92003E0221

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0221/03

by Samuli Pohjamo (ELDR)and Mikko Pesälä (ELDR) to the Commission

(3 February 2003)

Subject: Disparities in travel expenses in connection with EU projects

People participating in the European Union's various projects who live in peripheral regions of Europe are compelled to budget for travel on the same basis as their counterparts who live more centrally. In practice this means that those who live closer to the centre of Europe can travel to meetings using their own cars or cheap flights, while for example those who live in Finland often exhaust their travel allowances before a project is over. As a result they may not always be able to attend important meetings.

Could the Commission adjust its budgeting for travel expenses, for example using a coefficient which reflects distances to be travelled and geographical location?

Could the Commission report on EU projects and for instance compare the travel expenses of people based in Finland and Sweden on the one hand and Britain and Germany on the other? Differences in the costs of individual journeys to different countries' project representatives should also be examined, as should the adequacy of travel allowances in relation to the duration of a project.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2003)

The question raised by the honourable member concerns travel expenses in research project carried out in the Information Society Programme (IST) under the Fifth Framework Programme of the European Community (FP5)(1). The following paragraphs explain the rules for reimbursement of travel expenses in the Fifth and Sixth Framework Programme (FP6)(2)

The Commission has set out in the Commission Regulation No 996/1999/EC of 11 May 1999 on the implementation of Council Decision 1999/65/EC concerning the rules for the participation of undertakings, research centres and universities and for the dissemination of research results for the implementation of the Fifth framework programme of the European Community (1998-2002) the general principles for the Community contributions for the FP5. In these rules, the general principle is that the Commission contributes to the total eligible costs of the action. One of the eligible cost categories is travel and subsistence. The principle for calculation of the Community contribution is that the Community contributes with a given percentage to these total eligible costs. In the case of organisations using the so-called full cost model, the Community contribution is up to 50 % of the total eligible costs for travel for the participant, in case of organisations using the so-called additional cost model, the Community contribution is 100 % of the total eligible costs. However, those using the additional cost model are not reimbursed at 100 % for all their costs, only those additional direct costs that are not covered by their recurrent funding.

This principle is further elaborated in the Annex II to the different model contracts for FP5 and in the financial guidelines that have been issued for FP5. However, the main principle remains that the Commission contributes to the total eligible costs of the participants as documented by the participants. The Commission has not set out specific rules or ceilings for travel reimbursement. The distribution of the budget between cost categories is agreed by the participants and the Commission in negotiations before the contract is signed for each contract individually. Although there is some room for adjustment of the budget between categories and between partners, there are some limitations on these transfers, and often the agreement of the Commission is required before a major transfer take place.

For the FP6 the main principle of the Community contributing to the total eligible costs has been maintained, however with some important changes. In the FP6 there are no predefined eligible cost categories, and the contract will not set out any breakdown in cost categories. The participants in a contract can distribute the budget as they see fit with a view to achieving the purpose of the contract. Therefore, the distribution

of for example travel costs between the participants will be the responsibility of the participants themselves and such costs would be reimbursed if they meet the criteria established by the research contract (i.e. actual, economic and necessary, incurred during the life of the project, determined in accordance with the contractor's usual accounting principles and recorded in their accounts).

In summary for the research projects in both FP5 and FP6 it is an internal decision of the consortium how the travel budget is distributed between the participants. As this is an internal decision for the consortia, no coefficient for taking account the geographical distance is applied. The Commission has currently not foreseen to carry out a comparison of the travelling costs of different projects according to the geographical origin of the participants. Under FP6 the Commission does not require a detailed breakdown of the costs by category (such as travel) for each participant, but requires a management level justification of the costs and their certification by an external auditor.

(1) http://www.cordis.lu/fp5/.

(2) http://fp6.cordis.lu/fp6/home.cfm.