Welcome to Spinwatch
Nuclear Spin


          Content
Home Home
About SpinWatch About SpinWatch
 Articles By Category Articles By Category
Latest News Latest News
 News By Category News By Category
Blogs Blogs
Reviews Reviews

          Newsletter
Stay informed with the Spinwatch newsletter.


          Information
Book Shop Book Shop
Nuclear Spin Nuclear Spin
 Events Calendar
News Feeds News Feeds
Video Video
Links Links
Feedback Feedback
Donations Donations
Whistleblowers Whistleblowers


         Whistleblower
Are You Disillusioned with the PR tactics of your employer?

Or have you got a story on the PR industry?

Call the spinbusting hotline:
+44 (0)7939 529 349

or Email: whistleblower

         Saro Wiwa

Transparency and Trust: democratic deficits at the heart of European Public Affairs PDF Print E-mail
William Dinan, 25 July 2005

The Alliance for Lobbying Transparency and Ethics Regulation (ALTER-EU) coalition has emerged from a shared concern by numerous civil society groups about the growing corporate influence on European Union decision-making. The ALTER-EU coalition advocates pro-democracy reform of lobbying practices in Brussels. In particular, the coalition is calling for a mandatory register for all lobbyists, including consultants, in-house corporate lobbyists and NGOs, seeking to influence the EU policy-making process.

 

Since Commissioner Kallas launched the European Transparency Initiative (ETI) in March this year, the debate on lobbying transparency in Brussels has intensified. This debate is taking place as the dust settles after the French and Dutch rejections of the proposed European Constitution. Both these referenda, in part, reflected popular sentiments that the EU has become increasingly unresponsive to the concerns of ordinary citizens, while being run for the benefit of corporate and political elites. Given public mistrust of the relations between vested interests of all kinds and decision-makers, there now appears to be a pressing need for an independent register of lobbyists in Brussels.

 

The policy process must be open and transparent in order to be accountable. This goes to the heart of the European democratic deficit. We believe that those actors trying to influence and shape public policy should be subject to some form of transparency obligation. In principle, nobody should be excepted from this. The call for a mandatory register of lobbyists is not the radical platform that opponents of transparency claim: rather, it is a fundamental building block for a healthy democracy. A mandatory register is a concrete and realistic measure that will increase transparency and could help restore confidence in the EU policy process.

 

Currently the situation in Brussels is similar to that in the UK, where regulation is entirely focused on the activities of the lobbied. In Canada and the U.S. the regulatory emphasis rests on those doing the lobbying. Neither system is perfect. We believe that a system which combines information on both lobbyists and legislators (including officials) would best serve the principles of transparency and accountability that should be central to public affairs in Brussels.

 

What are the alternatives to a mandatory register? Clearly, Commissioner Kallas has signalled that the status quo will not suffice. Speaking at the launch of the ALTER-EU coalition last week he stressed the need for increased visibility of EU lobbyists and stated that he would certainly press ahead with plans for a central register. The issue that remains to be decided is whether such a register will be mandatory or voluntary.

 

ALTER-EU believes that self-regulation doesn’t work for a variety of reasons. Firstly, how can individuals and organisations that fail to join a voluntary register be regulated? What do you do about those lobbyists in Brussels today that are not members of professional associations and who are not bound by any code of conduct? We also need to recognise here that many civil society groups might have difficulty in voluntarily joining an association of, and by, professional commercial lobbyists.

 

Secondly, what confidence can there be in any professional association or club that is run in the interests of its members, rather than the public interest? These are simply not the same things, and experience elsewhere demonstrates the reluctance of professional lobbyists to properly police themselves. Voluntary codes cannot ensure external transparency. Moreover, research by Public Citizen in the U.S. shows that voluntary electronic lobbyist registers have a very poor compliance rate, approximately only 10%, whereas mandatory registers have high compliance rates ranging between 90% and 99%.

 

Not only does self-regulation not work properly, but regulation does work. Creating, and crucially maintaining, an electronic lobbyist register is not as difficult or complex as some like to suggest. The benefits far outweigh the costs. A register which offered timely information to the public, officials and representatives, the media, and others in the lobbying community, about who intervenes in the policy process, and how, would greatly improve the transparency of EU public affairs.

 

There are several recurring myths surrounding lobbyist regulation that need to be assessed in the light of evidence. First is the issue of definition. As experience across the U.S. and Canada shows, it is indeed possible to define lobbying and lobbyists, despite what transparency-sceptics might say. It's worth remembering that many of the global lobbying firms now active in Brussels have long complied with mandatory disclosure legislation in North America. The resistance of sections of the public affairs and public relations industry in Brussels to calls for mandatory disclosure is therefore rather disappointing. This form of transparency works elsewhere - why not in Europe?

 

Another issue that often crops up in debates on lobbying registration concerns access. There are usually two sides to this particular coin. The first is that registration creates a barrier to access for individual citizens and resource-poor groups - in fact the opposite is usually the case where legislation takes accessibility and participation seriously. Secondly, registration might be used as either a badge of approval, or for marketing purposes - again, the legislation can be framed to ensure this does not arise, as the Canadian case clearly demonstrates. Electronic filing systems mean that costs can be minimised and crucially, that searchable, user-friendly information is quickly put in the public domain via the internet.

 

So, bringing some transparency into the field of EU lobbying is not the impossible task some inside the lobbying industry – who have a vested interest in secrecy – would have us believe. Such transparency is entirely consistent with notions of a 'Plan- D' for European democratic renewal, and 'better regulation'. Lobbying transparency can and should happen in Europe. The ALTER-EU coalition invites those working across the field of lobbying in Brussels to join this campaign and make it happen.

 
< Prev   Next >
          Latest News
More News

          Latest Reviews
          Latest Blogs
 

Designed and Maintained By SCS Web Design
Website Enquiries Contact webmaster@spinwatch.org