WRITTEN QUESTION E-3833/03 by Roberto Bigliardo (UEN) to the Commission. Provincial authorities' involvement in the management of EU Structural Funds.
Date: 2003-12-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Structural Funds, eligible region, local authority, management, operational programme

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/653

about are part of new calls for tender recently issued by Trasagua. In fact, Trasagua has published separate
tenders for works contracts, relating to the construction of the infrastructure for the transfer of waters
from the river Ebro, and for service contracts, relating to consultancy on various aspects of the works on
the infrastructure. To the extent that their value goes beyond the Union thresholds, such works contracts
must comply with Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 on the co-ordination of procedures for the award
of public works contracts (3), whereas service contracts are subject to Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992
on the co-ordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (4). The Commission
understands that the Honourable Member refers in particular to compliance of the service contracts at
stake with the requirements of Directive 92/50/EEC. Indeed, those contracts involve consultancy and
assistance services to the management of the works, environmental direction and health and safety
coordination for the construction of the two sections of the infrastructure. According to the information
available to the Commission, tender notices concerning those contracts were published in the Official
Journal S 229 of 27 November 2003, and S 230 of 28 November 2003. Furthermore, the Commission
would like to point out that the Spanish authorities undertook to ensure that Trasagua applies in full the
Community public procurement rules when awarding public contracts. The Commission does not dispose
at this stage of any information allowing it to believe that this undertaking is not being honoured.

to conclude that

The Commission does not have specific information on the water transfer infrastructures at stake to allow
the
legislation.
they do not comply with Community environmental
it
Commission does not receive this type of information automatically, except
for projects which are
financed by the Cohesion Fund or for which the Community financing through the Structural Funds
exceeds EUR 50 million.

In fact,

Thirdly, as far as the need for a cost-benefit analysis, an analysis of the economic viability and the socio-
economic impact of the projects is concerned, in line with the requirements of Council Regulation (EC)
No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (5) they will only
be required if there is a request for Community co-financing and the projects are considered major ones.

Indeed, up to now the Commission has not received any request
infrastructures which are the subject matter of the tendering.

for the financing of

the two

(1) Oral reply, 21.10.2003.
(2) Written reply, 18.11.2003.
(3) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.
(4) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.
(5) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2004/C 78 E/0695)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3833/03

by Roberto Bigliardo (UEN) to the Commission

(12 December 2003)

Subject: Provincial authorities’ involvement in the management of EU Structural Funds

In the context of EU Structural Fund programming, responsibility for the use of Community funds lies
with the relevant regional authorities, with the involvement of local authorities (cid:1) in this instance, at
provincial level. In Objective 1 regions, including in Italy, provincial authorities have, under framework
agreements concluded with the relevant regional authorities, taken on a significant role in the management
of funds available under the Regional Operational Programme (ROP).

1.
Given the above, can the Commission state whether the authorities in Objective 1 regions in Italy
should in fact provide for the involvement of provincial authorities in the management of ROP funds and
whether this might not act as a barrier to the funds being used on schedule as a result of lengthy
coordination procedures?

C 78 E/654

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

2. Whether the involvement of local authorities in the management of ROP funds (at provincial level) is
nominal or real, given that
the 2000-2006
Community Support Framework?

involved in the drafting of

local authorities were not

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(27 January 2004)

The Honourable Member’s two questions relate to the principle of partnership involvement
programming and management of assistance (part-financing) from the Community Structural Funds.

in the

That principle is set out in Article 8 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying
down general provisions on the Structural Funds (1): ‘Community actions … shall be drawn up in close
consultation … between the Commission and the Member State, together with the authorities and bodies
designated by the Member State within the framework of its national rules and current practices …’.
Article 8 also requires Member States to ensure association of the relevant partners at each stage of
programming.

Accordingly the administrative authorities in charge of Operational Programmes must, if they are to ensure
that
the partnership principle is correctly and effectively applied, associate the local authorities in
partnership if national rules require them to do so or if they consider it advisable to do so. This entails
setting appropriate consultation procedures.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2004/C 78 E/0696)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3834/03

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 December 2003)

Subject: Discrimination against Portuguese workers abroad

As the Portuguese Northern Building, Wood, Marble, Stone, Ceramics and Building Materials Trade Union
recently complained, thousands of Portuguese civil construction workers find themselves the victims of the
problems experienced by the sector in Northern Portugal, and as winter draws near, their work contracts
are not being renewed. They are therefore obliged to emigrate, and are frequently the victims of
unscrupulous recruitment agencies which promise them good conditions and then fail to make good the
promises.

Two examples will suffice:

(cid:1) In Iceland, Portuguese workers are constructing tunnels for a water diversion in connection with the
building of dams in Kárahnjúkar, where there are no means of evacuation in an emergency, over and
above the fact that they are discriminated against compared with other workers from EU Member
States;

(cid:1) in Germany (in Berne, in the south) and Spain, the Portuguese workers are discriminated against in
terms of salaries, accommodation and insurance conditions, and their working timetable. In Spain, for
example, they are obliged to work a 12-hour day, and earn less than Spaniards working an 8-hour day
(companies in Galicia, the Basque country, Valencia and Lleida, inter alia).

The Commission:

1. What measures does it

this serious discrimination and unacceptable
exploitation of Portuguese workers in EU Member States, and guarantee them equality in terms of
salaries and working conditions?

intend to take to combat