2020/2133(INI) Strengthening transparency and integrity in the EU institutions by setting up an independent EU ethics body
Next event: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading 2021/07/05 more...
Lead committee dossier:
Next event: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading 2021/07/05 more...
- Committee opinion 2021/02/25
- Amendments tabled in committee 2021/02/16
- Committee draft report 2021/01/27
Progress: Awaiting committee decision
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | AFCO | FREUND Daniel ( Verts/ALE) | WIELAND Rainer ( EPP), CIMOSZEWICZ Włodzimierz ( S&D), BOYER Gilles ( Renew), CHAIBI Leila ( Confederal Group of the European United Left) |
Committee Opinion | PETI | KANEV Radan ( EPP) | Margrete AUKEN ( Verts/ALE), Ryszard CZARNECKI ( ECR), Ramona STRUGARIU ( RE), Ibán GARCÍA DEL BLANCO ( S&D), Stefania ZAMBELLI ( ID) |
Committee Opinion | CONT | PEKSA Mikuláš ( Verts/ALE) | Luke Ming FLANAGAN ( GUE/NGL), Tomáš ZDECHOVSKÝ ( PPE), Isabel GARCÍA MUÑOZ ( S&D), Gilles BOYER ( RE) |
Committee Opinion | ECON | EPPINK Derk Jan ( ECR) | Jörg MEUTHEN ( ID), Paul TANG ( S&D), Manon AUBRY ( GUE/NGL), Damien CARÊME ( Verts/ALE), Ivars IJABS ( RE), Sven SIMON ( PPE) |
Committee Opinion | JURI | SÉJOURNÉ Stéphane ( Renew) | Geoffroy DIDIER ( PPE), Lara WOLTERS ( S&D), Manon AUBRY ( GUE/NGL), Gunnar BECK ( ID), Raffaele STANCANELLI ( ECR), Marie TOUSSAINT ( Verts/ALE) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54, RoP 57
Legal Basis:
RoP 54, RoP 57Subjects
Events
2021/07/05
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
2021/02/25
EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2021/02/16
EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2021/01/27
EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2020/11/20
EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2020/10/07
EP - PEKSA Mikuláš (Verts/ALE) appointed as rapporteur in CONT
2020/09/17
EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2020/09/17
EP - Referral to associated committees announced in Parliament
2020/07/16
EP - KANEV Radan (EPP) appointed as rapporteur in PETI
2020/07/13
EP - SÉJOURNÉ Stéphane (Renew) appointed as rapporteur in JURI
2020/06/25
EP - EPPINK Derk Jan (ECR) appointed as rapporteur in ECON
2020/02/19
EP - FREUND Daniel (Verts/ALE) appointed as rapporteur in AFCO
Documents
Amendments | Dossier |
56 |
2020/2133(INI)
2020/10/07
ECON
56 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recalls its resolution of 16 January 2020 on institutions and bodies of the Economic and Monetary Union: preventing post-public employment conflicts of interest1
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Points out that the
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Points out that the inherent complexities in financial regulatory policies and the information asymmetries between financial market players and public officials ma
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Deplores for instance the appointment of the EBA Executive Director as AFME Chief Executive in February 2020; notes that this post-public employment with no cooling off period constitutes not only a risk to the reputation and independence of the EBA but to all Union institutions; considers that the independent EU ethics body should be competent to assess and make binding recommendations on such cases;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for a strengthening of the existing regulatory and enforcement framework for both pre-public and post- public employment conflicts of interest, in
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for a strengthening of the existing regulatory and enforcement framework for both pre-public and post- public employment conflicts of interest, in order to establish appropriate, clear and binding boundaries between the public sector and the private and non-profit sectors; calls on the Commission to consider measures such as mandatory divestment of interests in undertakings that are subject to the authority of the institution to which a newly appointed official belongs or which have dealings with that institution, and to consider also new types of prevention measures, such as mandatory recusal when dealing with matters that affect a former private sector employer; welcomes in this regard the work done by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the European Court of Auditors and the European Ombudsman; recalls that the EU ethics body should have competences over these matters;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for a strengthening of the existing regulatory and enforcement framework for both pre-public and post- public employment conflicts of interest, in order to establish appropriate as well as proportionate boundaries between the public sector and the private and non-profit sectors; welcomes in this regard the work done by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the European Court of Auditors and the European Ombudsman;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for a strengthening of the existing regulatory and enforcement framework for both pre-public and post- public employment conflicts of interest, in order to establish appropriate boundaries between the public sector and the private and non-profit sectors; welcomes in this regard the work done by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the European Court of Auditors and the European Ombudsman; points out the lack of alignment of the EU ethics rules with the OECD Guidelines for Managing Conflict of Interest in the Public Service; notes the OECD Guidelines recommended the creation of a central function responsible for the development and maintenance of the conflict-of-interest policy and procedure, that could take the form of an independent agency; underlines the European Ombudsman has been handling conflicts-of-interest complains in the absence of a mechanism dedicated to this task on top of its other missions, and without having the proper means and power to enforce its decisions;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Welcomes additional transparency measures announced by the President of the European Central Bank (ECB) Christine Lagarde regarding the publication of the ECB Ethics Committee’s opinions for cases of conflict of interest and post-mandate gainful employment by the members of the ECB’s Executive Board, Governing Council and Supervisory Board; calls on the ESAs to adopt a similar approach and publish relevant documents produced by their internal bodies in charge of conflict of interest and post mandate gainful employment;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Calls for an outright ban on individual stock ownership by Commissioners, senior EU institution officials and other senior agency officials while in office, where stock value might be influenced by their actions;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recalls its resolution of 16 January 2020 on institutions and bodies of the Economic and Monetary Union: preventing post-public employment conflicts of interest1
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Takes the view that the current legal framework and institutional enforcement for Ethics and Integrity in EU institutions and agencies is not fit for purpose and merits a thorough review;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4 b. Considers that the EU ethics body should also be competent to supervise the proper functioning and independence of the Commission’s decision-making process, including the creation and operations of Commission expert groups and similar entities; underlines that specific interests and/or organisations should not be granted undue influence over others; in this regard, is concerned about the recent decision by the Commission to grant the secretariat of the Clean Hydrogen Alliance to the industry association Hydrogen Europe, which represents the interests of the hydrogen and fuel cells industry, without any transparent procedure nor any public tender; calls on the Commission to review its decision on that particular matter;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4 b. Calls therefore for the setting up an independent EU ethics body;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 c (new) 4 c. Notes that the current ethics system in the European institutions is highly fragmented, with different standards and bodies in the different institutions, lacks independence and investigative powers; further notes that the application of existing rules for EU Commissioners, Members of the European Parliament and EU officials has shown too many weaknesses;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 c (new) 4 c. Takes the view that the new EU ethics body should have a broad mandate to assess all matters relating to ethics and integrity within EU institutions and agencies, including lobbying rules, transparency, “revolving doors” and conflicts of interest;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 d (new) 4 d. Stresses that the new EU ethics body should have the competence to oversee cases relating to all staff of the EU institutions and agencies, Members of the European Parliament, and European Commissioners, and that this ethics body should be able to revise authorizations of a job move where such a move could lead to conflicts of interests;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 e (new) 4 e. Points out that the new EU ethics body should be independent in terms of structure, governance and budget; underlines that the exact composition and mandate of the ethics body should be discussed taking due account of the opinion of civil society organisations;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 f (new) 4 f. Takes the view that the new EU ethics body should have a mandate comprising of both preventive and monitoring duties, namely on the technical and impartial review of declarations of financial interests and on verifying that imposed lobbying bans and control conditions are maintained, but also are active role, taking on complaints by designated entities, including whistleblowers;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 g (new) 4 g. Highlights that the new EU ethics body should have the power to issue administrative sanctions subject to possibilities of appeal and judicial review without interfering with the Treaties, namely with the prerogatives of the European Parliament;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 h (new) 4 h. Seeks the EU ethics body to be set up in a timely manner, so as to avoid cases of revolving doors and conflicts of interest already in the near future;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Stresses that, following an inquiry, the European Ombudsman found that the EBA should not have allowed its former Executive Director to become CEO of a financial lobby association and did not immediately put in place sufficient internal safeguards to protect its confidential information when the planned move became clear; welcomes, in this regard, the measures introduced by the European Banking Authority to deal with future “revolving door” situations, following recommendations by the Ombudsman;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Recommends
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Recommends
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Recommends empowering the European Anti-Fraud Office or the European Ombudsman, or exploring the creation of an independent and non- political EU body with the responsibility to carry out oversight of conflicts of interest, revolving doors and lobby transparency for EU institutions and agencies;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Recommends empowering the European Anti-Fraud Office or the European Ombudsman with the responsibility to carry out oversight of conflicts of interest, revolving doors and lobby transparency for EU institutions and agencies; stresses, especially in the cases of elected members, the necessity to adequately inform the broad public of relevant past and prospected (over a reasonable time frame) personal and financial commitments in order to meet transparency and accountability criteria to the benefit of European citizens;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Recommends that the independent EU ethics body’s decisions, including sanctions, should be binding and that such body should be given appropriate human and financial resources; considers that the capacity of an EU ethics body to adequately enforce ethics standards in the EU institutions largely depends on its independence and that its composition should therefore reflect this necessity; considers it necessary for the body to have the right of initiative to monitor pro- actively and sanction breaches of ethics rules within the EU institutions as well as enhanced investigatory powers; recommends that such EU ethics body should be able to give advice on request and to issue annual reports about its work including recommendations on its own initiative on how to further develop the EU ethics regime;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Underlines this body should work in close cooperation with internal ethics committees to the EU institutions, the Transparency Register secretariat, the European Anti-Fraud Office and the European Ombudsman; stresses however that the EU independent ethics body must be the one ultimately responsible for decisions related to conflicts-of-interest situations and must be competent for all EU institutions, including the ECB and the European Parliament, to avoid overlaps with other institutions that could lead to inactivity; calls for the lead committee to address this issue in its report;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5 b. Stresses the independent ethics body must have the necessary means, resources, and power to carry out definition, oversight, and enforcement of the EU ethics rules; underlines this body must have investigative powers to detect conflicts-of-interest pre, during, and post- public employment and the power to enforce both attenuation measures and sanctions, including the mandate to oversight cooling-off periods and revise the authorization of a job move if it finds that the specific job move in question constitutes a conflict of interest;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Highlights that post-public employment and ‘revolving door’ conflict of interest situations are recurring concerns
