Dear Ms R.,

On 7 August 2001, you made a complaint to the European Ombudsman concerning the way in which the relevant amount is 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.

On 27 September 2001, I forwarded the complaint to the Presidents of both institutions.

The European Commission sent its opinion on 15 November 2001, which I forwarded it to you with an invitation to make observations. On 9 January 2002, I received observations from you.

As regards the European Parliament, it appeared that no opinion was received by 31 December 2001, which was the deadline foreseen, and that the institution had not asked for an extension of the deadline. On 18 February 2002, I therefore wrote to the President of the Parliament and asked him to inform me of the opinion of the Parliament by the end of February 2002. The Parliament sent its opinion on 5 March 2002. I forwarded it to you with an invitation to make observation, which you made on 15 April 2002.

On 19 June 2002, I addressed a draft recommendation to the European Commission and the European Parliament. On the same day, I informed you by letter of this action.

The Commission sent its detailed opinion on 11 September 2002. On 17 September 2002, I forwarded the detailed opinion to you with an invitation to make observations by 31 October 2002.

The Parliament's detailed opinion was received on 21 October 2002. On 28 October 2002, the Secretariat of the Ombudsman contacted you by telephone.

I am writing now to let you know the results of the inquiries that have been made.

THE COMPLAINT

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 current inter-institutional system of payment does not allow for 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 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 on 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 was 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 did not want to blame the Commission's activity, but only 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, she would not add any comment.

THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION

On 19 June 2002, the Ombudsman addressed a draft recommendation to the Commission and to the Parliament in accordance with Article 3 (6) of the Statute of the European Ombudsman.

The basis of the draft recommendation was the following:

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.

In its opinion, the Commission regrets that the current inter-institutional system of payment does not allow for 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.

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.

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

The Ombudsman took note that both the institutions concerned have agreed that the inter-institutional system of payment is not satisfactory and that the complainant is entitled to receive the requested information. The Ombudsman also noted that the Parliament's Secretary General wrote 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 Ombudsman concluded 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. He therefore made the following draft recommendation to the Commission and to the Parliament:

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 Ombudsman informed both institutions that in accordance with Article 3(6) of the Statute of the Ombudsman, they should send a detailed opinion before 31 October 2002.

The Commission's detailed opinion

On 11 September 2002, the Commission sent its detailed opinion to the Ombudsman.

The Commission stated that the Ombudsman's recommendation has been the object of an in-depth examination by the Commission's competent services. Furthermore, the institution pointed out that technical arrangements necessary to set up the new inter-institutional system of payment to provide parents with detailed information on a regular basis, are in the course of development. On this basis, the Ombudsman's draft recommendation will be implemented shortly.

In the meantime, parents who so wish, could address their requests to the secretariat of the "Garderie" and of the "Centre d'étude".

The Parliament's detailed opinion

On 21 October 2002, the Parliament sent its detailed opinion to the Ombudsman.

The Parliament referred to the detailed opinion provided by the European Commission which informed the Ombudsman that the computer programme needed to provide detailed invoicing is currently being developed. The Parliament fully supported this initiative and pointed out that, according to its understanding, that this improvement will be implemented by the end of the current year.

The complainant's observations on Commission and Parliament's detailed opinions

On 28 October 2002, the services of the Ombudsman contacted the complainant by telephone and were informed that the complainant was satisfied with the outcome of the inquiry.

THE DECISION

1. On 19 June 2002, the Ombudsman addressed the following draft recommendation to the European Commission and to the European Parliament:

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.

2. In its detailed opinion, the Commission informed the Ombudsman that technical arrangements necessary to set up the new inter-institutional system of payment to provide parents with detailed information on a regular basis, are in course of development and that the Ombudsman's draft recommendation will therefore be implemented shortly.

In its detailed opinion, the Parliament supported the Commission's initiative and stressed that, according to its understanding, this improvement will be implemented by the end of the current year.

3. The Ombudsman considers that the measures described by the Commission and by the Parliament in its detailed opinion satisfy the requirements of the Ombudsman's draft recommendation. The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.

The President of the European Commission and of the European Parliament will also be informed of this decision.

Yours sincerely,

 

Jacob SÖDERMAN