|
|
Press
Release (Romanian version) |
|
Riscul de
deturnare masiva a destinatiei programelor cu Fonduri UE
ameninta reducerea decalajelor dintre Romania si spatiul comunitar
~ Comunicat de presa ~
Bucuresti, 23 mai 2008
In cadrul unei prime Conferinte Europene asupra prevenirii
neregulilor, fraudelor si coruptiei deja banuite sau anticipate
ca ar putea marca grav accesarea Fondurilor UE si, mai ales
implementarea ulterioara a proiectelor co-finantate din aceste
surse comunitare, Presedintele GRECO-Grupul de State impotriva
Coruptiei din Consiliul Europei, slovenul Drago KOS a
reliefat in mod deschis faptul ca Romania risca „urmari foarte
grave”, inclusiv inghetarea fondurilor daca va continua, dupa cum
s-a angajat in mod oficial, sa nu combata coruptia la nivel inalt
politic si al functionarilor publici de rang inalt. Spre comparatie,
inaltul demnitar - care conduce si comisia independenta de
specialitate din Slovenia - a invocat exemplul Bulgariei care este
deja la un pas de acest demers din partea Comisiei Europene.
Conferinta Europeana a fost organizata de Platforma “EU-RO Clearing
Funds”, coordonata de EUROLINK-Casa Europei, in parteneriat cu DBB
Akademie din Germania si Fundatia Radio Romania.
Tactica anihilarii reprosurilor prin omisune sau neprezentare
Si mai graitoare pentru situatia de impas in care se afla accesarea
Fondurilor UE in Romania, din punctul de vedere al gradului scazut
de transparenta al informatiilor, al perpetuarii prezentei pe site
de achizitii publice a numeroase apeluri de oferta (vadit
lovite de nulitate, cu vicii substantiale de formulare sau de-a
dreptul „dedicate”), al lipsei de inter-comunicare intre
solicitantii de finantare si multe din autoritatile responsabile, a
fost absenta importantilor reprezentanti guvernamentali care
confimasera prezenta la eveniment cu punctele de vedere solicitate
de organizatori. In actuala etapa, in pofida promisiunilor de
invitare a organizatiilor neguvernamentale implicate in monitorizare
si alarmare rapida la un dialog consultativ structurat, noua tactica
abordata de reprezentantii Guvernului consta in: ignorarea
mesajelor, invocarea unor scuze protocolare pentru
neprezentare, eschivarea prin diverse scrisori explicative
fata de raspunderile directe care le revin si minimalizarea
valorii/reprezentativitatii evenimentelor publice majore unde li
se solicita in mod direct clarificari si rapoarte publice de
activitate pentru informarea beneficiarilor potentiali, a
partenerilor sociali, mediului academic si sectorului ONG,
preocupate de un posibil derapaj al resurselor financiare
puse in joc.
Aplicarea in practica a cadrului legal d selectare a proiectelor
si a contractarii asistentei tehnice -deja marcate de confuzii,
lipsa de tranparenta si suspiciuni de incorectitudine administrativa
In cursul lucrarilor, a fost abordata o paleta tematica larga, dar
accentul a cazut pe neincrederea participantilor din randul
beneficiarilor potentiali, a asociatiilor oamenilor de afaceri,
multor experti tehnici in trasparenta si corectitudinea cu
care vor fi facute in continuare lansarea apelurilor de proiecte
de catre unele autoritati de management, a licitatiilor
publice catre sub-contractori, a informarii nepreferentiale a
beneficiarilor in vederea depunerii proiectelor in mod
nediscriminatoriu, a mentinerii unei stabilitati a regulilor si
procedurilor pe tot parcursul jocului etc, a unei politici viguros
transpuse in practica de prevenire a neregulilor si fraudelor. In
sumarul executiv al Raportului de monitorizare paralela nr. 4,
dat publicitatii cu acest prilej, institutiile care poarta
responsabilitatea cea mai mare sunt considerate a fi: Comitetul de
coordonare inter-ministeriala din cadrul Ministerului Economiei si
Finantelor, ANRMAP, Autoritatea de Audit, Departamentul de Lupta
Anti-Frauda din cadrul Guvernului, majoritatea agentiilor de
dezvoltare regionala ca organisme intermediare, Comisia de Afaceri
Europene a Parlamentului. In plus, utilizand metoda analizei
convergentei institutionale, un studiu preliminar scoate in
evidenta deja carentele grave ale comunicarii si
colaborarii dintre institutiile romanesti cu atributii
complementare sau conjugate. Aceste probleme sunt deja de natura sa
afecteze impactul calitativ al proiectelor, viteza si
eficienta de reactie a autoritatilor - in cazul unor crize sau
litigii majore, cat si credibilitatea procesului de accesare a
programelor de finantare ca atare.
“Achizitiile dedicate” sau cu unic ofertant – dovada unui demaraj
cu capcane si deraieri
In cadrul work-shop-ului dedicat dezbaterii acestor aspecte juridice
si administrative, moderata de jurnalista Cristina VASILOIU
(The Economist Intelligence Unit), reprezentantul ANRMAP a
incercat sa respinga toate criticile aduse modului defectuos in care
se desfasoara actualmente apelurile de oferte si procedurile de
achizitii publice si sa atribuie organizatiilor neguvernamentale ale
societatii civile responsabilitatea rezolvarii problemelor de
preventie/sanctionare, depistare a neregulilor si de instruire a
liderilor din adminstratia locala. De asemenea, acesta a incercat sa
minimalize cat mai mult intensitatea nemultumirilor, considerand ca
probleme foarte similare se intalnesc in majoritatea Statelor Membre
UE. Cu toate acestea, gravitatea problemelor semnalate a fost
relevata si reiterata simultan de articole gazduite de
prestigioasele Radio BBC si “The Economist” care
monitorizeaza si ele in paralel situatia programelor pentru tara
noastra .
Concluzii provizorii
In cursul conferintei, au fost date numeroase exemple de sprijin si
de bune practici oferite, de pilda, de Consiliul Europei, de OLAF,
de Banca Europeana de Investitii, de Guvernul Germaniei. Sunt
numeroase persoanele si institutiile de bune intentii care vad cu
ochi buni sansa actuala pe care o au romanii prin fondurile UE. In
urma unei interesante prezentari din partea Institutului European
din Romania, concluzia finala a conferintei a fost ca un
parteneriat efectiv si viabil intre gestionari, beneficiari si
echipele de project management se impune pentru a se reusi o
depasire radicala a apatiei, neincrederii opiniei publice si
beneficiarilor si a deficientelor actuale de natura sa afecteze la
modul generic procesul de accesarea Fondurilor UE.
Conferinta Europeana s-a bucurat de sprijinul Bancii “Bancpost”,
Membra a Grupului Eurobank EFG, iar Sponsorul principal a fost
Societatea “Deleanu Vasile-Avocati”, membra a
Warwick Legal Network. Alti sponsori: Détente Consultants
(Paris), Phaeton Gala si Biroul de Imagine. Partenerii
Media: Societatea Romana de Radiodifuziune, Agentia de presa
RADOR, the Money Channel TV, Radio ONG – proiect al
Forumului Donatorilor din Romania si al Fundatiei Synergetica,
Tribuna Economica, Euroconsultanta, Economie si
Administratie Locala, SmartFinancial.ro, SmartBank.ro,
PRWave.ro, Comunicatii Mobile.
Pentru conformitate,
Secretariatul Platformei “EU- RO Clearing Funds” |
|
Parallel Monitoring and Evaluation
Report |
|
Executive Summary of the Fourth
Report of Parallel Monitoring and Evaluation
on the current accession and
implementation stage of the projects
financed from European EU Funds in
Romania
Motto:
“The
anti-corruption discourse already disappeared from the rhetoric of
the political parties in Bucharest. Some voices in Brussels are
wondering now if it would not have been better to postpone
Romania’s accession ” – from an article presented by
BBC Romania – HotNews.ro (20 May 2008)
(Some of European
Commission’s officials) “ Feel deceived, for they really believed in
us and our promises undertaken before 1 January 2007. (...) Now, the
subject (fight against corruption) no longer exists in Romania, only
reversed.” – Declaration of
Mrs. Monica MACOVEI, ex Minister of Justice
Following the
Public Consultation
on the level of transparency and
administrative capacity of acceding/implementing the EU projects, we
succeeded to synthesize the following set of
major and pressing
difficulties/problems as
regards the absorption process in Romania, which were pointed out by
participants, potential beneficiaries, partners of the „EU-RO
Clearing Funds” Platform or of the Consortium of Strategic
Partnership (CPS), in the monitorised period
April-May 2008.
These observations and conclusions will be presented, as usual, to
Romanian authorities and also to the
European Commission
and the European Court of
Auditors, in order to
receive the official points of view, observations, comments and
recommendations of these institutions.
Major
difficulties and problems
as regards the
absorption process of EU Funds in Romania
-
The most serious doubts refer to the
quality and transparence of the pre-section and prioritization of
projects within the Regional and Environment operational programs
by the regional committees of selection.
-
Although there are frequent
procedural or legislative changes, which require the remake of the
feasibility studies or of the soliciting the package of technical
assistance through the calls for public procurements, the Romanian
officials reported a considerable number of already absorbed
funds. Nevertheless, due to the new requirements, there are no
post-accession implemented projects.
-
Despite the ACIS' unification of
information efforts, the access of the majority of entrepreneurs
to the information on the various axes of EU funds still remain
difficult through the
fragmentation and dispersion of information
on the websites of various
ministries, even if it is related to the same sectoral operational
program.
