Username: Password: Remember:


Latest Blog

Love Hurts

05 February 2010 |

Simon Cottrell It's a shame that the internet is a virtual medium, because there are a lot of people out there that I'd like to express my deep feelings of friendship to, and having spent the last two years here in Serbia, I'd like to do it in a truly Serbian way.


Feith: 'New Beginning' for Mitrovica
05 February 2010 | Lawrence Marzouk

The International Civilian Representative in Kosovo, Pieter Feith, has said the appointment of a team to create a new Serb-majority municipality in the divided city of Mitrovica could herald a 'new beginning'.

Macedonia Committed to EU and NATO Future
08 February 2010 | Sinisa-Jakov Marusic

There is no alternative to Macedonia's EU and NATO future, Macedonian President Georgi Ivanov said Sunday after the completion of the Munich Security Conference.

Bozic et al: First Instance Verdict Confirmed
08 February 2010 |

The Appellate Chamber of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina confirms the first instance verdict, sentencing Mladen Blagojevic to seven years in prison and acquitting Zdravko Bozic, Zoran Zivanovic and Zeljko Zaric of the charges that they committed war crimes in the Srebrenica area.



Bulgaria 'to Lose €500 million in EU Funding'

| 16 July 2008 |
 
The report puts more pressure on Sergey Stanishev's government
The report puts more pressure on Sergey Stanishev's government
Sofia _ Bulgaria is likely to lose €500 million in European Union funding over its failure to tackle crime and corruption, the Reuters news agency reports citing anonymous sources.

Bulgarian authorities will also be warned by the European Commission that they could lose more money if they do not intensify their efforts to tackle corruption. Sofia could face further financial sanctions, as the agencies in charge of the EU funds could be frozen or their accreditations suspended.

According to Reuters’ anonymous source, the European Commission on July 23 will issue three reports – one on corruption and organised crime, one on the judiciary and the other on how EU newcomers Bulgaria and Romania are managing the adoption of EU funds. The reports’ drafts are strictly confidential and even the countries’ governments are not familiar with them, Reuters reports.

Although both Balkan countries will be highly criticised for failing to tackle corruption and major problems at the judiciary, only Sofia is anticipated to face financial sanctions.

Under an investigation by the EU’s anti-corruption body, Olaf, Sofia has already been forced to freeze EU funding in three key project areas – on access to agricultural markets, technical support and road infrastructure. The funding of these projects will be lost, according to Reuters.

“Bulgaria has serious, regular problems. We’ll confirm that part of the money will be pulled out,” said Reuters’ anonymous source, adding that the sum is about € 500 million.

The further loss of EU funding would be critical for Bulgaria, pointed out Reuters.

Sofia is set to receive around €11 billion of EU funding for agriculture and regional development until 2013.

According to an unnamed Bulgarian official it would be worse for the country if the state agencies operating with EU funds lose their accreditation.

It is expected that Sofia will be praised for the efforts of deputy premier in charge of EU funds Meglena Plugchieva and the appointment of the new Interior Minister Mihail Mikov.

In April Bulgaria’s Interior Minister Rumen Petkov was forced to resign on April 13 following the arrest of two high-ranking police officials from his ministry. They are accused by prosecutors of passing sensitive information to shadowy businessmen and irregular phone tapping.

The killings of an author of books on the Bulgarian mafia and the chief of an energy company who were killed in two separate incidents in Sofia sparked warnings from the European Union about the country's failure to tackle contract killings.

In the report, Bulgaria will be deemed as failing to fight endemic corruption in state institutions and the regular suspension of court trials.

Meanwhile, Mark Grey, the European Commission spokesman, told Bulgarian National Radio that the final report is not ready yet. He added that the report will be under political discussion and refused to comment on its content.



Main News Page

Comments:
Bulgaria is not alone wrestling with EU funds
2008-07-23 03:35:28
The European Commission is set to withdraw the accreditation of two Bulgarian agencies and bar them for using EU funds after details of a European Commission report on Bulgaria’s fight against corruption and organised crime will be officially issued on July 23. Two agencies under the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works and the Finance Ministry will lose their permits to operate with EU funding under the bloc’s pre-accession programme PHARE. This could deprive Sofia of about €600 million. Two other agency/programme can meet the same procedure. Some average reader could think that some clever crocks have put nice sum in their pockets because the report highlights corruption, organized crime and economical fraud activities in Bulgaria. Undoubtedly this kind of crimes has happened. However the question about administration of EU funds is more complex than simple crimes. I have worked some 15 years with EU projects and would like bring forward some other aspects from fieldlevel of project management. EU has some 500-800 different programmes from where individual projects can have 10-100 % financing of their costs. There is some general guidelines, but nearly every programme has also individual regulations, practice and details. For administration it is huge task to manage, coordinate and implement this puzzle. EU funding/payment can be delayed or revised e.g. if project manager has offered coffee to participants during training session in one programme when this is allowed with other EU programme. Also he can make mistake using real exchange course in payment claim when only monthly average course is allowed. Most projects need own or SME financial contribution but sometimes according one programme rules it comes from too big company, or company is wrong side of municipal border while implementing regional development project. In payment claim some costs can be in wrong budget line or project manager has forgot to ask amendment/revision decision from Management Authority to do so. Some times it is also difficult to interpret if part of project partners´administrative work is its normal development work (uneligible cost) or strictly project development work (eligible cost). So there is different regulations which are eligible costs in each project depending from which programme main financing is coming. Many times while programme period changes even the EU officials do not know all details which to apply on the beginning of programme period - how then the project manager or province/state level managing authority could forecast them. Before mentioned boring details can give picture about bad project management, when similar details occurs with most of the projects one can judge situation as bad programme/EU fund management. But one can also see, that this kind of details are far away from organized crime scene. What is crime from my point of view is that most EU officials/Management Authorities are more interested about small financial details than the outcome of programme/projects. It is possible to keep budget lines, make a perfect financial report where every cent is in right place without any impact on the field. It is as well possible to implement project with excellent results, superb beneficiary feedback, with many spin-offs and follow-ups which following an insufficient financial report will be doomed as failure. In accordance of my opinion EU should shift the emphasis of the activity from financial nitpicking to goal orientated approach and the first question from EU officials should be the results on the field. The priorities could be e.g. following: * Is there any sence in proposed Logical Framework of programme/project * What are the results, are they verified and real * How the results were achieved (not to estimate justification of costs but to find best practices for similar cases in other regions/fields) * How much were the costs (to compare relation of results to investment) In case of Bulgaria I do not know how much the question is corruption, organized crime etc. and how much simply problems with applying complex EU bureaucracy new member state. However as taxpayer I would like to see EU concentrating to big lines in real world instead detail hooning between specialists about topics those influence to average citizen are close to zero.

Please read Terms and Conditions first
 

Your name:

Subject:

Comment:

Type in this code (used to prevent spam):

 
 

Whether it’s the Lotto, betting shops or gambling dens, Serbians are up for a gamble in increasing numbers and despite, or perhaps because of, the economic crisis, business is better than ever.


Albania’s parliament has extended the country’s moratorium on the use of speedboats along its coast for another three years. The moratorium is part of an effort to thwart illegal smuggling.


An international competition to manage Arena Zagreb has attracted only one local company.



Trencherman checks out this Celebrity Haunt.


Tim Judah, the Economist's Balkan's Correspondent, and regular Balkan Insight contributor, has fully updated one of the seminal works on the modern history of Serbia, bringing the narrative through to the present day.


Slobodan Trkulja is one of  Serbia’s hottest export items and his compositions and arrangements of traditional Serbian music have been widely praised.