Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
2018/2624(RSP) Integrity policy of the Commission, in particular the appointment of the Secretary-General of the European Commission
Legal Basis RoP 123-p2
Legal Basis RoP 123-p2
Subjects
Activites
- 2018/03/12 Debate in Parliament
Documents
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 129 |
2018/2624(RSP)
2018/04/05
CONT
129 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Citation 2 a (new) - having regard to Article 14 (1) of the Treaty on the European Union;
Amendment 10 #
Recital B b (new) B b. whereas the Secretary-General of an EU institution is a position that requires particular experience and competence and notably the trust of the President of the respective institution whom the Secretary-General assists in his or her daily work so that, in the case of the Commission, in the context of the political guidelines laid down by its President, the Commission achieves the priorities it has set, as stated explicitly in Article 20 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure, which includes the legal job description of the Secretary-General of the institution,
Amendment 100 #
Paragraph 19 b (new) 19 b. Underlines that in the run-up to the 2019 European elections, the Commission is expected to take appropriate and concrete measures to restore the credibility of the European institutions and repair any reputation damage of the European Commission and the European Union as a whole that was caused by the appointment of the new Secretary-General.;
Amendment 101 #
Paragraph 20 20. Recalls that only through proper publication of vacant posts is it possible to secure a wide choice of
Amendment 102 #
Paragraph 20 20. Recalls that
Amendment 103 #
Paragraph 21 21.
Amendment 104 #
Paragraph 21 a (new) 21 a. Is convinced that the practice of “parachuting” has seriously damaged the credibility of the EU; strongly calls for an end to this practice within all the institutions and bodies of the European Union, which negatively affects the career development of staff based on their professional capacities and job performance;
Amendment 105 #
Paragraph 22 Amendment 106 #
Paragraph 22 22. Calls on all the institutions and bodies of the European Union, in this context, also to put an end to the practice of cabinets and political “parachuting” in order
Amendment 107 #
Paragraph 22 22. Calls on the Commission to review the current procedures for appointments of senior top positions within the European institutions; and calls on all the institutions and bodies of the European Union, in this context, also to put an end to the practice of “parachuting” in order to protect the regular career progress of traditional European civil service; political influence must not undermine the application of the Staff Regulations;
Amendment 108 #
Paragraph 22 a (new) 22 a. Proposes that officials from staff representative bodies sit on Parliament’s senior management selection panels;
Amendment 109 #
Paragraph 22 b (new) 22 b. Considers Parliament should appoint one or two Vice-Presidents responsible for staff matters and that this or these Members should be involved in senior management appointments under clearly defined rules and procedures;
Amendment 11 #
Recital B b (new) B b. whereas Parliament often publishes senior management posts externally and whereas the criteria determining internal/external publication are not transparent,
Amendment 110 #
Paragraph 22 c (new) 22 c. Insists that Parliament only publishes senior management posts externally when it is satisfied there are no suitable in-house candidates and/or if the post is highly technical or requires special qualifications;
Amendment 111 #
Paragraph 22 d (new) 22 d. Considers the letter of the Staff Committee to President Tajani of 27 March 2018(D101954) on the imminent appointment of directors; recalls that on 28 February2018 the Staff Committee has had a meeting with President Tajani and Secretary-General Klaus Welle on this issue; requests the Secretary-General of the European Parliament to draw up an action plan to prevent political appointments and ‘parachuting’ in the European Parliament;
Amendment 112 #
Paragraph 22 e (new) 22 e. Requests President Tajani, in the light of the uproar of political appointments, to withdraw the proposed package of 9 appointments of directors;
Amendment 113 #
Paragraph 23 23. Invites
Amendment 114 #
Paragraph 23 23.
Amendment 115 #
Paragraph 23 23.
Amendment 116 #
Paragraph 23 a (new) 23 a. Strongly urges the Commission to submit without delay its definitive proposal regarding the admissibility of maintaining the appointment of the new Secretary General of the Commission, as well as additional action to counter the damage done to the Commission’s credibility;
Amendment 117 #
Paragraph 24 24. Calls on the Commission to review, before the end of 2018, its administrative procedure for the appointment of senior officials with the objective of fully ensuring that the best candidates are selected in a framework of maximum transparency and equal opportunities
Amendment 118 #
Paragraph 24 24. Calls on the Commission to review, before the end of 2018, its administrative procedure for the appointment of senior officials, including the Secretary General of the Commission with the objective of fully ensuring that the best candidates are selected in a framework of maximum transparency
Amendment 119 #
Paragraph 24 24. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 12 #
Recital B c (new) B c. whereas posts published externally frequently result in the selection of internal candidates that do not meet the requirements for applying under internal rules thereby circumventing regular career progression;
Amendment 120 #
Paragraph 24 a (new) 24 a. Is deeply concerned about a report by the German magazine "Der Spiegel" about rude and inappropriate language used by Mr Selmayr in addressing a Spiegel journalist; notes that such language, if it was indeed used by Mr Selmayr, would be a flagrant violation of Article 12 of Regulation No. 31 (EEC) ("the Statute"), notes with great concern that the Commission did not follow up on the Spiegel report with an investigation of the incident, is deeply concerned that Commissioner Öttinger did not bring the incident to the attention of his colleagues prior to the appointment of Mr. Selmayr, is deeply concerned that the undisputed Spiegel report may reflect adversely on Mr Selmayrs position as Secretary General of the Commission;
Amendment 121 #
Paragraph 24 a (new) 24 a. Welcomes the proposal made by Commissioner Oettinger during the hearing on 27 March 2018 to organise a round table as soon as possible in the present year with representatives from the EU institutions to review the Staff Regulations; calls on the contributing parties to carefully review the rules for the appointment of officials and to propose changes to the regulations where needed to make sure that appointment procedures are in line with the principles of transparency and equal opportunities;
Amendment 122 #
Paragraph 24 a (new) 24 a. Notes that when Mr. Selmayr was appointed, the rules were applied in such a way that only he could succeed; concludes therefore, that this seems very likely to be a case of favouritism; considers that the procedure must be re- opened, with the term of opening being extended by an additional month to give candidates from the individual Member States an opportunity to apply for the role;
Amendment 123 #
Paragraph 24 a (new) 24 a. calls on the Commission, the European Parliament, the Council and other EU Institutions to apply open and transparent selection procedures for all officials, seniors officials included, with the objective to select the best candidates throughout a framework that guarantees maximum transparency and equal opportunities for all eligible candidates;
Amendment 124 #
Paragraph 24 a (new) 24 a. Calls on the Commission to reverse the decision to appoint the new Secretary-General and to then open the process anew, inviting interest from suitable applicants (of which the new Secretary-General may be one) as per the usual procedure;
Amendment 125 #
Paragraph 24 a (new) 24 a. Calls on the European Commission to cancel the appointment of the current Secretary-General and to organise a new selection procedure; considers undesirable for Martin Selmayr to compete again;
Amendment 126 #
Paragraph 24 a (new) 24 a. Calls for the position of Secretary- General of the European Commission to be immediately reopened and filled in accordance with the rules;
Amendment 127 #
Paragraph 24 b (new) 24 b. Notes with great concern that the same Spiegel report quotes Mr Selmayr as saying he would never again give the Spiegel journalist any bit of information, notes that Article 17 of Regulation No. 31 (EEC) ("the Statute") prohibits the unauthorised disclosure of information received in the line of duty for all officials, regardless of rank, notes with great concern that the Commission did not follow up on the Spiegel report with an investigation of Mr Selmayr possibly leaking information to the media and presumably doing so on a regular basis, is deeply concerned that Commissioner Öttinger did not bring the incident to the attention of his colleagues prior to the appointment of Mr.Selmayr, is bewildered by Commissioner Öttinger's opinion, expressed in the Budgetary Control Committee, that Mr Selmayr leaked information to the journalist only confidentially, affirms that an official shall refrain from any unauthorised disclosure of unpublished information received in the line of duty and that this also holds for the Secretary General of the Commission;
Amendment 128 #
Paragraph 24 b (new) 24 b. Calls on the Commission to reassess the decision of the nomination of present Secretary General after the new rules adopted and in any case when the President of the Commission arrives to the end of his mandate; asks the Commission to take into account the EP opinion on the future decisions on the nomination of the EC Secretary General in order to strengthen transparency, democracy and trust on EU institutions;
Amendment 129 #
Paragraph 24 b (new) 24 b. Believes that if the Commission does not repeal this appointment, and taking into account the latest developments on the conflict of interest under Article 11 of the Staff Regulations, it would face a motion of censure;
Amendment 13 #
Paragraph 1 1. Regrets that the procedure for the appointment of the new Secretary-General of the European Commission on 21 February 2018 was conducted in a manner which aroused widespread irritation and disapproval in public opinion, among Members of the European Parliament and within the European civil service; notes that the result of this procedure constitutes a reputational risk not only for the European Commission but for all the European Union institutions; Therefore expects the College of Commissioners to take its political responsibility and to revoke its decision of 21 February 2018 to appoint Mr Selmayr as Secretary-General of the European Commission; Furthermore invites the European Commission to re-open the vacancy of Secretary-General and appoint the Secretary-General following an open and transparent application procedure.
