45 Amendments of Olivier CHASTEL related to 2022/2082(DEC)
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes with concern that the Court’s annual report on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2021 presents specific findings on Parliament, namely errors in two payments: (i) a minor over-payment for IT services caused by an incorrect application of contract terms, and (ii) one payment by Parliament to one of its political groups; is concernednotes that the internal procurement rules adopted by the Bureau and Parliament’s guidelines on their application allow the use of negotiated procurement procedures for high-value contracts whereas the Financial Regulation stipulates the use of open or restricted procurement procedures; notes with concern, furthermore, the Court’s finding that the political group failed to fully follow these internal rules, as it did not seek enough tenders and did not adequately documentdue to the difficulty to seek enough tenders because of the specificity of the criteria used to award the contract; highlights that the Court has previously reported shortcomings in transactions relating to procurement by political groups;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Observes that the position of Parliament’s administration is that Article 175(1) and Article 163(1) of the Financial Regulation defining the use of negotiated procurement procedures for high-value contracts only apply to direct management, while political groups manage the funds allocated to them according to the principles of indirect management in analogical application of Article 62(1)(c) of the Financial Regulation; welcomes, however, that Parliament accepted the Court’s recommendation to revise its guidelines on the application of the rules on public procurement by the political groups to better align them with the Financial Regulation; and asks that Parliament takes into account the technical specificity of some procurement procedures for which only limited number of tenders with high expertise is able to reply; notes the commitment of Parliament’s administration to continue to support the political groups for the appropriations to be used in accordance with the applicable rules;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that, in particular, the Court further examined a payment of EUR 74.9 million related to the purchase of the Scholl building on Rue Wiertz, the purchase of which was financed from funds that were not used during the COVID-19 crisis and carried over from 2020; notes that, when seeking offers, Parliament used award criteria that weighted 50% of points for both price and quality of the proposed building; notes that Parliament received two offers and awarded the contract to the tenderer proposing the Scholl building, significantly closer to Parliament’s main site but 30% more expensive per square metre than the building proposed by the other tenderer; notes that the Court considered that Parliament’s award criteria significantly reduced the importance of price as a basis for the purchase decision, making it unlikely that any other offer could have been accepted;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes the response given by Parliament to the Court’s observation that the distance criterion played a major role in the quality criteria (namely a weighting factor of 20/50 quality points), and the possibility of interconnection with the central buildings received an additional weighting factor (4/50 quality points), which led Parliament to consider the Scholl building on Rue Wiertz as the most economically advantageous offer despite the substantial price difference;; understands that the purchase of the building allowed the saving of a significant financial amount, compared to the situation where Parliament would have not acquired the building, underlines furthermore that it allowed to preserve the future of the investments made so far in the building.
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Recalls that once the Plenary calls for different rules or measures to be implemented by Parliament, such proposed rules or measures should be discussed and voted on by the Bureau, pursuant to Rule 25 of and Annex V to the Rules of Procedure and Articles 6 and 166 of the Financial Regulation; is deeply disappointed, however, that each year very notes that some concrete demands adopted by Plenary in discharge resolutions are not always well reflected in the discussions of the Bureau meetings despite the fact that both Bureau members and the Secretary-General are aware of the discharge resolutions and have the capacity to submit proposals under the aforementioned Rule 25; is disappointed that the Secretary-General's written replies to Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control are often limited to quotingrecalls that the composition of the bureau consists of the President of the cEurrent rules without any dedicated discussion in the Bureau and thus, lacking a genuine effort or intention to review those rules in accordance with Parliament’s will; believes that this situation is detrimental toopean Parliament, the 14 Vice-Presidents and the five Quaestors (non-voting members) elected by Parliament; recalls that the exercise of democratic scrutiny which is carried out via the discharge procedure and for which Parliament should be a role model for all Union institutions and bodies;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Recalls that the Bureau has been mandated by the Plenary to decide all administrative, staff and organisational matters concerning Members and is concerned that the decisions of the Bureau often fail to respect the will expressed by the Plenary in discharge resolutionsand it is responsible for all matters relating to the internal running of Parliament; reiterates the importance of the discharge procedure as set in the Financial Regulation and the Rules of Procedure and demands thata follow up of resolutions affecting the functioning of Parliament be thoroughly taken into consideration and followed up in a legitimate,in a transparent manner; recommends that the Committee on Budgetary Control should be systematically informed whenever a proposal arising from a discharge resolution is going to be discussed by the Bureau and calls on the Secretary-General to always include a clear list of the Bureau discussions and votes when providing the replies to the discharge resolutions;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Notes that the impact of the continuance of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021 led to substantial transfers within Parliament’s budget, and that a budgetary surplus became available in areas such as travel expenses, organisation and reception of groups of visitors, the operation of Parliament visitors’ centres, in-person training, and lower energy consumption; notes that, at the same time, the pandemic created additional budgetary needs in other areas, notably health and prevention, as well as technical equipment and logistics for multilingual hybrid meetings and votes; observes that a substantial part of the savings were used to amortise the costs of the expansive building policy of the last few years;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Is concerned that the measures introduced as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in modified working conditions in specific services such as copy shops and printing units within Parliament which had a negative impact on staff, for example at the copy shop in Brusselsome members of staff, where members of staff had to work in isolation for a long period of time even after the safety measures were lifted; asks Parliament’s administration to proactively re-evaluate the working conditions changed in possible similar situations;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Praises the key role of Parliament’s medical services at the forefront of the COVID-19 pandemic response and acknowledges the enormous workload involved, which included treatment, testing and vaccination of staff, providing psychological support and advising on mitigation measures; regrets the fact that the staff annual medical check-up was cancelled in 2021 and recalls that is a statutory right laid downnotes that exceptionally, staff were invited to do their annual medical check-up externally, under the same conditions as those usually offered by the parliament, as stated in Article 59(6) of the Staff Regulations; welcomes the creation, in October 2021, of the Medical Preparedness and Crisis Management Unit (MPCMU) made up of staff from the medical services in Brussels and Luxembourg with the objective of enhancing Parliament’s response capacity for future crisis;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Stresses the majorRecalls the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Parliament’s catering staff which led to worsening working conditions and even dismissals; welcomes the solidarity measures implemented from April 2020 to December 2021, namely the provision of ‘charity meals’ and a business continuity fee in the three places of work, that at least helped to safeguard 37 jobs for catering staff; welcomes the fact that there 20 new jobs have been created since the restart of all catering activities in March 2022, but regrets the fact that Parliament’s administration has not communicated how many jobs were lost during the pandemic with the pretext that it is a concession contract; is of the opinioncommends that the Parliament was the first EU institution to launch a food donation program, and that during the COVID 19 crisis, it was the only institution to take action to save employment; welcomes the fact that there 20 new jobs have been created since the restart of all catering activities in March 2022, stresses that the internalization of essential services such as catering and cleaning shwould be considered by the governing bodies, as Parliament has recently done with security and IT services, and it was also made with the CPE2 crèche in Luxembourgrequire massive recruitment of employees and lead to a significant increase in costs;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Is concerned about the reported hearing problems that resulted from remote interpreting for long periods of time with speakers using low quality microphones; is alarmed that 63,5% of respondents (127 out of 200) reported hearing problems in a survey on remote simultaneous interpreting conducted by the Staff Interpreters’ delegation at the beginning of 2021 and 54% of respondents (702 out of 1 602) mentioned in a survey conducted among staff and freelance interpreters in May 2022 that working under the conditions imposed as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on their health and well-being; recalls the duty of care owed by the European institutions to their employees, which must be taken into account when implementing preventive measures to avoid harm to the health of interpreters;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Observes that Parliament’s interpreters held a strike from June to October 2022 with the aim of improving working conditions, primarily better sound quality and a limitation on the number and duration of interpreting hours of remote speakers as done during the COVID-19 pandemic; regrets that Parliament's administration resorted to external interpreting services, with a total cost of EUR 47 324.,80, during this interpreters' strike as this decision jeopardised Parliament’s quality standard for interpretation, damaged its image and more importantly obstructed workers' right to strike; welcomes the Interim Working Arrangements for meetings with remote participation agreed between the trade union, interpreters’ representatives and Parliament’s administration on 17 October 2022 and notes that negotiations on interpreters’ working conditions will be conducted to reflect on Parliament’s post- pandemic working methods;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Notes that 877 out of 6 621 posts (13,2%) were vacant at the end of 2021; acknowledges the general difficulties encountered by the Union institutions, including Parliament, in attracting and retaining talent, which has an impact on the diversity and geographical distribution of the workforce; notes that in 2021 two surveys were run by Parliament’s Directorate-General for Personnel (DG PERS) to find out the main reasons for applying for a job in Parliament and that the results pointed to salaries, but also job significance and flexible working conditions; notes the opinion of Parliament’s administration on the slowness of the competitions conducted by the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) but recalls the current transformation process aiming to shorten the duration of competitions, to make them more efficient and to better target specialist profiles while keeping objectivity and equality of treatment at the core of the process; notes that in 2021 Parliament started running internal competitions and is concerned about the internal criticisms which have stressed that fast-track recruitment procedures that may lead to discrimination between professional categories;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Calls for a deep reflection on the new ways of working that can reconcile the needs of Parliament’s administration (including team cohesion, internal communication, and on-boarding of newcomers) with the expectations and satisfaction of its staff, which would positively impact their performance as well as the attractiveness of Parliament as an employer; highlights in this context the importance of a genuine social dialogue with the staff representatives on crucial points like a flexible work environment, health and welfare and training and career opportunities; also draws attention to the need to review the rules on harassment in relation to these new forms of work; suggests that a joint committee be established that assists DG PERS in monitoring the effective implementation and compliance of clear guidelines on teleworking and the right to disconnect that can be adapted to the needs of the different services;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Recalls Parliament’s recommendation to the Commission in its resolution of 18 April 2018 ‘to review its administrative procedure for the appointment of senior officials with the objective of fully ensuring that the best candidates are selected within a framework of maximum transparency and equal opportunities, thereby also setting an example for the other European institutions’; is of the opinion that an accelerated appointment procedure and an interview made up of only three questions to select its Secretary-General falls short of what is expected of Parliamentthe parliament, regarding appointment procedures, should always meet the highest standards in terms of transparency, accountability and good administration, and it is profoundly damaging to the institution’s reputation; recalls furthermore its own recommendation that officials from staff representatives bodies should sit on Parliament’s senior management selection panels; calls therefore on the Secretary- General to submit a proposal to the Bureau to modify its decision of 16 May 2000 laying down the steps in the procedure for appointing senior officials, in order to enable staff representatives to participate as observers in the Advisory Committee, which is fully compatible with Article 3(4) of Annex III of the Staff Regulations;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Reiterates its demand for APAs to receive the same subsistence allowance as the officials and other statutory staff for their missions to attend the part-sessions in Strasbourg; is of the opinion that the current situation, aggravated by the accumulated increase in prices over the last few years, is unacceptable as APAs have to travel to Strasbourg to carry out their work in exactly the same way as Parliament's officials and other statutory staff; fails to understand this discriminatory treatment regarding the missions to Strasbourg while expenses incurred by APAs in undertaking missions outside Parliament’s three places of work are reimbursed, mutatis mutandis, in accordance with the rules applicable to officials’ missions; highlights that aligning the daily subsistence allowance with that of statutory staff would also put an end to the discriminatory existence of three levels of allowances to choose from, which is maintained without any administrative or financial justification; reiterates, therefore, its request to the Bureau to modify its decision of 2 October 2017 with the aim of implementing such alignment;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
55. RegretNotes that the applicable rules currently prohibit APAs to accompany Members on official Parliament delegations and committee missions; points out that the technical support that APAs provide during missions is of key importance to the participating Members, in particular when they are involved in the organisation or play a specific role; is concerned that this situation compels Members to resort to financing APAs’ travel with the general expenditure allowance and obliges APAs to use their annual leave, thus jeopardising their insurance coverage, which represents a serious reputational risk for Parliament; regretnotes that neither the Bureau nor the Conference of Presidents have followed up on the long- standing request to allow APAs, under certain conditions yet to be determined, to accompany Members on official Parliament delegations and missions, as reiterated by several discharge resolutions; urges the Bureau and the Conference of Presidents to respond positively to this demand;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Welcomes the fact that the Bureau’s last revision of the rules for visitors’ groups introduced the possibility for Members to designate professionals to hold the financial responsibility, which has brought about a decrease of APAs as heads of visitors’ groups to 28%; reiterates that APAs should not be compelledbe forbidden to take on suchany financial responsibility, which can amount to substantial sums of money in some cases; insists, therefore, to the Bureau that APAs be eliminated from the list of permitted heads of groups, leaving only a member of the sponsored group or a professional, such as paying agents or travel agencies, to take up the ro; calls therefore for the Bureau to further revise the rules for visitors’ groups in order to differentiate between the role of organising the visit and financial responsibility for it; considers that APAs may be responsible for organising the visit if requested but it must be forbidden that they are the one financially responsible;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59
Paragraph 59
59. Notes the Schuman Recruitment and Development Programme launched for the first time by Parliament’s administration during the March 2021 traineeship period; regrets that Parliament’s administration failed to consult the Staff Committee on this initiative at an early stage and notes the negative opinion expressed in its resolution of 18 October 2021, which calls into question the objectivity and fairness of this programme; is aware of the difficulties encountered by Parliament’s administration in recruiting and retaining talent for the institution, in particular young professionals, but iinsists concerned about the wide margin of subjectivity given to directorates-general for the selection of participants, which undermines the essential principles of transparency, objectivity and fairness of the Union’s public service; draws attention to the discriminatory nature of this programme towards members of staff that cannot benefit from this privileged access to contract agent posts, particularly APAs a recruitment based on the essential principles of transparency, objectivity and fairness of the Union’s public service; stresses that recruitment procedures must be merit- based, competitive, fair and transparent, and calls on the Secretary- General to involve both the Staff Committee and the APAs Committee in a revision of this programme to find an agreement on the model to follow in the future;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
61. Stresses that transparency, accountability, and integrity are essential ethics principles within the Union institutions and particularly Parliament as house of the European democracy; recalls that unethical behaviours must be prevented, persecuted and condemned for significantly damage the credibility and legitimacy of the Union and constitute a serious threat to democracy and public trust; recalls the Court’s conclusions and recommendations in its special report 13/2019 on the ethnical frameworks of Union institutions, as well as Parliament’s resolution of 16 September 2021 on strengthening transparency and integrity in the Union institutions by setting up an independent Union ethics body with, on the one hand, a preventive role via awareness-raising and ethical guidance, and, on the other hand, a compliance and advisory role with the ability to issue recommendations on ethical matters, including conflicts of interest;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62
Paragraph 62
62. Calls for a thorough overhaul of Parliament’s ethical framework that integrates lessons learned and strengthens the current rules to ensure that there are stronger deterrents to address effectively current and future threats and interferences, whether they affect Members or staff; stresses that illegal activities funded by paid lobbying constitutes a profound attack on democracy and should be met with zero tolerance and heightened vigilance; calls in particular for aommends the current work initiated by the President of Parliament regarding the revision of the Rules of Procedure and the Members’ Code of Conduct, as well and calls for an urgent upgrade and reform of the current European Parliament’s Advisory Committee on the Conduct of Members, making it more visible and prominent, consolidating its role and strengthening its powers in order to ensure that Members act without any undue influence from interest representatives by means of a strict regulation of paid activities during the mandate, gifts or travel invitations, future employment expectations, and of undue use of information or contacts;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62 a (new)
Paragraph 62 a (new)
62a. Recalls the importance of ensuring and promoting a transparent and ethical interest representation at EU level, reminds that a transparency register has been set up in order to ensure the European institutions are open and transparent in their dialogue with interest representatives and civil society, allowing the citizens to see what interests are being represented at union level, as well as the financial and human resources dedicated to these activities; reminds that According to Rule 11 of the Rules of Procedures, members of Parliament should adopt the systematic practice of only meeting with registered interest representatives; that Members should publish online all scheduled meetings with interest representatives falling under the scope of the Transparency register; that without prejudice to Article 4(6) of Annex I, rapporteurs, shadow rapporteurs and committee chairs shall, for each report, publish online all scheduled meetings with interest representatives falling under the scope of the Transparency register; calls on Parliament’s services to expand the infrastructure on Parliament’s website to allow APAs and policy advisers to voluntarily publish their meetings with interest representatives;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72
