Tuesday

26th Sep 2017

Opinion

EU parliament boycotts transparency check

  • It took parliament President Martin Schultz's office seven months to address a request for transparency, and the answer was No (Photo: Parti Socialiste)

When the European Parliament's Constitutional Affairs committee voted on changes to the EU lobby register (18 March), it explicitly noted its support for transparency NGOs.

"The European Parliament … welcomes and encourages the role played by non-institutional watchdogs in monitoring the transparency of the EU Institutions,” it said.

Thank you for reading EUobserver!

Subscribe now for a 30 day free trial.

  1. €150 per year
  2. or €15 per month
  3. Cancel anytime

EUobserver is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that publishes daily news reports, analysis, and investigations from Brussels and the EU member states. We are an indispensable news source for anyone who wants to know what is going on in the EU.

We are mainly funded by advertising and subscription revenues. As advertising revenues are falling fast, we depend on subscription revenues to support our journalism.

For group, corporate or student subscriptions, please contact us. See also our full Terms of Use.

If you already have an account click here to login.

Noble sentiments indeed and there is no reason to doubt the sincerity of the committee's members, or the hundreds of MEPs who will most likely endorse this report when the plenary vote takes place in Strasbourg on Tuesday (15 April).

Sadly, these sentiments are not universally shared within the parliament, or, at least, not by those MEPs who are responsible for organising its internal affairs.

Last summer, Transparency International (TI) EU started the research for its study of the EU integrity system, which assesses the transparency, accountability and integrity of 10 EU institutions.

The study looks at the rules in place, but also how those rules are observed in practice. To do it properly it meant interviewing those people responsible for enforcing these rules in each institution.

All the institutions responded positively, with one striking exception – the European Parliament.

Delays, prevarications, silences

The initial request for interviews was directed to the secretary general of the parliament, Klaus Welle, back in July 2013. It was met with a series of delays, prevarications and long silences.

Last December, with time running out, we took the step of writing directly to the parliament’s governing body, the Bureau, pleading with them to look again at our request.

The parliament was even offered the opportunity to review the research findings before publication, in view of the short amount of time left.

A response from the President’s office finally came in February. It was a resounding No. The reasoning behind that refusal is so curious that it is worth reprinting in its entirety here.

There are a number of points worth noting in this short letter.

Firstly, look at the delay between the first request (as acknowledged in the text) and the date marked on the letterhead – a full seven months. Not a great result for an institution that aspires to be responsive to EU citizens' concerns.

Secondly, and peculiarly, the word integrity is placed in scare quotes, as if the authors of the letter were unsure what this means.

Thirdly, the claim that “comprehensive information and documentation has been sent to you” is slightly misleading. Transparency International received the information following access to document requests made through formal channels.

Fourthly, it cites a long list of committees and institutions that monitor the parliament's affairs, but fails to acknowledge that the same is true of the other EU institutions that did acquiesce to interviews.

Finally, there is a rather baffling passage which appears to suggest that as the parliament's internal bureaucracy is purely at the service of the political arm, that is a good reason why it should not talk to an NGO concerned with transparency and accountability.

It is possible to accept that this is parliament’s final word on the matter.

What is not possible to accept is that this is a full account of the reasons why the parliament refused to cooperate.

This is not merely speculation. A preparatory note for the meeting where the Bureau made its decision is worth quoting in full:

Too ‘political’ and too close to EU elections

"The request for co-operation and holding of interviews goes beyond normal administrative proceedings of the secretariat-general and the study could be considered as an audit of parliament, comparing it to other institutions (instead of comparing the parliament with national parliaments).

"The main focus is on members and the institutions' approach to 'integrity'. The objective of the study is political in nature and is likely to have a political impact on the Institution, taking into account past studies by TI in relation to members states and the chosen date of publication just before the European elections.

"The institutions approached by TI have all reacted differently. Documentation sent by arliament to TI so far does not seem to satisfy TI's purposes. It should also be pointed out that co-operating with TI should not create a precedent which could be invoked by other NGOs in order to carry out similar exercises. The president has been informed of the matter in November and has decided to put the issue to the Bureau."

Translation: This is not in our job description. We disagree with the approach taken by the study. We are unsure what "integrity" means.

