EU Influence: Ethics body exposed — Friendship groups forever — Israel’s art of the schmooze

Nov 06, 2023

A weekly newsletter on campaigning, lobbying and political influence in the EU.

Press play to listen to this article

Voiced by artificial intelligence.

Presented by Uber

By SARAH WHEATON

PRESENTED BY

Tips, tales, traumas to @swheaton or [email protected] | View in your browser

HOWDY. It's almost exactly six months since Qatargate broke, and exactly one year until the European Parliament elections. That means things are getting mighty partisan ‘round these parts. Buckle up.

"Of course there are people who don't want [post-Qatargate ethics reforms] to go quickly, because we have elections next year, and the longer you have the topic on the table, the longer you can talk about Qatargate, and that is a political point for some."

— European Parliament Vice President Katarina Barley, a German Socialist & Democrat, on Tuesday at the European Ombudsman's conference on "building a stronger EU integrity framework."

**A message from Uber: Never stop moving forward. Learn more at uber.com/europe.**

HABEMUS CORPUS: After months of delay, the Commission's proposal for an EU ethics body is finally out. No surprise, the watchdog NGOs and pro-transparency MEPs aren't happy — they were never going to be, given that Commission Vice President for Values and Transparency Věra Jourová has pretty much always ruled out the possibility of an authority that can launch its own investigations and punish wrongdoing.

BODY PARTS: Here's our quick-and-dirty summary of the proposal, for your reference …

The ethics body would be based on an agreement among nine EU institutions — the Commission, the Council of the EU presidency, the European Council, the Parliament, the Court of Justice of the EU, the Court of Auditors, the European Central Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee, and the Committee of the Regions.

Who's subject: So far, this is about political appointees and not staff. So think commissioners, not directors-general (though there's already desire to revisit this even within the Commission); MEPs, not assistants. The Commission estimates that the ethics body would apply to about 1,500 people in total.

The members: Each institution would send one representative, ideally at the level of vice president or equivalent. There would also be five independent experts who would attend meetings as observers and weigh in at various points.

The mission: Develop common standards in a series of categories within six months after the board gets up and running.

The categories: Interest and asset declarations; side jobs while in office; acceptance of gifts and hospitality by third parties; acceptance of awards and prizes; post-mandate work; meeting disclosure and Transparency Register requirements.

The staffing: A three-person secretariat would have a budget of €600,000 a year, Jourová said at an event hosted by the European Ombudsman on Tuesday. (The idea is that most of the work still happens at the level of investigators and enforcers within each institution.)

THE TEETH: Jourová's team devised what it hopes is an innovative way to box nine institutions into better self-policing, with a legally binding agreement among institutions. Let's look at five ways the Commission hopes the ethics body will have teeth — and how those teeth could be blunted, according to critics.

— COMMON RULES: Right now, Commissioners have a two-year cooling off period before they can lobby their colleagues, while it's (only just now) six months for MEPs. This is the type of standard the bodies would work to align, along with policies on asset disclosures, side jobs, accepting third-party gifts and other factors related to conflicts of interest. There's a nonregression policy, meaning an institution can't use a common standard as a reason to backslide if it's lower than what they already have. Under the agreement, institutions are obligated to implement the common standard.

Critics say: Each institution gets to choose its own representative to sit on the ethics body — and the ethics body's decisions must be reached by consensus. So by sending a less ambitious member, an institution could force a low common denominator. The ethics body could agree, for example, on a six-month minimum cooling-off period, keeping the Parliament in compliance, while the Commission keeps its two-year enforced break.

— LEGAL ACCOUNTABILITY: Many critics of the EU's current ethics regime point out that existing rules are poorly enforced. The NGO at the center of Qatargate, for example, wasn't in the Transparency Register, so it shouldn't have been able to hold events on Parliament premises. In addition to setting common ethics baselines, the body would also agree on enforcement standards, including the approach to sanctions.

The thinking in the Commission is that if the ethics body can't enforce the rules itself, it can be used to make institutions have some external accountability for their internal enforcement. Crucially, if an institution is found to be in breach of the common standards, they could be subject to a challenge in the Court of Justice of the EU.

