Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-18-Speech-2-292"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000118.10.2-292"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, this time last year the European Parliament set up a committee of independent experts chaired by Mr Middelhoek to investigate allegations of fraud, nepotism and corruption in the European Commission. On 15 March the committee published its first report concluding that: "It is becoming difficult to find anyone who has even the slightest sense of responsibility". Within a few hours of the presentation of the report President Santer announced the resignation of his entire team. The resignation marked the end of a bitter struggle between an increasingly confident Parliament and a European Commission mired in allegations of scandal. Since then the Brussels landscape has changed beyond recognition; a new, reinvigorated Parliament has been elected and a new Commission confirmed in office. Speaking in this House on 21 July President-designate Prodi undertook to take full account of the second report of the Committee of Independent Experts on Commission reform, which contains 90 detailed recommendations and which we are debating today.
Commissioner Kinnock will, tomorrow, present his communication on reform. This communication must contain a clear timetable. With a new Commission and a new Parliament up and running the momentum for reform is now as strong as it ever has been and probably ever will be. Enlargement of the Union is just a few years away. Now is the time for Europe to put its own house in order; to instil in its institutions – as the independent experts might have said – a sense of responsibility.
In June of last year Europe's voters gave a clear signal that they are fed up with endless stories about mismanagement and nepotism. There is a very simple way to deal with those stories. Let us get rid of mismanagement and nepotism.
The new Commission has already taken important steps to move away from the way it used to function. A code of conduct for Commissioners and their private offices has been adopted. In a symbolic but significant gesture Commissioners have voluntarily renounced their entitlement to the tax-free purchase of alcohol, tobacco, petrol and consumer goods. New rules have been drawn up and implemented governing the appointment of senior officials. The number of departments has been reduced. The Commission, in my opinion, has shown a clear and unprecedented commitment to change and for this they are to be congratulated. The overall aim of the reforms must be to create a strong, honest European public administration equipped to carry out its tasks in an effective and efficient manner; an administration in which officials are provided with the means to carry out their tasks and are held fully accountable at all levels; an administration that recognises and rewards merit and encourages officials to develop their full potential. In order to achieve this, action is required in four areas.
First, financial management and control within the Commission must be improved. One of the main problems is the lack of a functioning system of financial control. The Commission's DGs must be made fully responsible for their own expenditure, including financial control. A new independent audit system service must be set up. DGs must publish their own annual accounts so as to enable a clear identification of problem areas and set annual targets for reducing fraud and irregularities. In return for this greater degree of autonomy, managers must be made fully and personally responsible for their actions.
It is clear that the transition to such a new system will take time. Changes to the Financial Regulation will be required and Parliament must have its say on those changes. But while the Commission must ensure that it respects the Treaty and the Financial Regulation in the transitional phase, this must not be an excuse for inertia. Urgent change is required today.
Second, the fight against fraud, mismanagement and nepotism must be strengthened, firstly by creating a culture in which they cannot thrive. This requires a clear example to be set by Commissioners and senior staff as well as adequate training and secondly, by reinforcing the existing mechanisms for dealing with fraud. OLAF, the Commission agency set up earlier this year must be placed under the direction of an independent European public prosecutor whose job will be to prepare for prosecution by national criminal courts, criminal offences committed against the financial interests of the Union by Members and officials of the European institutions. A proposal can be made, a proposal should be made, on the basis of Article 280 of the Treaty, by the middle of this year.
Third, standards in European public life must be upheld. The political crisis which led to the downfall of the Commission earlier this year clearly demonstrated the need for unambiguous and enforceable rules of conduct. A number of codes have since been introduced. They must be assessed by Parliament and should be made legally binding. The European institutions should follow the example of a number of countries, most notably the United Kingdom, and institute a committee for standards in public life, with a mandate to give advice on professional ethics and rules of conduct in the European institutions. Whistle-blowers who act in good faith must be protected. At the end of last year Mr Kinnock announced new measures for the protection of whistle-blowers. They must be implemented without delay.
Although such measures can never be an alternative for good management, they must be an escape valve when something goes wrong. Crucially, reforms must not be limited to the Commission. Parliament must consider itself the need for improvements to its internal rules, administrative procedures and management practices.
Finally, the Commission's human resource policy must be modernised. It is clearly no longer suited to the requirements of a modern, multinational organisation. The social dialogue has often acted as a brake on reform and its overhaul is long overdue. A career with the European institutions must become more attractive. Too many young, new officials are leaving their jobs after just a few years. Merit must be recognised and rewarded, specific skills training should be a
for promotion to a higher grade. The promotions procedure must be made fairer and more transparent.
Last but not least the pay and benefits package must be reviewed. It must become more flexible and more responsible to labour market conditions. It must be rid of some of its more outdated elements; and it must deal with the legitimate concerns of the general public who cannot understand why European civil servants should be paid an expatriation allowance indefinitely in a Europe of open borders, or pay a level of taxes that is often well below that of Member States."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples