WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2916/97 by Jaak VANDEMEULEBROUCKE to the Commission. Contracts for security services at Commission buildings
Date: 1997-09-05
Institutions: European Parliament, VANDEMEULEBROUCKE
Subjects: Belgium, European Commission, European official, building safety, committee of inquiry, contract, corruption, duties of civil servants, pay, security services













EUR-Lex - 91997E2916 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E2916

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2916/97 by Jaak VANDEMEULEBROUCKE to the Commission. Contracts for security services at Commission buildings  


Official Journal C 102 , 03/04/1998 P. 0147 





WRITTEN QUESTION P-2916/97 by Jaak Vandemeulebroucke (ARE) to the Commission (5 September 1997)Subject: Contracts for security services at Commission buildingsThe Flemish press has carried reports about underhand dealing and possible corruption in connection with the award of the contract for security services at Commission buildings to Groep 4 Securitas in 1992.Shortly before the bids were due to be opened, full details of the competitors' bids were allegedly passed to Groep 4 Securitas, which was then given the opportunity to alter its own bid.For a time, the wages of the 600 security officers at the Commission were apparently calculated using an inaccurate mean index figure, so that while this situation persisted the Commission was paying more in wages to Groep 4 Securitas than the firm was actually paying the officers.It is also claimed that a Commission official arranged for 18 people to receive wages from Groep 4 Securitas without having to do any work at all for the Commission. The beneficiaries did, however, provide some quid pro quo to the official concerned. Meanwhile the brother of the official concerned, an inspector in the police force, is said to have been seconded to the official's department as a liaison officer. Senior Commission officials were informed of these practices in 1994. Yet neither an official inquiry nor any disciplinary proceedings were instituted, so that the culprits escaped scot-free.1. Are the above allegations true? If not, in what ways are they inaccurate?2. If the allegations are true, why did the Commission allow the contract with Groep 4 Securitas to remain in force after the truth had come to light?3. Please supply a precise chronological overview of the measures taken.Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (17 October 1997)The Commission has taken note of the serious allegations which appeared in the Belgian newspapers 'De Morgen' and 'Het Algemeen Dagblad' between 18 and 20 August 1997 concerning the contract between the company 'Groep 4 Securitas' and the Commission.The Commission's anti-fraud unit (Uclaf) and financial control immediately set up a team to carry out an in-depth inquiry on the allegations, inside as well as outside the Commission. The investigations which are already under way concentrate in particular on:- the circumstances under which the security services contract was awarded in October 1992 to Groep 4 Securitas;- the alleged payment under the contract of the salaries of a certain number of people who appear not to have provided any services to the Commission;- compliance with internal Commission procedures.Overpayment due to inaccuracies in the index figure has already been adjusted. It is premature at the present stage to draw any conclusions from the investigations which are on-going.