Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on implementing the information and communication strategy for the European Union
Date: 2004-04-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Union, action programme, communications policy, information policy, information processing, interinstitutional cooperation (EU), public awareness campaign

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 20.4.2004 
COM(2004) 196 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION  
TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, 
THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

on  
implementing the information and communication strategy  
for the European Union 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 3 

I. More structured and better prioritised communication........................................................... 5 

1. 

2. 

3. 

3.1. 

3.2. 

Interinstitutional cooperation ....................................................................................... 5 

Common values with a central thread? ........................................................................ 6 

Priority information topics (PRINCE) ......................................................................... 7 

Redefining the strategies for the different topics ......................................................... 7 

Multiannual programming ........................................................................................... 7 

II. Creating synergies between means........................................................................................ 9 

1. 

2. 

Partnership and decentralisation .................................................................................. 9 

PRINCE ..................................................................................................................... 10 

2.1. 

Partnership arrangements ........................................................................................... 10 

2.1.1.  Strategic partnership................................................................................................... 10 

2.1.2.  Management partnership............................................................................................ 11 

2.1.3.  One-off partnership .................................................................................................... 11 

3. 

Relays and networks .................................................................................................. 12 

3.1. 

Info-Points Europe and Rural Information and Promotion Carrefours...................... 14 

3.1.1.  Choice of new network - Direct management............................................................ 14 

3.1.2.  Choice of new network – Indirect centralised management ...................................... 15 

3.2. 

3.3. 

4. 

Major centres.............................................................................................................. 15 

PHARE Centres ......................................................................................................... 16 

Other communication instruments and tools.............................................................. 16 

4.1. 

Audiovisual media ..................................................................................................... 16 

4.1.1.  Adapting the tools ...................................................................................................... 17 

4.1.2.  A more dynamic approach ......................................................................................... 17 

4.1.3.  EuroNews................................................................................................................... 18 

4.2. 

4.3. 

Second-generation EUROPA..................................................................................... 20 

Opinion polls and Europe Direct................................................................................ 21 

4.3.1.  Eurobarometer............................................................................................................ 21 

4.3.2.  Europe Direct (00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 – http://europa.eu.int/europedirect) ................. 21 

CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 23 

LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT......................................................................... 24 

2 

 
 
  
 
INTRODUCTION 

At  its  meeting  on  11  November  2003,  the  Commission  noted  “that  Mr  Vitorino  would  
submit,  …  ,  a  memorandum  on  implementing  the  information  and  communication  strategy 
beyond 2004”. 

By  information  and  communication  strategy  is  meant  the  frame  of  reference  for 
communication to the general public (and not all the Commission’s information measures), as 
set out in the Commission’s communication of 2 July 2002 [COM(2002)350 final].  

This  strategy,  based  both  on  strengthening  interinstitutional  cooperation  and  developing 
structured partnerships with the Member States, has been discussed in detail not only between 
the  various  Community  institutions  but  also  with  most  of  the  government  information 
services,  whether  formally  at  the  invitation  of  the  Commission  in  Brussels  or  in  a  more 
informal but equally fruitful manner in the Club of Venice.  

This ongoing dialogue has resulted in the formal adherence of the Council to the strategy by 
its  decision  of  10  December  2002,  and  that  of  the  European  Parliament  on  10  April  2003, 
following the reports by Mr Bayona and Mr Andreasen. 

It is appropriate to emphasise the main objectives of the strategy. 

The principal objective is “to improve perception of the European Union and its Institutions 
and  their  legitimacy  by  deepening  knowledge  and  understanding  of  its  tasks,  structure  and 
achievements and by establishing a dialogue with its citizens”. 

This  includes  in  particular  raising  the  quality  of  European  public  debate,  associating  the 
public  in  European  decision-making,  listening  to  the  public  and  their  concerns  more 
attentively, and the methodical, consistent rebuilding of the EU’s image.  

To  do  this,  the  memorandum  proposes  a  realistic,  progressive  approach  based  on  two  main 
themes: 

•  the  ability  of  the  European  Union  to  formulate  and  disseminate  appropriate,  targeted 

messages about its various priority information topics; 

•  establishing  a  voluntary  working  partnership  with  the  Member  States,  fostering  synergy 

between their structures and know-how and the activities of the European Union. 

The  cohesiveness  of  the  strategy  will  also  require  better  coordination  of  the  Commission’s 
own  resources  as  regards  both  its  means  of  communication  and  its  internal  communication 
culture. This calls for: 

•  creating  more  synergies  between  the  Commission’s  means  by  reference  to  the  objectives 

and priorities laid down; 

•  more systematic and better organised dissemination of an internal communication culture.  

From now on, these objectives should be implemented in a new context characterised by the 
necessary adjustment of the resources available with a view to the Union’s enlargement. 

3 

 
 
  
 
In accordance with its institutional prerogatives1, the Commission will have to face this new 
situation  with  staff  numbers  unchanged  for  its  headquarters  and  particularly  limited  human 
resources for the establishment of 10 new representations. Thus, 2005 will be the first year in 
which the information and communication strategy will apply in full in EU-252.  

1 

2 

Opinion of the Legal Service of 10 July 2003: “information and communication measures are covered 
by  the  Commission’s  institutional  prerogatives,  which  can  be  carried  out  without  a  legal  basis  under 
Article 49(2)(c) of the Financial Regulation”. 
It will be noted that Phare appropriations will continue to apply in EU-8 until 31 December 2004, in the 
field of information and communication, under the responsibility of DG ELARG. 

4 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
I. More structured and better prioritised communication 

The recommended strategy is based in the first place on the sharing of objectives between the 
three Community institutions and its development and implementation will have to be closely 
concerted. Interinstitutional cooperation is essential and determines both the activities of the 
centre  and  those  of  the  Commission’s  representations,  Parliament’s  information  offices  and 
the governments’ information services. 

1. 

INTERINSTITUTIONAL COOPERATION  

Interinstitutional cooperation has, since 2002, seen the full participation of the Council in the 
development  of  an  information  and  communication  strategy,  in  particular  within  the 
Interinstitutional  Group  on  Information  (IGI),  which  it  now  chairs  jointly  with  the 
Commission  and  Parliament.  It  will  be  noted  in  this  respect  that  in  its  conclusions  of 
10 December 2002  the  Council  pointed  out  “that  European  Union  institutions'  information 
activities in Member States should be coordinated effectively with those of the Member States 
in question”.  

It also “hoped to see Member States take full advantage of the opportunities provided by the 
new strategy proposed by the Commission, …”.  

Parliament, for its part, emphasised, when it voted on 10 April 2003, how much it appreciated 
“the  Commission's  effort,  …  ,  emphasising  its  intention  to  consolidate  interinstitutional 
cooperation and establish a joint strategy in this area”. 

It  had  explained  that  “all  collaboration  with  the  Member  States  should  concentrate  on 
implementing priority information campaigns, defined at Community level, but adapted to the 
cultural and linguistic diversities of each”. 

Beyond  these  statements  of  principle,  interinstitutional  cooperation  is  developing  on  the 
ground  in  coordination  cells  bringing  together  the  various  partners,  as  provided  for  in  the 
Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) which the Commission and Parliament are proposing 
to their government partners.  

It  will  also  be  noted  that  this  interinstitutional  cooperation  is  also  growing,  especially  in 
administrative  and  management  terms  within  the  European  Union  Houses,  which  combine 
under the same roof the Commission’s representations and Parliament’s information offices. 

This  contract  of  confidence  which  interinstitutional  cooperation  represents  lies  at  the  very 
the 
basis  of 
Interinstitutional  Group  on  Information  (IGI),  whose  task  is  to  shape  interinstitutional 
cooperation at political level. 

the  recommended  strategy.  It  should  be  regularly  renewed  within 

To this end, the statute, role and mission of the IGI will have to be reassessed in order to give 
it more political prominence in each of its constituent parties. The preparation of its work will 
also  have  to  be  improved,  as  will  the  implementation  of  its  decisions.  In  particular,  the 
follow-up to the guidelines worked out in the IGI will have to be consistent and effective. The 
Commission is ready to discuss this with its partners following the renewal of the Institutions 
this year. 

5 

 
 
  
 
However, achieving structured communication about the European Union will also include a 
genuine teaching function in relation to its role and tasks.  

2. 

COMMON VALUES WITH A CENTRAL THREAD? 

Whether  it  is  information  of  a  general  nature  on  the  existence  and  role  of  the  Union  that  is 
involved or communication about major projects and challenges of the EU (PRINCE priority 
information  topics),  the  development  of  an  appropriate  information  and  communication 
strategy is a sine qua non for the success of the EU’s policies and initiatives.  

To be effective, the strategy must be based on a few common values that will make it possible 
to use a common frame of reference to structure the messages about its different policies. 

As indicated in its communication of 2 July 2002, a wide-ranging study, based on interviews 
with different focus groups, was carried out throughout EU-283 in the second half of 2003.  

The  study  related  in  particular  to  receptiveness  to  the  EU’s  fundamental  values,  which  are 
peace,  freedom,  solidarity  and  cultural  diversity.  It  was  also  designed  to  test  the  claims, 
against the yardstick of these values, made in the various priority information topics.  

In sum, the initial results of the study4 confirm the public’s lack of basic information about 
the Union. From this it can be inferred that the common European values taken as a reference 
for communication about the Union are not sufficiently explicit on such “infertile” ground. 

Initially,  the  values  appear,  for  most  of  the  focus  groups  tested,  to  be  insufficiently 
discriminating  and  specific  to  Europe  compared  with  other  democracies.  The  way  they  are 
defined is not sufficiently stimulating to bring out specific aspects of the Union.  

Moreover, a value is an abstract, static notion. While there is no denying that reference has to 
be made to these values, their relevance in communication terms has to be filtered through the 
Union’s principal political objectives and “proved” by giving specific examples. 

The  citizens  surveyed  are  receptive  and  interested  when  they  are  informed  about  specific 
aspects of Community policies and shown how they may be affected by them. 

It is of course necessary to step up the provision of information about such aspects, but this 
cannot provide a framework for a stimulating set of claims about the Union either, if the — by 
nature  very  diverse —  items  are  not  somehow  “linked”  by  a  central  thread  –  i.e.  the  higher 
goals from which they proceed. 

Clearly,  we  will  only  motivate  the  citizens  of  the  Union  by  delivering  a  strong  political 
message to them about the goals which the Union sets and even, over and above that, about 
the affirmation of a higher overall plan – i.e. by showing how it is based on values. 

The Institutions must therefore be able to draw up their own set of messages, and this requires 
common references and values – a central thread – that they can share. The main information 
topics  must  be  selected  on  the  basis  of  the  Union’s  major  policies  for  the  years  ahead,  and 

3 
4 

Comprises EU-15, the 10 accession countries, Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey. 
Report  on  the  qualitative  study  on  the  focus  of  communication  about  the  EU  (Rapport  d’étude 
qualitative relative à l’orientation de la communication sur l’UE), Optem, January 2004. 

6 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
should meet the public’s needs and concrete concerns (in the light of the policy priorities set 
in  the  Annual  Policy  Strategy  decision).  The  messages  to  be  prepared  and  disseminated 
should be priority ones not just for the Union but also for the public.  

The  challenge  for  the  Union  as  regards  communication  is  primarily  one  of  motivation, 
arousing  the  public’s  curiosity,  stimulating  interest,  and  doing  so  with  a  message  rooted  in 
common values, but whose substance is sufficiently specific for the public to identify with. 

3. 

PRIORITY INFORMATION TOPICS (PRINCE) 

As  stated  in  its  communication  of  2 July 2002,  the  Commission  has  so  far  concentrated  on 
four  defined  priority  information  topics:  enlargement,  the  future  of  the  Union,  the  area  of 
freedom, security and justice, and the euro. It has also obtained Parliament's and the Council's 
agreement for a fifth PRINCE topic in 2004 – the role of Europe in the world – the more fully 
to meet the concerns of the Union’s citizens. 

3.1. 

Redefining the strategies for the different topics 

The  fact  that  various  significant  events  will  be  taking  place  in  2004  makes  it  absolutely 
essential  to  update  the  strategies  underlying  the  different  priority  information  topics 
mentioned.  

In  the  first  place  this  concerns  enlargement.  This  communication  strategy  must  be  pursued 
beyond the decisive date of 1 May 2004; it should not be confined to simply explaining the 
arrival  of  ten  new  Member  States  but  should  also  cover  the  ongoing  negotiations  with  the 
other  candidate  countries  and  the  further  dimension  of  the  new  neighbourhood  policy.  This 
involves  educating  the  public  about  a  continuing  process  of  drawing  the  frontiers  of 
tomorrow’s  Union.  The  guidelines  laid  down  by  the  Commission  in  its  communication  of 
10 May 2000 are still the appropriate reference. 

A  review  is  even  more  warranted  where  the  future  of  the  Union  is  concerned.  The 
negotiations at the Intergovernmental Conference are still going on, and the new strategy to 
be  implemented  with  regard  to  the  new  constitutional  treaty  will  therefore  have  to  take 
account  of  the  European  elections  and,  in  particular,  of  the  new  timetable  for  future 
negotiations.  

Beyond 2004, which is a transitional year, it is also essential to think about the relevance of 
other  topics,  which  may,  with  an  eye  to  consistency,  correspond  more  fully  to  the 
Commission’s policy priorities. 

3.2.  Multiannual programming 

Apart  from  updating  current  topics,  the  timetable  for  2004  will  also  provide  an  opportunity 
for  preparing,  for  2005,  a  better  match  between  the  strategic  priorities  of  the  new 
Commission, set out each year in the Annual Policy Strategy decision, and the various priority 
information topics. Full account will also have to be taken of the fresh priorities identified in 
the new financial perspective. 

Accordingly,  the  enlargement  of  the  Union  will  have  to  be  flanked  by  a  greater  degree  of 
interinstitutional cooperation, based on better programming and a more structured redefinition 
of  the  various  priority  information  topics  for  2005  and  subsequent  years.  The  programming 
will  also  have  to  be  multiannual.  It  could,  for  instance,  cover  a  four-  to  five-year  period 

7 

 
 
  
 
(2005-2009),  accompanied  by  annual  monitoring  and  mid-term  review,  based  on  impact 
indicators  yet  to  be  defined,  the  more  accurately  to  reflect  Parliament’s  term  and  the 
Commission’s mandate. This would also suit the Member States’ needs for political visibility, 
legal certainty and financial guarantees. 

The  adaptation  of  the  PRINCE  activities  to  enlargement  will  affect  their  partnership 
arrangements but will also involve greater rationalisation of the detailed management rules.  

Priority information topics: adaptation of strategies and reprogramming. 

8 

 
 
  
 
II. Creating synergies between means 

The  means  available  to  the  Commission  are  both  centralised  and  dispersed.  Meeting  the 
challenge  of  developing  information  and  communication  strategy  in  the  context  of  EU-25 
requires  not  only  the  adaptation  and  extension  of  all  means  to  this  new  horizon  but  the 
provision of sufficient resources both at headquarters and in the 25 representations.  

1. 

PARTNERSHIP AND DECENTRALISATION 

As stated in the communication of 2 July 2002, the partnership offered to the Member States 
and  their  regional  and  local  authorities  received  a  fresh  boost  through  the  preparation  of 
political agreements in the form of a memorandum of understanding (MoU). This reference 
text,  approved  by  Parliament  and  the  Council,  crystallises  the  mutual  political  agreement 
between  the  Member  States  and  the  Community  institutions  on  the  main  vectors  of  the 
information  and  communication  strategy  for  the  EU.  It  thus  resembles  a  purely  political 
memorandum of understanding, resting on a voluntary basis, between the different parties in 
question. Soon to be signed by the majority of Member States, the instrument meets the need 
for flexibility and adaptability expressed by most of the national public authorities concerning 
the implementation of a joint communication plan with the European Commission. 

When it has been validated by the current Member States, it may also be offered as it stands 
to the new Member States from 1 May 2004. 

For  the  record,  it  will  be  noted  that  the  memorandum,  which  will  be  signed  by  the 
Commission,  the  government  and  the  European  Parliament,  is  designed  to  coordinate  the 
three parties’ information and communication strategies for the EU as part of a partnership for 
the dissemination both of general information on the EU and the major priority information 
topics decided jointly under PRINCE.  

To disseminate information to the public as fully as possible, the partnership will also cover 
the  EU’s  information  and  documentation  relays  and  networks,  including  the  national-level 
centres.  

The MoU thus provides for the creation of a coordination cell, comprising the representatives 
of  the  three  parties  (Commission,  European  Parliament  and  the  national  government), 
responsible  for  coordinating  the  preparation,  implementation,  monitoring  and  evaluation  of 
the partnership on the basis in particular of a joint communication plan. The coordination cell 
is the basis for the full involvement of Parliament in this exercise, which will strengthen the 
citizen  aspect  and  make  it  possible  to  benefit  from  the  commitment  shown  by  Parliament 
(most notably in the Andreasen5 and Bayona6 reports). Every measure carried out under the 
partnership will contain a reference clearly identifying both the government and the EU. 

To  date,  6  MoUs  have  been  signed  (with  Greece,  Italy,  Spain,  Portugal,  France  and 
Luxembourg) and 4 are in the process of being concluded within the current Union (Austria, 
Belgium, Netherlands and Finland). 

5 
6 

Resolution of 13 March 2002  P5_TA(2002)0109. 
Resolution of 10 April 2003  P5_TA(2003)0187. 

9 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
2. 

PRINCE 

Apart  from  the  possibility  of  centralised  management  of  the  PRINCE  information  lines 
(autonomous  Commission  action),  the  implementation  of  information  and  communication 
measures under PRINCE is traditionally  based on partnership between the Commission and 
the  Member  States,  i.e.  on  the  sharing  of  an  agreed  communication  plan  and  each  of  the 
parties’ respective resources.  

This  partnership  requires  the  development  of  co-financing  agreements  which  in  future  must 
comply  with  the  provisions  of  the  new  Financial  Regulation.  The  agreements  used  hitherto 
have  turned  out  not  to  be  consistent  with  the  Financial  Regulation,  which  imposes  fresh 
constraints  firstly  on  the  substance  and  scope  of  the  agreements  and  secondly  on  their 
approval  as  regards  validation  of  the  de  facto  or  de  jure  monopoly  of  the  competent 
authorities in relation to the proposed measures. 

So  it  is  essential  to  get  back  to  the  spirit  of  the  partnership,  i.e.  to  cooperation  in  terms  of 
strategic  objectives  between  the  Commission  and  the  national  government  with  a  view  to  a 
better distribution of competencies between the parties under the aegis of a joint coordination 
cell, as provided for in the MoU.  

2.1. 

Partnership arrangements 

Three  types  of  partnership  can  be  offered  to  the  Member  States:  strategic  partnership, 
management  partnership  and  one-off  partnership.  These  three  types  of  partnership  are  not 
mutually  exclusive  but  provide  a  choice  of  possibilities  that  could  be  of  interest  to  the 
Commission’s  partners  on  either  a  multiannual  or  an  annual  basis.  This  offer  of  services 
meets  the  flexibility  concerns  expressed  by  the  majority  of  national  and/or  regional 
authorities. 

All  the  same,  at  the  present  time  only  the  strategic  partnership  is  directly  and  immediately 
operational: management partnership and one-off partnership still require some development 
and the adoption of basic acts and standard agreements. 

2.1.1. 

Strategic partnership 

Direct implementation of the MoU’s provisions involves carrying out what may  be  called a 
strategic  partnership,  i.e.  with  respective  fields  of  competence  and  separate,  complementary 
financing. 

In line with current practice in several Member States, and in accordance with the MoU, the 
partnership reflects the basic principles of the PRINCE programme. 

Under  the  partnership,  the  national  government,  the  Commission  and  the  European 
Parliament  agree  on  a  joint  communication  plan,  whose  various  measures  are  financed 
separately but complementarily either by the Commission itself (subject to calls for proposals 
or  calls  for  tenders)  or  by  the  national  or  regional  government  (in  accordance  with  its  own 
financial  rules).  A  joint  logo  may  also  indicate  that  such  measures  are  the  result  of  a  joint 
strategy.  

This  approach  ensures  the  necessary  continuity  in  the  conduct  of  the  information  and 
communication strategy. It has the necessary flexibility to adapt to the different administrative 
structures  of  each  country  and  to  each  government’s  guidelines.  It  can  therefore  become  a 
reference framework for the action of all the Member States. 

10 

 
 
  
 
2.1.2.  Management partnership 

This type of collaboration between the Commission and the authorities of the Member State is 
a genuine structured partnership between the parties, designed to facilitate co-financing of the 
jointly approved communication plan. It is based on the establishment of indirect centralised 
management which devolves the administration of jointly decided information activities onto 
the Member States. 

Opting  for  this  system  means  that  a  Commission  decision  (basic  act  or  Beschluss)  must  be 
adopted to provide the authority for the delegation to the Member States. In accordance with 
Article 54(2)(c) of the Financial Regulation and Articles 38 and 39 of the Implementing Rules 
the basic act will have to define in detail the implementing tasks delegated and provide for the 
necessary control arrangements. 

Article  39(3)  of  the  Implementing  Rules  states that  “in  cases  of  management  by  a  network, 
requiring  the  designation  of  at  least  one  body  or  entity  by  Member  State  or  by  country 
concerned,  the  body  or  entity  shall  be  designated  by  the  Member  State  or  the  country 
concerned in accordance with the provisions of the basic act”.  

After  the  Member  States  have  designated  the  information  services  or  administrative 
departments concerned, the Commission will have to adopt the necessary acts of delegation in 
accordance  with  Article  41  of  the  Implementing  Rules.  These  agreements  must  include  a 
definition of the tasks assigned, the conditions and detailed arrangements for performing the 
tasks,  the  rules  on  reporting,  the  scrutiny  arrangements  and  the  provisions  guaranteeing 
visibility of the Community action in relation to the other activities of the body entrusted with 
implementing tasks. 

Only after this double procedural step within the Commission (Beschluss then instruments of 
delegation)  can  budget  funds  be  transferred  each  year  when  the  authorising  departments  by 
delegation and the bodies designated to carry out the implementing tasks have, in accordance 
with  Article  160  of  the  Implementing  Rules,  signed  agreements  to  make  available  the 
operational appropriations. 

The  Member  States  then  act  as  intermediaries,  responsible  for  awarding  and  managing  the 
grants and contracts in accordance with the guidelines, criteria and procedures determined by 
the Commission. The Commission has to establish that the delegation of implementing tasks 
complies with the principles of sound financial management7.  

Once it is up and running, the system provides every guarantee that the partnership between 
the Member State and the Commission will be sustained, while meeting the requirements of 
planning the institutions’ policy priorities.  

2.1.3.  One-off partnership 

This type of partnership consists simply in co-financing measures carried out directly by the 
Member  States.  Unlike  in  a  management  partnership,  however,  the  Member  State  may  not 
pass on grants to further recipients, because it is a beneficiary and not a person empowered to 

7 

Article 54(2)(c) of the Financial Regulation. 

11 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
implement  the  Community  budget8.  To  justify  the  award  of  grants  without  a  call  for 
proposals, a decision of the College is necessary, in this case in order to confirm the de facto 
or de jure monopoly of the beneficiary public authority in respect of the proposed measures. 

As  with  any  grant,  the  simple  co-financing  agreement  is  designed  for  beneficiaries 
implementing  measures  directly,  and  not  for  intermediaries  (public  authorities)  passing  on 
funds to third parties in the form of multi-stage grants. 

Very  often,  the  Member  State  or  regional  authority  behaves  like  an  intermediary  when 
implementing  its  information  and  communication  strategy.  Simple  co-financing  agreements 
are  limited  in  scope,  therefore,  especially  since  in  principle  each  measure  requires  its  own 
agreement. 

It should be noted therefore that, in the context of one-off partnerships, the Commission may 
also draw up a plan for a framework agreement flanked by a specific agreement. The approval 
of such a framework agreement by a Member State, following approval by the Commission, 
would  enable  that  State,  during  a  four-year  period,  to  sign  a  specific  agreement  for  a  given 
measure quickly without the Commission’s additional approval being necessary. 

–  Use of MoUs in EU-25 as the foundation for partnership between the Member State and 

the Community Institutions. 

–  Preparation and development of the types of partnership proposed. 

3. 

RELAYS AND NETWORKS 

It  will  be  noted  that  in  its  communication  of  2 July 2002  the  Commission  wanted  all  the 
relays and networks “to be analysed and assessed with a view to drawing up a new and more 
coherent framework for action and preparing to extend them to new Member States”.  

To get its information over to the public, the Commission relies on a network of more than 
1 000 information relays. 

These  are  mainly  the  Info-Points  Europe  and  Rural  Information  and  Promotion  Carrefours, 
European  Documentation  Centres  (EDC)  and  other  university  reference  centres  (about  780 
altogether) Also at the Commission’s disposal are the 550 lecturers of Team Europe. All these 
networks could well expand: about 100 organisations in EU-15 applied of their own accord to 
become relays in 2004. 

As stated in the communication of 2 July 2002 a stocktaking evaluation of all the relays and 
networks  was  carried  out  in  2003  in  order  to  help  the  Commission  define  a  model  for  a 
second-generation information relay better suited to the public’s information needs. 

The purpose of the evaluation was threefold: 

•  conduct a detailed examination and analysis of the present system; 
•  evaluate past experience and current effectiveness; 

8 

Articles 53 to 57 of the Financial Regulation strictly regulate the possibilities for delegation, which in 
the case in point would require indirect centralised management to be put in place in accordance with 
the management partnership arrangement. 

12 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
• 

identify possible improvements on the basis of the results of the evaluation. 

The reply rate for this exercise9 was sufficient to guarantee the reliability of the results. 

The most significant results, drawn from quantitative and qualitative analyses, are as follows: 

1) 

2) 

3) 

4) 

91.3%  of  the  Commission’s  Representations  in  the  Member  States  which  replied 
(reply  rate  of  100%)  consider  that  the  relays  and  networks  are  useful  or  even  very 
useful  as  multipliers  of  information  for  the  general  public.  They  enable  the 
Representations to fulfil one of their priority missions; 

of  the  92%  of  the  information  relays  which  took  part  in  the  evaluation,  over  80% 
claim to be able to count on the political support of their national authorities at local 
and/or regional level. This testifies to the high degree of support that Member States 
give to the work of the relays; 

this result is borne out by the host structures replying (66%), which are positive (over 
85%) in their assessment of: 

•  the importance of the relays in informing the public about Europe, 
•  the value added of the relays for their own institution, and 
•  their own interest in hosting a relay; 

in  addition  to  political  and  financial  backing,  relays  can  also  rely  on  sound 
operational  (technical,  logistic,  material,  administrative)  support  from  their  host 
structures: administrative support for the production of information material targeted 
at  local  needs  (in  90%  of  cases)  and  promotional  support  (some  80%  of  the  host 
structures  promote  the  work  of  their  relays  in  the  media).  Three  quarters  also  state 
that  they  intend  to  increase  the  capacity  of  their  relays  in  response  to  the  users’ 
information and documentation needs. 

To sum up, the results of the evaluation – operation and value added for the EU message – 
amply demonstrate that these relays are extremely proactive and that in the Member States, 
the national, local or regional authorities, the host structures of the relays and the Commission 
Representations all consider them to be crucial suppliers of information for the general public. 

The stocktaking evaluation thus confirms the strategy set out in 2002 of giving the IPEs and 
Carrefours a key role in the development of the second generation of information suppliers10.  

The enlargement of the EU is currently forcing the Commission to rationalise its relays and 
networks more effectively. This involves in particular finding a single name and logo for all 
of them. The name could be the generic term “Europe Direct” and would thus cover all the 
services  offered  by  the  Commission  for  spreading  information  and  answering  the  public’s 
questions, whether as a freephone number, the Europa website or a local relay nearby. 

9 

10 

European Commission Representations ........................................................................................... 100 % 
Information relays: Carrefours, Info-Points, interregional centres ..................................................... 92 % 
Team Europe....................................................................................................................................... 50 % 
European documentation centres and their host organisations ........................................................... 59 % 
Other host organisations ..................................................................................................................... 66 % 
See COM(2002) 350 of 2.7.2002. 

