Brussels, 21/09/2007 (Agence Europe) - The European Parliament is preparing to adopt a series of practical measures in the next few weeks to improve the way Parliament operates and make plenary debates more lively and coherent. The EP conference of presidents met on Thursday 20 September with members of a working group on European Parliament reform chaired by German MEP Dagmar Roth-Behrent (PES), who submitted to the presidents of the political groups an interim report including 25 concrete suggestions. The groups now have a month to examine the proposals in order for decisions to be taken at the conference of presidents on 25 October, on the fringes of the plenary in Strasbourg. Most of the suggested measures (see details below) would not require any formal changes in the EP's rules of procedure and could therefore be implemented without delay.
At the conference of presidents on Thursday, reactions were generally positive, explained close sources, adding that it was now a matter of waiting for the various groups' detailed reactions to see whether consensus will emerge on all of the suggested measures.
The 25 suggestions set out in the interim report can be divided into six main target areas:
1) Improving the plenary session agenda. The report suggests simplifying the structure of the agenda by dividing it into clearly defined slots, for example, and improving the connection between debates and votes (timing important debates just ahead of the votes). It also suggests giving political groups more time (at least a month) to examine the results of the votes in the EP's committees before legislative reports are added to the plenary agenda. This would also give EP departments more time to fine-tune the draft legislation. The report suggests improvements in the timing of questioning at the EP. The Commission should submit its written responses in advance, and some of each question-time hour should be reserved for questions on specific areas covered by the EU presidency (the presidency should be represented by the relevant minister to answer such questions).
2) Better definition of priorities. The European Parliament should define its political priorities better, following the example of the European Commission and the rotating presidency of the Council. The working group suggests that the conference of presidents in 2008 should decide on the European Parliament's priorities for 2009.
3) Improving the organisation of debate in plenary. The role of rapporteurs should be strengthened by giving them extra speaking time and time at the end of the debate to respond to issues raised during the debate. The Council and Commission speaking time should be decided in the form of an 'overall time budget'. Debates should be livened up by allowing spontaneous intervention and questions from MEPs.
4) Improving voting procedures. The working group feels that better preparation of voting would improve the coherence of adopted texts. The relevant parliamentary committee should examine the draft amendments made by parties outside the committee itself when there are more than a specific number of amendments. Debate in plenary ahead of the midday voting slot should never be allowed to extend into the ten minutes before midday. In this way, voting can be carried out properly. In addition, invitations of dignitaries to solemn ceremonies (mainly heads of state) should be more selective and in the future, solemn ceremonies should no longer run over into voting time.
5) Improving the participation of MEPs in plenary debate by restricting double-booking. As a general rule, no other meetings should be organised to coincide with key debates in Strasbourg on Tuesday and Wednesday afternoon during the 'Brussels mini-sessions'.
6) Changing seating arrangements in the Hemicycle. The seating in the Hemicycle parliamentary building should be changed to allow MEPs to speak from the front rows where they are physically closer to one another and also to representatives of the Council and Commission. This would highlight the political and institutional debating system, which the working group believes would make the debates more lively. (hb)