Parliament shoots itself in the foot

Date: 28/11/1996

FOR an institution which constantly trumpets its role as a champion of ordinary EU citizens, the European Parliament often shows a remarkably naïvety about its own public image.

This week's decision by the institution's vice-presidents to postpone any reform of the current system of daily and travel allowances for MEPs until February next year is a case in point.

Recent media reports about alleged abuses of the system have done serious damage to the Parliament's reputation. Senior MEPs appeared to acknowledge this when they attended a meeting convened by Klaus Hänsch earlier this month to discuss the problem, with the Parliament president declaring afterwards that there was now a “readiness” to introduce further reforms.

But it seems that in the three weeks since that initial meeting, that readiness has evaporated into thin air.

All of a sudden, talk of swift action to answer the Parliament's critics has been replaced by claims that it would be “unfair” to take any decision now, just weeks before a new president and new bureau of vice-presidents are due to be elected in January.

Why unfair? Given that the new rules would affect all 626 of the Parliament's MEPs (almost all of whom will still be in their seats next spring as there will not be another Euro-election until 1999), and given that most of the existing parliamentary bureau members are almost certain to be re-elected in the new year, surely this cannot be any justification for a further delay in implementing changes which would do much to restore the institution's battered reputation.

Hänsch has been an impressive champion of the campaign for reforms of the Parliament's internal procedures since he became its president in July 1994, recognising the need both to boost its efficiency and ensure that there are no skeletons in its own cupboard which could blunt its attacks on the misuse of Union funds by other EU institutions.

But his efforts have repeatedly been hampered by the reluctance of a majority of MEPs to countenance such changes.

Cynics are likely to suggest that this week's decision to delay reform of the current allowance system has little to do with the forthcoming elections for the Parliament's most senior posts and much more to do with widespread resistance from within the institution's own ranks to doing anything which might hit Euro MPs where it hurts most - in their pockets.

No one should be surprised if the delay prompts another rash of reports on television and in newspapers about the loopholes in the current system and the skill displayed by some MEPs in exploiting them to boost their income.

And no one should be surprised if the Parliament's oft-repeated calls for tighter controls on the way cash from EU coffers is spent are not treated with the seriousness they would otherwise deserve.