WRITTEN QUESTION E-2344/03 by Toine Manders (ELDR) to the Commission. Interreg bureaucracy.
Date: 2003-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU programme, administrative formalities, management, regional aid, regional development, support policy

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/87

Does the Commission collect data on the increase in violent incidents in ‘tourist areas’ of European capital
cities arising from or connected with alcohol consumption? If so please could the Commission provide this
information?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(6 October 2003)

The Commission does not at present collect data on the number of violent incidents in ‘tourist areas’ of
European capital cities arising from or connected with alcohol consumption.

Nevertheless, the Commission considers that it would be useful if the competent authorities of the Member
States, which are responsible for maintaining public order on their territory, were to collect information
for statistical purposes so that the extent of the problem could be correctly assessed and adequate measures
taken.

Such information could be relevant for the report which the Commission is drafting on the economic and
social burden of alcohol, which is one of the priorities of the public health program for the Community
for 2003-2008.

Crime prevention including the prevention of alcohol-related criminality, remains a matter largely within
the responsibility of local, regional and national authorities. Action at Union level in this field should
continue to be limited to supporting exchange of information and best practice between the competent
authorities, such as the European Crime-Prevention Network, which focuses on urban, juvenile and drug-
related crime.

(2004/C 70 E/090)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2344/03

by Toine Manders (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 July 2003)

Subject: Interreg bureaucracy

The rules governing Interreg subsidies in the Netherlands include passages which make administration
unnecessarily difficult. For example, in order to be eligible for a subsidy it is necessary actually to show
proof of payment of all invoices and wage/salary payments. This discourages organisations from applying
for subsidies, so that inadequate use is made of the funds potentially available.

In the Netherlands,
the procedure for applying for an Interreg BMG (Benelux-Middengebied/Central
Benelux Region) subsidy is often seen as enormously cumbersome: merely producing a thorough project
plan with defined end products already costs a huge amount.
In addition, the administration is of
considerable complexity: it is necessary to produce evidence of deployment of manpower, invoices, copies
of pay slips and now, as mentioned above, also proof of payment.

This means in practical terms that each month a partner has to check which employees on the pay roll
have contributed to the project and must print out a list of them, after which he must submit proof of
payment/a copy of
this information is
the bank statement providing the requisite overview. All
computerised and stored on payment diskettes, so that it is relatively easy to retrieve from the system,
but it is difficult to print out because the relevant lists are enormously long. In a word, while partners’
administrative work and book-keeping are computerised, Europe is still insisting on manually produced
evidence/copies.

Moreover, I have found that, as a result of the various national approaches and interpretations, project
concepts which would be very suitable are often refused Interreg funding and an unnecessary amount of
time is wasted because of inadequate coordination.

Is the Commission aware of the bureaucratic complexities involved in applying for Interreg subsidies,

1.
an example of which appears above?

C 70 E/88

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

Do the Interreg subsidy rules in other Member States likewise include such provisions, which

2.
promote bureaucracy? If so, what?

3. Will the Commission take measures to put an end to unnecessary bureaucratic procedures involved
in the granting of Interreg subsidies? If not, why not? If so, what will it do?

4. Will the Commission investigate the scope for setting up one competent authority per Euregion for
the central coordination of Interreg project applications, processing and finalisation?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 2003)

The Community Initiative,
Interreg cofinanced by the European Fund for Regional Development,
is governed by Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions
on the Structural Funds (1).

In accordance with the rules on financial management, interim payments are made by the Commission in
order to reimburse expenditure actually paid and certified by the paying authority. There is no requirement
invoices or equivalent accounting documents to be sent to the Commission or to the
for receipts,
‘Moreover, Article 38 (6) allows for the documents which the managing authority
Managing Authority.
keeps available for the Commission to be stored on commonly accepted data carriers.’

For the ‘Grensregio Vlaanderen/Nederland’ covering two sub-programmes for the Euregio Scheldemond
and the Benelux-Middengebied, the Province of Antwerpen was designated by Vlaams Gewest as Managing
Authority for the programme, the Province of Oost-Vlaanderen as Paying Authority. The programme is
supervised by a Monitoring Committee under the chairmanship of the managing authority, which at a
meeting held on 16 December 2002, approved the Handboek Administratieve Organisatie which included
a description of the management and financial control systems.

While the Commission applies the rules set out in the regulations, it has sought to ensure that, in practice,
management is as simple as possible. To this end, the Commission adopted a Communication on the
simplification, clarification, coordination and flexible management of structural policies, 2000-2006 (2).
the new provisions and
The Member States and regions have been urged to make full use of
recommendations and to simplify their internal rules and procedures with regard to the management of
European programmes.

With regard to the possibility of having one competent authority per Euregion, the Commission must
respect the decision on the part of the responsible Member States, Belgium and the Netherlands, to submit,
according to point 22 (2) of the Interreg Guidelines, a programme ‘for a border with’ sub-programmes
‘for each cross-border region’. At the same time, it should be noted that the secretariat in Turnhout is the
single authority for the central coordination processing and finalisation of Interreg applications as far as
the Benelux Middengebied is concerned.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
(2) C(2003)1255 of 25 April 2003.

(2004/C 70 E/091)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2347/03

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(16 July 2003)

Subject: Deaths of immigrants drowned in the seas of the south of the EU when attempting to reach the

coast in search of work and a new life

In recent weeks, in the latest in a long line of similar incidents, hundreds of people have drowned in the
seas of the south of the EU when attempting to reach the coast in search of work and a new life. Many of
the people who died were women, some of them pregnant, and children. Regardless of the approach taken