Brussels, 26/02/2013 (Agence Europe) - The Commission has strongly refuted the Court of Auditors' criticism of inappropriate use of European Union Solidarity Funds (EUSF) by the Italian authorities, following the earthquake at Aquila, in 2009. The difference between the two institutions focuses on the definition of temporary shelter, which 70% of European aid was used to finance as a response to the earthquake (see EUROPE 10793).
The European Court of Auditors believes that the buildings constructed were permanent and therefore did not comply with the EUSF regulation. It also believes that they were too expensive and were not provided swiftly enough for people left homeless following the disaster (15,000 people out of 70,000 people required assistance).
The Commission states that the criticism is, “largely unfounded. It reflects a lack of appreciation of the challenges on the ground and unrealistic expectations of the Italian authorities”. The Commission confirms that the CASE project, responsible for building the housing units and criticised by the Court, did indeed respect the EUSF regulation and in less than a year provided accommodation for thousands of displaced persons, although the total reconstruction phase could stretch out over a ten-year period. With regard to the question of the costs being too high, as argued by the Court, the Commission justifies them because the new buildings are equipped with anti-earthquake systems. The Commission also regret the “speculation” by the Court with regard to the possibility that these new buildings may generate long-term revenues. There are no provisions in the EUSF regulation prohibiting this and any hypothetical income cannot be deemed a net profit, given the costly damages created by the earthquake.
The Court of Auditors recommends that the Commission revise the definition of temporary accommodation in the ongoing review of the EUSF regulation. The Commission asserts that there already is a paragraph on this subject in the proposal currently being negotiated but which will only be used to clarify and simplify the rules in a general sense. Under the terms of the revised regulation, new builds have always been eligible for financing provided by the EUSF.
With regard to the Court's suggestion to ensure that member states are better prepared for emergency situations, the Commission points out that there are limits in this respect. The Commission explains that drawing up rehousing plans for the whole of Italy is unrealistic, although it is encouraging the EU 27 to demonstrate that they have preventive measures in place. (MD/trans/fl)