Indeks 
 Poprzedni 
 Następny 
 Pełny tekst 
Debaty
Środa, 28 lutego 2018 r. - Bruksela Wersja poprawiona

24. Niedozwolona działalność lobbingowa byłego przewodniczącego Komisji Europejskiej Joségo Manuela Barroso, np. spotkanie z komisarzem Jyrkim Katainenem (debata)
zapis wideo wystąpień
PV
MPphoto
 

  Preşedintele. – Următorul punct de pe ordinea de zi este dezbaterea privind Declarația Comisiei referitoare la activitățile interzise de lobby ale fostului președinte al Comisiei, Barroso, de exemplu întâlnirea cu comisarul Katainen (2018/2605(RSP)).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jyrki Katainen, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, unfortunately there are not that many Members around, but perhaps there are more important issues on their agendas. Nevertheless, thank you very much for your kind invitation to participate in this very interesting, timely and important debate. I am glad to have a chance to discuss transparency practices in the EU institutions with you, to tell you about my rendezvous with my friend and former Commission President, Mr Barroso, and also to correct some unintentional – and also some intentional – misperceptions concerning the meetings.

I did not think that the glass of beer I had with Mr Barroso would merit such attention, but I think it is good to clarify what this Commission does to meet the highest standards of transparency in general and, in particular, how we decided to deal with meetings with Mr Barroso after he accepted the position with Goldman Sachs.

This Commission took a very clear commitment from the very beginning to be transparent vis-à-vis European citizens and its actions. It is very important for this Commission and very important for me. This is why I have always paid great attention to the transparency of my meetings, and you can consult this on my website.

The European Commission as a whole is fully committed to enhancing transparency across all areas of its work. Upon taking office, the Juncker Commission decided first to limit meetings between Commissioners, their cabinets, the Commission Directors-General, to organisations and self-employed individuals engaged in EU policy and policy implementation who are registered in the transparency register. Secondly, and at the same time, the Commission took a specific decision in November 2014 obliging its members to publish these meetings. Unfortunately, the same level of transparency does not occur in all the EU institutions. The Commission is the most transparent institution in the EU.

Now to the particular case of my meeting with Mr Barroso on 25 October 2017. When Mr Barroso accepted the position with Goldman Sachs, President Juncker decided, and announced, that he would be received in the Commission in the future as a representative of an organisation. This is why a meeting with Mr Barroso always needs to be registered, and this is exactly what I did. I told my cabinet to publish the meeting on my website, in the section dedicated to meetings with organisations and self-employed individuals engaged in EU policy-making and policy implementation. The Commission decision of November 2014 provides for the publication of the name of the organisation, not of the names of individual persons representing the organisation. This is why I published the meeting with Goldman Sachs.

Some of you are interested in details of the meeting, so I am happy to clarify this. The meeting was set up at Mr Barroso’s request, in his personal capacity and not as a representative of the organisation. It was arranged over the phone by my office. I met him in the bar of the Silken Berlaymont hotel for a beer. Mr Barroso and I were the only persons present at this meeting. I consider José Manuel Barroso as a friend. I worked a lot with him when he was the President of the European Commission and I was the Finance Minister and Prime Minister of my country at the time. We worked together through one of the most difficult periods in Europe’s recent history, during the economic and financial crisis. For about four months I was Vice-President in this Commission in 2014, during his second mandate. In spring 2016, before he accepted a position with Goldman Sachs, I visited the United States. During my visit I spoke at the University of Princeton, where Mr Barroso was a lecturer and held a faculty, and he was kind enough to organise the event with the students to discuss Europe. Mr Barroso and I were also, at the same time, on a panel at the Atlantic Council event during my visit.

When he proposed we have a cup of coffee, I suggested going for a beer instead. My office took care of setting up the time and place of the meeting. If he had not contacted me, I would have contacted him, because I had already been thinking for a long time that it would be nice to see him again.

When we met it was me doing most of the talking. I told him about our ambitious trade and defence agenda. He is a lecturing professor, travelling a lot and meeting world leaders, so I thought it would be useful for him to know that Europe is on the move again. I hoped he would spread the word. I also spoke to him about the ‘Future of Europe’ discussion, which many of you are familiar with. Of course, we discussed politics, life and personal matters, as many people do when they are sitting with a friend.

