[...]
‘by contacting MEPs and offering to donate money to Unicef in exchange for meetings, Eurogas
aisbl - contracting FTI Consulting to act on its behalf - breached the code of conduct. They indeed
tried to obtain information (or did obtain if they managed to meet with some MEPs) by use of
inappropriate behaviour. By offering to donate money to Unicef, if MEPs met with them, FTI - acting
on behalf of Eurogas aisbl - put pressure on MEP by introducing a monetary dimension to the
interaction. The choice of donating money to UNICEF adds even more confusion to Eurogas and
FTI Consulting’s intention as promoting the use of fossil fuels has very little to do with the protection
of children’s rights.’
In support of the allegation relating to
point f), FOEE claims that:
[Eurogas]
‘did not respect the implementation of code and good governance practices by persuading
MEPs with donations in exchange for meetings. If they didn’t intend to use the donations as a way to
persuade and influence MEPs, there was no reason for FTI to mention the donation in the first
place.’ In support of the allegation relating to
point g), FOEE claims that:
‘Eurogas and FTI acting on its behalf breached point g of the code of conduct by inducing MEPs to
contravene the rules and standards of behaviors applicable to them. Indeed, MEPs should not meet
with lobbyists for any kind of compensation. Even if, in this case, the compensation is not given to the
MEP directly, the donation to UNICEF is still linked to a meeting with an MEP, which involved them
in the money exchange indirectly and therefore pushes them to contravene to the standards of
behavior.’. As regards the alleged breach of
points f) and
g), the JTRS, after a thorough analysis of the
complaint, did not consider it admissible on these grounds. However, it finds the complaint
admissible on the grounds of alleged violation of
point b) of the Code of Conduct. In fact, the JTRS
sees enough reasons to examine the propriety of trying to influence a politician’s decision whether or
not to accept a meeting invitation by highlighting an intention to grant a monetary donation to a third
party.
The JTRS would like to underline that while it respects the freedom of interaction of interest
representatives and their right to contribute to a diversity of views in the political process, such
activities need to be carried out in accordance with the Code of Conduct, which the registrants in the
Transparency Register have committed to abide by in their relations with the EU institutions.
Moreover, where an intermediary represents clients professionally, it has accepted to act in
compliance with the Code of Conduct laid down in Annex III of the Interinstitutional Agreement
(IIA) on the Transparency Register and, where relevant, to list any professional Code of Conduct by
which it is bound (FTI Consulting is also bound by the Codes of Conduct of EPACA and SEAP,
according to its registration in the Transparency Register).
Although not directly related to this complaint, the EPACA Code stipulates that public affairs
practitioner shall ‘neither directly nor indirectly offer or give any financial inducement to any elected
2