A Checklist for a Chemical Lobbyist

by

After many years working on substance lobbying, here are some of the most useful lessons learned in a checklist: 

 

  1. Turn up. I am always surprised when people ignore the invite to be an observer and get annoyed when the opinion goes against them.
  2. Step in at the right time.
  3. Know the procedures as they work in reality.
  4. Realise that most of the deliberation/drafting are done through a written procedure.
  5. From that flows, make sure that your input is clear, precise and granular.
  6. Write for the audience making the decisions, not yourself.
  7. Send information in early.
  8. For all meetings, send in clear pre-reads, to all people to digest your thinking and evidence.
  9. Provide clear and accurate executive summaries.
  10. Realise that just because another body outside the EU decided one way, this does not mean it will be blindly followed.
  11. Don’t lobby the RAC/SEAC.
  12. If you want to throw your case, attack the system.
  13. Engage constructively.
  14. Avoid melodrama and tales of the end of times.
  15. Your most valuable asset is the scientific expert who is trusted by the scientific panel,
  16. Go in with the idea that there is the presumption of guilt against you, and you’ll be in a good place.
  17. Don’t go in thinking that you are trusted.
  18. Have the state-of-the-art science available to you.
  19. Ideally, you’ll have a constant flow of studies responding to every point that could come up
  20. As soon as you hear of an intention to take action on your substance, go and see the authority behind the initiative and hand over the data.
  21. If they want more studies and data, get it done.
  22. If you have studies in the pipeline, let the authorities know. Provide the information in the submission.
  23. Make sure your REACH Consortium is ready to spend on research studies.
  24. You need to be worried if your state-of-the-art research is from 1949 and the expert is from 1949.
  25. If there is any error in your submission, it will likely discredit the whole of your submission.
  26. Know the procedure you are dealing with (RPS measures, Implementing Act, Delegated Act)
  27. Avoid acclimations of faith in your statements.
  28. Be granular in your submissions/statements.
  29. Make sure that every point you make has credible evidence to support it.
  30. Address any shortcomings in your chain of reasoning.
  31. Address the points that are going to come up.
  32. Address any jumps in logic from others with evidence to reduce concerns.
  33. Address every point you would rather not have brought up. These are the points that tend to come up.
  34. Address every point in the public consultation.
  35. Keep up to date on the case law. Don’t rely on points that the European Courts have rejected.
  36. Keep up to date on the agencies’ opinions. They give you an accurate snapshot of the direction of travel.
  37. Look at the work of other scientific expert bodies that are drawn upon (e.g. the MAK Commission).
  38. Don’t rely on the work of other scientific expert bodies that are not drawn upon.
  39. For CLP, if the real issue is the triggering effect, be honest to yourself.
  40. For Restrictions, have specific data on emissions throughout the life cycle.
  41. For Substance Evaluation, go and meet the Competent Authority and provide them with the necessary data.
  42. If you have a track record for obstruction and going to court to delay, don’t be surprised if officials don’t trust you.
  43. If the action has a real significant impact, flag it early on. Have accurate Impact Assessment data ready early. Don’t use the line if you don’t have the data and evidence. It is abused.
  44. Know the officials who take forward the opinions.
  45. Be trusted by those officials.
  46. Your best chance of success is to step in before an intention is published. For this to happen, you’ll need to be known and trusted by officials in the EU and national agencies and have a flow of studies addressing points of interest. It is a full-time job.
  47. Don’t ignore the public conversation. Books (e.g. Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring), Movies (e.g. Dark Waters), and accidents spur action.
  48. Have a long-term planning horizon and be patient. This is not a fast process.
  49. Don’t take things personally. If you find it hard to deal with people rejecting your position, this will be hard for you.
  50. Challenging RPS measures, Delegated and Implementing acts, has a low chance of success.
  51. If you want to challenge in front of the European Courts, make sure your lawyer is clear about the chances of success. If you are told to “fight on the principle”,set aside a pile of money for the award of costs against you.
  52. If you work on the assumption that the Commission table is the likely outcome, you are in a good starting place. 
  53. If you have never done this before, consider working with people who have a successful track record of going through these procedures and living to tell the tale. 
  54. You need to work with a scientific expert (e.g. toxicologist) who is respected by the regulatory scientific bodies.