Some sober thoughts on the day of Europe, 9th of May – financing of European projects

By: Hatto Fischer, Athens

---

...is grinding to a halt and no one seems to take note what is happening especially within the Interreg Program. At a recent conference about ‘culture and media’ held in Patras, March 25 – 29, 2006 a representative of the European Commission and responsible for communication said we should learn that often ‘less says more’. In reply to this could be said that some complex matters should not be simplified as if the European citizen is but a consumer of the jargons coming out of Brussels. A real political understanding of the situation Europe finds itself in after the failure to ratify the European Constitutional Treaty is that all kinds of Nationalisms are virulent and the European perspective has all but disappeared. At least it motivates no longer anyone to give ‘extra value’ to the making of a Europe which has by its own admission failed to fulfill the objectives set by the Lisbon protocol. At that time it was said Europe wanted to become the most competitive society in the world by basing everything on knowledge as understood and defined by the Information Society. Since May 1st, 2004 when ten new members joined a lot has gone wrong while the bargaining continues about what each member state ought to contribute compared to what everyone receives in return.

Since the Act of Freedom to Information is not applied in all Member States, there is no knowing who benefits, for instance, from the Agricultural Subsidy but at least in England it is now known that one of the major beneficiaries are the Queen and Prince Charles. So there must be some money flowing for otherwise pressure would increase to reform the Commission and to admonish the Council of Europe for not making progress at budgetary level to set the right priorities. This query is said because at project level some experience within the Interreg III B – CADSES program that the flow of money has come to a complete halt. There is no longer any way to know how the financial problem is going to be resolved before the time of these projects are up (life time usually an average of three years). These programs are organized in such a way that the over bureaucratization at Brussels level has been replaced by a similar problem at program level. For instance, the Managing Authority of the CADSES Program is located within the Ministry of Transport in Rom, Italy while the Technical Unit is in Dresden. And then there are added the national checks of all Financial Reports before the project leaders with their numerous partners can hand in their financial reports. At the same time, everyone is having problems keeping up with the changing rules for financial accounting.

Especially at national level they keep changing personnel and then everything starts from the beginning. No one seems to realize that the apparent re-nationalisation of European programs has led to such absurdities. No one seems to be, however, in a political position from where to counter this malaise. There has yet to be made some innovative proposals on how to make the administration of EU program more efficient while Brussels stays in dialogue with the actors implementing not the program but the funded projects. It can be said by now that there are cases where sub contractors of such programs have not been paid for over two years. One reason given by at least Greek political authorities involved in such projects is that they say law forbids them to take loans in order to make a pre financing possible. For the rules say pay first and then make your claims with the added risk that it is not a foregone conclusion what expenses are recognized as eligible, what not. Consequently Greek political authorities regardless of the level (Municipal, Regional, Prefecture) have been most reluctant to risk any pre payment but then they will not be able to claim in the end the money allocated to them for the implementation of the project. That means a constant paradox expresses itself through delays of payments especially to external experts while the necessary expenditures (investments) to which the original approval of the project has committed these authorities to are not made. For sure the days of granting EU funds up front are gone but without EU funds political authorities will not undertake actions with definite costs but no certainty when these are covered. All that is hardly surprising since in the absence of any monitoring and evaluation there neither a learning process going on to resolve this paradox or any accountability to be noticed at the overall European level. If that is Europe then the very absence of accountability and lack of payment in time means even huge INTERREG projects grind to a halt or else travel along like a car on three wheels while the fourth one is gone. They leave in their wake many if not helpless, then silent. A day of Europe would be more welcomed if this problem would be recognized at all levels. There should come through in all discussions some common sense so that work done would really be compensated and recognized in terms of its extra value for Europe. Otherwise there is to be feared that Europe outdoes on a permanent basis other economies known for obvious deficiencies e.g. the plight of miners in Russia who have to wait sometimes for their wages over six months before being paid. But to come back to the beginning, oddly enough Chancellor Merkel used most recently in a speech meant to prepare Europe for the German Presidency as of January 2007 to outline her new approach a formulation which may become the new buzz word, namely ‘less is more’. She may mean more national presence of the member states and less Europe, or less Euro

pean expansion and more consolidation in depth.

But if means in reality less payment at the bottom end of everything because those at the top take all, then Europe will loose out in the end altogether. Such a Europe will have no longer any competences in terms of governance to face social and economic injustices. At the same time, it will mean much more work will be needed but without pay to compensate for the absence of European funds if the European dimension is to be upheld. No wonder then that the only effective programs one hears about as of late are that of the volunteers whether for the Olympics, for Cultural Capitals or for Civil Protection yet this Civil Society has no real voice to claim more spending in that direction. Still, civil engagement does take place, but Europe as a whole risks loosing out on being believable as political entity with a sound morality. Thus it is hard to see how basic values shall be upheld. The erosion of them underneath the surface can be noticed whether with regards to immigrants or in the fight against terrorism. Politicians at all levels are prone to make all sorts of compromises and this has made European societies less liberal, more intolerant. Most worrying is a cheap version of Popularism as the case in Poland playing its over simplistic game. To those who think Europe can do without a constitution for either a while or even not at all, they are mistaken like the Dutch foreign minister. The legitimacy for the European Union is evaporating daily into thin air. The lack of a legal base is made worse by no one around who seems capable of renewing energies for a consensus needed to bring about such a constitution. However, only on the basis of such a consensus will Europe have legitimacy in the eyes of all its citizens. So clearly the day of Europe came and went without being hardly noticeable in the streets of European cities except for those who have been paid to sing a hymn on Europe. That is not much to go on.