Remainers have a curious amnesia when it comes to corrupt lobbying

By Pete North - April 15, 2021

I’m not generally one to engage in whataboutery, but the sight of remainers climbing aboard the “tory sleaze” bandwagon, wailing about “massively corrupt lobbying” has a certain comedic quality when recall that international transparency organisations have a full time Brussels desk, monitoring EU lobbying and that famous Brussels revolving door.

Be it emissions testing, GM foods, EFSA risk assessments, palm oil, tobacco, medicines and much else, when it comes to political intrigue and dirty dealings, Brussels is about as bad as Washington. Arguably worse.

This is a stick I often like to beat remainers with. It’s a bit disingenuous on my part being that lobbying is a fact of life, and it’s just how things get done. It’s not going to change in my lifetime and probably never will. Where there’s power, there’s money. But what makes it fun is that most of the lobbying issues raised come from lefty NGOs on issues that remainers (through the lens of the Brexit debate) profess to care about, be it climate, the environment and food safety – yet when it comes to dirty dealings in Brussels you can hear a pin drop.

Often, though, I find the issues are more nuanced and complicated with NGOs engaged in their own top level lobbying (with nefarious motives) and green NGOs are often used as pawns in larger corporate lobbying games. If you want to shaft your competition, get the EU to regulate it. (One wonders why global shipping giants tend to be the most enthusiastic proponents of sulphur limits on ships).

Of particular interest, though, is how the EU has for decades resisted calls for greater transparency. Lobbying and corruption is a fact of life, but Brussels is in no hurry to shine a light on it.

Even though the German government’s cosy relations with the car industry are finally under scrutiny and subject to public pressure, change is unlikely to materialise anytime soon. In Brussels alone, the car industry spends 15-20m euros a year on lobbying. Meanwhile, the pharmaceutical industry lobby is spending more than €40 million annually to influence decision making in the European Union (EU) – of which nearly half is spent by drug manufacturers on in-house lobbyists, often employing ex-MEPs as sherpas (and to make the introductions).

This is not to say that David Cameron should get a free pass for whatever he’s up to, nor is it right that senior civil servants can be working private sector roles concurrently. Whitehall has a revolving door of its own and abuses are flagrant. It’s standard fare for Private Eye. But there does seem to be a curious amnesia for Brussels lobbying scandals.

In an attempt to take some of the heat off, the EU does occasionally make token gestures to improve transparency, but transparency measures only cover one percent of officials, and about a quarter of lobbyists, meaning that trade negotiators such as those who negotiated the ill-fated TTIP, were not covered by the rules and were able to meet with US lobbyists without declaring it.

That is not to say the situation is resolved by Brexit. Or at least not as such. Trade will always be inherently corrupt, being that governments act as agents on behalf of exporters. Money talks. In all likelihood we will replicate that same Brussels trough surfing, and if the appointment of Daniel Hannan and Shanker Singham to the UK board of trade is anything to go by, the snouts are already stuck in. If, on the back of the Cameron affair, our media gets a taste for reporting on dodgy lobbying then there’s plenty for them to go at.

But then that, to me, makes the point of Brexit. By repatriating trade, we bring something that was out of sight and out of mind, back into the pubic arena – where we now have more eyes on more things – which makes for more accountable government. The essential problem of EU membership was that the dirty dealings did not directly relate to our politics thus could be safely ignored. The worst abuses seldom made the UK press. If that changes then we have Brexit to thank for that.