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
Parliamentary questions
PDF 117kWORD 19k
5 February 2018
P-000682-18
Question for written answer P-000682-18
to the Commission
Rule 130
Patrizia Toia (S&D)

 Subject:  Classified status of documentation concerning the European Medicines Agency
 Answer in writing 

It is surprising to note that the file concerning Amsterdam’s bid has been given classified status at the request of the Netherlands.

The Commission was supposed to provide Member States with the information necessary to be able to take an informed decision and found the Netherlands’ statements concerning the delivery of the final premises by April 2019, to be reliable, without conducting the appropriate checks, to the detriment of a fully informed technical assessment regarding the choice made by the Council.

The Council decision took place behind closed doors, through the drawing of lots, without any safeguards or transparency. In addition, to classify parts of the application file runs counter to the principles relating to procedural safeguards and transparency of the substance of institutional activities, giving rise to an objective disparity between the bids.

Parliament, under the codecision procedure, has the right and duty to gain access to the documentation.

Can the Commission therefore say:

On what legal basis it decided, with its Secretary-General, to accept the request to classify part of the file;
Whether it believes that Parliament should have access to the documentation in order to be able to take an informed decision and whether it still considers the technical assessment provided before the award to be valid;
Whether it has any estimate of the cost to the EU budget for the additional expenditure relating to the unavailability of suitable headquarters?

Original language of question: IT 
Last updated: 12 February 2018Legal notice