29. Notes that it takes on average two years and seven months from the start of a fraudulent practice until the moment it is detected; notes, furthermore, that another seven or eight months lapse before the irregularity is reported to the Commission; is concerned that guidelines on the times at which Member States report fraudulent irregularities and/or other irregularities to OLAF, if such guidelines exist in a Member State at all, differ not only across the individual Member States, but also across policy areas; expects the Commission to draw up Europe-wide guidelines for the reporting of fraudulent irregularities and/or other irreg ...[+++]ularities to OLAF; recalls that the staff of the European institutions are required, without delay and without any risk of their responsibility being called into question as a result, to notify OLAF of any fraud which has come to their attention in the fulfilment of their duties;

29. Notes that it takes on average two years and seven months from the start of a fraudulent practice until the moment it is detected; notes, furthermore, that another seven or eight months lapse before the irregularity is reported to the Commission; is concerned that guidelines on the times at which Member States report fraudulent irregularities and/or other irregularities to OLAF, if such guidelines exist in a Member State at all, differ not only across the individual Member States, but also across policy areas; expects the Commission to draw up Europe-wide guidelines for the reporting of fraudulent irregularities and/or other irreg ...[+++]ularities to OLAF; recalls that the staff of the European institutions are required, without delay and without any risk of their responsibility being called into question as a result, to notify OLAF of any fraud which has come to their attention in the fulfilment of their duties;

1. Member States shall, at the request of a competent authority in another Member State, supply information, in conformity with their national law, on disciplinary or administrative actions or criminal sanctions and decisions concerning insolvency or bankruptcy involving fraud taken by their competent authorities in respect of the provider which are directly relevant to the provider's competence or professional reliability.

I would therefore ask the Commission whether it has investigated possible fraudulent activity in the privatisation of Babcock Wilcox Española, SA, and whether, instead of authorising the novation of the contract for its shares to be traded for the benefit of companies of questionable solvency, it should not oblige SEPI to take back this company’s shares so as to begin all over again with a fresh privatisation process which would adequately guarantee the company’s continuity and its workers’ jobs?

I would therefore ask the Commission whether it has investigated possible fraudulent activity in the privatisation of Babcock Wilcox Española, SA, and whether, instead of authorising the novation of the contract for its shares to be traded for the benefit of companies of questionable solvency, it should not oblige SEPI to take back this company’s shares so as to begin all over again with a fresh privatisation process which would adequately guarantee the company’s continuity and its workers’ jobs?

. at the national level, the creation of investigatory bodies of a multidisciplinary nature, with the power to act in a number of fields and to establish relations with their counterparts in the other Member States and with UCLAF would prevent the dissipation of competences and encourage synergies, particularly in the fight against organized crime and cross-border fraud; those bodies could, moreover, also deal with anti-corruption activities, which are located upstream from anti-fraud action and could have significant effects in preventing fraudulent activity ...[+++](proposal No 7).