Activities of Gilles BOYER related to 2020/2133(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on strengthening transparency and integrity in the EU institutions by setting up an independent EU ethics body
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on strengthening transparency and integrity in the EU institutions by setting up an independent EU ethics body
Amendments (35)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that transparency, accountability and integrity are key components in promoting ethics principles within the EU, and are essential to protect the EU budget from fraud and corruption and to maintain democratic legitimacy as well as public trust in the EU; recalls that corruption has serious financial consequences and constitutes a serious threat to democracy, the rule of law and public investment; recalls that conflicts of interest can significantly damage the EU’s financial interests and decision-making processes, and should therefore be prevented and condemned;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13
Citation 13
— having regard to the recommendations of Transparency International, the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD),
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the TEU stipulates that ‘the Union shall observe the principle of the equality of its citizens, who shall receive equal attention from its institutions, bodies and agencies’; whereas this implies that public decisions are taken in the interest of the common good and not according to the financial power of individual actors;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the high level of fragmentation in the ethics legal framework and the lack of oversight have prevented the proper implementation of codes of conduct in EU institutions; believes that the current self-regulatory approach is not fit for purpose and cannot guarantee integrity; highlights that public officials are not in a position to self-assess ethical situations or conflicts of interest, and that this assessment should fall under the remit of an independent specialised third party; underlines the need to enhance the integrity of the EU institutions and restore public trust;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the ethical standards applicable to the European institutions are in many respects ahead of those applicable in their national equivalents but have not been enforced in a satisfactory manner, particularly in Parliament where, in spite of there having been at least 27 breaches of the code of conduct, no procedure has ever led to any sanction;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Encourages the creation of an Independent Ethics Body (IEB) common to all EU institutions; welcomes the fact that the Commission has made it a priority, and is committed to supporting the IEB’s effort to establish a common ethical framework at EU level; calls on all EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies to support and contribute to the establishment of the future common ethical framework of the EU; encourages the extension of the competences of the IEB as to cover all EU agencies, offices, bodies and other EU structures;
Amendment 17 #
5. Sees high potential for the EU institutions to transfer administrative decision-making competences to the IEB based on a new harmonised ethics framework that it will establish, which should include common rules on the content and publication of declarations of interests, avoidance of conflicts of interest and revolving doors, acceptance of gifts and entertainment, protection of whistle- blowers and victims of harassment, transparency of lobby meetings, public procurement and meeting calendars of senior staff, and use of transparent bank accounts for public funds;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the shortcomings of the current EU ethics framework derive largely from the fact that it relies on a self- regulatory approach and lacks adequate human, due to the absence of EU Criminal law, and financialsufficient resources and competences to verify information;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that the IEB should be in charge of prevention, monitoring, investigation and enforcement of the ethical framework for the protection of the EU’s financial interests; highlights that the IEB should be able to take disciplinary measures and impose financial sanctions in order to avoid abuse of the EU budget linked to unethical behaviour;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas, as a consequence, multiple alleged cases of unethical conduct and their inadequate handling by the EU institutions have potentially harmed the trust which European citizens place in the EU institutions;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that tasks transferred to the IEB can go beyond those currently exercised by the institutions; cCalls for the IEB to assess the implementation of ethics rules by the EU institutions and publish an annual report on its findings;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls for the IEB to lead by example on transparency by publishing all decisions and spending in a machine- readable open data format available to all citizens; strongly recommends that any software developed for upholding the ethical standards in EU public administration should be made available under a free and open-source software licence and should be shared with any institution in Europe wishing to use it;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
E a. whereas the European Court of Auditors recommended, in its Special Report 13/2019, the use of a harmonised approach to handling ethical issues within the EU institutions;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. WelcomEncourages the signing of an interinstitutional agreement (IIA) between EU institutions to set up the IEB; emphasises the importance of the Council, including the Member States’ representatives working in the Council, joining the IIA in view of the ECA’s and European Ombudsman’s repeated requests to enhance the institution’s working ethics and transparency; recalls the obligation of the Council to deal with high-level conflicts of interest, revolving doors and lobby transparency rules;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas allsome lead candidates in the 2019 European elections committed tosupported the creation of an independent ethics body common to all EU institutions; whereas the President of the Commission committed tosupports it in her political guidelines and whereas Parliament has already supported this view;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – introductory part
Paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. Considers that the new EU Ethics Body should be delegated a list of competences to implementpropose and advise on ethics rules for Members and staff; takes the view that this list should include by way of a minimum the competences provided for in:
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – indent 2
Paragraph 2 – indent 2
- Parliament’s Rules of Procedure: Rules 2, 10(5, 6 and 7) and 11, 176(1), Annex I, Articles 1 to 3, 4(6), 5 and 6 and Annex II,
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – indent 3
Paragraph 2 – indent 3
- the Commission’s Rules of Procedure: Article 9, its Code of Conduct, Article 2 and Articles 5-11, and Annex II, and its Decision of 25 November 2014 on the publication of information on meetings held between Members of the Commission and organisations or self-employed individuals, and the same decision for Directors-General,
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – indent 4
Paragraph 2 – indent 4
- the Staff Regulation’s Articles 11, 11(a), 12, 12(a), 12(b), 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21(a), 22(a), 22(c), 24, 27 and 40, applying mutatis mutandis to all personnel employed by the agencies if signatories of the IIA
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Recalls the difference between Members of Parliament who are elected and receive allowances, and civil servants who are appointed and receive a salary; stresses that for the former, control should take place after the election, and for the latter before the appointment
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Recalls that the notion of conflict of interest during the term of office or functions should be distinguished from the situation before and after
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Recalls the necessity to distinguish what must be declared and what must be prohibited;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2 d. Points out, however, that the final decision making concerning the adoption of ethics rules as well as decisions on sanctions remain the prerogative of the participating Institutions
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that the Members and staff of the participating institutions should be covered by the agreement before, during and in some cases after the term of office or service in line with the applicable rules; considers that this should apply to Members of Parliament, Commissioners and all EU staff falling under the scope of the Staff Regulation;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Insists that the IIA should be open to the participation of all EU institutions and bodies; believes that the IIA should allow the Ethics Body to conclude agreements with national authorities with a view to ensuring the exchange of information and best practices necessary for the performance of its tasks;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that the participating institutions should entrust the EU Ethics Body with monitoring powers over ethics standards, as well as advisory, investigative and enforcement powersthe capacity to propose sanctions, if appropriate;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Highlights that public officials are not in a position to conduct self- assessments concerning matters of conflict of interest or the respect of ethical standards; underlines that this task should fall under the competence of the EU Ethics body, as an independent specialised third party;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Considers that the new EU Ethics Body should have competence to contribute by way of proposals to the development and periodic update of a common ethical framework for the EU institutions, including common rules and a common model for declarations of financial interests in a machine-readable format;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Considers that the EU Ethics Body should be given the task to develop an EU public portal with relevant information on ethics rules, reports on best practices, studies, statistics, as well as a database containing the declarations of financial interests of all the participating institutions;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that in relation to its enforcement powers, the body cshould take over from the Appointing Authority in dealing with staff ethics obligations, and that in relation to Members of Parliament or Commissioners, the body could be granted enforcement powers within the limits of the provisions contained in the Treaties, and without prejudice to any additional mechanisms provided for in Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, in particular concerning termination of officeissue recommandations to the responsible authorities of the respective participative Institutions and without prejudice to any additional mechanisms;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that the decision on the absence of conflicts of interest of Commissioners-designate should remain a competence of Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs, while the EU Ethics Body should support the process with the publication of its analysis of each individual case and make its investigative capacities available;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that the Ethics Body should be composed of nine Members, three selected by the Commission, three elected by Parliament, and three assigned de jure from among the former Presidentjudges of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the Court of Auditors and former EU Ombudsmen;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Suggests that each institution choose these members in particular from among former judges of the CJEU, former or current members of highest courts of Member States, former Members of the European Parliament, former staff of the participating institutions and bodies, former EU Ombudsmen, and members of the ethics authorities in Member States; suggests further that the body elect a President and two Vice- Presidents from among its members;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Proposes a two-step approach whereby, in the event that the EU Ethics Body becomes aware of a breach or possible breach of ethics rules, it first recommends actions to put an end to the breach; considers that this first preventive step should ensure confidentiality and the right of the person to be heard; suggests that in the event that the individual concerned refuses to take the appropriate actions, the EU Ethics Body should make relevant information, without prejudice to the GDPR, about the case publicly available and drecideommend, if appropriate, on sanctions; considers that this two-step approach should apply provided that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the individual acted in bad faith and recommends that intentional breach, gross negligence, the concealment of evidence and non- compliance with the obligation to cooperate should be, as such, subject to sanctions, even when the breach itself has ceased;
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18