Corporate Europe Observatory

Exposing the power of corporate lobbying in the EU

MEP: lobbyism main reason for bad policy

Swedish MEP Carl Schlyter (Green) has told Corporate Europe Observatory that lobbyism is the main reason why the EU makes bad policies. Interviewed about his role as rapporteur for the European Parliament on the future of EU member states' bilateral investment treaties, he said he had never seen such an extreme example of MEPs focusing solely on big business interests.

  • Dansk
  • Nederlands
  • English
  • Suomi
  • Français
  • Deutsch
  • Ελληνικά
  • Italiano
  • Bokmål
  • Polski
  • Portuguese
  • Română
  • Slovenščina
  • Español
  • Svenska

Bilateral investment treaties give sweeping powers to foreign investors, including the right to challenge governments in international tribunals if they believe that new laws designed to protect the environment, public health or social well-being have adversely affected their profits. Schlyter said there was widespread agreement among MEPs and member state governments that it was right to protect the interests of investors – regardless of the consequences.

"The whole idea about just protecting industry is rooted in this colonial mindset that we are the ones doing business abroad and other countries are being developed by our investment. But it's no longer only Europeans doing business abroad. It's as if no one has realised that, for example, state-owned companies from China could come here and invest and we would have no democratic tools to intervene in what they are doing."

Asked about the recent cash-for-laws scandal, which saw three MEPs accused of accepting cash to table amendments, he said the practice was "disgusting" but questioned whether it was any worse than tabling amendments for lobbyists for free.

"I don't know what is more tragic because the result for policies is the same," he said. "Some of the amendments to my report are too technical to have been done by people who haven't followed the dossier at all. It is quite clear that many of these amendments originate from outside people's offices, most of them coming from industry or from governments."

"Lobbyism is for me the main reason why we are not making good policies. And it is hardly ever discussed in public. That has to change".

Schlyter believes one way to make the change would be to have a register of every email sent to an MEP with the intention of changing a policy or a law, allowing the public to see where amendments originate.

He also said he would like to see a fairer distribution of lobby badges for the Parliament, with a third given to economic interests, one third to NGOs and one third to social interests such as trade unions and universities.

And he said the EU's lobby transparency register should be made compulsory, with heavy fines for anyone found failing to comply.

Read the full interview here:

Bilateral investment treaties give sweeping powers to foreign investors, including the right to challenge governments in international tribunals if they believe that new laws designed to protect the environment, public health or social well-being have adversely affected their profits. Schlyter said there was widespread agreement among MEPs and member state governments that it was right to protect the interests of investors – regardless of the consequences."The whole idea about just protecting industry is rooted in this colonial mindset that we are the ones doing business abroad and other countries are being developed by our investment. But it's no longer only Europeans doing business abroad. It's as if no one has realised that, for example, state-owned companies from China could come here and invest and we would have no democratic tools to intervene in what they are doing."Asked about the recent cash-for-laws scandal, which saw three MEPs accused of accepting cash to table amendments, he said the practice was "disgusting" but questioned whether it was any worse than tabling amendments for lobbyists for free."I don't know what is more tragic because the result for policies is the same," he said. "Some of the amendments to my report are too technical to have been done by people who haven't followed the dossier at all. It is quite clear that many of these amendments originate from outside people's offices, most of them coming from industry or from governments.""Lobbyism is for me the main reason why we are not making good policies. And it is hardly ever discussed in public. That has to change".Schlyter believes one way to make the change would be to have a register of every email sent to an MEP with the intention of changing a policy or a law, allowing the public to see where amendments originate.He also said he would like to see a fairer distribution of lobby badges for the Parliament, with a third given to economic interests, one third to NGOs and one third to social interests such as trade unions and universities.And he said the EU's lobby transparency register should be made compulsory, with heavy fines for anyone found failing to comply.Read the full interview here:
 
Somebody forwarded Corporate Europe Observatory this invite to a select cocktail party on 17 July 2014, organised by the Transatlantic Business Council at the Representation of the Free State of Bavaria to the EU. Another occasion for big business representatives to meet US & EU TTIP negotiators in a pleasant and discreet environment...
No sector has lobbied the European Commission more when it was preparing negotiations on the proposed EU-US trade deal (TTIP) than the agribusiness sector, according to data published today by CEO in a series of research-based infographics.
Do you wonder which businesses are pushing most for the proposed EU-US trade deal TTIP? Or where they come from? And who has most access to EU negotiators? CEO’s at-a-glance info-graphics shine a light on the corporate lobby behind the TTIP talks.
Food is on the table at the negotiations for the EU-US trade deal the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). From a look at their lobbying demands, the agribusiness industry seems to regard the treaty as a perfect weapon to counter existing and future food regulations.
Scientific advice should be transparent, objective and independent, and there should be more science and more diverse expertise available to the European Commission’s President, a coalition of 28 international and national NGOs wrote in a letter addressed to President-elect Jean-Claude Juncker today (1).
A few observations on the debate sparked by our open letter on the position of Chief Scientific Advisor to the President of the European Commission, and on the need for proper scientific advice to EU legislators.
The position of Chief Scientific Adviser to the President of the European Commission is problematic, concentrating too much influence in one person and undermining other Commission research and assessment processes. We ask Mr Juncker, the new President of the European Commission, to scrap the position.
David Cameron's nomination of a revolving door ex-lobbyist, Jonathan Hopkin Hill, as EU commissioner is bad news for Jean-Claude Juncker's newly-stated commitment to lobby transparency.

Corporate Europe Forum