British American Tobacco’s deathly lobbying agenda in the EU
Jump to full article: Corporate Europe Observatory (be), 2009-06-01
Intro: One of BAT’s greatest PR achievements was recruiting former EU Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection Pavel Teli•ka55 as ‘facilitator’ of its so-called “EU social reporting sessions”. Teli•ka, who is also a former ambassador and head of Czech mission to the EU with 20-year’s experience in the EU capital, is now the director of the Brussels office of Czech lobbying firm BXL Consulting, a Rond-Point Schuman-based company providing services to Microsoft, RWE, and the investment fund of a Czech billionaire. . . .
Indeed BAT’s social reporting process looks like a sophisticated PR strategy to meet and lobby key EU officials out of sight. According to Jacek Siwek, head of BAT Corporate Affairs Europe, “regulators, in a natural way, have a tendency to prefer to talk to associations rather than to individual companies”68. But through this ‘social reporting process’, BAT lobbyists managed to meet and lobby no less than 42 people including six from the Commission and eleven from the Parliament69. All this, of course, as well as BAT’s usual EU lobbying activities through business groups like CECCM, ESTA and ESTOC.
BAT claims that the objective of CSR “is not to affect legislation, therefore any costs associated with it have nothing to do with lobbying”70. But according to the Commission, “contacting members or officials of the EU institutions, organising events, meetings or promotional activities in support of an objective of interest representation” — the very essence of BAT’s social reporting process — are lobbying activities71. . . .
Conclusion
Of course the exact amount spent by BAT on EU lobbying is difficult to estimate. BATs lobbying tools are diffuse and varied. But there is no doubt that BAT’s contributions to think tanks, industry associations and member state activity total more than the amount BAT declares in the EU register.
In under-estimating its lobbying expenditure in this way, BAT is exploiting the ambiguity of the Commission's guidelines. In particular, it is exploiting the instructions on double-counting of lobbying costs, exposing one of the many flaws in the voluntary registration scheme. BAT has clearly failed to ensure that some of its contributions to lobby groups are disclosed by the lobby groups themselves.
BAT has also failed to report its expenditure on activities which it describes as “corporate social responsibility” (CSR). Under the euphemism of “EU stakeholder dialogue”, BAT has been able to directly access EU policy makers and put forward its views on legislation under discussion. By disguising this contact as CSR, BAT clearly contravenes the Commission’s definition of “lobbying”.
Why does this matter?
This report highlights just some of BAT’s attempts to influence the legislative process at EU level and also in the member states. The fact that these activities are primarily hidden from the public is one reason for concern, but this is overshadowed by the more damaging fact that BAT’s lobbying activities are so blatantly not in the public interest. The EU is responsible for legislation designed to protect public and consumer health. BAT is a engaged in marketing a product that is clearly damaging to public health.
Unless effective measures are implemented to help current smokers quit and prevent young people from smoking, tobacco use is set to kill 10 million people by 2020 in the world and one billion this century, according to the WHO89.
BAT, and other companies engaged in similarly damaging activities, should not be allowed to influence a debate in which they have such blatant commercial interests. And the EU has no business in allowing them into such debates.
Jump to full article » |