Connect with us


Big East-West skew in record EU lobbying bonanza

Lobbyists spent a record €1.7 billion influencing the European institutions in 2016, with 95 percent..

Lobbyists spent a record €1.7 billion influencing the European institutions in 2016, with 95 percent of that figure coming from countries that joined the bloc before 2004, according to an analysis of data in the EU’s transparency register carried out by POLITICO.

At a time when many Central and Eastern European countries complain of a pro-Western bias in lawmaking and in the apportioning of EU benefits — such as the medicines and banking agencies moving from London after Brexit — the data reflect the dominance of firms, think tanks and NGOs headquartered in older member countries but with powerful lobbying operations in Brussels.

“We see that the odds are not exactly in our favor,” said Jan Němec, who is setting up a Brussels-based trade association representing Czech and Slovak transport associations in response to the dominance of trucking lobbyists from Western countries in the Brussels debate about the rights of posted workers — people who move to work in another EU country temporarily.

“If you look at the contact in the [European] Parliament, I have to say the Western view is prevailing there … They know how to lobby, they have resources, they are more experienced,” he said.

Influencers based in Belgium naturally top the list with spending of €427 million because of the preponderance of Brussels-based lobbying operations. Next on the list are Germany-based institutions, who spent €181 million in the last year, followed by the U.K. at €154 million and France at €106 million. By contrast, Poland, which has the EU’s sixth largest population, came in behind Austria, Denmark and Portugal in terms of the amount of money spent by its lobbyists. With Belgium in the mix, 95 percent of the total lobbying spend originates from old Europe, but even excluding that country, the disparity is huge with 93 percent coming from old Europe and 7 percent from countries that joined in 2004 or later.

“It’s inevitable that companies and organizations with greater resources — most of which come from the older member states — are able to invest the most in seeking to influence policy processes,” said Arnaldo Abruzzini, CEO of Eurochambres, a trade association representing 20 million businesses in 43 countries that spent up to €1.6 million last year on lobbying in Brussels.

Some of the disparity may be a reflection of cultural differences between nations. “Countries have different cultures and some countries like the U.K. have a long tradition of lobbying, while other countries know it less and influencing politics is done differently,” said Transparency International EU’s Daniel Freund, adding that the activity tends to be more developed in liberal democracies.

The EU’s transparency register was set up almost a decade ago and is operated jointly by the European Parliament and Commission. It is used by firms, associations and NGOs to officially record how much they are spending on lobbying the EU institutions, as well as state how many people are lobbying for them and which areas of legislation they seek to influence.

The number of lobbying entities on the register has multiplied by 35 since its introduction, with big upticks in the past few years. This is likely due to lobbying organizations acting on draft proposals to make signing up to the register compulsory in order to gain access to the EU institutions. Currently, lobbyists can only access senior officials in the Commission if they are on the register, but that does not apply to lobbyists seeking to influence MEPs and Council officials.

Financial disclosure on the transparency register — as well as all other information provided — is voluntary, and there’s no external audit to check whether companies have understood what is being asked and whether their entries are accurate.

Over the last two years, POLITICO has vetted financial entries from entities listed as high spenders in the register and adjusted any outlying figures based on research into each lobbying entity’s true effort (some firms record their total lobbying spend in the register rather than the amount spent on EU lobbying). By systematically gathering information from the database, the analysis also gives a deep insight into the lobbying environment in Brussels. The research, based on data disclosed on the register as of summer 2017, put the amount spent lobbying in 2016 close to €1.7 billion. The unvetted sum is much higher.

The figure suggests a lobbying bonanza in Europe’s capital that is now approaching spending in Washington. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, a U.S. transparency NGO, a total of $3.15 billion (€2.7 billion) was spent on lobbying the U.S. capital in 2016.

Money talks

The top 20 big spenders include pan-EU trade associations like the European Chemical Industry Council — which tops the list at €12.1 million — and BusinessEurope (€4.2 million). Also among the big money are consulting firms like FleishmanHillard (€7 million), Burson Marsteller (€4.7 million) and Interel (€5 million). The figures are for the rounded upper limit of a range given by companies and organizations in the transparency register.

