Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-03-Speech-1-128"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010903.9.1-128"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, on behalf of all my colleagues I would like very much to welcome Mr Kinnock here to discuss the reforms. I would like to say to him that it is not through lack of effort on our part that it has taken a long time to get this question on the agenda. It has been very disappointing that we have not made progress with the Bureau to elevate the importance of this discussion. Nevertheless we will make up for it tonight and it is a pleasure to have you here.
Clearly the reforms – and I know you will be able to tell us much more about them in a moment – are at a critical stage. We know you have been consulting extensively. In a way that presents us with a dilemma in Parliament. You will know from the support for my report last year that colleagues have taken a very deep and intensive interest in the whole package of reforms and we have given you strong support for them. Indeed, we have been very conscious of the fact that these reforms need to be implemented as quickly as possible so that staff do not get disillusioned and they can see that change is ahead of them and new working methods coming before them. We have made some suggestions that are reflected in the question tonight.
We do not want to disrupt that process. On the other hand when you send us the elements of the Staff Regulations, as legislators we need to make sure that those changes to the rules are going to work in favour of good administration and not against it. You made out the case persuasively, as it says in our report, that in many cases the current Staff Regulations are deficient in that respect.
The question we have tabled tonight goes to what we regard – and I hope that you will share our opinion – as the very heart of the reforms you are putting together. The achievement should be an organisation in which advancement is on merit, an organisation in which all members of staff in the Commission know that they have clear goals, know what those goals are, know that if they meet or exceed those goals their performance is going to be fully recognised. They should know that they work in an organisation in which appraisals of their performance are not bureaucratic exercises that are carried out every two years and put in a filing cabinet and not referred to again, that the appraisal process is part of the overall quality of management and processes within the Commission, part of giving all members of staff the feeling that it is part of their personal development. It is setting them goals, it is identifying the need for training for development, for promotion and identifying the things that they need to do to contribute to the development of themselves and to the organisation overall.
That question of appraisal links very strongly to an aspect of the reforms about which we know you are engaged in heavy discussions at the moment. I hope you will not mind if I mention that tonight even though it is not part of our question. That is the question of career structure and your proposals to move to a linear career structure. It is clear that appraisal and career structure are inextricably linked together. It is my argument – and indeed that was expressed in my report and supported by colleagues – that if the appraisal and development system works properly there are no obstacles to achieving the linear career structure – and that is the whole thrust of what you are trying to do. There should be no reason for setting artificial barriers to people's progress through an organisation. If there is a need for qualifications or training to move to the next job the development process will identify that. And so a properly designed and effective appraisal system, which we have asked you a number of questions about in the question we have tabled, is also linked very strongly to that move, and indeed it is the very foundation of a linear career structure as well.
My colleague, Mrs Guy-Quint, is going to cover all the detailed budgetary questions with her considerable expertise in that subject, but I would just like to mention two final elements of our questions, to set them in context. The first is one that we have specifically asked you about as an aspect of a modern public organisation: a policy for whistle-blowing – and the English terminology is now being widely accepted as a very good way of identifying a policy where officials believe and are confident that if they find wrongdoing they can report it without fear of recrimination or their careers being affected. The second links in with a debate we will be having later this week on the code of administrative behaviour: how do you see that as an integral part of the overall reforms?
In conclusion we very much look forward to hearing your responses this evening and also your reassurance that the reforms are proceeding to plan as you would wish. We hope you will also identify ways in which you would like more support from this House in what is for us an absolutely crucial development for the future of the Commission and indeed for the future of Europe itself."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Harbour (PPE-DE ). –"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples