Clash between the European Commission and the European Council on the increase of the salaries of EU officials. In a tough note, the General Affairs Council asks the Commission to explaine why, when it comes to salaries, the economic crisis seems to disappear and therefore the rules to contain wage increases jump, whereas when the Commission makes its recommendations to the Member States or published his studies on the economics there the crisis reappears.
States ask then, in a language very bureaucratic, with continuous references to articles of the European Treaties (sometimes calling them by the old name, at least in appearance) to the men of José Manuel Barroso to carry out a new, more credible, study. The text is unusually hard, “remembering the request made in March 2012” in which the Councill asked “in the light of objective data supplied by the Commission if there was a serious and sudden deterioration in the economic and social situation in the Union and to advance propooste appropriate if this was the case”. The commission study has been presented, but the Council “regrets the Commission’s conclusion that there is no reason to abandon the ‘normal method’ and therefore there is no reason to make a proposal under Article 10 Annex XI of the Staff Regulations. What is the article, which then refers to the former 283 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the Union, with which you adjust the proposals for the treatment of staff
The Council, however, is really angry, te States “does not share the Commission’s interpretation of Article 10, and “considers that the applicability” of this article is to be understood on the basis of economic conditions “in the broadest sense”, but especially emphasizes that “the study presented by the Commission does not reflect the serious and sudden deterioration in the economic and social policy, such as economic data known claim, as also does the Annual Growth Survey 2011 and 2012 presented by the Commission”. It goes on: “does not agree with the Commission’s analysis” on the states that have an excessive deficit procedure, and “regrets” that the Commission did not consider this information in his report.
So it’s all over again and the Council “makes a new request to the Commission” because “in the light of objective data” present a new report “on salary adjustments this year,” in time for the Council and Parliament to examine them before the end of 2012.
