Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-03-Speech-3-114"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000503.7.3-114"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, could I begin by thanking the honourable Member for his question. I substantially agree with the points that he very effectively made.
In response to the honourable Member’s second question relating to the rules and criteria applied to senior appointments, I draw the attention of the House to the decisions on the subject which the Commission adopted and published last September and last December. Those decisions constitute specific legal rules for the institution rather than a generalised code of conduct. Copies of those rules have been sent to the honourable Member and they are available on the Internet.
Against this background the following information may be useful to the House: the guiding principle of the system which the Commission uses is that appointments to all senior posts will be determined on evidence of the merit of candidates, including managerial capacity and other relevant abilities. In order to take necessary account of the geographical balance to which I referred earlier and to do so in compliance with the essential principle of meritocratic appointment, specific provision is being made.
The Commission has rejected the concept of quotas because of its counter-productive rigidity, and also because it would breach Staff Regulations. It has, however, adopted a decision to ensure that all Member State nationalities should be represented by at least 1 qualified person in the most senior post, Director-General or equivalent, and consistent with that, the Commission has given fresh emphasis to assess effectively proven merit as a prerequisite of highest positions. The effects will be to maintain high standards of quality amongst the officials who lead the staff in the Commission in its vital policy, treaty application and management tasks and to do so whilst ensuring the broad geographical balance which is central to the character of an institution serving the whole of the Union.
The system for making promotion to the highest posts facilitates these purposes of sustaining merit and balance and I will summarise its operation for the information of the House.
Candidates for A1 and A2 jobs are interviewed by a panel of senior officials which has been assisted in the lifetime of this Commission by an advisory external expert with relevant experience in executive selection. That panel makes an objective assessment of the professional and managerial qualities and capabilities that are relevant to the post and recommends a shortlist. The shortlisted candidates are then interviewed by the portfolio Commissioner who is most directly concerned with the post and, in the case of A1 officials, by the Commissioner for personnel, who at the moment is myself. The Commissioner responsible for personnel then formally proposes to the College the candidate who has been agreed upon with the portfolio Commissioner and with the President of the Commission.
In the case of appointments of Directors, the agreement of the relevant Director-General must also be obtained. At all times the panel, the Commissioners and the College are conscious of the commitment to quality and balance and therefore apply that commitment consistently in the interests of the Commission and of the Union. I can confirm that all appointments made by this Commission have been in accordance with these rules which are themselves based on Article 29 of the Staff Regulations and that will continue to be the course followed.
I apologise for the length of time I have taken up but, naturally, I wanted to give the House the most comprehensive information.
In fact I would only diverge on one point. He may be right that behind every great woman is a great man – there is a debate about that. What I am certain is true is that behind every great man is a very, very surprised mother-in-law.
The honourable Member is, I know, very clear about the fact that responsibility for employment policies and patterns in the Commission, as a separate institution, lies with the Commission itself. However, in order to provide useful information to this House and to the wider public, I am glad to respond to the two questions which the honourable Member has put down.
In order to give full and detailed answers to his first question, whilst saving some of the time of the House, I have sent a paper to the honourable Member listing the number of appointments of senior officials made in the Commission since taking office and also giving the names, nationalities and previous functions of all concerned. To provide comprehensive detail, that paper also sets out the total number of senior officials from each nationality in the Commission and of the total numbers of all A grade staff of each nationality in the Commission. A copy of that paper has also been provided to the secretariat-general of this Parliament for information and, naturally, it will be generally available to honourable Members.
In this oral answer, therefore, I will summarise the situation relating to senior appointments as at last Thursday, 27 April. Since the present Commission took office, six appointments have been made involving promotions to grade A1. They related to three officials of German nationality, two of Italian nationality and one of Irish nationality. There have been fourteen other transfers at Director-General or Deputy Director-General level, which did not involve promotion in grade, although in four cases relating to Spanish, French, German and British officials, the changes meant advances in responsibility to full Director-General posts.
In the same period 19 appointments involving promotion to grade A2 have been made. These related to officials of the following nationalities: 5 British, 4 Italian, 3 Belgian, 2 German, 1 Dutch, 1 French, 1 Spanish, 1 Irish and 1 Austrian. Eleven transfers at Director level which did not involve promotion in grade have also been made. In addition, two external appointments have been made in this period, one of a German national at Director-General level, and one of an Austrian national at Director level.
In summary therefore, a total of 25 promotions to senior appointments have been made since this Commission took office. Six of the officials are Italian nationals, five are German, five are British, three Belgian, two Irish, one Dutch, one French, one Austrian and one Spanish. These figures are accurate as of 27 April 2000.
As the House will know, in an international and multinational institution like the Commission, it is essential, as the honourable Member said, that the allocation of jobs broadly reflects the diversity of the Union that we serve and uses abilities effectively. Those principles of balance and quality are clearly set down in the Staff Regulations and the Commission is committed to applying them fully at all levels. As in any large organisation there is continual change amongst the staff of the Commission as people move, retire, become recruited, or promoted. As a result, a still-photograph of the staff profile at any fixed time does not, and cannot, give a complete picture.
To be properly judged, balance must consequently be assessed and be maintained over the medium term and the Commission is also actively committed to ensuring that."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples