Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | LIBE | FERRARA Laura ( EFDD) | CORAZZA BILDT Anna Maria ( PPE), HEDH Anna ( S&D), KIRKHOPE Timothy ( ECR), IN 'T VELD Sophia ( ALDE), TERRICABRAS Josep-Maria ( Verts/ALE) |
Committee Opinion | JURI | HAUTALA Heidi ( Verts/ALE) | Mary HONEYBALL ( S&D), Sajjad KARIM ( ECR), Jiří MAŠTÁLKA ( GUE/NGL), Cecilia WIKSTRÖM ( ALDE), Tadeusz ZWIEFKA ( PPE) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Events
The European Parliament adopted by 523 votes to 37 with 46 abstentions a resolution on public access to documents (Rule 116(7)) for the years 2014-2015.
Members recalled that the right of access to documents is a fundamental right, protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the Treaties and implemented by Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 , and that full transparency underpins citizens’ trust in EU institutions.
Transparency and democracy : Parliament pointed out that many of the recommendations in the resolution on public access to documents for the years 2011-2013 have not been given a proper follow-up by the three institutions. It wanted to see the appointment of a Transparency Officer , to be responsible for compliance and for improving practices. It also called on the Commission Vice-President to present an ambitious plan of action regarding transparency and public access to documents, in recognition of the fact that transparency is the cornerstone of better regulation.
Members considered that the EU institutions still fail to comply with the rules and the changes provided for in the Lisbon Treaty and Articles 41 and 42 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights when applying Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, especially as concerns participatory democracy. They noted that in order to bring about a legitimate, accountable and democratic political system complying with the rule of law, citizens must have the right to know about, and scrutinise:
the actions of their representatives, once the latter have been elected or appointed to public office; the decision-making process (including any documents circulated, individuals involved, votes cast, etc.); the way in which public money is apportioned and spent, and the ensuing outcomes.
Members urged the EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies to develop further a more proactive approach on transparency by: (i) proactively disclosing as many of their documents as possible, in the most simple, user-friendly and accessible way; (ii) having documents translated upon request into other EU official languages, and (iii) establishing proper, simple and inexpensive information access arrangements, including by digital and electronic means, allowing for the needs of people with disabilities.
Regretting the fact that official documents are frequently over-classified without proper justification, Parliament stressed the need to: (i) ensure clear and uniform rules for the classification and declassification of documents; (ii) adopt faster, less cumbersome and more accessible procedures for handling complaints against refusals to grant access .
Parliament suggested that:
the Council publish minutes of the meetings of Council working groups and other documents, in the light of the Access Info Europe case, intervening Member States and their proposals;
Parliament make available the agendas and feedback notes of the meetings of Committee coordinators, the Bureau and the Conference of Presidents, as well as, in principle, all documents referred to in these agendas;
all institutions evaluate and, where necessary, review their internal arrangements for reporting wrongdoing.
Revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 : Members considered it regrettable that the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 is still stalled in the Council , and called on the latter to adopt a constructive position, taking into account the position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 15 December 2011 on the proposal to revise the Regulation.
On the substance of a new regulation, Members felt that: (i) the latter should be amended in the light of the Treaty provisions and the relevant case law of the EU Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights; (ii) the scope of the regulation must be broadened to cover the European Council, the European Central Bank, the Court of Justice and all the EU bodies and agencies.
Furthermore, Parliament called for:
a common approach on registers of documents and for those EU institutions that have not yet established registers of documents to do so, and to implement measures to standardise the classification and presentation of the institutions’ documents; a common access point to EU documents through the three institutions' portals, and common procedures and criteria for registration and the assignment of an interinstitutional code to each document.
Transparency of the legislative process : Parliament stressed the need to make available documents forming part of, or related to, legislative procedures. Deploring the fact that citizens have no power to scrutinise trilogue negotiations, it called on the institutions involved to ensure greater transparency of informal trilogues and to increase reporting in the competent parliamentary committee on the state of play of trilogue negotiations. A list of trilogue meetings, and of documents created in the framework of a trilogue, should be made directly accessible on Parliament’s website.
It also felt that access should be granted for:
documents produced when powers are delegated (delegated acts), since these make up a substantial portion of European legislation; all relevant negotiating documents for international agreements, including those already agreed on, with the exception of those which are considered sensitive, with a clear justification on a case-by-case basis;
The Commission, on its part, should submit, without any further delay, its proposal for an interinstitutional agreement establishing a mandatory interinstitutional register of interest groups.
Transparency of the administrative process : EU institutions were asked to draw up common rules governing the conduct of administrative procedures and the procedures for presenting, classifying, declassifying, registering and disclosing administrative documents.
Infringement procedures : Parliament deplored the lack of transparency regarding letters of formal notice and infringement procedures against Member States, and called for documents relating to such procedures to be made accessible to the public, together with information on the execution of judgments of the Court of Justice.
Management of Structural Funds : Parliament believed that full data transparency and accessibility are essential to combat any abuse and fraud. It called on the Commission to make it compulsory to publish particulars on all recipients of money from the Structural Funds, including subcontractors. It also asked Member States to ensure that information about negotiations on national and regional operational programmes is made fully accessible and genuinely transparent.
The Commission should harmonise the criteria regarding the publication of the beneficiaries of the Structural Funds.
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by Laura Ferrara on public access to documents (Rule 116(7)) for the years 2014-2015. It notes that the right of access to documents is a fundamental right, protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the Treaties and implemented by Regulation 1049/2001.
Transparency and democracy : Members pointed out that many of the recommendations in the resolution on public access to documents for the years 2011-2013 have not been given a proper follow-up by the three institutions. They want to see the appointment of a Transparency Officer , to be responsible for compliance and for improving practices. They also called on the Commission Vice-President to present an ambitious plan of action regarding transparency and public access to documents, in recognition of the fact that transparency is the cornerstone of better regulation.
Members considered that the EU institutions still fail to comply with the rules and the changes provided for in the Lisbon Treaty and Articles 41 and 42 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights when applying Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, especially as concerns participatory democracy. They welcome the recent judgments of the Court of Justice in the Digital Rights Ireland and Schrems cases, in both of which the Court based itself on the Charter when declaring invalid the Data Retention Directive and the Safe Harbour Decision , respectively.
Members suggested that:
the Council publish minutes of the meetings of Council working groups and other documents, in the light of the Access Info Europe case, intervening Member States and their proposals; Parliament make available the agendas and feedback notes of the meetings of Committee coordinators, the Bureau and the Conference of Presidents, as well as, in principle, all documents referred to in these agendas; Parliament ensure that requests for in-camera meetings in Parliament be evaluated by Parliament on a case-by-case basis; all institutions evaluate and, where necessary, review their internal arrangements for reporting wrongdoing.
Revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 : Members considered it regrettable that the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 is still stalled in the Council , and called on the latter to adopt a constructive position, taking into account the position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 15 December 2011 .
On the substance of a new regulation, Members felt that the latter should be amended in the light of the Treaty provisions and the relevant case law of the EU Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. The scope of the regulation must be broadened to cover the European Council, the European Central Bank, the Court of Justice and all the EU bodies and agencies.
Furthermore, the committee called for:
a common approach on registers of documents and for those EU institutions that have not yet established registers of documents to do so, and to implement measures to standardise the classification and presentation of the institutions’ documents; a common access point to EU documents through the three institutions' portals, and common procedures and criteria for registration and the assignment of an interinstitutional code to each document.
Transparency of the legislative proce ss: Members stressed the need to make available documents forming part of, or related to, legislative procedures. It examined the trilogue process and stated that trilogue documents should be published proactively on an easily accessible platform without delay. They also felt that access should be granted for:
documents produced when powers are delegated (delegated acts), since these make up a substantial portion of European legislation; all relevant negotiating documents for international agreements, including those already agreed on, with the exception of those which are considered sensitive, with a clear justification on a case-by-case basis;
Transparency of the administrative process : EU institutions were asked to draw up common rules governing the conduct of administrative procedures and the procedures for presenting, classifying, declassifying, registering and disclosing administrative documents.
Infringement procedures : the committee deplored the lack of transparency regarding letters of formal notice and infringement procedures against Member States, and called for documents relating to such procedures to be made accessible to the public, together with information on the execution of judgments of the Court of Justice.
Management of Structural Funds : the committee believed that full data transparency and accessibility are essential to combat any abuse and fraud. It called on the Commission to make it compulsory to publish particulars on all recipients of money from the Structural Funds, including subcontractors. It also asked Member States to ensure that information about negotiations on national and regional operational programmes is made fully accessible and genuinely transparent.
The Commission should harmonise the criteria regarding the publication of the beneficiaries of the Structural Funds.
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2016)485
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T8-0202/2016
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A8-0141/2016
- Committee opinion: PE571.798
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE572.849
- Committee draft report: PE571.441
- Committee draft report: PE571.441
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE572.849
- Committee opinion: PE571.798
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2016)485
Activities
- Marina ALBIOL GUZMÁN
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Nicola CAPUTO
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Ildikó GÁLL-PELCZ
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Ivan JAKOVČIĆ
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Andrejs MAMIKINS
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Notis MARIAS
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Max ANDERSSON
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jean ARTHUIS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marie-Christine ARNAUTU
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jonathan ARNOTT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Zoltán BALCZÓ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Zigmantas BALČYTIS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Beatriz BECERRA BASTERRECHEA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Hugues BAYET
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Xabier BENITO ZILUAGA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- José BLANCO LÓPEZ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marie-Christine BOUTONNET
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Renata BRIANO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Steeve BRIOIS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Gianluca BUONANNO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- James CARVER
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Alberto CIRIO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jane COLLINS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Therese COMODINI CACHIA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Anna Maria CORAZZA BILDT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Michel DANTIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- William (The Earl of) DARTMOUTH
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marielle DE SARNEZ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Mireille D'ORNANO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Norbert ERDŐS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Edouard FERRAND
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Lorenzo FONTANA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Elena GENTILE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Arne GERICKE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Bruno GOLLNISCH
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Tania GONZÁLEZ PEÑAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Nathalie GRIESBECK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Takis HADJIGEORGIOU
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Anna HEDH
