Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
 Index 
 Full text 
Debates
Wednesday, 17 April 2019 - Strasbourg Revised edition

Negotiations with Council and Commission on European Parliament's right of inquiry: legislative proposal (debate)
MPphoto
 
 

  Alfred Sant (S&D), in writing. – This House has recently been making increasing use of its investigative rights with special and inquiry committees following major scandals. The TAXE committee, established after LuxLeaks, or the EMIS committee focusing on emission measurements in the automotive sector, showed the Parliament’s ability to contribute significantly to the European public debate. Exercises have been carried to understand how and why such maladministration and breaches of EU law have been happening and subsequent policy options to tackle them have been proposed. The first TAXE Committee set out ideas for transparent taxation across the EU and called for a legislative proposal on country-by-country reporting of companies’ profits, tax and subsidies, about which the Commission announced its plans a few months later. One would have expected this Parliament, especially with regard to the recent TAXE 3 committee, to deploy the best available methodologies and proceedings in its evaluation of taxation policies and financial services. Rather, it has given in to facile stigmatisation of certain countries, notably my country Malta, business sectors and professions. In such a case, the limits of this House’s investigative rights were quickly reached as soon tax populism and generalised statements replaced objective proceedings. Unfortunately this deeply questions the credibility and effectiveness of the Parliament’s right of inquiry.

 
Last updated: 9 July 2019Legal notice