WRITTEN QUESTION E-3410/01 by Hans-Peter Martin (PSE) to the Commission. EU civil service reform.
Date: 2001-12-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, European official, administrative reform, appointment of staff, institutional reform, regulations for civil servants

C 147 E/170

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2002

(2002/C 147 E/177)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3409/01

by Hans-Peter Martin (PSE) to the Council

(13 December 2001)

Subject: Next intergovernmental conference

According to an article entitled ‘Constitution postponed’ on p.19 of the German magazine ‘Der Spiegel’ of
29 October 2001, the Council intends to ‘let the dust settle’ on documents produced by the convention
planned in preparation for the next intergovernmental conference. This conference would therefore not
take place until after the European elections in summer 2004. Is this correct?

Reply

(18 March 2002)

The Council does not usually comment on the content of press articles.

However, the Council would inform the Honourable Member that the European Council meeting in
Laeken on 14 and 15 December 2001 adopted a declaration on the future of the European Union, in
which it entrusted a Convention composed of the main parties involved in the debate on the future of the
Union with the task of paving the way for the next Intergovernmental Conferences as broadly and openly
as possible. The European Council proposed that the inaugural meeting be held on 1 March 2002 and that
its proceedings take one year, in time to present its outcome to the European Council.

(2002/C 147 E/178)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3410/01

by Hans-Peter Martin (PSE) to the Commission

(21 December 2001)

Subject: EU civil service reform

According to the German magazine ‘Der Spiegel’ of 29 October 2001, the Commission President Romano
Prodi has ‘in essence contributed nothing to civil service reform.’

Is this correct? Does the Commission President have any observations to make on the many assertions
made in the detailed article, in particular those on the subject of purchasing power parity for retired EU
civil servants?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2002)

The 29 October article in ‘Der Spiegel’ to which the Honourable Member refers is : to say the least : an
exercise in selective reporting. The Commission is grateful for the opportunity provided by the Honourable
Member’s question to rebut the claims of the article in full.

The article neglects the very real progress made by the Commission under the leadership of President
Romano Prodi, and focuses instead on a number of outdated aspects of the personnel policy of the
Institution which the Commission is addressing as part of the fundamental overhaul of policy and practice
in this area. The design of the changes was, as the Honourable Member will know, set out as long ago as
March 1st 2000 when the Reform Strategy White Paper was adopted. Since then, as the Honourable
Member will also know, Parliament has made intensive examinations of the Reform proposals and
responded very positively to the principles and detail of Commission policy. This thorough and objective
Parliamentary activity contrasts strongly with the approach manifested in a ‘Der Spiegel’ article which
included a mixture of rumour, gossip and innuendo about the Commission President and did not
constitute serious reporting or intelligent analysis.

20.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 147 E/171

The facts are clear and speak for themselves: The Commission is well on course towards fulfilling the
mandate for fundamental administrative Reform given to it by the Heads of State and Government and
specified by Parliament. Secondly, under the active leadership of Romano Prodi, the entire College of
Commissioners has been directly involved in, and explicitly committed to, the modernisation process at
every stage.

The President’s decision to make a specific appointment of a Vice-President with explicit responsibility for
Administrative Reform, and the establishment of a formal Reform Group of Commissioners to guarantee
thorough engagement of the College in the Reform strategy, were examples of the way in which
unprecedented recognition has been given, from the outset, to the central
importance of Reform. To
interpret such deliberate actions as an abdication of responsibility by the President, as the Spiegel article
implies, is bizarre by any standards. All Commissioners together approved the Reform White Paper on
1 March 2000 (1), and signed it in order to emphasis their personal commitment to its full implementation.
Since then, the President : together with his senior advisers : has been fully involved in discussions, both
at political and at working level. He has met with staff and has taken the unprecedented step of inviting
staff representatives to meet the College on several occasions. In short, President Prodi has contributed
significantly to civil service reform and that continues.

In focussing exclusively on personnel policy, ‘Der Spiegel’ also failed to mention the considerable progress
that has been made in the other two themes of the Reform strategy: improved financial management, and
radically improving the planning and programming of Commission activities. On the former,
the
Commission’s financial procedures and systems have been completely overhauled, a comprehensive
proposal for revision of the Financial Regulations was submitted to Council and Parliament on 17 October
2000, and a new Internal Audit Directorate General has been established, together with the creation of
specialist audit capabilities in the services of the Commission. These and other relevant developments are
recognised by external expert observers to surpass the recommendations of the 1999 Comité des Sages,
and they are also recognised to be the sort of arrangements which provide for high standards of modern
financial management and control. Meanwhile, the Commission has also established : within the services
reporting directly to the President : a Strategic Planning and Programming function which will ensure
that the resources and the political priorities of the Commission are better matched, and that the personnel
and other means of the Commission are deployed with the highest achievable effectiveness. Taken
together, these changes provide practical evidence of the very significant improvements being made in the
way that the Commission manages its activities. To neglect that, or to give the impression that it is not
evidence of real achievement by the Commission and its staff which is being accomplished in a very short
time and at small cost, would be a gross misrepresentation of reality.

