91998E0934

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0934/98

by Elena Marinucci (PSE) to the Commission

(26 March 1998)

Subject: Life programme

In December 1997, the Commission presented the Council, some three months late, with the report provided for in Article 7 of the Life Regulation No 1404/96(1). The report was to provide the basis for discussions with the budgetary authority for the purpose of examining the reference amount with a view to possibly revising, i.e. increasing, the amount, taking into account the applications received. The discussion does not appear to have taken place in time and the Commission has actually proposed to reduce the reference amount from the level set in the initial financial plan.

Can the Commission indicate:

1. the level, in percentage terms, of the implementation of the budget for the three Life sectors, for commitment and payment appropriations?

2. The percentage increase in the number of projects received from the Member States for the 1998 financial year?

If the level of implementation of the budget proves satisfactory and the number of projects presented under the Life programme is shown to have risen, particularly in countries which have made consistent efforts to provide information on and disseminate the results of this instrument, what explanation does the Commission intend to give those who have submitted viable projects but cannot receive funding because of a lack of finance?

Does the Commission not agree that it deserves to be criticized for being lax about the environment as a result of its failure to guarantee the support that successful financial instruments such as Life deserve? What are the reasons for any loss of confidence in this instrument?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(25 May 1998)

The report provided in Article 7 of the Regulation No (EC) 1404/96 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1973/92 establishing a financial instrument for the environment (LIFE)(2) was indeed late although the main conclusion was communicated orally on time to the Council. The conclusion was that LIFE would actually be able to use greater resources up to and beyond the current reference amount of 450 MECU. However, in the current public finance situation in Europe, the Commission considered it necessary to submit a preliminary draft budget requiring almost no increase in total appropriations in comparison the previous year. In the case of LIFE, as a direct consequence of this political choice, it would be impossible to attain the reference amount planned for the period as a whole.

The budget 1998 adopted by the budget authority essentially confirmed the political choice proposed by the Commission. The reference amount of the Regulation was actually not revised given that it is only an indicative figure.

The level of implementation of the 1997 budget was, for Life-Nature, 100 % of commitment appropriations, 86 % of payment appropriations. For Life-Environment it was 100 % of commitment appropriations, 100 % of payment appropriations. For Life-Third countries it was 96 % of commitment appropriations and 79 % of payment appropriations.

The percentage growth of project proposals in 1998 as compared to 1997 was for Life-Nature 10 %, for Life-Environment 23 %, for Life-Third countries 50 %.

The general aim of LIFE is to contribute to the development and implementation of Community policy and legislation in the field of the environment. It is obviously unfortunate that the limited financial resources of LIFE do not allow all viable proposals to be financed. This is even more true taking into consideration the improvement in quality of the proposals received, partly due to the information campaigns carried out by the Commission in collaboration with the Member States.

The Commission considers LIFE a very important and successful instrument. Nevertheless, in order to prepare the revision proposal foreseen under Article 14 of the Life Regulation, an external evaluation of its performance is currently taking place. The external evaluators' report is due in June this year.

Finally, and in the light of the above-mentioned explanations, the Commission can only underline its full confidence in the instrument that is and will be essential for the implementation of environmental policies in the present eligible countries, as well as in the countries candidate for accession.

(1) OJ L 181, 20.7.1996, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 181, 20.7.1996.