correspondence related to PETI Committee's request to the Commission for more details

La demande est partiellement réussie.

Dear European Parliament,

Under the right of access to documents in the EU treaties, as developed in Regulation 1049/2001, I am requesting documents which contain the following information:

During the Petition Committee of June 2014, the following was decided:

Petition N° 1109/2010 by Simone Eiler (German), bearing one other signature, on EU aid to the Italian NGO ‘Amici dei Bambini’ Speakers: the Chair, Simone Eiler (petitioner), Alessandro Negro (ONG Amici dei Bambini), the Commission ( Salla Saastamoinen), Tatjana Zdanoka, Victor Bostinaru
Decision: The petition remains open waiting a more detailed reply from the Commission.
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2...

I would like to have access to the all communication/correspondence between the PETI Committee and the European Commission about this requested 'more detailed reply'.

Yours faithfully,

Arun Dohle

Dear European Parliament,

I apologise, but the date of the EP Petition Committee meeting was June 2011.

Yours faithfully,

Arun Dohle

Registre, Parlement européen

Dear Mr Dohle,

We acknowledge receipt of your request. You will receive a reply within 15
working days.

Best regards,

Transparency - Public Access to documents Unit 

Directorate C - DG Presidency
European Parliament
Public Register webpage

Registre, Parlement européen

1 Attachment

Following your request related to Petition N° 1109/2010, please find attached a communication containing the relevant information.

We inform you that the examine of the petition was concluded at the meeting of the Committee on Petitions of 27 February 2012

Best regards,

Transparency - Public Access to documents Unit
Directorate C - DG Presidency
European Parliament

Afficher les sections citées

Dear European Parliament,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of European Parliament's handling of my FOI request 'correspondence related to PETI Committee's request to the Commission for more details'.

The reply I received did not contain the information I asked for, as it did not include communication/correspondence between the PETI Committee/secretariat and the European Commission about the 'more detailed reply'that was requested during the Petition Committee of 15 June 2011.

I was already aware that the meeting of the Committee on Petitions of 27 February 2012 closed the Petition without discussion. Hence my question.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: http://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/corre...

Yours faithfully,

Arun Dohle

Registre, Parlement européen

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Dohle,

Following your request for additional information we would like to
clarify that there is no formal correspondence between the Commission
and the PETI committee secretariat. If the members of the PETI committee
decide, during a meeting, to requests further details to the Commission,
the Commission proceeds without need for a formal request letter from
PETI, provide the Commission is in a position to deliver the requested
information. Normally the Commission does it by an oral statement in a
PETI meeting and sometimes a document is transmitted.

Please find attached an additional note forwarded by the Commission and
related to Petition 1109/2010

Best regards,

Transparency - Public Access to documents Unit
Directorate C - DG Presidency
European Parliament

Afficher les sections citées

Dear Registre,

Thank you for this.

However, at the very least there should exist a transmission note/mail from the European Commission. I kindly request access to that.

Yours sincerely,

Arun Dohle

Registre, Parlement européen

Dear Mr Dohle,

As explained in our previous email there are no formal cover letters in
the transmission by the Commission of notes/communications related to
petitions. These notes are transmitted by email and the text of the
email is not archived, only the notes themselves.

In general, once a month the Commission sends by email a batch of notes
in this way.

We hope this clarifies the question.

I you are interested in the work of the Petitions Committee, please note
that you can follow the deliberations on line via web streaming on our
internet page:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ep-live/en...
I

Best regards,

Transparency - Public Access to documents Unit
Directorate C - DG Presidency
European Parliament

Afficher les sections citées

Dear Registre,

Thank you for this explanation of the standard procedure by which the European Commission sends notes/communications related to petitions.

I have now, through other means, got hold of the transmission email from the European Commission:

"To: "PETI Secretariat"
Cc: "LOWE David" ,
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 12:32:01 +0100
Subject: Petition 1109/2010
Dear Colleagues,
Attached you will some complementary information concerning this petition (Amici dei Bambini) as requested at the June 2011 PETI meeting.

It is being transmitted to you outside the usual transmission because the format is not that of a standard communication. It is in fact a 10-page table giving exhaustive information on the relevant expenditures (including both contract work and conferences). Could you please confirm that this is satisfactory?

Many thanks
Best regards
Anna

<>

Anna Wlazlo
Service de Coordination "Pétitions"
Secrétariat Général - SG.G3
Commission Européenne
Bureau : BERL 7/16"

According to this mail, a non standard transmission.

Therefore, I still would like to have access to any documents/mails related to this non standard submission (reasons, reason for acceptance?).

Also I wonder why the document you transmitted
http://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/699/r...
is not the same as document available on the European Parliament's website (the properties have been modified).

Yours sincerely,

Arun Dohle

Arun Dohle a laissé une remarque ()

New deadline 4 September 2013

Registre, Parlement européen

Dear Mr Dohle,

The Secretariat of the Petitions committee has informed us that they do not hold further documents related to this transmission. As already explained in our e-mail of 5 August, informal emails like the one you obtained, are not filed, only the notes or substantial documents forwarded.

Best regards,

Transparency - Public Access to documents Unit
Directorate C - DG Presidency
European Parliament

Afficher les sections citées

Dear Registre,

Thank you for your explanation that no emails are filed, even though it concerned in this case a non-standard transmission asking the Parliament's agreement to the use of a non standard communication.

However, I did not receive a reply to my question about the different document properties, as these properties of this document
http://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/699/r...
are not the same as in the document available on the European Parliament's website.

I'd welcome any explanation possible for the reason the European Parliament changed the properties of this document.

Yours sincerely,

Arun Dohle

Registre, Parlement européen

Dear Mr Dohle,

Could you please specify which link on the European Parliament's website
you refer to in your message.

Thanks in advance for your cooperation

Transparency - Public Access to documents Unit
Directorate C - DG Presidency
European Parliament

Afficher les sections citées

Dear Registre,

This is the link:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2...

Yours sincerely,

Arun Dohle

Registre, Parlement européen

Dear Mr Dohle,

In our Unit we are not IT experts, but it might be that the properties
of documents need to be changed in order to meet the requirements for
being uploaded on certain EP Internet sites, in this particular case the
"meeting documents" page for parliamentary committees.

Best regards,

Transparency - Public Access to documents Unit
Directorate C - DG Presidency
European Parliament

Afficher les sections citées

Dear European Parliament,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of European Parliament's handling of my FOI request 'correspondence related to PETI Committee's request to the Commission for more details'.

I received the below reply from Transparency - Public Access to documents Unit, Directorate C - DG Presidency
European Parliament:

"In our Unit we are not IT experts, but it might be that the properties of documents need to be changed in order to meet the requirements for being uploaded on certain EP Internet sites, in this particular case the
"meeting documents" page for parliamentary committees."

That reply does not make sense. The properties of the document oploaded on the 'meeting documents'page were not changed.

But, the properties of the document sent to me on 31 July by the Transparency Unit were different than the one uploaded by the Parliament before.

My question remains why this was done. And by whom.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: http://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/corre...

Yours faithfully,

Arun Dohle

Registre, Parlement européen

Dear Mr Dohle,

Thank you for your question related to the format of the document
(Additional Note from the Commission Services) delivered to you on 31
July 2013, which is pertinent.

We can confirm that the document was reformatted in order to send you
the "Additional Note" itself.

We extracted the document in question from a pdf document forwarded to
our Unit by the Secretariat of the Petitions Committee.

We hope this answer will clarify your doubts and remain at your disposal
for any further request for documents.

The specific remit of our Unit is to deal with requests for documents.
We work on a basis of mutual trust in the interest of transparency.

Yours faithfully,

Transparency - Public Access to documents Unit
Directorate C - DG Presidency
European Parliament

Afficher les sections citées

Arun Dohle a laissé une remarque ()

Reply not really satisfactory.
Am considering further actions.

Klaus Zinser a laissé une remarque ()

"We can confirm that the document was reformatted in order to send you
the "Additional Note" itself."
Where is this document ?