The article to which the Honourable Member refers appeared on 29 October 2001. On 30 October 2001,
following six months of consultation with staff and negotiation with staff representatives the Commission
adopted a package of proposals for a major overhaul of its human resources policy.

The impression given by the article is that the fact that some of the trade unions representing staff have
taken a positive view of the personnel policy reform package means that the Commission has somehow
sacrificed its commitment to meaningful Reform. That view is wrong in substance and perverse in attitude.
The Commission welcomes the fact that two staff unions which, between them, secured a very clear
majority of votes in the most recent Staff Committee elections have taken a positive and constructive
attitude to the reforms. It regrets that four other unions which, between them, attracted a minority of staff
support in elections have not so far been able to take the same stance. It would obviously be eccentric for
anyone to claim, however, that an agreement concluded with some unions after several months of
negotiation signified abandonment of the Reform mission. The truth is that the Commission has continued
to uphold the Reform objectives which it publicly specified in principle and in detail, it has undertaken
genuine and thorough consultation and negotiation in the way that it promised, and in the course of
negotiations it has accepted certain constructive and practical ideas put forward by staff representatives,
usually in a modified form. The negotiations added to understanding and commitment among staff
representatives, produced no more than marginal changes in cost, and did not dilute the purposes or the
provisions for Reform. That is why the Commission has been able to adopt the full personnel policy
Reform package. A conclusion to negotiations which did not fully sustain Reform would not have been
proposed by myself as responsible Commissioner, neither would it have been adopted by the College.

C 147 E/172

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2002

The ‘Der Spiegel’ article refers to a number of features of the Commission’s personnel policy, without
mentioning the fact that the package of proposals (foreshadowed in a series of consultation documents
adopted on 28 February 2001) puts forward changes to precisely these items which it regards to be
anomalous or anachronistic.

For example:

: First, where children attend educational establishments free of charge, the Commission proposes the
abolition of the education allowance. Officials whose children attend one of the European schools or
other public sector schools would consequently not receive this allowance.

: Second, the Commission has proposed the severe curtailment of officials’ ability to transfer part of
their salary to their country of origin with the application of a weighting factor. This would, in future,
be limited to specified and essential expenditure such as a parent’s proven payment of child
maintenance. In addition, the weighting factor relating to retired officials will no longer be based on
the cost of living in capitals, but on the average for each Member State as a whole : a change which
is both fair and cost effective.

: Third, the ‘Der Spiegel’ article derides the Commission proposal that formal recognition should be
given in the Staff Regulations to same-sex marriages that are contracted under the law of those
Member States which make such statutory provision. The implied prejudice of the author of the article
is evident. However, Community policy : endorsed by Parliament : is to contest discrimination of all
types, and the Commission’s proposal is certainly consistent with that. The Commission can therefore
see no justification for discriminating against staff who have legally contracted a same-sex marriage
under the law of one of the Member States.

It is also significant that the article gives no real attention to the very major changes in individual
appraisal, promotion, mobility and career structure that are being pursued as essential points of Reform.
Any magazine feature which purports to deal with civil service reform but does not focus on such core
issues has all of the authority and usefulness of a newspaper report of a football match that fails to
mention which teams were playing.

(1) COM(2000) 200 final.

(2002/C 147 E/179)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3417/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(21 December 2001)

Subject: Sales below cost

The Greek Parliament has introduced a law, No. 2941 of 12 September 2001, prohibiting from 1 October
2001 the sale of goods below cost, with certain exceptions. This law was passed following consultations
between the representative bodies of the commercial and manufacturing sectors and was supported by all
parties in the Greek Parliament without exception. Legal provisions prohibiting sales below cost have been
in force for years in some Member States, such as France, with the aim of protecting consumers and
competition from unfair practices.

for a regulation (1) of 2 October 2001 concerning sales
In the light of the Commission’s proposal
promotions in the Internal Market, which allows sales below cost, will the Commission examine whether
such commercial practices can be considered unfair since offers and inducements to consumers ultimately
lead to continual centralisation and monopoly situations. As the Member States have introduced
legislation, by general consent, to prohibit sales below cost in order to guard against monopoly situations,
why has the Commission not opted to apply the subsidiarity principle?

(1) COM(2001) 546 final.