DOCSLIB.ORG

Codecision and National Parliamentary Scrutiny

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Codecision and National Parliamentary Scrutiny HOUSE OF LORDS European Union Committee 17th Report of Session 2008–09 Codecision and national parliamentary scrutiny Report with Evidence Ordered to be printed 7 July 2009 and published 21 July 2009 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords London : The Stationery Office Limited £price HL Paper 125 The European Union Committee The European Union Committee of the House of Lords considers EU documents and other matters relating to the EU in advance of decisions being taken on them in Brussels. It does this in order to influence the Government’s position in negotiations, and to hold them to account for their actions at EU level. The Government are required to deposit EU documents in Parliament, and to produce within two weeks an Explanatory Memorandum setting out the implications for the UK. The Committee examines these documents, and ‘holds under scrutiny’ any about which it has concerns, entering into correspondence with the relevant Minister until satisfied. Letters must be answered within two weeks. Under the ‘scrutiny reserve resolution’, the Government may not agree in the EU Council of Ministers to any proposal still held under scrutiny; reasons must be given for any breach. The Committee also conducts inquiries and makes reports. The Government are required to respond in writing to a report’s recommendations within two months of publication. If the report is for debate, then there is a debate in the House of Lords, which a Minister attends and responds to. The Committee has seven Sub-Committees which are: Economic and Financial Affairs and International Trade (Sub-Committee A) Internal Market (Sub-Committee B) Foreign Affairs, Defence and Development Policy (Sub-Committee C) Environment and Agriculture (Sub-Committee D) Law and Institutions (Sub-Committee E) Home Affairs (Sub-Committee F) Social and Consumer Affairs (Sub-Committee G) Our Membership The Members of the European Union Committee are: Baroness Cohen of Pimlico Lord Plumb Lord Dykes Lord Powell of Bayswater Lord Freeman Lord Richard Lord Hannay of Chiswick Lord Roper (Chairman) Baroness Howarth of Breckland Lord Sewel Lord Jopling Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean Lord Kerr of Kinlochard Lord Teverson Lord Maclennan of Rogart Lord Trimble Lord Mance Lord Wade of Chorlton Lord Paul Information about the Committee The reports and evidence of the Committee are published by and available from The Stationery Office. For information freely available on the web, our homepage is: http://www.parliament.uk/hleu There you will find many of our publications, along with press notices, details of membership and forthcoming meetings, and other information about the ongoing work of the Committee and its Sub-Committees, each of which has its own homepage. Members’ interests are available at the Register of Interests: http://www.parliament.uk/about_lords/register_of_lords__interests.cfm General Information General information about the House of Lords and its Committees, including guidance to witnesses, details of current inquiries and forthcoming meetings is on the internet at http://www.parliament.uk/about_lords/about_lords.cfm Contacts for the European Union Committee Contact details for individual Sub-Committees are given on the website. General correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the European Union Committee, Committee Office, House of Lords, London, SW1A 0PW The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 5791. The Committee’s email address is [email protected] CONTENTS Paragraph Page Summary 6 Chapter 1: The codecision procedure: Origins, scope, expansion and the possible effect of the Lisbon Treaty 1 7 Our inquiry 3 7 How codecision works—the procedures as laid down in the Treaties 7 8 Box 1: Some jargon simplified—part one 8 First reading 10 9 Second reading 14 9 Conciliation and Third Reading 17 9 Figure 1: The Codecision Procedure—flowchart 11 How codecision works—the practice 21 12 Box 2: Some jargon simplified—part two 12 Increase in first and early second reading deals 23 12 How these deals occur—informal trilogues 26 13 Box 3: Some jargon simplified—part three 13 Trilogues—composition 27 13 Trilogues—mandates and accountability 30 14 Council, European Parliament and Trilogue meetings— Transparency 35 15 Implications for national parliaments seeking to keep abreast of negotiations? 38 15 Scrutiny of changes made during codecision negotiations? 