Sunday

22nd May 2022

MEPs vote not to publish controversial audit report

After a heated debate, MEPs from the budgetary control committee voted on Tuesday afternoon (26 February) not to publish a confidential report detailing abuses in the way some deputies use their monthly staff allowance.

In the morning session of the committee, the MEPs got locked in an internal dispute over whether to make the 92-page document public or not.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

  • The EU's anti-fraud office, OLAF, has been given a copy of the report (Photo: European Commission)

"There are no names of individuals in this report, no political parties or nationalities mentioned. Therefore, I do not see why EU citizens should not be allowed to see it", UK liberal MEP Chris Davies said.

"It's ridiculous. Even the other MEPs of this house [not being members of the budgetary control committee] cannot see it […] We have shot ourselves in the foot with this blanket of secrecy", he added, insisting that instead of being kept secret, the document should be used as "a manifesto for change".

Danish MEP Jens-Peter Bonde from the Independence and Democracy group also called for the report to be made public, giving examples of its content.

"There are examples where salaries for assistants are directed to accounts from the members themselves. In one example, money had been sent to a day care centre, and in another example, to a service provider dealing with wood", Mr Bonde said in a statement.

In another one, "a special Christmas bonus was given to an assistant 19.5 times his monthly salary", he added.

MEPs are entitled to up to 17,000 euro a month for payment to assistants.

The report on how some deputies use this money came to light last week but to date has only been available to a small group of MEPs – the members of the budgetary control committee – and only if they read it under supervision, do not take notes and agree to sign a paper that they would not quote from it.

There are reportedly two versions of the report – a "soft" version without names (which MEPs are calling to be published) and one with names, a parliament source said, but this has been denied by an official working for the budgetary control committee.

Pure working method

But while some MEPs in the budgetary control committee called for the report to be made available to the public, others argued in favour of keeping certain working documents confidential.

Herbert Bosch, an Austrian socialist MEP and head of the committee said that its work would be "jeopardised" if the report was made public.

He said that the committee would "no longer continue to receive certain information from the European Parliament" if it made its confidential reports public. He also noted that the committee is not entitled to make the decision but rather the parliament's administration.

He was backed up by Spanish Christian democrat Jose Javier Pomes Ruiz.

"This is a matter of work effectiveness, not an issue of transparency", said Mr Pomes-Ruiz.

"Transparency is one thing, working method is another", he insisted, adding: "for example, if I have a row with my wife at home, I will not make it public."

Socialist MEP Costas Botopoulos also said that "from a legal point of view, it's clear who can use which documents".

But he added that he personally was in favour of making the document public and did not see an "illegality" in this.

The \"scandal\" is how the issue is handled

At the end of the afternoon session of the committee, those opposing the publication of the report won against those appealing for more transparency.

During a vote on whether or not the committee should ask the parliament's administration to make the report public, 14 MEPs voted in favour of the move, while 21 voted against and the issue is now off the committee's agenda.

"This shows that the budgetary control committee wants to scrutinise us, but doesn't want to scrutinise its own affairs", Mr Bonde said after the vote.

The fact that there are "crooks" in the European parliament is not a scandal in itself, as they exist everywhere, Mr Bonde said.

"The scandal is how you handle them. Then, it is bad image [for the European parliament]", he added.

The EU's anti-fraud body OLAF has been sent a copy of the report and is now expected to investigate whether MEPs have been involved in fraud using public money.

Meanwhile, Swedish Green MEP Carl Schlyter, acting in his capacity as an EU citizen, has used his right to ask for authorisation to see the parliament's report and received a letter that his request is under process.

Under parliament rules, EU citizens can ask to see the institution's documents on the condition that they do not contain names or, if they do, that the citizen accepts that the names be taken out.

MEPs to change staff system after damaging report

Moves are under way to change the system for paying out staff allowances in the European Parliament after a damaging report recently revealed widespread abuse of the system, currently overseen by MEPs.

EU lobbies Hungary to break oil sanctions deadlock

After the EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen's Budapest trip, Hungary suggested it wants EU funds to offset the extra costs from receiving different oil sources, and the increased energy prices the planned Russian oil embargo entails.

Political groups shun far-right pro-Kremlin MEP

French MEP Thierry Mariani from the far-right Identity and Democracy Group is spearheading a report in the parliament's foreign affairs committee. The socialists are boycotting it.

Opinion

Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine - the case for granting EU candidacy

Granting EU candidacy status to Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine will firmly anchor their ties with Brussels — and enable the EU to secure its place in the Black Sea region, connecting Europe to China and energy-rich Central Asia, bypassing Russia.

Opinion

The EU Parliament Covid inquiry: the questions MEPs must ask

A basic lack of transparency around the EU's vaccines procurement negotiations has prevented effective public and parliamentary scrutiny. It has also made it impossible to answer some of the key questions we put forward here.

News in Brief

  1. UK to send 'hundreds' of migrants to Rwanda each year
  2. Norwegian knife attacks were domestic dispute
  3. Sweden hits back at Turkey's 'disinformation' in Nato bid
  4. Germany's Schröder gives up one of two Russia jobs
  5. G7 countries pledge €18bn in financial aid for Ukraine
  6. Italian unions strike in protest over military aid for Ukraine
  7. Russia cuts gas supply to Finland
  8. Half of Gazprom's clients have opened rouble accounts

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic delegation visits Nordic Bridges in Canada
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersClear to proceed - green shipping corridors in the Nordic Region
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic ministers agree on international climate commitments
  4. UNESDA - SOFT DRINKS EUROPEEfficient waste collection schemes, closed-loop recycling and access to recycled content are crucial to transition to a circular economy in Europe
  5. UiPathNo digital future for the EU without Intelligent Automation? Online briefing Link

Latest News

  1. What Europe still needs to do to save its bees
  2. Remembering Falcone: How Italy almost became a narco-state
  3. Economic worries and Hungary on the spot Next WEEK
  4. MEPs urge sanctioning the likes of ex-chancellor Schröder
  5. MEPs call for a more forceful EU response to Kremlin gas cut
  6. Catalan leader slams Pegasus use: 'Perhaps I'm still spied on'
  7. More EU teams needed to prosecute Ukraine war crimes
  8. French EU presidency struggling on asylum reforms

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us