Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 40kWORD 19k
22 January 2019
Question for written answer E-000297-19
to the Commission
Rule 130
André Elissen (ENF)

 Subject:  European Court of Auditors report ignored by the Commission
 Answer in writing 

Last month, the European Court of Auditors issued an extremely critical report on the EU’s largest buildings(1). The Court examined how expenditure was managed by the five institutions with the largest amount of office space. The buildings in question were those occupied by Parliament, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Justice and the ECB in Brussels, Luxembourg and Frankfurt.

1. Does the Commission agree that the European Court of Auditors is an institution respected for its monitoring of the EU’s expenditure, which from the point of view of European taxpayers is impenetrable, massive and senseless, and that its recommendations need to be taken seriously?

2. Why then is the Commission apparently ignoring the Court and most of its recommendations? Could the Court of Auditors be abolished as far as the Commission is concerned?

3. Is it not shameless to spend the proceeds from any savings on the costs of offices on civil servants who are already very well paid?

(1)Special report no 34 of the European Court of Auditors, ‘Office accommodation of EU institutions’, 13 December 2018 (https://www.eca.europa.eu/nl/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=48582).

Original language of question: NL 
Last updated: 11 February 2019Legal notice