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Brian HAYES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marian HARKIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Cătălin Sorin IVAN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Diane JAMES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Philippe JUVIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Barbara KAPPEL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Bernd KÖLMEL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Giovanni LA VIA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marine LE PEN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Bernd LUCKE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Monica MACOVEI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Vladimír MAŇKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ivana MALETIĆ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- António MARINHO E PINTO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jiří MAŠTÁLKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Dominique MARTIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jean-Luc MÉLENCHON
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Miroslav MIKOLÁŠIK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Louis MICHEL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marlene MIZZI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Sophie MONTEL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- József NAGY
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Norica NICOLAI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Liadh NÍ RIADA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Franz OBERMAYR
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Rolandas PAKSAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marijana PETIR
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Miroslav POCHE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Salvatore Domenico POGLIESE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Julia REID
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Claude ROLIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Lola SÁNCHEZ CALDENTEY
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Maria Lidia SENRA RODRÍGUEZ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Siôn SIMON
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Branislav ŠKRIPEK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Monika SMOLKOVÁ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Davor ŠKRLEC
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Igor ŠOLTES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Joachim STARBATTY
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Pavel SVOBODA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Patricija ŠULIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Tibor SZANYI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Dubravka ŠUICA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Indrek TARAND
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Claudia ȚAPARDEL
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Josep-Maria TERRICABRAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Pavel TELIČKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Mylène TROSZCZYNSKI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marco VALLI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marie-Christine VERGIAT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Miguel VIEGAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Sotirios ZARIANOPOULOS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ
Plenary Speeches (1)
Votes
A8-0141/2016 - Laura Ferrara - Am 1 #
IE | FI | DK | LT | EE | EL | LU | AT | BE | CY | NL | LV | FR | HR | SI | GB | MT | BG | SE | PT | ES | CZ | HU | SK | RO | IT | DE | PL | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total |
9
|
9
|
11
|
8
|
6
|
16
|
3
|
17
|
18
|
5
|
26
|
8
|
65
|
9
|
6
|
53
|
6
|
16
|
14
|
16
|
40
|
20
|
16
|
12
|
24
|
63
|
71
|
44
|
|
GUE/NGL |
42
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
Greece GUE/NGL |
2
|
3
|
France GUE/NGLAgainst (1) |
1
|
1
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
5
|
|||||||||||||||
EFDD |
35
|
1
|
United Kingdom EFDDFor (15) |
1
|
1
|
1
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ENF |
38
|
4
|
1
|
4
|
France ENFFor (20)Bernard MONOT, Dominique BILDE, Dominique MARTIN, Edouard FERRAND, Florian PHILIPPOT, Gilles LEBRETON, Jean-François JALKH, Jean-Luc SCHAFFHAUSER, Joëlle MÉLIN, Louis ALIOT, Marie-Christine ARNAUTU, Marie-Christine BOUTONNET, Marine LE PEN, Mireille D'ORNANO, Mylène TROSZCZYNSKI, Nicolas BAY, Philippe LOISEAU, Sophie MONTEL, Steeve BRIOIS, Sylvie GODDYN
|
1
|
1
|
Italy ENFAgainst (5) |
1
|
1
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Verts/ALE |
42
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
France Verts/ALEFor (4)Abstain (2) |
1
|
1
|
United Kingdom Verts/ALEFor (4)Abstain (1) |
3
|
Spain Verts/ALEAgainst (1) |
1
|
Germany Verts/ALEFor (9)Abstain (1) |
|||||||||||||
ALDE |
55
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
2
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
Belgium ALDEAgainst (2)Abstain (2) |
Netherlands ALDEAgainst (3) |
1
|
France ALDEFor (1)Against (5)Abstain (1) |
2
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
Spain ALDEFor (5)Against (1) |
4
|
2
|
2
|
|||||||||
NI |
10
|
Greece NIFor (2)Against (2) |
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
ECR |
57
|
2
|
Denmark ECRFor (3)Against (1) |
1
|
4
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
United Kingdom ECRAgainst (12) |
2
|
2
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
4
|
Poland ECRAgainst (17)
Anna FOTYGA,
Beata GOSIEWSKA,
Bolesław G. PIECHA,
Czesław HOC,
Edward CZESAK,
Jadwiga WIŚNIEWSKA,
Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI,
Karol KARSKI,
Kazimierz Michał UJAZDOWSKI,
Kosma ZŁOTOWSKI,
Marek JUREK,
Mirosław PIOTROWSKI,
Ryszard CZARNECKI,
Stanisław OŻÓG,
Sławomir KŁOSOWSKI,
Tomasz Piotr PORĘBA,
Zdzisław KRASNODĘBSKI
|
|||||||||||||
S&D |
149
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
4
|
3
|
2
|
3
|
1
|
France S&DAgainst (11) |
1
|
United Kingdom S&DFor (2)Against (16) |
3
|
3
|
Sweden S&DAgainst (6) |
Portugal S&DAgainst (6) |
4
|
3
|
3
|
Romania S&DFor (1)Against (9) |
Italy S&DFor (1)Against (23)
Alessia Maria MOSCA,
Andrea COZZOLINO,
Brando BENIFEI,
Caterina CHINNICI,
Damiano ZOFFOLI,
Daniele VIOTTI,
Elena GENTILE,
Elly SCHLEIN,
Enrico GASBARRA,
Flavio ZANONATO,
Gianni PITTELLA,
Isabella DE MONTE,
Luigi MORGANO,
Massimo PAOLUCCI,
Mercedes BRESSO,
Michela GIUFFRIDA,
Nicola CAPUTO,
Nicola DANTI,
Patrizia TOIA,
Pier Antonio PANZERI,
Pina PICIERNO,
Renata BRIANO,
Roberto GUALTIERI
|
Germany S&DAgainst (16)Abstain (1) |
Poland S&D |
||
PPE |
183
|
4
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
Austria PPEAgainst (5) |
4
|
1
|
Netherlands PPEAgainst (5) |
4
|
4
|
5
|
3
|
Bulgaria PPEAgainst (7) |
2
|
Portugal PPEAgainst (5) |
Spain PPEAgainst (12) |
Czechia PPEAgainst (7) |
