Brussels, 13/05/2015 (Agence Europe) - The Conference of the Presidents of the groups of the European Parliament on Wednesday 13 May finally acceded to the request by the EPP, ALDE and ECR groups to postpone the 'shareholders' rights' dossier to the June plenary session, although the JURI committee voted through a negotiation mandate last week (see EUROPE 11310).
The fate of the amendments of the Greens/EFA group requiring large businesses and those quoted on the stock exchange to report fiscal data on a country-by-country basis is at this stage uncertain, as the balance of power is different in plenary, which could play into the hands of the EPP and the ECR, which are opposed to these amendments, and of ALDE, which is divided over the issue.
The EPP's shadow rapporteur on this dossier, Italy's Giovanni Toti, opposes these amendments and made this clear before the JURI committee (see EUROPE 11261). 'Country-by-country reporting' must be the subject of a Commission impact assessment this summer and it is therefore inappropriate to rush it through, he said. It was also explained that there could be a better legal base than the 'shareholders' rights' directive. ALDE is divided and needs to hold discussions to decide whether or not to support the amendments. The shadow rapporteur of ALDE, Cecilia Wikström of Sweden, tabled amendments of a more general nature on transparency, and therefore did not support those of the Greens at the JURI committee. However, from the point of view of the Liberals and the EPP alike, the decision to postpone the dossier until the plenary is mainly linked to other key provisions of the directive, such as those providing for the shareholders to have scrutiny rights on directors' pay. There are fears within ALDE that when up against the Council at the trialogue session, the rapporteur will agree to drop the transparency amendments to secure the member states'approval of the provisions on directors' pay. In other words, it will use the provisions on reporting as a bargaining chip. This means that certain ALDE members are reluctant to vote in favour of this bargaining chip, for fear that it will shoot them in the foot when it comes to directors' pay. Other members of the group are opposed to reporting. “Disclosing tax information would be a strategic error”, said Jean-Marie Cavada (ALDE, France) when the amendments were examined by the JURI committee.
The Greens are reportedly “flabbergasted” at this turn of events. The group was certain that the request by the three groups to put a report to the vote of the plenary when the mandate has already been voted through in committee would be turned down on legal grounds. However, the legal services of the Parliament are reported to have concluded that the Conference of the Presidents was entitled to make this decision. If the mandate is not sufficiently clear or broadly shared, a request can be made for the plenary to take it over, and it will also ultimately have responsibility for approving the final results of the negotiation, an EP source explained. The report will not be voted on until June in order to build in a 'cooling-off period' and leave enough time for the texts to be translated.
However, the Greens at the European Parliament do not feel that they will necessarily lose out in plenary, for instance because the vote is based on a simple majority. They have the backing of the S&D and GUE/NGL groups. However, things will get tougher for them in trialogue, because France and Germany initially want to see reporting restricted to the authorities, and not made public. (Elodie Lamer)