WRITTEN QUESTION P-3789/00 by Cecilia Malmström (ELDR) to the Commission. Commissioner de Palacio's remarks regarding the Cashman report on 16 November 2000.
Date: 2000-11-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commissioner, Sweden, access to EU information, administrative transparency, parliamentary debate, sterilisation

C 187 E/50

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

(2001/C 187 E/053)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3789/00

by Cecilia Malmstr(cid:246)m (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 November 2000)

Subject: Commissioner de Palacio(cid:146)s remarks regarding the Cashman report on 16 November 2000

In the remarks she made regarding the Cashman report at the sitting of 16 November 2000, Commis-
sioner Loyola de Palacio del Valle-Lersundi made a reference to the sterilisation of people in Sweden and,
with regard to the debate on that subject, considered that problems can arise even in a country which
seeks to ensure maximum openness.

The principle of public access to official documents is enshrined in the Swedish constitution and means
that documents are in the public domain and may be requested by members of the public unless they are
covered by any of the exceptions that have been specified. This principle, which dates back to 1766, has
ensured that Sweden enjoys a transparent system of government. There is also clear evidence that a high
degree of openness reduces corruption.

Like Commissioner de Palacio, we, too, were dismayed when we learnt that people had been sterilised
without their consent in Swedish clinics and hospitals. However, we do not agree with her assertion that
the use of sterilisation had been a secret and that it may thus be concluded that there is no perfect system
when it comes to ensuring openness. In fact, it is thanks to Sweden(cid:146)s open system of government that it
was possible to discover that people were being sterilised and to debate the issue.

We find it offensive that a Member of the Commission has chosen to single out an individual Member
State for criticism in a parliamentary debate, especially when the assertions she made are ill-founded. Does
the President of the Commission consider it appropriate in a debate on openness to make thinly veiled
references to a specific country and a tragic part of its history in an attempt to argue that the democratic
credentials of that country are dubious? What does the sterilisation issue have to do with the current
debate on public access to EU documents?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(10 January 2001)

The Member of the Commission has clearly explained that her comment in the Parliament was not meant
to hold back efforts to strengthen transparency in the Community institutions nor to criticise any
particular Member State. Quite the contrary. The sole purpose of it was to stress that in the Community
there are different legislations and traditions to what is commonly known as (cid:145)transparency(cid:146), and all of them
have to be respected. There is not a single model of transparency. Furthermore, all the Member States and
Members of the Parliament, can and must contribute with their experience to improve transparency in the
Community institutions.

In those circumstances, the best way to make progress on the Commission(cid:146)s proposal on access to
documents, is dialogue and trying to understand each others(cid:146) concern rather than trying to impose its own
point of view. That was the only purpose of her words.

She understands however that if her words are taken out of context, they can easily be misinterpreted
which she regrets. The Commission hopes nevertheless that this reply makes the point clear. Indeed, the
Commission and Sweden share many common views on how to improve transparency in the institutions.
The Commission is therefore confident in that respect, that the Commission(cid:146)s proposal on access to
documents, currently under examination, will receive a great political input from the Parliament and the
incoming Swedish Presidency since Sweden has a well deserved reputation of being a Member State with
a long tradition in this field and that has taken the lead in the task of improving transparency in the
Community. The Commission is looking forward to it.