Critics say: Whether the ethics body or other institutions could actually take one of their fellow legislators to court is highly disputed. The institutional agreement "will oblige each signatory institution to collaborate on defining minimal standards BUT it can't impose on the same institution their adoption," said Alberto Alemanno, a professor of EU Law at HEC Paris, in an email. "The question is not whether another institution can bring the [Parliament] before the ECJ, but whether the new standards will be adopted by the [Parliament] in the first place."

Even if it is possible, others argue, it's such a complicated process that this is not a serious solution. And as a recent precedent for using inter-institutional agreements to enforce integrity standards: An effort to make entry in the Transparency Register mandatory for meetings is being widely panned as a failure.

— DEADLINES: The parties aren't able to slow walk, as the Commission sees it, writing multiple deadlines into the agreement. Common standards would have to be adopted within six months, and there’d also be deadlines for implementing them in each institution.

Critics say: What's the consequence of missing a deadline?

— REPORT CARDS: It should be pretty easy for interested citizens to see what the new standards are, and whether the institutions are adhering to them, according to the Commission design. Each institution would have to write a self-assessment about how their current approach squares with the new standards. And you wouldn't have to just take their word for it — five independent experts who observe the ethics body would also get to weigh in, and their views would be incorporated into a final report that would be public.

Critics say: So what? This isn't going to create enough political pressure to improve the broken system of self-policing. "MEPs check on MEPs, then we get bad grades from the ethics body, telling us, ‘Look you should sanction harder,’" said German Green MEP Daniel Freund, the rapporteur on the Parliament's 2021 call for a sanctioning body, mocking the plan.

Freund acknowledged that sanctioning power might need to stay within the institutions — but the ethics body would need to be more specific to be effective. For example, he said, it could issue public recommendations on how to punish instances of wrongdoing — but that, again, would involve investigative powers the ethics body doesn't have.

— LEAKS: Deliberations of the ethics body would be private, reflected only in an annual report. However, the work of the ethics body includes a built-in set of discussions and debates amongst the body's members — along with the independent observers. Sure, it's all supposed to be confidential, but that's not lost on anyone that this creates opportunities for — say, anonymous sources frustrated by a lack of process to name-and-shame players who are holding back serious overhaul.

Critics say: Given even post-Qatargate pressure ahead of an election year hasn't yet prompted a serious soul-searching about ethics, why would some insider sniping have any impact? (To which EU Influence says: We are here for all your insider sniping.)

POLITICAL REALITY: Best-case scenario, the Commission has cleverly circumvented political and legal obstacles to enact an overarching ethics referee. Yet even a technical triumph could prove a Pyrrhic victory when it comes to the public.

It is "really important not to fool the people," said European Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly on Tuesday, in advance of the proposal's unveiling. "What most people commonly understand is it would be independent […] that it would have strong powers of investigation."

The ombudsman is no stranger to dealing with a lack of binding authority. However, O’Reilly said, "our magic power is the power to investigate, to see whatever we need to see in order to put the report out."

PARTISAN POLITICS: Before the proposal was even out, MEPs from Renew and the Socialists and Democrats were rejecting the plan — and training their fire on the Parliament's conservatives for holding back real reforms. Meanwhile, Sven Simon, a key player on the measure for the European People's Party, gave it a tentative thumbs-up. More on the announcement and reaction here.

WHAT’S NEXT: Jourová said at a public appearance Tuesday that political negotiations will begin in early July.

SIDE JOBS FIGHT = MAIN EVENT: A closed-door working group within the Parliament's Constitutional Affairs Committee — tasked with implementing parts of the post-Qatargate ethics changes — is sharply divided over disclosures about assets and side jobs, said French MEP Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield, at an event organized by the Greens on Tuesday. "What we call ‘conflict of interest’ I would say 80 percent of this Parliament calls ‘expertise.’"

Taking on Renew: While the center-right European People's Party has typically been seen as the most powerful defender of MEPs’ freedom of mandate in these types of transparency debates, Delbos-Corfield said that the liberals were now the "problem," in the eyes of those who want tighter regulations. "NGOs, experts: Renew is your target," she told allies.

Getting personal: Anne Isakowitsch of WeMove.eu, a campaigning NGO, lamented that the work on transparency was being done "in secret." She complained specifically about Renew's representative to the working group, French MEP Gilles Boyer, saying his office ignored a request by dozens of their members to meet.

