One thing is for sure – without transparency – there is no democracy.

Varoufakis is often provoking and sometimes even rude – but he is right when he says:

politicians (also Theresa May with Brexit) should put all their cards on the table:

  1. what do they want to achieve and
  2. how they want to achieve it

otherwise the public is almost clueless left in the dark – about where their elected and unelected leaders of EU and country members are steering or trying to steer – leading probably to more problems than solutions and to legitimite nationalistic resentment about the whole EU project that feels like member countries are (on purpose?) pitted and set up against each others – Greeks people (“lazy money lenders”) vs German (“hard working Nazis”) – which is surely not the Europe we all want to see. (except for weapons manufacturers and others profiting from increased instability and insecurity (George Soros once betted against the Euro, as he did in 1992 with the British Pound – crazy world that such things are even POSSIBLE)

“Brussels, 31 January 2019 – Today, the European Parliament voted in favour of MEPs publishing their meetings with lobbyists.

This is the first mandatory lobby transparency measure to apply to EU parliamentarians and a huge step forward for transparency.

Transparency needs to be a cornerstone of EU policy making

(it not always is… see Meeting of Ministers of Finance of EU without protocols/minutes: EuroGroup)

so we are glad to see that the Parliament has delivered concrete results today,” said Vitor Teixeira, Policy Officer at Transparency International EU.

This is a strong signal ahead of the European elections that the Parliament is serious about being transparent about the influence of lobbyists.”

The European Commission, which has been publishing its meetings since 2014, should now accept this as a good signal from the Parliament and use it to reignite the negotiations on the mandatory lobby register.

In recent months these negotiations hit a stalemate and the Commission warned it would stop the discussions if there was no meaningful commitment by either the Parliament or the Council.

We now urgently need to resume the negotiations for the mandatory lobby register to adopt it before the elections,” continued Mr Teixeira. “We now need a similar signal from the governments of member states in the Council to bring about more transparency on which lobbyists are influencing decisions.”

Although the vote was ultimately successful, it was not an easy fight.

“Centre-right members of “(Donald Tusk‘s)” the European People’s Party (EPP) requested that the ballot was held in secret – thereby omitting which MEPs voted against.

Nonetheless, the result achieved today is a big accomplishment.”

src: https://transparency.eu/press-release-european-parliament-to-end-secret-lobby-meetings/

Sven Giegold Green Party Germany – strongly pro transparency

“The establishment of the transparency register of beneficial owners was a great success for the European Parliament in the fight against money laundering and corruption under the green reporting.

However, the German transposition of the EU directive has been completely misguided (4. EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive).

On the publication of data from the Transparency Register of Correctiv, NDR, WDR and Süddeutsche Zeitung says the spokesman of Bündnis 90/Die Grünen im Europäischen Parliament, Sven Giegold:

“The publications on the transparency register show that the German transparency register is useless.

The Register does not make shady companies transparent.

In the case of the crucial companies, it is an transparency register because it keeps obscuring the true owners.

When a dubious entrepreneur intervenes in two special purpose entities, he remains unrecognised.

The German law contradicts EU law, because the true owner can still remain non-transparent.

Minister of justice, Barley, must now quickly improve the law and bring it into line with EU law.

Until now, the Transparency Register has missed its purpose and only generates bureaucracy.

(same goes for EU-Dataprotection law DSGVO/GDPR… started good theory, badly put into practice completely fails it’s goals, everyone keeps using WhatsApp/Facebook and they don’t care about EU law X-D… goal failure ON PURPOSE? by WHOM? (TRANSPARENCY!))

The fees for using the register are dissuasive, even for journalists. Because of the shortcomings in the implementation of EU law, I lodged a complaint with the EU Commission several months ago. The introduction of the transparency register was a great success in the fight against money laundering. Transparency is the greatest enemy of companies that have something to hide. We must finally sharpen the Register.” (autoTranslated by Yandex)

German:

“Die Einrichtung des Transparenzregisters über wirtschaftlich berechtigte Eigentümer war ein großer Erfolg des Europaparlaments im Kampf gegen Geldwäsche und Korruption unter grüner Berichterstattung. Die deutsche Umsetzung der EU-Richtlinie ist jedoch völlig missraten (4. EU-Anti-Geldwäscherichtlinie).

Zur Veröffentlichung von Daten aus dem Transparenzregister von Correctiv, NDR, WDR und Süddeutsche Zeitung sagt der Sprecher von Bündnis 90/Die Grünen im Europäischen Parlament, Sven Giegold:

“Die Veröffentlichungen zum Transparenzregister zeigen: Das deutsche Transparenzregister ist nutzlos.

Zwielichtige Firmen werden durch das Register nicht transparent.

Bei den entscheidenden Unternehmen ist es ein Intransparenzregister, weil es die wahren Eigentümer weiterhin verschleiert.

Wenn ein dubioser Unternehmer zwei Zweckgesellschaften dazwischen schaltet, bleibt er unerkannt. Das deutsche Gesetz widerspricht EU-Recht, weil die wahren Eigentümer immer noch intransparent bleiben können. Justizministerin Barley muss nun zügig das Gesetz nachbessern und in Einklang mit EU-Recht bringen. Bisher verfehlt das Transparenzregister seinen Zweck und erzeugt nur Bürokratie. Die Gebühren zur Nutzung des Registers sind abschreckend hoch, auch für Journalisten. Wegen der Mängel bei der Umsetzung des EU-Rechts, habe ich schon vor Monaten bei der EU-Kommission Beschwerde eingelegt. Die Einführung des Transparenzregister war ein großer Erfolg im Kampf gegen Geldwäsche. Transparenz ist der größte Feind von Unternehmen, die etwas zu verbergen haben. Wir müssen das Register endlich scharfstellen.”

Die Schlechtumsetzung des Transparenzregisters ins Deutschland haben wir bereits am 15. März 2018 in einer schriftlichen Anfrage an die Kommission kritisiert:

https://sven-giegold.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Anfrage-an-die-Kommission_Transparenzregister-Deutschland.pdf

Die Kommission versicherte uns in ihrer Antwort vom 22. Mai 2018, sich die Konformität des deutschen Transparenzregisters anzuschauen und gegebenenfalls weitere Schritte einzuleiten. Seitdem sind wir im regelmäßigen Kontakt mit den Zuständigen in der EU-Kommission, die sich inzwischen in der Sache an die Bundesregierung gewandt hat. Wir bleiben hier dran.

https://sven-giegold.de/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Antwort-von-Frau-Jourová_Transparenzregister-Deutschland.pdf

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *