This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'TTIP lobbying'.



Ref. Ares(2015)5426026 - 27/11/2015
Ref. Ares(2017)3665888 - 20/07/2017
From: 
Art. 4.1b
 (TRADE) 
Sent: 
27 November 2015 17:11 
To: 
 (TRADE); 
 (TRADE); 
(TRADE); 
 (TRADE) 
Subject: 
Meeting with Transparency international - anti-corruption in FTAs  (29 
October 2015) 
For registering this report I am sending it again via ARES. Goes back to October 
Dear All 
On 29 October, I met with Carl Dolan of TI Brussels following a phone discussion on the the adoption of 
the Commission Communication Trade for All which also includes a pledge to include ambitious anti-
corruption provisions in future trade negotiations. TI had also issued a press release welcoming the 
Communication. (below) 
I gave a broad background to the new strategy and stressed that we were now in the process of defining 
the EU approach to anti-corruption in future trade agreements starting with TTIP. The UNCAC and OECD 
conventions and existing EU acquis are the basis. Pointed to some interesting TI studies on the current 
state of play of anti-corruption efforts in Member States and also asked about how TI evaluated the US 
approach/efforts on ac.  
Carl highlighted the letter and suggestions for anti-corruption in TTIP that TI had send to Commissioner 
de Gucht two years ago. Discussion then focused on recent developments on the implementation of 
beneficial ownership disclosure which is part of the Anti-Money laundering 4 directive and an important 
element in the fight against corruption and expressed disappointment at the watering down of the final 
directive via Council.  
TI will be publishing shortly its own comparison and assessment of how different G20 jurisdictions are 
implementing these BO principles and will share that with DG TRADE.  
He stressed issues of relevance to corruption in trade such as procurement, export credits, 
whistleblower protection and general reporting requirements (accounting, transparency) as well as the 
area of customs/trade facilitation.  
Pointed to the positive speech of David Cameroon in Singapore endorsing the fight against corruption 
(See here: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/tackling-corruption-pm-speech-in-singapore)an
the upcoming anti-corruption summit in 2016 to be hosted by the UK; the UK and Germany were at the 
forefront of better anti-corruption enforcement  
Art. 4.1b

PRESS RELEASE: EU Trade deals to 
include “ambitious” anti-corruption 
proposals 

Posted by TI EU Office 
14 Oct 2015 
Transparency International welcomes the European Commission’s pledge to include 
“ambitious” anti-corruption provisions and to increase transparency in all future trade 
deal negotiations. This new approach to the EU’s bilateral trade agreements was 
announced as part of a communication on the future of trade policy published today by the 
European Commission. The EU accounts for one-sixth of the world’s trade in goods.
 
The announcement marks a new departure for the Commission. Previous bilateral agreements 
with major trading partners, South Korea and Canada for example, have not included these 
provisions. The proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) will be a first 
test of the new policy. 
Corruption is a major obstacle to global trade and foreign investment flows. It distorts the fair 
awarding of contracts, reduces the quality of basic public services, limits opportunities to develop 
a competitive private sector and undermines trust in the rule of law. Despite evidence of 
persistently high levels of foreign bribery in international business transactions [1], Transparency 
International has highlighted the poor record of anti-bribery law enforcement worldwide [2]. 
Substantive and robust anti-corruption provisions – such as those Transparency International 
have  recommended  for inclusion in TTIP – will help raise standards and focus attention on 
implementation. These provisions should include no impunity for officials charged with 
corruption offences, steps to reduce the secrecy and abuse of anonymous shell companies, and 
the requirement for governments to consult with civil society on their anti-corruption 
commitments. 
“The EU’s trade policies can be an important tool to combat the scourge of bribery, secret 
dealings and abuse of power around the globe,”
  said Carl Dolan, Director of the Transparency 
International EU Office. “Strong anti-corruption provisions in these agreements will focus the 
minds of governments on enforcing their existing anti-corruption obligations”.
 
Corruption in the EU alone costs an estimated €120 billion per year [3]. Transparency 
International’s most recent report on the enforcement of foreign bribery legislation showed that 
11 EU countries – Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Luxembourg, 
Poland, Slovenia, Slovak Republic and Spain – have shown evidence of little or no enforcement 
of obligations under the OECD convention prohibiting bribery of foreign officials. Only two EU 
countries – UK and Germany – are considered to be actively enforcing the convention. 

The anti-corruption and transparency principles enshrined in these bilateral trade agreements 
must be consistent with the highest possible levels of transparency in the conduct of the 
negotiations, particularly where they have an impact on regulatory standards and decision making 
by public institutions, as is the case with TTIP. We welcome the Commission’s commitment to 
improve the transparency of these negotiations and acknowledge the steps taken so far. However, 
these steps do not go far enough. 
Transparency International’s demands for greater transparency in these negotiations can be read   
here. 

Art. 4.1b
European Commission
DG TRADE 
Unit G1 Trade Strategy