Leading the way through a dark maze?

Corporate lobbyists are frequently well placed to help civil servants find their way through the dark maze of often arcane and highly technical detail that is EU policymaking.

Civil servants, devoid of maps or prior knowledge, are inclined to follow. Such is the case in sectors such as financial services and the car industry. In the tight-knit world of EU policymaking, a little technical advice in the right ears can often go a long way.

"It’s a question of business domination," says David Miller, professor of sociology at the University of Strathclyde in the UK. "At a basic level they have more people and resources. It’s clear they have a major advantage. The policymakers don’t see a problem with making laws for and with the corporations."

Miller dubs the phenomenon ‘institutional corruption’. It is not a question, he says, of personal impropriety. Civil servants and politicians are collectively complicit in what appears to be a deeply-rooted flaw in the EU body politic. "Laws are obscure and detailed wherever they are made, but in most places there is democratic scrutiny," he says. "In Brussels there is no scrutiny because there is no public. The actors are entirely insulated from public opinion."

The overall picture of EU corporate politicking is blurry, some might say murky. For now, Siim Kallas, the anti-fraud commissioner, has decided to improve visibility through a voluntary code of conduct covering areas such as financial disclosure. Although watchdogs such as the Amsterdam-based Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO) have welcomed the code, they take the line that only US-style mandatory rules can create the levels of democratic oversight needed to lift the fog.

The Jack Abramoff scandal in the US, in which lawmakers took bribes from lobbyists representing Indian casinos, was uncovered thanks to strict disclosure rules, says Erik Wesselius, a campaigner and researcher at CEO. He dismisses the concerns of lobbying giants such as Burson-Marsteller, which have kicked against the notion on competition grounds. US firms have not been adversely affected, he claims.

Civil society lobby groups such as consumer organisation BEUC, which is part- funded with EU money, help to create a counterbalance to business, says Wesselius, but more needs to be done. Corporate lobbyists, by contrast, would claim that the influence of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and civil society groups is underestimated.

In the eyes of the corporate world, civil society groups and NGOs are becoming a force to be reckoned with. The debate on genetically modified organisms is now largely in the camp of NGOs and not of business, says Daniel Guéguen, chief executive of CLAN Public Affairs, who has been lobbying in Brussels for more than three decades. "In the WTO Uruguay round in the 1980s and 1990s, the NGOs were out of the story," he says. "They did not have the technical capabilities. Now they have progressed a lot and can throw back arguments at business."

Lobbying battles

• Software patents

The battle over the now defunct software patents directive was a David and Goliath affair pitting small time developers against IT giants such as IBM. Smaller outfits with virtually no knowledge of lobbying tactics, let alone experience of the Brussels machine, feared that the liberalising proposal would allow mightier counterparts with greater patent buying-power to hold them to ransom. The sudden emergence of a pro-liberalisation campaign representing artists, musicians, designers, engineers and software developers therefore came as a surprise. Closer scrutiny revealed that the ‘grass-roots’ collective had been masterminded by London PR firm Campbell Gentry, with the support of companies such as Microsoft and SAP. Creative stunts included handing out ice-cream to MEPs and sailing pirate-style with a pro-patents banner past the European Parliament in Strasbourg. Details on where the money had come from and who the campaign represented were never disclosed. Proposals were scrapped by MEPs.

• REACH

EU proposals on chemical safety adopted this year were significantly watered down as a result of industry lobbying on a massive scale, say non-governmental organisations. The corporate campaign, strongly supported by the US administration, was spearheaded by Cefic, the European chemicals industry association, and big-hitters such as German giant BASF and US-based Dow. In a report released last year, Greenpeace alleged that dirty tricks were employed in a bid to kill proposals. Lobbying sins allegedly included scaremongering with industry-funded studies and bankrolling support from industry-affiliated politicians. Embedded at the European Commission, says Greenpeace, were officials from the chemicals sector. The EU ombudsman is investigating. Industry would claim that, contrary to popular belief, steely-eyed NGO campaigners won the day, the proof being that the EU now boasts the world’s strictest chemicals law.

• Diamonds

Diamond dealers in Antwerp smelled a rat in January when the European Commission dropped a four-year investigation into the restrictive distribution methods employed by mining giant De Beers. The firm’s stranglehold on the market for rough diamonds had been consolidated last year by a joint-venture exploration deal with Russian rival Alrosa, a deal described by diamantaires as being tantamount to a merger. Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes appeared to ignore the deal in her decision to close the antitrust investigation despite the fact that, only months before, she had blocked a distribution deal between the two companies. Suspicions of foul play were fed by doubts about the close relationship between De Beers and the Commission. Former competition commissioner Karel Van Miert has been on the board of Anglo American, De Beers’s parent company, since 2002. Six years ago, it was he who escorted former De Beers managing director Gary Ralfe into the then competition commissioner Mario Monti’s office. "Frankly, I don’t think we were aware of how close to the wire we were," said Ralfe later when asked whether he had "any reserve in his back pocket" that day. That same question is still being asked.

Corporate lobbyists are frequently well placed to help civil servants find their way through the dark maze of often arcane and highly technical detail that is EU policymaking.