Dawn of a new era for EU lobbyists

Date: 17/02/2000

The jury is still out on whether the Prodi Commission will genuinely be more open than its predecessors. But if it does live up to its president's pledges of greater transparency, this - coupled with the increased powers now wielded by MEPs and likely changes to the EU treaty later this year - will have significant implications for lobbyists. Simon Taylor reports

LOBBYISTS will need to develop a more comprehensive communications strategy as the Union's decision-making process becomes more open and transparent.

That was the clear message which emerged from last week's seminar on 'Effective lobbying of the EU and the role of the press corps' organised by European Voice in association with communications specialists Hill & Knowlton.

Acknowledging the significant role which public affairs experts play in the policy-making process - and rejecting the notion that 'lobbying' was a dirty word - the head of the Prodi Commission's new Press and Communication Service, Jonathan Faull, said the Union institutions valued the input of outside groups and were planning to improve communications with external bodies.

Faull told delegates that one of the first priorities for the new Commission under President Romano Prodi had been to modernise the insitution's spokesmen's service to improve the way that the EU executive's policies are presented to the media and the general public.

The Commission's communications boss outlined what had already been achieved and described plans to set up a rapid-response unit which would be able to react immediately when the institution's policies were misrepresented in the media. "We will not take it lying down anymore when people claim we are banning bent bananas or cucumbers," he said, warning that his service might even go as far as to 'name and shame' journalists or media who deliberately distorted the Commission's activities.

But he stressed that the changes introduced by the Prodi Commission were not simply aimed at getting its message across to the public more effectively. The new team, he said, was also working to make the institution's activities more open and transparent to everyone - including lobbyists.

"There is a general effort to open the Commission up as an institution," he said, adding that representatives of all parts of civil society were "welcome to take part in the decision-making process".

Elaine Cruikshanks, managing director of Hill & Knowlton International, Belgium, explained how the role of lobbyists had developed over the last 25 years and stressed the need for consultants to revise their strategies for influencing policy debates which were being increasingly held in the public domain.

There are now some 10,000 lobbyists in Brussels, with the number rising steadily since the launch of the single market because of its far-reaching implications for business. The industry's growth has also been fuelled by the introduction of qualified majority voting, which significantly increased the opportunities for lobbying. Cruikshanks also pointed out that Brussels was now home to one of the world's largest press corps, with nearly 1,000 journalists now accredited to the EU.

Taken together, she said, these developments had changed the way lobbyists operate. The proliferation of information sources meant that it was no longer enough for public affairs specialists to be 'information gatherers'. "Customers want strategic advice so they can be a strategic partner in the decision-making process," she stressed.

It was also important for companies to get their message across to the media more effectively, said Cruikshanks, because of the symbiotic relationship between politicians and journalists. This meant that lobbyists would have to develop better communication strategies to target key audiences and the media they use.

She also examined the impact of changes to the Union's decision-making procedure introduced by the Amsterdam Treaty on the work of lobbyists.

She warned that the increase in the European Parliament's powers meant that interest groups now had to act more quickly to get their views across to MEPs because EU ministers would often accept the Parliament's amendments to proposed legislation wholesale, and the two sides were less likely to resort to lengthy 'conciliation' talks to settle their differences. "Players from the Council of Ministers and the Parliament are brokering deals much earlier," she added.

In general, said Cruikshanks, the extension of the number of policy areas where legislation was decided jointly by MEPs and the Council was a welcome development for lobbyists because co-decision was "one of the most open procedures in the decision-making process".

Looking ahead, she predicted that lobbyists would be able to exert an even greater influence on Union decisionmaking in future as a result of changes to the EU treaty likely to be introduced at the end of this year's Intergovernmental Conference, which got under way this week. Extending the use of qualified majority voting to more areas would, for example, have a significant impact on European business and enlarging the Union to take in new members would increase the opportunities for lobbyists.

Jacki Davis, editor of European Voice, said the rise in the number of lobbyists in Brussels demonstrated the increasing importance which companies attached to getting their message across to the policy-makers, and increased awareness that "an effective public affairs campaign can really make a difference to the final shape of EU legislation".

Davis pointed out that although Commissioners were technically civil servants while serving in Brussels, many had ambitions to return to domestic politics once they left the EU executive and their image in the eyes of the public was therefore very important to them. "Just because they don't kiss babies, it doesn't mean they don't want to be loved," she said, adding that this was one key reason why lobbyists had to do more to get their message across through the media.

That need would become even greater, insisted Davis, if Prodi delivered on his pledge to open up the EU executive. She said the jury was still out on whether the Commission would genuinely become more open as a result of the changes his team had introduced, but added that if it did, this would provide a real opportunity for genuine public debate on the Union's activities - and lobbyists would have to respond with much more sophisticated public relations campaigns to ensure that their clients did not lose the argument by default.

Davis also warned that if the Commission became more skilled at 'managing' the news agenda, as the new press service hoped, then lobbyists would have to do the same. "Simply working behind the scenes to influence the decision-makers will not be enough," she insisted.

Davis also offered interest groups advice on how to deal with reporters. The key, she insisted, was not to constantly bombard journalists with press releases and telephone calls, but rather to build a long-term relationship with them. Lobbyists should also provide reporters with as much background information as possible, as early as possible, so that when stories on issues which could affect their clients 'break', journalists already know the main planks of their argument.

In addition, said Davis, lobbyists must ensure that they are ready to respond clearly, concisely and, above all, swiftly to reporters' queries. They should also keep their message as simple as possible, as most EU journalists are not specialists in particular areas but instead cover a wide range of issues, many of which are extremely complex.

David Earnshaw, director of govern-ment affairs and public policy at pharmaceuticals company SmithKline Beecham's EU/Brussels office, assessed the growing importance of 'lobby advertising' as a tool for firms and interest groups seeking to get their message across to a wider audience.

Earnshaw said that while advocacy advertising was still in its infancy, it could - if used properly - be a powerful campaign tool, enabling interest groups to put new issues on the political agenda, open up the decision-making process, promote transparency and "level the playing field" between those on both sides of the argument.

He insisted, however, that it should never be used on its own but rather as part of a comprehensive public affairs strategy, and warned that companies risked a possible backlash if they were seen to be spending large sums of money on putting their views across.

Brendan Hodgson, account director with online media company Netcoms, explained how the Internet was becoming an increasingly important tool for lobbyists and campaigners to get their messages heard, adding that websites were an extremely cost-effective way of communicating with a target audience.

Summing up the key lessons which had emerged from the discussion, all the speakers agreed that the move towards greater openness in the EU institutions was increasing the opportunities for those affected by their decisions to influence the debate. They also agreed that if the Commission, in particular, lived up to its promises of more transparency, lobbyists would have to respond in kind - devoting more attention and resources to influencing that debate via the media - if they were to achieve their goals.

Major feature. The jury is still out on whether the Prodi Commission will genuinely be more open than its predecessors. But if it does live up to its president's pledges of greater transparency, this - coupled with the increased powers now wielded by MEPs and likely changes to the EU treaty later this year - will have significant implications for lobbyists. They will need to develop a more comprehensive communications strategy as the Union's decision-making process becomes more open and transparent. That was the clear message which emerged from a recent seminar on 'Effective lobbying of the EU and the role of the press corps', organised by European Voice in association with communications specialists Hill & Knowlton.