# CE2004084EN.01073202.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/732 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/732

---

(2004/C 84 E/0825)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3311/03

by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission

(10 November 2003)

Subject:   Rotation principle in Directorates-General

Subject:

The Commission operates a system whereby senior officials are moved from one Directorate-General to another after a certain period (around five years). This is based on the (in my view correct) assumption that a certain form of mobility among officials is desirable, and that the rotation principle reduces the risk of irregularities.

However, it has emerged from the recent publicity concerning the problems at Eurostat that the Director-General there was no longer subject to the mobility requirement because he was approaching retirement and it was no longer felt appropriate to move him.

How many officials are currently exempt from the mobility requirement?

Apart from impending retirement, are there other grounds for waiving this requirement? What are they?

In view of the Eurostat affair, will the Commission in future cease to exempt officials from the mobility requirement?

Joint answer

to Written Questions P-3142/03 and E-3311/03

given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(23 January 2004)

(23 January 2004)

Upon coming into office in September 1999, this Commission established guidelines for the appointment of its senior officials. Under those provisions, Directors-General are subject to mobility after five years and would not normally stay in a post for longer than seven years. The detailed provisions on selection and appointment of Directors-General are available to Parliament and have been published for all staff in the Administrative Guide.

From the list of career movements of Directors-General since 1999 which is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat, the Honourable Member will see that no current Director-General has been in his or her current post for more than five years.

In September 1999, eight Directors-General had been in their posts for more than seven years and four for more than five years. Of that total of 12, two moved posts or left the Institution in 1999, four in 2000, two in 2001, two in 2002 and two in 2003. The mobility provisions were not implemented in the case of the Director General for Eurostat initially because of his central role in the period running up to and following the introduction of the Euro and, subsequently, because of his impending early retirement. The procedure for his replacement was initiated by publication of his post on 9 January 2003 as part of a wider mobility schedule relating to several DGs which was prepared in 2002.

The Commission recognises the practical need to take due account of the interests of the Service when deciding on the timing of mobility moves and a limited period remaining before retirement can be one of the factors taken into consideration.

No officials are exempt from the mobility requirement and the Commission does not intend to introduce such exemptions or to change the current guidelines.

It is, of course, not possible to anticipate retirement dates of personnel with precision because some officials choose not to continue in employment until the age of 65 when it is compulsory.

The legal advice tendered to me is that systematic provision of information on the ages of named Directors General would breach the personal data protection provisions of Regulation 45/2001/EC and, specifically, Article 6 of that Statute.

The Commission can, however, inform the Honourable Member that of the 31 existing Directors General, one is 46, one is 48, two are 49, one is 50, three are 53, two are 54, one is 55, six are 56, one is 57, five are 58, three are 60, one is 61, two are 62, and two are 64.

---