Thursday

19th Oct 2017

Opinion

Are MEPs too 'free' to be accountable?

  • The commission proposed a new lobbying transparency register in September 2016, but does its proposal go far enough? (Photo: EUobserver)

The European Commission proposed to reform the EU Lobbying Transparency Register in September 2016, promising to make it mandatory across EU institutions.

But, when it comes to lobbying transparency, the ball is now in the European Parliament's court.

Thank you for reading EUobserver!

Subscribe now for a 30 day free trial.

  1. €150 per year
  2. or €15 per month
  3. Cancel anytime

EUobserver is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that publishes daily news reports, analysis, and investigations from Brussels and the EU member states. We are an indispensable news source for anyone who wants to know what is going on in the EU.

We are mainly funded by advertising and subscription revenues. As advertising revenues are falling fast, we depend on subscription revenues to support our journalism.

For group, corporate or student subscriptions, please contact us. See also our full Terms of Use.

If you already have an account click here to login.

On Wednesday (6 June), the parliament’s "contact group" – the two MEP negotiators Danuta Hübner and Sylvie Guillaume, plus members from each political group – will discuss their draft negotiating mandate for the register one more time.

If nothing changes from the current draft, it will be a meaningless paper, lacking any solid commitment from MEPs to introduce new incentives for lobbyists to join the transparency register.

Traditionally, the parliament had been a staunch supporter of a robust transparency register. It was the EU parliament, and not the commission, that first introduced some conditions on lobbyists: the obligation to register to obtain an access badge was agreed by the parliament back in 2010.

Moreover, MEPs have always emphasised the need for a binding register, backed by the force of law, in their negotiations with the commission. Such a register would be binding on lobbyists and allow the institutions to impose sanctions on them in cases of non-compliance.

But the commission was far less aspirant.

Instead, the EU executive body proposed an inter-institutional agreement – which would bind the institutions, but not lobbyists – based on a set of incentives to get lobbyists to register and comply with the rules.

As a first step, in 2014, EU commission president Jean-Claude Juncker introduced the rule that commissioners, their cabinet members, and directors-general should only meet with registered lobbyists, and must publish all their meetings online.

This sounded good, but it had a massive loophole: the remaining 30,000+ commission officials were left unaffected by these rules.

No meaningful commitment

There seems to be a consensus now between the three institutions about this low-key, unambitious, incentive-based approach.

We disagree with it and will keep up the pressure for a legally-binding register in the longer-term, as this is the only way to make the register – with its flawed data and massive enforcement problem – more effective.

If the institutions are serious, however, about increasing lobbying transparency via their soft approach, they will have to take stock of their own responsibilities and really put strong incentives in place.

But sadly, none of the three institutions seem willing to strengthen their requirements in their own contact with lobbyists.

The parliament's attitude is particularly disappointing, considering its prior record.

Back in December 2016, a majority of MEPs voted to adopt the systematic practice of meeting only with registered lobbyists. That was a step forward, but is widely interpreted as non-binding on MEPs. Lobbyists wishing to avoid scrutiny would easily be able to evade such a voluntary rule, which not all MEPs apply.

Many MEPs across the centre-right, centre-left and liberal groups now argue that they cannot aim for a clear and enforceable ban on MEPs meeting unregistered lobbyists, as it would be incompatible with the "free mandate" principle enshrined in EU primary law.

The free mandate principle guarantees that MEPs can vote and speak independently from any instructions – from their voters, or their parties, and so on. The argument goes that this also implies the freedom to meet whomever they feel they need to, to stay informed.

Unconvincing argument

This does not sound very convincing to us. We understand that independence from any external instruction is a fundamental principle of democracy. But there are other important values and principles too – transparency being one of them.

Does the "free mandate" really prevent MEPs from introducing accountability and transparency obligations?

Would asking lobbyists to register for a meeting and play by the rules really be such an attack on the freedom of MEPs?

And just to reject a red herring argument: meetings with citizens from MEPs’ constituencies, or random encounters, are not and have never been covered by the register. Meetings with whistle-blowers or others who, for reasons of personal security, would not want their name in the public domain, could also easily be exempt.

And if a clear ban is really asking too much: why not simply publish MEPs’ meetings with lobbyists online? Then the public could check who MEPs are meeting. This would be compatible with the "free mandate" of MEPs and, in our era of electronic calendars, would not really pose too big of an administrative burden, either.

Yet the idea of becoming more transparent and accountable to their electorate seems to be scary to many MEPs, and is being considered far more as a risk than as an opportunity.

This is a particularly baffling position for MEPs to take, especially when considering the distance between the work of the EU parliament and the home constituencies, which is often reflected in the poor turnouts in European elections.

We have witnessed a frustratingly reclusive attitude through the whole discussion phase of the mandate.

Civil society was only invited, reluctantly, to contribute to this important discussion after an open letter to the parliament was signed by 100 civil society organisations and the mandate had been kept secret from us.

Much-needed commitment

MEPs must stop hiding behind legalistic excuses and commit to something meaningful.

It's time for MEPs to leave their defensive mode and to stop hiding behind legalistic excuses.

Both of the MEP negotiators (Hübner and Guillaume) have signed two different pledges on lobbying transparency in the last European elections, as did many other MEPs.

It is time for those politicians to live up to their pledges and to persuade their colleagues to implement a clear ban on MEPs meeting with unregistered lobbyists and to ensure that MEPs publish their lobby meetings.

If the parliament does not act, MEPs will lose the moral high-ground vis-a-vis the other institutions in the debate on EU lobbying transparency.

And the result: the EU lobbying register will remain a very flawed transparency tool.

Nina Katzemich is an EU-campaigner for a German lobbying watchdog, LobbyControl, and a member of the ALTER-EU steering committee.

MEPs agree crackdown on lobbying

Starting next year, MEPs will no longer be able to work as paid lobbyists trying to influence the European Parliament.

EU commission presents 'realistic' lobbying rules

The EU executive called for more stringent regulation of interest representatives trying to influence EU decision making. Critics say the 'transparency revolution' is being blocked by the European Parliament and EU member states.

Lobbying transparency enhances MEPs' freedom

At a time when citizens expect an unprecedented level of accountability from their elected representatives, senior MEPs use their ‘free mandate’ to justify opposing new lobbying transparency rules.

News in Brief

  1. Austrian PM calls Brexit talks speed 'big disappointment'
  2. PM Muscat: journalist murder 'left a mark' on Malta
  3. Belgian PM: No crisis with Spain over Catalan remarks
  4. Ireland PM: Further Brexit concessions needed from UK
  5. Merkel: rule of law in Turkey going 'in wrong direction'
  6. Finnish PM: EU 'frustrated' with slow Brexit talks
  7. Dutch PM: Catalan crisis is not a European issue
  8. May 'urgently' wants to see a deal on citizens' rights

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. European Jewish CongressEJC Applauds the Bulgarian Government for Adopting the Working Definition of Antisemitism
  2. EU2017EENorth Korea Leaves Europe No Choice, Says Estonian Foreign Minister Sven Mikser
  3. Mission of China to the EUZhang Ming Appointed New Ambassador of the Mission of China to the EU
  4. International Partnership for Human RightsEU Should Seek Concrete Commitments From Azerbaijan at Human Rights Dialogue
  5. European Jewish CongressEJC Calls for New Austrian Government to Exclude Extremist Freedom Party
  6. CES - Silicones EuropeIn Healthcare, Silicones Are the Frontrunner. And That's a Good Thing!
  7. EU2017EEEuropean Space Week 2017 in Tallinn from November 3-9. Register Now!
  8. European Entrepreneurs CEA-PMEMobiliseSME Exchange Programme Open Doors for 400 Companies Across Europe
  9. CECEE-Privacy Regulation – Hands off M2M Communication!
  10. ILGA-EuropeHealth4LGBTI: Reducing Health Inequalities Experienced by LGBTI People
  11. EU2017EEEHealth: A Tool for More Equal Health
  12. Mission of China to the EUChina-EU Tourism a Key Driver for Job Creation and Enhanced Competitiveness

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. CECENon-Harmonised Homologation of Mobile Machinery Costs € 90 Million per Year
  2. ILGA-EuropeMass Detention of Azeri LGBTI People - the LGBTI Community Urgently Needs Your Support
  3. European Free AllianceCatalans Have Won the Right to Have an Independent State
  4. ECR GroupBrexit: Delaying the Start of Negotiations Is Not a Solution
  5. EU2017EEPM Ratas in Poland: "We Enjoy the Fruits of European Cooperation Thanks to Solidarity"
  6. Mission of China to the EUChina and UK Discuss Deepening of Global Comprehensive Strategic Partnership
  7. European Healthy Lifestyle AllianceEHLA Joins Commissioners Navracsics, Andriukaitis and Hogan at EU Week of Sport
  8. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Council Representative Office Opens in Brussels to Foster Better Cooperation
  9. UNICEFSocial Protection in the Contexts of Fragility & Forced Displacement
  10. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Innovation House Opens in New York to Support Start-Ups
  11. ILGA EuropeInternational Attention Must Focus on LGBTI People in Azerbaijan After Police Raids
  12. European Jewish CongressStrong Results of Far Right AfD Party a Great Concern for Germans and European Jews