Renew responds: "I’m surprised to learn that our work is being used for political purposes (both European and maybe also national), because that is not the spirit of it," Boyer said in an email to EU Influence. "We are not in this situation because of the Renew group, and a lot of groups are far more reluctant than mine on those issues."

One job, 14 points: Boyer stressed that the working group "has one job. Not two, not three." And that one job is to draft a report on implementing European Parliament President Roberta Metsola's 14 points for post-scandal reform. "I’m not saying that more significant evolution will not be necessary, I’m not saying that I wouldn't wish to be more creative — I’m just saying that this working group is not in charge of this," he added.

Look up, not at me: "I’m aware that some members of the working group want to use this opportunity to create new rules," Boyer said. "In my opinion, they should put pressure on their Group's President rather than pointing the finger at representatives of other political groups in this working group."

Open up: Several transparency NGOs and activists, including Transparency International EU, The Good Lobby and Corporate Europe Observatory, called in a letter for moving the overhaul deliberations out of the private working group and instead use the regular legislative process.

FRIENDS(HIP GROUPS) FOREVER: Banning unofficial "friendship groups" of MEPs with third countries was one of the earliest, no-brainer ideas post-Qatargate. Often operated by the country's embassy (as was the case with the Qatari-EU friendship group), it was an easy way to offer perks to sympathetic politicians. Yet MEPs are now finding a lot of loopholes..

No overlap: A report recommending post-Qatargate reforms to fight foreign interference, adopted in committee last week, called for "a ban on friendship groups with non-EU countries for which official Parliament delegations already exist, while recognising that friendship groups should continue to exist, on a case-by-case basis, for activities related to certain non-sovereign territories, persecuted minorities or partners for which an official delegation does not exist."

Friends with benefits: That means groups for Kurds, Uyghurs, Taiwan and Scotland are A-OK, French Renew MEP Nathalie Loiseau, one of the co-rapporteurs on the file, said at a press conference last week.

Official vs. unofficial: Slovak EPP MEP Vladimír Bilčík, the other rapporteur, said he saw "no contradiction" if there were "official friendship groups."

Network vs. friendship: Loiseau Bilčík held their press conference the day after Metsola announced that the Abraham Accords Network would be launched within weeks.

So, would this collection of MEPs helping to promote the normalization agreements between Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Morocco and other Arab countries count as a friendship group? POLITICO's Eddy Wax asked.

"We need to know more about it," Loiseau said last week, urging organizers to get in touch with the Foreign Affairs Committee. For what it's worth, there are already official MEP delegations for relations with Israel, the Maghreb countries and the Arab Peninsula.

ICYMI, DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY DELAY: Is it death by impact assessment of the Commission's so-called defense of democracy package? I looked at the politics behind the delay on the Commission's proposal to fight foreign interference, by, in part, requiring interest groups to disclose foreign funding.

CIVIL SOCIETY CALLS FOR DIRECTORY RETURN: Few outside the Brussels bubble would likely feel bad for the corporate lobbyists who now have to hustle harder to make contacts following the Commission's decision to remove junior staff from the public-facing EU WhoisWho directory.

But as 110 NGOs note in a letter to the Commission, spearheaded by Social Platform and Civil Society Europe, it's hitting the nonprofit sector especially hard. They warn the move could increase "inequity and bias, creating an environment where only those stakeholders with greater capacity and resources will be able to continue to engage with civil servants."

ISRAELI EMBASSY — THE ART OF THE SCHMOOZE: We got out of the metro at Rogier on May 31 and thought, "Why are all these cops around?" And then, we were like, "Oh, duh, because we are going to a party hosted by the Israeli embassy" — in this case, in honor of the 75th anniversary of the country.

We got through security at the DoubleTree just as European Parliament President Roberta Metsola was giving her remarks — a considerable coup for a non-EU country. As we reported in Playbook last week, she even made news, announcing the imminent launch of the Abraham Accords Network in the European Parliament. (In case you skipped straight to this gossip section — see more on that above.) Metsola was joined by some 700 other guests, including ambassadors from other signatories to the landmark peace agreements: Bahrain, United Arab Emirates and Morocco.

