A kerfluffle over severance payments to European judges:

European Union judges are continuing to be paid half their substantial salaries for three years after their posts have ended.

Sir
David Edward formerly Britain’s top European Union judge, is still
receiving £90,000 a year even though his 14 years with the European
Court ended in 2004.

The generous payments have
come under scrutiny after it emerged that Sir David, 71, was working
for Microsoft in its effort to overturn a record fine imposed by the
very court in which he once sat.

Sir David and
Melchior Wathelet, Belgium’s former judge at the EU court, have briefed
the software giant’s executives at the same time as pocketing
"feathered landing" severance payments of half their previous annual
salaries.

A scandal? I think not. Here’s the real one:

The double income puts both former judges in a potentially compromising
position. "It seems problematic to me," Karel Van Miert, the former EU
competition commissioner, told the Belgian newspaper Le Soir. "I have
always tried not to find myself acting against the commission. I think
you have to wait for a certain amount of time to pass before accepting
an offer from a company. You have also to check that there is no
conflict of interest."

Really? Having been on the Commission means you’ll never work against it? Even if, on a specific subject, they’re wrong? Could that be because if you, in the words of the contract, work against the interests of Europe (as defined by the Commission) you’ll lose your pension?

Which could be why we’ll never see Lords Patten and Kinnock saying boo to the goose?

Footnote. Pensions from the Commission are not considered relevant interests to be declared in the House Of Lords.