Chance to remove the ‘gravy train’ stains

Date: 03/07/1997

MEPs always complain loudly and bitterly when the media portrays them as first-class passengers on board a European gravy train.

Yet past opportunities to counter such images by agreeing on radical reforms to the European Parliament's generous system of travel and daily allowances have been squandered.

The pressure for change is now greater than ever in the wake of recent television programmes highlighting abuses of the system which have been seized upon by the Parliament's critics as evidence of blatant hypocrisy from an institution which repeatedly trumpets its role as a guardian of financial rectitude in the European Commission and the EU's member states.

But it is not just the media which is turning up the heat on MEPs. Other Union institutions are also weighing into the debate, with the Court of Auditors launching its own investigation into the way money from the Parliament's 48-million-ecu travel and subsistence budget is spent and EU Ombudsman Jacob Söderman demanding a response to complaints from members of the public.

Next week, Parliament President José María Gil-Robles and his vice-presidents will have a golden opportunity to answer the concerns which are being expressed with ever-increasing vigour when they consider a package of reforms to the system which would, among other things, see the introduction of random checks on MEPs' claims for travel expenses.

It is an opportunity they should grasp with both hands, by opting for radical reform rather than a mere tinkering with the system, to demonstrate to ordinary members of the public that their concerns are being taken seriously. On the question of travel expenses, for example, where two options are on the table - to base future reimbursement on the cost of a business class air ticket, or to adjust the current system of paying an allowance calculated on the number of kilometres travelled - they should, without hesitation, choose the former. Otherwise, critics will continue to seize on cases where the kilometre allowance bears little relation to the actual cost of the journey.

But any reform would be better than none. It would be disastrous for the Parliament's image if its most senior figures were once again to shy away from taking action for fear of sparking a backlash among 'back-bench' MEPs. EU taxpayers forced to bear the brunt of governments' efforts to reduce public deficits in preparation for the single currency will have every right to protest loudly if their elected representatives in Europe fail to put their own house in order - and MEPs will have only themselves to blame for the next barrage of 'gravy train' headlines.