0.cached.png
By William Underhill
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
It was every lobbyist's dream. French President Jacques Chirac was persuaded to help, and so was Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell lent a hand, as did Chancellor Gerhard Schroder of Germany. Meanwhile, the giants of the European chemical industry stumped up millions of euros over five years to barrage members of the European Parliament and national officials with data and arguments. In their sights: proposals from the European Union for a comprehensive safety regime that would force companies to test and register some 30,000 chemicals used in everything from bleach to shower gel.
It was the fiercest lobbying war in EU history, and a successful one. While the deal still needs final approval, its shape looks clear: the number of regulated substances has dropped to barely 12,000, and companies will not be forced to use safer substitutes whenever they exist. Aleksandra Kordecka of Friends of the Earth in Brussels marvels at the "mind-boggling, absolutely unprecedented" campaign of political pressure. But if the result was a victory for the chemical industry, it has fed a backlash against the lobbying industry.
Over the past decade, the widening power of EU institutions--especially the Parliament--has attracted more and more lobbyists to Brussels. Where there were but a handful two decades ago, estimates of their numbers now range as high as 15,000. Generally facing no obligation to register (unlike their counterparts in Washington), they work under a slew of titles, from lawyers to public-affairs consultants. Brussels is also home to some 2,600 special-interest groups, from the employers' association UNICE to various consumer and environmental organizations. These opposing forces clashed like never before on the chemical regulation, with both sides accusing each other of scaremongering and doctoring the science to back their claims.
Read More on News
The fierce campaign, enlivened by street-theater protests, only reinforced the calls for reform. The rejection of a new EU constitution last year by referendums in France and the Netherlands was a vote of distaste for a Brussels establishment seen as out of touch. Charges that corporate giants are in league with parliamentarians heightens this perception. "It is closer to a plutocracy than a democracy," says Paul Schlyter, a Green member of the European Parliament.
That's why the European Commission--the EU's executive arm--is working on a transparency initiative, including a register of lobbyists, that would help clarify who's attempting to influence whom. "We don't see a problem with lobbying as such," says Kristian Schmidt, a senior aide to Administrative Affairs Commissioner Siim Kallas. "It is important that the Commission or Parliament knows how it affects stakeholders. But it is crucial that the process should be seen as legitimate."
Indeed, the EU bureaucracy is particularly vulnerable to backroom operatives. Detached from national politics, Brussels institutions keep their doors deliberately open to outsiders, so the bureaucracy doesn't become divorced from popular opinion. At the same time, the technical dullness of much of the EU's rulemaking discourages media attention.
Yet Brussels is no Washington. Europe's arcane system divides power between the Commission, the Parliament and the member states, so influence peddlers can't buy an outcome by stopping in one shop. There's also far less money in a system that forbids American-style campaign funding. So there is no Brussels equivalent of Jack Abramoff, the U.S. lobbyist accused of buying up tame congressmen. "In Washington, lobbyists are trying to mobilize money for political parties," says Rogier Chorus of the Brussels-based Society of European Affairs Professionals. "That just doesn't happen here: this is all pretty innocent stuff." Perhaps. But tighter scrutiny is a good way to protect its innocence.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines