| Regulation of Lobbyists: Discussion with Dr. Raj Chari |
| Tuesday, 18 May 2010 | |
|
During a meeting of the Joint Oireachats Commitee on European Affairs, the regulation of lobbyists was discussed with Dr. Raj Chari. I said: It is a topic that has always interested me. I have been a Member of the Seanad for almost 18 years and I did not know that lobbying existed before I came in... I discovered the benefits of lobbyists when I first came to the Seanad, but I also discovered the disadvantages. First, wherever a topic was coming up it was very beneficial to have somebody who could explain their view on it. If there were two opposing views, one had to make one’s decision on that basis. What concerned me, however, was that I did not realise that lobbying took place. Earlier today, I checked an address I made in December 1999. I produced a paper on lobbying in which I proposed that the Seanad should change and become the only place where lobbyists could operate on every piece of legislation. They could use the Upper House as an open forum for lobbying. There is still a great deal to be said for having a ban on hidden lobbyists. Some lobbyists deal with Government, parliamentarians and officials but democracy would be healthier if it were all in the open. I am not sure how that is being achieved elsewhere. I noted Dr. Chari’s description of the three different levels of lobbying and how they work. What I had in mind was to ban any lobbying other than that which occurs in the full glare of public scrutiny. There is a benefit behind that. I was impressed by the fact that there are various levels of lobbying. Very often, lobbyists will approach officials rather than decision-makers in the long term. That is very useful to learn, but I still believe it should be done in the open. I am not sure if Dr. Chari is able to help us in that regard. Four years ago, I became a lobbyist myself without knowing it. I became chairman of EuroCommerce, which is based in Brussels and represents the international wholesale, retail and distributive trades in Europe. It is a fairly large organisation. I realised that its main purpose was to represent the views of international traders, including distributors, wholesalers and retailers. The arguments EuroCommerce has to make are needed in Europe to oppose alternative views that have much stronger lobbying. Manufacturers, farmers and consumers have strong lobby groups. Unless there was a lobby representing the business and trade sectors, many of their views would not be expressed. How can we ensure that lobbying takes place in the full glare of publicity, open to public scrutiny? In that way, everybody could see what lobbying was going on, and it would not happen behind closed doors. I would welcome Dr. Chari’s view on how that has been achieved in other countries. I look forward to seeing his book. I will look in particular at the list he has given us of the three levels - what he calls the low, medium and high regulation systems - in all those areas. Dr. Chari touched on the revolving door provision, which I had not recognised. There is a certain discussion going on at the moment with regard to a former European Commissioner accepting a position on the board of an airline. I am not seeking a comment on that particular case, but who decides whether or not that cooling off period can take place? I thank Dr. Chari for opening my eyes to a topic about which I had not realised so much work had already been done.
To read a record of the full debate, please click here.
|
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|