WRITTEN QUESTION E-3692/03 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Update on use of funding from the Daphne programme by the municipality of Siena.
Date: 2003-12-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, Tuscany, child, decision-making, project evaluation, violence, woman

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/629

mobilising a broad range of operators and resources in the Community and the Member States.
In particular, the Innovation Action Plan will complement the 3 % Action Plan adopted in 2003, which
aims at increasing the average research investment level to 3 % of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2010.

(1) OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003, p. 60.
(2) COM(2003) 0027 final.

(2004/C 78 E/0663)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3690/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject: Update on use of funding from the Daphne programme by the municipality of Florence

In its answer to question E-1006/03 (1), which asked whether the municipality of Florence had submitted
projects and secured funding under the Daphne programme, the Commission stated that a number of
proposals had been submitted, but that the outcome of the assessment would be available in July 2003.

Can the Commission say whether the projects submitted actually received funding and, if not, why they
were not considered suitable?

Have any other projects been submitted in the meantime?

(1) OJ C 51 E, 26.2.2004, p. 62.

(2004/C 78 E/0664)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3691/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject: Update on use of funding from the Daphne programme by the municipality of Pesaro-Urbino

In its answer to question E-1011/03 (1), which asked whether the municipality of Pesaro-Urbino had
submitted projects and secured funding under the Daphne programme, the Commission stated that a
number of proposals had been submitted, but that the outcome of the assessment would be available in
July 2003.

Can the Commission say whether the projects submitted actually received funding and, if not, why they
were not considered suitable?

Have any other projects been submitted in the meantime?

(1) OJ C 51 E, 26.2.2004, p. 62.

(2004/C 78 E/0665)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3692/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject: Update on use of funding from the Daphne programme by the municipality of Siena

In its answer to question E-1015/03 (1), which asked whether the municipality of Siena had submitted
projects and secured funding under the Daphne programme, the Commission stated that a number of
proposals had been submitted, but that the outcome of the assessment would be available in July 2003.

C 78 E/630

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Can the Commission say whether the projects submitted actually received funding and, if not, why they
were not considered suitable?

Have any other projects been submitted in the meantime?

(1) OJ C 51 E, 26.2.2004, p. 62.

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-3690/03, E-3691/03 and E-3692/03
given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(19 January 2004)

In 2003 the Daphne programme received the following proposals from the municipalities in question:

(cid:1) two proposals from the municipality of Florence: Education and Youth Policy Department, Education

Unit;

(cid:1) one proposal for the municipality of Pesaro: Social Services;

(cid:1) one proposal from the municipality of Siena: Equal Opportunities Committee.

The Commission did not accept these proposals for Community funding because they were not of the
required quality.

The applicants were duly informed of this decision as well as of the reasons why the proposals were
rejected. Moreover, in its correspondence, the Commission indicated which aspects of the proposal needed
to be improved.

It also stated that new proposals could, of course, be submitted under the next call for proposals in 2004.

Since there was no further call for proposals in 2003, the Commission did not receive any other proposal.

(2004/C 78 E/0666)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3697/03

by Luigi Vinci (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(3 December 2003)

Subject: Return to Turkey of refugees of Turkish origin

The government in Ankara and the UNHCR have reached an agreement on the repatriation to Turkey of
around 9,500 refugees of Kurdish origin, who have been living in the camp at Mahmur in northern Iraq
since 1998.

Is the Commission involved in this issue? If not, does it not consider that proper financial involvement is
needed to guarantee that the refugees from Mahmur return voluntarily and to ensure that they are safe
from any repressive action on the part of the Turkish security forces, who are known for their anti-Kurdish
attitude?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2004)

The Commission is aware of the ongoing discussions between the United Nations High Commissioner for
Refugees (UNHCR), the Turkish government and the United States government regarding the return to
Turkey of refugees of Kurdish origin, living in the camp at Mahmur in Northern Iraq.