Activities of Manon AUBRY related to 2020/2133(INI)
Shadow opinions (2)
OPINION on strengthening transparency and integrity in the EU institutions by setting up an independent EU ethics body
OPINION on strengthening transparency and integrity in the EU institutions by setting up an independent EU ethics body
Amendments (24)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that within the EU institutions different legislative measures aimed at preventing conflicts of interest contain varying definitions of the term ‘conflict of interest’; believes therefore that the term should be understood to mean a conflict between the public duty and private interests of a public official, in which the public official has private- capacity interests which could improperly influence the performance of their official duties and responsibilities; notes, howevconsider,s that a definition of this kind has an evolving nature and that full transparency does not necessarily guarantee the absence of any conflict of interest, nor does it guarantee public trustpplying the highest transparency standards is the best way to restore citizens’ trust in EU institutions;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Notes that trust in the European institutions and their democratic legitimacy have been profoundly altered by the adoption of the Treaty of Lisbon in 2007 despite the rejection by referendum in France and in the Netherlands of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe in 2005;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Further notes the low level of trust in the EU institutions, with only half of the EU citizens expressing trust for the EU institutions according to the Eurobarometer survey carried out by the European Commission in 2019;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Underlines that utmost importance of independence, transparency and accountability of public institutions and public officers to foster the trust of citizens that is necessary for the legitimate functioning of democratic institutions;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1 e. Notes that during the examination of the potential conflict of interests of Commissioner-designates in 2019, Members of the Committee for Legal Affairs have underlined profound flaws of the current procedure; Further notes that these flaws include the access only to a limited range of information, the lack of time for examination, the absence of investigative powers, the absence of support from experts, and the lack of impartiality of Members of the Legal Affairs Committee considering that Commissioner-designates are often chosen from their own political movements, and often by their own national governments;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is also of the opinion that for this examination to be complete and accurate, and for the possibility of a conflict of interest to be excluded, information and documents beyond the declaration of financial interests of Commissioner- designates are often essential; considers in this regard that the independent ethics body should be able to request from individuals under examination that they provide banking information, tax information, and any other information that may be necessary for the examination; considers that the independent ethics bodies should be given the appropriate investigative powers to be able verify the information provided; stresses that the independent ethics body should be able to impose sanctions for unjustified delays or for the refusal to provide information; further stresses that such information may remain confidential if necessary;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes therefore that the Committee on Legal Affairs in cooperation with the independent ethics body should be given sufficient time to evaluate possible conflicts of interest; further believes that it should be provided with sufficient resources, tools and skills to cross-check and locate necessary information;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that, given the sophisticated and complex nature of this responsibility, the establishment of a possiblexamination of a potential or actual conflicts of interest should be de- politicised and performed in an independent and systematic way with the assistance of a body with the relevant expertisby an independent body with the relevant expertise and experience; Considers that it should be undertaken as on ongoing exercise, with annual updates of the declarations of interests and the possibility for the independent ethics body to issue sand experiencections for delays or bad faith in the provision of information and updates of information;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that for proper expertise to be acquired, the futureindependent ethics body should have a permanent, independent and collegiate structure, and that its composition could be based either on specific institutional positions, such as that of the President of the Court of Justice, orand on the nomination of experts by each EU institution and relevant bodies such as the European Ombudsman, the OLAF, the European Court of Auditors, and on the participation of civil society organisations specialised in ethics, transparency and independence in public policy making;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Considers that the nomination by the Parliament of members of the independent ethics body should be done by a vote of the two third the plenary assembly;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Stresses that the composition of the independent ethics body should respect gender parity;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines however that the assessment of the independence of Commissioner-designates remains a political and institutional competence of the European Parliament; Recommends therefore that, while fully keeping its competence on the matter, the Committee on Legal Affairs decide on the existence of a conflict of interest after having received apublic, non-binding, precise and motivated recommendations by such an independent expert advisory body; Considers that the Committee on Legal Affairs should ultimately hold a debate and vote on the recommendations issued by the independent ethics body; Stresses that this decision of the Committee on Legal Affairs should be publicly motivated and taken by roll-call vote;
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes furthermore that this future advisory body could also be entrusted with the broader task of examining conflicts of interest within the EU institutions, including the European Parliament, and EU agencies in general, playing, in a complementary and balanced way, a preventive role via awareness raising and ethical guidance powers on the one hand, and a compliance role on the other.
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Notes that the fragmented administrative structure of the European Union has led to the development of different and uneven ethical standards and enforcement mechanisms across European institutions; Stresses that all European institutions and bodies should strive for the highest possible standards of transparency, accountability and integrity; Recommends that the future independent ethics body serves as an overarching supervisory body and works towards the harmonization of ethical standards while taking into account the specific nature and challenges of each institution;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8 b. Considers that the European Parliament should lead by example with regards to rules on ethics and their enforcement; Suggests that the future independent ethics body should we able to investigate breaches of ethics rules by Member of the European Parliament and impose appropriate sanctions, such as fines or the retention of allowances; Considers that the independent ethics body should be able to investigate on serious conflicts of interests arising in relation to a Member’s rapporteurship or shadow rapporteurship for specific files and take appropriate and effective decisions to redress litigious situations;
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8 c. Believes that the independent ethics body should control the independence and ethical conduct of EU civil servants both before, during and after they hold a position or an office within the EU institutions; stresses the importance of combating the phenomenon of revolving doors between public and private organisations; recommends the adoption of harmonized and adequate cooling-off periods across all EU institutions and reinforce the currently failing system of enforcement of those rules;
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8 d. Considers that competent civil society organisations should be closely associated to the work of the independent ethics body; Recommends that the European Parliament appoints civil society organisations as permanent members of the independent ethics body; Considers that they should also support the work of the independent ethics body in an advisory capacity and be responsible for the publication of an annual report on the functioning of the independent ethics body that should be transmitted to the European Parliament and the European Commission;
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 e (new)
Paragraph 8 e (new)
8 e. Stresses that it is of utmost importance that the independent ethics body is given the possibility to start investigations on its own initiative;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 f (new)
Paragraph 8 f (new)
8 f. Recommends the creation of an internal and confidential complaint mechanism for European public officers to raise concerns about potential breaches of existing rules without fearing retaliation;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 g (new)
Paragraph 8 g (new)
8 g. Stresses that the independent ethics body should be accessible to legitimate external stakeholders; Recommends the creation of a mechanism to allow for the submission of concerns by external stakeholders including individuals and civil society organizations;
Amendment 85 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 h (new)
Paragraph 8 h (new)
8 h. Recommends the adoption of a specific complaint mechanism for designated civil society organizations, as well as the obligation for the independent ethics body to examine these submissions without delay and motivate any decision taken in their regard;
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 i (new)
Paragraph 8 i (new)
8 i. Stresses that the combat against fraud, corruption, maladministration or misuse of public funds are distinct, although sometimes related, to the control of ethical issues in the EU institutions; Consequently underlines that the creation of an independent ethics body must not lead to the undue suppression or restriction of other existing bodies that supervise the good administration of the European Union;
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 j (new)
Paragraph 8 j (new)
8 j. Considers that, for the purpose creating an ethics body “common to all EU institutions”, in line with the mission letter of the Vice-President of the European Commission for Values and Transparency, it is necessary to amend the treaties of the European Union;