Wednesday

30th Nov 2022

Stakeholder

A long way to go for effective EU lobby regulation

  • It should be more difficult for regular lobbyists and interest groups not to register. (Photo: EUobserver)

The European Parliament's Constitutional Affairs Committee discussed the final agreement on the review of the EU's lobby register (the "Transparency Register") last week (11 February).

Over the past year, we at Transparency International have been following this review together with other NGOs, in particular the ALTER-EU coalition, but also with organisations representing lobbying companies (like EPACA) and individual lobbyists (like SEAP) over the past year.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

We were able to make our points in a number of hearings in 2013, the latest in October 2013, asking for a mandatory register while suggesting incentives, with potential negative effects, that could enforce at least a quasi-mandatory adherence in the short term. Without such, sanctions for potential misbehaviour by lobbyists cannot be effective.

For years, we and others have asked that Commissioners, MEPs and other EU officials should not speak at events of unregistered lobby organisations and consider not meeting with unregistered interest representatives. We asked that interest groups, which are members in Commission expert groups, should register. And we suggested during the last hearing that the EU institutions could learn from the rules of procedure of the German Bundestag, which foresee that only representatives of registered associations shall be heard.

Looking at the draft final agreement between the European Parliament and Commission, a number of these steps have been taken on board to move closer to a quasi-mandatory register. In particular, a set of "incentives" should make it more difficult for regular lobbyists and interest groups not to register. Nevertheless, these incentives still fall short of making the register quasi-mandatory.

The stance taken by the Commission and the Parliament over the past year was that it wasn't legally feasible to move towards a mandatory register. However, for anyone following the review process from the start it has been clear that a mandatory register was not wanted politically. Nonetheless, the Parliament will still half-heartedly request such legislation from the European Commission. The legal opinion of the institutions' internal services (which have not been published to our knowledge) has provided a welcome excuse.

While waiting for the final list of such incentives for the European Commission, Parliament's debate last week highlighted the incentives that the European Parliament wants to put forward for itself.

First, European Parliament officials or other staff will be encouraged to check whether organisations they are contacted by are registered and, if not, to encourage them to register. That's far from revolutionary as one would have expected such to have a been a long-ago first step. Secondly, access to European Parliament premises shall be restricted for non-registered organisations or individuals. This doesn't sound any different to what is already the case.

Thirdly, it would only be allowed that MEPs and the European Parliament itself co-organise, co-host or grant patronage to events with registered organisations. It is obvious that these last incentives in particular are a clear step forward from a purely voluntary register towards a register that is less easy to ignore – a welcome evolution.

Nonetheless, the register would only become quasi-mandatory and fully relevant if it were to affect the most risky part of lobbying, i.e. the potential for intransparent relations between policy-makers and interest groups. In the least worst case, these can result in a skewed interpretation of the public interest, and in the worst case they can end up in conflicts of interest or even corrupt relationships. A mandatory register therefore could actually protect ethical MEPs as it would ensure, to a wide extent, that those registered lobbyists they meet are who they say they are and would face sanctions for undue behaviour or corrupt offers.

The EU lobby register review has also skipped over the introduction of a legislative footprint, a public reference to meetings held with, and draft amendments or other type of input received from, interest groups by EU policy-makers. In the absence of quasi-mandatory measures, the review hasn't resolved the issue of lobbying law firms. And the review has even paved the way for exclusion of member state permanent representations from the scope of the register despite the broad acknowledgement that an important part of Brussels lobbying is conducted through national government channels.

As you can see, there's still quite some way to go. This is why in the coming years, Transparency International will not just continue to push for a better regulated, a more transparent and a more ethical lobbying process here in Brussels, but will coordinate across the EU to advocate for improvement also at national level.

In the end, the objective is not to demonise the interaction between policy makers and outside interests, a necessary part of democratic society. Our work is rather about guaranteeing that this process actually supports democracy by giving the widest possible range of views a fair chance to be heard in European policy-making.

Author bio

Ronny Patz is EU Communications & Policy Officer at Transparency International EU Office (TI-EU), a part of the global Transparency International movement. TI-EU promotes accountability, transparency and integrity in the EU's internal and external policies and the EU institutions through strategic advocacy campaigns at the EU level.

Disclaimer

This article is sponsored by a third party. All opinions in this article reflect the views of the author and not of EUobserver.

EU to shed light on law-making 'kitchen'

The EU commission is trying to change its image as an out-of-touch bureaucracy, because, it says, eurosceptics are most annoying when they're right.

A window to EU lobbying and lobbyists

The EU transparency register for the European Parliament and the European Commission was launched in the summer of 2011 to better expose outside influence on EU law and decision-making.

Over-ambitious packaging reuse targets mustn't kill off recycling

Beverage sectors are concerned the European Commission's new proposal on packaging legislation will be misguided in focusing their sectors almost exclusively on reusable packaging to the detriment of recycling schemes, rather than taking a holistic approach combining both.

EU, wake up! Don't leave West Balkans to Russia or China

Russia's attack on Ukraine and European values must remind us how important the enlargement process is, if properly conducted, as a motor for democracy, freedom, peace, the rule of law and prosperity, write six S&D MEPs.

Dialogue and action – Nordic cooperation and view on COP26

Nordic countries launched several initiatives at the COP26 climate conference which will have a real impact on the ground. Nordic and UK pension funds are to invest billions in clean energy and climate initiatives. Greenland has joined the Paris Agreement.

News in Brief

  1. 'Pro-Kremlin group' in EU Parliament cyberattack
  2. Ukraine will decide on any peace talks, Borrell says
  3. Germany blocks sale of chip factory to Chinese subsidiary
  4. Strikes and protests over cost-of-living grip Greece, Belgium
  5. Liberal MEPs want Musk quizzed in parliament
  6. Bulgarian policeman shot dead at Turkish border
  7. 89 people allowed to disembark in Italy, aid group says
  8. UN chief tells world: Cooperate on climate or perish

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersCOP27: Food systems transformation for climate action
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersThe Nordic Region and the African Union urge the COP27 to talk about gender equality
  3. International Sustainable Finance CentreJoin CEE Sustainable Finance Summit, 15 – 19 May 2023, high-level event for finance & business
  4. Friedrich Naumann Foundation European DialogueGender x Geopolitics: Shaping an Inclusive Foreign Security Policy for Europe
  5. Obama FoundationThe Obama Foundation Opens Applications for its Leaders Program in Europe
  6. EFBWW – EFBH – FETBBA lot more needs to be done to better protect construction workers from asbestos

Latest News

  1. EU Commission proposes suspending billions to Hungary
  2. EU: Russian assets to be returned in case of peace treaty
  3. Frontex leadership candidates grilled by MEPs
  4. Portugal was poised to scrap 'Golden Visas' - why didn't it?
  5. Why the EU asbestos directive revision ... needs revising
  6. Nato renews membership vow to Ukraine
  7. Catalan spyware victims demand justice
  8. Is the overwhelming critique of Qatar hypocritical?

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. European Committee of the RegionsRe-Watch EURegions Week 2022
  2. UNESDA - Soft Drinks EuropeCall for EU action – SMEs in the beverage industry call for fairer access to recycled material
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic prime ministers: “We will deepen co-operation on defence”
  4. EFBWW – EFBH – FETBBConstruction workers can check wages and working conditions in 36 countries
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic and Canadian ministers join forces to combat harmful content online
  6. European Centre for Press and Media FreedomEuropean Anti-SLAPP Conference 2022

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us