Well it seems that the parliamentary activities of your representative in Brussels are set to remain less than clear for a little while longer.
A brand new website detailing what MEPs get up to in the EU assembly – how often they attend plenary, whether they write reports, table questions or take part in committees – has been culled.
Just two days after going live, parlorama the work of one Flavien Deltort, no longer exists. Instead, visiting the site will get you this doleful/cheerful (I can’t make up my mind) little message “Due to the overwhelming volume of complaints, the site is closed…”
In any case, I like the three but-we-haven’t-heard-the-last-of-this dots at the end of the sentence.
The stated aim of the website was to help citizens choose who to vote for ahead of the June elections with its pre-being-taken-down blurb pointing to the amount of power in co-legislative terms that the parliament has. Powers that are only set to increase if the Lisbon Treaty comes into force.
Mr Deltort, who did not sound particularly cowed when I spoke to him, says he took the website down because he had a number of complaints. He refused to name the complainants except to say that one was a “national political party.” He is seeking legal advice to make sure he cannot be sued and hopes to put the website back up next week.
Those complaining were unhappy with how their ranking had been worked out. One centre-right French MEP Elisabeth Morin-Chartier sent around a lengthy press release pointing out that as she only came to the parliament in mid 2007, she (and others having a shorter mandate) were “unjustly penalised.” She also took umbrage with the fact that “invisible” work such as co-ordinating a political party’s position on a proposed EU law does not feature in the quantitative ranking.
Still, I was encouraged to hear that Mr Deltort also received several emails from MEPs (“Spanish, Greeks, Slovaks”) asking him why the site was down and praising him for the work.
If you have not seen the site yet, and so don’t know what the fuss is about, here is an earlier posting of mine which describes it a little more.
#1 by Aaron Grunwald on April 24th, 2009 - 5:28 pm
I certainly can understand his concerns. But it would be a bit outrageous for an MEP to take any legal action, if this is all publicly available information.
#2 by michal on April 27th, 2009 - 6:11 am
The activities of MEPs are here: http://kohovolit.eu/eu/activity.php
#3 by Chris on April 27th, 2009 - 3:49 pm
Seems like a fair complaint – why should members who joined mid-mandate be effectively named and shamed at the bottom of the ranking?
Honor, it seems you are too easily “encouraged” by MEPs who praised the site. No doubt a number of them did disproportionately well out of a ranking based on quantity of work rather than quality.
Or should we judge you against your EU Observer colleagues by the frequency of your blog posts?
#4 by Honor Mahony on April 27th, 2009 - 4:22 pm
Indeed it is a fair complaint. That is why I included it in the post. On being encouraged by the other MEPs emailing him, I meant that I was pleased that his work got some recognition, despite one political party lodging a strong enough complaint for him to temporarily close the site. I agree that quantity does not always equal quality but equally I do not see what is wrong with having such a website. It sheds light on the basic activities of MEPs in the European Parliament, something that is not always clear to their voters, and opens up the discussion between voters and their MEP on this very issue. Not altogether a bad thing, I don’t think.