Amendment 14 #
Paragraph 1 1. Regrets that the procedure for the appointment of the new Secretary-General of the European Commission on 21 February 2018 was conducted in
Amendment 15 #
Paragraph 1 1. Regrets that the procedure for the appointment of the new Secretary-General of the European Commission on 21 February 2018 was conducted in a manner which aroused widespread irritation and disapproval in public opinion, among Members of the European Parliament and within the European civil service; notes that the result of this procedure
Amendment 16 #
Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Deplores that the important decision to appoint a new EC General Secretary has been mixed with an important reshuffle of other high senior officials; regrets the discontent which some of these changes have also added critics against the EU institutions; asks the Commission to review the Staff Rules and to include a proper contradictory procedure to avoid this situation;
Amendment 17 #
Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Requests the Commission, and in particular its President, its First Vice- President as well as the Commissioner responsible for Budget and Human Resources, to publicly apologise for their lack of responsiveness to the public disapproval of the procedure followed;
Amendment 18 #
Paragraph 1 b (new) 1 b. Is not convinced that the transfer procedure as followed by appointing the former Head of Cabinet to Deputy Secretary-General and a few minutes later to Secretary-General served the interests of the service, and thus its legality, let alone its legitimacy are at least questionable;
Amendment 19 #
Paragraph 1 c (new) 1 c. Expresses the opinion that against this background the new Secretary- General should be called upon to voluntarily suspend his activities, so that the Commission has the opportunity of conducting a new and transparent recruitment procedure based upon an open call for applications;
Amendment 2 #
Citation 3 a (new) - having regard to the Staff Regulations for European Union civil servants and in particular Articles 4, 7 and 29,
Amendment 20 #
Paragraph 2 – indent 2 - only two candidates applied, a man and a woman, both from the cabinet of the EC President; the new Secretary- General was one of the applicants for the post; the second candidate, the woman, applied for the vacancy on 8 February 2018, went through the full day assessment centre on 12 February 2018 and withdrew the application prior to the interview with the Consultative Committee on Appointments (CCA), scheduled for 20 February 2018 and was appointed then as the new Head of Cabinet of EC President;
Amendment 21 #
Paragraph 2 – indent 4 Amendment 22 #
Paragraph 2 – indent 4 Amendment 23 #
Paragraph 2 – indent 7 - the President of the European Commission and his Head of Cabinet had known since 2015 that the then Secretary- General intended to retire soon after March 2018, an intention which was reconfirmed in early 2018; they both hoped to convince Mr Italianer to stay on as Secretary- General beyond 1 March 2018 and they continued to suggest this to him repeatedly until mid-February as their preferred choice had always been to keep Mr Italianer as SG until the end of the mandate; however, the President had not divulged this information in order not to undermine the authority of the then Secretary-General;
Amendment 24 #
Paragraph 2 – indent 7 - the President of the European Commission and his Head of Cabinet had known since 2015 that the then Secretary- General intended to retire soon after March 2018, an intention which was reconfirmed in early 2018; however, they both hoped to convince the then Secretary-General to stay on as Secretary General beyond 1 March 2018 and they continued to suggest this to him until Mid-February as their preference had always been to keep him as SG until the end of the mandate; the President had not divulged this information in order not to undermine the authority of the then Secretary-General;
Amendment 25 #
Paragraph 2 – indent 7 - the President of the European Commission and his Head of Cabinet had known since 2015 that the then Secretary- General intended to retire soon after March 2018, an intention which was reconfirmed in early 2018; however, the President had not divulged this information in order not to undermine the authority of the then Secretary-General but, had communicated with his Head of Cabinet;
Amendment 26 #
Paragraph 2 – indent 7 - the President of the European Commission and his Head of Cabinet had known since 2015 that the then Secretary- General intended to retire soon after March 2018, an intention which was reconfirmed many times, including in early 2018; however, the President had not divulged this information in order not to undermine the authority of the then Secretary-General;
Amendment 27 #
Paragraph 2 – indent 7 a (new) - the President of the European Commission tried on many occasions to persuade the Secretary General to change his mind (understandably, given the trust that had been established) and asked him to remain in the position past his stated preferred retirement date;
Amendment 28 #
Paragraph 2 – indent 7 b (new) - when his efforts at persuading the Secretary-General to extend his tenure repeatedly failed, the President of the European Commission should then, at the very minimum, have alerted the Commissioner responsible for Budget and Human Resources of the impending vacancy, so the steps to fill that vacancy could have been initiated in the normal, best-practice and timely manner;
Amendment 29 #
Paragraph 2 – indent 8 - acting on a proposal from the President, in agreement with the Commissioner for Budget and Human Resources, and
Amendment 30 #
Paragraph 3 – indent 3 Amendment 31 #
Paragraph 3 – indent 4 a (new) - after having successfully completed a selection procedure, the new Secretary-General was appointed Principal Adviser to the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development with effect as of 1 June 2014; with this appointment he became a grade AD14 official in his basic career;
Amendment 32 #
Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the extremely rapid career of the new Secretary-General who in a period of slightly more than 13 years, has progressed from AD6 to AD15, out of which he spent 8 years in different cabinets; questions the true intentions of a selection procedure where the new Secretary-General was appointed Principal Adviser to the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development with effect as of 1 June 2014 as it might not have served the purpose of filling this vacancy in the first place, but rather of providing a grade AD14 as an official in his basic career for the post he never occupied;
Amendment 33 #
Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the extremely rapid career of the new Secretary-General who in a period of slightly more than 13 years, has progressed from AD6 to AD15, out of which he spent 8 years in different cabinets (after the first cabinet he was promoted from AD10 to AD14; after the second cabinet from AD14 to AD 15);
Amendment 34 #
Paragraph 5 5. Notes that, according to the Commission, the three previous Secretaries-General became Director, Director-General and Head of Cabinet before being transferred to the function of Secretary-General, whereas the new Secretary-General
Amendment 35 #
Paragraph 5 5. Notes that, according to the Commission, the three previous Secretaries-General became Director, Director-General and Head of Cabinet before being transferred to the function of Secretary-General, whereas the new Secretary-General did not perform any management task in the Commission services; points out, in particular, that on 21 February 2018 he was not Deputy Secretary-General in function and he was less than two months in AD15 grade;
Amendment 36 #
Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 37 #
Paragraph 6 6. Takes note that the new Secretary- General was transferred in the interest of the service under Article 7 of the Staff Regulations and that the position was not published because the post was not considered vacant; hence no official could apply since the procedure was organised through a reassignment with post rather than as a transfer in the strict sense with proper publication of the vacant post, in view of the special function of the Secretary-General, whose tasks under the Commission’s Rules of Procedure it is chiefly to assist the President, it is unthinkable that a candidate would be chosen for this position who does not have the continuous trust and confidence of the President, which is why it is the President that proposes his choice of Secretary- General to the College;
Amendment 38 #
Paragraph 6 6. Takes note that the new Secretary- General was transferred in the interest of the service under Article 7 of the Staff Regulations and that the position was not published because the post was not considered vacant; hence no official could apply since the procedure was organised through a reassignment with post rather than as a transfer in the strict sense with proper publication of the vacant post; stresses that such a procedure for the post of Secretary-General is unacceptable, and against the spirit of implementing the rules for the appointment of EU officials, who are servants of the citizens of the European Union;
Amendment 39 #
Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 4 #
Recital A A. whereas it is fundamental that the European Commission, as Guardian of the Treaties, acts in conformity with the letter and the spirit of the rules,
Amendment 40 #
Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Takes note that in his oral replies to the CONT committee hearing, the Commissioner for Budget and Human Resources stated repeatedly that the new Secretary-General was the Commission President's strong preference for the appointment to this position, which strongly suggests that the Commission President also felt it was his prerogative to make this appointment, by whatever means necessary;
Amendment 41 #
Paragraph 7 7. Notes that the Commission used the same procedure of transfer under Article 7 of the Staff Regulations for the three previous Secretaries-General (transfer with post rather than transfer in the strict sense); underlines that none of the previous Secretaries-General were appointed successively Deputy Secretary-General and Secretary-General during the same College meeting; underlines also that all three previous Secretaries-General were proposed to the College in the very same College meeting in which their respective predecessor was transferred to a different post or announced their retirement;
Amendment 42 #
Paragraph 7 7. Notes that the Commission used the same procedure of transfer under Article 7 of the Staff Regulations for the three previous Secretaries-General (transfer with post rather than transfer in the strict sense); nevertheless underlines that none of the previous Secretaries-General were appointed successively Deputy Secretary- General and Secretary-General during the same College meeting;
Amendment 43 #
Paragraph 8 8. Stresses that the appointment by transfer was initiated by the President of the European Commission in agreement with the Commissioner responsible for Budget and Human Resources and after consultation of the First Vice-President (which was consulted about the name of the candidate but definitively not on the procedure);
Amendment 44 #
Paragraph 9 9. Acknowledges that it is not Commission practice to transfer directors in grade AD 15 to Director-General posts but notes that the Commission considers that, legally, the College could have decided to transfer a principal advisor to the post of Secretary-General; welcomes that, instead of choosing this easier and swifter procedure, a procedure was followed that ensured that the new Secretary-General had participated in a full-day Assessment Centre for senior managers for the second time in his career before taking up his position at Director-General level in line with the Commission decision on Assessment Centres for Directors-General/ Deputy Directors-General of 2015;
Amendment 45 #
Paragraph 10 10.
Amendment 46 #
Paragraph 10 10. Questions why the Commission used different procedures to appoint Deputy Secretary-General and Secretary- General for the same candidate and during the same college meeting;
Amendment 47 #
Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. Notes that so far the Budget Control Committee only invited Commissioner Oettinger for a hearing; underlines that in the interest of hearing both sides, not only management should be heard but also the most directly affected, including the staff; requests the committee to conduct further hearings of, amongst others, representatives of the Staff Associations and representatives of the Staff Unions;
Amendment 48 #
Paragraph 10 b (new) 10 b. Considers that the European Ombudsman has received a complaint on the promotion of Mr. Selmayr and is currently conducting an investigation; believes that the European Ombudsman should also be heard by the committee, at the latest once she has been able to formulate her recommendations in this respect;
Amendment 5 #
Recital B B. whereas trust in the European project and in the European Union will only be maintained, if the European Union institutions act as role models of the rule of law, transparency and good administration and prove to have sufficient internal check and balances
Amendment 50 #
Paragraph 11 11. Notes that the replies given by the Commission show that the President and his Head of Cabinet had been aware since 2015 of the intention of the former Secretary-General to retire soon after 1 March 2018, which he reconfirmed in early 2018; underlines that this knowledge would have allowed for a regular appointment procedure for his successor by one of the two public procedures foreseen by the Staff Regulations: (1) appointment by the College following publication of the post and selection procedure under Article 29 of the Staff Regulation; or, (2) transfer in the interest of the service pursuant to Article 7 of the Staff Regulations, equally upon publication of the post in order to allow any interested official to apply for such transfer; it is concerned about the communication between the President of the Commission and his Head of Cabinet on the retirement and vacancy of the former S-G and the new vacancy which could rise serious question of conflict of interest and privileged information;
Amendment 51 #
Paragraph 11 11. Notes that the replies given by the Commission show that the President and his Head of Cabinet had been aware since 2015 of the intention of the former Secretary-General to retire soon after 1 March 2018, which he reconfirmed in early 2018; under
Amendment 52 #
Paragraph 11 11.
Amendment 53 #
Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Takes note of the view of the Commission that the publication of a post is not to be considered the rule under the Staff Regulations, notably with regard to the position of Secretary-General which requires not only special experience but also a particular level of trust by the President and the College of Commissioners
Amendment 54 #
Paragraph 11 a (new) 11 a. Stresses that, according to the Commissioner for Human Resources, the replies to the questionnaire sent by the Committee on Budgetary Control concerning Martin Selmayr were supervised by Martin Selmayr himself in direct violation of Article 11 of the Staff Regulations;
Amendment 55 #
Paragraph 11 b (new) 11 b. Considers that, since the Commissioner in charge of human resources has knowledge of this information and does not take the appropriate sanctions, he engages the political responsibility of the institution;
Amendment 56 #
Paragraph 12 12. Underlines that by opting for the procedure under transfer of Article 7 of the Staff Regulations in the form of reassignment of the newly appointed Deputy Secretary-General with his post to the position of Secretary-General, it was
Amendment 57 #
Paragraph 12 12. Underlines that by opting for the procedure under transfer of Article 7 of the Staff Regulations in the form of reassignment of the newly appointed Deputy Secretary-General with his post to the position of Secretary-General,
Amendment 58 #
Paragraph 12 12. Underlines that by opting for the procedure under transfer of Article 7 of the Staff Regulations in the form of reassignment of the newly appointed Deputy Secretary-General with his post to the position of Secretary-General, it was possible to avoid publishing the vacant post of the retiring former Secretary- General; notes that the same procedure was used for the appointments of previous Secretaries-General while those have been previously in post of General Directors with high management and budgetary responsibilities; stresses, however, that this tradition of non-publication has reached its limits insofar as it does not correspond anymore to modern standards of transparency;
Amendment 59 #
Paragraph 12 12. Underlines that by opting for the procedure under transfer of Article 7 of the Staff Regulations in the form of reassignment of the newly appointed Deputy Secretary-General with his post to the position of Secretary-General, it was possible to avoid publishing the vacant post of the retiring former Secretary- General; notes that the same procedure was used for the appointments of previous Secretaries-General; stresses, however, that this tradition of non-publication has reached its limits insofar as it does not correspond anymore to modern standards of transparency the Commission, the European Parliament and other EU institutions should abide to;
Amendment 6 #
Recital B B. whereas trust in the European project and in the European Union will only be maintained
Amendment 60 #
Paragraph 12 12. Underlines that by opting for the procedure under transfer of Article 7 of the Staff Regulations in the form of reassignment of the newly appointed Deputy Secretary-General with his post to the position of Secretary-General, it was possible to avoid publishing the vacant post of the retiring former Secretary- General; notes that the same procedure was used for the appointments of previous Secretaries-General; stresses, however, that this tradition of non-publication has reached its limits insofar as it does not correspond
Amendment 61 #
Paragraph 12 a (new) 12 a. Notes that the Commission attributes to itself a wide discretion as regards to the procedure to be adopted to assign staff in order to best ensure the interest of the service; notes that the replies given by the Commission show that it acknowledges the possibility of terminating a procedure on the basis of Article 29 of the Staff regulation without follow-up and proceed directly with a transfer based solely on Article 7; is concerned that this wide discretion of the appointing authority runs against the idea of ensuring a fair, rule-based and transparent management of the staff;
Amendment 62 #
Paragraph 12 a (new) 12 a. Recommends that the appointment procedure of Secretary-General must be fully transparent and should always be bound to the publication of vacant posts;
Amendment 63 #
Paragraph 12 b (new) 12 b. Notes that it is a usual practice of the Commission to appoint staff by using transfers under Article 7; notes that 50,6% of all appointments at Director- General/Deputy Director-General/Hors Classe Adviser level were transfers according to Article 7 of the Staff Regulations; questions whether this wide use of transfers is compatible with rules which should allow the best candidates to be selected in an open, fair and transparent procedure;
Amendment 64 #
Paragraph 13 13. Notes that only the President, the Commissioner responsible for Budget and Human Resources, the First Vice-President and the former and new Secretaries- General knew in advance of the meeting of the College of Commissioners of 21 February 2018 that the proposal for the immediate appointment of the new Secretary-General
Amendment 65 #
Paragraph 13 13.
Amendment 66 #
Paragraph 14 14.
Amendment 67 #
Paragraph 15 Amendment 68 #
Paragraph 15 Amendment 69 #
Paragraph 15 15. Is deeply concerned that this way of proceeding with the appointment of the new Secretary-General could cast doubt on the preceding procedure of appointment to Deputy Secretary-General insofar as it might not have served the purpose of filling this vacancy in the first place, but rather of allowing for the transfer of this post to the post of Secretary-General under Article 7 of the Staff Regulations without publication of the post; considers that, although such a way of proceeding might satisfy purely formal requirements, it nevertheless runs against the spirit of the Staff Regulations and prevents any competition for the post by other eligible staff;
Amendment 7 #
Recital B a (new) B a. whereas all EU institutions have, under the Treaties, autonomy in matters related to their organisation and their personnel policy, including in choosing their top civil servants on the basis of merit, experience and trust, in line with the Staff Regulations and their respective rules of procedure,
Amendment 71 #
Paragraph 16 Amendment 72 #
Paragraph 16 16. Is disappointed by the fact that not a single Commissioner seems to have questioned this surprise appointment, asked for a postponement of this appointment decision or requested discussion of principle on the role of a future Secretary- General in th
Amendment 73 #
Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Stresses that there have been clear and continued failings by the European Commission in the communication of the processes and procedures for the appointment of the Secretary-General of the Commission to both the public and the press; in this regard notes that the European Commission published its response to the Budgetary Control Committee’s questions at 03h00 on Sunday the 25th March 2018; stresses that in the interest of transparency and informing the broadest possible audience on a matter of public interest, such a working practice is unacceptable;
Amendment 74 #
Paragraph 16 b (new) 16 b. Notes that throughout the European Parliament’s investigation into the appointment of the Secretary-General of the European Commission, neither the Commission President or the Secretary- General of the Commission have appeared before the Members of the European Parliament, notes that this is against the spirit of inter-institutional cooperation and the spirit of transparency and openness; stresses that the debates within the European Parliament are intended to give the public and the press the opportunity to scrutinise the work of the EU institutions and hold them to account;
Amendment 75 #
Paragraph 17 17. Reminds that Directors-General in the European institutions are in charge of hundreds of staff members and the implementation of substantial budgets as authorizing officers, as well as having the obligation to sign a declaration of assurance in their annual activity report at the end of each financial year;
Amendment 76 #
Paragraph 17 17. Reminds that Directors-General in the European institutions are in charge of hundreds of staff members and the implementation of substantial budgets as authorizing officers, as well as having the obligation to sign a declaration of assurance in their annual activity report at the end of each financial year; questions therefore the Commission’s claim that Heads of Cabinet of the President could be considered equivalent to a Director- General position in terms of management and budgetary responsibilities without having being in such a position, as it was the case in the previous SG of the Commission; points out that the internal Communication from the President to the Commission governing the composition of the private offices of the Members of the Commission and of the Spokesperson’s service of 1 November 2014 does not supersede or modify the Staff Regulations;
Amendment 77 #
Paragraph 17 a (new) 17 a. Regards as highly inacceptable the appointment of the occupant of the manifestly political post of Head of Cabinet to the President of the Commission to the post of Secretary General of the by default strictly non- political professional staff of the Commission of the EU;
Amendment 78 #
Paragraph 18 Amendment 79 #
Paragraph 18 18. States that the
Amendment 8 #
Recital B a (new) B a. whereas in this regard also Parliament's own senior management recruitment procedures should be fully transparent and based solely on merit thereby excluding any kind of political deal-making,
Amendment 80 #
Paragraph 18 18.
Amendment 81 #
Paragraph 18 18. States that the two-steps nomination of the Secretary General co
Amendment 82 #
Paragraph 18 a (new) 18 a. Notes the political proximity of the new Secretary General given his activity as campaign manager for the EPP lead candidate for the President of the European Commission; is concerned that his nomination could undermine the political independence of the European Commission as set down in Article 17(3) of the Treaty on the European Union; stresses that the administration of the European Commission as an independent organ should remain free from political influence;
Amendment 83 #
Paragraph 18 a (new) 18 a. Asks for the immediate resignation of the newly appointed Secretary-General, in order to restore the faith in the European Institutions and their integrity; asks therefore for a new publication of vacant post, with a procedure open to every candidate, in compliance with the Article 29 of the Staff Regulation;
Amendment 84 #
Paragraph 18 a (new) 18 a. Considers that, should the Staff Committee or Staff Union of the European Commission file suit against the appointment of the Secretary General of the European Commission at the Court of Justice of the European Union, the European Parliament joins the suit of the Staff Committee as complainant;
Amendment 85 #
Paragraph 18 a (new) 18 a. Expresses serious concerns over the impartiality and objectivity of the President of the European Commission, given that the President of the Commission has publically threatened to resign if the appointment of the newly appointed Secretary-General is not honoured;
Amendment 86 #
Paragraph 18 a (new) 18 a. Stresses that the Parliament can’t find any “serious and urgent situation”, as explained by the Parliament’s Legal service, to justify the use of the procedure of reassignment under Article 7 of the Staff Regulations without publication of the post;
