§ Mr. VazTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assistance the UK has given to each EU applicant country since 7 June 2001. [63443]
§ Peter HainThe UK pays 19.6 per cent. of EU pre-accession assistance (the total figure for such assistance was €3,240 million in 2001 and €3,328 million in 2002).
Last financial year, the Department for International Development provided further assistance for the Candidate Countries through its bilateral programme of assistance. The amounts spent per country was; Baltic States (Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia) £1,595,765, Poland £2,526,998. Hungary £1,264,405. Slovakia £2,180,647, Czech Republic £725,416, Slovenia £82,800, Romania 636W £5,430,728, Bulgaria £,760,117, Turkey £2,485,074. DFID did not provide any specific assistance for Cyprus and Malta.
The Department for International Development also provided £2,254,120 for Central and Eastern European Regional Projects.
The UK was the second largest contributor to the EU's TAIEX programme, which delivers technical assistance to Applicant Countries, including transposition of legislation in 2001 and is the leading Member State so far in 2002. Over 20 UK civil servants have been selected in the last year to work on new twinning projects in applicant country Ministries, making over 50 either in the countries or preparing to arrive. The UK won the second highest number of new twinning projects in 2001 (25) and has won involvement in eight more so far in 2002. The UK has now won its one hundredth such project and was the first Member State to become involved in projects in all 12 eligible countries.
Through bilateral Action Plans, the Foreign Office spent £1.8 million in the EU applicant countries during the last financial year. An additional £608,541 was spent from Command Programme Budget allowances devolved to the Embassies in the Candidate Countries. Further assistance has been provided through functional departments' budgets (e.g. Global Conflict Prevention Fund) but to provide the information requested would incur disproportionate costs.