13 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
Relays  now  receive  considerable  technical  assistance  in  a  variety  of  forms:  free  supply  of 
documentation  and  publications  for  the  general  public  (around  1 500 000  copies  a  year  –  
EUR  15),  access  to  the  relays  and  networks  intranet,  specialist  assistance  via  a  relays  and 
networks  help  desk  (at  an  annual  cost  of  around  €1 500 000  –  EU-15),  free  staff  training 
courses  (800  person/days  a  year  –  EU-15),  events  and  networking,  in  particular  regular 
coordination meetings, visits, exchange programmes for relay staff (over 1 000 person/days a 
year – EU-15) and original information products tailored to their specific needs.  

Among the relays and networks, the host structures of the 266 Info-Points Europe and Rural 
Information and Promotion Carrefours received additional support from the Commission, up 
to and including 2003, in the form of a flat-rate direct operating grant of some €20 000 a year.  

3.1. 

Info-Points Europe and Rural Information and Promotion Carrefours 

At  its  meeting  on  26  November  2003,  the  Commission,  following  confirmation  of  the 
budgetary authority’s agreement reached at the budgetary conciliation on 24 November 2003, 
authorised  for  one  final  year  in  2004  the  funding  of  the  host  structures  of  the  IPEs  and  the 
Carrefours  by  means  of  operating  grants  based  on  a  transitional  ad  hoc  decision  derogating 
from the principle of the call for proposals enshrined in the Financial Regulation. 

With a view to preparing the new action framework for relays and networks (2nd generation) 
in the context of EU-25, the Commission thinks it worthwhile first reappraising the merits of 
the existing network with a view to its development in the new Member States. For this it is 
proposed  that  their  management  be  modernised,  with  due  allowance  for  the  different 
situations which exist within the enlarged Union. EU-15 already has an established network, 
while one will have to be set up in EU-10. Different types of management will therefore be 
necessary depending on the area concerned. 

It is proposed that a call for proposals (direct management) be launched for EU-15, so that the 
existing  IPEs  and  Carrefours  can  capitalise  on  their  experience  in  a  situation  of  open 
competition,  except  for  the  EU-15  countries  preferring  indirect  centralised  management, 
which would be given the responsibility of launching their own call for proposals. 

For EU-10 it is proposed that only indirect centralised management be used, so that in each 
new Member State it will be possible to draw on the national authorities’ knowledge of their 
specific requirements for the purpose of setting up these new relays and networks. 

These two systems would be launched at the same time for a similar period of four years, after 
which they would be reviewed in the light of experience. 

In order to provide proper understanding of the solution recommended, it would be helpful to 
spell out the details of the management of the two systems, which will both have to be based 
on  a  Commission  decision  containing  the  same  criteria  and  provisions  for  the  selection  and 
financing of the new network.  

3.1.1.  Choice of new network - Direct management 

In  accordance  with  the  principles  of  equal  treatment  and  transparency,  the  selection  of  host 
structures  for  relays  receiving  an  operating  grant,  from  2005  will  necessarily  involve 
launching a call for proposals. 

The selection and award criteria and the financial and control provisions must be laid down in 
a Commission decision. For the sake of the stability of the network and the continuity of its 

14 

 
 
  
 
information  and  communication  operations,  the  call  for  proposals  could  be  launched  on  a 
multiannual basis (four years). Partnership agreements (framework agreements) could then be 
concluded with all the beneficiaries for the same period. 

The  authorising  officer  would  approve  the  work  programmes  and  would  implement  the 
specific annual agreements tied to these framework agreements. 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  Article  112(2)  of  the  Financial  Regulation  requires  all  the 
agreements to be signed before 30 April 2005. 

3.1.2.  Choice of new network – Indirect centralised management 

This  option  entails  devising  a  plan  for  indirect,  centralised  management,  in  which  the 
performance of the activities and the management of the network would be devolved to the 
Member States. 

To  be  carried  out,  it  would  have  to  be  based  on  a  Commission  decision,  so  as  to  delegate 
authority to the Member States; these would then be responsible for managing and promoting 
the  network  of  relays,  although  the  Commission  would  not  be  relieved  of  its  monitoring 
responsibilities  (Article  54(2)(c)  of  the  Financial  Regulation  and  Articles  38  and  39  of  the 
Implementing Rules). This decision will have to contain the same selection and award criteria 
and relevant financing provisions as the decision for the system of direct management. 

After the Commission has adopted this basic act (Beschluss), the Member States will have to 
designate  the  entities  which  may  receive  this  management  delegation  (Article  39(3) 
Implementing  Rules).  Once  the  entities  have  been  designated,  the  Commission  will  have  to 
adopt the instruments of delegation (delegation agreements, Article 41 Implementing Rules). 
Once this multiannual framework has been laid down, agreements on making available funds 
will  be  concluded  annually  for  the  transfer  of  the  funds  corresponding  to  the  operating 
subsidies  of  the  host  structures  of  this  new  network  of  relays  (Article  160  Implementing 
Rules). 

For  this  the  Member  States  (entities  receiving  this  delegation)  will  have  to  apply  the  EU 
Financial Regulation for the selection of the new relays which may receive an operating grant. 
This  is  because  in  this  system  the  Member  States  are  simply  an  intermediary  in  the 
application of the Financial Regulation: they themselves will have to issue a call for proposals 
for the selection of the new relays and networks. 

Implementation of the two options for the management of this type of relay and network. 

3.2.  Major centres 

The Commission relies on three national major centres (Grands Centres) (Lisbon, Paris and 
Rome).  It  is  a  founder  member  of  these  three  centres,  constituted  as  European  economic 
interest  groupings  (Lisbon  and  Rome)  or  as  an  economic  interest  grouping  (Paris)  and 
financed fifty-fifty with the Member States concerned. It is represented on all their managing 
bodies.  

At its meeting on 11 November 2003, the Commission confirmed that in the case in point the 
Community  contribution  is  similar  to  a  subscription  from  a  member  of  the  grouping  and  is 
therefore  not  subject  to  the  provisions  on  grants.  It  was  on  this  basis  that  it  renewed  the 
agreement on the Sources d'Europe centre in Paris on 15 March. 

15 

 
 
  
 
An overall evaluation of the usefulness and impact of the operations conducted by these three 
centres  needs  to  be  conducted  before  envisaging  any  development  of  the  structures  in  the 
enlarged EU. This evaluation will be available in the second half of 2004. 

More generally,  this issue  will  be addressed in the broader context of  the guidelines for the 
Commission’s  participation  in  private-law  bodies  will  be  put  before  the  Commission  in  the 
very near future. 

Any  future  development  of  these  centres  is  subject  to  compliance  with  these  two  pre-
conditions. 

Overall  evaluation  of  the  three  existing  centres  to  be  conducted  and  compliance  with  the 
obligations linked to the Commission’s guidelines on its participation in private-law bodies. 

3.3. 

PHARE Centres 

Relays of a special type currently exist in eight of the ten future Member States. These are the 
(PHARE)  EU  Information  Centres  in  the  capitals  of  the  countries  concerned  and  at  present 
financed entirely from the PHARE appropriations. 

These Centres will have no legal basis after 31 December 2004. Under no circumstances can 
they be taken over by the Commission. 

Some  of  the  functions  performed  by  the  Centres  will  be  taken  over  in  part  by  the  new 
representations  (contacts  with  the  press)  and  in  part  sub-contracted  to  outside  companies 
selected  by  calls  for  tenders  (media  monitoring).  If  the  Member  States  concerned  so  wish, 
they can take over the Centres but will have to finance them in full. 

Confirmation that the Commission will not take over the (PHARE) EU Information Centres 
of the new Member States. 

4. 

OTHER COMMUNICATION INSTRUMENTS AND TOOLS 

The  vast  majority  of  people  in  Europe  are  still  very  ill-informed  about  European  issues: 
according to the latest Eurobarometer (EU-15) findings, 72% of the public admit to knowing 
very little or nothing about the European Union.  

It  is  against  the  background  of  these  findings  that  we  must  analyse  the  usefulness,  purpose 
and added value of the Commission’s communication instruments and tools, which will have 
to be developed in relation to the many and diverse needs of 450 million people.  

4.1. 

Audiovisual media 

Television and radio are still by far the preferred sources of information on European issues 
for  the  public  in  Europe,  including  in  the  ten  new  Member  States.  Because  of  the  massive 
increase in the number of radio and television channels available (for EU-15 alone there are 
over  1 100  national  television  channels  and  1 900  local  and  regional  ones;  for  the  ten  the 
corresponding  figures  are  thought  to  be  166  and  264),  making  use  of  them  is  not  an  easy 
matter.  Reaching  the  “general  public”  with  the  limited  resources  relative  to  the  costs  that 
achieving this objective would entail would mean drawing up media strategies that adapt the 
messages  supplied  more  closely  to  the  target  audiences  and  applying  a  critical  mass  of 

16 

 
 
  
 
resources to the multiplier targets – information professionals (Europe by Satellite (EbS) and 
studios  and  media  library),  decision-makers  and  politically  aware  public  (EuroNews  and 
cross-border  information  channels)  –  and  at  the  same  time  continuing  an  active  policy  of 
diversifying  the  co-financing  of  operations  (calls  for  proposals)  directed  at  a  variety  of 
“general public” audiences.  

4.1.1.  Adapting the tools 

The  audiovisual  strategy  will  continue  to  revolve  primarily  around  the  information  tools 
intended  for  the  media  and  information  professionals:  development  of  EbS,  support  for 
electronic media and the media library. All of this is being developed in digital format and the 
range of on-line services available is constantly growing. 

Opening up this activity to the new Member States will mean extending coverage of European 
events to all of them on the same basis as the service currently provided in EU-15. The same 
will be true of production activity in the studio, and this will apply equally to developing a 
co-production  programme  to  suit  producers  and/or  broadcasters  in  the  new  Member  States 
and to the ability to provide training in audiovisual techniques for Commission members and 
staff from the new countries.  

Work  is  already  under  way  to  equip  EbS  to  work  in  21  languages,  with  the  possibility  of 
increasing  this  in  the  medium  term.  Framework  contracts  are  also  being  negotiated  to 
facilitate rapid and effective television production work in EU-25. 

As  an  interinstitutional  instrument,  EbS  is  making  an  active  contribution  to  improving 
television coverage in EU-25 of the priority information themes agreed by the IGI. Through 
the quality and variety of its broadcasts EbS is now, by virtue of the demand for its services, 
the eighth supplier of Eurovision (EBU) out of a hundred or so. 

Information  seminars  will  also  be  provided  in  large  number  for  Union  journalists.  These 
seminars are currently used essentially for training journalists from the new Member States.  

4.1.2.  A more dynamic approach 

With enlargement it also becomes essential to achieve a better match between the targets that 
are set and the means available. This more dynamic approach calls for new operational tools 
to be developed that give a better understanding of the media market and increased resources 
to evaluate the different and changing information needs of the various population groups and 
to put in place media strategies for selecting media more closely in line with the messages to 
be broadcast and the target groups.  

It is therefore proposed that management and selection arrangements be improved but that co-
financing  of  audiovisual  programmes  and  the  EU  be  continued  by  means  of  calls  for 
proposals. This approach, developed in 2003 with an €8.5 million call for proposals, allowed 
over 40 radio and television broadcasts to be co-financed in EU-15. A call for proposals, with 
standardised arrangements in order to limit the human resources required will be launched in 
2004 by the EU-15 representations and by headquarters in cooperation with the REP in 2005. 

Similarly,  the  initiation  of  multilateral  cooperation  between  different  parliamentary  or 
political  channels  in  EU-25,  in  accordance  with  the  wishes  of  Parliament  expressed  in  the 

17 

 
 
  
 
report by Mr Andreasen11 and confirmed in the report by Mr Bayona12 is under consideration. 
The  aim  of  this  project,  now  known  as  Channel  Europe,  would  initially  be  to  facilitate 
cooperation  between  these  channels  so  that  they  can  increasingly  provide  viewers  with 
political information from the other Member States and EU institutions. Ultimately this could 
result in a European political information channel. Specific recommendations relating to this 
project may be made in the course of 2004. 

4.1.3.  EuroNews 

The  Commission  Communication  of  9  July  2003  called  for  an  ad  hoc  evaluation  of 
Community  support  for  the  EuroNews  channel.  This  evaluation  was  carried  out  by  Deloitte 
and  Touche,  a  specialised  independent  company,  following  an  invitation  to  tender13.  Its 
verdict is positive and its main conclusions are as follows: 

“EuroNews is clearly relevant to EU objectives. 

“It is effective in achieving the objectives of providing EU-perspective information to a large 
number  of  people  in  several  languages.  Its  effectiveness  is  inevitably  limited  by  financial 
constraints. 

“It is efficient as a partner for the Commission compared to comparable alternatives and to 
industry norms. 

“Its  utility  is  demonstrated  by  (limited)  polling  evidence  of  viewer  attitudes,  but  it  is  again 
dependent on financial capacity… 

“…Given  Euronews’  unique  nature  and  position,  we  are  of  the  opinion  that  no  other 
pan-European  channel  would  have  been  appropriate  or  efficient  as  an  alternative  for  the 
partnership  between  the  Commission  and  Euronews.  Its  average  cost  per  hour  of 
broadcasting  is  extremely  low  compared  to  European  average  costs  of  public  service 
broadcasters”. 

These positive assessments are based essentially on the following points: 

-  Firstly  the  success  of  EuroNews  in  terms  of  distribution  and  audience  and  the  strong 
position it holds on the European audiovisual scene. 

Since  1993  when  it  first  started  broadcasting,  EuroNews  has  developed  in  a  very  rapidly 
changing market in terms of both programmes offered and technology. While the number of 
national  or  cross-border  channels  has  risen  from  190  in  1993  to  1 132  in  200314  EuroNews 
has  extended  its  broadcasting  network  from  35 million  to  151 million  households.  The 
channel is now broadcast in seven languages (including Russian) by cable and satellite in 78 
countries,  particularly  in  Europe  and  in  the  EU  neighbourhood  countries  (Eastern  Europe, 
Middle  East,  Maghreb).  Its  audience  has  also  increased  very  sharply  to  over  7.1 million 
viewers a day at end 2003 (as against 5.6 million in 2000). 

11 
12 
13 

14 

Resolution of 13 March 2002  P5_TA(2002)0109. 
Resolution of 10 April 2003  P5_TA(2003)0187. 
“Evaluation  of  conventions  and  co-financing  projects  with  Euronews  in  the  period  1993-2003”  Final 
report DG Budg/2000/S 203-130610, European Commission, DG Press, March 2004. 
See  Transfronteir  television  in  the  European  Union:  Market  impact  and  selected  legal  aspects, 
European Audiovisual Observatory, Council of Europe, March 2004. 

18 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
The EuroNews website also has over 500 000 hits a month with 4 million pages visited and 
3 000 hours of video information downloaded. 

In  terms  of  European  information  EuroNews  has  become  the  reference  channel  on  the 
audiovisual scene in the EU and the neighbourhood countries. 

Secondly, EuroNews is the television channel with the lowest costs in Europe. 

According to studies available, EuroNews’ costs per hour of broadcasting are far below those 
of  other  television  channels15.  As  a  result  Community  funds  (€3.6 million  in  2004)  will 
co-finance  112  hours  of  new  programmes  and  1 426  hours  of  broadcasting  of  European 
programmes,  equivalent  to  4  hours  of  information  viewed  each  day  by  over  7.1 million 
viewers. 

There  does  not  seem  to  be  another  information  tool  that  can  produce  the  same 
quality/performance/cost ratio. 

To conclude, in the medium and long term, it would therefore seem entirely justified, as is 
indeed recommended by the evaluators, that EuroNews be kept as one of the Commission’s 
partners in implementing its audiovisual strategy. 

One way of doing so, which would be compatible with the financial regulations, would be to 
apply  a  contract-based  approach.  Given  that  a  strategy  for  audiovisual  communication  has 
now  been  agreed,  responsibility  for  part  of  its  implementation  could  be  devolved  to 
EuroNews  by  means  of  a  negotiated  service  contract.  The  contract  could  be  concluded  for 
2005  and  subsequent  years,  in  line  with  the  rules  applicable  to  public  contracts  for  cultural 
services16.  

This approach  would avoid all problems relating to competition aspects, first of all because 
the public service contract procedure is covered by Community law and secondly because it 
means that there will be no overpayment for the service provided. 

The  Community  contribution  for  the  period  2005-2007  would  be  in  the  order  of  €9  to  €12 
million over three years. 

In  the  short  term,  the  European  Parliament  allocated  €8  165  000  to  heading  16.02.02 
“Citizens’ information via the media” when drafting the 2004 budget, placing €2 million of 
this amount in reserve with the following comment: 

“Part of this appropriation may be allocated to EuroNews with due respect for the provisions 
of  the  Financial  Regulation.  The  appropriation  entered  in  reserve  will  be  released  on  the 
basis of an evaluation by the Parliament of proposals presented by the Commission by 1 May 
2004 at the latest, on the conditions and objectives for the financing of EuroNews by the EU 
budget.”  

15 
16 

Mac Kinsey & Company: Organisatie-en efficientieverbeteringen Publieke Omroep”, 2003. 
See  Council  Directive  92/50/EEC  of  18  June  1992  relating  to  the  coordination  of  procedures  for  the 
award  of  public  service  contracts,  as  amended  by  Directives  97/52/EC  (WTO  agreements)  and 
2001/78/EC  (standardised  notices)  which  is  an  integral  part  of  our  budgetary  procedures,  and  126.b 
MODEX of the Implementing Rules of the Financial Regulation. 

19 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
In the light of this, the Commission could decide to award EuroNews an operating grant in 
2004,  from  the  2004  budget,  of  about  €2  million17.  That  would  bring  the  Commission’s 
contribution to EuroNews in 2004 up to about €5.4 million18, or about 16.9% of the channel’s 
turnover  corresponding  to  the  percentage  of  broadcasting  time  co-financed  by  the 
Commission. 

The  financial  viability  of  EuroNews  was  subject  to  positive  analysis  in  the  procedure  for 
awarding grants for actions by the Commission in December 2003. As the situation has not 
changed since, the purpose of such a grant would not be to ensure a balance in the EuroNews 
accounts,  but  would  on  the  contrary  correspond  to  the  recommendations  made  to  the 
Commission  by  the  evaluator.  It  would  help  to  speed  up  the  renewal  of  the  EuroNews 
production  tool,  thus  to  improve  its  effectiveness,  efficiency  and  continue  to  increase  its 
audience. It would also be rational in economic terms. 

For an operating grant to be awarded in 2004, the Commission would have to take an award 
decision by 30 April as laid down in the Financial Regulation19. 

Whatever the decision taken, Parliament would have to be informed by means of a detailed 
presentation  of  the  results  of  the  external  evaluation  of  EuroNews  referred  to  above.  If  the 
Commission  decides  to  pursue  collaboration  with  EuroNews  beyond  2005,  the  amount 
involved would have to be taken into account in the preparatory work on the budget for 2005 
and subsequent years. 

–  Confirm the key role of EbS and digital database management; 

–  Confirm the centralised approach to the audiovisual policy of the Commission and the EU; 

–  Extend audiovisual coverage of major EU events to the new Member States; 

–  Prepare  an  operating  grant  award  decision  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the 
Financial  Regulation  and  its  implementing  rules  for  2004  as  soon  as  possible  and  for 
adoption by 30 April 2004; 

–  Lay down new arrangements for collaboration with EuroNews for 2005 and beyond. 

