16 Amendments of Enrico GASBARRA related to 2015/2319(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas it has expressed its concerns with regard to the functioning of the previous framework for Commission expert groups of November 20103 which had been set up with the aim of introducing significant operational innovations to strengthen the transparency and coordination of inter- institutional work; __________________ 3 C(2010)7649 final of 10.11.2010.
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, in particular, its Committee on Budgets, in light of the lack of transparency and the imbalanced composition of a certain number of expert groups, and given the need to make sure that the composition of expert groups strikes the right balance in terms of expertise and of views represented, adopted budgetary reserves in 2011 and 2014, and has formulated demands which have not yet been accepted for their reform;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that transparency is of paramount importance in the composition of the expert groups; therefore welcomes the fact that the selection process is now taking place publicly; stresses in this connection that it needs to be clearly visible what practical experience and, qualifications and possible conflicts of interest the experts possess; have;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the European Ombudsman has in her strategic inquiry5 , put forward a recommendation concerning the composition of Commission expert groups; __________________ 5, in particular emphasising the need for greater transparency within the expert groups; __________________ 5 OI/6/2014/NF. OI/6/2014/NF.
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the Commission Decision of 30 May 2016 establishing horizontal rules on the creation and operation of Commission expert groups, but regrets the fact that, despite many non- governmental organisations having expressed their interest, the Commission did not organise a full public consultation; reiterates the importance of reviving forms of involvement of representatives of civil society and the social partners in crucial areas such as the transparency and the functioning of the European institutions;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that the Commission has made progress towards a more balanced composition of the expert groups; regrets, however, that as yet no express distinction is drawn between those representing economic and non-economic interests in order to guarantee a maximum of transparency and balance; considers it important therefore to involve Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee in order to produce a more balanced definition of that distinction;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the new rules should apply to all Commission expert groups, irrespective of their title (thus including special, high-level or other ‘extraordinary’ groups, and formal or informal groups), that are not exclusively composed of representatives of Member States or governed by Commission Decision of 20 May 1998 on the establishment of Sectoral Dialogue Committees promoting the Dialogue between the social partners at European level6 ; reiterates that a wide extension of the principle of participation in the expert groups is essential to ensure an effective reform of the system; __________________ 6 OJ L 225, p. 27.
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to ensure that all minutes of meetings are published; stresses in this connection that the content and the positions expressed by the experts at these meetings must be clearly shown; also calls for the possibility of publishing minority decisions; reiterates the importance of making public the decisions of the expert groups and believes that this principle should remain valid even where a qualified majority of their members support the need to keep secret a specific meeting or part of a meeting;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission, when creating new expert groups or changing the composition of existing ones, to state clearly in the public call for applications, in all possible forms, how it defines a balanced composition and which interests it seeks to be represented, and to justify any possible deviation from the balanced composition as defined beforehand, when the expert groups are established;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to set up a complaints mechanism, if the definition of balanced composition is contested by interested stakeholders; calls for Parliament to be associated in this control mechanism;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Requests the Commission to apply its provisions for reimbursement of expenses generouslyin an efficient and equitable manner, in order to cover outlays for any such ‘alternative costs’’;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that both Parliament and the European Ombudsman hasve recommended to the Commission to make the deliberations of expert groups public, unlessconsiders that this principle should still be valid even if a qualified majority of their members decide that a specific meeting or part of a meeting would need to be secret, and regrets that the Commission has persisted in a system in which the meetings remain secret unless a simple majority of the members of expert groups decides that the deliberations should be made public;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Invites the Commission forthwith to develop specific guidelines explaining how it interprets the provision that the minutes of the expert groups shallould be meaningful and complete, especially whenand that the meetings are notshould be public, and urges the Commission to provide, in this regard, the maximum transparency possible, in line with the recommendation of the European Ombudsman;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to make enough resources available for the central oversight of the implementation of the horizontal rules, and not to delegate this to the individual Directorates-General;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission to devote, in particular, sufficient resources to the activities relating to the Register, by developing innovative and particularly effective methods so that it will be kept up to date and does not contain any factual errors;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that the Commission has stated that by the end of 2016, the new framework for Commission expert groups will have to be implemented by all Directorates-General, and requests the Commission to submit to Parliament an evaluation report at the latest one year after the adoption of the Decision, i.e. before 1 June 2017; Calls on the Commission to ensure that, as part of the structured dialogue with Parliament, a first oral presentation of the report can already be made within the next six months;