You are in:
- Contents » Scams
The EU's Omerta
“This Parliament is a paradise of unjustified privileges and possibilities for real cheats. It is a central problem for democracy and credibility in Europe.”
You will doubtless be unsurprised to hear that Euro-MPs from the EU Parliament's budgetary committee voted against revealing the contents of the secret fraud report to the public.
The report shows how some Euro-MPs abuse staff allowances of up to €17,000 a month to pay family members, or pocket it themselves.
Those defending the code of silence said that the budget committee's work would be jeopardised if the document was made public; it was claimed that some information would not be forthcoming if it was likely to enter the public domain.
In response, we have to ask "what is the budgetary committee's job?" If it can't reveal its findings, how are we to trust it is carrying out its duties?
Austrian Socialist Euro-MP Herbert Bösch, the committee chairman, said it was a waste of time trying to get the report published. He himself admitted that he would keep his expenditure private: "I will refuse any demand to have a look at my journeys or trips because sometimes you have to meet people off the agenda.”
Yes, perhaps a lunch here and there. But an annual allowance of €204,000? It can't all be secret trips.
Another on the Committee, Spanish Christian democrat Jose Javier Pomes Ruiz, gave an even more bizarre explanation:
"Transparency is one thing, working method is another (...) For example, if I have a row with my wife at home, I will not make it public."
EURSOC is certain that somewhere in Mr Pomes-Ruiz's mind there is a clear explanation of what he means by this analogy, but it is not evident to us. If he and his missus disagree, that is clearly a matter for him, her and their neighbours. But if hundreds of MEPs are fiddling taxpayers money and closing down any enquiries which might bring the gravy train to a halt, this is very much a public issue.
Interestingly, the EU Observer reports that there may be two versions of the report, a confidential version which details scams without naming offending Euro-MPs and a second which names names.
Clean-up campaigners and Eurosceptics were quick to respond:
Denis MacShane, Labour MP and former Europe Minister: “Any reports on these matters should be in the public domain. End of story. MEPs, like MPs, do themselves no good by not being as transparent as possible as is the case with British MEPs from the mainstream parties.”
Kate Hoey, Labour MP: “This is another example of the closed and secretive nature of the EU.”
Philip Davies, Tory MP: “People have long known it is a bit of a gravy train in the European Parliament and this will probably confirm their worst fears. This will further undermine people’s confidence in European institutions.”
Martin Bell, the former independent MP and antisleaze campaigner: "It is a complete racket."
Danish MEP Jens-Peter Bonde: "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 .In another, a special Christmas bonus was given to an assistant 19.5 times his monthly salary."
Hans-Peter Martin, Austrian MEP ostracised after he filmed some of his colleagues signing in for the day to collect their per diem allowance, then promptly leaving, said: “This Parliament is a paradise of unjustified privileges and possibilities for real cheats. It is a central problem for democracy and credibility in Europe.”
Like any good organised crime operation, the Euro-MPs on the committee turned their fire on the whistleblowers. In this case, British LibDem Chris Davies was the target of criticism for revealing some of the contents of the report.
The Briton, who said that some MEPs could face jail if their scams were revealed to police, was told he brought the parliament into disrepute.
Euro-MPs are doing that very well without Mr Davies' help.
