Traduction de «améliorer la transparence » (Français → Anglais) :

Points out that, while trilogues are important and effective, the procedures currently applicable to them give rise to concerns as regards the openness in the legislative procedure; calls on the institutions involved to ensure greater transparency of informal trilogues to strengthen democracy by allowing citizens to scrutinise the relevant information which has formed the basis of a legislative act, as stated by the Court of Justice of the European Union in the joined cases Sweden and Turco v Council, while ensuring adequate space to think for the co-legislators; calls on the EU institutions to increase reporting in the competent parli ...[+++]amentary committee on the state of play of trilogue negotiations; considers that where documents are created in the framework of trilogues, such as agendas, summaries of outcomes, minutes and general approaches in the Council, as available, such documents are related to legislative procedures and cannot, in principle, be treated differently from other legislative documents; takes the view that a list of trilogue meetings, and of such aforementioned documents, should be made directly accessible on Parliament’s website; recalls that the future interinstitutional agreement on better law-making includes a database on legislative files and, if adopted, would also address the appropriate handling of trilogues.

4. Reaffirms its first reading position as adopted on 15 December 2011 (EP-PE_TC1-COD(2008)0090) as the starting position for negotiations, highlights that in particular an amended text, as an absolute minimum, and in accordance with the Treaty requirements, should: extend explicitly the scope to all EU institutions, offices and agencies; enhance legislative transparency, whereby any use of exceptions in the legislative procedure should be an exemption from the general rule of legislative transparency; clarify the relationship between transparency and data protection; include the Aarhus Convention; provide for transparency of documen ...[+++]ts originating from Member States; include legal-service opinions drafted in the course of the legislative procedure, provide for financial transparency of EU funds (including at Member State level) and enhance transparency when it comes to gaining external expertise; not include a limitation on the definition of ‘document’; and not introduce any block exemptions;

3. Considers that transparency in the allocation of funds fosters correct implementation and is a key precondition for achieving the overall objectives of cohesion policy and as such needs to be reinforced at all stages of implementation; believes that disclosure of the list of beneficiaries should be continued, notably online, as it is an efficient tool to improve transparency; takes the view that setting Community guidelines and introducing strategic reporting as a new instrument have contributed to increased accountability in delivering policy objectives; calls in this context for regular political debate in order to improve transp ...[+++]arency, accountability and assessment of the effects of cohesion policy;

24. Calls on the EU actively to promote transparency, not just in terms of revenue collection, but also in terms of expenditure of natural resource revenues, by supporting initiatives to enhance budgetary transparency in African countries; urges the EU to promote "responsible lending" by all donors, requiring recipient resource-rich countries with a history of bad governance and corruption to take concrete steps towards greater transparency in revenue management as a condition for receiving non-humanitarian assistance; calls on the EU to apply Articles 96 and 97 of the Cotonou Agreement more consistently to resource-rich countries and, ...[+++] at the same time, to enter into a dialogue with China and other donors with a view to taking concerted action to increase the effectiveness of corresponding measures; stresses that the EU should lead by example by making its own development programmes and projects a model of transparency and good governance;

24. Calls on the EU actively to promote transparency, not just in terms of revenue collection, but also in terms of expenditure of natural resource revenues, by supporting initiatives to enhance budgetary transparency in African countries; urges the EU to promote "responsible lending" by all donors, requiring recipient resource-rich countries with a history of bad governance and corruption to take concrete steps towards greater transparency in revenue management as a condition for receiving non-humanitarian assistance; calls on the EU to apply Articles 96 and 97 of the Cotonou Agreement more consistently to resource-rich countries and, ...[+++] at the same time, to enter into a dialogue with China and other donors with a view to taking concerted action to increase the effectiveness of corresponding measures; stresses that the EU should lead by example by making its own development programmes and projects a model of transparency and good governance;

24. Calls on the EU actively to promote transparency, not just in terms of revenue collection, but also in terms of expenditure of natural resource revenues, by supporting initiatives to enhance budgetary transparency in African countries; urges the EU to promote ‘responsible lending’ by all donors, requiring recipient resource-rich countries with a history of bad governance and corruption to take concrete steps towards greater transparency in revenue management as a condition for receiving non-humanitarian assistance; calls on the EU to apply Articles 96 and 97 of the Cotonou Agreement more consistently to resource-rich countries and, ...[+++] at the same time, to enter into a dialogue with China and other donors with a view to taking concerted action to increase the effectiveness of corresponding measures; stresses that the EU should lead by example by making its own development programmes and projects a model of transparency and good governance;