40 16 Conclusion 44 16 Agreements at early stages 45 17 Conclusion 49 17 Fast agreements 50 18 Conclusions 53 18 Agreements reached in informal trilogues 55 18 Conclusions 60 20 Chapter 2: National parliamentary scrutiny 64 21 Principles behind the UK System 64 21 Our role 64 21 The Government’s role in providing information to facilitate this scrutiny 67 21 Box 4: Some jargon simplified—part four 21 Figure 2: Scrutiny actions flowchart 23 Box 5: Key information the Government should provide to the Committee under the Scrutiny Guidance 24 Assessment of the adequacy of the information we have from the Government 72 24 The opportunity to give our views at each reading or where a text has changed substanitally 72 24 Conclusions 74 25 Ensuring effective scrutiny of proposals adopted at early stages: about what should we be informed 77 25 Ensuring effective scrutiny of proposals adopted at early stages: Departmental performance 82 26 Ensuring effective scrutiny of proposals adopted at early stages: some safeguards 87 27 Key points in the negotiations 91 28 Limité documents: provision 95 28 Limité documents: constraints on use 100 29 Addressing the results of our scrutiny to other parliaments 103 30 Chapter 3: Summary of Conclusions 105 31 Principles underlying scrutiny of codecided proposals 105 31 The existing scrutiny system 112 32 Adding to this system to ensure effective scrutiny negotiations at first and second reading 116 32 Two safeguards 124 33 LIMITE documents 126 34 Addressing our views to MEPs and other national parliaments 127 34 Appendix 1: European Union Committee List of Members 35 Appendix 2: List of Witnesses 36 Appendix 3: Call for Evidence 37 Appendix 4: Sub-Committee responses to Codecision questionnaire 39 Appendix 5: EP Code of Conduct for negotiating Codecision Files 57 Appendix 6: Recent Reports from the Select Committee 59 Oral Evidence Rt Hon Caroline Flint MP, Minister for Europe, Ms Alison Rose, Head of Communications, Institutions, Treaty and Iberia Group, Europe Directorate and Mr Ananda Guha, Deputy Head, Europe Strategy Group, Foreign & Commonwealth Office Written evidence 1 Oral evidence, 5 May 2009 8 Supplementary written evidence 13 Mr Andy Lebrecht, UK Deputy Permanent Representative to the EU and Mr David Tripp, Private Secretary to Mr Lebrecht Oral evidence, 2 June 2009 18 Mr Philip Léglise-Costa, French Deputy Permanent Representative to the EU Oral evidence, 2 June 2009 27 Mr Anthony Teasdale, Head of Strategy, Office of the President, European Parliament, Ms Els Vandenbosch, Director for Legislative Coordination, DG IPOL, Mr Klaus Baier, Head of Conciliation and Codecision Unit, DG IPOL, Mr Andreas Huber, Head of Secretariat, Environment Committee and Mr Niall O’Neill, Directorate for Relations with National Parliaments, European Parliament Oral evidence, 2 June 2009 35 Ms Una O’Dwyer, Acting Director for Relations with the Council, including Codecision, Commission Secretariat General and Mr Niall O’Neill, Directorate for Relations with National Parliaments, European Parliament Oral evidence, 2 June 2009 43 Mr Hubert Legal, Director (Codecision) Legal Service, Council General Secretariat and Mr Jonathan Dancourt-Cavanagh, Senior Desk Officer, Codecision Unit, European Council Oral evidence, 2 June 2009 51 Mr Richard Corbett MEP and Ms Arlene McCarthy MEP, European Parliament Written evidence from Richard Corbett MEP 59 Oral evidence, 2 June 2009 60 Written evidence Tim Ambler, London Business School & Francis Chittenden, Manchester Business School 72 Dr Giacomo Bendetto, University of London 75 Dr Charlotte Burns, University of Leeds 76 European Commission 78 European Council 85 Federal Trust for Education and Research 88 French Sénat 89 German Bundesrat 90 German Bundestag 91 Professor Simon Hix, London School of Economics 92 House of Representatives, The Netherlands 94 Irish Parliament 94 Davor Jančić, Utrecht University 96 Dr Helle Krunke, University of Cophenhagen 105 Parliament of Denmark 107 Parliament of Finland 108 Parliament of Sweden 111 Tapio Raunio, University of Tampere, Finland 112 Dr Christine Reh, University College London 115 Romanian Parliament 118 Dr Klára Szalay 121 NOTE: References in the text of the report are as follows: (Q) refers to a question in oral evidence (p) refers to a page in written evidence SUMMARY Codecision is the European legislative procedure whereby a proposal from the European Commission is negotiated and adopted jointly by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers. For some time the perception has been that the codecision procedure, and the way in which its practice has developed, makes it harder for national parliaments to conduct effective scrutiny of EU legislation. This report concludes that there are aspects of codecision which cause difficulties for us in seeking to influence the Government’s position. In large part these difficulties arise because agreements are reached at first and second reading stages though the use of informal trilogues: small, private meetings between the Commission, Council and European Parliament. To minimise these difficulties we review our procedures for conducting
