Wednesday

26th Jul 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.

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.

Stronger EU-Egypt ties must not disregard human rights

The EU’s apparent willingness to water down its stance on human rights in Egypt could seriously compromise its credibility and have far-reaching consequences for its relations with other countries in the region.

Winter is here for Spitzenkandidat, but he'll survive

Candidates from all political families should be presenting their vision on where the Union should be headed. European socialists want to keep the Spitzenkandidat procedure for future elections.

Stronger EU-Egypt ties must not disregard human rights

The EU’s apparent willingness to water down its stance on human rights in Egypt could seriously compromise its credibility and have far-reaching consequences for its relations with other countries in the region.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. EU2017EELocal Leaders Push for Local and Regional Targets to Address Climate Change
  2. European Healthy Lifestyle AllianceMore Women Than Men Have Died From Heart Disease in Past 30 Years
  3. European Jewish CongressJean-Marie Le Pen Faces Trial for Oven Comments About Jewish Singer
  4. ACCAAnnounces Belt & Road Research at Shanghai Conference
  5. ECPAFood waste in the field can double without crop protection. #WithOrWithout #pesticides
  6. EU2017EEEstonia Allocates €1 Million to Alleviate Migratory Pressure From Libya in Italy
  7. Dialogue PlatformFethullah Gulen's Message on the Anniversary of the Coup Attempt in Turkey
  8. Martens CentreWeeding out Fake News: An Approach to Social Media Regulation
  9. European Jewish CongressEJC Concerned by Normalisation of Antisemitic Tropes in Hungary
  10. Counter BalanceOut for Summer Episode 1: How the EIB Sweeps a Development Fiasco Under the Rug
  11. CESICESI to Participate in Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee on Postal Services
  12. ILGA-EuropeMalta Keeps on Rocking: Marriage Equality on Its Way

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. European Friends of ArmeniaEuFoA Director and MEPs Comment on the Recent Conflict Escalation in Nagorno-Karabakh
  2. EU2017EEEstonian Presidency Kicks off Youth Programme With Coding Summer School
  3. EPSUEP Support for Corporate Tax Transparency Principle Unlikely to Pass Reality Check
  4. Counter BalanceEuropean Parliament Improves the External Investment Plan but Significant Challenges Ahead
  5. EU2017EEPM Ratas: EU Is Not Only an Idea for the 500mn People in the Bloc, It Is Their Daily Reality
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersCloser Energy Co-Operation Keeps Nordic Region on Top in Green Energy
  7. ILGA-EuropeGermany Finally Says Ja - Bundestag Votes for Marriage Equality!
  8. EPSUJapanese and European Public Sector Unions Slam JEFTA
  9. World VisionEU, Young Leaders and Civil Society Join Forces to End Violence Against Girls
  10. UNICEFNarrowing the Gaps: The Power of Investing in the Health of the Poorest Children
  11. EU2017EEEstonia to Surprise Europe With Unique Cultural Programme
  12. International Partnership for Human RightsEU-Kyrgyzstan Human Rights Talks Should Insist on Ending Reprisals Vs. Critical Voices