The Good - European Commission, Paul van Buitenen - Brief Article

Ecologist, The, Feb, 2001 by Paul Van Buitenen

This month's heroes and villains: the contrasting European styles of Paul van Huitenen and Pascal Lamy.

Today was one of the most difficult days of the last year,' reads the diary entry for B October. '[They] used all [their] persuasive powers on me to try to stop me from publishing the book as it is. [They] predicted hell and damnation if I continued with the book. I felt desperate. I phoned my publishing company to ask how much it would cost me to stop or postpone the publication of the book. Finally, after a few more phone calls, a talk with my wife, who fully supported me, and some quiet prayer, I realised that people were supporting me to carry on. I decided not to let myself be scared off. The publication of the book next week in the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Austria and Switzerland will definitely go through!'

The diary entry is taut and nervous, but frank. It brings to mind the writings of Vaclav Havel or Alexander Solzhenitsyn under communist regimes, or some desperate soul in a Kafkaesque climate. Yet the writer is Dutchman Paul van Buitenen, the year is 1999, and the 'they' is none other than the European Commission. What on earth was going on?

We have to go back to December 1998, when van Buitenen, an assistant auditor in the European Commission's Financial Control Directorate, sent a letter to Magda Aelvoet, President of the Greens in the European Parliament. 'It is with deep regret that I write this letter to you,' he began. 'As Commission official, I am not allowed under the staff regulations to address myself directly to the European Parliament on internal Commission matters. This subject, however, appears to surpass what could normally be designated 'internal' since the credibility and future of the Commission is at stake.'

Over the course of 34 pages, van Buitenen outlined a litany of failures and poor management in the Commission's attempt to run a clean business. 'I have been in a "privileged position" to witness the incompetence and unwillingness of the Commission's administration to deal efficiently with fraud and irregularities,' he wrote, and thus it was that one of the most humiliating and revealing chapters of modern bureaucratic European history began.

His report showed that the Brussels-based Commission had deliberately covered up multi-million pound frauds; it had blocked inquiries into financial irregularities involving vast sums of taxpayers' money; it had removed mention of spending on fictitious projects from auditors' reports; it had mishandled money across a broad spectrum of departments, from the tourism unit and vocational training section, to its humanitarian aid department and nuclear safety programme. Within days, international confidence in the European Commission's ability to handle the EU's [pound]65 billion annual budget had crumbled.

The first reaction, of course, was to blame the messenger. Within a month of releasing his letter, van Buitenen was receiving threatening phone calls telling him not to reveal the details of the abuses. A report even came through that Commission security officers had been buying long-range sniper rifles with night sights and silencers, although this extraordinary development was later explained away as an anti-terrorism move. For days, van Buitenen was effectively the most wanted man in Europe, but as time passed it was becoming clear that the Commission's financial affairs would need to be independently examined.

By March 1999, the focus had shifted onto the Commission, with an independent review concluding that van Buitenen's allegations carried legitimacy, and that 'it was not easy to find anyone in the Commission with a proper sense of responsibility'. The same month, the entire Commission resigned.

Van Buitenen had been suspended on halfpay during this time, but was reinstated by April. However, he found himself to be banned from further auditing tasks and reprimanded for his whistle-blowing. 'I considered leaving the Commission's services as I doubted whether there would still be a basis for me to continue my efforts to help improve the organisation from within,' he wrote. 'However, quite unexpectedly the previously anonymous support from many colleagues materialised in more visible form through my election as a staff representative with a high number of preferential votes. I decided to stay on board.' By September, the Committee of Independent Experts presented their final report: detailing its recommendations for a thorough administrative reform of the Commission.

Many might have considered van Buitenen vindicated by now, but the Commission hadn't finished, bringing us back to the hurdles they put up to block the publication of his book of the affair. Yet, inspired as he says above by family, friends and colleagues, van Buitenen went ahead, and in March 2000 the Commission unveiled its White Paper for internal reform.

Today, van Buitenen is considered a European hero: media outlets as diverse as Reader's Digest and the Australian Broadcasting Commission have honoured him as European of the Year.