Esta es la versión HTML de un fichero adjunto a una solicitud de acceso a la información 'Correspondence with Eurogas and FTI consulting'.



 
In support of the allegation relating to point b) of the Code of Conduct, MEP Ziluaga claims that:  
 
‘In the email attached, FTI Consulting requests an interview on Eurogas. In addition, it is specified 
that: "For each response Eurogas will donate €50 to UNICEF." To my understanding, this 
constitutes a breach of the Code of Conduct for lobbyists, in particular Annex II, article b) [...]. By 
mentioning that Eurogas will give money to UNICEF, FTI Consulting and Eurogas believe that this 
will have an impact on the willingness of the MEP to meet with them, as it will give the MEP a 'feel 
good' 

moment.’ 
 
MEP Ziluaga concludes that: 
 
‘This can be considered as giving an immaterial gift to the MEP to influence his behaviour, which is 
inappropriate. Therefore, I ask you to take the appropriate measures to sanction FTI Consulting and 
Eurogas and prevent this type of practices.’ 
 
In support of the allegation relating to point b) of the Code of Conduct, FOEE further claims that: 
 
[...]‘by contacting MEPs and offering to donate money to Unicef in exchange for meetings, FTI 
Consulting - acting on behalf of Eurogas - 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 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: 
 
FTI Consulting [..] ‘did not respect the implementation of code and good governance practices by 
persuading MEPs with donations in exchange for meetings. If 
[FTI Consulting] 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 g) of the Code of Conduct, FOEE claims that: 
 
‘FTI Consulting - acting on behalf of Eurogas - 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.’ 
 
                                                                                                                                                                    
 


 
FOEE concluded that:  
 
‘This behaviour is unethical and damaging to other interest groups. Introducing a financial 
dimension to lobby interactions leads to a dangerous path and a lack of sanction from the 
transparency register’s services will set a precedent therefore potentially leading to others doing the 
same. Given the emails received by MEPs the non-compliances were completely intentional, clearly 
stating « For each response, Eurogas will donate €50 to UNICEF »’.
 
 
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 
or  appointed  public  official,  or  staff  of  their  institutions  and  political  groups,’3  with  a  similarly 
worded  provision  in  Article  1.3  of  the  SEAP  Code  of  Conduct.4  In  light  of  the  above,  the  JTRS 
considers  that  the  elements  brought  to  its  attention  merit  an  investigation  in  order  to  determine 
whether a breach of point b) of the Code of Conduct has occurred. 
 
The view of the complainant is that  FTI Consulting 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  JTRS  agrees  that  a  perception  audit  regarding  the 
activities of Eurogas ‘has very little to do with the protection of children’s rights,’ as put forward by 
the complainant. The mentioning of a donation to a third party may indeed create confusion as to the 
real goal of the meeting and, as a result, be perceived as inappropriate behaviour. 
 
                                                 
3 https://epaca.org/code-of-conduct/ 
4 https://seap.be/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/SEAP-code-2016.pdf