Hungary PPEAgainst (11) |
Slovakia PPEAgainst (6) |
10
|
14
|
Germany PPEAgainst (30)
Albert DESS,
Andreas SCHWAB,
Angelika NIEBLER,
Axel VOSS,
Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN,
Burkhard BALZ,
Christian EHLER,
Daniel CASPARY,
David MCALLISTER,
Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH,
Elmar BROK,
Herbert REUL,
Ingeborg GRÄSSLE,
Jens GIESEKE,
Joachim ZELLER,
Karl-Heinz FLORENZ,
Manfred WEBER,
Markus FERBER,
Markus PIEPER,
Monika HOHLMEIER,
Norbert LINS,
Peter JAHR,
Peter LIESE,
Rainer WIELAND,
Renate SOMMER,
Sabine VERHEYEN,
Sven SCHULZE,
Thomas MANN,
Werner KUHN,
Werner LANGEN
|
Poland PPEAgainst (20)
Adam SZEJNFELD,
Agnieszka KOZŁOWSKA,
Andrzej GRZYB,
Barbara KUDRYCKA,
Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI,
Bogdan Brunon WENTA,
Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI,
Danuta JAZŁOWIECKA,
Danuta Maria HÜBNER,
Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA,
Jacek SARYUSZ-WOLSKI,
Jan OLBRYCHT,
Janusz LEWANDOWSKI,
Jarosław WAŁĘSA,
Jerzy BUZEK,
Julia PITERA,
Krzysztof HETMAN,
Marek PLURA,
Michał BONI,
Róża THUN UND HOHENSTEIN
|
A8-0141/2016 - Laura Ferrara - § 33/2 #
FR | IT | GB | ES | BE | NL | SE | EL | DK | PT | AT | EE | LT | DE | FI | RO | CY | IE | LU | MT | HR | BG | LV | CZ | SK | SI | HU | PL | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total |
63
|
63
|
54
|
40
|
18
|
26
|
14
|
16
|
11
|
16
|
17
|
6
|
8
|
74
|
8
|
24
|
5
|
10
|
3
|
6
|
9
|
16
|
8
|
19
|
12
|
6
|
16
|
44
|
|
S&D |
150
|
11
|
Italy S&DFor (24)Alessia Maria MOSCA, Andrea COZZOLINO, Brando BENIFEI, Caterina CHINNICI, Damiano ZOFFOLI, Daniele VIOTTI, Elena GENTILE, Elly SCHLEIN, Enrico GASBARRA, Flavio ZANONATO, Gianni PITTELLA, Isabella DE MONTE, Luigi MORGANO, Massimo PAOLUCCI, Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Nicola CAPUTO, Nicola DANTI, Patrizia TOIA, Pier Antonio PANZERI, Pina PICIERNO, Renata BRIANO, Roberto GUALTIERI, Silvia COSTA
|
United Kingdom S&DFor (18) |
3
|
3
|
Sweden S&D |
3
|
3
|
Portugal S&DFor (6) |
4
|
1
|
2
|
Germany S&DFor (18) |
1
|
10
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
4
|
3
|
3
|
Poland S&D |
||
ALDE |
54
|
France ALDEAgainst (1)Abstain (1) |
4
|
Netherlands ALDEFor (7) |
1
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
4
|
1
|
4
|
||||||||||
Verts/ALE |
43
|
France Verts/ALEFor (6) |
United Kingdom Verts/ALEFor (5) |
Spain Verts/ALE |
2
|
2
|
3
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
Germany Verts/ALEFor (11) |
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|||||||||||||
GUE/NGL |
42
|
3
|
3
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
Greece GUE/NGL |
1
|
3
|
5
|
1
|
2
|
4
|
3
|
|||||||||||||||
ENF |
38
|
France ENFFor (20)Bernard MONOT, Dominique BILDE, Dominique MARTIN, Edouard FERRAND, Florian PHILIPPOT, Gilles LEBRETON, Jean-François JALKH, Jean-Luc SCHAFFHAUSER, Joëlle MÉLIN, Louis ALIOT, Marie-Christine ARNAUTU, Marie-Christine BOUTONNET, Marine LE PEN, Mireille D'ORNANO, Mylène TROSZCZYNSKI, Nicolas BAY, Philippe LOISEAU, Sophie MONTEL, Steeve BRIOIS, Sylvie GODDYN
|
Italy ENF |
1
|
1
|
4
|
4
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|||||||||||||||||||
EFDD |
36
|
United Kingdom EFDDFor (16) |
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NI |
9
|
1
|
1
|
4
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
ECR |
58
|
1
|
United Kingdom ECRAgainst (12) |
4
|
2
|
1
|
Denmark ECRFor (3)Against (1) |
Germany ECRAgainst (3)Abstain (2) |
2
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
Poland ECRFor (1)Against (16) |
|||||||||||||
PPE |
182
|
France PPEFor (12)Against (3) |
Spain PPEAgainst (12) |
4
|
Netherlands PPEFor (1) |
2
|
3
|
Portugal PPEFor (1)Against (4) |
Austria PPEAgainst (5) |
1
|
2
|
Germany PPEAgainst (30)
Albert DESS,
Andreas SCHWAB,
Angelika NIEBLER,
Axel VOSS,
Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN,
Burkhard BALZ,
Christian EHLER,
Daniel CASPARY,
David MCALLISTER,
Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH,
Elmar BROK,
Herbert REUL,
Ingeborg GRÄSSLE,
Jens GIESEKE,
Joachim ZELLER,
Karl-Heinz FLORENZ,
Manfred WEBER,
Markus FERBER,
Markus PIEPER,
Monika HOHLMEIER,
Norbert LINS,
Peter JAHR,
Peter LIESE,
Rainer WIELAND,
Renate SOMMER,
Sabine VERHEYEN,
Sven SCHULZE,
Thomas MANN,
Werner KUHN,
Werner LANGEN
|
2
|
10
|
1
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
4
|
Bulgaria PPEAgainst (7) |
4
|
Czechia PPEAgainst (6) |
Slovakia PPEAgainst (6) |
5
|
Hungary PPEAgainst (11) |
Poland PPEAgainst (20)
Adam SZEJNFELD,
Agnieszka KOZŁOWSKA,
Andrzej GRZYB,
Barbara KUDRYCKA,
Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI,
Bogdan Brunon WENTA,
Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI,
Danuta JAZŁOWIECKA,
Danuta Maria HÜBNER,
Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA,
Jacek SARYUSZ-WOLSKI,
Jan OLBRYCHT,
Janusz LEWANDOWSKI,
Jarosław WAŁĘSA,
Jerzy BUZEK,
Julia PITERA,
Krzysztof HETMAN,
Marek PLURA,
Michał BONI,
Róża THUN UND HOHENSTEIN
|
A8-0141/2016 - Laura Ferrara - Résolution #
GB | FR | IT | DE | PL | ES | RO | BE | CZ | NL | AT | BG | PT | SE | EL | DK | IE | FI | LT | SK | LV | MT | HR | EE | CY | HU | LU | SI | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total |
53
|
63
|
62
|
73
|
44
|
38
|
24
|
18
|
20
|
26
|
17
|
16
|
15
|
14
|
16
|
11
|
10
|
9
|
8
|
11
|
8
|
6
|
9
|
6
|
5
|
15
|
3
|
6
|
|
S&D |
148
|
United Kingdom S&DFor (18) |
11
|
Italy S&DFor (23)Alessia Maria MOSCA, Andrea COZZOLINO, Brando BENIFEI, Caterina CHINNICI, Damiano ZOFFOLI, Daniele VIOTTI, Elena GENTILE, Elly SCHLEIN, Enrico GASBARRA, Flavio ZANONATO, Gianni PITTELLA, Isabella DE MONTE, Luigi MORGANO, Massimo PAOLUCCI, Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Nicola CAPUTO, Nicola DANTI, Patrizia TOIA, Pier Antonio PANZERI, Renata BRIANO, Roberto GUALTIERI, Silvia COSTA
|
Poland S&D |
10
|
3
|
4
|
3
|
4
|
3
|
Portugal S&DFor (6) |
Sweden S&D |
3
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
1
|
|||
PPE |
178
|
France PPE |
Italy PPEFor (4)Against (3) |
Germany PPEFor (11)Against (15)Abstain (4) |
Poland PPEFor (18)Adam SZEJNFELD, Agnieszka KOZŁOWSKA, Andrzej GRZYB, Barbara KUDRYCKA, Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI, Bogdan Brunon WENTA, Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI, Danuta JAZŁOWIECKA, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA, Jacek SARYUSZ-WOLSKI, Jan OLBRYCHT, Janusz LEWANDOWSKI, Jarosław WAŁĘSA, Jerzy BUZEK, Krzysztof HETMAN, Marek PLURA, Róża THUN UND HOHENSTEIN
Abstain (2) |
Spain PPEFor (8)Against (1) |
Romania PPEFor (8)Against (1)Abstain (1) |
4
|
Czechia PPEAgainst (1)Abstain (1) |
Netherlands PPEAgainst (1) |
Austria PPEFor (4)Abstain (1) |
Bulgaria PPEFor (6)Against (1) |
4
|
2
|
Greece PPEFor (2)Abstain (1) |
4
|
2
|
2
|
Slovakia PPEFor (2)Against (1)Abstain (2) |
4
|
3
|
4
|
1
|
1
|
Hungary PPE |
1
|
Slovenia PPEFor (3)Against (1)Abstain (1) |
||
ALDE |
55
|
France ALDEFor (6)Abstain (1) |
2
|
2
|
4
|
4
|
Netherlands ALDEFor (7) |
1
|
4
