28.

Criticises the fact that the Secretary-General has failed to answer a series of questions asked by Members; reiterates that the effective monitoring of the implementation of Parliament's budget has always called for and will continue to call for close cooperation between Parliament's administration and the Committee on Budgetary Control; calls, therefore, on the Secretary-General to complete the questionnaire by answering the following questions in writing: Strategic Execution Framework for the European Parliament (a) When presenting the Strategic Execution Framework (SEF) for the European Parliament on 3 June 2014, the Secretary-General stated that the SEF is based on an academic theory developed at the Stanford School of Engineering in Palo Alto (California). Can the Secretary-General explain how Parliament came to choose this theory as the basis for the SEF? Were other theories developed by other universities or specialist establishments, in particular in Europe, or other international institutions considered, studied and compared before Parliament opted for the Stanford theory? If so, why was the theory developed by the Stanford School of Engineering chosen? How was the decision taken, and by whom? (b) Can the Stanford theory be used free of charge, or is Parliament required to pay a fee of some kind? If so, what is the fee involved? (c) When the SEF was being developed, did Parliament staff have to undergo specific training at Stanford or any other academic institution? If so, which staff members (grades and posts) underwent training and how much did that training cost for each person? Will further training be required in the future? If so, how much will it cost? (d) Are there plans to hold interdepartmental discussions or discussions with the Staff Committee and trade unions about the SEF? How and when will the SEF be implemented and what is the likely cost? Strategic Documents (e) In recent months the Secretary-General has submitted to the Bureau a series of strategic documents on the functioning of Parliament which will have a decisive bearing not only on administrative life, but also on Parliament's approach to EU lawmaking and policies. Given these documents' importance for the organisation and future development of our work, why has no provision been made for a discussion and decision-making procedure which involves all the parties concerned, and not just Parliament's Bureau? Resource Efficiency Measures Strategy (f) Before the new time slots for meetings were proposed and introduced, was the impact of the changes on the organisation of Members' work assessed (restricted time slots for meetings, working meetings, meetings with organisations and members of the public, etc. outside official meetings)? Why were Members not consulted on a decision which has such a clear bearing on their work? Members of the European Parliament (g) Now that it has been operating for several months, how effective has the one-stop shop for the provision of parliamentary services to Members been? Directorate-General for Communication Communication strategy and preparation of the information campaign for the 2014 elections (h) The European Youth Event held in May 2014 as part of that campaign brought 5 000 young people to Strasbourg. When that event was being prepared, was due account taken of the economic situation in Europe and of the way in which the expenditure involved in holding an event on such a scale might be perceived by young Europeans? (i) Is the concept ‘ACT, REACT, IMPACT’ generally considered to be a success? What are the performance indicators to measure this success? How is the concept used after the elections and was any assessment/evaluation report made after the EP legislative and value campaigns? Please provide the Committee on Budgetary Control with a copy of the evaluation. (j) What assessment/evaluation has been made of the multi-annual grants programme 2012-14 aimed at raising awareness on the role of the European Parliament and can such evaluations be made available to the Committee on Budgetary Control? Accredited Parliamentary Assistants (APAs) (k) Has the effectiveness of the recruitment tool for APAs, APA-PEOPLE, introduced at the start of the parliamentary term already been assessed? (l) What was the reason for a delay of several months for some APA to be included in the relevant mailing lists of EP (Assistants 8th legislature, Bruxelles) which has impeded them from receiving information concerning their work? Have some measures been taken? Directorate-General for Infrastructure and Logistics Catering services (m) Would like to know the reason why the prices in the SQM building are 25 % more expensive than in the ASP canteen and wonders if this may hamper the intention to drive out customers from the overcrowded ASP canteen. Directorate-General for Security and Safety (n) Which measures have been identified to increase security after recent breaches notably on 7 October 2014 by Kurdish protesters? Will the New Global Security Concept be updated? (o) Did Parliament acquire an electronic recognition system for car number plates? What was the cost? Was this system installed and used at the entrances of the garage to check if the number plate corresponds with the information on the entry badge?