Piia-Noora Kauppi, an MEP for the Finnish conservative party, has since 1999 been part of the Parliament’s important Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee (ECON), which deals with financial market legislation. Kauppi has throughout her time in Parliament had very close relations with big banking lobbyists. She successfully assisted these lobbies in promoting a laissez-faire approach: as little and as light regulation as possible. She also headed the European Parliament Financial Services Forum, which brings together MEPs and lobbyists and in effect serves as a lobbying vehicle for large banks.
In 2005, the Wall Street Journal reported that Mrs. Kauppi had assisted the banking lobby in watering down EU money-laundering rules and "submitted amendments that borrowed word-for-word from the European Banking Industry Committee". EBIC is part of the European Parliament Financial Services Forum.
On January 1st 2009 (six months before the next European Parliament elections) Kauppi will take this conflict of interest to a new level as she moves through the revolving door to become managing director of the Federation of Finnish Financial Services, a lobby group of banks and insurance firms. Kauppi’s new employer proudly announced the deal in June 2008 with a press release stressing Kauppi’s “effective network of contacts in place in both Finland and the EU”.
To add insult to injury, Kauppi has continued to be very active in the European Parliament’s discussions on financial market issues. In September, Kauppi spoke out against new regulations going beyond what already exists on the national level in the financial sector. She also failed to inform other MEPs about her links - and future job - with the financial services industry.
Whose interests was Kauppi defending in these debates: those of the European public or those of her new employer? In a dramatic context of accelerating global financial meltdown and calls for a tougher approach to regulating global financial markets and corporations, can Kauppi be trusted to regulate the very industry she will soon be lobbying for? Would it not have been prudent for her to abstain from participating in debates and decision-making on issues concerning the interests of her soon-to-be employer?
Kauppi is an example of growing trend among MEPs of being headhunted by corporate lobby groups and lobby consultancies who see MEPs as able to gain access to decision-makers. Unlike in the US Congress, there is no “cooling off” period to stop an MEP from going straight through the revolving door. Currently they are only obliged to declare financial interests and there are no additional rules to prevent conflicts of interest.
http://www.worstlobby.eu/2008/vote/info/7/worstconflictofinterest
In 2005, the Wall Street Journal reported that Mrs. Kauppi had assisted the banking lobby in watering down EU money-laundering rules and "submitted amendments that borrowed word-for-word from the European Banking Industry Committee". EBIC is part of the European Parliament Financial Services Forum.
On January 1st 2009 (six months before the next European Parliament elections) Kauppi will take this conflict of interest to a new level as she moves through the revolving door to become managing director of the Federation of Finnish Financial Services, a lobby group of banks and insurance firms. Kauppi’s new employer proudly announced the deal in June 2008 with a press release stressing Kauppi’s “effective network of contacts in place in both Finland and the EU”.
To add insult to injury, Kauppi has continued to be very active in the European Parliament’s discussions on financial market issues. In September, Kauppi spoke out against new regulations going beyond what already exists on the national level in the financial sector. She also failed to inform other MEPs about her links - and future job - with the financial services industry.
Whose interests was Kauppi defending in these debates: those of the European public or those of her new employer? In a dramatic context of accelerating global financial meltdown and calls for a tougher approach to regulating global financial markets and corporations, can Kauppi be trusted to regulate the very industry she will soon be lobbying for? Would it not have been prudent for her to abstain from participating in debates and decision-making on issues concerning the interests of her soon-to-be employer?
Kauppi is an example of growing trend among MEPs of being headhunted by corporate lobby groups and lobby consultancies who see MEPs as able to gain access to decision-makers. Unlike in the US Congress, there is no “cooling off” period to stop an MEP from going straight through the revolving door. Currently they are only obliged to declare financial interests and there are no additional rules to prevent conflicts of interest.
http://www.worstlobby.eu/2008/vote/info/7/worstconflictofinterest
Vastaukset
Vanhimmat
Ei vielä vastauksia
Aloittaja odottaa vastauksia. Kerro oma näkemyksesi ensimmäisenä.