Our meeting respected in full the rules the Commission has adopted. The Commission has never said that Mr Barroso could not have meetings with members of the Commission and that members of the Commission would not be allowed to have meetings with him. The meeting took place in public, according to the rules and the commitment taken by President Juncker. Had I not made this meeting public, I could understand questions being asked, but do not criticise the Commission for having made the meeting public, because this is a request we are imposing on ourselves.

We all have a right to have a private life and we all have a right to select our friends. I could not imagine myself politicising other people’s friendships. The NGOs which had questions have received answers from the European Commission, and those who still have questions will also get answers.

It is in this spirit of transparency that I am discussing here with you today.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Paulo Rangel, em nome do Grupo PPE. – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Vice-Presidente Katainen, antes de mais, queria agradecer-lhe pela forma clara, sóbria, e eu diria com respeito por esta casa, como explicou este assunto.

Na verdade, fazer este debate, hoje, nesta casa, com este motivo, é mais próprio de um reality show do que de um parlamento. Não há na conduta de José Manuel Durão Barroso, nem enquanto foi Presidente da Comissão por dois mandatos, nem no período que se seguiu, nem a partir do momento em que regressou à vida privada, nada que se lhe possa apontar do ponto de vista ético ou do ponto de vista da correção de comportamento.

Há talvez perseguição pessoal, há talvez inimizade, há talvez gente que neste Parlamento não gostou das linhas políticas que ele assumiu. E por isso, de cada vez que fala, de cada vez que aparece, de cada vez que pratica um ato normal da sua vida privada, é motivo de ataque neste Parlamento.

É estranho que numa semana em que sai o escândalo Manafort e até há altos dignitários da Comissão que estão envolvidos em questões da Ucrânia, nós não estejamos aqui a debater isso e estejamos a debater se José Manuel Durão Barroso devia, ou não devia, ter bebido uma cerveja num bar de um hotel em Bruxelas.

Pobre parlamento que perde tempo com um assunto destes e que não respeita aqueles que o serviram com dignidade e com sentido ético, como é o caso de José Manuel Durão Barroso.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Ana Gomes, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhor Presidente, ao contrário do que afirmou o Presidente Juncker, o encontro entre Durão Barroso e o Vice-Presidente Katainen não é um não assunto. Não me espanta que Durão Barroso tenha quebrado o compromisso de não fazer lobby junto das instituições europeias quando estava em causa a compatibilidade do seu emprego no Goldman Sachs com os seus deveres como ex—Presidente da Comissão Europeia.

Mas quem aqui tem esclarecimentos a prestar, ao Parlamento Europeu e aos cidadãos, é justamente o Sr. Vice-Presidente Katainen, que bem sabia que é impróprio, pouco recomendável, reunir com Durão Barroso, dada a controvérsia causada pela sua nomeação para aquele banco privado depois de ter ocupado o cargo de Presidente da Comissão.

Ainda para mais quando o próprio Vice-Presidente Katainen, depois de ter de reconhecer que o encontro com alguém do Goldman Sachs era com Durão Barroso, o que inicialmente omitiu do registo, acabou também por admitir que tinham tratado de assuntos de política europeia no campo do comércio e da defesa. Obviamente, ao contrário do que disseram o Presidente Juncker e o próprio Sr.Vice-Presidente, não se tratou de um copo entre amigos, e por isso, há demasiadas contradições e mudanças na narrativa, Sr. Vice—Presidente. Precisamos de saber, precisamos que esclareça que assuntos específicos de comércio e de defesa discutiu com o Sr. Durão Barroso, empregado do Goldman Sachs.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Marian Harkin, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, I believe in listening to both sides of the story, but any explanation must have real credibility. First, your meeting is logged in the register as a meeting with Goldman Sachs, yet you said it was a meeting between friends. You say that Mr Juncker said that it is a rule that any meeting with Mr Barroso has to be logged, so why not by name? Secondly, we have the sorry saga of Barroso’s hasty exit from the Commission to Goldman Sachs, a company that carries at least some responsibility for the crash where millions of EU citizens’ lives were damaged or destroyed. You cannot ignore that fact. At any meeting logged in the transparency register, you are a Commissioner first and a friend of Barroso second.

The golden circle of powerful interests and powerful people meeting with no account of proceedings does not have the confidence of EU citizens. No matter how you explain it, your meeting with Barroso falls into that category.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Dennis de Jong, on behalf of the GUE/NGL Group. – Mr President, thank you, and thanks also to the Vice-President for being here. I am very happy that we are talking about transparency and we share the interest of the Commission in transparency, but I must say that the more I listen to the Vice-President, the more confused I get. You enter into the register, rightfully so, that you meet a lobbyist. That is also the policy of the Commission, that Mr Barroso is treated only as a lobbyist, not as a friend, not as a beer drinker, nothing like that: just a lobbyist. Then you say, ‘but we had a chat, and of course this wasn’t about Goldman Sachs; I wrote down in the register Goldman Sachs, but it wasn’t about Goldman Sachs, it was about a university background, trade and defence and the European Union’.

This is all very contradictory. I really think that we, as Parliament, deserve to know exactly whether he was there in his capacity as a lobbyist for Goldman Sachs, because then we would also have a problem with the Commission. The ad hoc committee – the ethical committee – made very clear that his commitment not to lobby for Goldman Sachs with people like you was important for the committee when taking the decision not to take sanctions against Mr Barroso. So I think we need far more clarity than you have given, and at this hour it is quite normal that the people who are spokespersons for their Groups are here, but not the entire Parliament.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Sven Giegold, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Herr Kommissar Katainen, ich muss Ihnen ganz offen sagen: Sie haben Recht, dass die Kommission, was die Transparenz von Treffen angeht, weiter ist als das, was wir hier im Parlament selbst praktizieren, weiter als was die Mitgliedstaaten praktizieren. Die Transparenz über die Treffen der Spitzenbeamten und auch Sie als Kommissare, das ist ein echter Schritt nach vorne, was Lobbytransparenz angeht.

Das Ziel von Lobbytransparenz ist niemals Kontaktverbote zwischen Freunden – darum geht es nicht. Aber das eigentliche Problem, über das wir hier sprechen, ist, wie so ein solcher Seitenwechsel von Herrn Barroso zu Goldman Sachs überhaupt möglich war. Sie haben leider die Gelegenheit verpasst, eine tiefe Reform der Seitenwechselregeln einzuleiten; Sie haben nur ein bisschen an den Regeln die Schrauben angedreht. Was nach wie vor fehlt, ist ein unabhängiges Ethikkomitee, das über diese Fragen entscheidet und das nicht von der Kommission ernannt wird, sondern aus eigenständigen Persönlichkeiten besteht. Bitte ziehen Sie die Konsequenz aus dieser Geschichte, diese Regeln jetzt endlich demokratiefreundlich auszugestalten.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Gilles Lebreton, au nom du groupe ENF. – Monsieur le Président, l’ancien président de la Commission de Bruxelles, M. Barroso, a été engagé en 2016 par la banque Goldman Sachs, tristement célèbre pour avoir provoqué la crise financière de 2008.

Officiellement, il n’a pas été engagé pour faire du lobbying – ce qui paraît difficile à croire, mais le comité d’éthique, commandité par la Commission, a fait semblant de croire à cette baliverne. Entre eurocrates, il faut bien se serrer les coudes. Oh! surprise, M. Barroso vient pourtant d’être surpris en pleine conversation avec le commissaire Katainen. Le spectre du lobbying reparaît et les explications que vient de donner M.  Katainen – une rencontre entre amis – ne sont guère convaincantes.

Cet événement prouve à mes yeux que l’Union européenne est l’Europe des banques et des affairistes sans foi ni loi. C’est d’une autre Europe dont nous avons besoin: une Europe respectueuse des nations et des libertés.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Pervenche Berès (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Vice-Président, j’ai l’impression que, si vous nous avez parlé de transparence, en réalité, vous avez été d’une confusion totale.

Vous nous parlez de transparence et d’un café avec un ami, mais de quel ami s’agit-il?

Vous ne pouvez pas ignorer que votre responsabilité comme vice-président de la Commission doit vous amener à vous interroger sur le type de rendez-vous et de contacts que vous pouvez avoir avec M. Barroso, qui est engagé par Goldman Sachs pour les conseiller sur la question du Brexit. Et pour parler de quoi? De commerce et de défense!

Me diriez-vous qu’il n’y a pas de passerelle entre les deux, entre le mandat de M. Barroso au sein de Goldman Sachs et du thème même que vous avouez avoir évoqué avec lui?

Alors c’est peut-être autour d’un verre de bière, mais cela ne change rien au fait que vous avez par là même franchi toutes les frontières de ce qui est possible dans le cadre du respect, de l’indépendance et des règles minimum qui devraient être celles de la Commission, s’agissant du lobbying exercé par M. Barroso, qui a été pris la main dans le sac.

 
  
 

Intervenții la cerere

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jean-Paul Denanot (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, je sais bien que les promesses n’engagent que ceux qui y croient, mais M. Barroso avait fait la promesse de ne pas intercéder en faveur de son nouvel employeur, Goldman Sachs. Déjà, nous avions été un certain nombre à considérer qu’un commissaire – pardon, un ancien président de la Commission – n’avait pas à aller pantoufler, comme on dit en France, dans des délais aussi courts.

Aujourd’hui, on apprend qu’il est allé prendre une bière avec un ami qui se trouve être, s’il vous plaît, un vice-président de la Commission – en fait, peut-être pour parler quand même affaires.

Les citoyens européens attendent de leurs responsables de la transparence dans les relations que ceux-ci ont avec les lobbies. Pour ma part, comme la plupart de mes collègues, je publie toutes les rencontres que j’ai pu avoir dans le cadre de mes fonctions. Nous avons le devoir de vérité, vous, M. Katainen, comme moi, Jean-Paul Denanot.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η πρόσληψη του Barroso από την Goldman Sachs προκάλεσε σάλο κυριολεκτικά στην ευρωπαϊκή κοινή γνώμη. Τώρα βλέπουμε ότι ο Barroso είναι και λομπίστας της Goldman Sachs, παρότι υποσχέθηκε ότι δεν θα το κάνει, γεγονός το οποίο προκαλεί την ευρωπαϊκή κοινή γνώμη και αυτό είναι το βασικό στοιχείο. Από κει και πέρα κ. Katainen, με τις απαντήσεις που δώσατε, μάλλον περισσότερα ερωτήματα δημιουργήσατε παρά εξηγήσατε το τι συνέβη. Διότι, αν ήταν μια ιδιωτική συνάντηση, τότε δεν είχε νόημα να καταγραφεί ως συνάντηση με την Goldman Sachs και, αν ήταν μια συνάντηση με την Goldman Sachs, θα έπρεπε να έχετε περιγράψει και να αναφερθείτε και στη συνάντηση με τον Barroso. Είναι προφανές λοιπόν ότι υπάρχει ατόπημα από τη δική σας πλευρά κι αυτό θα πρέπει να αποκατασταθεί. Το ότι συζητήσατε για θέματα άμυνας, έτσι γενικώς και αορίστως, δεν μας πείθει. Υπάρχει ενδιαφέρον της Goldman Sachs για μετοχές επιχειρήσεων άμυνας; Για defence stocks; Ναι ή όχι; Γνωρίζετε γι’ αυτό το θέμα;

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Krisztina Morvai (NI). – Elnök Úr! Együttérzéssel gondolok azokra a szegény fiatalokra Magyarországon, meg hát idősebbekre is, akik az Európai Unió lobogóját lóbálva kelnek ki a magyarországi korrupció ellen. Szánalmas dolog ez, hiszen látjuk, mi folyik az Európai Unióban. Most kivételesen lebuktak, porszem esett a gépezetbe, de ez egy abszolút tipikus történet. Itt van Barroso úr, az Európai Bizottság volt elnöke, miután lejár a mandátuma már minden politikai kapcsolatát ugye megfelelően kiépítette. Elszegődik a Goldman Sachs-hez, az egyik olyan céghez, hogy így mondjam, amelyik eminens felelőse annak, hogy európai polgárok millióinak tönkrement az élete.