Amendment 87 #
Paragraph 18 b (new) 18 b. Reiterates that by “Transfer in the interest ofthe service” as a means to fill a post, Article 7 of the Staff Regulation mustbe read in conjunction with Article 4 - in principle a post that falls freemust be published as there are no exceptions stated in the statute and filledby “the most competent officials” which can only be appointed through selectionprocedure;
Amendment 88 #
Paragraph 18 b (new) 18 b. Is concerned by the fact that the new Secretary General accompanied the President of the Commission to a meeting of the EPP leaders on 23 March 2018; stresses that the Secretary General of the European Commission should exercise his function in full independence of political parties;
Amendment 89 #
Paragraph 18 b (new) 18 b. Considers that the Commission's spokespersons should address journalists’ concerns adequately in an open and transparent manner; regrets journalists were treated as opponents by Commission spokespersons rather than as valuable allies in the quest for ethical governance;
Amendment 9 #
Recital B a (new) B a. whereas the Santer Commission had the courage to resign on 15 March 1999 following a damning report and faced with the risk of a motion of censure;
Amendment 90 #
Paragraph 18 c (new) 18 c. Stresses the fact that the College of Commissioners themselves decided to directly appoint Mr. Selmayr as the new secretary General before the post would even be vacant thus far dismisses the Commission’s statement that there was no vacant post of the Secretary General’s position;
Amendment 91 #
Paragraph 18 d (new) 18 d. Expects from the Commission to cancel the recent appointment of the new Secretary General and Starts a new appointment procedure under the procedure provided for in Article 29 of the Staff Regulations thus allowing for all eligible staff to compete for the position;
Amendment 92 #
Paragraph 18 e (new) 18 e. Calls on the European Parliament to postpone the Commission’s 2016 discharge until the Commission carries out an appointment procedure provided for in Article 29 of the Staff Regulations;
Amendment 94 #
Paragraph 19 19. Points out that in order to maintain an independent, loyal and motivated European civil service, the Staff Regulations need to be applied in letter and spirit: this requires notably that Articles 4, 7 and 29 of the Staff Regulations need to be fully respected so that all “vacant posts in an institution shall be notified to the staff of that institution, once the appointing authority decides that the vacancy is to be filled” and that this
Amendment 95 #
Paragraph 19 19. Points out that in order to maintain an excellent and independent, loyal and motivated European civil service, the Staff Regulations need to be applied in letter and spirit: this requires notably that Articles 4, 7 and 29 of the Staff Regulations need to be fully respected so that all “vacant posts in an institution shall be notified to the staff of that institution, once the appointing authority decides that the vacancy is to be filled” and that this obligation of transparency needs also to be respected for transfers under Article 7 of the Staff Regulations, apart from very exceptional cases and duly motivated, as recognised by the Court of Justice;
Amendment 96 #
Paragraph 19 a (new) 19 a. Takes note that the Court of Justice has admitted some exceptions for transfers under Article 7 but in a limited and restrictive way and that the Judges have pointed out that these transfers should be done only in the interest of the service which means that the situation has to be severe, serious and most of the time urgent; considers that in the interests of transparency and equal opportunities, the non-publication of a vacancy as a result of the interest of the service should always be justified in writing and made public, indicating the reasons for the exceptionality and the urgency and demonstrating that the negative effects in case of not adopting that decision are more serious than the failure to make that decision and finally, the invocation of urgency should not be imputable to the Appointing Authority;
Amendment 97 #
Paragraph 19 a (new) 19 a. Is of the opinion that conditions for transfers in the interest of the service under Article 7 of the Staff Regulation need to be defined and justified more clearly; believes, in particular, that reassignments with the officials' post where the publication of a vacancy is not needed should only be used in exceptional circumstances; calls on the Commission to review and propose changes to its internal rules for the appointment of staff in this regard;
Amendment 98 #
Paragraph 19 a (new) 19 a. Believes that in order to respect the plurality of the European Union, the functions of Secretary General of the European Parliament, of the European Commission and of the European Council can not be occupied by officials of a same nationality. Calls on the three institutions to establish inter-institutional rules to address this problem and take that direction;
Amendment 99 #
Paragraph 19 a (new) 19 a. Reminds the Commission that the complaint about the appointment submitted to the EU Ombudsman was declared admissible; and calls on the Commission to follow and act upon the conclusions of the research conducted by the EU Ombudsman;
source: 620.780
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2018-09-12Show (6) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| other/0 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
CONT/8/12567
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stageNew
Procedure completed |
| procedure/title |
Old
Integrity policy of the Commission, in particular the appointment of the Secretary-General of the European CommissionNew
Resolution on the integrity policy of the Commission, in particular the appointment of the Secretary-General of the European Commission |
2018-03-15Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/docs |
|
2018-03-14Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/type |
Old
Debate in plenary scheduledNew
Debate in Parliament |
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 123-p2New
Rules of Procedure EP 123-p2 |
2018-03-10Show (5) Changes
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|