Many thanks to the European Parliament Liaison Office for the invitation to speak to you today. It is a pleasure to be here in Milan as part of my regular trips to Member States to visit EU agencies and other bodies.

These visits remind us of the reach and relevance EU’s policies, not just setting standards for medicines, food, chemicals and financial services etc, but increasingly mapping out new paths for the Union in a challenging global geopolitical environment.

The European Ombudsman was established in 1993 by the Maastricht Treaty and the Ombudsman is elected every five years by the European Parliament. It acts independently and essentially as a bridge between citizens and the EU administration that serves them. The Ombudsman conducts inquiries into the main EU legislative institutions - the Commission, the Council, the Parliament - but also the European Central Bank, the European Investment Bank and all of the regulatory agencies throughout the Member States.

These inquiries can range from a simple failure to reply by an institution, to concerns about undue lobbying, requests for access to EU documents, ethics standards in an EU institution, or whether fundamental rights are being upheld. But we deal with very human cases as well, enabling young, but not well off,  EU citizens to gain access to traineeships in the European External Action Service by encouraging it to pay its trainees, and just recently, securing a European Parliament pass for the baby of a breastfeeding contract worker.

The main source of my inquiries are complaints by citizens, including journalists, academics and members of civil society organisations. I can also open inquiries on my own-initiative or carry out information-gathering exercises. This is particularly useful for reacting quickly to a developing situation or preventing future potential problems. For example, I recently asked the Commission how it decides on and uses artificial intelligence.

At its best, public administration is proactive, efficient, accountable, and transparent, at its worst it is opaque, defensive, and hostile to people’ needs. An Ombudsman job is to encourage best practice and discourage its opposite.

The European institutions have relatively high administrative standards, with multiple accountability and transparency rules. As far as public perception is concerned however, the EU administration is only as strong as its weakest point. We saw this in late 2022 with reports of alleged influence buying in the European Parliament, a scandal that involved we understand just a few people but which damaged the image of the EU as a whole.

Currently another test of EU ethics rules is underway in Brussels as the European Parliament prepares for next month’s hearings of the proposed new European Commissioners. Potential conflicts of interests and the capacity to act fully in the public interest are central to the questions that will be asked of all the candidates. These hearings act as an important barometer on the state of ethics in EU public life. 

A further important ethics test is the EU institutions’ approach to revolving doors, when EU officials move to related jobs in the private sector. There is increasing awareness of how damaging this can be but it has taken some highly concerning cases for this matter to be taken seriously.

One of my inquiries for example concerned a former vice-president of the European Investment Bank taking a job at an Italian national promotional bank for which he had participated in approving financing agreements in the weeks before his appointment.

There is a limit to how prescriptive one can, or should, be as an Ombudsman. What I am aiming for is an administrative culture where it is natural to ask: will my actions damage public trust in the institution that I work for.

Broadly speaking the profile of complaints to my office tend to match the wider political context - but a central part of my work is anticipating issues that citizens are likely to be concerned about. For example, I proactively looked into whether there is sufficient transparency around the vast sum of EU funds meant to help the post-pandemic recovery of the European economy.  Italy is receiving almost €200bn in loans and grants for many projects, including several not too far from here.

I welcome the fact that Member States have been required to publish data on the biggest recipients of funds, however proper accountability would mean the public could know the recipients of the funds regardless of the size of the project. At the moment, there is also little detail of the final recipients of the funds as opposed to the public entity that will distribute it to private contractors and to others.

This lack of basic and necessary transparency fuels mistrust about who is spending this money and how. I have also pressed the Commission to deal with access to documents requests related to national government spending plans for these funds more quickly and with the public interest in mind.

As a final point, I will mention my work related to migration and fundamental rights. The wider context is very different to what it was just a few years ago. Taboos about how to deal with migration are being broken as last week’s EU summit discussions on the matter further showed. The creation of deportation centres outside the EU is an idea gaining traction among member states while it is already official EU policy to ‘externalise’ migration to border countries such as Tunisia, Egypt and Lebanon.  Nonetheless the EU must still meet its fundamental rights obligations and my office seeks to remind EU institutions that these obligations should not be pushed aside by politics.

I am about to conclude an own-initiative inquiry into how the European Commission intends to ensure the protection of human rights in the context of its agreement with Tunisia - a country about which there has been deeply disturbing reports about how its border guards treat migrants. Other inquiries of mine are looking into how fundamental rights are being upheld in EU-funded migration management facilities or during so-called ‘debriefing’ interviews of migrants.

 I have also looked into the exact nature of the EU border and coastguard agency Frontex’s role in search and rescue operations following the Adriana shipwreck off the Greek coast last year, which resulted in over 600 people drowning. The tragedy happened despite the fact that the Greek coastguard, the Italian coastguard and Frontex knew what was happening. The inquiry showed how limited Frontex’s role is once a national coastguard takes charge of this kind of situation. This meant that even when Frontex’s repeated offers of monitoring help to the national Greek coastguard were ignored, the law did not allow it to act on its own initiative. I have asked EU legislators to consider changing the rules so that Frontex can fulfil its fundamental rights obligations.  

As you can see, the range of issues covered by my inquiries is very broad. This is a reflection of the ever-changing nature and challenges that face the EU administration. My Office’s task is to keep pace with these new challenges and ensure that whatever the EU administration does to meet them, it does so on a foundation of accountability and integrity.

Thank you for listening. I am happy to take any questions.