|
Neue EU-Privilegien-Enthüllungen auf Titelseite der "International Herald Tribune"
Heute veröffentlicht die weltweit verbreitete "International Herald Tribune", die von der "New York Times" herausgegeben wird, einen ausführlichen Artikel über das EU-Parlament. Ein internes Dokument, das der unabhängige EU-Abgeordnete Hans-Peter Martin aus Österreich der Zeitung übergab, enthüllt, dass lediglich 37 EU-Parlamentarier sich an ihr Wahlversprechen gehalten haben, Überschüsse aus EU-Reisekostenpauschalen zurück zu überweisen. Außerdem kommt es beim 163 Millionen Euro teuren EU-Dolmetscherdienst zu abschreckendem Mißmanagement und Verschwendung durch chronisch verspätete Sitzungen.
Legislators at the EU hang on to their perks
 By Dan Bilefsky International Herald Tribune
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 2006
BRUSSELS Despite public vows by members of the European Parliament to give up their generous perks, only a few have proved willing to part with what are essentially tax-free handouts for travel and other privileges, according to an internal report from the Parliament's secretary general obtained by the International Herald Tribune.
In another example of Parliament's excessive spending, costs of interpretation and translation in an expanded EU are spiraling out of control, according to a separate draft report from the legislature's budgetary control committee.
The committee said it is "very concerned" that nearly €26 million, or $31 million - 16 percent of the €163 million spent on interpretation - is used to hire translators who are on call or sitting idle.
Before the last European Parliament elections, in June 2004, more than 200 candidates from Germany to Sweden pledged to eliminate travel-expense perks that have allowed Parliament members to earn generous and tax-free profits by claiming reimbursement for as much as 10 times the price of their airline tickets.
In a much publicized gesture, 89 German members of the European Parliament promised to take reimbursements of travel expenses at actual cost.
But the late January report from the Parliament's secretary general, Julian Priestley, who is charged with the Parliament's administration, shows that in 2004, only 37 out of 732 legislators opted to pay back the Parliament for travel allowances not used.
The report shows that only €234,096 was paid back to Parliament out of a total travel budget for Parliament members of more than €60 million.
Parliament officials did not return several phone calls seeking comment.
"At the very moment when MEPs are asking their voters to make cutbacks at home in entitlements and pensions, they themselves are cashing in as much possible and this is pure hypocrisy and harms democracy," said Hans-Peter Martin, an independent member of Parliament, or MEP, from Austria. He came to prominence in 2004 for surreptitiously filming fellow Parliament members leaving Brussels and Strasbourg after signing in for daily stipends for attending parliamentary sessions.
Martin estimates that he himself pocketed more than €20,000 in nontax profits in 2002 from leftover travel allowances.
Markus Ferber, a German member of Parliament who spearheaded the pledge by German lawmakers to claim only for real travel expenses incurred, said that he did not know the nationality of the 37 members who had reimbursed the Parliament. "We remind our members to stand by their pledge, but we do not audit them," he added.
The Parliament, which shuttles monthly between Brussels and Strasbourg at a cost of €200 million a year, agreed last June to reform part of its generous system of allowances, including perks that allow members to be reimbursed for the most expensive economy ticket, even if they fly a budget airline or travel by car.
But the reform will only come into force in June 2009 and existing members of Parliament are allowed to keep these privileges until then.
"There was a palpable sigh of relief when the reforms were passed since the delay means 'pain tomorrow' rather than 'pain today,'" for members of Parliament, said Graham Watson, leader of the Liberal group, which has played a key role in pushing for the changes.
Located in a sprawling modernist glass building meant to represent its openness to voters, the European Parliament plays a significant role in shaping laws on everything from warnings on cigarette packs to environmental regulations.
Its growing powers, which would have been reinforced further by the now moribund European constitution, were highlighted last year when it forced the European Commission president, José Manuel Barroso, to reshuffle his team or risk having it rejected. But the body still remains better known for arcane committees and generous members' perks than for its legislative prowess.
Its credibility has been further dented by low voter turnout, which has steadily declined from 63 percent in 1979 to 46 percent in the latest European elections in 2004. Many political analysts believe that abuse of members' privileges is a decisive factor.
These range from chauffeured cars, jobs for relatives including spouses paid for through an annual secretarial allowance of €150,000, a pension of €1,200 a month for any former member over 60 who has served at least five years, and free language lessons.
According to Martin, the legislator from Austria, members of Parliament and their families are each allowed up to 60 sessions a year of a combination of medical massage, medical gymnastics, hydromassage and hydrotherapy.
They also are entitled to a daily allowance of €274 by signing in at a registry in Parliament regardless of how long they remain in Brussels or Strasbourg on a given day.
In order to improve its image, the Parliament's critics say it ought to adopt the American congressional system of perks by which members of the House receive million-dollar budgets, but are barred from nepotism and must account for every penny.
"The young EU can learn from a U.S. system that is far more transparent," Martin said.
The European Parliament's president, Josep Borrell, who is pushing to revamp the Parliament's remote image, recently said that he was "really embarrassed" by the poor attendance of Parliament members at many debates.
He noted he had received a complaint from Barroso that more of his commissioners and officials were in the chamber during his presentation earlier this year of the commission's 2006 work program than were Parliament members.
Some critics say the Parliament has become too big and unwieldy since the EU's recent expansion to 25 members, which added 10 new countries and 9 languages in May 2004. The draft report from the Parliament's budgetary control committee notes that the cost for interpreting 20 languages in a one- day meeting can be as high as €118,000, compared with €6,000 to €9,000 for three languages.
But Watson, of the Liberal party, said the hefty cost of translation was justified since it was essential for democracy in the bloc that citizens could understand debates in their own languages.
The budgetary control committee's report notes that the Parliament's cumbersome triple location in Brussels, Strasbourg and Luxembourg is raising the cost of interpretation.
Before the former Communist countries joined the EU, hiring interpreters to translate 11 languages for a one-day meeting cost about €40,000. Today, that cost is €88,500.
Erschienen in der Tageszeitung "International Herald Tribune", 15.3.2006.
Siehe auch:
Zum eingescannten Originaltext
Zum Originaltext Online
Siehe auch:
The Times, London: EU gravy train 'is still running'
Crooks Corner
Neuer EU-Skandal: Das Dolmetscher-Paradies
Wie EU-Parlamentarier Wahlversprechen von 2004 brechen
|
nach oben
zurück