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 c (new) 5 c. Stresses the EU independent ethics body will not be self-sufficient to address conflicts-of-interest situations within the EU institutions; therefore calls for a revision of relevant EU rules, especially the EU staff rules, the Commission Decision C(2018) 4048 of 29.6.2018 and the Codes of Conduct of the different EU institutions to ensure legislative consistency;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 d (new) 5 d. Notes that EU ethics rules are not respected in practice due to weaknesses in the functioning and the mandate of the ethics committees internal the EU institutions; is concerned about the lack of independence of these ethics committees from the EU institutions; calls for a revision of the regulations setting these ethics committee to ensure they are independent of the EU institutions they are controlling; takes the view the EU independent ethics body should oversight these ethics committees, is competent for all EU institutions and have the ultimate responsibility on questions of revolving doors and conflicts of interest;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 e (new) 5 e. Stresses the composition and mandate of the EU independent ethics body should be discussed inclusively, including the views of civil society; stresses the composition of the EU independent ethics body must be chosen carefully to ensure it is truly independent of political considerations and any other interests;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Recognises the need to
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Recognises the need to
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Recognises the need to strike a
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Is of the view that
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Is of the view that
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Is of the view that
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Highlights that post-public employment and ‘revolving door’ conflict of interest situations are recurring concerns that
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Is of the view that any prohibition of a professional move should be justified on
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Calls for the establishment of an online ethics record at the European level to provide access to key transparency documents, including all appointments that may create pre-public and post-public employment conflicts of interest and all conflicts of interest assessments as carried out by ad hoc and/or internal ethics committees;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Reiterates that unless clear procedures are in place, inclusive of effective sanctions for those who fail to observe them or who infringe them for personal advantage, EU decision-making will continue to suffer from a credibility problem with the wider public;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Is hesitant of using the imposition of conditions or lobbying restrictions in place of banning job moves in cases where such restrictions cannot be strictly controlled;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7 b. Reiterates the need for a unified legal framework to efficiently address these issues and its call on the Commission to propose a review of the legal framework for the prevention of post-public employment conflict-of- interest when the new EU ethics body is set up;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7 c. Insists on its call on the Commission to include rules on the expansion of the possibility to block professional moves, and to consider a possible extension of cooling-off periods of senior officials on a proportionate case-by-case basis, to ensure equal treatment in line with Article 15 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 d (new) 7 d. Reiterates its call on the Commission to extend this review to pre- public employment conflicts of interest and to consider strengthening existing measures, such as mandatory divestment of interests in undertakings that are subject to the authority of the institution to which a newly appointed official belongs or which have dealings with that institution, and also to consider new types of preventive measures, such as mandatory recusal when dealing with matters that affect a former private-sector employer;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Underlines that transparency and integrity issues at EU and at national level are strongly interlinked; supports therefore the work of the Council of Europe's Group of States against Corruption, and calls on Member States to implement their recommendations, specifically those regarding the creation of a strict code of conduct for national politicians and the introduction of rules for post-public employment;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Recalls that, according toa report by Transparency International EU1a,in early 2017 more than 50% of former Commissioners and 30% of former Members of the European Parliament who had left politics were working for organisationsregistered within the EU Transparency Register; _________________ 1ahttp://transparency.eu/wp- content/uploads/2017/01/Access-all- areas.pdf
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2 b. Highlights the integrity risks created by the financing of political parties at national and European level; regrets in this context the direct involvement of US ambassador to the Netherlands Pete Hoekstra in fundraising activities of Forum voor Democratie, including by hosting a high-level fundraising event at the US embassy;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 c (new) 2 c. Underlines the importance of strong party ethics codes, including strict rules on post-public employment and full transparency on any secondary positions held by politicians;
source: 658.867
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2021-03-03Show (9) Changes | Timetravel
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
docs/3 |
|
2021-02-24Show (9) Changes | Timetravel
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
docs/2/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE681.036
|
2021-02-17Show (9) Changes | Timetravel
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
docs/2/date |
Old
2021-02-11T00:00:00New
2021-02-16T00:00:00 |
2021-02-16Show (12) Changes | Timetravel
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3/rapporteur/0/mepref |
197508
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
docs/1 |
|
docs/2 |
|
forecasts |
|
2020-12-09Show (6) Changes | Timetravel
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur/0/mepref |
197539
|
committees/2/rapporteur/0/mepref |
97133
|
committees/3/rapporteur/0/mepref |
197508
|
committees/4/rapporteur/0/mepref |
197839
|
2020-11-21Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
docs |
|
2020-10-07Show (1) Changes
committees/1/rapporteur |
|