Európsky ombudsman

Addendum

After "Budget line A 4301 (...)", and before "European Schools":

Double child allowance

The Commission also fails to mention the double child allowance for disabled children. Article 67.3 of the new Staff Regulations states:

"The dependent child allowance may be doubled by special reasoned decision of the appointing authority based on medical documents establishing that the child concerned is suffering from a mental or physical handicap which involves the official in heavy expenditure."

In it general implementing directive the Commission interprets this right in the following way:

"L'allocation pour enfant à charge peut être doublée par décision spéciale et motivée de l'autorité investie du pouvoir de nomination prise sur la base de documents médicaux probants et établissant que l'enfant impose au fonctionnaire de lourdes charges résultant d'un handicap mental ou physique dont l'enfant est atteint.

Les démarches à entreprendre et le déroulement de la procédure sont les suivants :

Le fonctionnaire (ou l'agent) introduit auprès de l'unité compétente (cf point 2.d) une demande écrite accompagnée d'un rapport médical ainsi que des documents qui démontrent que la condition "lourdes charges" est bien remplie. L'existence des lourdes charges est constatée lorsque la différence entre les revenus de toute nature de l'enfant et les dépenses non remboursables pour son entretien excède 20% du montant imposable de la rémunération du fonctionnaire avec comme minimum le montant de la double allocation pour enfant à charge; (...)". (DSG underlining)

At national level, EU countries generally provide for a fixed 'disabled child' allowance, not linked to income and not conditioned by proofs of real costs. This allowance is meant to cover all kinds of daily costs which are difficult to prove and compensate in some measure for the great disruption and stress to normal life caused by the disability. Generally, the basic allowance is completed by supplementary allowances which are related to the degree of the disability or the needs of the child and the real burden for the family, but never linked to income.

The Commission's interpretation of the statutory right of an extra allowance for disabled children is discriminatory, extremely bureaucratic, rigid and restrictive. Even if, in practice, the rule is not applied very strictly and the limit of 20% may be flexible (according to a Commission official), the fact remains that the implementing rules are a discrimination in comparison with national provisions for families with disabled children. It makes officials with disabled children all the more dependent on the good will of an official in authority, and imposes on them more red tape. What kind of documentation is the official supposed to supply to justify his or her claim? Even more bizarre is that this particular interpretation of the statutory provision has, in practice, the effect that a primary, statutory right is used to fill the gaps of the provisional support of budget line A 4301 and the sickness insurance scheme.