Activities of Benedek JÁVOR related to 2016/2174(DEC)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2015 PDF (320 KB) DOC (64 KB)
Amendments (23)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the contribution of the Authority to the safety of the Union food and feed chain, by providing Union risk managers with comprehensive,and stresses that independent and up-to-date scientific advice on questions linked to the food chain, as well as clear communicationg clearly to the public on its outputs and the information on which they are based, and cooperating with interested parties and institutional partners to promote coherence and trust,are crucial in order to strengthen public trust in the Authority and in the Union food safety system;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Fails to understand why the Authority hired without any cooling-off period a lobbyist from the food industry as its Communications Director; considers that in the current climate of strong criticism against the Union such a decision is particularly unfortunate;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the Authority should continue paying special attention to public opinion, and commit itself, as much as possible, to openness and, transparency, and independence from all companies whose products it has to evaluate; welcomes, in this respect, that in 2015, the Authority successfully tested its new methodological approach to the use of scientific evidence; also welcomes, in this context, the improvements in sharing data by opening up the data warehouse of the Authority to a growing number of stakeholders; calls on the Authority to review its independence policy swiftly and in a way that reassures the public about its independence from all regulated companies; calls on the Authority to strictly follow its independence policy whenever new members are appointed to its scientific panels and working groups; encourages the Authority to further progress on this path;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Stresses that experts with financial interests linked to companies whose substances are evaluated by the Authority shall not be allowed to sit in the Authority's scientific panels or working groups, and that no such expert should be appointed by the Authority before two years after his/her interests have expired; is convinced that the Authority should be endowed with a sufficient budget to hire independent in-house experts with no conflicts of interests;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Takes note that the Authority has already committed to introduce two-year cooling-off periods in relation to the following interests: membership of a managing entity or scientific advisory body, employment and consultancy; calls on the Authority to ensure that a two-year cooling-off period covers all material interests related to commercial companies whose products are assessed by the Authority, as well as organisations funded by them;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Takes note that the Authority has already committed to introduce two-year cooling-off periods in relation to the following interests: membership of a managing entity or scientific advisory body, employment and consultancy; calls on the Authority to swiftly implement the measure in line with the Discharge Authority's repreated requests;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Stresses that a core element of scientific credibility is transparency as regards the scientific studies which have been considered, as well as reproducibility of the results;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Calls on the Authority to revise its access to documents policy, following the European Court of Justice's rulings on requests related to access to environmental documents from 23rd November 20161a . The Court ruled that, when a person requests access to environmental documents, the concept of 'information on emissions into the environment' covers, inter alia, information concerning the nature and effects of the release of a pesticide into air, water or soil, or onto plants, and that the confidentiality of commercial and industrial information may not be invoked to preclude the disclosure of such information; _________________ 1aJudgments in Cases C-673/13 P Commission v Stichting Greenpeace Nederland and PAN Europe and C- 442/14 Bayer CropScience and Stichting De Bijenstichting v College voor de toelating van gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden; see http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/a pplication/pdf/2016-11/cp160128en.pdf
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Believes that, in order to strengthen public trust in the Authority, the European Parliament should be closely involved in this process of revision of the Authority's conflict of interest rules and the related composition of a special working group in the board;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6 d. Stresses that experts with financial interests in companies whose substances are regulated by the Authority shall not be allowed to sit in the Authority's scientific panels or working groups, and that no such expert should be appointed by the Authority before two years after his/her interests have expired; is convinced that the Authority should be endowed with a sufficient budget to hire independent in- house experts with no conflicts of interests;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 e (new)
Paragraph 6 e (new)
6 e. Is concerned that any staff reduction within the Authority could seriously damage its capacities and reputation; believes, therefore, that it should be ensured that no reduction of staff takes place;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 f (new)
Paragraph 6 f (new)
6 f. Believes that, in order to further the trust of the citizens of the Union, the Authority should take further steps as regards transparency and accountability, such as publishing the minutes of the its management board meetings, as well as the remunerations for experts' declared activities, and it should regularly check declarations of interests and publish the results as an annex to its yearly report;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Acknowledges from the Authority that, since the adoption of its 2011 policy on independence, it assesses and validates 100 % of the declarations of interest submitted by its experts, which on average corresponds to a grand total ranging from 6 000 to 7 000 declarations of interest per year that are assessed and validated by the Authority’s staff, in accordance with its policy on independence and its rules on declarations of interest; takes note that the Authority additionally, twice per year, performs additional compliance and veracity checks by staff not involved in the ordinary checks mentioned above; calls on the Authority to publish the results of its checks as an annex to its yearly report; notes that a review of the 2011 policy is ongoing with a public consultation planned for spring 2017 and a target date of adoption of the new independent policy by summer 2017; notes with concern that the Authority’s policy on prevention and management of conflicts of interests is not applied to its interim staff;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that there were important milestones in the Authority’s communications with risk managers and the public in 2015: the launch of its new website based on extensive user research, and the move of the EFSA Journal to an external professional publishing platform. Progress was also made by the Applications Helpdesk, the Authority’s front office and support desk for the safety assessment of regulated products. With those and many other projects and initiatives, the Authority ensured that it remained an effective and trusted service of scientific advice for the interests of consumers Such projects and initiatives help enhancing a positive perception of the Authority within the Unionpublic;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Acknowledges from the Authority that, since the adoption of its 2011 policy on independence, it assesses and validates 100 % of the declarations of interest submitted by its experts, which on average corresponds to a grand total ranging from 6 000 to 7 000 declarations of interest per year that are assessed and validated by the Authority’s staff, in accordance with its policy on independence and its rules on declarations of interest; calls on the Authority to publish the remunerations for experts' declared activities at least in brackets; takes note that the Authority additionally, twice per year, performs additional compliance and veracity checks by staff not involved in the ordinary checks mentioned above; notes that a review of the 2011 policy is ongoing with a public consultation planned for spring 2017 and a target date of adoption of the new independent policy by summer 2017; notes with concern that the Authority’s policy on prevention and management of conflicts of interests is not applied to its interim staff;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Insists that the Authority implements its independence policy consistently, and in particular for panel chairs and vice-chairs;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10 b. Is concerned that a vice-chair of the Authority's Pesticides Panel is currently involved in a research project half-funded (at 50%) by the European Crop Protection Association;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)
Paragraph 10 c (new)
10 c. Is concerned that at four members of the working group on the food additive titanium dioxyde (E171) interveded at the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) according to a TV documentary screened on 26/02 on France 5; reminds the Authority that ILSI is the same institute which has caused the scandal leading to the postphonement of the Authority's discharge in 2012;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that only some of declaration of interests of the Authority’s Management Board members are published on its website; calls on the Athuroty to ensure that all declarations are published urgently;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Calls on the Authority to revise its access to documents policy, following the European Court of Justice's rulings on requests related to access to environmental documents from 23rd November 2016 1a ; the Court ruled that, when a person requests access to environmental documents, the concept of 'information on emissions into the environment' covers, inter alia, information concerning the nature and effects of the release of a pesticide into air, water or soil, or onto plants, and that the confidentiality of commercial and industrial information may not be invoked to preclude the disclosure of such information; _________________ 1aJudgments in Cases C-673/13 P Commission v Stichting Greenpeace Nederland and PAN Europe and C- 442/14 Bayer CropScience and Stichting De Bijenstichting v College voor de toelating van gewasbeschermingsmiddelen en biociden; see http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/a pplication/pdf/2016-11/cp160128en.pdf
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19 b. Calls on the Authority to publish its list of Food Safety Organisations, as well as the outcome of its evaluations of experts' interests;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)
Paragraph 19 c (new)
19 c. Request that the Authority, as a matter of principle, uses only published and peer reviewed studies for the assessment of regulated products, so that any scientist qualified in the field can replicate its findings; urges the Commission to review the applicable legal framework to enable the Authority to do so in secure legal conditions; suggests that this legal review is performed in line with the following requirements: (a) the research necessary is performed much earlier in the process of authorisation; (b) the evidence is produced by laboratories independently from the producers; (c) the data is made entirely available to the scientific community; (d) the cost is met by the producer in a way that does not penalise SMEs against large corporations;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 d (new)
Paragraph 19 d (new)
19 d. Calls on the Authority to verify systematically the correctness of the GLP– status of the scientific studies that are used for risk assessments;