38 Amendments of Pedro SILVA PEREIRA related to 2015/2041(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1
Citation 1
– having regard to its decision of 15 April 2014 on the modification of the inter- institutional agreement on the Transparency Register1 (EU lobby register); __________________ 1 Texts adopted, P7_TA(2014)0376.
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas non-transparent, one-sided lobbying can poses a significant threat to the integrity of policy-makers, policy-making and to the public interest;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
Introducing a legislative footprint, making the lobbtransparency register as mandatory as possible
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the Commission, Parliament and the Council should record and discloseevaluate if all input received from lobbyists/interest representatives on draft policies, laws and amendments as a ‘legislative footprint’could be collected centrally, e.g. by the Committees’ secretariats, and made public online; suggests that thisa legislative footprint should consist of a formbe annexed to reports, detailing all the lobbyists with whom thoseconsisting of a form, detailing organizations with which the rapporteur in charge of a particular file have mets been in contact with in the process of drawing up each report and a second document listing all written input received;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to expand andfurther improve its existing initiative as laid out in its decision of 25 November 2014 on the publicby expanding the practice to meet only organizations of information onr self-employed individuals which are registered in the Transparency Register to all Commission staff; considers that the publication of scheduled meetings held between Members of the Commission and organiszations or self-employed individuals; considers that the recording of meeting data sh with the purpose of influencing EU-legislation could be expanded to include everyoneall Commission staff involved in the EU’s policy-making process, by publishing the Commission unit(s) and the external organisation(s) present at the meetings;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Suggests that the Code of Conduct should be amended so as to make it mandatory for rapporteurs and committee chairs toshould adopt the same practice of exclusively meeting lobbyists registered lobbyin the Transparency Registser and publish information on such meetings online and for rapporteurs to publish a legislative footprscheduled meetings having the purpose to influence EU-legislation onlinte;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Reiterates its longstanding call to back up the EU lobbtransparency register with a legal act, if it is not possible to close all loopholes and achieve a fully mandatory register for all lobbyists with an inter- institutional agreement; considers that the proposal for this legal act could take into account the progress achieved by changes in the inter- institutional agreement and Parliament’s Code of Conduct;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Reiterates its call to the Council to join the lobbtransparency register as soon as possible;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers lobby transparency through monthly reporting by lobbyists about their meetings as a keyof lobbying activities as an essential element for future EUa better legislationve process in the EU;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that, when interpreting ‘inappropriate behaviour’ within thBelieves that the Rules of Procedure should be ameanded ing of point (b) of the Code of Conduct, this expression should be taken to include turning down formal invitations to hearings or committees without sufficient reasonrder to withdraw access badges to the European Parliament from representatives of organisations that have refused to cooperate with a parliamentary inquiry; believes that repeated incidents should lead to a temporary suspension from the EU transparency register;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Insists that registered law firms which are also active in lobbying should declare in the lobbtransparency register all clients on whose behalf they perform covered activities with the purpose of influencing EU- legislation; points out that law firms can only refer to the attorney client privilege when giving legal advice;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Asks the Bureau to restrict access to Parliament’s premises for non-registered organisations or individuals by makEmphasises that the European Parliament as the European citizens’ chamber should retaing all visitors to its premises sign a declaration that they are not lobbyists falling within the scope of the register or otherwise declare their n open door policy towards the citizens and that no unnecessary obstacles should be created, which could discourage citizens from visiting the European Parliament’s pregmistrationes;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Believes it to be necessary, as a matter of urgency, to introduce a proper monitoring system for submitted information in order to ensure that the information that registrants provide is meaningful, accurate, up-to-date and comprehensive; calls in this regard to substantially increase the resources of the Transparency Unit within the European Parliament and the Joint Transparency Register Secretariat;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Believes that at least 5 % of declarations should be checked by the Transparency Unit each year;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Believes that representations of national, regional and local governments should not fall under the EU lobby register if they have their own mandatory lobbtransparency register, and do not offer workspace for private or corporate actors within their representationss they are part of the EU’s multi-level system of governance;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Believes that the members of the Advisory Committee chosen from among Members of the European Parliament should be complemented by a majority of externally chosen members who must be qualified experts in the field of ethics regulation and should be drawn from an open call and include members of civil society; omposed of MEPs should be chosen according to their expertise, inter alia in accounting, legal affairs and ethics regulation; underlines that the composition of the Advisory Committee must at the same time reflect the political balance in the European Parliament, for example through a rotation system;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Believes that the Code of Conduct should be amended to additionally empower the enlarged Advisory Committee to adopt final decisions instead of the Presidentinitiate the procedure for investigating a possible breach of the code of conduct for MEPs, and to empower the Conference of Presidents to adopt final decisions instead of the President; requests that the Advisory Committee is informed about the final decision in due course;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Deems it necessary that the Advisory Committee has access to information and documents relevant to cases it has to examine, including the results of OLAF investigations;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Believes that the Rules of Procedure should be amended with regard to Members’ declarations of financial interests to task the Advisory Committee andintroduce more accurate categories for income from external sources and to task the supportive administration with factual checks in samples and to empower them to ask for proof where necessary;
