WRITTEN QUESTION E-2877/02 by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Health and welfare in Greece.
Date: 2002-10-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Regional Development Fund, European Union membership, Greece, commitment of expenditure, operational programme, press release

9.10.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242 E/31

(2003/C 242 E/034)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2877/02

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 October 2002)

Subject: Health and welfare in Greece

Recently there have been several references in the Greek press to problems concerning the progress of the
Health and Welfare operational programme, which is managed by the Ministry of Health and Welfare with
funding from the third CSF.

It is well known that some of the Health and Welfare operational programme’s resources come from the
European Social Fund (ESF). Could the Commission give details of exactly which projects funded by the
third CSF in the health sector have started in Greece? What amounts (either automatic advance payments
or payments made on receipt of applications) have been provided by the ESF (detailed on a project-by-
project basis) in the health sector (Axes 1 and 2)? Could the Commission give details of exactly which
projects funded by the third CSF in the welfare sector have started in Greece? What amounts (either
automatic advance payments or payments made on receipt of applications) have been provided by the ESF
(detailed on a project-by-project basis) in the welfare sector (Axis 3)? Could the Commission give details of
exactly which projects funded by the third CSF in the supporting measures area have started in Greece?
What amounts (either automatic advance payments or payments made on receipt of applications) have
been provided by the European Funds (detailed on a project-by-project basis) in this sector (Axes 4 and 5)?

What comments does the Commission have to make on the criticisms made by Mrs Verstraete (European
Commission Director-General) during her recent visit to Athens (19 June 2002), when she said that the
proposals made by the Greek Ministry of Health and Welfare for projects for 2001 were disturbing? What
was the reason for the disagreement between Mrs Verstraete and Mr Sofianos (Secretary-General of the
Ministry of Health and Welfare) on 19 June at the second meeting of the monitoring committee in Athens,
where Mr Sofianos spoke of investments of EUR 60 million while the Commission (cid:1) represented by
Mrs Verstraete (cid:1) did not foresee more than EUR 7,5 million for Greece in 2002 under any circumstances?
What are the total amounts of resources utilised by the Health and Welfare operational programme in its
two years of operation?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-2876/02 and E-2877/02
given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(26 November 2002)

The operational programme ‘Health and social welfare’ was approved by the Commission on 4 April 2001.
Total Community aid comes to EUR 385 million, of which EUR 220 million will come from the European
Social Fund (ESF) and EUR 165 million from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).

To date, the Commission has committed EUR 110 million to this programme (EUR 61 million from the
ESF and EUR 49 million from the ERDF) and has made an advance payment of EUR 27 million
(EUR 15,5 million from the ESF and 11,5 million from the ERDF).

Applications for interim payments submitted to the Commission concern a total amount of EUR 8,8, of
which EUR 565 000 has been paid to date by the Commission. The remainder, which is the subject of a
recent application, is under examination.

The Commission will send directly to the Honourable Member and the Secretariat-General of
the
Parliament the list of all the actions taken under the operational programme, broken down by measure and
area of focus, as well as the relevant financial information for each fund.

At the meeting of the programme’s Monitoring Committee held in Athens on 19 June 2002, there was a
debate on how the programme had progressed, during which Mrs Verstratete and Mr Sofianos had an
exchange of views on what had been achieved in 2001 and on expenditure forecasts for the programme
up to 31 December 2002. The Commission was concerned because, at the time of the meeting, it had not
received any application for interim payment (cid:1) possibly reflecting a delay in the implementation of the

C 242 E/32

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

9.10.2003

programme. Moreover, the Commission was basing its arguments on the implementation forecasts for the
period up to 31 December 2002 which had been presented by the Ministry of Economic Affairs a few
weeks before the meeting. These forecasts showed a sum of EUR 7,5 million from the ESF for this
programme, whereas during the meeting the Secretary-General of the Ministry of Health presented
implementation forecasts which were considerably higher and which could amount to EUR 60 million for
the programme as a whole.

(2003/C 242 E/035)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2978/02

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(22 October 2002)

Subject: Adulteration of butter in the European Union

On 6 July 2000, an OLAF press release announced the smashing of a butter-adulteration network in the
EU, which had adulterated several tens of thousands of tonnes of butter between 1995 and 2000.

On 19 March 2001, the Commission revealed that it could not name the companies involved, since the
information was exclusively in the possession of OLAF, and the issue was ‘sub judice’ in accordance with
the rules of the Member States. The Commission has not, to date, announced that its position has changed.
Is the Commission still prevented from knowing the names of the companies involved, and therefore
unable to take the appropriate measures to protect the Community budget, consumers and farmers?

When does the Commission intend to learn the names of these companies, and what measures does it
intend to take when it does so?

Could the Commission specify just what it means by ‘sub judice’ and likewise state the specific legal
reasons preventing it from learning the names of the companies concerned and thus taking the requisite
action?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2003)

The Honourable Member is hereby informed that criminal proceedings are under way in two Member
States (France and Italy) in respect of the matter to which he refers, and that the principle of secrecy of
judicial proceedings applies.

This principle, which in Italy is governed by Article 329 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and in France
by Article 11 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, applies to any person not involved in the investigation
proceedings.

With regard to Belgium, the documents obtained from the Italian authorities by the European Anti-Fraud
Office (OLAF) as part of its coordination and assistance activities were transmitted, with the agreement of
those authorities, to the Belgian paying agency, which is currently considering whether to pass them on to
the national judicial authorities.

The Member States concerned are bound by a due diligence requirement as regards the recovery of aid
paid unlawfully in the form of indirect subsidies funded by the Guarantee Section of the European
Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF). Nevertheless, the Commission will carefully monitor
follow-up to these cases. It should be noted that OLAF has set up a Magistrates Unit whose responsibilities
include helping to ensure more effective follow-up for criminal and judicial proceedings.

The Commission would also refer the Honourable Member to the answer given to Written Question
E-2702/02 (1), which provides a detailed description of measures adopted to combat the serious problem of
food adulteration.

(1) OJ C 110 E, 8.5.2003, p. 92.