The right's pension hypocrisy exposed as MEPs seek bailout
The European Parliament is considering using public money to rescue its MEPs' voluntary pension fund, which is 105 million euros in deficit. Here is what is known.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
The European Parliament is considering bailing out its MEPs' voluntary pension fund with public money. The fund carries a deficit of 105 million euros. It is a case that contrasts with the narrative that public pensions are unsustainable.
The European Parliament is studying a rescue, using public money, of the voluntary pension fund of its own MEPs. That fund has accumulated a deficit of **105 million euros**. The paradox is plain to see: the same institution that preaches the supposed unsustainability of public pensions is considering saving a failed private plan with other people's money.
## What is the MEPs' pension fund
It is a voluntary pension scheme, additional to the general system, which MEPs can join. It is not compulsory and does not replace the public pension to which they are entitled. The fund has accumulated a hole of **105 million euros**, according to figures held by the institution itself.
The European Parliament is now considering injecting public money to cover that deficit. In other words, the same body that demands adjustments and reforms from member states is admitting that its own private plan cannot sustain itself.
## The story of unsustainability
For more than **30 years** it has been repeated that the public pension system is unsustainable because of population ageing and rising life expectancy. That narrative has been used to justify cuts and increases in the retirement age.
Some claim that the system has run surpluses for much of its history and that the pension pot was diverted to other purposes, such as the banking bailout. This is a claim that circulates in public debate and is not backed by an official report cited here. What is verifiable is that the MEPs' private fund has failed and that a public bailout is being considered.
## Contributory and non-contributory pensions
The Spanish system distinguishes between contributory pensions, funded by workers' contributions, and non-contributory pensions, paid from other state funds. Mixing the two sources is one of the criticisms levelled at the management of the system.
The debate over whether non-contributory pensions should be paid out of the contributory pot is legitimate. What does not add up is that those who warn about that mixing simultaneously defend bailing out a failed private fund with public money.
## The business at stake in Europe
In a context of deindustrialisation and competition with powers such as **China**, some point out that Europe's great economic dynasties have set their sights on two sectors: pensions and healthcare. First the idea spreads that the public system cannot cope; then the ground is cleared for private plans.
The case of the MEPs' fund does not prove that all private plans fail. It proves that one specific one — the one belonging to those who legislate in Europe — has failed. And that the proposed solution is not exactly the austerity they demand from everyone else.
If this matter affects your finances or your retirement, consult a financial adviser or a specialised professional before making decisions.
The European Parliament is studying a rescue, using public money, of the voluntary pension fund of its own MEPs. That fund has accumulated a deficit of **105 million euros**. The paradox is plain to see: the same institution that preaches the supposed unsustainability of public pensions is considering saving a failed private plan with other people's money.
## What is the MEPs' pension fund
It is a voluntary pension scheme, additional to the general system, which MEPs can join. It is not compulsory and does not replace the public pension to which they are entitled. The fund has accumulated a hole of **105 million euros**, according to figures held by the institution itself.
The European Parliament is now considering injecting public money to cover that deficit. In other words, the same body that demands adjustments and reforms from member states is admitting that its own private plan cannot sustain itself.
## The story of unsustainability
For more than **30 years** it has been repeated that the public pension system is unsustainable because of population ageing and rising life expectancy. That narrative has been used to justify cuts and increases in the retirement age.
Some claim that the system has run surpluses for much of its history and that the pension pot was diverted to other purposes, such as the banking bailout. This is a claim that circulates in public debate and is not backed by an official report cited here. What is verifiable is that the MEPs' private fund has failed and that a public bailout is being considered.
## Contributory and non-contributory pensions
The Spanish system distinguishes between contributory pensions, funded by workers' contributions, and non-contributory pensions, paid from other state funds. Mixing the two sources is one of the criticisms levelled at the management of the system.
The debate over whether non-contributory pensions should be paid out of the contributory pot is legitimate. What does not add up is that those who warn about that mixing simultaneously defend bailing out a failed private fund with public money.
## The business at stake in Europe
In a context of deindustrialisation and competition with powers such as **China**, some point out that Europe's great economic dynasties have set their sights on two sectors: pensions and healthcare. First the idea spreads that the public system cannot cope; then the ground is cleared for private plans.
The case of the MEPs' fund does not prove that all private plans fail. It proves that one specific one — the one belonging to those who legislate in Europe — has failed. And that the proposed solution is not exactly the austerity they demand from everyone else.
If this matter affects your finances or your retirement, consult a financial adviser or a specialised professional before making decisions.
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (11 replies).
More summaries
-
Spain's right and the 0.35% pension increase of 2018
A forum user argues that the 0.35% pension increase in 2018 damaged the right's credibility on pensions. Another notes that the PP beat the PSOE by a wide margin in 2023.
-
The provincial map of tactical voting that splits Spain's right
A province-by-province map designed to decide how to vote against the left has split Spain's right: tactical voting, made-up provinces and the d'Hondt law remain unanswered.
-
Brazilian Far-Right Candidate Flavio Bolsonaro Swears Before Brazilian Grand Lodge
A viral tweet claims Flavio Bolsonaro swore before the Brazilian Grand Lodge to hand over Brazil to Israel and Satan. There is no evidence of such an act.
-
Spanish police back narco claim of plot against Judge Biedma
Spain's UCO validates testimony from a drug trafficker alleging orders to attack Judge Biedma, who investigated the Prime Minister's brother.
-
Jordi Wild posted this a few years back
Streamer Jordi Wild published a satirical tweet about the Catalan independence process. We look at what it says, what context it reflects and why it keeps being shared.
-
Viral 'panchizal' slur targets Mutua doctor in Spain
A viral message uses 'panchizal' to describe a doctor at a Spanish Mutua. The word is not a diagnosis or a job category: it is a slur. Here is what lies behind it.