WRITTEN QUESTION E-2290/98

by José Barros Moura (PSE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: Information leak in respect of the assessment of the National Employment Plans

To use a catch phrase which has recently become popular in my country, the Commission knows that I know that the Commission knows that I know what happened, which is why the version of events which it is now putting forward (see Question Time for June 1998, Question H-0527/98(1)) constitutes a belated, surprising, clumsy and, as far as I am concerned, completely unacceptable rewriting of history (in this case with a small letter, of course).

Out of courtesy I shall refrain from mentioning names but I would remind the Commission that the internal document produced by its staff was passed to journalists by an official before being sent to the representatives of the Member States' governments. Furthermore, the document in question was not intended to be made public on that occasion and its covering note is dated 17 June, which is highly revealing since the document is a preparatory one for the Commission's Communication COM(98) 0316 final, which is dated 13 May. Why - unless for the purpose of covering up an "information leak" - should a "preliminary assessment" be officially released over a month after the publication of the Communication to which it gave rise? After the "information leak" another official, representing some other Commission department involved, acknowledged, and expressed regret at, the fact that an internal document had been divulged without authorization.

These facts are all the more serious in view of the fact that similar incidents have, unfortunately, occurred before. The divulging of internal documents, which are so often inaccurate, has obvious and inevitable political and economic consequences (quite apart from the damage done to the prestige of the Member States), for which reason such a practice cannot be regarded as either accidental or harmless.

I would therefore retable all the questions which the Commission has left unanswered, and also ask the following additional questions:

1. Is this what the Commission understands by "transparency": the divulging of preparatory documents as a way of criticising the Member States before they have even been able to make any response?

2. Does the Commission believe such procedures to be in accordance with the sound EU institutional practice evident in the way in which independent institutions (in particular the Commission, the Council and Parliament) cooperate?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(6 October 1998)

In its answer to oral question H-0527/98 on the same subject, the Commission took the opportunity to enlighten the Honourable Member about the nature and objectives of the Commission departments' report on the evaluation of the national employment plans(2). This report and the related communication(3) contain the results of the examination which the Commission is empowered to undertake in respect of the national action plans for employment based on the guidelines approved by the Council.

Playing its full part within the Employment and Labour Market Committee, the Commission helped with the preparatory work for the Cardiff European Council. Once the communication had been approved on 14 May 1998, the Commission forwarded it, along with the background report, to the representatives of the Member States in order to assist the Committee in the process of joint examination of the national plans.

As far as the employment strategy is concerned, the results of the Cardiff European Council are viewed very positively by the Commission, the Member States, the social partners and, it appears, also by Parliament. A lively dialogue has sprung up between the Commission and the Member States, resulting more recently in the organisation of bilateral meetings with all the Member States and the forwarding of implementation reports shedding light on aspects which are insufficiently developed in the action plans.

The Commission is satisfied that the European employment strategy has, since its inception, been conducted with a high degree of cooperation between the Institutions and it intends to do all it can for the future to ensure that this spirit of cooperation continues.

(1) European Parliament Debates (June 1998).

(2) "From guidelines to action: evaluation of the National Action Plans - Background report".

(3) COM(98) 316 final "From guidelines to action: the National Action Plans for Employment".