Vienna (OTS) – Expert Martin Kreutner is featured in the standard online story “IMPULSE FOR THE ORF – anti-corruption expert:
ORF does not sufficiently comply with the Transparency Act” dated May 19, 2024 as saying that “the ORF did not – as required by the law – make it transparent with whom the consulting contracts were concluded” and that it saw a “distraction effect”: “We have a budget of a billion, but we are only discussing the few hundred thousand.” The ORF firmly rejects this: The ORF’s management is transparent and is subject to numerous checks. All transparency guidelines set out in the new ORF law have been and are being implemented precisely.
The expert is clearly wrong in his accusation that the ORF should have provided the names of the contractual partners in consulting contracts and procurement contracts. The opposite is true, as can be clearly seen from the explanations of the ORF law amendment (ErlRV 2082 BlgNR 27. GP on § 7a ORF-G): “The description of the subject matter, remuneration and term of consulting contracts, procurement framework contracts as well as Contracts for work serve to ensure transparency as to which services the ORF does not cover or cover through services within the company, to what extent and for what purpose, but rather purchases them externally. The name and type of service ordered are sufficient for the presentation, without it being necessary to provide personal data.” The names of the contractual partners would be personal data.
The ORF has a clear legal mandate that it must fulfill. In contrast to commercial media, the ORF, as a public broadcaster, is fully accountable to the public for the implementation of its mandates and the appropriate use of financial resources. As one of the most audited companies in the country, its business activities are strictly and continuously monitored, particularly with regard to advisory and consultant contracts, by the following institutions:
Board of Trustees, Audit Commission, Regulatory Authority KommAustria, Court of Auditors.