Activities of Wim van de CAMP related to 2015/2040(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on procedures and practices regarding Commissioner hearings, lessons to be taken from the 2014 process
Amendments (5)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
- 1a. Acknowledges that public hearings of Commissioners-designate present an important opportunity for Parliament and EU citizens to assess the priorities of each candidate and their suitability for the role;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the formation of the Juncker Commission was delayed owing to the late nomination by some Member States of their candidate commissioner, while an acceptable degree of gender balance was only achieved at the last minute thanks to Parliament’s firm insistence that the new Commission must contain at least the same number of women as the outgoing Commission; considers that such a situation could be prevented in future by setting a deadline by which Member States have to nominate their candidates, and by encouraging Member States to propose at least two nominees – one male and one female – for consideration by the President-electn acceptable number of women;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Expresses its utmost dissatisfaction regarding the procedure that could lead to the replacement of Maroš Šefčovič in the transport portfolioa Commissioner- designate at very short notice and without prior consultation with the Committee on Transport and Tourism, even though the President-elect had been promptly informed of threspective cCommittee’s firm wish to maintain Mr Šefčovič in this portfolio; deplores the fact that the TRAN Committee’s request was not fulfilled and; deplores consequently that the subsequent nominee, Violeta Bulc, di could not enjoy equal and fair conditions in presenting herself to the committee, as she had very limited time at her disposal to prepare for the hearing, which was nevertheless successful; reiterates that transport is a key policy area which should not be the victim of last-minute changes to accommodate other political considerations/himself to the Committee;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that the d'Hondt rule for allocating speaking time among the political groups should be thoroughly applied;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that the generally applicable rule of 45 questions of three minutes, as decided by the Conference of Presidents, did not give committees sufficient flexibility to vary their practices where necessary, for example by introducing a catch-the-eye procedure or allocating more time to the speakers in the first round, while three minutes was completely insufficient for a follow-up question; considers that in future arrangements should be made to provide committees with more flexibility, while also ensuring the inquisitorial nature of the hearings through the effective application of the ‘ping-pong’ principle;