Activities of Notis MARIAS related to 2015/2319(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Control of the Register and composition of the Commission's expert groups (short presentation) EL
Amendments (21)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that transparency is of paramount importance in the composition and the action 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 the experts possess;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Ε
Recital Ε
Ε. whereas it recognises that before adopting the Decision, the Commission did engaged with representatives of Parliament and with the European Ombudsman;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas it welcomes, in particular, the presentation by the Commission presented to Parliament of a working document of the Commission’s services, responding to the recommendations contained in a working document of the Rapporteur for the Committee on Budgetary Control;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Ζ
Recital Ζ
G. whereas, this notwithstanding, unfortunately neither the working document of the Commission’s services, nor the Commission Decision, provides solutions to all concerns raised by Parliament;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomesPoints to 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;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that the Commission hasshould madke progress towards a more balanced composition of the expert groups; regretsdeplores the fact, 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;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. RecognisesPoints out that, through the adoption of the new horizontal rules, many concerns previously expressed by Parliament have seemingly been met, in particular those concerning the need for public calls for applications for the selection of the members of expert groups and concerning the revision of the Register of Commission expert groups and the creation of synergy between this Register, the Transparency Register of the Commission and Parliament, as well as those rules relating to the need to avoid conflicts of interest, in particular as regards experts who are appointed in a personal capacity;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. NotesDeplores the fact that for financial and organisational reasons it is frequently not possible for under-represented groups, which are often representatives of civil society and of small and medium-sized undertakings, to participate; therefore calls on the Commission, in the interest of ensuring balanced composition of expert groups, to consider possibilities forseek an increase in financial support to enable them to participate;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the new rules should apply strictly 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 level;6 · __________________ 6 OJ L 225, p. 27. OJ L 225, p. 27.
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to ensure that all minutes of meetings are published in order to produce greater transparency; 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;
Amendment 18 #
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 how it defines a balanced composition and, which interests it seeks to be represented, and why, and also to justify any possible deviation from the balanced composition as defined beforehand, when the expert groups are established;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission forthwith to set up a complaints mechanism, if the definition of balanced composition is contested by interested stakeholders;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. NoteRecalls that in the past it was not always possible for the Commission to find sufficient experts representing SMEs, consumers, trade unions or other organisations of general public interest, and that this was often caused by the costs involved, either in taking up leave or, for example in the case of SMEs, in finding replacement for the time spent in the expert groups, hereafter referred to as ‘alternative costs’;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Highlights furthermoreStresses that the Commission, in preparing and drafting delegated acts, must ensure that all documents, including draft acts, must be communicated to the European Parliament and the Council at the same time as to the Member States’ experts, as agreed in the Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making of 12 May 2016.
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Commission to make sure that, even if, despite specific arrangements, it is still not possible to find sufficient experts representing all relevant interests, the expert group concerned will take all appropriate measures, for example by weighted voting procedures, to make sure that the final reports of these expert groups will effectively be representing all relevant interests in a balanced manner;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that both Parliament and the European Ombudsman has recommended to the Commission to make the deliberations of expert groups public, unless 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 40 #
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 shall be meaningful and complete, especially when the meetings are not public, and urges the Commission to provide, in this regard, the maximum transparency possible, in line with the recommendation of the European Ombudsman;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to clarify that, if individuals appointed in their personal capacity have submitted false or incomplete declarations of interest, or have failed to keep these up to date, this will not only have consequences for their membership in the expert group concerned, but will alsoutomatically mean that they will be banned from other existing or future expert groups for a period of at least twofive years after the discovery of the errors in respect of their declarations of interest;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recalls that, in addition to experts appointed in their personal capacity, members from universities, research institutes, law firms and consultancies may also have conflicts of interest, as they do not necessarily represent a specific interest, and requests the Commission to clarify how it avoids conflicts of interest for these specific categories of experts;
Amendment 57 #
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 yearsix months after the adoption of the Decision, i.e. before 1 June 2017;