Brussels, 28/11/2012 (Agence Europe) - The European Commission presented on Tuesday 27 November its first annual report on the Transparency Register of interest representatives, that was set up in 2011 (see EUROPE 10739). The report outlines what has been achieved in the first 12 months of the Register and sets fresh goals for 2013.
The Commission highlights a number of achievements in the first year of the Register's existence, including a successful switch-over from the two previous registers with no drop in registrants; the opening of the online European Parliament accreditation request module; the issue of three successive waves of guidelines; designation by the Council of observers to the Joint Transparency Register Secretariat (JTRS); and setting up of a methodology for quality checks. In addition, an online public consultation was held to gain more in-depth feedback from users. Nearly four out of five registered respondents declared themselves satisfied with the platform.
The Transparency Register website received an average of 7,000 individual visitors every month, and the helpdesk responded to an average of 30 phone calls and 100 emails every week. Since March 2012, the JTRS made more than 400 quality checks, an average of 15 per week. It also handled five complaints; in one case this led to an organisation being removed from the Register.
Looking to the future, the report calls, among other things for: further improvements to the quality of the Register's content; strict enforcement of the rules; expansion of the number of registrations through further external information and communication efforts; active use of the scheme by staff and members of both institutions by providing them with guidelines on the register; encouragement for other EU bodies, organs and agencies to use it; and further clarification and guidelines for registrants on how to provide the necessary information.
The report also calls for consideration of several policy issues during next year's review, including the voluntary versus compulsory nature of registration; the possibility of an ad hoc, derogative and exceptional formula for law and consultancy firms which want to register but are concerned about client confidentiality; clarification of the difference between alerts and complaints; and clarification of the category covering organisations representing local, regional and municipal authorities. (OL/transl.fl)