Lobbying in the 21st century:
04.06.2021
According to the OECD survey, lobbying is a natural part of the democratic process. By sharing experiences, legitimate needs, and evidence about policy issues and how to address them, different interest groups can provide Governments with valuable data from which to develop effective public policies. In 2014, the OECD published the first report on the implementation of the Council's Recommendation on the Principles of Transparency and Integrity in Lobbying (hereinafter referred to as the 2014 Report, the Principles of Lobbying). The main purpose of this report is to highlight the problem of lobbying. However, while these efforts have led to greater awareness of the risks of lobbying practices and openness towards them, they have been subject to pressure from public and political groups that have left room for loopholes and weak transparency mechanisms. Also, in some places, there was also abuse of official authority, where the actions of the participants went beyond what was necessary to solve problems. This OECD review provides a further assessment of the progress made by countries in implementing the Lobbying Principles. The importance of recognizing lobbying as a legitimate tool for influencing public policy, on the one hand, and the governance risks associated with it, on the other, remains one of the key issues. The review aims to address three key elements of Lobbying Principles: transparency, integrity, and access.
In 2020, 18 countries had public registries with information about lobbyists and / or lobbying activities. Some countries place the burden of responsibility on public officials by requiring them to disclose information about their meetings under so-called "open agendas". However, 9 out of 18 countries indicated that they require certain government officials to make their agendas public or disclose information about their meetings with lobbyists. However, the levels of transparency vary from country to country, and some of the measures taken provide only limited transparency "about the influence process". The results of the conducted research include the following:
After analyzing the information provided, the OECD concluded that only a few countries are transparent about the entire "complex" of lobbying aimed at all branches of government. The Principles of Lobbying state that the disclosure requirements should indicate the state institutions that are the object of lobbying activities. It is now widely recognized that lobbying often focuses on the legislative and executive branches of government. In addition, over the past decade, courts and judicial remedies have been increasingly relied upon to address key public policy issues. Through their judicial practice or as arbitrators, courts are often asked to determine the results of public policy in areas such as: protection of constitutional rights, trade and commerce, national security, labor protection or the environment. In this regard, the judicial branch of government (including judges and prosecutors) it can also be the target of lobbying strategies for decisions that have a major impact on society. The transparency indicator was analyzed using information provided by 41 countries. In particular:
Transparency measures usually place the burden of disclosure on lobbyists, who must record information about themselves in the lobbyist register. An alternative, and sometimes additional, tool is to impose a burden on public officials targeted by lobbying, requiring them to disclose information about their meetings with lobbyists, or through a registry (Chile, Peru, Lithuania, and Slovenia), either through "open agendas" (Lithuania, Spain, the UK, and the EU) and / or requiring public officials to disclose their meetings with lobbyists to higher management(Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia). For reference: An open agenda may include information about the meetings of a government official: the date, time, and purpose, as well as information about the stakeholders with whom the meetings were held. In countries where lobbying registers and open agendas are combined(Great Britain and Romania)cross-checking agendas and lobbying registers provides an opportunity to analyze who and how tried to influence government officials. In other countries, the agenda is available on request or under certain circumstances. For example, in Norway, the Ombudsman stated that the right to review includes access to the personal agendas of ministers. The Lobbying Principles call on government officials to " communicate with lobbyists in accordance with specialized rules, standards, and guidelines in a manner that can withstand the most rigorous scrutiny." Public officials should "not question their impartiality in promoting the public interest, share only authorized information and not abuse 'confidential information', disclose relevant private interests, and avoid conflicts of interest." They should also "set an example by their personal behavior in dealing with lobbyists." Although the vast majority of government employees follow these principles, in some cases, government employees do not comply with them, which calls into question the impartiality and overall integrity of the public decision-making process. In addition, the Lobbying Principles call on countries to impose restrictions on" revolving-door practices." For reference: The "revolving door practice" refers to the circulation of employees between different government agencies, as well as the transition of former employees of private companies to the public service. Such restrictions may include a "cooling-off" period that temporarily restricts former government employees from lobbying for their pas.organizations, as well as a similar temporary period for appointing or hiring a lobbyist to fill a regulatory or advisory position. The cabinet restriction in question is observed in 26 of the 45 jurisdictions. Countries can continue their efforts to strengthen the integrity of the decision-making system by addressing the following issues:
Analyzing international practice in respect of integrity, examples of countries such as Australia, the United Kingdom, Brazil and Germany can serve as reference points. Australian Regulation on Ministerial Standards. Given that ministers are "entrusted with significant privileges and broad discretionary powers", the Australian Regulation includes ethical principles such as honesty, fairness, taking responsibility and promoting the public interest. The UK Ministerial Code. In the United Kingdom, new Prime Ministers issue their own Ministerial Code, setting out the rules and standards that are expected of all ministers. The Code establishes the "seven principles of public life", which apply to any person holding public office, regardless of whether he is elected or appointed, including at the national and local levels. Brazilian Code of Conduct for Senior Federal Administration Officials. Brazilian Code sets clear standards of conduct to ensure " the integrity and fairness of government decision-making." The Code applies to ministers and Secretaries of State, executive Secretaries, presidents and directors of national agencies. German Civil Service Law establishes "cooling-off" periods for civil servants after they leave public service or reach retirement age. The Federal Government may prohibit, in whole or in part, members of the Government and parliamentary Secretaries of State from engaging in paid or other work for the first 18 months after leaving office if there are concerns that such employment would negatively affect the public interest. In turn, the decision to "cooling-off" is made after the recommendation of an advisory body consisting of three members. Access As a result of the 2014 report, there was a trend in most countries to develop rules to increase openness and improve stakeholder access to the policy-making process. However, most of the developed ones failed to "balance" the lobbying power of special interest groups. At the time of writing, many OECD countries have strengthened their practices of engaging with stakeholders in regulatory processes. The reforms were mainly related to increasing the transparency of the system. For example, this may be the publication of information about planned consultations or the publication of comments received from interested parties during such consultations. Several countries have also expanded their consultation practices and made them more accessible to the general public. However, even if formal requirements for interaction with all stakeholders usually exist, most countries still lack the institutional structures to ensure that this works well in practice. To improve the indicated positions, it is necessary to solve the following issues:
Most OECD countries consult on all major laws at a late stage in the legislative development process (as of 2017, 22 countries are consulted), and only some of them are introducing it in the early stages (as of 2017, 2 countries are conducting consultations). Based on the practical component, the participation of stakeholders as an "access tool" was used as a mere formality. As a result, stakeholders may feel left out of the decision-making process and / or refrain from participating in the future.
It should be noted that with the development of digital technologies and social networks, lobbying has become more complex, from the point of view of the regulatory mechanism, the process. Traditionally, lobbying is defined as oral or written communication between a lobbyist and a public official in order to influence rulemaking, policy, or administrative activities. Methods and channels of influence have become more diverse, which can lead to new forms of abuse. In this regard, government policies are increasingly influenced by non-governmenta.organizations, research and analytical centers, and the use of social media strategies to inform, disinform, or change public perception. This phenomenon can undermine the credibility of both Governments and those who influence policy-making. Based on the data analyzed, only a small group of countries take into account the risks of lobbying in their governance mechanisms, which provide for a system of transparency and integrity. In 2020, only 23 of the 41 countries analyzed provided the necessary level of lobbying transparency: through a public register containing information about lobbying activities, and/or requiring certain government officials to disclose information about their meetings with lobbyists through open agendas. The COVID-19 crisis has demonstrated that countries with effective regulatory frameworks that provide for transparency in lobbying activities have provided a greater degree of accountability in policy decision-making during the crisis. Improving the transparency and integrity of public decision-making remains high on the agenda of many Governments. For example, at least 7 of the countries surveyed are currently developing or considering new lobbying rules or reviewing existing ones. The transparency of lobbying activities has increased in those countries where transparency and integrity systems are in place. Certainly, the levels of transparency vary from country to country, but some of the existing measures provide only "limited transparency" of the influence process. In most countries, transparency is limited both in terms of who conducts lobbying activities and in terms of who they are directed at. Certain entities that are actually lobbyists (such as some NGOs and think tanks), are not always subject to the transparency requirement. Despite the risks to democratic processes and national security, only Australia, Canada, the US and the EU provide some transparency about the influence of foreign governments through lobbying activities. Finally, only a few countries provide some transparency in lobbying activities in all branches of government. At the moment, the Canadian Lobbyist Registry and the EU Transparency Registry are the only mechanisms that require lobbyists to disclose information about the use of social media and other public relations campaigns as a lobbying tool. Although the transparency of political funding is high, some grey areas remain in practice, such as the financing of digital advertising for political parties and candidates. A separate issue that requires attention is the transparency of the composition and functioning of advisory and expert groups. Thus, lobbying can have a strong impact on the results of public policy and, as a result, on the well — being and standard of living in society. By sharing experiences, legitimate needs, and evidence, interest groups can provide Governments with valuable information and data on which to base effective public policies.
The full version of the review can be found here
Views: 1817 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
