Corporate Europe Observatory

Exposing the power of corporate lobbying in the EU

  • Dansk
  • NL
  • EN
  • FI
  • FR
  • DE
  • EL
  • IT
  • NO
  • PL
  • PT
  • RO
  • SL
  • ES
  • SV

Setbacks for Round Table Responsible Soy

The Round Table on Responsible Soy (RTRS), a much criticised initiative for the certification of soy as ‘responsible’, has stepped up its lobbying to be included under the EU's Renewable Energy Directive to certify ‘sustainable agrofuels’. This would give RTRS-approved soy, much of which would be produced in unsustainable and damaging monoculture farming, the EU's seal of approval in the context of the EU 10% agrofuels target.

But the RTRS' lobby efforts are now facing setbacks as an important Brazilian player has left the RTRS and the Dutch government seems to be having seconds thoughts about ‘responsible’ soy. The RTRS was so far financed principally by the Dutch government.The RTRS lost one of its key members this week when the Brazilian Association ofVegetable Oil Industries ABIOVE announced they would leave. ABIOVE has disappeared from the RTRS membership list, but according to TraceConsult, “ABIOVE will not go public with this information as they do not intend todiscredit the RTRS.”[1]

Another important RTRS member, APROSOJA, representing large Brazilian soy producers, already left last year because of the ‘deforestation clause’ included in the round table's basic set of Principles and Criteria. As TraceConsult points out, “With APROSOJA defecting already last year and ABIOVE tip-toeing out now, the world’s second largest soy producing country, Brazil, is hardly represented in the RTRS any longer. It is no coincidence that ABIOVE, also this week, has announced its own certification: SOJA PLUS. The objectives of SOJA PLUS are clear: an even cheaper and simpler certification system to repair the damaged image of Brazilian soy producers.

Apart from losing Brazilian members, the RTRS suffered another blow last week, when the Dutch government decided to reject a 68 million euro funding proposal on ‘sustainable trade’ initiatives, which included the RTRS. The funding application came from the two Dutch NGOs that drive the RTRS in Europe, WWF and Solidaridad. [2]

Meanwhile,the RTRS has formed a working group to promote that the RTRS will be accredited by the European Commission under the Renewable Energy Directive as a qualified certification scheme tocertify ‘sustainable’ agrofuels. This, however, would require a major overhaul of the RTRS deforestation clause, which as it is now does not come close to meet the EU criteria on this matter. [3]

Another RTRS member, Patagonia Bioenergia, has hired one of Brussels’ most controversial PR agencies, Burson Marsteller, to set up meetings with Members of European Parliament. Laetitia Bourgeix of Burson Marsteller wrote to several MEPs on behalf of Federico Pochat, CEO at Patagonia Bioenergia S.A andExecutive Director of CARBIO (Argentinean Chamber of Biofuels) to arrange meetings in mid-February. Bourgeix mentioned that Mr Pochat would like todiscuss “... aspects of the Renewable Directive like default and actual values, sustainability criteria and trade issues”.[4] “As a key player in the Argentinean biofuels industry and member of the Round Table of Responsible Soy(RTRS), he would like to explain that Argentinean biodiesel is one of the world’s most competitive and sustainable biofuels, adhering to the highest international environmental standards”, the Burson Marsteller lobbyist wrote.

This happens in a context of the EU agrofuels debate entering a new stage of intensity, due to the upcoming Commission report on Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC). The report will assess how the broader land use impacts of agrofuelsproduction influence the greenhouse gas balance of agrofuels.