4.2. 

Second-generation EUROPA 

On  6  July  2001  the  Commission  adopted  a  communication  entitled  "Second-generation 
EUROPA  –  advanced  Web  services  to  citizens,  businesses  and  other  professional  users" 
(C(2001)1753/2) as part of its eEurope programme. 

The aim of this communication was to develop the interactive side of Europa, to adapt it to 
EU-25  and  to  make  it  more  accessible  using  a  system  of  portals  for  different  categories  of 
users.  

In 2004 and 2005 Commission sites will start to migrate to a new information production and 
management  environment  on  the  Internet,  provided  the  Directorates-General  devote  the 

17 
18 

19 

Article 108(2) of the Financial Regulation. 
Of  which,  €0.6  million  is  financed  out  of  the  2001  budget  and  just  under  €3  million  out  of  the  2003 
budget. 
Particularly Article 108(1)(b) of the Financial Regulation and Article 168(c) of the Implementing Rules. 

20 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
necessary  resources.  The  process  is  an  essential  precondition  for  the  success  of  the 
eCommission.  

To meet the general information needs of 450 million European citizens, material on Europa 
must  be  presented  at  the  first  two  levels  of  access  to  the  Europa  sites  in  the  20  official 
languages.  In  addition,  a  multimedia  database  will  have  to  be  developed  to  provide  basic 
information  which  would  be  supplemented  and  adapted  locally  to  cater  for  public  demand. 
The second-generation relays and networks could thus evolve into Cyber-relays offering free 
access to the information and interactive services available on Europa.  

More  specific  portals  will  also  be  developed  for  target  audiences,  such  as  people  moving 
within the European Union (young people, students, job-seekers, etc.) or people with a daily 
professional interest in EU activities and legislation.  

Electronic management of the Commission’s publications will also become more widespread, 
to respond to the needs of the enlarged EU in real time and thus minimise storage costs. 

–  Migration  of  Commission  sites  to  an  advanced  information  production  and  management 

system on the Internet; 

–  Interactive  and  multilingual  development  of  Europa  II,  using  special  portals  managed 

jointly by the Directorates-General responsible for the topic.  

4.3. 

Opinion polls and Europe Direct 

4.3.1.  Eurobarometer 

The Commission’s opinion polls are an invaluable reference tool providing information about 
current trends for both the European Union and the individual Member States. Their value – 
and the reliability of Eurobarometer (EB) in particular - must be preserved and guaranteed in 
EU-25.  

For  this  reason,  the  Commission  has  decided  to  create  two  framework  contracts  -  
EB  standard/special  and  EB  Flash  –  each  of  which  will  cover  the  25  Member  States.  
EB standard/special should be operational by autumn 2004 and EB Flash by the end of 2004.  

Looking ahead to enlargement, there is also the question of monitoring polling activity, and 
specifically  Eurobarometer.  The  Commission  should  be  able  to  carry  out  the  controls 
necessary for the development of this area of activity. 

Thanks  to  the  new  framework  contract  signed  this  year,  the  Commission  is  developing 
qualitative studies for the needs of all Directorates-General which already cover the 25 states 
of the enlarged EU (and sometimes even 28 states). 

4.3.2.  Europe Direct (00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 – http://europa.eu.int/europedirect) 

This service provides a free telephone number and website for replying to people’s questions 
about all Community policies directly in their own language. It has already been adapted to 
the  needs  of  25  Member  States  and  will  also  be  incorporated  in  the  EU's  information  and 
communication strategy, both in its interinstitutional aspects (contribution to preparing for the 
next  European  elections)  and  in  the  area  of  partnership  with  the  Member  States  and  the 
various EU relays and networks.  

21 

 
 
  
 
By 1 May 2004 at the latest, all citizens of the new Member States will have access to Europe 
Direct.  A  single  phone  number  for  the  entire  enlarged  European  Union  will  come  into 
operation next spring. 

Develop  Eurobarometer  and  Europe  Direct  on  an  interinstitutional  basis  to  serve  the  EU’s 
information and communication strategy. 

22 

 
 
  
 
CONCLUSION 

If the European Union’s information and communication strategy adopted on 2 July 2002 is to 
succeed it must be adopted at the highest policy-making level and must itself be based on the 
institution’s policy priorities. 

The forthcoming years must be used to consolidate the achievements of the EU’s information 
and communication strategy since July 2002. 

The enlargement of the EU only enhances the importance of the concepts of partnership and 
decentralisation that underlie this strategy.  

Its  successful  implementation  will  depend  on  the  tasks  the  Commission  sets  itself  and  the 
Member States in this growing field of communication and on the resources that are available.  

In  the  case  of  the  Commission,  the  initiating,  coordinating  and  planning  role  of  the  central 
administration must be enhanced, but at the same time the tasks of the representations must be 
defined in a way that is more in keeping with their resources. 

23 

 
 
  
 
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT 

Policy area(s): 16 – PRESS AND COMMUNICATION 

Activit(y/ies): 

16 01 – Administrative expenditure of policy area ‘Press and communication’ 

16  02  –  Provision  of  information  to  the  media  on  the  decisions  and  the  policies  of  the 
Commission 

16 03 – Analysis of public opinion trends and development of general information for citizens 

16 04 – Integrated management of means of communication (at central and local level) 

16 05 – Coordination of information relays and networks in the European Union 

TITLE  OF  ACTION: 

IMPLEMENTING  THE  EUROPEAN  UNION’S 

INFORMATION  AND 

COMMUNICATION STRATEGY  

1. 

BUDGET LINE(S) + HEADING(S) 

16  01  04  01  (ex  –  B3-300A)  –  General  information  work  concerning  the  European 
Union – Expenditure on administrative management 

16  01  04  02  (ex  –  B3-301A)  –  Information  outlets  –  Expenditure  on  administrative 
management 

16 01 04 03 (ex – B3-306A) – Information activities in connection with specific policies 
– Expenditure on administrative management 

16 01 04 04 (ex – B3-303A) – Communication work – Expenditure on administrative 
management 

16  49  04  01  (ex  –  B3-300A)  –  General  information  work  concerning  the  European 
Union – Expenditure on administrative management (payments 2004) 

16  49  04  02  (ex  –  B3-301A)  –  Information  outlets  –  Expenditure  on  administrative 
management (payments 2004) 

16 49 04 03 (ex – B3-306A) – Information activities in connection with specific policies 
– Expenditure on administrative management (payments 2004) 

16 49 04 04 (ex – B3-303A) – Communication work – Expenditure on administrative 
management (payments 2004) 

16 02 02 (ex – B3-3000B) – Citizens’ information via the media 

16 02 03 (ex – B3-3030B) – Direct communication - Media 

16  02  04  (ex  –  A-421)  –  Operation  of  radio  and  television  studios  and  audiovisual 
equipment 

16 03 01 (ex – B3-3000B) – Public opinion analysis and proximity actions 

24 

 
 
  
 
 
16 03 02 (ex – B3-3030B) – Actions in the field of communication 

16 04 02 (ex – B3-3000B) – Tools for information to the citizens 

16 04 03 (ex – B3030B) – Communication tools 

16 05 01 (ex – B3-301) – Information outlets 

16 01 02 01 (ex – heading A7) – External staff of DG PRESS 

16 01 02 11 (ex – heading A7) – Other management expenditure of DG PRESS 

OVERALL FIGURES 

Total allocation for action (ex - Part B): €63.835 million for commitment in 2005 

Period of application: 

2004-06 

2. 

2.1 

2.2 

2.3 

Overall multiannual estimate of expenditure: 

(a)  Schedule  of  commitment  appropriations/payment  appropriations  (financial  intervention)  
(see point 6.1.1) 

(€ million to three decimal places) 

Lines 16 02 to 16 05 
Commitments 

2004 

2005 

2006 

60.705 

59.050 

59.450 

Payments 

51.900 

53.200 

53.200 

Total 

179.205 

158.300 

(b) Technical and administrative assistance and support expenditure (see point 6.1.2) 

(€ million to three decimal places)  

Lines 16 01 04 

Commitments 

Payments 

2004 

4.464 

2005 

4.785 

2006 

4.785 

2.869 

4.785 

4.785 

Subtotal a+b 

Commitments 

Payments 

2004 

2005 

2006 

65.169 

63.835 

64.235 

54.769 

57.985 

57.985 

Total 

14.034 

12.439 

Total 

193.239 

170.739 

25 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(c)  Overall  financial  impact  of  human  resources  and  other  administrative  expenditure  
(see points 7.2 and 7.3) 

2004 

2005 

2006 

TOTAL 

Commitments/ 
Payments 

1.300 

1.300 

1.300 

3.900 

TOTAL a+b+c 

2004 

2005 

2006 

TOTAL 

Commitments 

66.469 

65.135

65.535

197.139 

Payments 

56.069 

59.285

59.285

174.639 

2.4 

Compatibility with financial programming and financial perspective 

Proposal is compatible with existing financial programming 

2.5 

Financial impact on revenue 

Proposal has no financial impact on revenue 

3. 

BUDGET CHARACTERISTICS 

Type of expenditure 

New 

Contribution 
from EFTA 
countries 

Contributions 
from 
applicant 
countries 

Heading in 
financial 
perspective 

NO 

NO 

NO 

3 and 5 

Non-comp 

Diff/ 
Non-diff 

4. 

LEGAL BASIS 

Measures taken by the Commission by virtue of its institutional prerogatives. 

5. 

DESCRIPTION AND GROUNDS 

5.1 

Need for Community intervention 

5.1.1  Objectives pursued 

At  its  meeting  on  11  November  2003,  the  Commission  noted  “that  Mr  Vitorino  would  
submit, …, a memorandum on implementing the information and communication strategy beyond 
2004”. 

26 

 
 
  
 
 
 
By information and communication strategy is meant the frame of reference for communication 
to  the  general  public  (and  not  all  the  Commission’s  information  measures)  as  set  out  in  the 
Commission’s communication of 2 July 2002 on an information and communication strategy for 
the European Union (COM(2002)350 final).  

This  strategy,  based  both  on  strengthening  interinstitutional  cooperation  and  on  developing 
structured partnerships with the Member States, was endorsed by the Council in its conclusions 
of  10 December 2002  and  by  the  European  Parliament  in  its  resolution  of  10 April 2003, 
following the report by Mr Bayona. 

The principal objective is “to improve perception of the European Union and its Institutions and 
their  legitimacy  by  deepening  knowledge  and  understanding  of  its  tasks,  structure  and 
achievements and by establishing a dialogue with its citizens”. 

This  will  require  stronger  planning  of  information  activities  in  the  context  of  interinstitutional 
cooperation and clarification of the implementing procedures. 

Measures have to be implemented in a new context shaped by the implications of the entry into 
force  of  the  new  Financial  Regulation  and  implementing  rules  and  by  the  need  to  adjust  the 
available resources in the run-up to enlargement. 

5.1.2  Measures taken in connection with ex ante evaluation 

The proposed strategy will be implemented on the basis of opinion polls and studies available to 
DG  PRESS.  More  specifically,  this  communication  (point  I.2.)  is  based  on  the  report  on  the 
qualitative  study  on  the  focus  of  communication  about  the  EU  (Rapport  d’étude  qualitative 
relative à l’orientation de la communication sur l’UE) drafted by Optem in January 2004, which 
confirms  the  overriding  need  to  structure  the  Commission’s  communication  effort  around 
concrete examples reflecting the EU’s policy goals. 

5.1.3  Measures taken following ex post evaluation 

The  evaluation  function  having  been  created  within  DG  PRESS  in  October 2003,  the  DG’s 
management plan will specify each year the main evaluation priorities to be developed. 

5.2 

Actions envisaged and budget intervention arrangements 

The budget lines concerned belong to the policy area ‘Press and communication’ (Title 16).  

The  actions  envisaged  chiefly  concern  general  information  activities  conducted  in  partnership 
with the Member States, the financing of relays and networks in the EU and the centralised and 
devolved means of communication at the Commission’s disposal. 

The  management  arrangements  proposed  for  the  partnership  with  the  Member  States  (see  5.3 
below) can also be used for implementing the PRINCE priority information operations.20  

20 

- Debate on the future of the European Union (budget line 25 03 02), 
- Information and communication strategy / Enlargement (budget line 22 04 01), 
- Area of freedom, security and justice (budget line 18 08 01), 
- Communication on economic and moetary union, including the euro (budget line 01 02 04), 
- Role of the European Union in the world (budget line 16 04 05). 

27 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
 
 
 
 
5.3 

Methods of implementation 

The objectives will be pursued chiefly through three types of action: 

– 

Partnership with the Member States 

In  the  context  of  the  Commission’s  communication  of  2  July  2002  on  an  information  and 
communication  strategy  for  the  European  Union  (COM(2002)350 final)  and  with  reference  to 
the  provisions  of  the  new  Financial  Regulation,  the  implementation  of  information  and 
communication  activities  via  the  Member  States  is  based  on  a  partnership  between  the 
Commission  and  the  Member  States,  in  other  words  on  a  pooling,  around  an  agreed 
communication plan, of each of the parties’ resources.  

Three types of partnership can be considered: 

(1)  Management  partnership:  a  system 

indirect  centralised 
management  which  devolves,  via  a  Commission  decision,  the  management  of 
information activities onto the Member States. 

implemented 

through 

(2)  One-off partnership: consists simply in the cofinancing of specific measures carried out 
by the Member States, which are the final beneficiaries of grants (awarded on the basis of 
a  Commission  decision21)  and  not  intermediaries  in  the  implementation  of  the  strategy. 
This  option  allows  a  framework  agreement  (flanked  by  specific  agreements)  to  be 
concluded for a four-year period.  

(3) 

Strategic  partnership:  measures  are  financed  separately  but  complementarily  on  the 
basis of a joint communication plan. 

– 

Relays and networks 

To get its information over to the public, the Commission relies on a network of more than 1 000 
information  relays.  Only  the  Info  Points  Europe  and  Rural  Information  and  Promotion 
Carrefours, of which there are 266 in 2004, qualify for a Community (operating) grant.  

With a view to preparing this new action framework for relays and networks (second generation) 
in  the  context  of  EU-25,  the  Commission  will  maintain  the  aid  granted  to  these  entities  in  the 
form  of  technical  assistance  plus  direct  operating  aid  for  such  structures.  The  management 
arrangements envisaged for this aid are as follows: 

(1) 

(2) 

EU-15:  direct  management  (a  call  for  proposals  in  order  to  select  host  structures  for 
relays  and  networks,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  Financial  Regulation)  or 
indirect centralised management for the Member States which so desire;. 

EU-10: indirect centralised management: (operation of the relays would be devlopedto 
the  Member  States  that  were  willing  to  take  on  such  responsibility,  by  means  of  a 
Commission decision). 

The Commission also relies on three major national centres (Grands Centres) (Lisbon, Paris and 
Rome). It is a founder member of these three centres, constituted as European economic interest 

21 

Intended to validate the de jure or de facto monopoly of the grant beneficiary (Member State) according to 
the action envisaged. 

28 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
groupings  (Lisbon  and  Rome)  or  as  an  economic  interest  grouping  (Paris)  and  financed  50/50 
with the Member States concerned. 

To  meet  the  needs  arising  from  the  expansion  of  the  information  and  communication  strategy 
and to respond to the wishes already expressed by several Member States, it is proposed to set an 
objective,  starting  with  the  three  existing  centres  and  before  considering  the  possibility  of 
extending these structures at the level of the enlarged Union, of conducting an overall assessment 
of  the  usefulness  and  impact  of  the  activities  carried  out  by  the  existing  major  centres.  In 
addition, guidelines on the Commission’s involvement in private-law bodies will be laid down in 
a  memorandum  from  the  Secretariat-General,  to  be  submitted  to  the  Commission  very  shortly. 
Any  extension  of  or  change  in  the  major  centres  will  therefore  be  subject  to  these  two 
preconditions.  

– 

Synergies between the Commission’s means of action 

To  supplement  the  activities  described  below,  the  Commission  also  has  a  number  of  means  of 
action. 

(1) 

Communication instruments and tools 

•  Audiovisual media: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Strengthening  multilateral  cooperation  between  different  parliamentary  or 
political  channels  (Channel  Europe  project);  following  the  analysis  that  is 
under way, specific recommendations will be made in the course of 2004; 

Cofinancing  of  audiovisual  programmes  about  the  EU  via  calls  for 
proposals; 

Continuing to organise information seminars for journalists; 

Establishing a basis for future cooperation with EuroNews on the basis of an 
operating  grant  in  2004  (requiring  a  Commission  decision)  and  grants  for 
actions from 2005 onwards. 

•  Second-generation Europa: migration of Commission sites to an advanced system for 
producing and managing information on the Internet, and interactive and multilingual 
development of Europa II (under way). 

•  Opinion  polls,  in  particular  Eurobarometer:  adaptation  to  an  enlarged  Union  (in 

progress). 

•  Maintenance  of  Europe  Direct  (free  telephone  service  for  replying  to  people’s 

questions directly in their own language about all Community policies). 

(2) 

Commission representations in the Member States (p.m.) 

The process of converting the delegations in the new Member States into representations should 
result  in  August  2005  in  a  homogeneous  network  of  representations.  The  new  representations 
will continue to be progressively expanded after that date. 

----------------------------------------------- 

29 

 
 
  
 
The  reference  options  used  for  calculating  the  financial  impact  and  the  impact  on  staff  and 
administrative expenditure (points 6 and 7 below) are the following: 

Partnership with the Member States 

(cid:190)  Management partnership: the legal/financial instruments will have to be prepared at 
headquarters  and  negotiated  by  the  representations  with  the  Member  States’  public 
authorities,  with  responsibility  for  implementation  and  monitoring  remaining  with 
the authorising departments (no subdelegation for PRINCE budget lines). 

Relays (Info Points and Rural Carrefours) 

(cid:190)  Indirect  centralised  management  (for  the  EU-10  countries  and  the  EU-15  countries 
which so desire) and call for proposals (for the EU-15 countries which do not want 
indirect management). 

Audiovisual media (EuroNews) 

(cid:190)  Operating grant in 2004 (requiring a Commission decision awarding the grant) and 

service contract from 2005 onwards. 

6. 

