Europe, Headlines

CORRUPTION-EU: The Gravy Train Rolls On

Stefania Bianchi

BRUSSELS, Apr 15 2005 (IPS) - A leading anti-corruption group has condemned the refusal by the European Parliament to reform its controversial expenses system.

Transparency International (TI), a leading global non-governmental organisation (NGO) devoted to fighting corruption reacted with dismay Thursday after members of the only democratically elected European Union (EU) institution rejected the reform proposals earlier this week..

Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) voted Tuesday against a proposal to replace the generous system of automatic travel expenses with a system that would reimburse actual travel costs. They also rejected a proposal to allow auditors to check the way MEPs fund their private pensions and a system of sanctions for those found guilty of violating parliamentary rules.

"This decision is deeply disappointing. The rejected reforms are essential in ensuring the financial accountability of MEPs. The current system is open to embezzlement," TI chief executive David Nussbaum said in a statement Thursday.

Critics of the current system say there is no control over travel reimbursements, pension contributions and office allowances and that this enables MEPs to receive tens of thousands of euros a year in first class travel payments, on top of their annual salary.

They do not have to produce receipts, which means they can claim the full amount for first class or taxi fares even if they have flown on budget airlines or given a lift in a car.

MEPs’ basic salaries range according to the country they are from. They start at 800 euros (1033 dollars) a month for MEPs in Lithuania and Estonia to 12,000 euros (15,530 dollars) a month in Italy – the highest paid. MEPs from Britain earn the same as a member of parliament, ú57,485 (108,840 dollars) a year.

An MEP can make about 1000 euros (1292 dollars) a week on travel expenses.

Apart from travel costs, MEPs receive a daily allowance of 260 euros (333 dollars) to cover accommodation and food when they attend parliament in Brussels or the French city of Strasbourg.

They also get an additional 3,700 euros (4,745 dollars) a month to run offices and pay staff, with little scrutiny of how the money is spent.

TI said the MEPs’ rejection of the proposals puts into question the EU’s role as a leading example for other countries around the world.

"This regrettable decision threatens to undermine the legitimacy of the EU’s endeavours to promote democracy in candidate countries and other regions of the world," Laurence Cockcroft, chairman of the British arm of TI said Thursday.

"The European Parliament’s standards are lower than those operating in many countries which look to the European Union to set a positive example. We ask that the Parliament revisit this decision and reflect on their responsibility as democratic representatives of the people of Europe," he added.

Some MEPs critical of the Parliament’s generous expenses system shared the TI concerns.

British Liberal Democrat MEP Chris Davies described the unreformed system as a "continuing public scandal" and said the decision "gives the all-clear to embezzlement."

Davies had pushed in particular for changes to ensure that private contributions to MEPs’ pension schemes should not be paid out of public funds..

"After the votes today people across Europe can hardly be blamed if they think that some MEPs are engaged in corrupt practices, and that they don’t belong in a Parliament but in jail!" reads a statement on his website.

"We are using public money and the public has a right to know that it is being spent properly. We should be setting high standards for the whole of Europe, not waiting for scandals to engulf us and force long overdue changes to be made," it adds.

British MEPs of all parties are regarded as generally being in favour of reform.

One reason for the failure to secure reform is thought to be that members from countries new to the European Union, who in most cases are paid very much less than other MEPs, are reluctant to surrender the allowances until a common salary is introduced.

But Lithuanian MEP Ona Jukneviciene, member of the committee on budgetary control rejected this argument earlier this month, saying "I do recognise the huge discrepancies in basic salaries, but that is no justification for abusing the system." The parliament’s so-called "gravy train" reputation is seen as one of the reasons for a constant decline in European election turnout since direct elections to the parliament started in 1979. Disillusionment among voters and concerns about fraud prompted some MEPs to demand reforms.

Moves to overhaul the European Parliament’s allowances system have repeatedly failed. Luxembourg, which currently holds the EU presidency, plans to propose reform before it hands the chair to Britain later this year.

In another disappointment to the reformers, MEPs rejected a proposal from the Liberal group to create a code of professional ethics that would among other things help clarify the links between MEPs and lobby groups.

"Such codes are invaluable tools for ensuring the accountability of public servants.. We urge the European Parliament to enact these much-needed reforms," said Rytis Juozapavicius, executive director of TI Lithuania.

British Labour MEP Terry Wynn said it was shocking to see some of his colleagues fill their annual declaration of interests simply with the mention "as before".

"What I still have not come to terms with is the amount of people who have agricultural interests – and there are a lot of them – and who then vote on questions of agricultural interests," he said in a statement Wednesday.