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Government Response to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee Report HC 109-1 of Session 2013-14 Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons
    Government Response to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee Report HC 109-1 of Session 2013-14 Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs by Command of Her Majesty July 2014 Cm 8914 Government Response to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee Report HC 109-1 of Session 2013-14 Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs by Command of Her Majesty July 2014 Cm 8914 © Crown copyright 2014 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v.2. To view this licence visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/2/ or email [email protected] Where third party material has been identified, permission from the respective copyright holder must be sought. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at [email protected]. Print ISBN 9781474109796 Web ISBN 9781474109802 Printed in the UK by the Williams Lea Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. ID P002659226 42260 07/14 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. Government Response to the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee 24th Report HC 109-1 of Session 2013-14, Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons The Government welcomes the European Scrutiny Committee’s Inquiry into Reforming the Scrutiny System in the House of Commons and the detailed consideration the Committee has given this important issue.
    [Show full text]
  • Evidence: the Role of National Parliaments in the European Union
    EUROPEAN UNION SELECT COMMITTEE The Role of National Parliaments in the European Union Oral and Written evidence Contents Dr Gavin Barrett, University College Dublin—Written evidence .................................................. 4 Professor Dr iur. Hermann-Josef Blanke, University of Erfurt, Germany—Written evidence . 7 Mr Mladen Cherveniakov, Chairman of the Committee on European Affairs and Oversight of the European Funds, National Assembly of Bulgaria—Written evidence ................................... 13 Mr Carlo Casini MEP and Mr Miguel Angel Martínez Martínez MEP, Vice-President, European Parliament—(QQ 125-136) ................................................................................................................... 15 Sonia Piedrafita, Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)—Written evidence ................... 16 Charles Grant, Director, Centre for European Reform, and Mats Persson, Director, Open Europe—Oral evidence (QQ 1-17) ..................................................................................................... 23 Dr iur Patricia Conlan, Member, Institute for the Study of Knowledge in Society, University of Limerick, Ireland—Written evidence ............................................................................................. 41 Dr Ian Cooper, University of Oslo—Written evidence ................................................................. 56 Dr Richard Corbett, Member of the Cabinet of the President, European Council—Written evidence .....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Act on the Autonomy of Åland (1991/1144)
    Act on the Autonomy of Åland (1991/1144) The war of 1808-09 resulted in Sweden being forced to relinquish Finland and the Åland Islands to Russia, whereby Swedish-speaking Åland became part of the Grand Duchy of Finland. When Finland gained its independence, the Ålanders began to hope for reunion with Sweden. Consequently the Parliament of Finland adopted an Autonomy Act for Åland in 1920. At first the Ålanders refused to accept it, and the question of Åland's status was referred to the League of Nations. In June 1921 the Council of the League of Nations reached a decision that Finland should receive sovereignty over the Åland Islands. Finland undertook to guarantee the population of Åland its Swedish language, culture and local customs. The Council of the League of Nations also prescribed that an international agreement should be made confirming the demilitarization of the Ålands Islands from 1856 and expanding it to include neutralization. The Autonomy Act was supplemented in conformity with the decisions of the Council of the League of Nations, and the Ålanders started applying the Act. The first election to the Åland Parliament was held in 1922. The Autonomy Act from 1920 soon proved inadequate and was replaced in 1951 by another Act, which also became outdated. After almost 20 years of preparations the present Act on the Autonomy of Åland has been passed by the Parliament of Finland in constitutional order and with assent of the Åland Parliament. The Act entered into force on 1 January 1993. Please note: This is an unofficial translation.
    [Show full text]
  • Download PDF on Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation in Relation To
    REPORT Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation in Relation to the UK’s Withdrawal from the European Union By Simon Patrick First published in Great Britain in 2017 by The Constitution Society Top Floor, 61 Petty France London, SW1H 9EU www.consoc.org.uk © The Constitution Society ISBN: 978-0-9954703-8-5 All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise), without the prior written permission of both the copyright owner and the publisher of this book. Contents About the Author 4 Summary 5 Introduction 6 The current procedures for delegated legislation 7 - Definition of ‘delegated legislation’ 7 - Types of Parliamentary control 7 - Scrutiny of instruments by select committees 9 - Procedure for formal consideration of instruments: Commons 10 - Procedure for formal consideration of instruments: Lords 11 Procedures in the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill, as presented 11 Possible criticisms of the procedure 12 - The context 12 - The existing proposals 12 - Henry VIII powers 13 Proposals for change 14 - Who should decide the procedure? 14 - Debates and examination of the merits of delegated legislation 15 - A possible solution 16 Resources required 17 Conclusion 17 SCRUTINY OF DELEGATED LEGISLATION ON BREXIT 3 About the Author Simon Patrick OBE was a House of Commons Clerk for 38 years, during the last ten of which he was a Principal Clerk responsible for, successively, delegated legislation, bills and select committees. He has also been Clerk of the European Scrutiny Committee and of the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Foundations, Structures and Institutions of Autonomy in Comparative Law
    Legal Foundations, Structures and Institutions of Autonomy in Comparative Law Markku Suksi 1 Introduction Autonomies around the world1 as a form of organization at the sub-national level show a number of common features or dimensions that offer a basis for comparisons. The comparisons, in turn, can be used for the purposes of explaining the legal effects of various forms of autonomy and for outlining the reasons for differences and similarities. What are the key features of autonomy, how could different autonomies be compared with each other and what is the future of autonomy as a form of organization? How could the different autonomies and their relations to each other be illustrated in the visual form, as a chart, so as to make it possible to identify the mul- titude of different models of autonomy on the basis of their normative features? For such a comparative exercise to take place, a common framework or platform of comparison should be designed. In other words, a so-called tertium comparationis should be developed. For the purposes of our discussion of autonomy, it is proposed that this tertium comparationis is created against the background of the right to participation in a broad sense, encompassing both the general right to participation as identified in article 25 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on the one hand and the right to self-determination as a meta-right of participation as pointed at in article 1 of the same Covenant. 2 Participation and Self-Determination Article 25 of the CCPR deals with participation and covers participation not only at the national level but also at the sub-national and local government level.
    [Show full text]
  • Triangle of Partnership Or Conflicts
    International Journal of Political Science (IJPS) Volume 4, Issue 4, 2018, PP 34-41 ISSN 2454-9452 http://dx.doi.org/10.20431/2454-9452.0404006 www.arcjournals.org Turkey in Relation to EU and Russia - Triangle of Partnership or Conflicts Bulent Acma1*, Mehmet Ali Ozcobanlar2 1Anadolu University, Department of Economics, Eskisehir/Turkey. 2Department of Management, University of Warsaw, Warsaw/Poland *Corresponding Author: Bulent Acma, Anadolu University, Department of Economics, Turkey Abstract: EU-Turkey-Russia. In this research, the relationship between European Union and Turkey, an age long neighbour to the continent and an associate member of European Union since 1963, are examined and analysed. Turkey is an important ally of the union and the only Muslim country-member of NATO from the very beginning of the treaty, since it joined the organization in 1952, at the same year that Greece did. The relations between the Union and Turkey are examined from the aspect of security. The reactions of the European Union to the recent political changes in Republic of Turkey, after the 15 July 2016 failed coup- attempt, are also examined. The EU - Turkey relations after the failed coup attempt and the international impact of it are studied from the perspective of political and social influence it might have. Russia is a vital energy supplier to the Union and Turkey is a geopolitical bridge between west and east, an energy corridor standing at the crossroad of important energy markets such as Iran, Iraq and Azerbaijan. The country has also relations with Cyprus, an upcoming gas supplier and an EU member.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future Relationship Between the United Kingdom and the European Union
    THE FUTURE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND THE EUROPEAN UNION Cm 9593 THE FUTURE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND THE EUROPEAN UNION Presented to Parliament by the Prime Minister by Command of Her Majesty July 2018 Cm 9593 © Crown copyright 2018 Any enquiries regarding this publication This publication is licensed under the terms should be sent to us at of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except [email protected] where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open- ISBN 978-1-5286-0701-8 government-licence/version/3 CCS0718050590-001 07/18 Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain Printed on paper containing 75% recycled permission from the copyright holders fibre content minimum. concerned. Printed in the UK by the APS Group on This publication is available at behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s www.gov.uk/government/publications Stationery Office The future relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union 1 Foreword by the Prime Minister In the referendum on 23 June 2016 – the largest ever democratic exercise in the United Kingdom – the British people voted to leave the European Union. And that is what we will do – leaving the Single Market and the Customs Union, ending free movement and the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in this country, leaving the Common Agricultural Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy, and ending the days of sending vast sums of money to the EU every year. We will take back control of our money, laws, and borders, and begin a new exciting chapter in our nation’s history.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Scrutiny System in the House of Commons 3 the European Scrutiny System in the House of Commons 4
    PARLIAMENT 20 1 5 PARLIAMENT 2 01 5 WELCOME TO PARLIAMENT COMMONS COMMONS OFHOUSE IN THE SYSTEM SCRUTINY EUROPEAN THE MAY 2015 20Scrutiny Committee1 5Commons European of House the of staff guideA short by the WELCOME TO PARLIAMENT 2 1 0 5 CONTENTS Introduction 5 The purpose of the scrutiny system 6 The scope of the House of Commons system 7 The Explanatory Memorandum (EM) 10 THE The European Scrutiny Committee 12 EUROPEAN The European Scrutiny Committee’s consideration of documents 14 SCRUTINY The scrutiny reserve resolution 17 SYSTEM European Committees 21 Proceedings on the Floor of the House 23 IN THE Pre- and post- Council scrutiny 25 HOUSE OF Other aspects of scrutiny 26 COMMONS The strengths of the European scrutiny system 29 Sources of information 30 Appendix 1 32 © Parliamentary Copyright Orders of reference of the European Scrutiny Committee 32 (House of Commons) 2015 Appendix 2 34 May be reproduced for purposes of private Standing Order on European Committees 34 study or research without permission. May be reproduced for purposes of private Appendix 3 37 study or research without permission. Reproduction for sale or other commercial (The scrutiny reserve resolution) 37 purposes not permitted. Reproduction for sale or other commercial purposes not permitted. Contact information 40 2 THE EUROPEAN SCRUTINY SYSTEM IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS 3 THE EUROPEAN SCRUTINY SYSTEM IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS 4 INTRODUCTION This guide describes the European Union scrutiny system in the House of Commons. Further advice is available from the Clerk of the European Scrutiny Committee (Sarah Davies, [email protected], x5467) and her colleagues.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill Research Briefing
    National Assembly for Wales Senedd Research The European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill Research Briefing January 2020 The Assembly and National Assembly for Wales The National Assembly for Wales is the Senedd Research democratically elected body that represents the interests of Wales and its people, makes laws for Wales, agrees Welsh taxes and holds The European Union the Welsh Government to account. (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill Research Briefing January 2020 Authors: Manon George, Aled Evans and Rhun Davies Paper overview: On 19 December 2019, the UK Government introduced the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill. This research paper provides an overview of the Bill including the background to its introduction, key provisions, legislative consent and the UK Government’s impact assessment. An electronic copy of this document can be found on the National Assembly website: www.assembly.wales Copies of this document can also be obtained in accessible formats including Braille, large print, audio or hard copy from: National Assembly for Wales Cardiff Bay CF99 1NA Tel: 0300 200 6219 Email: [email protected] Twitter: @SeneddResearch Blog: SeneddResearch.blog LinkedIn: Senedd Research, National Assembly for Wales © National Assembly for Wales Commission Copyright 2020 The Assembly and The text of this document may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium providing that it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading or derogatory context. The material must be acknowledged as copyright of the National Assembly for Wales Commission and the title of the document specified. The European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill: Research Briefing The European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill: Research Briefing 5.
