WRITTEN QUESTION P-1376/03 by Juan Izquierdo Collado (PSE) to the Commission. Advances — Objective 1 research projects.
Date: 2003-04-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Spain, Structural Funds, advance payment, co-financing, operational programme, research and development, research project, structural expenditure

C 11 E/178

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

15.1.2004

of the various levels of pay which currently exist for MEPs from the various Member States. Should such a
change come about, it could mean, for example, that Swedish MEPs would receive a pay rise of some
SEK 35 000. There is a risk that such a steep increase in the current salaries of Swedish MEPs would bring
about a manifest crisis of confidence in Sweden, and would probably widen the gap between elected
representatives and electorate.

What is the Commission’s assessment of the risk that a change in MEPs’ pay structure (cid:1) whereby Swedish
Members, for example, might receive a pay rise of SEK 35 000 (cid:1) will result in a lack of voter confidence in
their Members of Parliament?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(21 May 2003)

As the Honourable Member will be aware, the draft statute for Members of Parliament continues to be the
subject of intensive discussion between the Council and Parliament and therefore at present there is no
specific proposal of Parliament on the table. Once the Commission is seized of a formal proposal adopted
by Parliament, it will give the opinion required under Article 190(5) of the Treaty.

(2004/C 11 E/203)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1376/03

by Juan Izquierdo Collado (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Advances (cid:1) Objective 1 research projects

(7 April 2003)

What is the interpretation of Article 32 of Regulation (EC) 1260/1999 (1) and the Commission’s definitive
position with regard to payment of advances and the issue of whether they are to be taken into account
(or not) for the n+2 rule, in respect of research projects cofunded under the Structural Funds included in
the Spanish Objective 1 R & D operational programme in 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003?

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(16 May 2003)

Article 32(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions
on the Structural Funds stipulates that interim payments and payments of the balance are to relate to
expenditure actually paid out, which must correspond to payments effected by the final beneficiaries,
supported by receipted invoices or accounting documents of equivalent probative value.

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1685/2000 of 28 July 2000 (1)
laying down detailed rules for the
implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 as regards eligibility of expenditure of
operations co-financed by the Structural Funds defines the concept ‘expenditure actually paid out’. In order
to clarify this concept, the Commission sent an interpretative note to Member States in September 2001.
The note stresses that payments of advances by final beneficiaries must not be included in expenditure
declared to the Commission.

With a view to including advances in eligible expenditure in certain cases, the Commission undertook to
present a proposal for amendment of Regulation (EC) No 1685/2000. That proposal having been rejected
by the majority of Member States, the Commission informed them on 19 February 2003 that it would not
be making further proposals.

Because of legitimate expectations which may have arisen during the discussion, advances for which the
decision granting aid was taken by Member States before 19 February 2003 and advances for which aid
was granted by appeal to proposals closed before 19 February 2003 are considered eligible for Community
part-financing.

15.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11 E/179

Payment requests corresponding to advances thus covered on the basis of legitimate expectation will be
taken into account for application of the N+2 rule. Moreover, this clarification of the ineligibility rules on
advances corresponding to arrangements after 19 February 2003 applies only to advances not mobilised
by the final beneficiary. This has no bearing on the eligibility of payment requests corresponding to actual
utilisation of advances by the final beneficiary. With regard to the Operational Programme ‘Investigación,
Desarrollo e Innovación (cid:1) Objetivo 1 (2000-2006)’, approved by Commission decision on 26 February
2001, the initial deadline for possible application of the N+2 rule is 31 December 2003.

(1) OJ L 193, 29.7.2000.

(2004/C 11 E/204)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1379/03

by Anne Jensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(15 April 2003)

Subject: Multi-Stakeholder Forum

The Commission has set up a Multi-Stakeholder Forum to ensure, among other things, the exchange of
experience and good practice at EU level while seeking to establish common guiding principles for
corporate social responsibility also at EU level.

What has this Multi-Stakeholder Forum cost to date? What result does the Commission expect from this
forum?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(27 May 2003)

The activities of the Multistakeholder Forum on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) are supported from
within the existing financial, human and administrative resources of the Commission. For each meeting of
the Forum (1) the Commission provides a room, interpretation (2), and covers the reimbursement of 20
experts (3).

The Commission strongly believes that the Union’s success in promoting CSR is based ultimately on
widespread ownership of CSR principles by business, social partners and civil society. Also, in order to
ensure credible and effective CSR policies, it is the Commission’s position that these need to be developed,
implemented and evaluated with the involvement of the most affected stakeholders.

In this context, the Commission has set up the Multistakeholder Forum to develop a structured and
partnership-based approach between business and their stakeholders to raise awareness on CSR, promote
the exchange of experience and good practices, and enhance the transparency and credibility of CSR
practices and instruments.

The approach is bottom-up:
the Commission is not mandating solutions but rather is asking the
stakeholders to try to develop common answers through dialogue and partnership. The Commission sees
the Forum as a challenging experiment and a great opportunity for the different stakeholders to develop a
common approach to CSR and reach consensus on the challenges raised by CSR.

At the launch of the Forum in October 2002, the Forum members adopted the following objectives: to
foster corporate social responsibility and to promote innovation, transparency and convergence of CSR
practices and instruments though improving knowledge on CSR, facilitating the exchange of experience
and exploring the appropriateness of establishing common guiding principles for CSR.