Saturday

23rd Sep 2017

Opinion

Who to blame when you can't blame Brussels?

  • The Council of the EU, representing member states, prefers to work outside public scrutiny (Photo: consilium.europa.eu)

Blaming Brussels is one of the easiest techniques for any politician to make an excuse to their national electorate.

Don’t want to spend additional money on social housing? Blame it on strict deficit rules set in Brussels. A company is complaining about a specific regulation? Not their fault, it was "imposed" by Brussels.

Thank you for reading EUobserver!

Subscribe now and get 40% off for an annual subscription. Sale ends soon.

  1. €90 per year. Use discount code EUOBS40%
  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.

But who do you blame when you cannot blame Brussels because you ‘are’ Brussels? The current negotiations for a mandatory EU lobbying register provide an interesting answer to that question.

Let’s have a quick look at what these negotiations entail.

For years, citizens have asked for more transparency and better rules around lobbying in Brussels. Millions of citizens have protested, petitioned or otherwise voiced their concerns over the lack of transparency and the hidden influence of corporate lobbyists in Brussels.

Rightly or wrongly, it has played an important role in almost any major debate, be it on TTIP, Brexit or ongoing attacks by eurosceptics. Lobbyists themselves strongly support stricter rules and more transparency.

In this context, the European Commission proposed a "mandatory lobbying register" almost one year ago.

A quick fix

Fearing that a legislative proposal would not find the necessary majorities, the EU commission suggested a quick fix based on an agreement between the three decision-making institutions: the European Parliament, Council of the EU, where member states sit, and the commission.

The mechanism to make the register mandatory was that the institutions would agree to refuse access to lobbyists that are not willing to register.

Indeed, the EU commission of current president Jean-Claude Juncker made an important step in that direction in 2014 by introducing rules for the commissioners and their closest advisers.

The basic idea now was to extend this rule of “no registration, no meeting” and the publication of those meetings by the commission to the council and parliament. The council has so far abstained even from the voluntary register.

Parliament has traditionally been the strongest supporter of a mandatory register. But both institutions, the council and parliament, have been discussing their position on the proposal and things are not looking too promising.

The council knows that some progress is necessary and that it needs to be more transparent. When it comes to the details, however, its reservations persist.

The main lobby targets in the council are the representations of member states, governments back in the capitals across Europe, and the 6-month rotating presidency, in particular.

The new rules covering anything beyond the council secretariat, which is probably the least lobbied part of the EU institutions, does not seem to find support. Many point to the fact that everything beyond the secretariat falls under national competence and would have to be done by member states.

The EU parliament is ambitious in asking for more transparency of the other institutions.

Applying the “no registration, no meeting” rule to MEPs, however, seems to pose problems as the chief negotiators outlined in an op-ed for EUobserver.

In December last year a majority of MEPs voted to introduce the mandatory publication of lobby meetings for all MEPs.

Unfortunately, however, the majority was not strong enough to change the parliament’s internal rules. Now its legal service has issued an opinion which indicates that both preventing meetings with unregistered lobbyists, or making publication of meetings mandatory, would be in violation of the MEPs' so-called "free mandate".

Bring in the lawyers

So, when citizens strongly support lobbying transparency, when Brussels lobbyists are all in favour of a better register, but your EU institution does not seem to want to create the dearly-needed mandatory EU lobby register, who do you blame? The lawyers.

The legal services of the EU parliament and council have come up with "national competence" and "free mandate" excuses, which prevent any meaningful progress.

Parliament’s legal analysis conveniently finds that such transparency rules should indeed apply to assistants, political advisers and civil servants, but not the main target of lobbying: the MEPs themselves.

In their view, it might somehow hinder them from exercising their mandate freely.

But doubts have already been cast on the legal reasoning of the institutions. If these assessments are maintained, and both MEPs and most of the council exclude themselves from any lobby transparency rules, the commission’s plan for a ‘quick fix’ will have failed.

In both cases – national politicians blaming Brussels and Brussels politicians blaming legal challenges – what is really is at hand is a lack of political will and leadership.

We have seen many examples over the last years where even contradicting treaty rules did not prevent or slow down decisions that had full political backing, be it the “no bailout clause” or the setting up of an entire crisis-response institutional structure outside the EU treaties.

The mandatory lobbying register was the main proposal of the Juncker commission to make the EU more democratic, more accountable and more transparent. This important project must not fail.

Rather than deploying lawyers to find obstacles, we need politicians to lead the way to more lobbying transparency. Under their guidance, lawyers will find a way to word the new regime in a way that will not contradict existing rules.

Daniel Freund is the Head of Advocacy for EU Integrity at Transparency International EU.

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.

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.

News in Brief

  1. Dutch state appeals ban on taking air-polluting measures
  2. May proposes 2-year transition period after Brexit
  3. May to call on EU's 'sense of responsibility'
  4. Catalonia has 'contingency plans' for independence vote
  5. Last German polls confirm Merkel's lead
  6. EU to step up sanctions on North Korea
  7. Tusk calls 'euro summit' in December
  8. Report: May to seek two-year EU transition

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. EU2017EEEU Finance Ministers Agreed to Develop New Digital Taxation Rules
  2. Mission of China to the EUGermany Stands Ready to Deepen Cooperation With China
  3. World VisionFirst Ever Young People Consultation to Discuss the Much Needed Peace in Europe
  4. European Jewish CongressGermany First Country to Adopt Working Definition of Antisemitism
  5. EU2017EEFour Tax Initiatives to Modernise the EU's Tax System
  6. Dialogue PlatformResponsibility in Practice: Gulen & Islamic Thought
  7. Counter BalanceHuman Rights Concerns Over EIB Loan to the Trans Anatolian Pipeline Project
  8. Mission of China to the EUChina Leads the Global Clean Energy Transition
  9. CES - Silicones EuropeFrom Baking Moulds to Oven Mitts, Silicones Are a Key Ingredient in Kitchens
  10. Martens CentreFor a New Europeanism: How to Put the Motto "Unity in Diversity" Into Practice
  11. Access MBAGet Ahead With an MBA Degree. Top MBA Event in Brussels
  12. Idealist QuarterlyIdealist Quarterly Event: Building Fearless Democracies With Gerald Hensel

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Mission of China to the EUPresident Xi Urges Bigger Global Role for Emerging Economies
  2. EU2017EEAre We Socially Insured in the Future of Work?
  3. European Jewish CongressFrench Authorities to Root Out "Societal Antisemitism" After Jewish Family Assaulted
  4. European Federation of Local Energy CompaniesClean Energy for All? On 10.10 Top-Level Speakers Present the Clean Energy Package
  5. UNICEFUp to Three Quarters of Children Face Abuse & Exploitation on Mediterranean Migration Routes
  6. Swedish EnterprisesEurope Under Challenge; Recipe for a Competitive EU
  7. European Public Health AllianceCall to International Action to Break Deadlock on Chronic Diseases Crisis
  8. CES - Silicones EuropePropelling the construction revolution with silicones
  9. EU2017EEEU 2018 Budget: A Case of Three Paradoxes
  10. ACCAUS 'Dash for Gas' Could Disrupt Global Gas Markets
  11. Swedish Enterprises“No Time to Lose” Film & Debate on How Business & Politics Can Fight Climate Change
  12. European Free AllianceSave The Date!! 26.09 - Coppieters Awards To... Carme Forcadell