4 ms·
> If they weren’t VPs, they would still be regular MPs, so only a 800 € difference. But if those 14 VPs were MPs then there wouldn't be the need for 14 other M
by wizeman 4y ago
> If they weren’t VPs, they would still be regular MPs, so only a 800 € difference.
But if those 14 VPs were MPs then there wouldn't be the need for 14 other MPs.
Which means that the difference per VP would be the price of an MP + 800 EUR (of difference between VP and MP), which is exactly the price of a VP.
In other words, no, the difference would still be ~3.7 - 4.6 million / year in total.
- layer8 4y agoBeing a VP is just a role you can assume as an MEP. Reducing the number of VPs won’t reduce the number of MEPs. Reducing the number of MEPs is orthogonal to reducing the number of VPs.