How to spin a political crisis: Haim Regev, Israel's unflappable ambassador to the EU and NATO, did make an apparent reference to the crippling, widespread protests against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's aborted judicial overhaul (a plan that critics said would threaten the rule of law if implemented).

"Israel indeed is a vibrant democracy, and we are taking this expression very seriously, so that we develop a habit of participating in elections and demonstrations quite often," Regev said. "So, I would like to tell our friends here — as well as our enemies that I hope are not here today with us — that it's a sign of strength, it's not a sign of weakness."

RUD PEDERSEN PUBLIC AFFAIRS — ON THE ROCKS: The once-niche Nordic agency is now one of the biggest shops in town, boasting some 80 staff in Brussels, said namesake Morten Rud Pedersen at De Warande on Tuesday evening.

If you rent it, they will come: Rud Pedersen talked about how he rented office space before he actually had clients, first on Rue d’Arlon near the Parliament. When he heard current managing partner James Stevens was on the market, he sought to woo the then-FleishmanHillard exec with a 485-square-meter space on Avenue Marnix.

"I took James one evening by the hand, we went up to the office, I borrowed the keys. I showed him all the square meters. And I said, ‘I think we can fill that office with people, and we can serve clients in the city, if you join us. Now here, six years later, we have 985 square meters."

Kyiv karma, RP edition: Rud Pedersen cast the agency's recent move to open an office in Ukraine as an instance of making "nonprofit decisions" because it "feels good in our heart." EU Influence asks you to forgive our cynicism, but unless you view the world very differently from your (Nordic!) competitors, we suspect you’re anticipating this wartime investment will feel good in your wallet down the line.

Woke venue note: The courtyard of De Warande, a private Flemish club, was lovely. But the chunky stones used as ground cover made us glad we skipped the high heels and concerned for anyone trying to navigate in a wheelchair.

CHEMICALS

— Sylvie Lemoine was promoted to deputy director general at the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic), making her the first person to hold the post.

CONSULTING & COMMS

— Rolf Driesen became the new CEO of Deloitte Belgium. He takes over from Piet Vandendriessche, whose second mandate as CEO came to an end.

— Christian Hierholzer recently took on the title of group managing director international at Hanover Communications. But don't call it a promotion, he tells us: it's more a reflection of the job he's been doing since June 2021. The big change: a move from Brussels to Dubai (after shuttling between the two for years) even as he’ll continue leading on health care and other clients in Brussels.

— Joana Cruz joined Rud Petersen Public Affairs as an account director. She previously worked at Eurocities.

ENERGY

— Audrey Galland, director general of France Gaz Liquides, is the new president of Liquid Gas Europe. She is taking over from Esther Busscher of SHV Energy.

MOBILITY

— Camille Barré will start as director of transport & mobility at European Tyre & Rubber Manufacturers’ Association (ETRMA) in July. She is currently European government affairs manager at Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT).

TECH

— Jelena Letljane becomes a new EU government affairs manager focusing on environment, industry and trade at Schneider Electric. She previously worked at the American Chamber of Commerce to the EU (AmCham EU).

THINK TANKS

— Sylvie Matelly will be the new director of the Jacques Delors Institute from October 1, succeeding Sébastien Maillard. An economist, Matelly is currently deputy director of the French Institute for International and Strategic Affairs (IRIS) in Paris.

URBAN POLICY

— Eurocities announced a round of promotions: Alex Godson takes on a role of communications director, Brooke Flanagan becomes the new director for climate and environment and Sinéad Mullins is newly head of outreach and member engagement.

THANKS TO: Eddy Wax, Giorgio Leali and especially Ketrin Jochecová; web producer Giulia Poloni and my editor Sonya Diehn.

**A message from Uber: Since 2017, we’ve been committed to being better partners to drivers, better residents of the EU, and better citizens of the planet. Learn more.**

SUBSCRIBE to the POLITICO newsletter family: Brussels Playbook | London Playbook | London Playbook PM | Playbook Paris | POLITICO Confidential | Sunday Crunch | EU Influence | London Influence | Digital Bridge | China Watcher | Berlin Bulletin | D.C. Playbook | D.C. Influence | Global Insider | All our POLITICO Pro policy morning newsletters