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
1
|
||||||||||
ECR |
58
|
United Kingdom ECRFor (12) |
1
|
5
|
Poland ECRFor (14)Against (3) |
1
|
4
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
4
|
2
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
|||||||||||||
Verts/ALE |
43
|
United Kingdom Verts/ALEFor (5) |
France Verts/ALEFor (6) |
Germany Verts/ALEFor (11) |
Spain Verts/ALE |
2
|
2
|
3
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|||||||||||||
GUE/NGL |
40
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
5
|
6
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
1
|
Greece GUE/NGL |
1
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
||||||||||||||
EFDD |
36
|
United Kingdom EFDDFor (15) |
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
ENF |
38
|
1
|
France ENFFor (20)Bernard MONOT, Dominique BILDE, Dominique MARTIN, Edouard FERRAND, Florian PHILIPPOT, Gilles LEBRETON, Jean-François JALKH, Jean-Luc SCHAFFHAUSER, Joëlle MÉLIN, Louis ALIOT, Marie-Christine ARNAUTU, Marie-Christine BOUTONNET, Marine LE PEN, Mireille D'ORNANO, Mylène TROSZCZYNSKI, Nicolas BAY, Philippe LOISEAU, Sophie MONTEL, Steeve BRIOIS, Sylvie GODDYN
|
Italy ENF |
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
4
|
4
|
|||||||||||||||||||
NI |
10
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
Greece NIFor (2)Abstain (2) |
1
|
Amendments | Dossier |
132 |
2015/2287(INI)
2015/12/02
LIBE
113 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 – having regard to
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Points out that the actions of the institutions and EU policies have to be based on participatory democracy
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 – point 1 (new) (1) Notes that in a change to its policy on transparency the ECB now publishes the minutes of meetings of the ECB Governing Council, but regrets that the ECB is still lagging far behind the world’s other central banks in this regard; awaits the implementation of further major measures to improve the transparency of its communication channels;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 – point 2 (new) (2) Believes that considerable progress can still be made through publication of the minutes of Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) meetings; hopes furthermore that in the future all documents concerning decisions taken in the Asset Quality Review process will be made public to guarantee a level playing field across the EU; hopes too that transparency requirements will also be applied to the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM) due to start on 1 January 2016;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 – point 3 (new) (3) Is disappointed with the transparency policy applied by the European Investment Bank (EIB) and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD); recalls that the ECB’s new transparency policy allows it to establish confidentiality procedures in order to keep secret internal investigations into irregularities such as corruption, infiltration by organised criminal groups or maladministration; calls for a prompt review of their transparency policies and asks in particular that the EIB make public information on its beneficiaries and on the subcontractors who benefit from its funding;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 – point 4 (new) (4) Is critical of the lack of transparency within some institutions that have taken crucial economic decisions affecting EU citizens, such as the Eurogroup and the Ecofin Council configuration; emphasises the urgency of making these meetings public and transparent, and calls for the relevant institutions to release the documents concerned; is critical of the mismanagement of the ‘Greek crisis’ and calls attention to the fact that the Troika operated outside the limits laid down in the Treaties; is critical too of the failure to publish documentation on decisions relating to the European Stability Mechanism (ESM); asks that the Troika’s modus operandi be assessed to clarify the responsibilities attributable to the institutions involved and ensure democratic legitimacy in the adoption and implementation of the rescue programmes;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Invites the Interinstitutional Committee established by Article 15(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 to work more actively and report to the competent committees on the issues discussed; calls on it to meet more regularly, and to open internal discussions and deliberations by and inviting and considering submissions from civil society, the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor; calls on it to address as a matter of urgency the issues mentioned in this resolution;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 – subparagraph 1 (new) Selection of staff for the EU institutions, agencies and other bodies
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 – point 1 (new) (1) Regrets that the procedures for selecting EU institution staff are not fully transparent and calls in particular for the Staff Regulations to be revised, particularly with reference to ‘Annex III - Competitions’;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 – point 2 (new) (2) Considers that competitions for entry to the European civil service ought to be entirely based on criteria of openness and transparency in order to combat corruption and conflicts of interest;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 – point 3 (new) (3) Considers it essential that the EU agencies apply a common policy on conflicts of interest; notes that in some cases the policy applied to date includes provisions concerning publication of the CVs and declarations of interests of the Director and of senior management; observes with concern however that the obligation to publish CVs and declarations of interest does not apply to experts; calls on the agencies to extend this obligation to experts;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Points out that
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 – point 4 (new) (4) Is disappointed by the lack of transparency in the appointment of EFSI managers; calls for transparency in appointment procedures and for information on CVs and declarations of interests to be made public;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 a (new) 26a. Follow up Requests the Commission and calls upon the Secretary-General of the European Parliament to inform the European Parliament about the implementation of the recommendations in this resolution;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 a (new) 26a. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the Ombudsman, the Data Protection Supervisor, and the Council of Europe.
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 a (new) 26a. Invites the Commission to harmonise the criteria regarding the publication of the beneficiaries of the EU Structural Funds.