FINANCIAL IMPACT 

6.1 

Total financial impact for the operational part (ex - Part B) 

6.1.1 

Financial intervention 

Commitments (in € million to three decimal places) 

16.02 02 Citizens’ information via the media 

10.165 

9.000 

2004

2005

2006  TOTAL 
28.165 

9.000 

16.02 03 Direct communication - Media 

2.710 

2.600 

3.000 

8.300 

8.100(*) 

9.000 (*) 

9.000 (*) 

26.100 (*) 

1.000 (*) 

1.100 (*) 

1.100 (*) 

3.200 (*) 

16.03 01 Public opinion analysis and proximity 
actions 

6.800 

8.000 

8.000 

22.800 

4.585 (*) 

6.000 (*) 

6.000 (*) 

16.585 (*) 

16.03 02 Actions in the field of communication 

9.890 

8.650 

8.650 

27.190 

16.04 02 Tools for information to the citizens 

9.650 

7.300 

7.300 

24.250 

1.000 (*) 

1.000 (*) 

1.000 (*) 

3.000 (*) 

16.04 03 Communication tools 

4.400 

5.750 

5.750 

15.900 

2.460 (*) 

2.500 (*) 

2.500 (*) 

7.460 (*) 

16.05 01 Information outlets  

17.100 

17.750 

17.750 

52.600 

2.150 (*) 

3.450 (*) 

3.450 (*) 

9.050 (*) 

TOTAL  

7.682 (*) 

15.782 (*) 

15.782 (*) 

39.246 (*) 

60.715 

59.050 

59.450 

179.205 

26.977 (*)

38.832 (*) 

38.832 (*) 

104.641 (*) 

30 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(*) The amounts in italics form part of the appropriations indicated for each line and correspond 
to the budgetary impact presented in Table 6.2. 

6.1.2 

Technical and administrative assistance and support expenditure 

Commitments (in € million to three decimal places) 

2004

2005

2006  TOTAL 

16.01 04 01  

0.180 

0.180 

0.180 

0.540 

General information work concerning the 
European Union – Expenditure on 
administrative management (ex B3-300A) 

16.01 04 02  

0.292 

0.325 

0.325 

0.942  

Information outlets – Expenditure on 
administrative management (ex B3-301A) 

16.01 04 03 

2.592 

2.880 

2.880  

8.352  

Information programme for European citizens 
(PRINCE) – Information activities in connection 
with specific policies – Expenditure on 
administrative management (ex B3-306A) 

16.01 04 04 

1.400 

1.400 

1.400 

4.200  

Communication work - Expenditure on 
administrative management (ex B3-303A) 

TOTAL  

4.464 

4.785 

4.785 

14.034 

6.2. 

Calculation of costs by measure envisaged 

Commitments (in € million to three decimal places) 

Breakdown 

Type of outputs 

Number of outputs 

Average unit cost 

1 

2 

3 

16 02 02 

Citizens’ information via the media 

EuroNews 

Financing of 
coproduction 

One agreement to be 
signed in 2005 

4.000 (annual 
amount) 

Other audiovisual activities 

16 02 03 
Direct communication - media  

Other audiovisual activities 

Call for audiovisual 
proposals 

1 
(via various framework 
contracts) 

Information 
seminars for 
journalists 

variable number 
(on the basis of a 
framework contract) 

News coverage 
production 
capacities  

1 
(via several framework 
contracts) 

31 

Total cost 
2005 
4=(2X3) 

9.000 

4.000 

4.000 

0.600 

1.100 

1.100 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
16 03 01 
Public opinion analysis and proximity 
actions 

Partnerships with the Member States (1) 

Opinion polls 

16 03 02 
Actions in the field of communication 

Partnerships with the Member States (1) 

16 04 02  
Tools for information to the citizens 

Partnership 
agreements 
Eurobarometers 
(EB) and specific 
opinion polls 

8 

2 framework contracts 
(EB std/special and EB 
Flash) 

Partnership 
agreements  

17 

Europe Direct 

Call centre 

1 

16 04 03  
Communication tools 

Europa  

Other audiovisual activities 

16 05 01 
Information outlets 

Relays and networks 

TOTAL COST 

New advanced 
system 

Media library 

1 
(via various framework 
contracts) 
1 
(on the basis of three 
framework contracts) 

Grants for host 
structures of relays 

Existing relays (266) 

+ 18 new relays per new 
Member State 

0.020 

Contribution to the 
major centres  

3 existing major centres 

+ 22 new major centres 
(of which 9 in 2005) 

0.500 
(cotisation de 
démarrage) 

6.000 

0.500 

5.500 

1.000 

1.000 

2.500 

2.500 

3.450 

3.100 

0.350 

15.782 

5.292 

3.600 

2.390 

4.500 

38.832 

(1) The amounts shown concern only “institutional” information operations implemented by DG PRESS. The partnership agreements concerned 
can also be used for the PRINCE appropriations which are the responsibility of other DGs. 

For information, the PRINCE appropriations entered in the 2004 budget, for which the conclusion of agreements is envisaged as a management 
method, amount to: 

  - PRINCE – Debate on the future of the European Union (25 03 02): €4.5 million 
  - PRINCE – Information and communication strategy / Enlargement (22 04 01): €16.5 million.  

For the record, the other PRINCE appropriations entered in the 2004 budget relate to the following areas: 

  - PRINCE – Communication on economic and monetary union, including the euro (01 02 04): €6 million 
  - PRINCE – Area of freedom, security and justice (18 08 01): €3 million 
  - PRINCE – Role of the European Union in the world (16 04 05): €4 million. 

32 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7. 

IMPACT ON STAFF AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE 

7.1. 

Impact on human resources 

Types of post 

Staff to be assigned to management of the 
action using existing and/or additional 
resources 

Number of 
permanent posts 

Number of 
temporary posts 

Description of tasks deriving from the 
action 

Total 

N/A 

In the light of the Commission decision on the APS 2005 

Officials or  

temporary staff 

Other human 

resources 

Total 

The human resources requirements identified for the options described in point 5.3 are estimated 
as follows: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

preparation of agreements in the context of the partnerships with the Member States and 
technical assistance for their implementation: 1 A and 1 B; 

establishment  and  management  of  an  enlarged  network  of  relays:  5  A,  4  B  and  
3 C;22 

establishment and management of new major information centres: 7 B and 6 C;23 

strengthening  of  operational  coordination  for  all  activities  developed  by 
representations: 1 A and 1 C.  

the 

The  authorising  departments  in  the  Commission  undertake  to  put  in  place  appropriate 
management mechanisms by means of the necessary legislative proposals in order to implement 
the  Commission’s  information  and  communication  strategy  with  the  human  and  budgetary 
resources that are allocated.  

7.2 

Overall financial impact of human resources 

N/A 

22 

23 

On 14 April  2004  the  President,  Mr. Vitorino  and  Mrs.  Schreyer,  reached  an  agreement  on  these  human 
resources requirements on the basis of the following: 
- 5 additional posts to be made immediately available in 2004; 
- 3 additional posts in 2005; 
- 4 posts to be redeployed in 2004 within DG PRESS. 
Indicative  request,  which  does  not  prejudge  the  results  of  the  evaluation  and  the  memorandum  which  is 
being prepared on the Commission’s participation in private-law bodies. 

33 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
 
 
7.3 

Other administrative expenditure deriving from the action 

Budget line 
(number and heading) 

Amount € 

Method of calculation 

Development of Europe by Satellite 
(EbS)  to  work  in  21  languages 
(already under way) and adaptation 
tools 
of 
library) 
(production, 
(in 
managed 
progress) 

audiovisual 
media 

in  digital 

format 

the 

16 02 04 – Operation of radio and television studios and 
audiovisual equipment 

€1 300 000 

Total 

€1 300 000 

The amounts are total expenditure for 12 months. 

I. 
II. 
III. 

Annual total (7.2 + 7.3) 
Duration of action 
Total cost of action (I x II) 

€1 300 000 
3 years 
€3 900 000 

8. 

FOLLOW-UP AND EVALUATION 

8.1 

Follow-up arrangements 

For  the  partnerships  with  the  Member  States,  all  the  activities  are  regularly  monitored  by  the 
operational units at headquarters and by the representations, via the Commission/Member State 
coordination teams on which they are represented. 

As  regards  the  relays  and  networks  and  the  activities  conducted  by  DG  PRESS,  the  DG’s 
internal monitoring and reporting system will be enhanced in order to ensure that resources are 
used as efficiently as possible in the new context (enlargement, new agreements in line with the 
Financial Regulation, increased checks, etc). 

8.2 

Arrangements and schedule for evaluation 

Recurrent evaluations will be carried out from 2004 onwards using an evaluation methodology 
specific to DG PRESS and drawing from the ongoing evaluation of activities under the PRINCE 
programme. 

As part of the evaluations of the activities of the relays, a specific evaluation will be carried out 
in 2005, using the DG PRESS evaluation methodology, in particular on the basis of the relays’ 
final  activity  reports,  the  reports  on  on-the-spot  checks,  the  reports/analyses  provided  by  the 
Commission representations, etc. It will also take account of the technical assistance provided to 
the  relays  by  the  Commission  departments  (training,  documentation,  information,  audiovisual 
and electronic services, etc.). The evaluation will be performed by an outside consultant. 

9. 

ANTI-FRAUD MEASURES 

The  provisions  of  the  financial  rules  relating  to  implementation  of  the  budget,  with  special 
reference to monitoring measures, will be put into effect. 

34 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
As  far  as  grants  are  concerned,  the  agreements  concluded  between  the  Commission  and 
beneficiaries  allow  for  on-the-spot  checks  by  the  Commission  or  the  Court  of  Auditors  at  the 
premises  of  the  direct  beneficiary  of  the  Community  grant  and  the  eventuality  of  requiring 
documentary  evidence  for  any  expenditure  made  under  such  agreements  for  a  period  of  five 
years following payment of the balance of the grant. 

Grant  beneficiaries  are  furthermore  required  to  submit  reports  and  financial  statements,  which 
are analysed from the point of view of content and eligibility of expenditure, bearing in mind the 
purpose of the Community funding. 

It  should  be  stressed  that  the  checks  carried  out  before  payments  are  made  will  cover  any 
objective  evidence  that  the  grant  beneficiary  can  supply,  such  as  the  certification  of  financial 
documents. 

35