Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-10-23-Speech-4-010"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081023.4.4-010"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, thank you for this opportunity to address Parliament on the annual report of the European Ombudsman for 2007. I also wish to thank the rapporteur, Mrs Zdravkova, and the Committee on Petitions for their excellent and constructive report.
A further important initiative which should come to fruition within the next quarter of the year is that my office is developing an interactive guide to help citizens find the most appropriate avenue of redress for their grievances. This guide should enable an even greater proportion of complainants to address directly the body best equipped to deal with the complaint. Complaints which are inadmissible for me will therefore be resolved more promptly and effectively. My institution will then be better able to fulfil its core role – to help citizens who are unhappy with the way they are being treated by EU institutions and bodies.
The Ombudsman cannot work alone. Ensuring a top-class administration is a task that must be fulfilled proactively in cooperation with EU institutions and bodies. The increased settlement of cases and friendly solutions is a source of encouragement and serves as an indication of our mutual efforts to contribute to building citizens’ trust, vis-à-vis the Union, at a point in time where that is greatly needed. I am also deeply grateful for Parliament’s support and guidance, both in terms of the budgetary resources you provide my institution with and in terms of the positive relationship I enjoy with the Petitions Committee. With your continued support, I will endeavour to build on the achievements of this past year.
Finally, as this is the last occasion during this parliamentary term that I have the honour of presenting my annual report to this House, I would like to put on record my deep appreciation for the close cooperation and good advice that I have received from Parliament and individual Members during the past four and a half years.
My report records progress in handling complaints, promoting good administration and providing knowledge about the Ombudsman’s role. The number of admissible complaints increased, in both absolute and relative terms, from 449 (12% of the total) in 2006 to 518 (16% of the total) in 2007. We therefore met both of the objectives which Parliament has consistently emphasised: increasing the number of admissible complaints and reducing the number of inadmissible complaints.
The main types of maladministration alleged in admissible complaints were: lack of transparency, including refusal of information; unfairness or abuse of power; unsatisfactory procedures; avoidable delay; discrimination; negligence; legal error; and failure to ensure fulfilment of obligations. Three hundred and forty-eight decisions closing inquiries were made. That represents a 40% increase compared to 2006. In 95 cases, the inquiry revealed no maladministration. Such a finding is not always negative for the complainant, who at least has the benefit of a full explanation from the institution concerned. Even when maladministration is not found, I may identify opportunities to improve the quality of administration provided by institutions. If so, I point them out in a further remark.
Many of my inquiries result in a positive sum outcome that satisfies both the complainant and the institution complained against. One hundred and twenty-nine cases were settled by the institution concerned to the satisfaction of the complainant. That is double the number of cases settled in this way in 2006, and reflects a growing willingness on the part of institutions and bodies to regard complaints made to the Ombudsman as an opportunity to recognise and put right mistakes that have occurred.
When I find maladministration, I try to achieve a friendly solution. In some cases, this can be achieved by the institution or body concerned by offering compensation to the complainant. Any such offer is made
or in other words without admission of legal liability and without creating a legal precedent. When a friendly solution is not possible I close the case with a critical remark. A critical remark is also appropriate if it is no longer possible for the instance of maladministration to be eliminated. It confirms that the complaint is justified and indicates to the institution or body concerned what it is has done wrong. Such a criticism is intended to be constructive, so as to help avoid similar maladministration in the future.
It is important for institutions and bodies to follow up critical remarks and to take prompt action to resolve outstanding problems. To better monitor the impact of my criticism, I launched a study of the follow-up to all critical remarks, and to the cases involving a further remark, made in 2006. The results of that study, published on my website and sent to all the bodies concerned, should provide encouragement to the European public service to improve practices and further develop a culture of service to citizens.
In cases where it is still possible to eliminate the instance of maladministration, I normally make a draft recommendation to the institution or body. If it fails to respond satisfactorily, I may send a special report to Parliament. I submitted one such report to you criticising the Commission for not dealing with an infringement complaint concerning the European Working Time Directive. I welcome Parliament’s support, as expressed in your resolution of 3 September 2008, based on Mr De Rossa’s report.
This year, I have again included star cases in my annual report. These are cases where I consider that institutions or bodies involved responded to my inquiries in an exemplary fashion. Seven such star cases are highlighted. Four of these concerned the Commission, one concerned the Council, one the European Central Bank and one the European Aviation Safety Agency. I have continued to make every effort to ensure that EU institutions and bodies adopt a citizen-centred approach in all their activities, by seeking every opportunity to achieve friendly solutions and by launching more own-initiative inquiries in order to identify problems and encourage best practice.
I would now like to mention some other activities undertaken with a view to ensuring the best possible service to citizens. I have continued my efforts to improve the quality of information concerning rights under EU law, provided especially through the European Network of Ombudsmen. That network, which includes the Petitions Committee, cooperates in case handling and in sharing experiences and best practice. One of the purposes of the network is to facilitate the rapid transfer of complaints which are admissible for me to a competent ombudsman or similar body. When possible, I transfer cases directly or give suitable advice to the complainant. During 2007 I was able to help 867 complainants in this manner."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples