lobbying inter-service consultation – some thoughts

by

From time to time I am asked how the Commission adopts proposals.

 

Whilst one or two Commission departments seem to selectively ignore Inter-Service Consultation, I thought it would be useful to share some practical thoughts.

 

These ideas work well for most files, except for a limited number of files where Commission Departments don’t know their own adoption rules.

 

 Some Practical Considerations

 All decision taken by the College of Commissioners are preceded by a formal consultation of all relevant Commission Departments. If services issue a negative opinion, the file must be decided via the oral procedure where the issues is placed on the agenda of the weekly meeting of Commissioners. Non-contentious files can be adopted by written procedure which is scrutinsed by the teams of the different Commissioners.

 

You have two clear opportunities – consideration by the Services and Political Scrutiny by the Cabinets and College –  to influence the final text. But, the longer it goes on, the likelihood of success diminishes.

 

The system stands and falls on the strenuous efforts of the Commission Services, Secretariat-General and Cabinet officials. They need to make a judgement based on a short description of the proposal. Often the title of a proposal hides its real importance.

 

It is not uncommon for only a few officials – the desk officer and a few others –  to understand the real substance and details of a proposal.  Officials have few incentives to highlight if an initiative is sensitive. If that flag is raised in the Decide IT system, a considerable amount of work and extra scrutiny is going to happen.

 

Flagging an Important Issue

  1. The best way for the Services and Cabinets to know if the proposal is important is if you tell them. The earlier you do so, the better. Ideally, you will tell them far in advance of the Inter-Service Consultation (ISC) being launched.

 

  1. Your first point of call is usually the group of officials, including the Secretariat-General, working on the preparation of any Impact Assessment in the Interservice group. They are likely to be involved in providing feedback for the ISC. If not, they will know who in the DGs are.

 

  1. The tricky bit is you don’t know when the inter-service consultation is going to start. It is not public. The only reliable way to find out is to be informed by good contacts in the Services, Secretariat-General and Cabinets. If you step in late, your chances of influencing the final text disappear.

 

Normal procedure – Services

  1. The interservice consultation is launched by the Commission department preparing the file but they must seek permission from the relevant Commissioner/Vice-President and also the President’s cabinet.

 

  1. Once it starts, the process is over quickly. If the package of documents is longer than 20 pages, it will last 15 days (3 weeks). If under it lasts 10 days (2 weeks). For some urgent or politically sensitive matters, the lead DG can request the Secretary-General for fast track ISC which lasts 48 hours which culminates in a meeting where the various positions of the individual Commission departments are recorded.
  1. If you do not have a copy of the text being considered, you are lost. You are going to rely on your network to provide you a copy of the proposal or at the very least, the text relevant for you.

 

  1. You should never reveal your text. The Commission deploy software to reveal the source of the leak. Deliberate typos and strange punctuation are tell-tale signs.

 

  1. Significant changes to the draft text occur during ISC. Getting those changes can be the difference between getting a proposal you like or one that you do not

 Political Scrutiny

 

  1. After inter-service consultation from the Services, the draft proposal passes to receive political scrutiny from the Cabinets. During the oral decision-making procedure, the file is first discussed by the Cabinets (Special Chefs). They usually meet on a Thursday to agree a deal ahead of the weekly meeting of the Heads of Cabinet.  They meet Monday at 11 am, before it is sent for adoption by the College of Commissioners where any outstanding issues will be discussed.

 

  1. The Special Chefs and Heads of Cabinet will need convincing reasons to step in. They set a high bar. Highlighting any genuine divergence from the ‘President’s Political Guidelines’ is a point that is well received.

 

  1. Your intervention will draw down on a limited pool of political goodwill and credibility. If you have little or no political goodwill, it is unlikely that anyone in this tight-knit group will step up for you.

 

Considerations

 

1. You cannot intervene in every relevant file. Interventions need to be focused on the files that count.  At the same time, you will need to take year-round steps to build up your political goodwill and credibility.

 

  1. Too often, shooting from the hip with broad brush interventions that are not supported by evidence wipe out your credibility. You then spend the next few years re-building relationships and credibility.

 

  1. You will not always get what you want. You are going to meet key officials, Cabinet members or Commissioners who pass on the news that they will not support you. Temperately, you need to be able to respond to bad news. Responding badly will lead to you being shut out for years to come.  If you are in a meeting and see it going in that direction, intervene, stop the meeting, thank people for their time, and leave.

 

 Majority Needed at the College

  1. The College adopt measures by a simple majority (14 out of 27). A vote is very rare and it usually goes through by agreement. There are rare occasions when a Commissioner calls for a vote. Then French Commissioner Barnier under President Barroso called for a vote on support for bio-fuel. He lost the vote.

 

  1. Before the College meets, there is a pre-meeting of political camps of Commissioners. They discuss a line to take for the College meeting. This has led to initiatives being adjusted or withdrawn.

 

  1. ,Commissioners often are well-established politicians, with their own political hinterland back in the Member States. Your network may be able to harness those local connections. Many Commissioners have a staff member to keep an ear to the ground back home.

 

Lobbying ISC

There are some tried and tested ways to engage with ISC.

 

  1. If you have not yet managed to persuade the Commission to support your   lobbying the ISC is your likely your best chance of making sure the proposal that goes out the door works for you. As many legislative proposals from the Commission are often finally adopted into law without significant alteration, this is your last and best hope.
  2. There are a limited number of people deciding at this stage, from officials in the Services, the Cabinets and maybe the Commissioners. That makes it a lot easier to meet with and put forward a persuasive case to them. It is crucial that have allies within the Commission who can provide you with feedback on the take up your case in the Special Chef and Hebdo.
  3. You are going to adapt your argumentation for this political scrutiny stage. Use clear examples, comprehensible charts, in no more than one page (annexes allowed). You are writing for politicians and not pure technocrats. Get to the point, detail the text you want to be changed, the reasons for the change and the proposed alternative.
  4. If you want to close down any conversation, or at least close down the take up of your message, a rambling briefing paper and intervention littered with algorithms and technical jargon is a sure-fire way of making sure officials shut down very quickly.
  5. Many favour bringing in the CEO for the meeting with officials, cabinets or the Commissioner to make the case. While widely used it rarely succeeds. If you do, at least bring someone from the same country as the Commissioner. One or two Commissioners prefer to meet the CEOs directly.
  6. It should be self-apparent that as much of your case is made in writing, you need to persuade with your pen. This is not a surprise. After all, most Commission decisions are adopted by written procedure.
  7. The most effective technique to master is the clear and compelling briefing if you want to win over officials who have no vested interest in supporting you. Your greatest challenge is to raise interest enough to raise an objection or reservation.
  8. Officials do not like their draft proposals reaching the press before they are adopted. Coverage in Politico or FT alerts their political hierarchy that a sensitive issue is going through the political adoption machinery and may need to look at in far greater detail.
  9. Well-timed political news coverage can work. It is not easy to pull off. There are few things a Commissioner dislikes more than having to explain to fellow Commissioners that an innocent-sounding initiative is politically loaded and sensitive. If you go for this, you need to work back a week before the file is meant to be on the College’s agenda. That gives time to get it changed or pulled.
  10. Even if you secure a good proposal, it is not uncommon to find the same text you removed re-tabled by a Member State or MEP. It is like an official who did not get their way inside the Commission, is hoping the European Parliament or Council re-insert it.