-
Considering the level of „ensuring
the communication strategy”, the dissatisfaction is given by the
lack of a prompt and clear
reply of the various
managing authorities to the inquires of the beneficiaries. We
asked similar questions coming from local communities and we did
not receive any official answer, even if the questions were sent
in copy (Cc) to all responsible institutions, including ACIS.
Furthermore, the dissatisfaction involve also most of Regional
Development Agencies (as intermediary bodies), which do not act as
pro-active factors and facilitators, able to
promote the most
qualified and eligible projects and applications.
-
Many beneficiaries face serious
difficulties in determining to whom should they address
efficiently in order to have their problems solved as responsible
and quick as possible within the process of
accessing/implementation of projects. Instead of the needed
implementation of the principles of the
European Good Governance
and of the familiarisation with the
requirements of the Lisbon
Strategy, transferring
problems from one authority/agency to another one seem to have
become almost the rule, so that nobody could be held responsible
for not finding the right and coherent solution to this kind of
problems. Most of the institutions limit themselves to
brief and incomplete information
sent via email, which
leave no space for clarification, adaptation, corroboration with
other information or for the authorities to synthesize repetitive
problems of beneficiaries/applicants.
-
Even at this stage, several dilemmas
were expressed as regards the
ambiguous, unprofessional
or even
„dedicated”
content
of most calls for public procurement
of the local/county authorities requesting technical assistance or
consultancy. We received many complains from consultancy agencies
and we already send them as examples to the European Commission.
Most of the complains and questions refer to the role played in
the monitoring and prevention areas by the
National Authority for Regulating
and Monitoring Public Procurement
and by the specialized department
within the Ministry of
Economy and Finance. It
is disturbing the level of incompetence or dishonest of the public
servants within local authorities/city halls which launch such
calls, which could finally have as a result the refund procedure.
-
We also consider that the European
Commission, especially
OLAF and the budget
committee of the European
Parliament should better
consider the fragility and apathy towards a vigorous policy in the
area of preventing fraud and waste of the money of the European
citizens.
We can mention
here the lack of legislative framework for the activity of the
Romanian Audit Authority, but also the lack of pro-active
mobilization of this institution, which avoided in many occasions to
participate/react to the official invitations addressed by “EU-RO
Clearing Funds Platform”. Also, we can mention a similar
disappointment regarding the activity and role of the
Directorate of Fight against
Corruption of the
Romanian Government. The main complaints are the lack of dialogue
with the civil society, the
absence of visibility for its own activities and impact, as well as
the lack of involvement in the activity of preventing and constant
correction of the encountered irregularities. Moreover, we point out
the significant dissatisfaction related to the lobby capacity of the
Committee of
Inter-ministerial coordination of EU Funds
established within the Ministry of
Economy and Finance, which lacks a clear message and has a fragile
capacity of coordinating various authorities.
Provisional
Forecast and Conclusions
The poor
level of institutional convergence
explicated above, as well
as the fragile weak
inter-institutional communication
combined with a passive attitude
towards the inquires of beneficiaries coming from many politicians
and some of the representatives of the central and sometimes
regional authorities lead to serious doubts of a honest,
professional and transparent absorption process.
Using the
terminology and methodology of a recent study of the Civil Society
Institute in Lithuania, developed by the Vilnius chapter of
Transparency International,
a partner organisation of OLAF in the European Union, as well as
adapting these results to the Romanian realities, we could
anticipate that the public perception is dominated by the feeling
that the absorption process in Romania is and will be marked by the
following potential dangers:
the organisation
of a large number of public procurements, which may seem formally
correct, but are in fact doubtful in substance, if not “dedicated”,
bringing a prejudice to the quality of the projects and of the
implementation;
the extensive use
of the so-called “illegal
connections” for acceding
the funds via “friendly” or “ad-hoc” consultancy agencies or local
branches of multinational companies constrained
“to adapt”
to the rules of Bucharest in order to present good results to their
head-quarters;
the interference
as sub-contractors for goods
and services of many “loyal
companies” with the aim to obtain as many funds as possible in order
to weaken or to dilute the serious projects or the EU policies as a
whole;
the provision of
“bribes”
for a more favorable evaluation of the
projects, which are usually directed via independent assessors or
evaluators or via consultancy firms or banks;
the concentration
of all “semi-confidential
nature” information or
heavily accessible on the hands of hidden economic interest groups,
up to the final deadlines of the call for projects;
generating a
discouraging trend within SMEs beneficiaries, with the aim to
“drain” some percentage of the EU Funds towards false priorities or
artificial objectives in relation to the priorities of Romania’s
socio-economic cohesion.
For
conformity,
Platform for
Action and Rapid Intervention of the Civil Society
in favour of
stimulating the absorption of European Funds –
“EU-RO CLEARING
FUNDS” www.Portal.StructuralFunds.ro |
|
Argument
