(Made in accordance with Article 3 (6) of the Statute of the Ombudsman.(1))

THE COMPLAINT

The complaint concerns the amount deducted from the salary of those officials whose children attend the Garderie/Centre d'études du Centre polyvalent de l'enfant -CPE-(hereinafter "Garderie") in Luxembourg.

The son of the complainant, who is a Parliament official, attends the Garderie of Luxembourg, managed by the European Commission. All charges are deducted from the complainant's salary on a monthly basis. In her complaint, the complainant alleged lack of transparency of the sum deducted, because since it is a lump sum which constantly changes, it is impossible to check its accuracy. She claims that the sum deducted should be more detailed and the parents should be informed of any changes.

THE INQUIRY

The Commission's opinion

In its opinion, the Commission refers to the relevant rules concerning admission to and operation of the establishment comprised in the ECC. According to Article 5, the parental contribution shall be made by means of deduction from the salary of the parent who registered the child. The parental contribution shall be based on the scale laid down by the Social Activities Committee and shall be reviewed periodically.

The Commission states that the children's meal voucher consisting of 20 tickets are signed and authorised in advance by the parents. Furthermore, the institution points out that on 12 September 2000, all the parents concerned were informed that the price of a carnet would change from 69,41 to 74,34 €.

The Commission regrets that the inter-institutional system of payment does not consent to give more detailed information concerning the codes "retenus" and "divers". However, the new inter-institutional system of payment which is currently being set up will avoid such inconvenience. At the present, each institution has to provide to the parents concerned the detailed invoice forwarded by its administrative service on a monthly basis.

The Parliament's opinion

In its opinion on the complaint, the Parliament recognises that its Pay and Allowances Division is aware of the situation described by the complainant, who contacted them in several occasions.

According to the Parliament, the problem stems from the fact that the European Commission, as manager of the Garderie, asks the various institutions to deduct the monthly charges for the attendance fee and the children's meal vouchers from their parents' pay without giving detailed information on the amounts charged to the parents.

The Parliament stresses that the Pay and Allowances Division, considers this situation to be unsatisfactory and has contacted the relevant Commission department several times, but without effect. The complainant was therefore informed that only the Commission has the relevant information which she is entitled to have.

Furthermore, the Secretary General of the European Parliament has recently written to the Secretary General of the European Commission requesting that a solution to the problem in the interest of the officials concerned be found.

The complainant's observations on the European Commission's opinion

The complainant stressed that the procedural information concerning the functioning of the Garderie were not relevant in the context of her complaint. She underlined, moreover, that the Commission recognised the inadequacy of the informatic system and referred to a new one which will avoid these inconveniences without, however, giving any concrete information on the time of its entry into force.

The complainant also pointed out that she would not blame the Commission's activity, but. denounce a problem of which the Commission itself admits the existence. In her view, it is irrelevant which of the two institutions concerned the Commission or the Parliament would provide the relevant information on a regular basis.

The complainant's observations on the European Parliament's opinion

The complainant pointed out that, in view of the contents of the Parliament's opinion which spoke for itself, she would not add any comment.

THE DECISION

1 Failure to provide detailed information

1.1 The son of the complainant, who is a Parliament official, attends the Garderie of Luxembourg, managed by the European Commission. All charges are deducted from the complainant's salary on a monthly basis. In her complaint, the complainant alleged lack of transparency of the sum deducted, because since it is a lump sum which constantly changes, it is impossible to check its accuracy. She claims that the sum deducted should be more detailed and the parents should be informed of any changes.

1.2 In its opinion, the Commission regrets that the inter-institutional system of payment does not consent to give more detailed information concerning the code "retenus" and "divers". It also states that the new inter-institutional system of payment which is currently being set up will avoid such inconvenience.

1.3 In its opinion, the Parliament points out that its services consider this situation to be unsatisfactory and have therefore contacted the relevant Commission department several times, but without effect. Furthermore, it stresses that the Secretary General of the European Parliament has recently written to the Secretary General of the European Commission requesting that a solution to the problem in the interest of the officials concerned be found.

1.4 It is good administrative behaviour for public administration to provide the most accurate information about its own decision. Such information should enable the decision's recipients to judge its accuracy easily.

1.5 The Ombudsman takes note that both the institutions concerned agree that the inter-institutional system of payment is not satisfactory and that the complainant is entitled to receive the information requested. The Ombudsman also notes that the Parliament's Secretary General wrote to the Secretary General of the European Commission requesting a solution to the problem in the interest of the officials concerned be found.

1.6 The Ombudsman considers that the failure to provide the complainant and all the parents concerned with detailed information on the amount charged for the attendance fee of their children to the Garderie constitutes an instance of maladministration.

2 Conclusion

2.1 On the basis of his inquiries into this complaint, the Ombudsman concludes that the failure to provide, on a regular basis, detailed information concerning the sum deducted from the official's salary for the participation fee of their children at the Garderie, constitutes an instance of maladministration.

2.2 The Ombudsman therefore makes the following draft recommendation to the Commission and to the Parliament, in accordance with Article 3 (6) of the Statute of the Ombudsman:

The draft recommendation

Parents concerned are entitled to receive detailed information concerning the amount charged for the attendance fee of their children to the Garderie. The European Commission and the European Parliament should therefore find a solution so as to provide this information regularly.

The complainant will be informed of this draft recommendation. In accordance with Article 3 (6) of the Statute of the Ombudsman, the Commission and the Parliament shall send a detailed opinion before 31 October 2002. The detailed opinion could consist of the acceptance of the Ombudsman's draft recommendation and a description of how it has been implemented.

Strasbourg, 19 June 2002

 

Jacob SÖDERMAN

---

(1) Decision 94/262 of 9 March 1994 of the European Parliament on the Regulations and General Conditions Governing the Performance of the Ombudsman's Duties, OJ 1994 L 113/5.