Brussels, 12/03/2009 (Agence Europe) - In Strasbourg on Wednesday 11 March, the European Parliament brought a number of changes to the initial proposal on access to documents. The aim was to ensure that no document referring to a legislative procedure should be kept secret. Parliament chose not to complete the first reading (co-decision), leaving the door open for the Commission to amend its proposal and for the new Parliament to negotiate with Council, under Swedish Presidency, after the summer. Sweden has made transparency one of the priorities of its Presidency in the second half of this year, and has already publicly welcomed the report by Michael Cashman (PES, UK) on access to documents. The amended proposal contained in Cashman's report was approved by the EP by 439 votes to 200, with 57 abstentions.
Some of the EP amendments clarify the term “document”, defining it as “any data or content, whatever its medium, concerning a matter relating to the policies, activities, decisions falling within the institution's sphere of responsibility”. A distinction is made between legislative and non-legislative documents: the former should always be available to the public and should not be kept secret.
At least equivalent transparency in member states. Documents originating from a member state and received by Community institutions should also be disclosed, after consultation of the member state, although this should not give member states a right of veto, an EP amendment says. Furthermore, in adopting the amendment put by the PES group, the EP says that “member states shall seek to ensure that an equivalent level of transparency is granted in relation to national measures implementing acts of the EU”. The text also protects political activity and the independence of MEPs, pointing out that documents and electronic communication received or sent by MEPs are not considered to be “documents” under the terms of this regulation. These informal documents are covered by the Statute for members of the European Parliament.
A single EU portal on the web. Parliament added an article on legislative transparency, stating that these documents must be made available on an inter-institutional website. Preparatory documents, impact studies, legal opinions and other documents must also be published.
A new category for “EU classified” documents. MEPs have also devised a scale for classifying documents, from “EU restricted” to “EU top secret”, for documents the unauthorised disclosure of which could harm the interests of the European Union or its member states. Reasons must be given why access to a document is refused. Further, documents on legislative procedures must not be classified, MEPs say. Exemptions will only apply for the period during which protection is justified, and may only apply for 30 years, unless the exception relates to the private life or the integrity of the individual.
Financial transparency. Under an amendment put down by Marco Cappato, on behalf of the ALDE Group, information relating to the EU budget, its implementation and beneficiaries of EU funds and grants should also be made “public and accessible to citizens” by means of a specific website. The EP believes that, under the current system, traceability of European funding is very limited, because, in most cases, it falls under the responsibility of the member states, which use different methods, languages and information.
International agreements. International agreements on the sharing of confidential information concluded in the name of the EU (such as the PNR agreement with the United States on air passenger information) must not give a non-EU country or an international organisation the right to prevent the European Parliament from accessing confidential information. The EP, in adopting an amendment by the GUE/NGL Group, calls on the Commission to make available all documents relating to the ongoing international negotiations on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA).
Register of lobbyists. An inter-institutional register of lobbyists should also be set up, and the names, titles and functions of the lobbyists should be made public, as should those of EU officials, unless this information would impinge on the privacy or integrity of the individual. A special oversight committee, made up of MEPs, should be set up and should have access to classified documents. Each Directorate General of every institution should designate a person responsible for ensuring that the regulation is properly implemented. Requests for paper copies of documents must be processed within 15 days, rather than the 30 days in the initial proposal. (L.C./transl.rt)