![]() |
Privatisation,
dysfunctioning, and the law of silence: the
lessons of the past are just not getting through! Brussels, 14 September 2000 |
R&D has always been resolutely opposed to
all ill-considered outsourcing aimed at sub-contracting
public service jobs to private firms at the highest
price, not to mention the additional costs and a loss of
efficiency and control over what happens. The privatisations adopted for the implementation of the 5th Research Framework Programme, and particularly the exercise whereby the reception of tenders received in the framework of organised procedures was handed over to a private firm together with the organisation and administration of the evaluation platform located in square Orban, confirm our underlying fears. R&D has received numerous complaints from colleagues forced to work in square Orban in unimaginably chaotic conditions, and since July 1999 has drawn attention to the serious instances of dysfunctioning in the implementation of the contract. It is worth recalling that, to compensate for the contractors shortcomings, DG Research staff have had to work up to 20 hours a day and, in addition to their normal tasks, deliver messages, work as porters, do odd jobs, keep the place clean and tidy, spend their own money on buying locks and furniture at BRICO and IKEA, and then at the weekend, between Programmes, run around looking for chairs and tables. Faced with the usual delaying tactics that are reserved for our initiatives, R&D wrote to M Busquin in November 1999 and officially demanded that, all checks should be carried out without delay, and that conclusions should be drawn from this dysfunctionment. An audit was eventually carried out by DG AUDIT in January 2000. And in June 2000, R&D asked M Busquin to announce the conclusions of this audit. No reply to this request has been received. R&D wishes to point out that due to the consequences for the regularity of procedures in implementing this ill-considered privatisation, dozens of project selection and funding procedures that should have been adopted by the College were suspended for several months at the request of the EC Financial Controller. Following an agreement between the offices of Mme Schreyer and M Busquin that sought to unblock these procedures and put an end to a situation that had become intolerable, a phrase referring to a range of problems in respect of both external service providers and Commission services was inserted in each procedure submitted to the College for approval. The exceptional nature of this development, which is unprecedented so far as we are aware, confirms the seriousness of problems that had previously been denied. However, what R&D was first and foremost obliged to denounce was the unacceptability of the agreement between the cabinets of Mme Schreyer and M Busquin, as it holds the services concerned responsible for the problems of which they were themselves the first victims. Accordingly, in order to re-establish the reputation of DG Research services, R&D called on President Prodi, as guarantor of the reputation of the institutions staff, to carry out official checks immediately in order to identify everyones responsibilities in this fiasco. It is simply a matter of applying the principles of responsibility and transparency on which President Prodi said he wanted to base the commissions work, and of honouring the commitments to this effect that Mme Schreyer made to the COCOBU and the European Parliament. R&D:
The Executive Committee |
|
Membres du Comité Exécutif: Ianniello Franco, Adurno Giuseppe, Zorbas Gerassimos, Ravagli Alessandra, Uguccioni Bruno, Docherty Michael, Vassila-Souyoul Erica, Bochu Claude, Drevet Jean-François, Napolitano Raffaele, Crespinet Alain, Sybren Singelsma, Paul Frank, Panarisi Edi, Sperling Christiane, Domingos Dias. |