Europees Joods Parlement

[Zwitser]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Piero

En u gelooft dat Rick Santorum die theorie over het universum wil invoeren in de de regering van de VS?

Ik acht het mogelijk dat hij dit misschien gaat proberen. Was ik Amerikaan ik zou nooit voor hem stemmen.

[Zwitser]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door D'ARTOIS

Respect voor religie is respect hebben voor moord, doodslag en marteling. De Romeinse kerk heeft daarin ervaring van om en nabij 1500 jaar.

Sorry, nee.

Als "respect voor X" automatisch "respect voor Y dat volgens Z in naam van X gebeurd is" betekent kan je voor niks respect hebben.

Voor elke religie of ideologie loopt er namelijk wel ergens iemand rond dat deze met moord of doodslag associeert.

[D'ARTOIS]

Dat is er dan in ieder geval een die de realiteit ziet.

Toch te zielig voor woorden dat de mens anno 2012 nog steeds geloof hecht aan wat een stel oplichters in elkaar hebben gedraaid.

[Zwitser]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door D'ARTOIS

Dat is er dan in ieder geval een die de realiteit ziet.

Toch te zielig voor woorden dat de mens anno 2012 nog steeds geloof hecht aan wat een stel oplichters in elkaar hebben gedraaid.

Dat verbaasd mij ook. Echter ik zie geen reden waarom ik mensen hun waan niet zou gunnen. Of hoef ik mensen die in astrologie, of socialisme geloven dan ook niet langer meer te respecteren?

[den dinges]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door D'ARTOIS

Ik dank U heert Zonbron. Wij melden ons weer

@ Mam

Je tegenargumenten benadrukken juist waarom een EJP ontoelaatbaar is.

Ontoelaatbaar omdat religie en staat strikt gescheiden dienen te zijn en met Joden uit de Ukeaine en alles wat zich buiten Europa bevindt hebben niets te schaften met zowel de organisatie en de inhoudelijke taak van de diverse commissies.

Het is bij de wilde beesten af. Twee industrielen die een partijtje oprichten en vervolgens middels een bende smeergeld zichzelf de EU binnensluizen.
Je denkt toch zeker niet dat zoiets vanzelf gaat.

1) Wie zijn die 400.000? Waar vandaan?
Hebben zij stemrecht in dier voege dat zij kunnen bepalen wat ingezetenen van de EU zeer zeker niet kunnen?

2) Ontoelaatbaar dat Oost-Europese individuen zich middels smeergeld toegang verschaffen tot de EU. Afkomstig uit landen die door dezelfde EU met opzet buiten de deur gehouden worden.
Joods imperialisme?
Van de gekken te gek.

Inderdaad, dit kan niet. Of anders moet je morgen ook een Europees Moslim Parlement toelaten, met vertegenwoordigers uit alle arabische landen...Bvb...

[Piero]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Zwitser

Dat verbaasd mij ook. Echter ik zie geen reden waarom ik mensen hun waan niet zou gunnen. Of hoef ik mensen die in astrologie, of socialisme geloven dan ook niet langer meer te respecteren?

U begint weer over mensen respecteren. Als u iemand respecteert betekent dat niet dat u zijn waan respecteert. U mag hem inderdaad zijn waan gunnen, zelfs als u er heel veel hinder van ondervindt. Dat moet u zelf weten. Maar in sommige kringen kunnen bepaalde wanen niet worden getolereerd.

In wetenschappelijke kringen worden mensen die in astrologie geloven niet getolereerd, maar mensen die in socialisme geloven wel. U ziet toch ook het verschil wel tussen de categorieën waarin astrologie en socialisme thuishoren, hoop ik?

[Zwitser]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Piero

U begint weer over mensen respecteren. Als u iemand respecteert betekent dat niet dat u zijn waan respecteert. U mag hem inderdaad zijn waan gunnen, zelfs als u er heel veel hinder van ondervindt. Dat moet u zelf weten. Maar in sommige kringen kunnen bepaalde wanen niet worden getolereerd.

In wetenschappelijke kringen worden mensen die in astrologie geloven niet getolereerd, maar mensen die in socialisme geloven wel. U ziet toch ook het verschil wel tussen de categorieën waarin astrologie en socialisme thuishoren, hoop ik?

Maar waarom dan in hemelsnaam heb jij er een probleem mee dat een groep mensen die in een bepaalde godsdienst geloven bij elkaar gekomen zijn?

[Zwitser]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door den dinges

Inderdaad, dit kan niet. Of anders moet je morgen ook een Europees Moslim Parlement toelaten, met vertegenwoordigers uit alle arabische landen...Bvb...

Sorry, maar als de Europese Moslims besluiten om vertegenwoordigers te kiezen en die bij elkaar te laten komen, dan is er niks wat je er tegen kan doen. Vrijheid van vergadering, weet je wel.

[den dinges]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Zwitser

Sorry, maar als de Europese Moslims besluiten om vertegenwoordigers te kiezen en die bij elkaar te laten komen, dan is er niks wat je er tegen kan doen. Vrijheid van vergadering, weet je wel.

Dat ze in moslimlanden gaan vergaderen, niet in het Europees parlement...

[zonbron]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door den dinges

Inderdaad, dit kan niet. Of anders moet je morgen ook een Europees Moslim Parlement toelaten, met vertegenwoordigers uit alle arabische landen...Bvb...

3! Kan niet.

Uit Wikipedia
The EJU hopes to establish a European Jewish Parliament, comprising 120 members modeled on the Israeli Knesset.[3][4] This group would then represent the concerns of the Jewish community to the European Union.

Zelfs vele Joodse Europese burgers voelen zich niet vertegenwoordigd door deze groep genaamd EJU. Ze nemen er afstand van en beschouwen het als een gevaar voor hun eigen doelstellingen.

En nogmaals:

...

Jean-Marc MOSKOWICZ, Président d’Europe Israël, faisait partie des 12 élus représentants la France.

« C’est avec enthousiasme et émotion que je me suis rendu �* la séance inaugurale du premier Parlement Juif Européen. Cette idée initiée par Shimon PERES est porteuse d’espoir �* divers titres: �* la fois pour permettre aux Juifs de 47 pays européens de réaffirmer d’une seule voix les valeurs et l’identité juives, mais aussi de combattre ensemble l’antisémitisme qui revet des aspects différents dans les pays de l’Est que celui subit �* l’Ouest.

Pour Europe Israël et les Juifs de France attachés au sionisme et au soutien �* Israël, ce nouveau Parlement est une opportunité sans précédent de créer un groupe de pression européen dans l’objectif de soutenir d’une seule voix Israël tant au sein du Parlement Européen que dans les divers pays représentés, l’opportunité de créer �* l’échelle européenne un vrai lobby de soutien �* Israël face �* la vague européenne de délégitimation de l’Etat Hébreu. »


Voici un résumé de la séance inaugurale selon EJU

Les membres du Parlement représentent 47 pays et ont été élus par plus de 400.000 personnes en Europe de l’est, centrale et occidentale qui ont voté via internet et ont ainsi montré un intérêt et une demande sans précédent pour une organisation nouvelle transparente et démocratiquement élue, indique l’Union juive européenne (EJU), l’organisation �* la base de la création de ce parlement.

...

BRON : www.israel-flash.com/2012/02/seance-inaugurale-du-premier-parlement-juif-europeen-a-bruxelles-«-un-grand-jour-pour-les-juifs-en-europe

[zonbron]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door den dinges

Dat ze in moslimlanden gaan vergaderen, niet in het Europees parlement...

2! Spot on.

[Zwitser]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door den dinges

Dat ze in moslimlanden gaan vergaderen, niet in het Europees parlement...

Het "EJP" heeft ook niet in het Europees parlement vergadert...

[Zwitser]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door zonbron

2! Spot on.

Dus vrijheid van vergaderen geld niet als je Moslim bent?

[zonbron]

@Zwitser, U blijft maar doorbomen over recht op vergaderen. Natuurlijk heeft iedereen dat recht.
Het gaat hier echter om het volgende...

Uit Wikipedia
The EJU hopes to establish a European Jewish Parliament, comprising 120 members modeled on the Israeli Knesset.[3][4] This group would then represent the concerns of the Jewish community to the European Union.

Het doel is dus het 'DIRECT' beinvloeden van het Europees Parlement via dit EJP.

Zelfs vele Joodse Europese burgers voelen zich niet vertegenwoordigd door deze groep genaamd EJU. Ze nemen er afstand van en beschouwen het als een gevaar voor hun eigen doelstellingen.

En nogmaals:

...

Jean-Marc MOSKOWICZ, Président d’Europe Israël, faisait partie des 12 élus représentants la France.

« C’est avec enthousiasme et émotion que je me suis rendu �* la séance inaugurale du premier Parlement Juif Européen. Cette idée initiée par Shimon PERES est porteuse d’espoir �* divers titres: �* la fois pour permettre aux Juifs de 47 pays européens de réaffirmer d’une seule voix les valeurs et l’identité juives, mais aussi de combattre ensemble l’antisémitisme qui revet des aspects différents dans les pays de l’Est que celui subit �* l’Ouest.

Pour Europe Israël et les Juifs de France attachés au sionisme et au soutien �* Israël, ce nouveau Parlement est une opportunité sans précédent de créer un groupe de pression européen dans l’objectif de soutenir d’une seule voix Israël tant au sein du Parlement Européen que dans les divers pays représentés, l’opportunité de créer �* l’échelle européenne un vrai lobby de soutien �* Israël face �* la vague européenne de délégitimation de l’Etat Hébreu. »


Voici un résumé de la séance inaugurale selon EJU

Les membres du Parlement représentent 47 pays et ont été élus par plus de 400.000 personnes en Europe de l’est, centrale et occidentale qui ont voté via internet et ont ainsi montré un intérêt et une demande sans précédent pour une organisation nouvelle transparente et démocratiquement élue, indique l’Union juive européenne (EJU), l’organisation �* la base de la création de ce parlement.

...

BRON : www.israel-flash.com/2012/02/seance-inaugurale-du-premier-parlement-juif-europeen-a-bruxelles-«-un-grand-jour-pour-les-juifs-en-europe

Deze heren willen een lobby vormen ter ondersteuning van Israel, en druk uitoefenen op Europa, want ze voelen dat Europa hun onrecht aandoet. (*** face �* la vague européenne de délégitimation de l’Etat Hébreu.)

Ze mogen doen wat ze willen, maar een EJP (nadien mss AIPAC-achtige toestanden) die gerust in de Europees Parlement vergaderen en de Europese vlag aanwenden en veranderen.

Welnu, not in my name.

Laat de dames en heren van het Moslimbroederschap ook maar een EU-parlement oprichten en nadien mss tevens een emo-parlement.

Verder is dit geen simpele 'vergadering' van mensen die een geloof beleven, maar wel het organiseren van een politiek Zionistisch blok.

Sommige Joden die op de kieslijst stonden hebben hun naam laten verwijderen, anderen die op de lijst stonden, en sommigen die zelfs verkozen werden, werden uitgestoot vanwege anti-semitisme (lees : anti-zionisme). Dus het is overduidelijk...

[den dinges]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Zwitser

Dus vrijheid van vergaderen geld niet als je Moslim bent?

Iedereen mag vergaderen zoveel hij wil. Maar in het Europees parlement horen enkel vertegenwoordigers van de Europese deelstaten thuis. Geen religieuze drukkingsgroepen, en/of vertegenwoordigers van Niet-Europese landen...

[filosoof]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door den dinges

Iedereen mag vergaderen zoveel hij wil. Maar in het Europees parlement horen enkel vertegenwoordigers van de Europese deelstaten thuis. Geen religieuze drukkingsgroepen, en/of vertegenwoordigers van Niet-Europese landen...

http://forum.politics.be/showpost.ph...4&postcount=46
http://forum.politics.be/showpost.ph...8&postcount=50
http://forum.politics.be/showpost.ph...1&postcount=30

[zonbron]

U wilt vergaderen in de gebouwen van het Europees Parlement te Brussel ?

Laat ons even zoeken : http://lmgtfy.com/?q=verhuur+vergade...lement+brussel


En bvb.

Brussel vergaderzaal Europees Parlement
Business center Brussel conferentie

Mogelijkheden zat in de omgeving van het EP te Brussel. Maar in het EP zelf ?
Daar heb ik nog steeds geen informatie over gevonden.

[D'ARTOIS]

Zonbron je bent spot on en Zwitser snapt er feitelijk geen mallemoer van. De beste man komt met volstrekte en zinloze argumenten.

De grote Joodse organisaties vormen internationaal onafhankelijke maar zeer grote machtsblokken, welke handel en industrie, entertainement en het bankwezen beheren en aansturen in de richting van hun eigen moderatie en financieel voordeel.

Israel wordt, het zij nogmaals gezegd, niet meer bestuurd noch beheerd vanuit Israel.
Dat doen de machtsblokken in de VS (en daarbuiten) die hun stromannetjes in de Knesset hebben.
(Een dag Knesset en je bent compleet doorgedraaid).

Het is een tendens. Een tendens die zich stelselmatig aan het expanderen is.
En daar moet een halt aan gemaakt worden.

[zonbron]

Gevonden, het betreft hier blijkbaar een 'Cross-Party Group', 'intergoup' of beter, een alternatieve vorm van een lobby.

Transparency Boost Needed
for European Parliament Cross-Party Groups
Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO), October 2006
The European Energy Forum takes MEPs on an adventurous trip to the Arctic region, sponsored by a large oil firm. The secretariat of the Sky and Space Intergroup is run by the Aerospace and Defence Industries Association of Europe. Cross-party groups are clearly an increasingly popular way for business lobbyists to mingle with and influence select groups of MEPs. TheParliament’s current rules on intergroups are too limited and weakly enforced to secure even the basic levels of transparency around the activities, composition and funding sources of intergroups and MEP-industry forums.
The influence of lobbying on European Union decision-making is currently under the spotlight, for instance as part of the debate around the European Transparency Initiative (ETI).1 One aspect yet to receive attention is the role that cross-party groups of Members of the European
Parliament (MEPs) play as vehicles for lobbying.
This report focuses on two specific types of groups.2 The first is the ‘intergroup’, which consist of MEPs from different political groups. Currently 25 intergroups are registered and officially recognised. Many more informal cross-party groups of MEPs refer to themselves as intergroups. Some observers estimate the total number of intergroups (including those which are not registered) to be over 80. The unregistered intergroups are not covered by the European Parliament’s rules introduced in 1999.
The second type is a grouping that involves MEPs from different parties together with corporate lobbyists. These hybrid groups do not consider themselves to be intergroups and will be referred to as ‘MEP-industry forums’ in this report. These groups are not bound by any parliamentary ethics and transparency rules at all, and this lack of scrutiny makes it hard to determine how many exist. However, our research shows that these MEP-industry forums are de facto lobbying vehicles for corporate interests aiming to influence EU decision-making in their favour.
In both the case of intergroups and MEP-industry forums, there is a huge lack of transparency around their membership and activities, and notably around their sources of financing. In the United Kingdom, ‘all party groups’ – comparable to intergroups and MEP-industry forums in the EU context3 – have recently undergone serious scrutiny by the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner, following the discovery by The Times that representatives of the nuclear, pharmaceutical and drinks industries were giving financial support to supposedly independent groups of Members of Parliament (MPs), and even writing policy reports on their behalf.4 In the UK tighter rules are planned after an inquiry into the activities of British MPs and lobbyists in these groups.5 This report shows that the European Parliament’s current rules on intergroups fail to prevent co-optation by lobby groups and fail to secure even minimal transparency around the ever- growing number of cross-party groups. Tighter transparency obligations for all cross-party groups of MEPs should be introduced as soon as possible.
1
European Commissioner Siim Kallas started a heated debate in a major speech in March 2005 when he concluded that transparency around the activities of lobbyists in Brussels is ”too deficient in comparison to the impact of their activities.” To help overcome this problem, he launched the European Transparency Initiative.
2
This report is based on interviews by Fatoumata Jawara with MEPs and coordinators of intergroups and similar groupings conducted between March and May 2006, as well as internet research.
...

MEPs and lobbyists
Lobbying in Brussels is big business. It is estimated that over 15,000 lobbyists work in Brussels and around two-thirds are representing the interests of industry. One industry insider has estimated the annual turnover of corporate EU lobbying to be between 750 million to 1 billion euro. With its increasing powers, the European Parliament has become a major target for lobbyists.
...

EP rules on Intergroups
Intergroups are informal bodies of MEPs with membership from different political groups from within the European Parliament. While intergroups are not considered organs of the European Parliament, officially recognised intergroups are resourced by the Parliament with meeting space and translation facilities.
As can be seen from the lists of registered and non-registered intergroups in annex 1 and 2,
intergroups are very diverse. They include: Country specific intergroups focusing on policies linked to certain countries, such as Friends of Israel, Friends of a Free Iran and the Tibet intergroups; Policy centred intergroups like the Consumer and Health, Disability, and the Antiracism and Diversity intergroups; European Parliamentary affiliates of global parliamentary networks such as GLOBE (Global Legislators for a Balanced Environment) and GOPAC- Europe (Parliamentarians Against Corruption); and Crosscutting intergroups covering a wide range of issues such as the Globalisation intergroup, the Sky and Space intergroup, SOS Democracy and the Federalist Intergroup for the European Constitution.
...

– 2
The number of intergroups continues to grow. An MEP with a particular appetite for intergroups is Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, who has within the last year co-founded no less than four such initiatives, none of which are officially recognized intergroups:
– COMETIS (Committee for a European Technology Institute in Strasbourg)
– the European Life Science Circle (ELSC)
– the Circle for Research and Innovation in the European Parliament
– Patient Information Network (PIN)
Since the mid-1990’s concerns have been raised about the potential of intergroups to over-
shadow official Parliamentary Committees. This was further compounded by concern about the influence of lobby groups on intergroups.7 The impossibility of providing very large numbers of intergroups with meeting rooms and translations also sparked debate about how to regulate this phenomenon. As a result, in 1999, the Conference of Presidents of the European Parliament laid out more detailed rules regarding the establishment of intergroups.8

Why start an intergroup?
Understanding the role of the intergroup is complex. Corbett suggests that intergroups enable MEPs to form cross-party coalitions on specific issues of interest, which can foster wider political friendships and consensus building within the European Parliament.9 Another reason for the proliferation of cross-party groups in the European Parliament is that political parties are weakly developed on the EU level.10 The party groups in the EP being far more heterogeneous than parties in national parliaments, MEPs are more likely to seek alliances across parties around specific issues and interests. The United Kingdom is one of few EU member states where a similar phenomenon exists: all-party groups. In order to obtain recognition as an inter-group, at least three political parties within the European Parliament must endorse and become members of the group. Due to limits on the number of signatures available to the political parties represented in the Parliament, the maximum number of official intergroups is 26.11 The most recent official list (dated December 2004) includes 24 recognised intergroups (see annex 1), With the Health and Consumer Intergroup the current total is 25. The rules further state that official intergroups must declare “all direct or indirect financial support which, if offered to Members as individuals, would have to be declared”.12 The register of these declarations “shall be open to the public for inspection”.13 Public access to the European Parliament’s Intergroup register is not exactly straightforward.
Firstly, the register is not available on the internet. Interested citizens have to make an appointment with the parliamentary staff who are responsible for keeping the register. When CEO visited the office in the Henri Spaak wing of the European Parliament in Brussels we were presented with two binders containing information about the 25 officially recognised inter-groups. Photocopying or taking pictures was not allowed. The information in the binders is very...
7
Intergroups were seen as “enabling organised interests to have uncontrolled influence on MEPs”. “Shaping the New Europe”, PhD dissertation by Rebekka Göhring, FU Berlin (2004).
8
As described in the Rules Governing the Establishment of Intergroups – Decision of the Conference of Presidents
of 16th December 1999 (consolidated May 2004). See Annex 1 to this report.
9
The European Parliament, Sixth Edition, 2005 (Richard Corbett MEP et al).
10
See also Ever Closer Union: An Introduction to European Integration, Desmond Dinan, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.
11
See Rules governing the establishment of intergroups. The EPP and PES groups have each 21 signatures,smaller groups like Greens and GUE have each 8 signatures.
12
Article 6 of the rules on intergroups states that: “The declaration of financial interests, which shall be drawn up under the personal responsibility of the Intergroup Chairs, shall be made annually. The officers of the intergroups shall be required to declare all direct or indirect financial support which, if offered to Members as individuals, would
have to be declared...”
13
Article 7 emphasises that: “The Quaestors shall keep a register of the declarations of financial interests submitted
by the Intergroup Chairmen. That register shall be open to the public for inspection.”
Corporate Europe Observatory: Transparency Boost Needed for EP Cross-Party Groups – 3
limited and many Intergroups fail to fulfil key transparency requirements.14 Membership information was often missing or out of date. Several intergroups did not disclose outside support, for instance secretariat services. The Sky and Space Intergroup, which is hosted by the Aerospace and Defence Industries Association of Europe (ASD) did not mention this support in the regis-
ter. The register had last been visited more than six months before, by an assistant of an MEP.
The rules introduced in 1999 have only been effective in one aspect: they have reduced the number of officially recognised intergroups. This may be seen as an advantage in terms of the allocation of European Parliament meeting rooms and translation facilities. For the wider issues
surrounding the intergroups phenomenon, the current rules are however clearly insufficient.
The number of self-defined but unregistered intergroups has continued to increase. More importantly, the rules introduced have not achieved the objective of increasing the transparency of intergroups; as many as 60 unregistered ‘intergroups’ remain outside of the sphere of parliamentary rules.15 As one academic observer puts it, the current rules mean that “most inter-
groups have to remain in the ‘underworld’ of parliamentary activity instead of being exposed to the light of public scrutiny”.16 The current rules not only exclude a large number of de facto intergroups from official status (as well as corresponding obligations), but instead have created the ironic situation that there are major advantages emerging from not having official status. While the official intergroups have the right to meetings rooms and translation into five languages, they are only allowed to
meet in Strasbourg. The non-registered groups, meanwhile, do not face any such restrictions
and frequently meet in the European Parliament’s building in Brussels. Among the official
intergroups, there is growing dissatisfaction with this situation.
Intergroups and lobbying
The fact that most intergroups – both the officially recognised and the informal ones – provide very limited or no external transparency around their activities is problematic because intergroups are often being used as lobbying vehicles. Those who expected the 1999 rules to reduce the influence of lobby groups on MEP intergroups must conclude that this has clearly not worked. As Honor Mahony points out in a recent article on EUobserver.com, “intergroups are seen as a valuable 'second-level’ lobbying option by lobbyists.” 17 One Brussels-based lobbyist is quoted for saying that “They save time. Instead of going to one MEP at a time, we can hit a whole group at once with our arguments.”
One such example of an intergroup providing lobbyists with an efficient short cut to get access to MEPs on a certain topic is the Sky and Space Intergroup. This officially recognised intergroup is hosted by the Aerospace and Defence Industries Association of Europe (ASD),
Europe’s leading arms industry lobby group.18 ASD provides the intergroup’s secretariat,
coordinates its activities and admits to lobbying MEPs through the intergroup.19 The Sky and Space Intergroup does not have a website and it fails to disclose its funding sources.
14
The binders included the documents required to register the intergroups (most of those filed in the Autumn of 2004), outlining the purpose of the intergroup and listing founding and regular members. In some cases there was no
membership list and clearly the membership lists had never been updated since registration of the intergroups and are therefore far from precise. For all intergroups there were forms on which the chairs should declare any outside support. Only a few intergroups that receive secretarial support from NGOs and lobby groups actually reported this outside support.
15
In a 2005 publication, Richard Corbett MEP, estimated that there are over 80 intergroups. The European Parliament, Sixth Edition, 2005 (Richard Corbett MEP et al). The authors noted that regulation of intergroups intended to prevent abuse and limit their number turned registered groups into semi-official EP bodies. In addition, a large number of non-registered intergroups operating outside the system evolved.

...


