Back to Brussels: the man who brought the European Commission
to its knees is back to torment its successors
In the recent elections to the European Parliament, alongside
two members of the EU-critical Socialist Party, Dutch voters
handed two seats to a list established and headed by Paul van
Buitenen, well known in and beyond the Netherlands as the whistleblower
who in 1999 forced out the corrupt Commission headed by Jacques
Santer. Why did van Buitenen decide to make his bid for a seat
in the EP, and what does he hope to achieve now he and a supporter
have achieved this goal? Below we print a translation of the
manifesto which won him over 7% of the vote, just in front of
the SP and the pro-EU Green Left, as well as two other lists
from established parties.
Transparent
Europe
Non-political
Transparent
Europe is non-political in the sense that it is not dominated
by any particular party political tendency.
Our moral baggage can be found in the struggle
for openness and against fraud, corruption and nepotism. These
are values which are common to every law-based state, the preconditions
for good governance. For Europe the challenge is surrounded
as it is by bureaucracy, religious fundamentalism and the aftershocks
of Stalinism to take a democratic path capable of ridding
us of existing tensions and replacing them with dialogue. Is
that left wing or right wing? We would rather see it in terms
of honesty versus corruption. A hundred percent unanimity is
a utopian ideal. Interests and opinions will always clash, but
we can at least take decisions on the basis of trustworthy information,
because only then will such decisions be worth something. The
cynics say that the world is happy to be corrupt. We have serious
doubts that that is the case.
The non-political
character of Transparent Europe is a conscious choice. Tackling
abuses and disinformation and furthering transparency and responsibility
will demand all of our time. We have no desire to be traditional
politicians with an opinion on every issue, because this would
draw us into the demanding system of questions, debates, reports,
meetings, negotiations and travelling. Transparent Europe is
concerned by abuses and by finding solutions to these abuses
and invites the voters to look over our shoulders as we pursue
these concerns.
Divide
the Power, reunite Europe
There are in
reality only two political systems in the world: the system
of concentration of power in the hands of dictators of left
or right, religious fanatics or aristocrats of industry, and
the system of division of power, under which everyone is equal
before the law and can make his or her voice heard. This latter
system is at one and the same time both the best and the most
difficult: popular representatives control those who carry out
their directives and enforce laws developed in the name of the
people. This democracy, to which we believe ourselves
accustomed, is in fact only possible under conditions of complete
transparency and where politicians have a strong sense of responsibility.
Lastly, it is no small thing to act on behalf of millions of
people. Anyone to whom so much trust has been extended should
be prepared to get out amongst the voters, cultivating contact
with them and fulfilling the trust they have placed in him.
Separation of powers
As
well as a division of power, democracy demands the spreading
and sharing of powers: legislative and executive powers, powers of control and justice.
At one time the European Commission was an independent
institution, but now it has become a bastion which Members of
the European Parliament can rarely penetrate. What power does a MEP have, for instance, if
the Commission gives a ridiculous answer to his or her question?
In fact, the Parliaments power of control has become nothing
more than a display, done entirely for show. A division of powers
is also needed within the Commission itself: the Commissioner
responsible for the budget is also in charge of budgetary control.
And her portfolio is indeed full. Every year €100 billion passes
through Brussels. Our money, your money, taxpayers money.
Fraud is theft: it enriches the perpetrators and impoverishes
Europe. The additional costs attendant upon the admission
of new member states could be met from within the existing budget.
But as a consequence of corruption, the squandering of money,
and mismanagement, the resources needed to address such problems
are frittered away. The Commission constantly pleads its innocence,
blaming the member states for fraud even the future member
states, for which all final decisions over the spending of European
moneys are taken by the Commission itself! That things have
got to this point has everything to do with the arrogance of
power, a lack of any sense of responsibility and an aversion
to control. The leaders of Europe do not want to be controlled
from outside, but also fail to exert any control themselves:
do not unto others what you do not wish them to do unto you.
It sounds almost sympathetic, were it not for the fact that
openness and control are two sides of the same coin.
€30 billion wasted?
The total budget
of the European Commission amounts to €100 billion per annum.
With the accession of new member states, a further increase to
€140 billion has been sought.Some
indicators of irregularities, fraud and waste of funds:
·
At
Eurostat, more than 30% of financial transactions are not in
good order.
·
The criteria under
which subsidies for vocational training are awarded are systematically
tampered with.
·
In agriculture
44% of the institutions responsible for making payments have
failed, as a result of irregularities, to have their accounts
approved.
·
The structural
funds continue to receive and disburse moneys despite objections
from their own monitoring service.
·
The billions paid
in subsidies to Eastern Europe include a large proportion which
never found its way to those sections of the population for
which the money was intended. Despite this, the Commission continues
to make payments.
Transparent
Europe estimates that at the present time almost a third of
the total budget is misspent. Transparent Europes view
is therefore that no extra money should be paid to Brussels
until this waste is brought into the open and the existing budget
spent in a responsible manner.
Control
One illustration
of the aversion to control is provided by OLAF, the internal
fraud service of the European Unions institutions. However
tough the name may make it sound, OLAF is entirely dependent
on the European Commission, and it is the Commission to which
it must report a team of investigators in the service
of the wrongdoers. None of its documents is secure. OLAF is
full of leaks and who, citizen or parliamentarian, is
going to trust such a leaky vessel by handing over explosive
evidence? The chance that OLAF will achieve anything is clearly
smaller than the chance that the citizen or parliamentarian
will achieve something without OLAF. Only in relation to small
matters has OLAF ever achieved anything,.
More
than a consumer
Another threat
to the separation of powers is privatisation and the increasing
entanglement of governmental authority and industry. Not only
Commissioners and their staff, but also parliamentarians are
vulnerable to temptation. It is a slippery slope: a firm sponsors
a football club, the weather forecast, a film, a contribution
to development aid, a political campaign, until the political
enterprise and the enterprising politician are ever more difficult
to tell apart. There is a growing tendency to see the citizen
first and foremost as a consumer. But we are much more than
purchasers of potatoes and rice; a state based on the rule of
law isnt something you can pick up in a mobile grocers.
We have many needs that cannot be fulfilled by the (super)market:
affordable education health care, an independent judiciary and
press, freedom of speech and religion, and a healthy environment.
A civil servant or politician who dilutes the general interest
with his own private interests cannot continue to function.
Division of power means separation of powers and both of these
demand control. Demand transparency!
Really
important?
Whoever
thought up the slogan Europe Really Important
clearly needed to convince himself.
Transparent Europe says unequivocally: Europe is
important! It
is, however, far from having a democratic system based on the
law. The population of the whole of Europe, as much in the East
as in the West, has to deal with a small elite, one which places
its own interests before the people, whatever the political
system. Transparent Europe demands democracy, which will come
only when decisions are taken openly, with all relevant information
available to all. And that would make Europe suddenly really
rich!
What has
to be done to tackle the problem?
In
the European Parliament Members from Transparent Europe will
work exclusively to gain access to reliable information.
Fellow parliamentarians are not seen as opponents, but
fellow controllers who will profit from our efforts.
What is needed
is a European information point for abuses and mismanagement
of European moneys, initially under the supervision of Transparent
Europe. An interactive website will strengthen contact with
the voter in relation to such matters. In addition, the organisation
of a database of irregularities and current investigations will
further contribute to this strengthening. It will, moreover,
not rest content with one-off announcements; everything which
is not properly conducted will be maintained in a follow-up
system so that the authorities investigations will be
permanently monitored.
The
voter will be able to keep up to date with developments, so
that things will no longer be hushed up. The duty of employees
to remain silent, which has been cherished for far too long,
should be replaced by the right to speak.
It is also
important that a European Assessment Office be established able
to give advice and support to whistle-blowers from any member
state. Dormant institutions such as OLAF or the Committee on
Budgetary Control must be woken up and returned to work. A European
Public Ministry should be established to ensure control of spending
of European money and act independently in the fight against
abuses. Appointments in this area should no longer
be influenced by political considerations, but should on the
contrary be decided independently and transparently on the basis
of qualifications for the job. In this way effective monitoring
by OLAF and the European Court of Auditors will no longer be
diluted by political considerations.
Outside Parliament
we will support actions which strive towards the same ends:
the reanimation of democracy and the revival of participation
and trust on the part of the voters. We will take action ourselves
where official bodies fail to do so. Whenever necessary shocking
dossiers will be saved from obscurity and, after suitable study
and explanation, made public in order to bring about a breakthrough
in the will towards truly fundamental reforms of the European
institutions and the bodies responsible for monitoring them.
A sound cooperation
with the press is indispensable. The press must receive information
enabling it to bring about a breakthrough. The press is the
bridge to the voter.
If we do our
job well enough, we will become unnecessary. Transparent Europe
can boast a high tally of whistle-blowers and a large proportion
of people with the same wearying characteristic: a well-developed
conscience. They are putting themselves at the service of the
European Parliament and the European electorate. That their
work will not be limited to exposing fraud and other abuses
is obvious from our definition of a European citizen as someone
who is much more than a consumer. Transparency is needed if
the confidence of the disappointed voter is to be won back and
if the European Parliament is again to fulfil its tasks of control
and monitoring. The eventual aim of the list is to make ourselves
redundant. If we perform well and achieve our aims, we will
become unnecessary.