[ad_1]
The European Parliament will not disclose current investments made in a luxurious pension scheme for MEPs — regardless of transparency calls for made by the EU’s administrative watchdog, the European Ombudsman.
When requested if comparable unethical investments are nonetheless being made in the present day, the European Parliament says it would not know.
“I am afraid that on condition that parliament doesn’t maintain the form of checklist requested, parliament can not present such a listing,” mentioned a European Parliament spokeswoman.
This comes regardless of a number of of its present vice-presidents having signed as much as the controversial scheme, whereas on the identical time sitting on the fund’s board headquartered on the European Parliament’s premises in Luxembourg.
Amongst them is Othmar Karas, an Austrian centre-right MEP and first vice-president of the European Parliament.
Different board members and pension holders embody rightwing MEP Roberts Zile, one other European Parliament vice-president. Zile, of the European Conservatives and Reformists group, additionally oversees doc entry requests on the European Parliament.
When EUobserver filed a freedom of data request to acquire particulars on the scheme, it was Zile who signed the letter declining the request.
Also referred to as the Voluntary Pension Fund, the scheme is underwritten by the taxpayer and dietary supplements pensions of people that signed up till 2009.
These MEPs, together with former MEP and present EU international coverage chief Josep Borrell, at the moment are receiving month-to-month payouts from a fund that’s operating a large deficit.
Miguel Arias Canete, whereas EU commissioner for local weather, can be pulling a pension from the fund. He was additionally among the many fund’s first board members and at a time when it was investing in soiled fossil-fuel industries corresponding to Royal Dutch Shell.
Given previous doubtful investments, it stays unclear if the fund continues to pour public cash into these sectors. Overriding public curiosity claims for his or her disclosure have been sidelined to as a substitute shield business pursuits.
That features a doc within the European Parliament’s possession, which it refused to grant entry to.
EUobserver then filed a criticism with the European ombudsman Emily O’Reilly.
After reviewing the doc, O’Reilly mentioned the European Parliament doesn’t have to disclose it as a result of it accommodates info not related to the unique request that sought to get a list of current investments.
However she additionally mentioned there’s a clear and justified public curiosity in realizing what investments have been made.
She mentioned the general public ought to know whether or not investments are made in accordance with the values and targets to which the EU subscribes.
“The European Parliament ought to present the complainant [Nikolaj Nielsen] with a listing of the person investments made by the Voluntary Pension Fund,” she mentioned, following a prolonged assessment.
That request has since been refused.
[ad_2]
Source link
