WRITTEN QUESTION P-2835/03 by Heinz Kindermann (PSE) to the Commission. Approval of TERRA project Geoplantour — OLAF investigations.
Date: 2003-09-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, European Anti-fraud Office, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, invitation to tender, project evaluation, regional policy, town and country planning

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/145

(2004/C 70 E/149)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2834/03

by Gilles Savary (PSE) to the Commission

(18 September 2003)

Subject: Air transport agreements with the USA

On 1 October 2003, the European Union will open negotiations in Washington with the USA to establish
a new global legal framework for transatlantic air links.

In view of the ambitious nature of this objective and the complexity of the issues involved, by when does
the Commission expect to be able to conclude an agreement?

In the light of the negotiating mandate drawn up by the Council in June 2003, can the Commission
reasonably expect to conclude an agreement within the next few months at the risk of not making genuine
progress on all the issues to be discussed?

Answer given by Ms de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(14 October 2003)

In accordance with the negotiating mandate granted to the Commission by the Council in June 2003, the
purpose of the negotiations that began on 1 October 2003 in Washington is to conclude a global
agreement with the United States with a view to redefining the legal framework for transatlantic air links.
The aim is to thoroughly reform the legal framework concerned. It is a reflection of the importance of the
desired reform that certain adjustments and/or changes will have to be made to laws and regulations
applicable to the United States, or even to certain texts concerning Community law.

Therefore, given the important political events on the horizon both within the Community and in the
United States in 2004, it does not seem realistic at this stage to expect an agreement before the year 2005.

The Commission, however, considers that in the meantime adjustments should be made to the existing
bilateral agreements, which are necessary to bring them into line with Community law. Proposals of this
kind have been put to the American authorities. These proposals will be discussed in a separate framework
from that concerning the abovementioned global agreement.

(2004/C 70 E/150)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2835/03

by Heinz Kindermann (PSE) to the Commission

(18 September 2003)

Subject: Approval of TERRA project ‘Geoplantour’ (cid:1) OLAF investigations

The European Anti-Fraud Office, OLAF, is investigating suspected irregularities (case reference IO/2001/
4030) in connection with the approval of a project entitled Geoplantour submitted under the EU’s TERRA
programme in 1997.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1.

Is the Geoplantour project approved in 1997 simply a modified version of the original project No 57 B,
‘Bugewitzer Oderhaff-Zone’, or is a totally new project actually involved?

2. How does the Commission explain the fact that Directorate-General XVI (currently regional policy)
approved a Geoplantour project in the summer of 1997, i.e. a year after the deadline of 8 July 1986,
contrary to the implementing provisions for the TERRA programme and the principle of equal
treatment?

C 70 E/146

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

3. How does the Commission explain the fact that the Directorate-General for Regional Policy has to
date failed to answer two written inquiries from OLAF, thereby delaying OLAF’s investigations into
this matter?

4. What does the Commission now intend to do to step up the investigation into this case?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(1 December 2003)

1.
Geoplantour is a new project, with a new partnership, based on an initial proposal (cid:1) Project No 57 B
‘Bugewitzer Oderhaff-Zone’ (cid:1) submitted under a call for projects for the TERRA programme, submitted by
the Gemeinde (municipality) of Bugewitz/Amt Ducherow (Germany).

The Geoplantour project was approved in accordance with the project selection procedures set out in
2.
Article 10 of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
for the period 1994-1999 and the
procedure indicated in the call for proposals. Moreover, the text published in the Official Journal made it
clear that the Commission reserved the right to propose amendments to the programme or strategy before
a proposal regarded as innovative was definitively approved.

The final date for the submission of proposals, laid down in the call for proposals (1), was 8 July 1996.
The projects
received were examined in depth by a committee of 12 independent experts on
23/24 September 1996, and then by an interdepartmental working party on regional planning on
22 October 1996. Fifteen pilot projects were selected. The financing decisions were signed with the lead
following a detailed consultation between the Commission and the local
partners of each project
authorities responsible and their partners in the successful projects,
in accordance with the call for
proposals.

The Bugewitz/Ducherow project was not originally selected, as it did not meet all the eligibility criteria
(in particular, there was no transnational partnership). However, the Commission persuaded it to work
with a Greek partner from one of the 15 successful projects. The original proposal was reworked on this
basis by the new partnership. The project partnership, now dubbed Geoplantour, was expanded to regional
level in Germany and its content was improved.

During the negotiating period which preceded the final decision to grant funding, the Commission
received complaints about the project from a consultant who had worked with the German partner.
The Commission consulted the German authorities to clarify the situation before it took its final decision,
which explains the late approval of the project at the end of 1997.

The Commission finally granted funding under the TERRA programme to the municipality of Bugewitz/
Amt Ducherow, as the local authority responsible for carrying out
for the
Commission to comment on the problems between the body responsible for the project and the consultant
who had been involved in drafting the original proposal.

the project.

is not

It

The Commission closed the project at the beginning of 2003.

OLAF contacted the Directorate-General

3.
In the
meantime, in accordance with the rules in force, the Commission had provided OLAF with the documents
and information requested and all relevant information.

for Regional Policy as part of its investigation.

4.
OLAF has full control of its investigations; the Commission provides OLAF with existing documents,
ensures the cooperation of its departments, and, if necessary, reminds its departments of their obligation to
cooperate if OLAF reports any problems. OLAF is already working in collaboration with the German
authorities in order to speed up the investigation.

(1) OJ C 119, 24.4.1996.