12 Amendments of Maria GRAPINI related to 2020/2133(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that transparency, accountability professionalism and integrity are key components in promoting ethics principles within the EU, and are essential to protect the EU budget from fraud and corruption and to maintain democratic legitimacy; recalls that corruption has serious financial consequences and constitutes a serious threat to democracy, the rule of law and public investment; recalls that conflicts of interest can significantly damage the EU’s financial interests and decision-making processes, and should therefore be prevented, investigated and condemned;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that the European Court of Auditors (ECA) identified serious weaknesses in this regard in its 2019 audit on the ethical frameworks of the EU institutions, which concludes that improvements need to be made throughassessed the ethical frameworks of the Parliament, the Council and the Commission and published its findings in the special report 13/2019; notes that the ECA concluded that the audited institutions had established adequate ethical frameworks; notes with concern that the ECA also identified some weaknesses in this regard and recommends improvements that could be made in terms of harmonisation, awareness raising and strengthening of EU ethics rules; shares the ECA’s concern about the absence of a common EU ethical framework governing the work of Member States’ representatives in the Council;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Highlights that the ECA states that there should be effective institutional frameworks, and clear procedures and channels in place for facilitating the reporting of wrongdoing and corruption, as well as that whistleblowers acting in good faith must be protected from retaliation;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises that the high level of fragmentation in the ethics legal framework and regarding sanctions and the lack of oversight have prevented the proper implementation of codes of conduct in EU institutions; believes that the current self-regulatory approach is not fit for purpose and cannot guarantee integrity; underlines the need to enhance the integrity of the EU institutions and restore public trust;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. EncouragesReflects on the creation of an Independent Ethics Body (IEB) common to all EU institutions; welcomacknowledges the fact that the Commission has made it a priority, and is committed to supporting the IEB’s effort to establish a common ethical framework at EU level; remarks that improving and harmonising the existing ethic frameworks and their effective implementation don’t rely exclusively upon the creation of the IEB; considers it to be of utmost importance, prior to the elaboration of a legislative proposal to create an IEB, to perform a thorough cost-benefit analysis and an impact assessment, including different scenarios competence-wise; highlights that the objective is to protect the EU budget from unethical behaviours while maintaining the highest standards of ethics and integrity among a diverse and large number of EU institutions and bodies, and contemplates a range of options to reach this objective;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Sees high potential but also important risks for the EU institutions to transfer administrative decision-making competences to the IEB based on a new harmonised ethics framework that it will establish, which, which nevertheless should include common rules on the publication of declarations of interests, avoidance of conflicts of interest and revolving doors, acceptance of gifts and entertainment, protection of whistle- blowers and victims of harassment, transparency of lobby meetings, public procurement and meeting calendars of senior staff, and use of transparent bank accounts for public funds, while taking into consideration the different work performed by the institutions as well as the risks inherent to their members’ specific duties;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that empowering the IEB with the current internal ethics functions of the EU institutions will concentrate expertise, create synergies and hence improve the implementation of ethics rules, requiring public officials always to act for the good of society through the sound management of public funds and legal, fair and transparent decision making; is confident that this transfer of competence will represent considerable savings for the EU budget;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that the IEB should be in charge of prevention, monitoring, investigation and enforcement of the ethical framework for the protection of the EU’s financial interests; highlights that the IEB should be able to take disciplinary measures and impose financial sanctions in order to avoid abuse of the EU budget linked to unethical behaviour; stresses that the IEB must heighten staff awareness of the ethical framework provisions and the ethical culture in the EU institutions so as to prevent fraud and corruption;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights that tasks transferred to the IEB can go beyond those currently exercised by the institutions; calls for the IEB to assess the implementation of ethics rules by the EU institutions and, publish an annual report on its findings and recommendations and present it to Parliament;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls for the IEB to lead by example on transparency by publishing all drecisionommendations, annual reports and spending in a machine- readable open data format available to all citizens; strongly recommends that any software developed for upholding the ethical standards in EU public administration should be made available under a free and open-source software licence and should be shared with any institution in Europe wishing to use it; calls for a close cooperation with the European Data Protection Supervisor on this regard;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the signing of an interinstitutional agreement (IIA) between EU institutions to set up the IEB; emphasises the importance of the Council, including the Member States’ representatives working in the Council, joining the IIA in view of the ECA’s and European Ombudsman’s repeated requests to enhance the institution’s working ethics and transparency for the benefit of EU citizens; recalls the obligation of the Council to deal with high-level conflicts of interest, revolving doors and lobby transparency rules;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses the importance of enhanced mutualhaving a clear division of tasks and a close cooperation between the IEB and EU bodies such as the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), the European Ombudsman, the European Court of Auditors (ECA), the IEB if applicable and others within their respective mandates, and of such cooperation generating a steady information exchange.; warns that the public trust cannot afford adding the IEB to the EU institutions and bodies without giving full reassurance in terms of opportunity and efficacy;