Il think tank, che cerca di combattere la corruzione in tutte le sue forme, dice che il pubblico britannico è “lasciato all’oscuro” da architetti inspiegabili che danneggiano il panorama politico della Gran Bretagna.

Il nuovo rapporto di TI UK, dal titolo “Accountable Influence“, indica che meno del 4% della sfera del lobbying britannico è regolata nonostante gli interessi corporativi abbiano un forte ruolo nel policy making britannico. La ricerca, pubblicata negli scorsi giochi, segna il lancio della campagna del think tank per sottolineare l’importanza della trasparenza nella lotta contro la corruzione.

I lobbisti cercano di influenzare la spesa di gran parte dei soldi pubblici del governo della Corona, ma spesso non sono responsabili delle loro azioni nei confronti dell’opinione pubblica. L’80% dei lobbisti del Regno Unito, secondo il rapporto, rappresenta gli interessi delle aziende top 100 registrate alla borsa di Londra.

TI UK ha scoperto anche potenziali conflitti di interesse dei parlamentari che svolgono anche attività di consulenza. Nel 2014, 73 parlamentari hanno ricevuto 3,4 milioni di sterline come compenso per le consulenze da loro svolte al di fuori del loro ufficio pubblico. Ciò è legale per la Camera dei Comuni, mentre rimane illegale per la Camera dei Lord e i parlamenti di Scozia e Galles. Un rapporto del Britain’s Committee on Standards in Public Life nel 2013 aveva raccomandato agli “MPs” di essere campioni di altruismo, integrità, obiettività, responsabilità, apertura, onestà e leadership nel proprio lavoro.

Nonostante il settore sia stato da poco regolamentato, ci sono molte carenze del nuovo registro dei lobbisti e degli interessi dei parlamentari britannico: TI UK ha rivelato 39 esempi di “falle nel sistema” nel rapporto tra legislatori e lobby britanniche.

Il capo delle ricerche della ONG Nick Maxwell ha quindi chiesto al Parlamento di introdurre l’obbligatorietà della registrazione per tutti i tipi di lobbisti, siano essi consulenti o aziendali, in modo da fornire al pubblico “informazioni accurate, significative, accessibili” sugli incontri tra rappresentanti di interessi e decisori. Ovviamente monitorati da un’agenzia totalmente indipendente per garantire i principi di trasparenza e partecipazione democratica.

Ecco qui il testo della lettera (Disponibile anche qui)

12 December 2013

Dear Mr Maude and Mr Lansley,

Response to Mr Maude’s letter of 1 November 2013 to the UK OGP civil society network re the Government’s commitment to lobbying transparency

As campaigners for greater openness in decision making, we applauded the Coalition commitment in May 2010 to ‘regulate lobbying through introducing a statutory register of lobbyists and ensuring greater transparency’. However, we are extremely concerned that the current plans, in Part 1 of the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trades Union Administration Bill, will fail to deliver the transparency promised. The proposed register is not fit-for-purpose. In the short time the Government has allowed for debate on the bill, it has been heavily criticised by the Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee and Members of Parliament, as well as representatives of the consultancy industry and a wide range of civil society groups.

In sostanza. Grazie di averci provato. Ma non basta. Anzi, c’è molto da fare. Cosa? Lo dice la seconda parte della lettera:

We urge you to redraft Part 1 of the Bill to:

• broaden the definition of lobbyist to include all third party consultants and in-house lobbyists, whether corporate, union or charity;
• extend the definition to include lobbying of mid-ranking civil servants and special advisors; and
• introduce fuller disclosure requirements to include the target, topic and estimated cost of lobbying activity.

