The Postbus AG has for many years made in the highly subsidised regional transport profit. And because this is not allowed, it has hidden it with accounting tricks. The Post office had to pay back to the cantons and the Federal government 200 million Swiss francs. It is the largest subsidy scandal of Switzerland.
in addition to an administrative criminal proceedings investigated by the Parliament, which knew of the Board of Directors and the Confederation as owner. Next Thursday, the Council of States bends over the scandal. It is clear that both the Board of Directors as the Federal authorities can stop the rip-off much earlier had. There are seven open-ended questions, which the parliamentary supervision could go to the bottom of it:
1. From what has been cheated?
The Post at the law firm of Kellerhals Carrard requested examination report to, the thing only up to 2007. Older fraud are time-barred. It could well be that the accounting tricks have already started in 1998. The business audit Commission of the Council of States called for last fall, the Federal Council, to go to the bottom of it. The Federal Council rejected recently because it was "disproportionate".
2. Why step, Federal councillor Doris Leuthard not a?
In November 2012, the Secretariat of Federal councillor Leuthard has been expressly advised of the conflict between the profit requirements of the Federal government, and the prohibition to make in the post-car-regional traffic gains. The Federal councillor took then, but nothing. Starting in 2012, the Price watchdog Stefan meierhans tried to understand in more detail what is going on at the Post office. He was reticence or gaps continually wrong information was given the information.
Also at the Federal office for transport, Meier, Hans was from 2013 to make representations. However, five years passed before the for, the audit Department discovered the error. The experts report noted, the office had remained "idle". Until a new auditor in charge, to 2017, the thing went to the bottom of it. An investigation by the trust company BDO, which made the "world week" in public, showed to 2018, that the consideration of the bill was in the Federal office are totally inadequate and do not meet the statutory requirements corresponded to.
The Board of Directors discussed the shifts – and no one asked whether that was legal.
4. When warned, the internal audit Department of the Post?
not later than from 2013, the internal audit Department warned the Board that there were illegal transfers. At the end of July 2016, at the time of the former CVP member of the Ständerat Urs Schwaller was as Chairman of the Board in office, warned the internal audit again in front of the goal conflict between the profit requirements of the Federal government and no-Profit rule in the post-car-regional traffic. However, the internal audit also proposed to optimize the profit by means of "transfer prices". Urs Schwaller admitted to the Blow of the scandal, he would have had to read the report "critical". In front of the media, he said he'll take responsibility for it. Consequences he is not moved, but he was also the group's auditor.
5. Why none of the members of the Board a, as the theme of 2013 was discussed?
Schwaller is not the only Board that can detect the fraud and to intervene. The shifts were even items on the Agenda at a Board meeting in June 2013, at that time under the post President Peter Hasler, how the "views" revealed. The Board of Directors discussed shifts in the Profit, and no one asked for, because if that was legal. This, although the post-peak has been made at the Federal office for transport's attention to the fact that in the subsidised post-car-regional traffic gains are not allowed.
6. Why not or only too late was the Protocol of the meeting of the Board in the investigation?
The minutes of this Board meeting is mentioned in the 216-page report of investigation of the law firm kellerhals Carrard not a single syllable. This despite the fact that the lawyers had the job, the facts of the case in the Post explicitly at Board level to identify and work up. On demand at the Post office and at the law firm is up to now unclear when the document wo showed up and why it only separately to the Detec as the owner was passed. We were actually supposed to land in 2013 in the office of Federal councillor Doris Leuthard and in financial management.
7. Why does the investigation report, that this Board of Directors, the Protocol will not change anything to the conclusions?
The legal assessment of the investigation report are still under lock and key. On request, cellar neck Carrard writes, a serious legal assessment based on a single document, but always on several elements, Evidence or circumstantial evidence.
Created: 08.03.2020, 18:55 PMUpdated Date: 09 March 2020, 03:02