Majd pedig visszajár lobbizgatni a Goldman Sachs érdekében az európai uniós pajtásaihoz. Így megy ez, kérem szépen, tehát ne az Európai Unió zászlóját lobogtassuk, hogyha a korrupciótól meg akarunk szabadulni, mert ez nem az a hely, ahonnan tanulni lehetne. Ha nem akarunk Magyarországon korrupciót, nagyon helyes, én is gyűlölöm, de nem az Uniótól van tanulnivalónk.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Elly Schlein (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, Vicepresidente Katainen, mi pare che ci siano degli elementi contraddittori nelle spiegazioni fornite a questo Parlamento e quindi ai cittadini europei. L'incontro con Barroso viola gli impegni che aveva preso, ed è inopportuno che chi ha avuto l'onore di servire da Presidente della Commissione possa poi, tramite le revolving doors, mettersi a fare attività di lobbying sulla Commissione stessa. Anche dai Commissari ci aspettiamo trasparenza e indipendenza, il che vuol dire evitare ogni potenziale conflitto di interesse.

Vorremmo almeno sapere di quali temi, in concreto, avete discusso. La sfida di ridurre la distanza dei cittadini europei dalle nostre istituzioni parte anche da qui, da una maggiore trasparenza, una misura indispensabile per capire quali interessi si muovono in questi corridoi, altrimenti rafforzerete l'idea che l'UE abbia, con le sue istituzioni, più orecchie per i portatori di grandi interessi economici che non per i problemi dei cittadini e le loro difficoltà.

 
  
 

(Încheierea intervențiilor la cerere)

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jyrki Katainen, Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, thank you very much for the questions.

First, I would like to answer Ms Gomes’s question regarding the defence and foreign policy-related issues which we discussed. I am sure you know most of them. I explained what we are planning to do with the Defence Industrial Fund, how we have established a preparatory action on defence research, and also the latest developments on Permanent Structured Cooperation on Security and Defence (PESCO), etc. On the trade agenda, I explained or listed all the countries with whom we are negotiating, and things like that. As I am in charge of these issues and am interested in these issues, it says a lot that things are now moving in a positive direction in Europe. Those MEPs who are involved in these files will know more or less the substance of what I discussed.

A couple of other remarks. I understand that people have controversial thoughts regarding Goldman Sachs as a financial institution. Everybody has the right to have a negative, positive or neutral position on this. Also, some people may have a certain attitude or opinion regarding Mr Barroso. I think we all can agree here that, as Mr Giegold said, transparency does not mean denying people the chance to meet each other. Commissioners are allowed – just like anyone else – to meet Mr Barroso, for instance. He cannot be the only person in the world who cannot be met. I am sure that many of you can understand that it is natural to meet and discuss with a person who I know from many years back and who I consider a friend, who has a wide view on how the world is moving, just like anyone else meets him. If I invited him to my home with my wife, as a group of other friends, I would not expect anyone to ask me to invite a Commission official to sit in the corner of my dining room and record what we are discussing. It is nothing more than a normal discussion. I checked my website today and I have never received anybody from Goldman Sachs. I would not have a problem meeting Goldman Sachs if they had something to say.

A couple of my cabinet members have once or twice received representatives of Goldman Sachs, just like they meet all the other financial institutions, NGOs, labour unions or industrial organisations who are interested in meeting with us.

Taking into account all the controversies around this topic, in my mind friendship also matters. I understand that everybody does not consider friendship in the same way that I do. It is not a matter which is relevant to public debate. Friendship has its own value, and I do hope that we all see things like that. I will meet Mr Barroso next time: I do not know when, but hopefully, soon enough. We see each other very rarely nowadays because he is travelling and I am busy, but hopefully I will have a chance to meet him again, and I will do exactly the same as I did this time. I will disclose this meeting, even if it is a private meeting, because we have a principle on this. I will do the same as I did this time.

Mr Barroso has followed the Commission rules and his personal commitment. He has not lobbied the Commission. I do not know, but I am sure that all of you here always disclose every time you meet somebody and you make notes on these discussions. It is a good principle, because we need to do whatever it takes to strengthen the confidence of our citizens towards the political decision-makers. In this House it is very important, because you are the real decision makers, together with the Council.

Thank you very much for this discussion. I am always available if you want to continue this particular discussion or a discussion on other issues.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Preşedintele. – Dezbaterea a fost închisă.

 
  
  

VORSITZ: EVELYNE GEBHARDT
Vizepräsidentin

 
Ostatnia aktualizacja: 14 kwietnia 2018Informacja prawna