In all their diversity, cross-party groups (whether official intergroups, non-recognised inter-
groups or MEP-industry forums) are a popular means of lobbying to influence the European Parliament. Despite their differences, all of these categories of cross-party groups are potentially vulnerable to co-optation by lobbyists, and although there are positive exceptions,transparency around the role of lobby groups is missing for an overwhelming majority of cross-party groups. This underlines the urgency of a thorough review of the failing European Parliament rules around intergroups.
Improving the rules around cross-party groups is an important part of the European Parlia-
ment’s challenge in the context of the European Transparency Initiative (ETI). In its Green
Paper on the ETI (May 2006), the European Commission rightfully states that “When lobby groups seek to contribute to EU policy development, it must be clear to the general public which input they provide to the European institutions. It must also be clear who they represent, what their mission is and how they are funded.”23 Lobbying via European Parliament cross-party groups is clearly an area where far more visibility is needed. The current lack of voluntary transparency shows the need for clear rules to make such disclosure obligatory. The implicit and often explicit rejection of our requests for information about the funding sources of MEP-industry forums underlines that voluntary approaches are very unlikely to deliver.
We would like to offer the following recommendations for improving European Parliament rules on intergroups and other cross-party groups:
– As a first step, the basic information on registered intergroups should be made more easily available through a website maintained by the European Parliament.The online Register of All-Party Groups of the UK House of Commons shows how this can be done.
24
– The enforcement of the current rules for officially recognised intergroups must be improved.
Particularly, the disclosure of up-to-date membership and funding information must be
secured. All outside parties involved in the activities of the groups should be fully disclosed.
– Transparency obligations should be introduced for all cross-party groups involving MEPs,
including unregistered intergroups and MEP-industry forums. Mechanisms need to be put in place to ensure that all these groups are registered and that key information is fully disclosed to the public. This would help enable public scrutiny and contribute to exposing any undue lobbying tactics. While there might be practical reasons for limiting the number of recognised intergroups with rights to meeting rooms and translation facilities, this could be achieved in a manner that does not exclude the large majority of cross-party groups from ethics and transparency obligations. The priority must be to secure effective transparency for all cross-party groups operating in and around the European Parliament. In the UK, registration is compulsory for any group that includes MPs from more than one party and has at least one officer from the House of Commons. This would be an obvious step forward for the European Parliament.
23
24
Green Paper on the European Transparency Initative, European Commission, May 2006.
Register of All-Party Groups, House of Commons.
Corporate Europe Observatory: Transparency Boost Needed for EP Cross-Party Groups – 7
While not a major focus of this report, we have in our research come across numerous examples of cross-party groups offering smaller or larger gifts and other benefits and services to MEPs.25 We recommend the European Parliament to review which of these practices create unacceptable conflicts of interests. In the US, Congressional Ethics Rules are likely to be further tightened after it has become clear that Members of Congress continue to receive millions of dollars per year in free travel and other benefits from lobby groups and companies hoping to gain influence.
Finally, we recommend that the European Parliament studies the recommendations published in May 2006 by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards on how to improve the regulatory situation around UK ‘All-Party Groups’.26 The recommendations, for instance, for securing full transparency around the role of consultancies in All-Party Groups are entirely relevant at the EU level.
Key recommendations for UK ‘All-Party Groups’27
– Consultancies should clarify and name any clients whose interests overlap with the all-
party group they provide secretariat support for, regardless of whether they assist in
funding.
– Where assistance is provided by a charity or not-for-profit organisation, “The name of any
commercial company with a direct interest in the work of the APG which contributes
materially to meeting the central costs of the charity should be listed.”
– Publications (including reports and press releases) produced by APGs should carry the
name of their author(s), the organisation(s) which provide secretariat services to the
Group, and any relevant client or sponsor.
Boosting the EP’s Research Capacity
One of the reasons that many MEPs are attracted by industry-dominated cross-party groups is their need for information on the often very complex technical dossiers discussed in the
European Parliament.
...

Between Democracy and Technocracy – the Role of Expertise for the European Parliament, Brigitte Reck, ibidem-
Verlag, 2003.
29
Lobbying is part of democratic process, letter from Julian Priestley (Secretary General of the European
Parliament) published in the Financial Times, January 25 2006.
30
An Insider in Brussels: Lobbyists Reshape the European Union, Elke Cronenberg for CorpWatch.org, September
18th 2006.
Corporate Europe Observatory: Transparency Boost Needed for EP Cross-Party Groups – 8
Appendix 1
The Secretaries General of the Political Groups agreed on the establishment of the following
intergroups :
Intergroup Political Group(s)
AGEING EPP-ED; PSE; UEN
ANTI-RACISM AND DIVERSITY PSE; ALDE; GUE
BALTIC EUROPE (&KALININGRAD) EPP-ED; ALDE; PSE
BIOETHICS EPP-ED; IND/DEM; V
CINEMA AND AUDIOVISUAL POLICY (& diversité culturelle) EPP-ED; PSE; GUE
DISABILITY INTERGROUP EPP-ED; PSE; ALDE; GUE
FAMILY AND PROTECTION OF CHILDHOOD EPP-ED; IND/DEM; UEN
FEDERALIST INTERGROUP FOR THE EUROPEAN
CONSTITUTION
FIELDSPORTS, FISHING AND CONSERVATION (Chasse)
FOURTH WORLD EUROPEAN COMMITTEE
GAY and LESBIANS RIGHTS
GLOBALISATION
PEACE INITIATIVE
PRESS
SKY AND SPACE INTERGROUP
SME (Small & Medium Sized Enterprises)
SOCIAL ECONOMY
TIBET
TOURISM (Railway Policy and Tourism)
TRADE UNION COORDINATION GROUP
TRADITIONAL NATIONAL MINORITIES, CONSTITUTIONAL
REGIONS AND REGIONAL LANGUAGES
URBAN (Housing)
VITICULTURE – TRADITION – QUALITE
WELFARE AND CONSERVATION OF ANIMALS
PSE; ALDE; EPP-ED
EPP-ED; IND/DEM; UEN
EPP-ED; PSE; GUE
PSE, ALDE, V
PSE; GUE;V
V; GUE; PSE
PSE; ALDE; V
EPP-ED; PSE; GUE
EPP-ED; PSE; IND/DEM
EPP-ED;PSE; ALDE
EPP-ED; V; UEN
EPP-ED; ALDE; PSE
PSE;GUE; EPP-ED
EPP-ED; PSE; ALDE;
PSE; ALDE; EPP-ED
EPP-ED; IND/DEM; UEN
EPP-ED; PSE; V
8.12.2004
Corporate Europe Observatory: Transparency Boost Needed for EP Cross-Party Groups – 9
Appendix 2
From: The European Parliament, Sixth Edition, 2005 (Richard Corbett MEP et al).
Non-registered Intergroups active in late 2004
GLOBE (Dagmar Roth-Behrendt, Anders Wijkman)
Kangaroo group (Karl von Wogau)
Land Use and Food Policy LUFPIG (Terry Wynn)
Referendum on Constitution – No campaign (Jens Peter Bonde)
Consumer Forum (Karin Scheele)
Mining (Bernard Rapkay)
Western Sahara (Peace for the Saharawi People) (Karin Scheele, Carlos Camera)
Progressive Women (Lissy Gröner)
Roma Rights (Katalin Levai)
Camino de Santiago: European Cultural ltinerary (C. Gutierrez, Janelly Fourtou, Ines Ayala)
Cancer (Alojz Peterle)
Ecumenical Prayer Breakfast
Europeans Abroad (Jean-Louis Bourlanges)
Forum for the Future of Nuclear Energy (Terry Wynn)
Friends of a Free Iran (Paolo Casaca, Struan Stevenson)
Fruit and Vegetables (Beatrice Patrie: Joseph Daul)
Islands (Manuel Medina, T. Riera Madurell)
Law Enforcement, Organised Crime and Terrorism (Williarn Newton Dunn)
Mountains (Catherine Guy-Quint, Boguslaw Sonik)
Sports
Friends of Football (Chris Heaton Harris)
Some other Intergroups active in recent years
Friends of Israel
Health
Stateless Nations
Paneuropean
Taxation of capital, tax policy, and globalisation Children’s Rights
Local and Regional Representatives
Peace for the Saharaui People
Sustainable Development
Beer Club
Social Economy
Corporate Europe Observatory: Transparency Boost Needed for EP Cross-Party Groups – 10

ANNEX I
Number of signatures available to the political groups for the establishment of intergroups
during the sixth legislative term (2004-2009):
EPP-ED
21
PES
21
ALDE
10
Greens/ALE
8
GUE
8
Ind/Dem
6
UEN
...

BRON : http://archive.corporateeurope.org/crosspartygroups.pdf - Scratch my back and I'll Scratch yours: 'Intergroups' and Europe

En @Zwitser dacht dat iedereen zomaar in de gebouwen van het EP kan vergaderen.

[D'ARTOIS]

Dus Zonbron, La Snappico? Jij hebt het licht gezien maar vele anderen kennelijk nog niet.
Piero ziet ook wel waar de duistere wolken hangen.

Trek die massa lobbygroepen uit elkaar, maak cross-references en kijk welke personen er ziitting hebben in de bestuursorganen.

Dan ga je zeer verrassende dingen zien.