McCreevy steps down from bank board over conflict

Scofflaw

Ineffectual rubber-stamp Parliament threatens fat-cat unaccountable Commissioners...

Members of the European Parliament are threatening to freeze part of the budget for European commissioners' salaries and allowances unless changes are made to the commissioners' code of conduct.

The Parliament's budgets committee on Tuesday (28 September) approved an amendment to the Commission's administrative budget for 2011, putting €460,000 in a reserve “until the Commission honours its...self-imposed commitment” to improve the code of conduct. The budget that the Commission proposed for 2011 allocated just over €4.6 million for commissioners' salaries and “other management expenditure”, so the threat is limited to one-tenth of the total.

Unaccountable Commissioners investigate Charlie McCreevy's new job as a result:

The EU Commission is investigating the appointment of former Commissioner Charlie McCreevy to London-based NBNK Investments, which is buying up distressed banking assets.

Commission spokesman Michael Mann has confirmed that his latest Directorship is under investigation for possible conflicts of interest and the Commission's internal oversight body is assessing whether it in line with their Code of Conduct.

Last week's vote by the European Parliament's powerful Budget Committee to freeze the salaries and allowances of European Commissioners, unless urgent changes are made to this Code of Conduct, has now resulted in this new investigation by the Commission.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

...and McCreevy has to step down:

Former European commissioner Charlie McCreevy has resigned from the board of a new banking firm after an EU ethics committee found a conflict of interest with his work as commissioner in charge of financial regulation.

Mr McCreevy stepped down from the board NBNK Investments last night on foot of a negative opinion from the committee, which was established by the Commission to assess his employment by the firm.

This is first time that a former member of the EU executive has had to resign a directorship since it introduced the current system for overseeing the work of retired commissioners in 2003.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/1007/breaking36.html

That was gratifyingly quick. Ethics investigation, the EU way - but I'm sure our own system of decade-long tribunals would be preferable really.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Arfan

I think it was a case of the parliament threatening to cut off the commission's pocket money until they cleaned their room.

View

Arfan wrote: »

I think it was a case of the parliament threatening to cut off the commission's pocket money until they cleaned their room.

You mean Parliament holds the "unaccountable" Commission to account? Next you will be saying that the "unelected" Commission could only assume office after getting elected by (i.e. a majority from) the Parliament...

RandomName2

Scofflaw wrote: »

Ineffectual rubber-stamp Parliament threatens fat-cat unaccountable Commissioners...

Unaccountable Commissioners investigate Charlie McCreevy's new job as a result:

Or fat-cat unelected, unaccountable Commissioners get ample opportunity to vent their long-standing personal animosity with McCreevy due to political circumstance coupled with Ireland going to the dogs?

Sounds about right.

Or were you trying to imply that there is no gravy-train in Brussels?

View

RandomName2 wrote: »

Or fat-cat unelected, unaccountable Commissioners get ample opportunity to vent their long-standing personal animosity with McCreevy due to political circumstance coupled with Ireland going to the dogs?

Sounds about right.

Or were you trying to imply that there is no gravy-train in Brussels?

If you read Scofflaw's post, you'd see the Parliament did hold the Commissioners to account as they froze part of the Commission's budget thus forcing the Commission's hand.

Then again, I suppose we wouldn't have had that issue if the Parliament hadn't bothered to elect the Commission (i.e. give it majority approval thus clearing the way for it to take office much like applies to the Government domestically).

Scofflaw

View wrote: »

If you read Scofflaw's post, you'd see the Parliament did hold the Commissioners to account as they froze part of the Commission's budget thus forcing the Commission's hand.

Then again, I suppose we wouldn't have had that issue if the Parliament hadn't bothered to elect the Commission (i.e. give it majority approval thus clearing the way for it to take office much like applies to the Government domestically).

It's like the facts just don't exist for eurosceptics.

cordially,
Scofflaw

DjBryn

the whole mcreevy thing stinks, my personal opinion....

Yag reuoY

Scofflaw wrote: »

It's like the facts just don't exist for eurosceptics.

cordially,
Scofflaw

The fact that the EU appoint the likes of McCreevy to important positions in the first place, obviously matters little to you.

Dismissively,

Yag eruoY

Scofflaw

Yag reuoY wrote: »

The fact that the EU appoint the likes of McCreevy to important positions in the first place, obviously matters little to you.

Dismissively,

Yag eruoY

The EU doesn't appoint the Commissioners - the national governments appoint them.

comme j'ai dit,
Scofflaw

Yag reuoY

Scofflaw wrote: »

The EU doesn't appoint the Commissioners - the national governments appoint them.

comme j'ai dit,
Scofflaw

My mistake.

However, you're forgetting the small matter of baroness Ashdown! :pac:

Great appointment from the EU overlords.


Mockingly,

Yag eruoY

Scofflaw

Yag reuoY wrote: »

My mistake.

However, you're forgetting the small matter of baroness Ashdown! :pac:

Great appointment from the EU overlords.


Mockingly,

Yag eruoY

Appointed by the European Council - that is, by the heads of the government of the member states. Also, Baroness Ashton, not Ashdown.

You can have another go, if you like.

amused,
Scofflaw

Yag reuoY

Scofflaw wrote: »

Appointed by the European Council - that is, by the heads of the government of the member states. Also, Baroness Ashton, not Ashdown.

You can have another go, if you like.

amused,
Scofflaw

You see, she's such a fringe figure -- not even elected at a UK level -- that I am not familiar with how her name is spelled. :pac:

These are the kind of personnel you will find in the highest ecehlons of EU politics.

No wonder Europe is a failure, and always will be a failure.

Herman Van Rumpuy as EU president!? :pac: LOL!

Keep attempting to deflect from the real issues of the flawed,inefficient and bankrupt union.

Triumphantly,

Yag eruoY

Scofflaw

Refreshingly content-free sub-Faragism. Have you something to contribute other than slogans? If you'd like, for example, to debate "the real issues of the flawed,inefficient and bankrupt union", I'd be happy to do so, but not if they reduce to the question of van Rompuy's charisma.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Yag reuoY

You can start by attempting to defend the EU for demanding a 5.95% budget increase during a period of economic austerity!

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/EU-Showdown-Looms-Over-Demand-For-Rise-In-2011-Budget-As-Countries-Continue-To-Face-Hard-Times/Article/201010315759046?lpos=World_News_News_Your_Way_Region_0&lid=NewsYourWay_ARTICLE_15759046_EU_Showdown_Looms_Over_Demand_For_Rise_In_2011_Budget_As_Countries_Continue_To_Face_Hard_Times

Angrily,

Yag eruoY :mad:

Scofflaw

Yag reuoY wrote: »

You can start by attempting to defend the EU for demanding a 5.95% budget increase during a period of economic austerity!

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/EU-Showdown-Looms-Over-Demand-For-Rise-In-2011-Budget-As-Countries-Continue-To-Face-Hard-Times/Article/201010315759046?lpos=World_News_News_Your_Way_Region_0&lid=NewsYourWay_ARTICLE_15759046_EU_Showdown_Looms_Over_Demand_For_Rise_In_2011_Budget_As_Countries_Continue_To_Face_Hard_Times

Angrily,

Yag eruoY :mad:

And is there anything at all I could say that would make you see that rise as necessary or useful? After all, I'm sure the most die-hard eurosceptic would agree that Lisbon meant the EU would be doing more things - it would seem unusual that that wouldn't require more money.

Do you feel that the proposed increase is too large, or that any increase would be too large?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Yag reuoY

Scofflaw wrote: »

And is there anything at all I could say that would make you see that rise as necessary or useful? After all, I'm sure the most die-hard eurosceptic would agree that Lisbon meant the EU would be doing more things - it would seem unusual that that wouldn't require more money.

Do you feel that the proposed increase is too large, or that any increase would be too large?

cordially,
Scofflaw

I can't remember the Lisbon treaty reccommending an 85% increase in the EU entertainment budget? Or extra funding for an EU palace?

At a time when many EU states have recorded record budget deficits, it is only right the EU's stipend be cut accordingly. This will hopefully happen due to the bravery of the Conservative government in the UK, and the growing discontent France and Germany are displaying as a result of recent EU interference and economic implosion.

But keep attempting to defend the indulgent EU elite as they squander badly needed tax funds. :rolleyes:

Over to you to explain how an increase in EU funding is necessary, and how it will be accounted for.

Anticipatingly,

Yag eruoY

Scofflaw

Yag reuoY wrote: »

I can't remember the Lisbon treaty reccommending an 85% increase in the EU entertainment budget? Or extra funding for an EU palace?

At a time when many EU states have recorded record budget deficits, it is only right the EU's stipend be cut accordingly. This will hopefully happen due to the bravery of the Conservative government in the UK, and the growing discontent France and Germany are displaying as a result of recent EU interference and economic implosion.

But keep attempting to defend the indulgent EU elite as they squander badly needed tax funds. :rolleyes:

Over to you to explain how an increase in EU funding is necessary, and how it will be accounted for.

Anticipatingly,

Yag eruoY

I'm not actually going to defend the budget increase, though - I'm just going to point out that if you believe that the EU budget is something that is simply a perquisite of "the indulgent EU elite as they squander badly needed tax funds", then presumably the whole EU budget is a bad thing anyway, even though it's spent on and in and largely by the Member States. If that's what you believe, why would I waste my time defending a budget decision I'm under no particular obligation to agree with anyway?

cordially,
Scofflaw