8 Amendments of Klaus BUCHNER related to 2015/2041(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the Treaty on European Union (TEU) marked a new stage in the process of creating an ever closer union in which decisions are taken as openly and as closely as possible to the citizen (Article 1 TEU); notes that there is a considerable lack of trust among EU citizens in EU trade-policy making, and believes that a radical shift is needed in the way that information about trade negotiations is communicated to thand made publically available, in order to ensure their legitimacy; considers that a key point to regain public trust not only in trade-policy making but in the EU as such is to approach principles of transparency from the perspective of citizen to be empowered to understand policy-making and administration instead of an inner- administration logic of procedures and documentation;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Recommends that the Commissions on-going efforts to increase transparency in all current and future trade negotiations should entail the strengthening of the European Ombudsman's mandate as an independent oversight body; calls on the Commission to grant the European Ombudsman the right of access to all trade related documents, in particular consolidated and confidential files;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Suggests a set of new rules dealing in particular with the treatment of internal documents, especially wider access to Legal Service opinions drafted within the framework of the decision-making process as well as to information relating to the work of Member State representatives when acting as members of the Council, including transcripts of meetings;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that, pursuant to the principle of sincere cooperation, the Union and the Member States must, in full mutual respect, assist each other in carrying out certain tasks (Articles 4 and 13 TEU), which is a precondition for Parliament to adequately exercise its legislative and budgetary functions, and those of political control and consultation (Article 14 TEU); calls on the Council and the Commission to commit fully and seriously to this principle of sincere cooperation with Parliament by immediately providing, through the relevant channels, full and accurate information pertaining to the Union’'s external action, including its Common Commercial Policy (CCP), in regard to decision-making and implementation of primary and secondary legislation; notes that, even though an interinstitutional cooperation agreement exists between Parliament and the Commission, the same does not exist between Parliament and the Council, which creates certain hurdles for scrutiny; calls on the Commission to take into full consideration Parliament’'s requests concerning the interinstitutional agreement, in particular as regards a set of clear criteria for the provisional application and implementation of trade agreements; calls on the Council to accept these criteria and guarantee that the provisional application of trade agreements is contingent to the prior consent of Parliament;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the fact that the Committee on International Trade (INTA) and the Commission’s Directorate-General for Trade have been collaborating pro-actively to enhance cooperation, establish best practices and improve communication channels, and that this collaboration has been especially useful for monitoring trade negotiations through INTA Standing Rapporteurs and targeted monitoring groups; welcomes recent efforts by the Commission to increase the transparency of trade negotiations; believes, nevertheless, that the Council and the Commission can still improve their working methods to better cooperate with Parliament as regards access to documents, information and decision-making for all issues and negotiations related to CCP (such as information relating to negotiations – including scoping, mandates and evolution of negotiations – provisional application of trade agreements, activities and decisions taken by bodies created by trade and/or investment agreements, expert meetings, and delegated and implementing acts); notes that the European Commission was ineffective in properly assessing and reacting to all individual and standard responses to its public consultation on ISDS in TTIP in 2014 and calls on the Commission to improve the inclusiveness of all public consultation results in order to fulfil its commitments to the European citizens; notes with regret that after one year of negotiations between the Commission and Parliament on access to documents related to the TTIP negotiations, there is still no agreement about access to confidential documents;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that, as pointed out by the European Court of Justice (ECJ), imperatives for transparency derive from the democratic nature of governance within the EU, and that, where confidential information is beyond the reach of public access, as in the case of trade negotiations, it must be available to parliamentarians who scrutinise trade policy on behalf of citizens; considers therefore that access to classified information is essential for scrutiny by Parliament, which in return should abide by its obligation to manage such information properly; demands that Members of the European Parliament and key political group staff with a "need to know" will be granted access to trade negotiation documents on the level of the best current practice of any national Parliament within the EU; considers that there should be clear criteria for labelling documents as ‘'classified’' and for the de- classification of classified documents at the earliest moment; notes that the case law of the ECJ makes it clear that where a document originating in an EU institution is covered by an exception with regard to the right to access, the institution must clearly explain why access to this document could specifically and effectively undermine the interest protected by the exception, and that the risk must be reasonably foreseeable and not purely hypothetical; calls on the Commission to implement the recommendations of the European Ombudsman of July 2015 with particular regard to access to documents for all negotiations, and calls on the Commission to convince EU negotiating partners to increase transparency at their end; believes that the scoping exercise prior to the start of trade negotiations with a third country should include the scoping of aspired transparency of the negotiations and that continuous failure of partners in trade negotiations to increase transparency to a similar level as in the EU should constitute a reason to halt negotiations;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recalls the importance for the CCP legislative process to count on Union statistics consistent with Article 338(2) TFEU and on impact assessments and sustainability impact assessments conforming to the highest standards of impartiality and reliability, a principle which should lead all respective revisions in the frame of the "Better Regulation" policy of the Commission; calls for further reflection on further promoting a mandatory legislative (and lobbying) footprint throughout the legislative process, which would further legitimise it by making it more fact based and transparent for citizens and stakeholders;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Believes that the credibility of the EU's ethical behaviour will be ultimately judged by citizens in relation to the consistency of the EUs political initiatives with its internal administrative standards; commends in this regard the EU internal standards on the fight against corruption and the protection of whistle-blowers and demands to protect these standards in international trade agreement negotiations on the protection of trade secrets within chapters on Intellectual Property.