WRITTEN QUESTION E-1647/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Way in which EU funds for integrating Roma in Bulgaria and improving their living conditions are used and managed.
Date: 2003-05-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Bulgaria, Roma, living conditions, project management, social integration, support policy

C 78 E/378

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

(2004/C 78 E/0400)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1647/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(16 May 2003)

Subject: Way in which EU funds for integrating Roma in Bulgaria and improving their living conditions are

used and managed

1.
Is the Commission aware that questions have been raised concerning the use of PHARE funds for the
benefit of the Roma population in Bulgaria, in particular the work by the EU delegation in Sofia on the
setting up of non-governmental organisations and the way in which funds are being used in the city of
Plovdiv where there is the highest concentration of Roma, including in the district of Stolipinovo with its
40 000 inhabitants?

2.

The following projects receive financial support from the EU:

(cid:1) PHARE BG9907.01.01 ‘Access to Education’: EUR 200 000;

(cid:1) PHARE BG9907.01.02 ‘Urbanisation of Roma Neighbourhoods’: EUR 257 000;

(cid:1) PHARE BG0104.01.01 ‘Roma Population Integration’: EUR 765 000;

(cid:1) PHARE BG0104.01.02 ‘Roma Population Integration’: EUR 1 350 000;

(cid:1) PHARE BG0104.01.03 ‘Roma Population Integration’: EUR 210 000;

(cid:1) PHARE BG0102.06 ‘Social Integration of Roma’: EUR 2 299 000;

(cid:1) PHARE BG0104.02 ‘Access of Roma to Healthcare’: EUR 1 000 000;

(cid:1) PHARE 2001 ‘Study of the Housing Conditions of the Roma Population’: EUR 160 000.

Could the Commission state, on the basis of qualitative and quantitative indicators, what contribution each
of these projects has actually made to improving conditions for Roma?

How is transparency ensured in respect of these and future projects with regard to the integration of

3.
Roma?

4. What steps are being taken to ensure participation by Roma themselves in these projects and to
prevent large numbers of decisions from being taken over their heads?

5. What improvements does the Commission consider need to be made in order to achieve better
results than at present?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(16 June 2003)

The Commission has been supporting projects in favour of the Roma Community in Bulgaria since 1999.
The city of Plovdiv and its district Stolinpinovo are among the beneficiaries, as the Roma population there
is rather high. Some of the projects, so-called micro-projects under the Access programme, have in fact
funded Roma Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in the Stolipinovo quarter. These projects had the
objective of encouraging the inclusion and participation of
individuals and groups who risk being
economically, socially or politically marginalised in the transformation process. However, the Commission
itself has not set up any of these NGOs.

As regards the PHARE projects mentioned in the written question, so far only one has been finalised. The
project (BG 9907 ‘Promotion of Integration of Roma’) has achieved good results. Under the component
‘Access to education and training for Roma representatives to work in public administration and police
structures’ Roma policemen have been trained, a practical guide on Roma language and two elementary
textbooks (including teacher guides) on Roma culture and history have been published, the textbooks have
been distributed to a number of schools and teachers have been trained to use them etc. Under the
component ‘Urbanisation of Roma neighbourhoods’, the infrastructure of Roma quarters was improved.
The other PHARE projects are ongoing and it would be too early to assess their impact at this stage.

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/379

PHARE Projects for Roma are generally implemented in close co-operation with Roma representatives.
A National Steering Committee, composed of the National Council on Ethnic and Demographic Issues and
35 Roma NGOs is responsible for overall coordination. The Commission’s Delegation provides observers
in the meetings of the National Steering Committee. Transparency is ensured through the obligation to
publish all projects and strategies on the web pages of the relevant Ministries and the National Council on
Ethnic and Demographic Issues (NCEDI), as well as through the media.

Proper involvement of Roma and their representative organisations in identification of the needs, the
project design preparation and implementation is crucial to the success of these projects. To the extent
possible, Roma advisers in the national administrations and governmental structures in charge of Roma or
minority issues are therefore regularly consulted during the programming process. Funding priorities are
discussed in the context of the frequent contacts the Commission maintains with the National Council for
Ethnic and Demographic Issues which is the mandated body to co-ordinate government policies,
programmes and funds related to ethnic issues, and to facilitate the dialogue and interaction between
ethnic minorities, government and civil society in Bulgaria. Representatives of numerous ministries,
governmental institutions as well as representatives of thirty-five non-governmental organisations of ethnic
minorities are members of this body. The priorities are in line with the Framework Programme for Roma
Integration adopted by the last two governments and 150 Roma NGOs. In addition consultative bodies
involving NGOs are been established on various aspects of the Framework programme.

Despite these efforts, the socio-economic situation and living conditions of the Roma population remain
difficult. They also face widespread discrimination. The integration of Roma in society should be the first
priority, even if it is difficult to achieve visible results in the short term. This priority should be addressed
within all key national policies, such as education, housing, public health and employment and combined
with the necessary budgetary means. Moreover, the development of an appropriate legal framework to deal
with minority issues will further increase the sustainability of a number of projects. In this context, the
adoption of comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation would, for instance, be an important step
forward. A very important additional aspect is to further decentralise Roma policy at the regional and
national level in line with the principle of subsidiarity. The Commission has invited Bulgaria to address
these issues in the framework of the recently revised Accession Partnership.

(2004/C 78 E/0401)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1653/03

by Joost Lagendijk (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(13 May 2003)

Subject: European Civil Peace Corps (cid:1) current developments (cid:1) mainstreaming of conflict prevention in

external EU policies

The European Parliament has asked for the establishment of a European Civil Peace Corps several times.
So far the other institutions have not followed up on this. What action will the Commission take with
regard to the expressed readiness of the Greek Presidency to make progress on EU conflict prevention and
the European Civil Peace Corps? How much progress has the Commission made with the establishment of
the network of training institutes for civilian crisis management? How does the Commission envisage
moving on from this towards a European Civil Peace Corps? As national ministries and institutes each have
least promote
different rosters, what steps is the Commission going to take to harmonise, or at
compatibility of these rosters? Would the Commission be prepared to administer a roster at EU level for
EU crisis management operations? How would NGOs and their specialists be part of these rosters?

To what extent is the Commission following up Parliament’s proposals for conflict assessments in all EU
external policies? What have been the results in the areas of external trade, agriculture policy and
environmental policy? Has the Commission achieved its goal of mainstreaming conflict prevention in EU
development cooperation policies? In this perspective, has the Commission been able to apply Article 11
of the Cotonou agreement? How much funding under the EDF has been made available for conflict
prevention? In which ACP countries does the Commission support conflict prevention programmes with