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Points out that the actions of the institutions and EU policies have to be based on
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Stresses that privacy and data protection should be respected while ensuring transparency
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Points out that it is the duty of the institutions to carry on a continuing open, transparent dialogue with citizens, associations representing them and civil society, so as to enable citizens themselves to bring scrutiny directly
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Points out that it is the duty of the institutions to carry o
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Points out that transparency and full access to documents held by the institutions have to be the rule, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, and that, as has already been laid down by the precedents consistently set by the EU Court of Justice, exceptions to that rule have to be properly interpreted, taking into account th
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Points out that transparency and full access to documents held by the institutions have to be the rule, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006, and that, as has already been laid down by the precedents consistently set by the EU Court of Justice, exceptions to that rule have to be properly interpreted,
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Recalls that any decision denying public access to documents must be based on clearly and strictly defined legal exemptions, accompanied by reasoned and specific justification, allowing the citizen to understand the denial of access, and to make effective use of the legal remedies available;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Notes that in order to bring about a legitimate, accountable democratic political system complying with the rule of law, citizens must have the right to know about, and scrutinise
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 a (new) – having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies,
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Notes that in order to bring about a legitimate, accountable democratic political system complying with the rule of law, citizens must have the right to know about, and scrutinise, the actions of their representatives, the decision-making process, the way in which public money is apportioned and spent, and the ensuing outcomes; considers it necessary, therefore, to publish an e-register in which all the aforementioned items are recorded;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Notes that in order to bring about a legitimate, accountable democratic political system complying with the rule of law, citizens must have the right to know a
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Urges the Commission to designate a Commissioner to be responsible for transparency and public access to documents; calls upon the Commission Vice-President to present an ambitious plan of action regarding transparency and public access to documents in the meantime and within the shortest delay, for transparency is the cornerstone of better regulation;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses the efforts made by the Union in terms of transparency and access to documents, including on the European institutions’ web portals; considers, in particular, that the accessibility of information should be improved by making interfaces and search systems easier to use; calls for search portals to be harmonised between institutions and between departments of the same institution (including Directorates- General in the Commission); calls also on the institutions to continue and strengthen the work of expanding knowledge of EU legislation and policies; believes that, to that end, the EU should make full use of the potential offered by new technologies (social networks, smartphone applications, etc.) in order to ensure complete and easy access to information;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Deplores the fact that it is still difficult for citizens to gain access to information held by EU institutions, the reason being that there is no effective citizen-oriented interinstitutional policy based on complete transparency, communication, and direct democracy; urges the institutions to
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Deplores the fact that it is still difficult for citizens to gain access to information held by EU institutions, the reason being that there is no effective
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Deplores the fact that it is still difficult for citizens to gain access to information held by EU institutions
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Regrets that official documents are frequently over classified, and institutions call for in camera meetings without proper justification; an independent authority should be tasked with oversight of the classification of documents and requests for meetings to be held in camera;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Deplores the fact that the EU institutions and bodies have not followed up the Parliament's recommendation of its previous resolution on public access to documents that each EU institution or body appoint from within its management structures a Transparency Officer, to be responsible for compliance and for improving practices; urges the institutions to do so within the shortest delay;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Considers that a more proactive approach helps ensuring effective transparency as well as preventing unnecessary legal disputes, which might cause unnecessary costs and burdens for both the Institutions and the citizens;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 7 a (new) – having regard to the Annual Report 2014 of the Ombudsman,
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Calls upon the EU institutions, bodies and agencies to adopt faster, less cumbersome and more accessible procedures for handling complaints against refusals to grant access, as to reduce the need for litigation;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 c (new) 5c. Urges the Parliament to proactively disclose feedback notes from parliamentary committee coordinators' meetings, as recommended by the European Ombudsman;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Urges all the institutions, pending its desired revision, to apply Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Urges all the institutions, pending its desired revision, to apply Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 in the proper manner; calls in particular on the Council, in
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Urges all the institutions, pending its desired revision, to apply Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Urges all the institutions, pending its desired revision, to fully apply Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Is concerned that the registers kept by the institutions still do not properly implement the provisions of Articles 11 and 12 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and that large numbers of documents are not in fact registered: urges all institutions, agencies and other bodies to keep records for each file of its incoming and outgoing mail, of the documents it receives and of the measures it takes and to establish an index of the files it keeps; reiterates its call for a common access point to EU documents and common procedures and criteria for registration and the assignment of an inter- institutional code so that eventually a common inter-institutional register could be established;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Urges all the institutions to apply the stronger transparency provisions contained in Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 when information requested relates to the environment, and to abide by their obligations to proactively publish environmental information;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls on the EU institutions, bodies and agencies to adopt the recommendations put forward by Parliament in its previous resolution on public access to documents;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Calls on all institutions to evaluate and, where necessary, review their internal arrangements for reporting wrongdoing, and calls for the protection of whistleblowers; calls, in particular, on the Commission to report to Parliament on its experiences with the new rules on whistleblowing for EU staff adopted in 2012 and with their implementing measures; calls on the Commission to come forward with a proposal to protect whistleblowers, not only morally but also financially, in order to properly protect and support whistleblowers as part of the democratic system;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 9 a (new) – whereas full transparency underpins citizens' trust in EU institutions, contributes to developing an understanding of the rights deriving from the legal system of the Union and awareness and knowledge of the EU decision-making process, including the correct implementation of administrative and legislative procedures,
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Points out that, as a result of the entry into force of the TEU and the TFEU, the right of access to documents covers all EU institutions, bodies, and agencies; believes, therefore, that the substance of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 should be amended in the light of the relevant case law of the EU Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights; stresses that the actual public access to documents and the management of registers over documents need to be based on standards which adequately respect Articles 41 and 42 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Points out that, as a result of the entry into force of the TEU and the TFEU, the right of access to documents covers all EU institutions, bodies, and agencies; believes, therefore, that
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Notes that the Treaty of Lisbon has done away with the reference to safeguarding the efficiency of legislative decision- taking; believes therefore that this exception, which still appears in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, is no longer admissible as it is incompatible with the new constitutional setup;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9.
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Deplores th
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Reiterates its position that clear and uniform rules should be established for the classification and declassification of documents, and that an independent oversight authority should oversee the classification and declassification processes within the EU institutions;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers it
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers it regrettable that the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 is stalled in the Council and
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Recommends the creation of a single set of principles governing for access to documents which would allow for more clarity for citizens; including though Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 and the Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001.
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 9 a (new) – having regard to the resolution on public access to documents for the years 2011-2013 1 a, __________________ 1a PE524.641v02-00
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Reiterates its call on the institutions to assess and publicly justify requests for in camera meetings in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Points out that transparent law-making is of the utmost importance to citizens; reminds that the Treaties in force no longer contain any provisions comparable to the ones in Article 207(3) of the EC Treaty which could justify the application of the exception protecting the 'space to think' in Article 4(3) of the Regulation to legislative matters; recalls that access to documents and that openness in the legislative procedure contributes to strengthening democracy by allowing citizens to scrutinise all the information which has formed the basis of a legislative act; calls on the institutions actively to circulate documents forming part of, or related to, legislative procedures and to improve communication with persons who might wish to obtain them; considers in particular that the EU institutions should, by default, make as many documents as possible accessible to the public via a single
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Points out that transparent law-making is of the utmost importance to citizens; calls on the institutions actively to circulate public documents forming part of, or related to, legislative procedures
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Points out that transparent law-making is of the utmost importance to citizens; calls on the institutions
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the Ombudsman’s inquiry into the transparency of the legislative process, with a particular focus on ‘trilogues’, the established practice by which most EU legislation is adopted; urges the Ombudsman to make full use of her powers of investigation under the Treaties, with a view to enhancing the transparency of legislative and non- legislative work within the EU;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12.
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the Ombudsman’s inquiry into ‘trilogues’, the established practice by which most EU legislation is adopted;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Points out that the use of trilogues is not consistent with the legislative procedure laid down in the Treaty and that conciliation committees may be used only at third reading as a last resort, in cases where Parliament and the Council are unable to reach agreement on a Commission legislative proposal;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Points out that the use of trilogues
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 9 a (new) – having regard to the European Commission´s Green Paper on Public Access to Documents held by institutions of the European Community of 2007,
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Rejects the position taken by the Council in its letter to the Ombudsman in regard of this own-initiative inquiry that the organisation of trilogues is a political responsibility and falls outside the Ombudsman's mandate;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Calls on the Commission, the Council and Parliament, to ensure greater transparency of informal trilogues, by holding meetings in public, publishing documentation including calendars, agendas, minutes, documents examined, amendments, decisions taken, information on Member State delegations and their positions and minutes, in a standardised and easily accessible online environment, by default and without prejudice to the exemptions listed in Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Deplores the fact that citizens have no power to s
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14.
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14.
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Deplores the fact that, due to leaking of formal and informal trilogue documents, unequal access to documents, and therefore to the legislative process, is enjoyed by the knowledgeable and well connected interest groups; notes that document leaking would occur to a lesser extent once trilogue documents will be proactively published on an easily accessible platform without delay;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the institutions involved to amend their own rules of procedure so as to ensure in future that negotiations will be transparent and, to that end, to allow meetings to be held in public and webstreamed and to arrange for agendas, minutes, and the main issues discussed to be published;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the institutions involved to ensure in future that negotiations will be transparent and, to that end, to allow meetings to be held in public and webstreamed and to arrange for agendas, minutes, and the main documents relating to issues discussed to
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the institutions involved to ensure in future that negotiations will be transparent and, to that end, to allow meetings to be held in public and webstreamed and to arrange for agendas, minutes, and the main issues discussed to be published; considers, that documents created in the framework of trilogues, such as agendas, summaries of outcomes and the 'four column' documents drawn up for facilitating negotiations, which without doubt are documents related to legislative procedures cannot in principle be treated differently from other legislative documents;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 9 b (new) – whereas the right of access to documents is a fundamental right, protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the Treaties and implemented by Regulation 1049/2001, with the aim, in particular, of ensuring that this right can be exercised as easily as possible and of promoting good administrative practices regarding access to documents by ensuring democratic scrutiny of the activities of the institutions and ensuring that they comply with the rules enshrined in the Treaties,
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the institutions
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Calls on Parliament to make in principle all documents referred to in the agendas of the Bureau and the Conference of Presidents available by publishing them on the Parliament's website;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Welcomes the Commission’s intention of
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16.
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Welcomes the Commission’s intention of proposing an interinstitutional agreement establishing a mandatory interinstitutional register of interest group representatives operating, and also the local authorities and regional organizations within the institutions and calls for that matter to be given the highest priority;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Also calls on Parliament and the Council to follow the Commission practice, as established by the decision of 25 November 2014, by publishing information about contacts between
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17.
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17.
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 9 b (new) – having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1367/ 2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies,
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Calls on all the institutions to publish information about the contacts of interest group representatives with their officials, including those of non-managerial level;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Calls on Parliament as a first step in this regard to make available for those MEPs who wish to report on their contacts with lobbyists a template for Rapporteurs that can be annexed to their reports as well as space for this type of information on the webpages of the Parliament referring to individual MEPs;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Points out that, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and in order to guarantee full democratic and transparent parliamentary control, access should likewise be granted to documents produced when powers are delegated (delegated acts), since these make up a substantial portion of European legislation, for which reason adequate and transparent parliamentary and democratic control ought to be fully guaranteed; in this context, particularly deplores the lack of transparency of the European supervisory authorities (EBA, EIOPA, ESMA) because of the lack of involvement of the co-legislators; considers it disappointing that no single register of
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Points out that, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and in order to guarantee full democratic and transparent parliamentary control, access
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that international agreements have binding force and an impact on EU legislation and points to the need for negotiations to be transparent throughout the entire process, implying that the institutions should be obliged to publish the negotiating brief conferred on the Commission; considers it regrettable that
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that international agreements have binding force and an impact on EU legislation and points to the need for negotiations to be transparent throughout the entire process, implying that the institutions should be obliged to publish the negotiating brief conferred on the Commission simultaneously with its approval and before the negotiations begin; considers it regrettable that negotiations are secret and citizens have no access to information, but only to documents communicated to the press, thus giving rise to speculation and misconceptions about the negotiations; maintains that the public should be given access to all of the parties’ relevant negotiating documents, including documents on which the parties have already reached agreement, with the exception of those which are to be classified, with a clear justification on a case-by-case basis, in keeping with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Notes that international agreements have binding force and an impact on EU legislation and
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Points out to the Commission that it is required to inform Parliament fully and immediately at every stage while negotiations are taking place, and to assess at every stage which documents and information can proactively be made public;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Points out to the Commission that it is required under Article 207 TFEU to inform Parliament fully and
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Points out to the Commission that it is required to inform Parliament fully and immediately at every stage while negotiations are taking place; welcomes that MEPs have access to relevant negotiations documents within the European Parliament;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 0 (new) Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Points out that transparency strengthens, and helps to give effect to, the principle of good administration, as set out in Article 41 of the Charter and Article 298 TFEU; calls, therefore,
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Calls for all documents relating to non-legislative procedures, such as binding measures, measures relating to internal organisation, administrative or budget documents or documents of a political nature (such as conclusions, recommendations or resolutions), to be rendered readily, and if possible directly, accessible in accordance with the principle of proper administration;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Calls on the EU institutions to draw up common rules governing the conduct of administrative procedures and the procedures for presenting, classifying, declassifying, registering, and disclosing administrative documents; hopes that a legislative proposal for that purpose can be submitted without delay;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Deplores the lack of transparency regarding
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24.
