Laziness in achieving European integrations and EU candidate status, Serbia`s financial assert provided from EU`s "checkout-counter" keeps reducing for our country has the access to two out of five IPA Fund programmes, unlike Croatia, Bulgaria or Hungary which receive even few times higher amounts of financial injections for their projects.
First IPA Fund programme regards institutions, the development of local self-government, justice and police reforms, the upgrowth of civil society, assistance in social-economic reforms, as well as health and educational sector. The other programme concerns the development of cooperation in frontier area.
Ognjen Miric, the coordinator of the management of the EU funds in Serbian Government, explains that every country plans its expenditures, and that document is known as "multi-annual indicative financial framework".
"It`s up to us to demonstrate that we are capable to attract more finances with projects worth that money. Europe is strict when it comes to budget supervision, because it is the money of their tax payers. Just like a certain financial amount is provided for every financial year, the European Commission may reduce or not approve finances, and it may happen when a national government decides not to pave a path toward Euro-integrations," says Miric, adding that only after it achieves candidate status, Serbia may apply for IPA funds regarding regional, human resources and rural development.
To prove how much the money from pre-accession funds matter in case when Serbia tries to complete reforms and adjoin the EU, one needs to know that foreign investments provided for ten new member countries (Czech Republic, Estonia, Lithuania, Cyprus, Latvia, Malta, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia) have been increased from 24.5 billion euro in 2000 to 39.3 billion euro in 2007, which means that the investments have increased for 60 percent.
Serbia could exist without the European Union only if it speeds up the reforms and gets to the position of Estonia faster then expected, but reality indicates that pre-accession funds and the reform of the system are of high importance for completing the process of transition. Besides, the EU provides significant financial support to new EU members, meaning that Bulgaria, a country similar to Serbia concerning both the population and size, receives five times higher amount of money.
It is planned that 282.8 billion euros should be invested in less developed EU member countries between 2007 and 2013, in a way that Poland receives 22.1, Slovakia 11.3 and Slovenia 4.1 billion euros.
Since Serbia is still far from full EU membership, higher amounts of financial asserts from EU funds can be expected only after reaching the candidate status. Neighbouring Croatia has managed to advance in process of Euro-integrations, which gave this country the possibility to apply for receiving 30 percent more finances than before, when Croatia was only a potential candidate for EU accession.
But if Serbia does not realise the candidate status until the end of current year, our country will certainly miss the best opportunity for approving higher amounts of financial support for the purposes of system`s reforms. The complicated procedure of amending EU budget is planned until the end of 2009, which, according to Ognjen Miric, would be a good moment for providing higher expenses for Serbia in three year period.
"It`s important for us to prepare for candidate status and, at the same time, for achieving three IPA components, which imply this status in the process of Euro-integration", explains Miric, stressing that each IPA component matches some structural fund intended for member states, thus the experience in this process is of significant importance for money retreatment from funds once Serbia becomes EU member.
This process is complicated and endured, and negotiations with the European Commission can even last for 12 months, while the contracting procedures up to six months. That is the reason why the realisation of projects, planned to be financed in 2007, begins in 2009. This money is intended to be used by various institutions and public companies, including ministries and the Electric Power Industry, as well as local self-governments and NGO`s.
European practice, however, proves that EU funds were sources of corruption, which inspired the British "Open Europe" independent research centre to put up a list of 100 top-cases of malversations and prodigality. EU auditors have stipulated that nearly 80 million euros was spent on false projects such as building ski paths in a plain which during winters remains without snow or growing olive yards on a local dump.
Instead of buying solar photovoltaic panels, an Italian dentist has spent money from EU funds on expensive cars, while a Spanish mayor has used money intended to be used for riding school for erecting a mansion which was afterwards rented to prostitutes, because the building was not given the license for public use.
Unless political elite refuses to drop a fear of regionalism, Serbia will probably be denied a significant financial aid, although there has not occurred a problem regarding malversation in using EU funds so far. Serbia could adjust to EU regional policy, which implies an even development of European countries and its regions, by forming the Nomenclature of Units for Territorial Statistics.
In a moment when Serbia tries to manage EU funds, Serbian officials need to bear in their minds that in the course of EU accession process most of the countries have not succeeded in using all finances authorised by Brussels just because there was not an efficient decentralised system of financial management. Spain has succeeded during its European integrations, which made this country not only the most common EU funds user, but the fifth largest economy within the EU and the eight in the world.
* CEV Magazine is an online publication of the Centre for European Values. (Photo: European Parliament) 
