WRITTEN QUESTION P-2154/03 by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission. Delays in the disbursement of funding for SMU projects.
Date: 2003-06-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU programme, European Commission, administration of the Institutions, implementation of the budget, research expenditure (EU), research project

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/481

benefited was determined by the President of the Republic, while the ‘reactivation’ of the sentence was the
outcome of a simple decision taken by the Ho Chi Minh City authorities and against which Ven. Thich
Quang Do was unable to defend himself before any court whatsoever. Furthermore, according to AFP,
quoting sources inside the Vietnamese Foreign Ministry, the Vietnamese authorities were thinking about
possibly releasing him on 2 September 2003.

Is the Commission aware of these sad developments in what may henceforth be referred to as the ‘Thich
Quang Do Case’? What new measures does the Commission intend to take with a view to informing the
Vietnamese authorities that the continuing imprisonment of Ven. Thich Quang Do constitutes a serious
breach of Vietnamese law, international Conventions to which Vietnam is signatory and the letter and the
spirit of the Cooperation Agreement which links Vietnam to the EU? More generally, what measures will
the Commission take to ensure that the Vietnamese authorities radically change their attitude and revive
the spirit of dialogue which they demonstrated during the recent meeting between the Patriarch Thich
Huyen Quang and the Vietnamese Prime Minister, Mr Phan Van Khai?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(30 June 2003)

The Commission is well aware of the continued housearrest for the most Venerable Thich Quan Do.

The Commission’s policy towards Vietnam is to encourage and support continued progress on human
rights and democratisation, and to raise concerns where abuses occur or where a deterioration in the
situation becomes evident. The Commission works closely with the Member States in monitoring human
rights developments in the country and participates in all Union démarches to the Government of Vietnam
on human rights issues, including those pertaining to the situation of Persons of Concern.

The Commission and the Member States have repeatedly urged the Government of Vietnam to strengthen
its respect for political and religious freedoms, to further strengthen economic and social freedoms and to
create a legal framework for a supportive environment to allow the development of a strengthened civil
society.

The Commission will continue to follow closely the human rights situation in Vietnam, together with the
Diplomatic Missions of the Member States in Vietnam, and take appropriate action.

(2004/C 84 E/0558)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2154/03

by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission

(24 June 2003)

Subject: Delays in the disbursement of funding for SMU projects

One of the aims of the 5th and 6th Framework Programmes for Research is to encourage innovation.
Against this background, the Commission asked interested parties to submit by 15 March 2002 proposals
for innovative projects under the reference number INN/01/02. Following the assessment process, in June
2002 31 projects were approved. However, by late December 2002 only four contracts had been
concluded.

Can the Commission state why, more than one year following the award of funding, contracts have not
been drawn up for 27 of the 31 projects and when it intends to conclude those contracts?

Does the Commission share my view that delays of this kind pose a serious threat to individual projects?
If so, what measures is the Commission taking in order to minimise the problems which these delays may
cause?

C 84 E/482

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

In respect of how many projects under the 5th and 6th Framework Programmes for Research have
contracts not yet been signed, even though the assessment of those projects was completed one year, or
even longer, ago?

As of late May 2003 the backlog of payments under the budget title covering research and technological
development totals some EUR 7 billion. Can the Commission state how quickly it intends to reduce that
backlog, what measures it is taking in order to achieve that aim and whether there is a danger that some
of the appropriations will be cancelled? In that connection, are delays also occurring in the disbursement
of funding for projects already under way and in respect of which invoices are regularly submitted? If so,
in how many cases (absolute and relative proportion of all current projects) and for what reasons?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2003)

In answer to the third part of his question, the Honourable Member will find below a list of unsigned
research contracts the assessment of which was completed over a year ago

This list only relates to the 5th framework programme (RTD). The question cannot apply to the
6th framework programme, for which implementation did not begin until the end of 2002.

(cid:1) ten individual grants in the ‘Human factor and mobility’ field;

(cid:1) twenty CRAFT projects in the Industrial Technologies field;

(cid:1) two projects in the Environment field;

(cid:1) four projects in the ‘Knowledge-based society and economy’ field.

In most cases, the delays are attributable to the contractors (contractor in liquidation, withdrawal, change
of details requiring a new entry in the third party ledger, etc.) or to the instability of partners within the
consortia (bankruptcy, change of priorities, change of partners or coordinator, etc.).

(2004/C 84 E/0559)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2158/03

by Danielle Darras (PSE) to the Commission

(24 June 2003)

Subject: Sub-contracting, EU funding and Isbergue

The author of this question has duly noted the reply of 6 June 2003 which she has received from
Mrs Diamantopoulou (on behalf of the Commission) in respect of her question P-1696/03 (1), but she
would like to request
further information: namely, can the Commission object to the restructuring
envisaged on the Isbergue site if EU funding is received either by Arcelor or by the companies with which
Arcelor has sub-contracting arrangements?

(1) See page 474.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(25 July 2003)

The answer to this question must set out the same principles already explained in the answer given on
6 June 2003 to the Honourable Member’s Written Question P-1696/03.

The Commission cannot object to the restructuring of an industrial grouping based solely on whether this
group has or has not received assistance from the Structural Funds.