What can one say about this unfortunate state of affairs?

Fortunately, it is not representative of the vast majority of MEPs, assistant and officials we work with on a day-to-day basis.

And over the last five years the parliament has helped to push major anti-corruption and transparency reforms in the oil and gas sector and in anti-money laundering legislation.

As an anti-corruption organisation, we talk a lot about 'tone from the top' and how that impacts on the values and behaviour of an organisation, making it clear that the rules apply to everyone with no exceptions. In this case, the tone is decidedly off-key.

We can only hope that the next parliament changes its tune.

The writer is director of Transparency International's EU office. The EU integrity system will be published later this month. A version of this article was originally published on the TI website.

A social Europe needs better housing

EU social and urban policies should be more linked together and involve local authorities, in order to help people find affordable homes.

Time to de-escalate in Catalonia

Spain's apparent refusal even to allow for a dialogue on the referendum is giving the Catalan government less and less of an incentive to aim for a compromise.

News in Brief

  1. Tusk: No sufficient progress yet in Brexit talks
  2. EU commission provides €2mn for food quality studies
  3. Almost a third of Europeans unaware of cost-free roaming
  4. No immediate declaration after Tallinn digital summit
  5. Alternative women's rights fund raises €292mn
  6. Russian gay rights activist calls for EU action
  7. Food maker shamed on inferior products in Croatia
  8. British PM to meet EU president on Brexit

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. European Jewish CongressExpresses Concern Over Worrying Gains for the Far-Right AfD
  2. EU2017EEEU Finance Ministers Agreed to Develop New Digital Taxation Rules
  3. Mission of China to the EUGermany Stands Ready to Deepen Cooperation With China
  4. World VisionFirst Ever Young People Consultation to Discuss the Much Needed Peace in Europe
  5. European Jewish CongressGermany First Country to Adopt Working Definition of Antisemitism
  6. EU2017EEFour Tax Initiatives to Modernise the EU's Tax System
  7. Dialogue PlatformResponsibility in Practice: Gulen & Islamic Thought I 27 September, 2017
  8. Counter BalanceHuman Rights Concerns Over EIB Loan to the Trans Anatolian Pipeline Project
  9. Mission of China to the EUChina Leads the Global Clean Energy Transition
  10. CES - Silicones EuropeFrom Baking Moulds to Oven Mitts, Silicones Are a Key Ingredient in Kitchens
  11. Martens CentreFor a New Europeanism: How to Put the Motto "Unity in Diversity" Into Practice
  12. Access MBAGet Ahead With an MBA Degree. Top MBA Event in Brussels

Latest News

  1. Egg scare prompts EU to consider national food safety officers
  2. EU commission says Spanish website seizures are legal
  3. EU commission sees 'more evidence' of dual food quality
  4. A social Europe needs better housing
  5. London firms seek free trade after Brexit
  6. Macron to lay out plan for EU 'pioneers'
  7. Polish president disappoints EU on judicial reform
  8. Italy brushes off southern alliance in EU agency race

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Idealist QuarterlyIdealist Quarterly Event: Building Fearless Democracies With Gerald Hensel
  2. Mission of China to the EUPresident Xi Urges Bigger Global Role for Emerging Economies
  3. EU2017EEAre We Socially Insured in the Future of Work?
  4. European Jewish CongressFrench Authorities to Root Out "Societal Antisemitism" After Jewish Family Assaulted
  5. European Federation of Local Energy CompaniesClean Energy for All? On 10.10 Top-Level Speakers Present the Clean Energy Package
  6. UNICEFUp to Three Quarters of Children Face Abuse & Exploitation on Mediterranean Migration Routes
  7. Swedish EnterprisesEurope Under Challenge; Recipe for a Competitive EU
  8. European Public Health AllianceCall to International Action to Break Deadlock on Chronic Diseases Crisis
  9. CES - Silicones EuropePropelling the construction revolution with silicones
  10. EU2017EEEU 2018 Budget: A Case of Three Paradoxes
  11. ACCAUS 'Dash for Gas' Could Disrupt Global Gas Markets
  12. Swedish Enterprises“No Time to Lose” Film & Debate on How Business & Politics Can Fight Climate Change