Dunque, tanto per cominciare, lobbisti non sono solamente i freelance ma anche quelli che lavorano in azienda, sindacato o in enti no profit. Escluderli, dice chiaramente la lettera, significherebbe tagliare fuori l’80% dei professionisti della rappresentanza di interessi. Leggete qui: Central to our concerns is the narrow definition of lobbyist. As drafted, the Bill excludes at least eighty per cent of the industry, notably in-house lobbyists. It will also exclude most key consultant lobbyists through a significant loophole: those who in the course of their lobbying do not make contact with Ministers and Permanent Secretaries will not be required to register. This, as lobbyists and the lobbied well know, is the majority of lobbying activity. The justification for such a narrow definition does not stand up to scrutiny. The Government has defined the problem as a lack of transparency about who an agency is representing when it meets with a Minister. Official meeting lists reveal that this would apply to only a handful of meetings. As many in Parliament have pointed out, if this is a genuine problem, it would be better solved with improved disclosure from Ministers.

I “lobbati” invece non sono solamente i direttori generali, ma anche i funzionari e i consulenti. Infine, per avere piena trasparenza ci vogliono informazioni sugli obiettivi della strategia di lobbying e sui costi che il lobbista stima di spendere per raggiungerli.  Anche su questo punto la letter è chiara: “Of equal concern to us is the lack of any meaningful information on lobbying activity to be included in the proposed register. It would require lobbyists merely to register their clients, but reveal nothing of their interaction with government (i.e. whom they are lobbying, and what they are seeking to influence). This information is essential if the government is to realise its laudable aim through the register of ‘increasing public accountability and public trust in the UK system of government and improving the efficiency of government policy outcomes’. Fuller disclosure would also bring the UK in line with international standards.

Di qui il passaggio immediatamente successivo. A che serve un registro dei lobbisti? Presto detto:

The fundamental purpose of introducing a register of lobbyists is to allow the public to examine and understand the activities of lobbyists, to improve government accountability and ultimately to rebuild public trust. It is imperative to have in mind the widely held public perception of how decisions are taken by government, a view summed up by David Cameron as ‘a cosy club at the top making decisions in its own interest’. This lack of trust must be of serious concern to Government. Proper disclosure rules for lobbyists would go a long way to dispel this perception. The reality of lobbying in the UK, which would be revealed in a robust register of lobbyists, would be far more mundane than is popularly imagined. A refusal to introduce genuine transparency, however, would only reinforce the perception that public scrutiny is something politicians would rather avoid.

Conclusione politica. Ma ci può stare:

The shortcomings of the current Bill are all the more surprising considering the leadership you have shown through the Open Government Partnership and your vocal support for greater transparency. The current proposals threaten to undermine not only your ambition to be ‘the most open and transparent government in the world’, but also detract from the OGP initiative. Civil society groups long ago identified a robust register as a key priority for the Partnership, yet we encountered a surprising reluctance from some Cabinet Office officials to engage with us during the development of the proposals. The result is a register that is wholly inadequate.

The Coalition rightly identified ‘secret’ lobbying as an issue of public concern, one which ‘goes to the heart of why people are so fed up with politics’. ‘We can’t go on like this,’ said David Cameron. We urge you to now fulfil your commitment with a proper register which will allow public scrutiny of lobbying activity in the UK.

Yours sincerely,

Alexandra Runswick, Director, Unlock Democracy
Dr Andy Williamson FRSA, Founder, FutureDigital & Chair, Ivo.org
Anne Thurston, Director, International Records Management Trust
Anthony Zacharzewski, democracy campaigner
Gavin Hayman, Director of Campaigns, Global Witness
Graham Gordon, Head of Public Policy, CAFOD
Javier Ruiz, Campaigns Director, Open Rights Group
Jonathan Gray, Director of Policy, The Open Knowledge Foundation
Maurice Frankel, Director, Campaign for Freedom of Information
Miles Litvinoff, Coordinator, Publish What You Pay UK
Simon Burall, Director, Involve
Tamasin Cave, Director, Spinwatch
Thomas Hughes, Executive Director, ARTICLE 19

Post Scriptum: oltre al lobbying bill vorremmo anche la XBoX e il piumino di marca. Grazie. 

Fonte: Formiche.net