EU and Corruption: What about Denmark?

According to Transparency International, Denmark was the least corrupt country in the world in 2008. Something every citizen in Denmark can be proud of. This can explain why there is great confidence in the Danish bureaucracy. It can also explain why for example Italians have little confidence in their own government (see World Value Survey, 2005). Transparency International gave Italy only 4.8 points on a scale ranging from 0 to ten where the former is completely corrupt and the latter is completely clean. Denmark has a score of 9.3. Transparency International measures corruption through the so called CPI or Corruption Perceptions Index. Basically it measures, "[...] the perceived levels of public-sector corruption in a given country and is a composite index, drawing on different expert and business surveys. The 2008 CPI scores 180 countries (the same number as the 2007 CPI) on a scale from zero (highly corrupt) to ten (highly clean)."

The situation in the EU

Before addressing the core of this problem, let us first turn our attention upon the situation regarding corruption in the EU. As already mentioned Denmark is the "cleanest" country in the EU while Bulgaria is the "dirtiest" with a score on only 3.6 according to Transparency International. First let us take a look at the clean countries.

The clean countries

• Denmark (9,3)


• Sweden (9,3)


• Finland (9,0)


• The Netherlands (8,9)


• Austria (8,1)

Votes in the European Parliament: 86
Votes in the Council of the European Union: 54

The dirty countries

• Bulgaria (3,6)


• Romania (3,8)


• Poland and Lithuania (4,6)


• Greece (4,7)


• Italy (4,8)

Votes in the European Parliament: 207
Votes in the Council of the European Union: 103

In other words the "clean" countries have less than half the votes that the "dirty" countries have, while it is almost the same in the Council.

Theoretical implications

The European Union is governed through the parliament (EP) and the Council with the Commission as the executive power. The focus will be on the former two. Of the 736 seats in the EP 28 % is controlled by the dirty countries while the clean countries only control 12 % of the seats. In the Council the "dirty" country control 30 % of the votes while the "clean" countries control only 16 % of the votes. In other words the if there existed a clean coalition they would by definition be a minority opposed to the dirty coalition as well as the middle ground which I have not enclosed in this article. The alignment in both the parliament as well as the Council is not created along corruption lines. Rather around different topics. This is where it gets problematic. Assume that there is a vote about the CAP or Common Agricultural Policy. Especially Poland and France have a great interest in this arrangement while the president of the Danish Agricultural Council has stated opposition (Danish) towards CAP. Together Poland and France (France has a CPI score of 6,9) can muster 123 MEP's and 56 votes in the Council. In other words corruption (can) play(s) a role in the decision making process in the EU. Or put boldly - corrupt countries have a say in the cleanest country in the world.

Implications for Denmark

While Denmark will continue to be the cleanest country despite the European issues, it is important to remember that many of the laws (in fact more than half the laws approved in Denmark) originates from the EU system. Boldly said, corrupt politicians have a say in more than half the laws the Danish parliament approves (until now I will leave this as is but return to the matter in my next article).