|
|
| ||||||
<<< press your browser’s back button to go back to list of candidates EPACA, the European Public Affairs Consultancies AssociationNominated for its high-profile counter-campaign against the European Commission’s plans for a lobby transparency register.
EPACA describes itself as “the representative trade body for public affairs consultancies working with EU institutions”. A role for which it has taken high-profile and determined action in recent months against the European Commission’s plans for a lobby transparency register – even though initial measures of transparency control will be fairly weak. The designated obligations to disclose their financing within this register have caused outrage among the Brussels-based lobby consultants. EPACA’s media offensive denounced the Commission’s transparency plans as “excessive”, “an unnecessary burden”, “impossibly complex” and “voyeurism”, and even threatened to boycott the transparency register. Amongst the range of criticisms that EPACA throws at the Commission’s transparency plans is the argument that “money does not equal influence”, so financial disclosure is therefore irrelevant or even “dangerous”. EU Commissioner Kallas, who heads the transparency work, replied by suggesting that “nobody would pay real money for lobby services without expecting something in return – and that ‘something’ is influence”. Yet EPACA is determined to maintain the shroud of secrecy that cloaks the clients they lobby for, and sources of financing. EPACA’s (over-)reaction and its shifting of positions demonstrate they are political opportunists of the highest degree. Initially EPACA argued for a voluntary register, now they argue for a mandatory one, but without financial disclosure. The main target seems to be to delay and eventually stop the whole transparency initiative. The opportunistic attitude is further revealed by the fact that many of EPACA’s members are subsidiaries of US-based consultancy firms that operate in Washington D.C., where for more than a decade, far more stringent mandatory lobby disclosure obligations have been in place. There can be little doubt that these professional spin-masters know very well that the (often contradictory) arguments they present against a meaningful lobby register are fundamentally flawed. Expose these cynical opportunists and use your free vote to cast influence and award them with the Worst Lobby Award 2007. Sources:Hired-gun lobbyists in last-ditch battle against EU transparency plans, Corporate Europe Observatory, August 2007. ReactionEPACA reacts to nomination for Worst EU Greenwash Award 2007, 14 November 2007. Comments132 Juergen Isensee 5 December 2007: Nicht die Bürger, sondern Lobbyisten müssen so gläsern wie irgend möglich sein. Jeder Parlamentarier und jeder Beamte soll hargenau wissen, von wem ein Lobbyist wieviel Geld erhält 127 transparent citizen 4 December 2007: Governments and Industry like us to be as transparent as possible and themselves to be as intransparent as possible. I’d rather have it the other way around. Just as: People should not be afraid of their governments, but governments should be afraid of their people. 108 May-Lise Talgø 27 November 2007: Power corrupts! Do we really need an EU parliament? More power to the people! Let’s dissolve the EU and connect real people into real decision making processes!!! 91 Volker Racho 20 November 2007: Bei dem vorliegenden Wissen über den Lobbyismus, wie er wirklich ist mit all seinen Verstrickungen.Muss die Frage erlaubt sein, ob die RAF, die Terroristen waren oder doch die privilegirten Persönlichkeiten von oben. 85 Martin Guardini 17 November 2007: in der neutralen Schweiz habe ich gelernt, dass die beste Taktik darin besteht:alles offenlegen, aber falsch interpretieren. 83 Nico Saringer 16 November 2007: Transparenz ist das a und o für ein friedliches miteinader. 80 Erwin Scholze 13 November 2007: In einer guten und dauerhaften Transparenz sehe ich nachhaltig DIE Zukunft für ein gemeinsames Europa. 58 Martin Auer 2 November 2007: Mehr Tranzparenz muss her! 53 V. Lombard 1 November 2007: If these lobbying agencies are emanations from their US counterparts, we may wonder if the EU Commission is more or less influenced by policies inspired by Washington… The issue is serious enough to set up a very strict code ruling lobbies & lobbyists. Not everything’s bad in the US – maybe we could implement similar or even stricter laws for lobbies here in the EU. I hope so ! Our future as Europeans may depend on our ability to control these people. 51 Frank van Schaik 1 November 2007: The cartoon is great! Reminds me of the german word for “banners”: Transparanten! Maybe EPACA should rename themselves into OPAQUA, to clarify more what they are about. but then again, exactly that is what they wouldn’t want to do. well, the y get my vote abnyhow. 49 R. Wagner 28 October 2007: Auf jeden Fall mehr Tranzparenz,besonders bei Ärzten 47 Jan Saver 26 October 2007: More transparency is clearly a good thing for everyone involved. The behaviour of some consultancies can be best described as dishonest, cashing in on outsiders’ desire to get closer to EU decision making and freeriding on EU officials’ openness and hard work. Having a mandatory and strict code will also introduce more fair competition between lobbying firms. It will force them to produce real value rather than make promises and flaunt contacts. Hopefully a solid code will succeed in separating the wheat from the chaff so to say. 46 Anna van Marle 26 October 2007: Scandaleux!!! 40 Andreas Schmitt 22 October 2007: mehr Transparenz, bitte! | ||||||
|
The EU lobby awards are organised by Corporate Europe Observatory, Friends of the Earth Europe, LobbyControl and Spinwatch. This site is developed by easyMIND. |