Corporate Europe Observatory

Exposing the power of corporate lobbying in the EU

Budget negotiations: cut industry subsidies, not public interest research!

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

To: Members of the European Parliament, Member States of the European Union

 

Dear Member of the European Parliament, dear Madam, dear Sir,

You are now involved in the final negotiations around the EU's budget for 2014-2020. The position reached by the European Council's February 8th meeting concludes that a significant cut in research funding is being considered. According to European Commission estimates, this would translate into a €10 billion cut in Horizon 2020, out of an original €80 billion budget1.

Civil society organisations have been denouncing Horizon 2020's excessive corporate bias since the very first Green paper published by the Commission in 20112, but big business' lobbying prevailed. As it stands, the project is divided into three pillars, with the entire second pillar - more than €20 billion – allocated to a program called “Industrial leadership”, for activities with a “business-driven agenda”3.

Past experience with similar business-driven EU Research programs shows that despite promises that the priority for these funds will be SMEs, for new research projects, they have mainly been captured by large multinational corporations, to finance research activities that were already planned4. This means that these much-needed research funds have been transformed into industry subsidies, with little added value in terms of research results and questionable legitimacy when these same companies slash their workforce while still paying out dividends and bonuses. One example is the Joint Technology Initiative “Clean Sky”, a public-private partnership between the European Commission and industry, in which €400 million of taxpayers' money is directly transferred to the largest companies participating (such as EADS, Thales, Dassault, Finmeccanica, Rolls-Royce...)5.

Dedicating even more money to a failed policy is not an acceptable use of scarce public funds. We request that the “Industrial Leadership” program is the sole recipient of budget cuts, and that more money is made available for crucial research needs in areas such as food safety, preventative health policy, fundamental public research, ecology-focussed agriculture or renewable energies. Public research funding should go to public interest projects.



Signatories

ARC 2020
ASEED Europe
BUKO Pharma-Kampagne
Corporate Europe Observatory
Committe for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN)
Earth Open Source
European Coordination Via Campesina (ECVC)
European Public Services Union (EPSU)
European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility (ENSSER)
Fondation Sciences Citoyennes
Fondazione Italiana per la Ricerca in Agricoltura Biologica e Biodinamica (FIRAB)
GMWatch
Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL)
International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM) EU Group
Living Knowledge Network
Naturschutzbund Deutschland e.V. (NABU)
Pesticides Action Europe (PAN)
Testbiotech
Wissenschaftsladen Wien - Science Shop Vienna

 

Polluters in Peru blog

The way in which the Commission has appointed the head of its “in-house think-tank” has demonstrated its woefully inadequate conflict of interest assessment for new appointments, says Corporate Europe Observatory. The conflict of interest assessment applied to the former chief of the Lisbon Council, Ann Mettler as head of the new European Political Strategy Center (EPSC) does not appear to have explored her close cooperation with some of the biggest corporate players in the digital and technology market. In CEO's view, this casts serious doubts on the independence of the advice that is to be given to President Juncker and his college of commissioners.
In response to the criticism of the controversial investor rights in TTIP, a number of law firms recently founded a think tank designed to protect the current investment arbitration system: The European Federation for Investment Law and Arbitration (EFILA).
Regulatory cooperation could become the graveyard of public interest lawmaking.
Are public regulators siding with the corporations they are supposed to regulate or with the public interest?
The way in which the Commission has appointed the head of its “in-house think-tank” has demonstrated its woefully inadequate conflict of interest assessment for new appointments, says Corporate Europe Observatory. The conflict of interest assessment applied to the former chief of the Lisbon Council, Ann Mettler as head of the new European Political Strategy Center (EPSC) does not appear to have explored her close cooperation with some of the biggest corporate players in the digital and technology market. In CEO's view, this casts serious doubts on the independence of the advice that is to be given to President Juncker and his college of commissioners.
Civil society organisations denounce European Commission’s leaked proposal
On 17 April, Via Campesina, the D190-20 Alliance and Corporate Europe Observatory held a lobby tour around the Brussels European quarter, highlighting the corporate lobbies who are pushing an aggressive agenda around TTIP (the EU-US trade deal currently being negotiated). There was a particular emphasis on the impacts TTIP will have, if passed, for farmers' livelihoods, food standards, and for the way food is produced in the EU. The next negotiation round will take place on 20 April, this time in New York.
New report by CEO and Friends of the Earth Europe on the European Commission's new advisory network on fracking, which is opening the back door to shale gas expansion across Europe, despite massive public opposition.

Alternative Trade Mandate

Corporate Europe Forum