The Parliament of Iceland has voted last week in favor of opening accession negotiation with the EU. The adhesion will then be voted in a popular referendum. Prognostics indicated that the country could join in 2011 or 2012, given that it already belongs to the European Economic Area (EEA) and has already adopted over 2/3 of the "Acquis Communautaire".
After the financial crisis that almost wiped the economy of this small island up north, the interest of joining the EU and the Euro has been revived. Well the more, the merrier? A strong democratic country, with high level of incomes, living in peace with Mother Nature... can only be an asset for the EU right? Well the language is going a tricky one: we will have to recruit some Icelandic/Maltese interpreters, Icelandic/Luxembourgeois translators...
Thinking a little bit more about it, I am not so sure that it is such a positive development for the Union. I am ill-at-ease that they decide to join when they are in deep problems. Why not before? Not to share.
I see accession a bit like a wedding: we share our destiny for the best and for the worst... but what to really think about a partner who wants to marry you only after loosing his/her job, large chunks of his/her savings, etc. I bet you will be a bit suspicious. What happened when their country get better (yes eventually it will)? Will they join the Eurosceptics, play foul to protect their interests...?
Oh come on, you know I am just dreaming out loud! That can happen! We have never dealt with islanders who benefited greatly from EU funds and then voted against Lisbon Treaty, or others who, when times got better, invented stories to renounce their contribution rebates they got when times weren't so rosy...
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
In the News: Commissioners' Leaving Bonus
Once in a while, when the subject is relevant to the inside life of the Institutions, I will try to comment burning news.
The first one, which is currently breaking the headlines, is the bonus commissioners are expected to receive when they leave their position.
Euroseptics got pretty upset when they learned that:
"The basic monthly salary is around €20,000 for a European Commissioner, and they can still receive a portion [40 to 65% depending on the length of service] of that for three years after they have left their post. If they accept a new job which pays less, their European contract tops it up."
Barroso, the President of the EC, is actually paid €24,400 (gross), similar to Obama's stipend. Not bad for an unelected official. As the matter of fact, they are both beaten by Dominique Strauss Khan (Head of the IMF) who is the highest paid public official, with around half a million dollars per year.
So a commissioner can expect €468k and Barroso €570k...
Golden parachutes are quite a drama nowadays, with the financial meltdown. Commissioners' bonuses aren't new; they were set up (and that is why there are high) during the European Coal and Steel Community, to avoid commissioners joining the industry right after serving the Commission.
But the real point is: Do they really deserve to be paid so much in the first place?
The role of commissioners is in fact quite limited. They do set an agenda and a direction for the European Commission, but after that you have to be really convincing to get Fonctionnaires to move in your direction. There has not been a strong College of Commissioners for a while (Prodi was ok, but not as good as Delors), and the recent one have been very focused on downsizing the headcount of officials... not a good incentive, you might say.
Moreover, Commissioners are politicians (usually second-class), and they are not usually appointed to a sector relevant to their experience but after a complex political game of compromises. Some DGs are having hard time working with some of them, either because they don't know what they are talking about, or they have their own personal agenda, or they are defending their member states when they are required not to.
Something really stroke me the last time I met one of them. It was Leonard Orban in charge of Multilingualism. One of the obvious questions was how many languages he could speak... 3: Romanian, English and French. And believe me is English and French were not even great!
Eventually, I find their salary to be ok. After all, it is not much different from what ministers can get in member states, and of course you want to make sure they cannot be influenced easily by lobbies. But the pension is a bit puzzling. If it was really hard to get a job after that, then maybe. Elected officials get that in member states as well. But why the top up, when previous commissioners such as Mandelson or Frattini when straight back to their government? Why not a regressive compensation? 60% the first year, 40 the second and then 20 the third... a bit like Contract Agents :)
The first one, which is currently breaking the headlines, is the bonus commissioners are expected to receive when they leave their position.
Euroseptics got pretty upset when they learned that:
"The basic monthly salary is around €20,000 for a European Commissioner, and they can still receive a portion [40 to 65% depending on the length of service] of that for three years after they have left their post. If they accept a new job which pays less, their European contract tops it up."
Barroso, the President of the EC, is actually paid €24,400 (gross), similar to Obama's stipend. Not bad for an unelected official. As the matter of fact, they are both beaten by Dominique Strauss Khan (Head of the IMF) who is the highest paid public official, with around half a million dollars per year.
So a commissioner can expect €468k and Barroso €570k...
Golden parachutes are quite a drama nowadays, with the financial meltdown. Commissioners' bonuses aren't new; they were set up (and that is why there are high) during the European Coal and Steel Community, to avoid commissioners joining the industry right after serving the Commission.
But the real point is: Do they really deserve to be paid so much in the first place?
The role of commissioners is in fact quite limited. They do set an agenda and a direction for the European Commission, but after that you have to be really convincing to get Fonctionnaires to move in your direction. There has not been a strong College of Commissioners for a while (Prodi was ok, but not as good as Delors), and the recent one have been very focused on downsizing the headcount of officials... not a good incentive, you might say.
Moreover, Commissioners are politicians (usually second-class), and they are not usually appointed to a sector relevant to their experience but after a complex political game of compromises. Some DGs are having hard time working with some of them, either because they don't know what they are talking about, or they have their own personal agenda, or they are defending their member states when they are required not to.
Something really stroke me the last time I met one of them. It was Leonard Orban in charge of Multilingualism. One of the obvious questions was how many languages he could speak... 3: Romanian, English and French. And believe me is English and French were not even great!
Eventually, I find their salary to be ok. After all, it is not much different from what ministers can get in member states, and of course you want to make sure they cannot be influenced easily by lobbies. But the pension is a bit puzzling. If it was really hard to get a job after that, then maybe. Elected officials get that in member states as well. But why the top up, when previous commissioners such as Mandelson or Frattini when straight back to their government? Why not a regressive compensation? 60% the first year, 40 the second and then 20 the third... a bit like Contract Agents :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
