18 Amendments of Nessa CHILDERS related to 2015/2176(DEC)
Amendment 3 #
Proposal for a decision 1
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GPostpones its decision on grantsing the Executive Director of the European Food Safety Authority discharge in respect of the implementation of the Authority’'s budget for the financial year 2014;
Amendment 7 #
Proposal for a decision 2
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. ApprovPostpones the closure of the accounts of the European Food Safety Authority for the financial year 2014;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Reminds the Authority that the first objective of its independence policy should be its reputation and therefore to make sure that the Authority is free from real or perceived conflicts of interests, in particular with the economic sectors it is de facto regulating;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Fails to understand why the Authority's Executive Director chose to appoint a food industry lobbyist as the Authority's new Communications Director, especially in the light of the rising public concerns on the independence of the Authority from regulated industry and previous requests from the discharge authority in particular in 2011 and the Article 11 of the EU Staff Regulations stating that "the appointing Authority shall examine whether the candidate has any personal interest such as to impair his independence or any other conflict of interest";
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Acknowledges that the Authority launched a project to modify the way it screens and processes the annual declarations of interest in order to ensure better coherence and overall compliance with its rules on declarations of interest; notes, furthermore, that this new system, scheduled to be completed in the course of 2016, foresees centralised screening of the annual declarations of interest and transfer of responsibility from the Authority’s scientific departments to its legal and regulatory department; calls on the Authority to include in its policy the prohibition to work with any expert including Member States' delegated experts who do not properly and meaningfully fill in the declaration of interests(DoI); calls on the Authority to include in its policy an obligation for experts to inform the Authority of any eventual changes while working for the Authority;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. AscertainsNotes with concern that, in order to attain both working with the top academics in the industry and having the most effective conflicts of interest policy possible, the Authority uses a system to assess the experts’ interests, which takes into account the role of the experts and the mandate of the scientific working group or panel of which the expert would be a member against a number of different criteria; notes, furthermore, that in 2016 the Authority will undertake an examination of the systems it has in place to detect conflicts of interest as part of the regular cycle of review of its independence policy; asks the Authority to inform the discharge authority about the outcomes of the review;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Is of the opinion that the current independence policy of the Authority only banning evident and general conflicts of interests and solely assessing interest according to the specific manifest of the scientific panels and working group interests is not a sophisticated and robust way to avoid potential conflicts of interests; the Authority's current independence policy and implementing rules are neither ''robust'' nor ''sophisticated'' but remain costly and ineffective and its limited intention of implementing a cooling-off period with the scope of the panel mandate is largely insufficient;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls on the Authority to review both its independence policy and related implementing rules in a way that guarantees that no relevant economic interests are falling within Authority's remit; reminds in this respect the Authority to the repeated requests from the discharge authority to take into account the mandate of the Authority and not the panel in question when assessing whether there is conflict of interest;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Reiterates its call for the Authority to apply a two-years cooling-off period; does not accept the Authority's justification for its refusal to implement the discharge authority's repeated demands of establishing a two-years cooling-off period on all material interests related to companies it regulates;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that, in order to improve its independence and conflicts of interest policy concerning expert groups, the Authority performed in 2014 an ex-post analysis of its rules on declarations of interests; notes with concern that despite the fact that this analysis led to a review and the adoption of a new, and simpler and more sophisticated version of these rulesversion of these rules without substantial changes however; and in particular, reminds with great concern the Authority the main changes requested by the discharge authority have not been taken into account;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Reminds the Authority of the European Ombudsman's ruling stating that the Authority "should revise its conflict of interest rules" to ensure that those experts who work for academia declare all relevant information to EFSA"; is of the opinion that if this would affect around one third of the experts as stated by the Authority, then the Authority should dedicate special attention to the issue and work on specific measures together with the concerned academic institutions to safeguard the integrity of both institutions;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Points out that several EU regulations including amongst others the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union gives individuals the right to access public documents; reminds the Authority that scientific rigour is ensured best by transparency and accountability of the results; highlights that the Authority should make therefore all data used to reach any scientific conclusions public in a machine readable format so as to enable scientific scrutiny and constant progress;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Acknowledges the Authority's efforts to improve the transparency of its work as well as the data it uses for it; acknowledges the existing legal limitations it faces for increasing data transparency; stresses that the aim of the disclosure is to make reproducibility of the Authority's work possible and therefore the steps taken towards process transparency in risk-assessment are a welcomed first step, however data transparency should also be ensured;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Reminds the Authority that commercial confidentiality clauses must not be allowed to impair disclosure of data due to the overriding public interest of health and safety; encourages it to interpret existing legal protection of commercial interest as restrictively as possible;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Is looking forward to results of the Authority's systemic review of its Policy on Independence and Scientific Decision- Making Process in 2016; welcomes the Authority's commitment to consider the publication of remunerations for experts' declared activities;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Calls on the Authority to make more extensive use of a new status for hearing experts following the example of the invited experts from World Health Organization's International Agency for Research Against Cancer; calls on the Authority to report to the discharge authority on use of hearing experts;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)
Paragraph 10 c (new)
10c. Stresses that experts in regulatory agencies must be paid for their work so as to enable their independence from the sector they regulate; calls on the Commission to provide the financial means for the Authority to pay external experts and develop in-house research to ensure independence;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Acknowledges that a large part of the difficulties the Authority is facing in securing its independence comes from the fact that the Commission consistently refuses to allocate it sufficient means of operation to work at defending food safety for EU citizens independently of the regulated industry's influence;