16 Amendments of Lara WOLTERS related to 2023/2130(DEC)
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that the 2022 follow-up process resulted in the closure of 38 of the 92 open actions and for which the agreed due dates for implementation had expired; is concerned by the fact that as of 31 December 2022, 29 open actions were overdue for more than 12 months; expects the different directorates-general to ensure that the remaining actions are closed without any further delay and that the agreed actions are implemented in accordance with the due dates set in the internal auditor’s annual report;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Notes that 2022 was the first year of the full implementation of the mandatory transparency register under the revised IIA adopted in 20212 and that the register is a key tool for promoting transparent and ethical interest representation at Union level becauseas long as registration is respected as a precondition for interest representatives to be able to carry out certain activities with the Union institutions, including Parliament; calls for the provision of all necessary resources to ensure that the internal rules related to the Transparency Register are effectively enforced, including, where appropriate, the imposition of adequate sanctions; _________________ 2 Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 May 2021 between the European Parliament, the Council of the EuropeanUnion and the European Commission on a mandatory transparency register, OJ L 207, 11.6.2021, p. 1.
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Welcomes the increased use of the transparency register as an information and reference tool for interest representation activities at Union level; notes the continuous improvement in the quality of information on the public database resulting from eligibility and data quality checks of new applicants; welcomes the regular communication, helpdesk and awareness-raising activities undertaken by the Secretariat among stakeholders both within the institutions and outside, as well as the development of IT solutions to improve the transparency register; recommends that IT solutions are used to integrate the Transparency Register in all Parliament’s activities involving external entities to allow to record and track their participation through the relevant databases;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Stresses the need for a thorough pre-check as part of registration in the transparency register to disclose all funding sources; notes that funding from Union funds must be traceable from the direct recipient to the final beneficiary when funds are passed on in a chain; calls for a revision of the guidelines for registration in the transparency register to disclose all incoming and outgoing funds, including the transfer of funds from one NGO and stakeholder to another; underlines that NGONotes that funding from Union funds must be traceable from the direct recipient to the final beneficiary; underlines that all registrants receiving money from third parties, whose registration in the transparency register is not required, need to disclose the source of their funding by specifying the same information as all regular registrants;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
Paragraph 36 a (new)
36a. Recalls that OLAF has the mandate to investigate suspicions of serious misconduct by EU staff and members of the EU institutions, including possible breaches of the Code of Conduct of Parliament’s Members; notes that Parliament has systematically rejected OLAF’s requests to conduct inspections of MEPs’ offices and access their electronic servers and devices, which is a legal prerogative only used when it is strictly needed and proportionate for the investigation and fully respecting confidentiality; calls Parliament’s administration to not put any obstacles in the way of implementation of Parliament’s Decision of 18 November 1999 governing relations with OLAF during internal investigations;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
53. Acknowledges that several Directorates-General have expressed their concerns about attracting talent and specialised profiles that are essential to carry out Parliament’s core business; notes that only services that are essential may be considered for a potential internalisation exercise; highlights that some services are carried out by external service providers due to their specific nature which does not meet the conditions for internalisation; is therefore of the opinion that the services not meeting these conditions should not be considered for internalisation by the governing bodies and thus, is of the opinion that Parliament's governing bodies should consider the internalisation of essential services such as catering and cleaning, as Parliament has previously done with security and IT services, as well as with the CPE2 crèche in Luxembourg; calls on the Secretary-General to carry out a feasibility study on the internalisation of catering and cleaning services in order to have a reasonable cost-benefit analysis and to report back to the Committee on Budgetary Control on the outcome;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58 a (new)
Paragraph 58 a (new)
58a. Recalls Parliament’s recommendation to the Commission in its resolution of 18 April 2018 “to review its administrative procedure for the appointment of senior officials with the objective of fully ensuring that the best candidates are selected within a framework of maximum transparency and equal opportunities, thereby also setting an example for the other European institutions”; is of the opinion that Parliament, regarding appointment procedures, should always meet the highest standards in terms of transparency, accountability and good administration; calls therefore on the Bureau to include the appointment to the post of secretary-general in its decision of 16 May 2022 laying down the steps in the procedure for appointing senior officials;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67 a (new)
Paragraph 67 a (new)
67a. Recalls the Bureau decision of 23 October 2019 to approve the creation of an IDEA Lab with the aim of testing new, innovative solutions in the context of offices and facility management; points out that the IDEA Lab is supposed to be at the disposal of Members and thus, points out that Members have not been properly and proactively informed about the innovations to be tested nor their costs; notes the high annual maintenance cost of IT solutions that are not being implemented in Parliament; calls on the Bureau working group on buildings and Parliament’s administration to ensure greater transparency regarding the functioning and budget for the IDEA Lab and to regularly present to the Committee on Budgetary Control the list of innovative solutions, their cost and the feedback produced, as well as the potential saving if implemented;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73 b (new)
Paragraph 73 b (new)
73b. Is concerned that the Osmose building in Strasbourg will not be able to accommodate meeting rooms, as was the initial reason for renting it and that this will not be solved even if part of the administration is moved to that building; is concerned about the hidden costs of the Osmose project, i.e. leasing, cleaning and security that would amount to EUR 189 981 000 for the stipulated leasing period of 99 years, in addition to EUR 10.3 million for furnishing, security and IT equipment and the still undetermined cost for connecting the Osmose building to Parliament premises; believes that the Legal Service shall confirm whether Parliament can take on a leasing from the French authorities on a building they don’t own;
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110 a (new)
Paragraph 110 a (new)
110a. Welcomes the Parliament's recent introduction of the possibility for Members on maternity leave or in expectation of childbirth to indicate absence from votes; deplores nonetheless the fact that there is no system in place to ensure that Members who are temporarily absent for a justified reason, such as maternity leave, parental leave, long-term sick leave or carer’s leave, can continue to carry out their core duties if they so wish and are able to, first and foremost to vote; deems this problematic as it can negatively impact citizens’ representation in Parliament; underlines that younger, particularly female, Members and their voters are disproportionately affected when no such arrangements are provided for; emphasizes that a vote for a female Member of Parliament should not lead to a lack of representation; calls on the Committee on Constitutional Affairs to provide for the possibility of continuation of remote participation by revising Parliament’s Rules of Procedure;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110 b (new)
Paragraph 110 b (new)
110b. Notes that the suspension of Strasbourg part-sessions during the Covid-19 pandemic contributed to total savings of EUR 26 260 608 according to Parliament’s Secretariat, while also significantly reducing Parliament’s carbon footprint; highlights that the Court estimates that “the end of moving from Strasbourg to Brussels could generate annual savings of EUR 114 million plus a one-off saving of EUR 616 million if the Strasbourg buildings are successfully divested, or a one-off cost of EUR 40 million if they are not"1a; considers that given the current climate crisis, retaining the Strasbourg seat is irresponsible, calls on the Council to take Parliament’s position into account and act on it as a matter of urgency; _________________ 1a https://www.eca.europa.eu/other%20publi cations/pl1407_letter/pl1407_letter_en.pdf
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 110 c (new)
Paragraph 110 c (new)
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 111
Paragraph 111
111. Welcomes Parliament’s zero tolerance policy on harassment and the awareness-raising campaigns carried out; stresses that the Code of Appropriate Behaviour for Members of the European Parliament seeks to ensure that Members behave towards everyone working in Parliament with dignity, courtesy and respect and without prejudice or discrimination; recalls that in 2022, 56 MEPs participated in the training session; notes that, since November 2018, when the first sessions were offered, a total of 324 current MEPs had participated in the training session, plus 56 former Members whose mandate has ended; notes that in 2022, 106 members of staff and APAs had participated in anti-harassment training courses; notes with concern that cases of harassment are still occurring regardless of the activities being carried out to eliminate harassment in the work place; recalls that Parliament has requested on several occasions the implementation of mandatory anti-harassment training courses for all Members, as well as staff, including persons in managerial roles in the different Directorates-General and political groups;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117
Paragraph 117
117. Welcomes the decisions taken by the Bureau; recalls that the problem will still need to be addressed in the future; notes that legal assessment of the latest judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union and their consequences for future Bureau decisions were also made available to the Members of the Bureau in order to allow them to take an informed decision; notes that there are ongoing appeals in the Court of Justice of the European Union and the matter will need to be addressed again after the judgments are handed down; recalls that the Parliament does not have a legal obligation to guarantee particular levels of payouts of the fund, nor would have to assume and take over its obligations in case of its insolvency as no contract between the fund and Parliament exists3a; recalls that the Fund has always constituted a purely supplementary pension for those Members making use of it3b; also notes that the Fund's beneficiaries contributed to the fund only through the General Expenditure Allowance and that the Fund's investment portfolio included, and possibly still includes, shares in the fossil fuel industry3c, calls in light of these characteristics of the Fund for the Secretary-General to guarantee that no taxpayer money is used for any future bail-out; _________________ 3a https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?a bstract_id=3739504 3b https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ etudes/STUD/2021/659763/IPOL_STU(20 21)659763_EN.pdf 3c https://euobserver.com/green- economy/156605
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117
Paragraph 117
117. Welcomes the decisions taken by the Bureau; recalls that the problem will still need to be addressed in the future as the measures adopted are expected to extend the lifespan of the VPF only by two or three years and asks the Administration and the Bureau to guarantee that no taxpayer money is used for any future bail-out; notes that legal assessment of the latest judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union and their consequences for future Bureau decisions were also made available to the Members of the Bureau in order to allow them to take an informed decision; notes that there are ongoing appeals in the Court of Justice of the European Union and the matter will need to be addressed again after the judgments are handed down;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 a (new)
Paragraph 117 a (new)
117a. Acknowledges that Parliament is not involved in the management of the VPF’s investment portfolio but expresses its concern regarding press reports on the investments made by the Fund in controversial sectors and the potential reputational risk for the institution;