requirements concerning child restraint systems, in particular ‘removable’ seats intended for children.

Annex XVII of Directive 2000/3/EC refers explicitly to Regulation 44 of the United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe (UN/ECE), as regards the technical requirements necessary to approve child
restraint systems. It is worth noting that the Community has acceded to Regulation 44 including the 03
series of amendments, by virtue of Council Decision 97/836/EC of 27 November 1997 with a view to
accession by the Community to the Agreement of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe