Spurred by public mistrust, the European Union is debating establishment of lobbying disclosure laws for the first time.
The proposal — to have all advocates including hired lobbyists, corporate staff, think tanks and nongovernmental organizations reveal their issues, clients and fees — would impact hundreds of U.S. organizations. That impact could be a positive, however, if U.S. firms — who already make similar information public here — get more insight into the various lobbying influences on issues before the European Parliament and the EU Commission.
The still-to-be-formulated disclosure rules are part of a larger Transparency Initiative, launched in November by Siim Kallas, vice president of the European Commission in charge of Administration, Audit and Anti-fraud.
“The people do not trust European Union institutions,” said Erik Wesselius, an analyst with the pro-closure group Corporate Europe Observatory. “They think there are all sorts of shady things are going on there.”
While the reason for that distrust is hard to pin down, Wesselius told The Examiner, the impact is not. Last year France and The Netherlands both voted against the European constitution in high-turnout elections. The initiative is aimed at addressing the problem.
The disclosure proposals, contained in a “green paper” on the initiative, would have identity, client and funding information submitted through a Web-based registration system with a “general overview” of the groups provided to the public. There would also be a code of conduct that would have lobbyists honestly state who they are representing. It would also ban offering inducements or disseminating false information.
In the last two months a debate has broken out over making registration mandatory and setting up enforcement of the conduct rules. The commission has recommended registration be voluntary with incentives, such as putting registered lobbyists on lists to be invited in for consultation. Self-policing, the commission says, would address infractions though stronger enforcement would be considered if problems arise.
While the three European lobbying associations generally favor the commission’s approach, government watch dogs including the Observatory and Friends of the Earth Europe are calling for mandatory registration and disclosure plus a new independent office to police conduct. In an analysis issued in May, the FEE looked at current schemes for self-regulation and concluded they were not set up to be either effective or open to public review. The enforcement office advocated by the FEE would be able to independently investigate and fine those who break the rules. Serious and persistent offenders could be subject to criminal prosecution and all enforcement actions would be open to the public.
If the commission proposals sound familiar, it’s because they are similar to rules already in place in the United States. Frustrated lobbying reform advocates in Washington might be surprised at how many times American disclosure rules were citedas a model for Europe to follow. In fact the Association of Accredited Lobbyists to the European Parliament has begun discussions with the American League of Lobbyists in Washington to set up a European accreditation program modeled on the classes ALL now offers.
The main change for America firms under the commission approach would be the time and money to file paperwork, said Benno van der Laan, a senior vice president at Cabinet Stewart, a European affairs consulting firm. Even that requirement will not kick in anytime soon. The rules are only at the discussion stage with the first round of comments due in by August 31.
What U.S. organizations ultimately get in return could, however, outweigh any fees. Important commercial standards and other policies are sometimes set in Europe in ways that are, by U.S. standards, considerably less than inclusive and clear.
Many EU procedures are not open to scrutiny, confirmed Van der Laan.
“Maybe [the initiative] will force the EU institutions to be more open and accessible.”
