Questions about Mr Linkohr’s role have been circulating for months. Finally in January Corporate Europe Observatory, a pressure group, wrote to Mr Kallas, Mr Piebalgs and commission president Jose Manuel Barroso, apparently triggering the action.

Back in September MEP Herbert Bosch asked for names of advisers. It took three months for Mr Kallas to tell him how many there were. He was promised the names at a later date but they haven't materialised. The Commission pleaded data protection problems but recently shifted its stance. The latest position seems to be that advisers have to agree to be named. If they refuse, their contract will be terminated.

Transparency campaigners point out that without full disclosure of names and interests it is hard for the public to scrutinise those making decisions in their name.

You can follow the correspondence at http://www.corporateeurope.org. This is in a different order than Edith Cresson, the French ex-commissioner, putting her dentist on the payroll, which helped bring down the commission in 1999. Yet it is also more subtle.

The usual objection to too much transparency is that there will now be a shortage of quality people coming forward. Yet Mr Barroso has a clutch of academics advising him as well as the illustrious Michel Barnier, a former French foreign minister and commissioner. He is drawing up a report on whether the EU should have its own crisis management teams to deploy during natural disasters.If nothing else, it shows just what a tricky task Mr Kallas has in finalising his transparency initiative to try to shed light on all these matters, expected next month.

"An adviser gives advice, but the Commission has to decide for itself," says Mr Linkohr.

At the heart of the matter is the quality of European policymaking. Of course expertise is required. But Brussels is also trying to get close to the citizen and it is hard to see how that is served by having unnamed people whispering in commissioners’ ears.