Brussels, 10/01/2001 (Agence Europe) - The lack of detail in objectives and the inadequacy of controls are the two main criticisms expressed by the Committee on Budgetary Control towards the European Commission regarding four special reports by the Court of Auditors on Structural Funds. The Dell'Alba report (Radical, Italy), to be submitted next week to the plenary vote (debate Tuesday 16), proposes to MEPs that they make the following criticism and recommendations concerning:
Additionality, the principle whereby European funds must not be substituted for financing of national public authorities but serve to cofinance specific projects. The report recalls that this principle is essential and calls for compliance to be better verified (clearer definition, more statistics, transmission of information, follow-up, sanctions). In this sense, the report approves the new regulation on the Structural Funds which should make it possible to "simplify (…) verification of additionality".
Support given by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) to the development of industrial sites. "The Commission does not know where this money really goes" and "part of the funds has allowed financing of measures including projects of a kind that does not relate to industrial reconversion", we read in the Dell'Alba report. The report calls for clear objectives to be followed throughout the whole duration of the programme. It also calls on the Member States and the Commission to set in place a real Community reconversion policy, comprising a diagnosis of needs, selection criteria for projects, as well as evaluation of achievements, which would allow active management of the territory.
Promotion of youth employment by the European Social Fund (ESF) and the European Agricultural Guarantee and Guidance Fund (EAGGF-Guidance): the aims are not defined in a sufficiently clear way, and it is difficult to measure the impact of such aid, denounces the report which calls on Member Sates to present action plans based on concrete and measurable objectives.
PEACE programmes and International Fund for Ireland (IFI). The rapporteur supports the activities of the IFI and the special PEACE programme, for which he recognises the innovative and positive aspect for consolidation of the peace process, but he considers that the Commission has not sufficiently verified the use of Community funds by the IFI. Regarding the PEACE programme, the report makes some recommendations (more control, no overlapping with Structural Fund programmes) that he hopes to see taken into account in the PEACE II programme).