Loyal public servant bids farewell

Date: 06/02/1997

A DISTINCTIVE era in the life of the European Parliament will draw to a close this month.

In a fortnight, its Secretary-General Enrico Vinci will be 65-years-old. A week later he will stand down from the post he has held since 1986 and retire from the institution he has served for almost four decades.

For many, Vinci and the Parliament are inseparable. He and the institution have prospered together. As he has risen through the ranks from the lowly A7 administrative post he held when he joined in 1960, the Parliament has developed from an assembly of part-time politicians into a body which plays an increasingly influential role in shaping Union policy.

The similarities between the fortunes of each have been even greater over the past decade, with the increase in the Parliament's legislative powers coinciding with Vinci's secretary-generalship.

As a result, it is his signature - along with those of his counterpart in the Council of Ministers and the presidents of both institutions - which has been appended to EU legislation.

Vinci acknowledges the parallels with a self-deprecating chuckle. “I grew up with the Parliament. But the small difference is that while I merely became old, the Parliament continued to grow in size,” he says.

He is also the institution's conscience. When asked what characteristics the secretary-general must display if he is not to be swept away by the many turbulent currents which swirl though the Parliament, Vinci has a ready answer. Indeed, in avuncular fashion, he has already passed this advice on to his successor, Julian Priestley, previously chef de cabinet to former Parliament President Klaus Hänsch.

“You must keep your professional independence. If you subordinate this to your political convictions you will fail. The secretary-general must also remain European. You have two permanent opponents in the Parliament,” he says, pointing to political groups and national interests, each of which tries to influence the post to suit their own wishes.

“My third piece of advice is one I also give my children. I tell them you should always do what you think is right without thinking of the consequences and to treat each day as if it were the last of your career,” he explains.

Armed with these principles, one of Vinci's central objectives has been to find a middle path between conflicting political, national and personal interests - not to mention defusing any potential tension between MEPs and the Parliament's own staff.

“You must find a happy medium and a compromise which can be accepted by everyone and by a large majority. Unlike other institutions, the Parliament needs a large majority. Its legal and political authority is in direct correlation to that majority,” he insists.

In many ways, the challenges facing the Parliament's secretary-general are no different from those confronting his counterparts in the other major EU institutions.

But Vinci and his predecessors have had to juggle even more balls in the air to keep the show on the road.

“The secretary-general is responsible for the administration and he must organise its work. This is a difficult task given 11 languages, at least three places of work and the sensitivities of 15 different member states, which you have to take into account in every single department,” he says.

But these practical difficulties are - and will remain - a fact of life. “I am totally against the abolition of this or that language, as language represents a people's identity, its culture and its traditions. If you marginalise a language, you are undermining that identity. The Commission and Council of Ministers speak to governments, but we speak to the citizens who elected us and we must be able to speak their language,” he explains.

Vinci himself is officially based in Luxembourg, but spends half of his time in Brussels - an arrangement which means almost constant travel by road between the two cities.

“It is true that the situation is logically absurd and costs money. But frankly, the inconveniences are not out of all proportion and I fully support the present practice of putting Union agencies in different member states. It is wrong to create a bureaucracy that is too powerful and over-concentrated in one place,” he insists.

It is no surprise that Vinci is fiercely loyal to the institution and, with the benefit of years of experience, he can point to parliamentary initiatives - such as establishing contacts with African, Caribbean and Pacific countries and with national parliaments - dating back as far as the 1960s, which have later been taken up by the Union as a whole.

He is also pragmatic about its faults and takes in his stride the recent criticism of the way the Parliament handles its members' expenses.

“Each institution - and person - has its vices and virtues. When you get dressed in the morning you try to hide the former and display the latter. What the Parliament is now trying to do in this area is to introduce more transparency by saying clearly what each member receives and why, and by introducing stricter controls,” he explains.

But loyalty does not prevent him from being critical. “You have to admit the Parliament has its faults. It has not fully used all its powers. For instance, take censure motions against the Commission. I feel the Parliament should have been tougher. It has not used them as it has seen its main protagonist as being the Council of Ministers, and so it has somewhat ignored the Commission. But in many ways relations between the Parliament and the Commission are extremely important,” he points out.

Vinci may have reached the pinnacle of the European Parliament and helped steer the institution for more than a decade, but his efforts late in life to carve out a new political career have twice fallen flat.

In one way, he is retiring with a strong sense of frustration. The fault lies not with the Parliament, but with the vagaries of domestic Italian politics.

As governments selected their future European Commissioners towards the end of 1994, Vinci's name came into the frame. He makes no effort to disguise the bitterness he still feels that the prize was snatched from his grasp.

“I still feel deeply disappointed, as it was offered to me by the Italian government at the time. I had not sought it. I became quite excited about it and when it did not work out because of internal Italian politics I was obviously disappointed, not from any material point of view - my salary was already comparable to a Commissioner's - but because my ambitions and dreams had been dashed,” he says.

His later efforts in the 1995 Italian elections to cross the divide from parliamentary official to parliamentarian also came to nought. Although he was well known locally, the Italian electoral system of national lists scuppered his chances.

This set-back has obviously influenced his view of the relationship between the Parliament and the electorate.

“I am convinced we must come to an electoral system which is based more on the British model. I always used to be somewhat hesitant about a constituency system, but now I feel we need a system which guarantees contacts between the citizen and the elected,” he says.

“We should avoid national lists established by political parties. For example, if you are a Sicilian and you vote for your party and you elect a deputy you have never seen and whom you never see, how can you have these contacts?”

As he contemplates the future, Vinci readily admits he will miss his colleagues, the members and the buzz of handling daily challenges. But some things will remain unchanged.

One is his respect for public service. “I have decided to refuse all offers from the private sector. I have always worked in public institutions and do not feel able to make the change of mentality required to work in the private sector. Secondly, if like me you have had the opportunity to be secretary-general for 11 years, it would reflect badly if I went into the private sector.”

Another is his order of priorities. “I believed in Europe in the Fifties and continue to believe in it. My commitment is as strong as ever and is part of my make-up. It cannot be changed. I am a European first and foremost, then a Sicilian and finally an Italian.”