    [Show full text]
  • The Competence of Autonomous Entities in The
    INTERNATIONALInternational Jot RVAL Jot «va _ OS os MlNOWTY Minority ASD and GroupGroup Rights Rights MMARTINUS A R T I N U S NIJHOFFNIJHOFF publisherspublishers International International Journal on Minority Journal and Group on RightsMinority 15 (2008) and 259—271 Group www.brill.nl/ijgr Rights 15 (2008) 259—271 www.brill.nl/ijgr TheThe Competence Competence of Autonomous of Autonomous Entities in the Entities in the InternationalInternational Arena - ArenaWith Special - WithReference Special to the Aland Reference to the Aland IslandsIslands in the in European the European Union Union SorenSören Silverstrom*Silverström* Acting Head of Unit, European and External Affairs, Government of AlandAland Abstract International law and the internationalinternational communitycommunity isis primarilyprimarily basedbased onon thethe dominantdominant rolerole ofof thethe state. Other actors are increasingly involvedinvolved inin conductingconducting internationalinternational affairs.affairs. ThisThis articlearticle examinesexamines different solutions for bringing autonomousautonomous entitiesentities toto thethe internationalinternational level,level, takingtaking oneone specificspecific autonomous entity, the Aland Islands,Islands, asas anan example.example. TheThe articlearticle concentratesconcentrates onon competencescompetences ofof autonomous entities in relation toto internationalinternational treatiestreaties andand thethe EuropeanEuropean Union.Union. Keywords Autonomous entities,entities, AlandAland Islands,Islands, international international
    [Show full text]
  • Rules of Procedure
    RULES OF PROCEDURE 7th parliamentary term July 2013 EN United in diversity EN Note to the reader: In accordance with Parliament's decisions on the use of gender-neutral language in its documents, the Rules of Procedure have been adapted to take account of the guidelines on that subject approved by the High Level Group on Gender Equality and Diversity on 13 February 2008 and endorsed by the Bureau on 19 May 2008. Interpretations of the Rules (pursuant to Rule 211) are in italic script . CONTENTS TITLE I MEMBERS, PARLIAMENT BODIES AND POLITICAL GROUPS CHAPTER 1 MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT Rule 1 The European Parliament Rule 2 The independent mandate Rule 3 Verification of credentials Rule 4 Term of office of Members Rule 5 Privileges and immunities Rule 6 Waiver of immunity Rule 7 Procedures on immunity Rule 8 Implementation of the Statute for Members Rule 9 Members' financial interests, standards of conduct, mandatory transparency register and access to Parliament Rule 10 Internal investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) Rule 11 Observers CHAPTER 2 OFFICERS OF PARLIAMENT Rule 12 Provisional Chair Rule 13 Nominations and general provisions Rule 14 Election of President - opening address Rule 15 Election of Vice-Presidents Rule 16 Election of Quaestors Rule 17 Term of office of Officers Rule 18 Vacancies Rule 19 Early termination of an office CHAPTER 3 BODIES AND DUTIES Rule 20 Duties of the President Rule 21 Duties of the Vice-Presidents Rule 22 Composition of the Bureau Rule 23 Duties of the Bureau Rule
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting of the OECD Global Parliamentary Network 1-2 October 2020 List of Participants
    as of 02/10/2020 Meeting of the OECD Global Parliamentary Network 1-2 October 2020 List of participants MP or Chamber or Political Party Country Parliamentary First Name Last Name Organisation Job Title Biography (MPs only) Official represented Pr. Ammar Moussi was elected as Member of the Algerian Parliament (APN) for the period 2002-2007. Again, in the year Algerian Parliament and Member of Peace Society 2017 he was elected for the second term and he's now a member of the Finance and Budget commission of the National Algeria Moussi Ammar Parliamentary Assembly Member of Parliament Parliament Movement. MSP Assembly. In addition, he's member of the parliamentary assembly of the Mediterranean PAM and member of the executif of the Mediterranean bureau of tha Arab Renewable Energy Commission AREC. Abdelmajid Dennouni is a Member of Parliament of the National People’s Assembly and a Member of finances and Budget Assemblée populaire Committee, and Vice president of parliamentary assembly of the Mediterranean. He was previously a teacher at Oran Member of nationale and Algeria Abdelmajid Dennouni Member of Parliament University, General Manager of a company and Member of the Council of Competitiveness, as well as Head of the Parliament Parliamentary Assembly organisaon of constucng, public works and hydraulics. of the Mediterranean Member of Assemblée Populaire Algeria Amel Deroua Member of Parliament WPL Ambassador for Algeria Parliament Nationale Assemblée Populaire Algeria Parliamentary official Safia Bousnane Administrator nationale Lucila Crexell is a National Senator of Argentina and was elected by the people of the province of Neuquén in 2013 and reelected in 2019.
    [Show full text]