NGOs complain that they are massively outspent by corporate interests when it comes to influencing legislation. “It is no secret that corporate interest representatives in Brussels outweigh civil society organizations both in number and in the financial resources they have for lobbying EU decision-makers, which has dire consequences for public interest policymaking,” said Vicky Cann, a campaigner at Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO), an NGO campaigning against corporate capture in Brussels.

POLITICO’s corrected data bear this out. Sixty-six percent of lobbying spend comes either from companies themselves or law firms and consultancies working for them. NGO spending accounts for only 19 percent of the total, although within that category some organizations also sometimes share the interests of corporates — for example, the European Digital Rights Initiative, which receives funding from companies like Google and Microsoft or IFOAM-Organics International, which is backed by the organics industry.The rest is made up of research and academic institutions and regional organizations.

Some of the top spenders are trade associations representing financial services sectors, like the Association for Financial Markets in Europe (€4.7 million), Insurance Europe (€7 million) and the European Banking Federation (€4.2 million). Individual firms like Deutsche Bank, Google, Microsoft and extractive industry firms ExxonMobil and Shell also feature in the top 20 lobbyists.

“If you compare all the biggest philanthropies … it’s nothing compared to what states have available as money, and it’s nothing compared to corporates,” said Inge Wachsmann, program manager at the Swiss-registered Charles Léopold Mayer Foundation, which donates around €9 million a year to NGOs such as CEO and Finance Watch, which campaigns on financial services regulation.

The transparency register records how much firms are spending on lobbying the EU institutions | Valentina Petrova/AFP via Getty Images

But it is the extent of the disparity between East and West that will likely be most surprising.

For example, firms and NGOs from Morocco, which is currently lobbying the EU institutions on an update to its lucrative trade agreement with the bloc, spent more money than seven EU member countries this year. Kenyan organizations spent more on lobbying than four EU countries (Slovenia, Latvia, Croatia and Estonia).

“We need to be more present here,” said Kinga Grafa, head of the Brussels office of Lewiatan, Poland’s 18-year-old business lobby, adding that there was a growing recognition by Polish industry that having a presence in Brussels mattered.

Grafa is one of the association’s two staffers based in Lewiatan’s Brussels office, and one of four on staff who lobby the EU institutions, with an annual spend of up to €200,000. In contrast, the Confederation of Danish Industry discloses 12 individuals lobbying the EU institutions with an annual spend of up to €1.2 million.

“Government advocacy and lobbying is still not rooted in our political systems,” said Liberal Czech MEP Martina Dlabajová, explaining why so few firms spend money lobbying in Brussels. “We still didn’t get that negotiating and transferring information to policymakers is crucial if you want to make your voice heard.”

“Policy business is a new kind of business for [companies in the Western Balkans]” — Natko Vlahovic, founder of a Croatian consultancy

And the lobbying imbalance extends beyond business. “It’s a fact that trade unions — and presumably NGOs — in many of the newer member states have fewer resources than those in the older, Western European member states,” said Julian Scola, a spokesman for the European Trade Union Confederation, which spends up to €1.2 million on lobbying the institutions.

But for associations representing smaller EU countries that joined the bloc in 2004 or later, a significant part of the challenge is waking up their business communities to the threats — and opportunities — presented by European law.

“It has been a very steady learning curve among Lithuanian businesses to really take developments in Brussels seriously,” said Tomas Vasilevskis, the director of the Lithuanian Confederation of Industrialists in Brussels, adding that there had been a big uptick in interest in “the last three or four years.”

For companies in the Western Balkans, they simply “do not understand to what extent Brussels impacts their policy and regulatory environments,” according to Natko Vlahovic, founder of Vlahovic Group, a Croatian consultancy that recently opened an office in Brussels. “Policy business is a new kind of business for them,” he added.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article misstated the trade association being set up in Brussels by Jan Němec. The association will represent Czech and Slovak transport associations.

Original Article


The post Big East-West skew in record EU lobbying bonanza appeared first on News Wire Now.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Burkina Faso: Growing Violence Threatens Health Care

Away from the worlds attention, Burkina Faso has been slipping into violence. In less than a year, t..

Away from the worlds attention, Burkina Faso has been slipping into violence. In less than a year, the number of displaced has increased fivefold, from 50,000 last December, to 270,000 in August. As ever, the most vulnerable suffer most: the very young, and the very old.

When Alidou Sawadogos elderly mother fell ill, he faced a long and dangerous journey to get treatment for her.

“When she collapsed, a friend called me,” he explains. “By the time I arrived she was already unconscious. I decided to take her to the health center and luckily someone who had a motorcycle helped me. Because of the violence many people who are sick wait at home and die. Everyone is afraid of taking the road to the health center in Barsalogho.”

Across Burkina Faso, the rising insecurity has forced over a hundred health centers to close, or to limit their work. Half a million people now have little or no access to health care. Dedicated health workers, among them Dr Bertrand Dibli in Barsalogho, are struggling to meet the needs, and to stay safe themselves.

“This is one of the few health centers that isnt closed,” he says. “We dont have enough equipment. And the insecurity has caused huge anxiety among health workers. Even coming here to Barsalogho is a huge challenge because the route is so dangerous.”

The ICRC has been working to support Burkina Fasos health professionals, with medical kits, and vaccination campaigns. During his visit to the country, ICRC President Peter Maurer expressed his concern at the multiple challenges facing Burkina Fasos people.

“We are very concerned,” he said. “Very worried about the upsurge in violence, its a vicious circle that is trapping the civilian population between armed groups.”

“We also see,” Mr Maurer added, “that it is not only the violence that is affecting the country, it is also under development, and climate change. Together with the violence that is obstructing the health services, its an accumulation of factors.”

And so the ICRC – jointly with the Burkinabé Red Cross – is also delivering food to the displaced, and helping to improve access to water supplies. All of this, says nurse Jeanette Kientega, is desperately needed by a population uprooted by conflict, and denied access to basic health care.

“By the time they are able to get here, it is often too late” she says. “Sometimes we can help, but if they have already been ill a long time, it is difficult. We try to do what we can.” (more…)

Continue Reading


World Bank and WHO Statement on Partnership & Deployment of Financing to WHO for Ebola Response in DRC

WASHINGTON, August 23, 2019—The World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), along with the G..

WASHINGTON, August 23, 2019—The World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), along with the Government and other key partners, are working in close partnership on the Ebola Crisis Response in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Central to this partnership is the assessment of the financing needs, and deployment of resources, with the goal to put an end to the current deadly outbreak.

The World Bank is today announcing that US$50 million in funding is to be released to WHO for its lifesaving operational work on the frontlines of the outbreak. The WHO is announcing that this US$50 million in funds will close the financing gap for its emergency health response in DRC through to the end of September 2019, and is calling on other partners to mirror this generous support in order to fund the response through to December.

The funding comprises US$30 million from the Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility (PEF) and US$20 million from the World Bank. The US$50 million in grant funding is part of the larger financial package of approximately US$300 million that the World Bank announced last month to support the fourth Strategic Response Plan for the DRC Ebola outbreak.

“WHO is very grateful for the World Banks support, which fills a critical gap in our immediate needs for Ebola response efforts in DRC, and will enable the heroic workers on the frontlines of this fight to continue their lifesaving work,” said Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General, World Health Organization. “We keenly await further funding from other partners to sustain the response through to the end of the year.”

The DRC government, working in collaboration with the World Bank, WHO, and other key partners, has finalized the Fourth Strategic Response Plan (SRP4), which outlines the total resources needed for the DRC Ebola Crisis Response from July to December 2019. The financing announced today is part of the World Banks previously announced financial package of up to US$300 million and covers over half of SRP4s needs, with the remainder requiring additional funding from other donors and partners.

“The World Bank is working closely with WHO, the Government of DRC, and all partners to do everything we can to put an end to the latest Ebola outbreak,” said Annette Dixon, Vice President, Human Development at the World Bank. “The partnership between our organizations and the Government is critical for responding to the emergency as well as rebuilding systems for delivery of basic services and to restoring the trust of communities.”

The Government of DRC requested US$30 million from the PEF Cash Window to be paid directly to WHO. The PEF Steering Body approved the request bringing the PEFs total contribution to fighting Ebola in DRC to US$61.4 million. The PEF is a financing mechanism housed at the World Bank; its Steering Body is co-chaired by the World Bank and WHO, and comprises donor country members from Japan, Germany and Australia. The quick and flexible financing it provides saves lives, by enabling governments and international responders to concentrate on fighting Ebola—not fundraising.

Read from source

Continue Reading


Borno State launches first Malaria Operational Plan, reawakens fight against malaria

Maiduguri, 13 August 2019 – Following recommendations from malaria interventions in Borno State Nige..

Maiduguri, 13 August 2019 – Following recommendations from malaria interventions in Borno State Nigeria, the Malaria Annual Operational Plan (MAOP) was developed and launched on 08 August 2019 with technical support from the World Health Organization (WHO) and partners. Aligned to the National Malaria Strategic Plan (2014 -2020), MAOP was developed through a broad-based stakeholders workshop involving malaria stakeholders, reviewed on different thematic areas and endorsed by the Commissioner for Health and Permanent Secretary, Borno State Ministry of Health.

Speaking during the launch, the Borno state Malaria Programme Manager, Mr Mala Waziri described the MAOP as the first to be endorsed and disseminated in Borno State. “WHO has made us proud by supporting the first ever Malaria Operational Plan right from development, review, printing to dissemination.”

Dr Ibrahim Kida, the Ministerial Secretary Borno State Ministry of Health and Incident Manager of the state, described the launch as “an historic event as stakeholders across the health sector made commitments to use the document as an implementation guide for all malaria programs”. The plan was also described as an advocacy tool for planning domestic funds mobilization.

The MAOP has seven objectives among which are: provide at least 50% of targeted population with appropriate preventive measures by 2020; ensure that all persons with suspected malaria who seek care are tested with Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT) or microscopy by 2020 and all persons with confirmed malaria seen in private or public health facilities receive prompt treatment with an effective anti-malarial drug by 2020.

The MAOP will further ensure that at least 50% of the population practice appropriate malaria prevention and management by 2020, ensuring timely availability of appropriate anti-malarial medicines and commodities required for prevention, diagnosis and treatment of malaria in Borno State by 2020.

In addition, it seeks to ensure that all health facilities report on key malaria indicators routinely by 2020 and finally strengthen governance and coordination of all stakeholders for effective program implementation towards an A rating by 2020 on a standardized scorecard. These strategic objectives have specific targets and the MAOP takes into account the humanitarian response.

“Malaria remains a leading cause of poor health in Nigeria. According to the 2018 WHO Malaria Report, 53million cases are recorded annually in Nigeria, roughly 1 in 4 persons is infected with malaria contributing 25% of the global burden,” says Dr Nglass Ini Abasi, WHO Malaria Consultant for the North East.

“Furthermore, 81,640 deaths are recorded annually (9 deaths every hour), which accounts for 19% of global malaria deaths (1 in 5 global malaria deaths) and 45% malaria deaths in West Africa. The Nigeria Malaria Strategic Plan (NMSP) 2014-2020 has a goal to reduce malaria burden to pre-elimination levels and bring malaria-related mortality to zero and WHO is working assiduously with Government to ensure the burden is reduced accordingly.”

Results from WHO’s Early Warning, Alert and Response System (EWARS) week 30 report from 223 sites, (including 32 IDP camps) show that malaria was the leading cause of morbidity and mortality accounting for 35% of cases and 46% of reported deaths. In addition, results from the Nigeria Humanitarian Response Strategy (NHRS 2019-2021) indicate 7.1million people are in dire need of healthcare and 6.2million are targeted for immediate attention.

Despite recent improvements, insecurity remains a challenge limiting access to the functional health facilities. Easily preventable and treatable diseases such as malaria, acute respiratory infection and diarrheal diseases account for the greatest proportion of morbidity and mortality among the vulnerable population. Furthermore, Malaria is endemic in North East Nigeria and the transmission is perennial with a marked seasonal peak from July to November every year. (more…)

Continue Reading