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Believes that Article 3 of the Code of Conduct for Members should be rephrased to include a clear ban on Members holding side jobs or other paid work that could lead to a conflict ofpaid work as a representative of special interests;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Believes that the Code of Conduct should be amended to provide for a three- yearan eighteen months ‘cooling-off period’ during which former Members may not engage in lobbying work in the area of their parliamentary responsibilitieshave to notify the European Parliament of any post-term-of-office occupation they intend to take up;
Amendment 261 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Believes that for Members of the Commission the ‘cooling-off period’ should be extended to three years and that a two-year cooling-off period should also apply to all Commission staff involved in the drafting or implementation of EU legislation or treaties, includall EU officials including temporary, contract agents and national experts must undergo full training contract staff how to deal with lobbyists;
Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Supports the Ombudsman’s call for entry in the lobbtransparency register to be made a requirement for appointment to expert groups provided that the Members concerned are not government officials and do not receive all or the vast majority of their other income from state institutions such as universities;
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Considers control by Parliament of the financing of European political parties to be an unnecessary conflict of interestNotes that under Regulation No 1141/2014 applying from 1 January 2017 the total amount of Union funding awarded to the eligible European political parties and foundations is determined under the annual budgetary procedure and that the distribution between the eligible European political parties and foundations follows a fixed distribution key; notes further that the control with respect to Union funding is exercised by the independent Authority for European political parties and European political foundations on the basis of external audit reports, whose decisions may be the subject of court proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Union;
Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 326 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Requests that the Commission make sure that non-EU actors which receive EU funds should be as aceffectively countable as EU institutions are wrols then spending such fundof EU funds by non-EU actors;
Amendment 342 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Believes, therefCalls for Council to improve the transparency of its worek, that preparatory meetings within the Council should be as public as meetings of Parliament’s committeesincluding by making its preparatory meetings public whenever appropriate;
Amendment 351 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Believes that the chairs of Parliament’s committees should proactively publish minutes and all documents used in trialoguesInsists that Parliament’s negotiators in trilogues fulfil their obligation under Rule 73 (4) of the Rules of Procedure to report back to the following meeting of the responsible committee and to make documents available which reflect the outcome of the last trilogue; calls for both the oral report and the documents to contain information on the state of the trilogue negotiations; calls furthermore for a list of the dates of trilogue meetings and the names of the direct participants to be made publicly accessible;
Amendment 361 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls on the Presidency of the Council to include allonsiders that Parliament and the Council ought to provide for more transparency in trialogue documents in the documents register to allow for access in accs and conciliation procedures; recalls the need to improve the transparency of legislative negotiations and underlines the impordtance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001of publishing the progress of negotiations after each trilogue;
Amendment 369 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. TakWelcomes the view that Members should have access to all Commission documents, where necessary under exceptional circumstances through a reading roomagreement between the European Parliament and the European Commission of 2 December 2015, which gives Members full access to all documents with regards to the TTIP negotiations;
Amendment 378 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Deems it unacceptable that Parliament has less, or less open,Members of the European Parliament have less access to documents in trade negotiations than some members of national parliaments;
Amendment 388 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 a (new)
Paragraph 39 a (new)
39 a. Calls on the Council to publish the negotiation mandates for international trade negotiations;
Amendment 395 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Believes that, when the Commission engages in trade negotiations, it should publish the negotiation mandates, and all negotiating positions, all requests and offers and all consolidated draft negotiation texts prior to each negotiation round, so that the European Parliament and national parliaments, as well as civil society organisations and the wider public, can make recommendations thereon before the negotiations are closed for comments and the agreement goes to ratification; underlines that the Commission must also persuade negotiating partners to increase transparency at their end to make sure that this is a reciprocal process in which the EU's negotiating position is not compromised;
Amendment 422 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. RegretNotes the Ombudsman’'s finding that mostsome EU institutions have not yet properly implemented rules to protect whistleblowers; points out that to date onlythe European Parliament, the Commission, the Ombudsman and the Court of Auditors have adopted such rules;
Amendment 426 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Believes effective whistleblower protection to be a key weapon against corruption and therefore reiterates its call to the Commisscalls on the Member States and the EU-institutions to prepare a whistleblower protection directive, including minimum Europe-wide standards of protectionensure the protection of whistleblowers on their respective level;
Amendment 440 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. "Believes that the ongoing review of EU elecpolitical parties are best placed to contribute to the fight against corruption lawand should include a rule thattherefore play a stronger role on this issue by excluding persons found guilty of high-level corruption against the EU’'s financial interests or within Member States may not run for office in the next two terms of the European Parliamentfrom electoral lists for European elections";