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Believes that full data transparency and accessibility are essential to prevent and combat any abuse and fraud; in this context, calls on the Commission to make it compulsory to publish particulars of all recipients of money from the Structural Funds, including subcontractors;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Reiterates that full transparency of public expenditure in the EU is crucial to ensure accountability and to fight corruption;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 – subparagraph 1 (new) EU institutions and financial bodies
source: 572.849
2015/12/16
JURI
19 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Considers that the institutions, agencies and other bodies of the European Union still fail to take fully into account the changes introduced by the Lisbon Treaty and the Charter of Fundamental Rights when applying Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001, especially as concerns participatory democracy; notes and welcomes the recent judgments of the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice in the Digital Rights Ireland1 and Schrems2 cases, in both of which the Court based itself on the Charter when declaring invalid the Data Retention Directive3 and the Safe Harbour Decision4 respectively; stresses that the actual public access to documents and the management of registers of documents need to be based on standards which adequately comply with Articles 41 and 42 of the Charter; __________________ 1 Joined Cases C-293/12 and C-594/12. Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 8 April 2014. 2 Case C 362/14. Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 06.10.15. 3 Directive 2006/24/EC. 4 Commission Decision 2000/520/EC of 26 July 2000.
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Urges the Commission to establish a joint register for legislative procedures in order to facilitate the traceability of the legislative process;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Recalls that Articles 1(c) and 15 (1) obliges the institutions to 'promote good administrative practises on access to documents' and to 'develop good administrative practises in order to facilitate the exercise of the rights guaranteed by (the) Regulation'; stresses that transparency is closely connected with the right of good administration, as referred to in Article 298 TFEU and Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and reiterates its call for the adoption of a regulation on the administrative procedure of the EU's own administration1 a; __________________ 1a European Parliament resolution of 15 January 2013 with recommendations to the Commission on a Law of Administrative Procedure of the European Union (2012/2024(INL)) P7_TA(2013)0004.
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Sees it as a priority that EU institutions ensure full transparency when it comes to access to documents; stresses in this regard that besides access to documents also the debates in Council should be made public in order for citizens to understand how and why decisions have been taken;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Invites, once again, the Interinstitutional Committee established by Article 15(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 to work more actively and report to the competent committees on the issues discussed; calls on the Interinstitutional Committee to meet more regularly and to open up internal discussions and deliberations by inviting and considering submissions from civil society,
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Invites, once again, the Interinstitutional Committee established by Article 15(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 to work more actively and report to the competent committees on the issues discussed; deplores that little progress has been made to implement Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 as regards the obligation for the institutions to keep complete registers of documents, is convinced that Members of the European Parliament should have access to all the Commissions 'documents, points out in this relation the lack of transparency while negotiation the TTIP, calls on the Interinstitutional Committee to meet more regularly and to open up internal discussions and deliberations by inviting and considering submissions from civil society, the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor; calls on it to address the issues mentioned in this resolution as a matter of urgency.
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 – point 1 (new) (1) Welcomes the idea to request that the Commission establish a register of delegated acts, which are an important part of EU legislation, and points out that under Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and in order to ensure full, democratic and transparent oversight by Parliament, access must also be granted to the documents drawn up as part of the procedure for the delegation of powers;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Urges the Council to review its policy on access to documents and align it with the relevant provisions of the Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Notes that in order to bring about a legitimate, accountable democratic political system complying with the rule of law, citizens must have the right to know about, and scrutinise, the actions of their representatives, the decision-making process, how public money is allocated and spent in line with the principle of traceability of funds and in conformity with the position taken by the Parliament in earlier resolutions.
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Points out that, while progress has been achieved in providing information on Parliament's website on the different allowances MEPs are entitled to, and on the rules by which they are governed, this policy should be pursued taking into account best practices in National Parliaments, as well as the actions already undertaken by individual Members; encourages therefore all Member of Parliament to become engaged in this endeavour by proactively disclosing information relating to their specific activities and use of expenditure, in order for the Parliament to remain at the forefront of transparency and openness in the EU, and with a view to better public accountability of public funds.
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Considers that the institutions, agencies and other bodies of the European Union
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Points out, in this connection, that the Treaties in force no longer contain any provisions comparable to the ones in Article 207(3) of the EC Treaty concerning access to Council documents, which were used to justify the application of the exception protecting the
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Is concerned that the present practice favours access only by lobbyists to decisive phases of the legislative process and not by the broader public, nor by journalists and academics who transmit and interpret the process for the benefit of informing the public;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers, therefore, that documents created in the framework of trilogues, such as agendas, summaries of outcomes, minutes and the ‘
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers, therefore, that documents created in the framework of trilogues, such as agendas
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. In order to improve transparency as regards first reading agreements commonly conducted in trilogues and deployed more and more frequently, underlines the importance of publishing the progress of negotiations after each trilogue and to opt for a plenary mandate of the EP negotiation team;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Emphasises that also non-legislative documents such as administrative documents are covered by the principle of 'the widest possible access to documents' enshrined in Article 1(a) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 and that documents should be examined case-by-case in order to determine if disclosure of it would actually undermine the protection of one of the interests protected by the exceptions to public access and, where this possibility is foreseen in the Regulation, as well if an overriding public interest would require the disclosure of the document even though an exception could have been applicable prima facie;
source: 573.178
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
docs/3/docs/0/url |
/oeil/spdoc.do?i=27066&j=0&l=en
|
committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE571.441New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/LIBE-PR-571441_EN.html |
docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE572.849New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/LIBE-AM-572849_EN.html |
docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE571.798&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-AD-571798_EN.html |
events/0/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
events/1/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/2 |
|
events/2 |
|
events/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20160427&type=CRENew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-8-2015-04-27-TOC_EN.html |
events/5 |
|
events/5 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
docs/3/body |
EC
|
events/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0141&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2016-0141_EN.html |
events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0202New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0202_EN.html |
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 159 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
LIBE/8/04885New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
activities/4 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stageNew
Procedure completed |
activities/4 |
|
activities/3/docs |
|
activities/3/type |
Old
Debate scheduledNew
Debate in Parliament |
activities/4/type |
Old
Vote in plenary scheduledNew
Vote scheduled |
activities/3/type |
Old
Debate in plenary scheduledNew
Debate scheduled |
activities/2/docs/0/text |
|
activities/2/docs |
|
activities/2 |
|
activities/3/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Debate in plenary scheduled |
activities/4 |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage |
activities/1 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
|
activities/1/date |
Old
2016-04-11T00:00:00New
2016-04-27T00:00:00 |
activities/1/date |
Old
2016-03-07T00:00:00New
2016-04-11T00:00:00 |
activities/1 |
|
activities/0/committees/0/date |
2015-09-15T00:00:00
|
activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
committees/0/date |
2015-09-15T00:00:00
|
committees/0/rapporteur |
|
activities/0/committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
activities/0 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
LIBE/8/04885
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|