WRITTEN QUESTION E-1905/03 by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Publicity for the 2008 CSF in Greece.
Date: 2003-06-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community support framework, EU financing arrangements, Greece, advertising, political propaganda

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/187

(2004/C 33 E/189)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1901/03

by Carlos Ripoll y Martínez de Bedoya (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Processed tomatoes

(11 June 2003)

I have been informed that the Greek Government used national funds to support producers of processed
tomatoes, in the village of Gastouni in the Ilias Prefecture, during 2001, despite the EU decision not to
grant any subsidies.

Is the Commission aware of such payment of subsidies?

Did the Greek Government officially apply to the Commission for a derogation?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2003)

The Greek authorities have not formally notified the Commission any State aid as regards the question
raised by the Honourable Member.

Community subsidies for tomatoes intended for processing are provided for by Council Regulation (EC)
No 2201/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the markets in processed fruit and
vegetable products (1),
introducing an aid scheme for producer organisations which deliver tomatoes
harvested in the Community to approved processors. This aid scheme is based on contracts between, on
the one hand, producers organised in Producer Organisations recognised under Regulation (EC) No 2200/
96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables (1) and, on the
other hand, processors approved by the competent authorities. Aid is granted to producer organisations
which, in turn, pay it to their members. The recognition of producer organisations is the competence of
in accordance with the regulations referred to above, establish a series of
the Member States, which,
criteria to be satisfied by producer organisations, in order to be entitled to receive Community aid.

The producer organisation referred to in the question raised by the Honourable Member (A.S. Gastounis)
was recognised by the Greek authorities in the first place but, at a later stage, the Greek authorities
informed the Commission that the producer organisation did not comply with the minimum criteria for
recognition. It is, in the first instance, for the Greek authorities to draw the necessary consequences from
that fact.

At the Community level, the financial consequences for the Member State of the non-respect of the
conditions have to be examined, in particular in as far as the reimbursement by the European Agriculture
Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) to the Greece State is concerned, in the context of the clearance of
accounts procedure.

The Commission is much obliged to the Honourable Member for the information provided. Following his
question, the Commission has already contacted the Greek authorities in order to ascertain whether any
national State aid is being granted to the producer organisation concerned. The Commission will keep the
Honourable Member informed about the outcome of this issue.

(1) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996.

(2004/C 33 E/190)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1905/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Publicity for the 2008 CSF in Greece

(11 June 2003)

Recently, publicity promoting the 2008 Community Support Framework has been screened on Greek
television at peak viewing times (e.g. before or during news bulletins).

C 33 E/188

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

The content of this publicity is pure propaganda in that it highlights the government’s ‘achievements’ in
education,
financial
the economy etc., making only a passing reference to the Community’s vital
contribution.

Does the Commission know the exact cost of the publicity for the 2008 CSF? Which Community
appropriations are covering the cost? Is the Commission aware of the content of the publicity? Did the
Commission authorise payment for publicity, particularly at peak viewing times? Can such propaganda
continue to be broadcast in the run-up to the Greek general election?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(5 August 2003)

information campaigns on European regional policy is a responsibility that

The launching of
is
decentralised to the authorities in the Member States in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity. It is
for the Member State to identify the most appropriate manner to inform the public while respecting the
provisions in relation to Regulation (EC) No 1159/2000 (1) and those contained in the Community Support
Framework (CSF). The Honourable Member may wish to note that these provisions also require publicity
actions to be interrupted two months before any election date. The Commission has no information at its
disposal to suggest that there has been any misuse of Community funds in Greece for the information
campaign.

It is not possible to make an assessment of the total amount of resources that will be mobilised for
publicity and information in Greece during the third CSF since these are included within the total
appropriations for technical assistance, and are not separately identified within those appropriations.

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1159/2000 of 30 May 2000 on information and publicity measures to be carried

out by the Member States concerning assistance from the Structural Funds, OJ L 130, 31.5.2000.

(2004/C 33 E/191)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1908/03

by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 June 2003)

Subject: Delayed payment of development grants

In February 2003, a grant was awarded for a project to develop a particular business environment. The
grant was awarded by a local manpower and business centre in Finland. However, the project leaders
report that the project will not receive the promised money until December 2003.

How long does it generally take for payments to be made to EU-funded projects?

Why are payments delayed after grants have been awarded? Is this due to the slowness of Member States’
own administrations or is it caused by EU rules?

In the light of feedback from Member States, how big a problem are delays in grant payments for EU-
funded projects?

How could the award and payment of grants be accelerated?