Paragraph 72
72. Reiterates that APAs are in a particularly vulnerable position in whistleblowing cases due to their particular employment situation; therefore calls on the Secretary-General to modify the internal rules on whistleblowing adopted on 4 December 2015 to align them to Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council2 1a, as well as to provide whistleblower APAs with a similar protection to that of victims of harassment, in particular with regard to provisional measures during the administrative investigation and, protectionve measures concerning anonymity, pay until the end of the contract, transfer of post and protection from retaliation; _________________ 2 Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law (OJ L 305, 26.11.2019, p. 17).and all other appropriate protection measures;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 74 a (new)
Paragraph 74 a (new)
74a. Underlines that the workload in the EPLOs seems to have dramatically increased taking on new permanent tasks, and calls for the Parliament to ensure EPLOs have sufficient human, technical, financial resources to fulfil their missions;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 75
Paragraph 75
75. Notes that, in May 2018, the Bureau approved an upgrade to the former Info-Point in Brussels and that the new Info Hub aims to attract civil society stakeholders, multipliers, partners and specialised interest groups; notes that the Info Hub has had a total cost of roughly EUR 8 400 000 during 2020, 2021 and 2022which includes approximately EUR 6.6 million for renovation works and EUR 1.8 million for communication activities, and that it has welcomed 20 000 visitors since it opened its doors in mid- July 2022; regrets, however, that Members are not aware of these facilities and calls for a better information campaign to publicise their activities and possible uses;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 77
Paragraph 77
77. Notes that the lunchtime classical music concerts in the Citizens’ Garden were conceived to support classic musicians during the COVID-19 crisis and to demonstrate the value that Parliament places on European musical heritage; notes that 40 concerts were held in 2021 with 4 106 attendees, with a budget of EUR 51 925; supports wholeheartedly this initiative during the extraordinary COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021, but questions its relevance in the future and, above all, emphasises that under no circumstances does this initiative serve as a justification for Parliament to commit to renovate the Citizens' Garden;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 80
Paragraph 80
80. NoteRegrets that eight Members decided, on their own initiative, to observe elections in third countries where Parliament had decided not to send an election observation delegation or had not been invited; notes that in all eight cases the Members were in breach of the Implementing Provisions of the European Parliament’s Democracy Support and Election Coordination Group and that they could not and were not selected to participate in an official Election Observation delegation until the end of 2021;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82
Paragraph 82
82. Welcomes the fact that the Digital Signature Portal (DiSP) allows Members to digitally sign documents, which improves efficiency, traceability and transparency to the procedures, and regrets that, in contrast to DiSP, signing plenary amendments is still an outdated and burdensome procedure of signing them by hand and sending them in scanned form; calls for the extension of DISP to all signed documents;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 85
Paragraph 85
85. HighlightWelcomes Parliament’s investment in strengthening its cybersecurity, which includes the creation of a dedicated Directorate in DG ITEC and a significant increase of the related resources aiming to increase the protection of Parliament’s information systems in the face of constantly growing threats and ransomware attacks; urges the Parliament to maintain its efforts and increase its investments in cybersecurity as long as the infrastructures remain vulnerable to cyber-attacks; underlines the need to ensure the recruitment and retention of enough highly-qualified staff in this very strategic sector; welcomes the expansion of the range of digital services provided via the e-Portal leading to an increase of 67% in the number of transactions, which is a significant increase compared to 2020, and to the achievement of 85% use rate of the e-Portal by Members for their travel and subsistence expenses;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86
Paragraph 86
86. Notes that DG SAFE’s reorganisation has foreseen the creation of the new Directorate on Security Technology and Information aiming to ensure protection of all categories of information handled by Parliament; is concerned that the specific unit responsible for Security Engineering has been created but that the head of unit position does not appear as such in Parliament’s organisation chart; calls on the Secretary-General to remedy this situation promptly in order to provide the new key Directorate with the necessary resources to fulfil its responsibilities; suggests to offer regularly updated cybersecurity-related training programmes for all staff within the Parliament;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88
Paragraph 88
88. Expresses concerns about structural problems in the Treves I building; uUnderlines the urgent need for the Trèves I building to be upgraded to the latest energy and environmental norms; underlines the need for urgent measures to fix the unstable heating system, the lack of air conditioning and toilets for persons with reduced mobility, the poor sound proofing, as well as the sewage problem in line with the renovation plan that DG INLO is currently developing;
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 89
Paragraph 89
89. Notes the purchase of the Treves II building approved by the Bureau on 18 October 2021, purchased with the intention of allowing the interconnectivity of Parliament’s central buildings in Brussels, and notes that it will be at the disposal of Parliament as from 1 January 2025; is concerned by the poor energy- performance of the building, of whichnotes that the energy performance certificate indicates an annual primary energy consumption equivalent to class E, and notes that the last renovation of the building dates back to 2000; calls on Parliament’s administration to make the necessary adaptations to the applicable energy efficiency regulations in order to improve the building’s energy- performance;
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 90
Paragraph 90
90. Notes the architectural competition on the design of the renewal of the Spaak building in which the competitors handed over their proposals in January 2021, the jury analysed the 15 entries and ranked the five laureates in February 2021 and the Bureau endorsed the five laureates proposed by the jury at its meeting of 6 July 2022; believes that the current economic context calls for renovation projects to be reconsidered in order to explore money-saving opportunities to bring safe working conditions to Members and Parliament’s staff without unreasonable budgetary implicationsnecessary steps must be taken, to renovate the building, given its deteriorating condition, in order to ensure the security and well-being of staff ; keeping in mind that the budgetary implications should remain reasonable;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 95
Paragraph 95
95. Notes that the East Wing of the Adenauer building in Luxembourg was completed in 2020 and the large-scale relocation of offices from the Schuman building startended in 20212; notes that works to build the West Wing started in 20210 and draws attention to the low occupancy rate of the buildingsthat the office space are almost all allocated to the parliament staff;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 97
Paragraph 97
97. Recalls that the technical specifications of the concession contracts provide for the obligation to offer a solution to respond to food intolerances upon advance request; points out that such conditionality is completely unknown to the vast majority of clients and, in any case, clearly insufficient for the service provided in Parliament, where hundreds of workers go to; calls for more communication on this issue; calls for clearer food and allergen specifications on meals proposed in canteens and cafeterias at peak hours; reiterates its request that at least one fresh gluten-free meal option is available each day in Parliament’s canteens and cafeterias;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 98
Paragraph 98
98. Notes the preparation throughout 2021 of the internalisation of general security services in Luxembourg with the organisation and follow-up of all recruitment procedures and an induction training for 115 agents; notes that the internalisation entered into force on 1 January 2022; is concerned that offering posts in function group I and the associated salary makes it difficult to attract and recruit specialised staff from all Member States in the security field; reiterates that is particularly concerned about the situation in Luxembourg, where this wage is lower than the minimum inter-professional wage, forcing Parliament to resort to social compensation, which is neither sustainable nor appropriate for a Union institution; reiterates, therefore, that Parliament should convey to the Commission the extreme urgency of creating a correction coefficient for Luxembourg;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103
Paragraph 103
103. Recalls that transport of persons accounts for roughly two-thirds of Parliament’s carbon footprint; notes that the CO2 emissions from the monthly commutes to Strasbourg in 2021 were approximately 490 tonnes of CO2 including travel of staff and APAs, and transport of documents and equipment; underlines however the parliament’s efforts to reduce CO2 emissions through chartered trains, and the “paperless initiative” to help reduce the carbon footprint;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 106
Paragraph 106
106. Acknowledges that, following the example of measures taken in many Member States and in other Union institutions, the proposaldecision taken by the Bureau to turn off the heating system and let the building drift to a minimal temperature as of Thursday evening to Monday morning and over the holiday periods would result in significant savings estimated at over EUR 2.5 million in total; however, calls on Parliamentnotes the measures taken by the Bureau to guarantee an adequate temperature in the Parliament’s buildings from Mondays to Fridays as regular working days; understands the need to reduce energy consumption but calls forand reminds that heating saving measures to beneed to remain compatible with staff welfare;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 107
Paragraph 107
107. Recalls that efficient lighting solutions are an essential factor for the sustainability of buildings; welcomes the fact that the replacement of existing lighting with low-energy LED lights is evaluated whenever possible and feasible in Parliament’s buildings; regrets thatnotes that in Brussels, not all offices in Parliament’s three places of workbuildings are equipped with motion detectors and that it appears that the motion detectors in several offices in the Spinelli building do not work correctly; understands that the areas not equipped are limited and concern buildings rented or awaiting decision on their future use; welcomes the fact that, in Strasbourg, all offices are equipped with motion detectors, and that in Luxembourg, the new Adenauer building is equipped with automatic switch off based on the absence of movement; calls on Parliament to ensure that fully functioning motion detectors are installed in Brussels as soon as possible wherever feasible to reduce energy consumption; understands the need to reduce electricity consumption but calls for lighting saving measures to be compatible with staff welfare;
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 108
Paragraph 108
108. Understands that the core business of the service cars is the transport of Members, including the journey between Brussels and Strasbourg; points out, however, the waste of resources resulting fromwelcomes the fact that on average 185% of the seats available in the service fleet were been occupied for that journey in 2021; reiterates its call on Parliament’s administration to widen the user group while making sure that Members’ seats are secured, i.e. establishing a reserve list, and coherent deadlines to confirm the journey, giving regular updates on the numbers of seats available;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 113
Paragraph 113
113. Suggests the creation of a Bureau ad-hoc Working Group to carry out a thorough overhaulat an evaluation of the Implementing Measures for the Statute for Members of the European Parliament (IMMS) while striking a balance between the freedom of the exercise of the mandate, the reputational risks to Parliament and managerial ethics; strongly recommends that a comprehensive consultation of Members is carried out before the end of the current mandate to provide this Working Group with first-hand information from experienced Members on thshould be carried out, in order to take into account a more practical application of the rules governing the Parliament and the ability to identify inconsistencies such as the fact that the Members’ attendance on Fridays is not registered in Brussels during plenary weeks or even if a Parliament’s committee official mission is carried out on Thursdayo remedy certain inconsistencies;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 114
Paragraph 114
114. Recalls that in previous discharge resolutions Parliament requested a reform of the General Expenditure Allowance (GEA) to make the expenditure of this lump sum more transparent and accountable; notes the announcement at the Bureau meeting of 7 March 2022 of the setting up of a Bureau ad-hoc working group on the GEA, which is tasked with evaluating the operation of the Bureau decision of 2 July 2018; observwelcomes that the Bureau, at its meeting of 17 October 2022, adopted a set of amendments to the IMMS clarifying the rules applicable to the entitlement and use of the GEA and measures aimed at increasing transparency but believes that this reform does not meet the demands expressed in Parliament’s resolution of 26 March 2019 on the 2017 discharge and in subsequent resolutions;
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 116 a (new)
Paragraph 116 a (new)
116a. Stresses the need for more transparency about ongoing investments made by the funds ; underlines that investments should be aligned and coherent with the goals and objectives set by EU policies, calls therefore for any investments in contradiction with those goals to be removed; underlines the potential devastating reputational risks for the European Parliament; notes the inquiry opened by European ombudsman into Parliament’s decision to refuse access to documents under Regulation 1049/2001; notes that the Parliament invoked an exception under the EU legislation on public access to documents, arguing that disclosure could undermine the commercial interests of the private company responsible for the fund; calls on the advisory board of the pension fund to revise all ongoing investments not in line with EU values and goals;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 125
Paragraph 125
125. Recalls the key role of a lively and resilient European democracy underpinned by pluralism of political parties at Union level; emphasises therefore that a level playing field has to be ensured and compliance has to be controlled in full respect of procedural rights; welcomes in this context the essential work of the Authority which independently and in close cooperation with Parliament controls compliance of European political parties and foundations with the legal framework, provides transparency to the citizens, and contributes to the integrity of Parliament elections; urges the budgetary authority to ensure that the Authority is equipped with the necessary resources, in particular human and IT resources, including cybersecurity experts, to continue fulfilling its existing mandate including in light of evolving threats of foreign interference, as well as any new tasks to be provided by the legislator; underlines in this context that the European election year 2024 will be pivotal for financial and functional integrity of European democracy and create a significant surcharge of work for the Authority;