On Monday, the European Court of Auditors (ECA) reminded the European Parliament’s Committee on Environment of the conclusions of its report published last June (see EUROPE 13657/13) on the financing of the fight against forest fires.
Funding for prevention, through the Cohesion Fund, the European Regional Development Fund, the Interreg cross-border cooperation programme and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) has increased, but is not always spent where it is most needed, according to the ECA.
Shortcomings were identified in the selection of projects, based on out-of-date maps, for example. The ECA also noted the lack of appropriate indicators for evaluating the results of funded projects and disseminating information to Member States.
Jutta Paulus (Greens/EFA, German) lamented: “While we could be collecting data and we should do so, but we don’t want to”, referring to the harmonised framework for monitoring the EU’s resilient forests, which is expected to be adopted on Tuesday 23 September by the European Parliament’s Committees on Environment and Agriculture. “We’re shooting ourselves in the foot if, tomorrow, we don’t adopt” this forest monitoring framework, confirmed Martin Haüsling (Greens/EFA, German). This would enable more coordinated monitoring and improved prevention, he believes. The text proposes “a range of indicators that could be used to monitor the health of our forests”, added Marta Temido (S&D, Portuguese).
“We have a very robust monitoring system at European level called EFFIS (‘European Forest Fire Information System’)”, pointed out Pascal Arimont (EPP, Belgian). Although functional, this satellite data collection system is not used “when it comes to compiling projects and then evaluating their effectiveness”, said the MEP with surprise. Rather than creating a new system, he recommended using the existing one.
The European Commission reiterated that its role was to advise Member States and ensure that spending was carried out “in a regular and legal manner”. It assured that it was committed to making “greater efforts in the area of sharing good practice”, particularly as it is not responsible for selecting the projects funded. (Original version in French by Florent Servia)