WRITTEN QUESTION E-3972/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Campaign in Bulgaria against distribution and management of funds for civil society development by the EU delegation in Sofia and ways of assuaging the associated annoyance.
Date: 2004-01-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Bulgaria, European Commission, accession to the European Union, distribution of aid, image, non-governmental organisation

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/659

countries, already under strain, will be faced with even more daunting challenges. In this respect the
Commission has approved in 2000 an ambitious Action Plan on AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis which
fosters an holistic approach to fight the pandemics which includes specific actions across all sectors of
society including agriculture. Governments are increasing reflecting this approach in their sector policies
and strategies.

(2004/C 88 E/0675)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3972/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 January 2004)

Subject: Campaign in Bulgaria against distribution and management of funds for civil society development

by the EU delegation in Sofia and ways of assuaging the associated annoyance

Is the Commission aware that concern is growing in Bulgaria about the distribution and management
1.
of EU funds for civil society development, which is reflected in a campaign by members of Parliament
entitled ‘Clean hands for the non-profit sector’, the drafting of a law on transparency and involvement of
NGOs in the distribution of EU funds, publicity in Bulgarian newspapers, an e-mail bombardment under
the official concerned and proposed wider
the title ‘Isabel must go’, plans for legal action against
campaigns in January 2004?

2.
Is the Commission aware that the concern referred to above and the consequent campaigns are
particularly directed against the conduct of the civil society adviser at the EU delegation in Sofia, who is
accused of interfering unnecessarily with the internal decision-making of Bulgarian NGOs, basing her
decisions on the allocation of funds primarily on her own preferences, excluding critics of her policy from
the allocation of funds a priori and behaving in an arrogant and intimidating manner towards everyone
who disagrees with her?

3.
Does the Commission agree that, while this adviser’s behaviour may be said to have a positive aspect,
namely that she has succeeded in uniting Bulgarians, Turks and Roma in such a way that they are of one
opinion, it would be preferable for this to be achieved in some other manner than by inspiring unanimous
indignation at the conduct of one or more officials representing the EU?

4. What will the Commission do, in so far as possible and at the earliest opportunity, to assuage the
growing annoyance about the approach to the EU’s involvement in Bulgaria?

(2004/C 88 E/0676)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3973/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 January 2004)

Subject: National Council for Ethnic and Demographic Issues (NCEDI) ignored when allocating EU funds

for social participation in Bulgaria

Is

the Commission aware of

1.
the controversy surrounding Social Participation Programme
BG 0102.06, whose purpose is to support the social and economic integration of the Roma, other ethnic
in which connection, without consulting either the
minorities and people with disabilities in Bulgaria,
National Council for Ethnic and Demographic Issues (NCEDI) or the Ministry of Culture, as stipulated, the
EU delegation in Sofia unilaterally took a final decision on the allocation of EUR 7 million, namely that
EUR 2 500 000 should be spent on civil society development and EUR 4 500 000 on integration of the
Roma and people with disabilities?

2. Why was it that, as a result of the above decision, out of the 20 proposed projects those selected did
not include the improvement of the 12 best Roma cultural and information centres but a centre in Sofia, a
centre in Sliven and two centres in the coastal settlement of Varna, in which connection the assessment of
the urgency of the last of these projects caused particular astonishment and serious disappointment,
especially in the country’s second city, Plovdiv, which has a large Roma population?