BursonMarsteller is not the only consultancy that has been hired by the agrofuelsindustry to influence this debate: Edelman Public Affairs now works for the Malaysian palm oil giant Sime Darby Group, including arranging meetings with Members of European Parliament. Edelman's Noémie Papp wrote: "Sime Darby is closely following a number of EU policy initiatives in the fields of Environment, Agriculture and Energy linked to palm oil, sustainability, biofuels and biomass issues. SimeDarby is very committed to making a substantive contribution to these policy debates and believes that a sustained dialogue is key to achieving effective outcomes." [5]And then there's Gplus, which still works for the Malaysian Palm Oil Council (MPOC). Weber Shandwick, moreover, is conducting a survey on behalf of Brazil’s sugarbarons united in UNICA, in order to “... help UNICA better understand the perceptions and expectations of key stakeholders, and will subsequently inform UNICA’s communications strategy and input to policy debates in Europe.” UNICA’s lobby is also assisted by Cabinet DN, a Brussels-based consultancy full offormer MEPs and EP staffers. Cabinet DN, which is not registered in the EU's lobbying transparency register, prominently highlights its policy of “client confidentiality” on its website.[6]

[1]www.traceconsult.ch[2] http://www.viceversaonline.nl/2010/04/afvaller-solidaridad-boos-waar-is-... communication with DG TREN[4] emailcommunication from Burson Marsteller to MEPs, January 2010[5] emailcommunication from Edelman to MEPs, April 2010[6] http://blog.brusselssunshine.eu/2010/03/cashing-in-on-secrecy.html

But the RTRS' lobby efforts are now facing setbacks as an important Brazilian player has left the RTRS and the Dutch government seems to be having seconds thoughts about ‘responsible’ soy. The RTRS was so far financed principally by the Dutch government.The RTRS lost one of its key members this week when the Brazilian Association ofVegetable Oil Industries ABIOVE announced they would leave. ABIOVE has disappeared from the RTRS membership list, but according to TraceConsult, “ABIOVE will not go public with this information as they do not intend todiscredit the RTRS.”[1]Another important RTRS member, APROSOJA, representing large Brazilian soy producers, already left last year because of the ‘deforestation clause’ included in the round table's basic set of Principles and Criteria. As TraceConsult points out, “With APROSOJA defecting already last year and ABIOVE tip-toeing out now, the world’s second largest soy producing country, Brazil, is hardly represented in the RTRS any longer. It is no coincidence that ABIOVE, also this week, has announced its own certification: SOJA PLUS. The objectives of SOJA PLUS are clear: an even cheaper and simpler certification system to repair the damaged image of Brazilian soy producers.Apart from losing Brazilian members, the RTRS suffered another blow last week, when the Dutch government decided to reject a 68 million euro funding proposal on ‘sustainable trade’ initiatives, which included the RTRS. The funding application came from the two Dutch NGOs that drive the RTRS in Europe, WWF and Solidaridad. [2]Meanwhile,the RTRS has formed a working group to promote that the RTRS will be accredited by the European Commission under the Renewable Energy Directive as a qualified certification scheme tocertify ‘sustainable’ agrofuels. This, however, would require a major overhaul of the RTRS deforestation clause, which as it is now does not come close to meet the EU criteria on this matter. [3]Another RTRS member, Patagonia Bioenergia, has hired one of Brussels’ most controversial PR agencies, Burson Marsteller, to set up meetings with Members of European Parliament. Laetitia Bourgeix of Burson Marsteller wrote to several MEPs on behalf of Federico Pochat, CEO at Patagonia Bioenergia S.A andExecutive Director of CARBIO (Argentinean Chamber of Biofuels) to arrange meetings in mid-February. Bourgeix mentioned that Mr Pochat would like todiscuss “... aspects of the Renewable Directive like default and actual values, sustainability criteria and trade issues”.[4] “As a key player in the Argentinean biofuels industry and member of the Round Table of Responsible Soy(RTRS), he would like to explain that Argentinean biodiesel is one of the world’s most competitive and sustainable biofuels, adhering to the highest international environmental standards”, the Burson Marsteller lobbyist wrote.This happens in a context of the EU agrofuels debate entering a new stage of intensity, due to the upcoming Commission report on Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC). The report will assess how the broader land use impacts of agrofuelsproduction influence the greenhouse gas balance of agrofuels.BursonMarsteller is not the only consultancy that has been hired by the agrofuelsindustry to influence this debate: Edelman Public Affairs now works for the Malaysian palm oil giant Sime Darby Group, including arranging meetings with Members of European Parliament. Edelman's Noémie Papp wrote: "Sime Darby is closely following a number of EU policy initiatives in the fields of Environment, Agriculture and Energy linked to palm oil, sustainability, biofuels and biomass issues. SimeDarby is very committed to making a substantive contribution to these policy debates and believes that a sustained dialogue is key to achieving effective outcomes." [5]And then there's Gplus, which still works for the Malaysian Palm Oil Council (MPOC). Weber Shandwick, moreover, is conducting a survey on behalf of Brazil’s sugarbarons united in UNICA, in order to “... help UNICA better understand the perceptions and expectations of key stakeholders, and will subsequently inform UNICA’s communications strategy and input to policy debates in Europe.” UNICA’s lobby is also assisted by Cabinet DN, a Brussels-based consultancy full offormer MEPs and EP staffers. Cabinet DN, which is not registered in the EU's lobbying transparency register, prominently highlights its policy of “client confidentiality” on its website.[6][1]www.traceconsult.ch[2] http://www.viceversaonline.nl/2010/04/afvaller-solidaridad-boos-waar-is-... communication with DG TREN[4] emailcommunication from Burson Marsteller to MEPs, January 2010[5] emailcommunication from Edelman to MEPs, April 2010[6] http://blog.brusselssunshine.eu/2010/03/cashing-in-on-secrecy.html

 

This week's European Commission decision to extend Glyphosate's market authorisation points to many broader problems - here is a CEO overview of the issues at large.

The official EU assessment of glyphosate was based on unpublished studies owned by industry. Seven months later, the pesticide industry still fights disclosure and, so far, successfully. We obtained a copy of their arguments.

In recent times we have seen various examples of green activists “coming out” as GMO-proponents, arguing that GMOs are safe and have multiple benefits: reduced pesticide use, higher income for farmers, contributing to food security, reduced greenhouse gas emissions... As an essential part of their discourse, organisations that continue to reject GMO technology are depicted as old-fashioned and as acting in contradiction to their own aims.

Mark Lynas is a well known example of this in the UK, with an (in)famous public apology for his past role in the anti-GM movement that drew a lot of media attention. Lynas' move has been copied by others, like blogger Stijn Bruers in Belgium. This framing of the GMO debate has proven quite attractive to the media, even though it is not always clear why specifically these people are seen to have the credentials to merit this attention.

There are many fundamental flaws in the argumentation they are putting forward. Claire Robinson of GMWatch, at the request of Corporate Europe Observatory, has written a rebuttal of many of the claims made by these newly converted GMO proponents. For practical reasons, this rebuttal follows the argumentation and claims made in an article by Bruers on his blog about GMOs .

On 15 June 2016, the Commission will finally announce the long-awaited scientific criteria for EDCs. Time to do a recap of this last season’s main episodes.

A few weeks after the May coup against Dilma Rousseff by conservative parties backed by the country's largest corporations, Brazil's “interim” government, led by Michel Temer, signed an emergency loan to the State of Rio de Janeiro to help finance infrastructure for the 2016 Olympics. The bailout was conditional to selling off the State's public water supply and sanitation company, the Companhia Estadual de Águas e Esgotos (Cedae). 

When we interviewed City Councillor and chair of Rio’s Special Committee on the Water Crisis Renato Cinco, in December 2015, he was already warning against such privatisation threats and provided important background information on the water situation in Rio.

José Manuel Barroso's move to Goldman Sachs has catapulted the EU’s revolving door problem onto the political agenda. It is symbolic of the excessive corporate influence at the highest levels of the EU.

Corporate Europe Observatory, Friends of the Earth and LobbyControl today wrote to Martin Schulz, President of the European Parliament, calling on him to investigate Angelika Nieber MEP over a possible conflict of interest.

CEO presents some first reflections on the UK's vote for Brexit.

 
 
 
 
 
-- placeholder --
 
 
 

The corporate lobby tour