Communication from the Commission - Follow-up to the Green Paper 'European Transparency Initiative' {SEC(2007) 360}
Date: 2007-03-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Commission, administrative transparency, dissemination of information, interest group

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 21.3.2007 
COM(2007) 127 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 

Follow-up to the Green Paper 'European Transparency Initiative' 

{SEC(2007) 360} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 

Follow-up to the Green Paper 'European Transparency Initiative' 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

On 3 May 2006, the Commission adopted a Green Paper1 in order to drive forward 
its 'European Transparency Initiative''2 (ETI). 

The  objective  of  the  Green  Paper  was  to  launch  a  broad  public  consultation  on  the 
following key components of the ETI: 

•  The  need  for  a  more  structured  framework  for  the  activities  of  interest 

representatives (lobbyists); 

•  Feedback  on 

the  Commission’s  minimum 

standards 

for  consultation3 

("consultation standards"); 

•  Mandatory  disclosure  of  information  about  the  beneficiaries  of  EU  funds  under 

shared management. 

From May to August 2006, the Commission consulted widely and comprehensively, 
in  particular  on  the  basis  of  an  open  internet-based  consultation.  In  addition,  the 
Commission  Representations  organised  consultation  meetings  in  a  number  of 
Member  States.  In  June  2006,  the  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee 
(EESC)  held  a  hearing  with  more  than  60  European  interest  groups  and  other 
interested  parties,  which  provided  another  useful  opportunity  for  an  exchange  of 
views on the Commission's proposals4. 

In response to the internet consultation, the Commission received contributions from 
more  than  160  interested  parties.  These  included  submissions  by  some  of  the  EU 
Member States, private sector interest groups, the NGO community and a number of 
individual  citizens.  Not  only  European  but  also  national  and  regional  organisations 
took  part  in  the  consultation  process.  In  accordance  with  the  Commission's 
consultation standards, all contributions have been displayed on the ETI consultation 
website5. 

In terms of reaction from the EU advisory bodies, the European Economic and Social 
Committee6  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions7  each  produced  an  opinion  on  the 
Commission's Green Paper. 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 

COM(2006) 194. 
COM(2005) 1300.  
COM(2002) 704. 
http://eesc.europa.eu/sco/events/11_07_06_transparency/minutes-en.pdf 
http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/eti/index_en.htm 
CESE 1373/ 2006. 
CoR 235/2006. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The Commission's Green Paper generated wide public interest. Every month, several 
thousand visits to the ETI consultation website were registered. On the basis of this 
Communication, the Commission now wishes to provide feedback in response to the 
arguments  put  forward  in  the  consultation  process  and  to  decide  on  the  follow-up 
measures to the Green Paper. 

2. 

FEEDBACK AND FOLLOW-UP 

2.1. 

Interest Representation (Lobbying) 

2.1.1.  Overall approach, terminology and scope 

The opportunity to discuss the issue of interest representation at European level was 
generally  welcomed,  although  several  participants  in  the  consultation  process  were 
critical of the Commission's use of the term 'lobbying' to describe this phenomenon. 
Therefore,  it  should  be  stressed  once  again  that  the  Commission's  definition  of 
'lobbying' did not include any negative value judgment. Lobbying was referred to as 
"activities  carried  out  with  the  objective  of  influencing  the  policy  formulation  and 
decision-making processes of the European institutions". The Commission explicitly 
underlined  the  legitimate  and  useful  role  of  lobbying  activities  in  a  democratic 
system.  The  Commission's  new  register  (see  below)  will  nevertheless  be  entitled 
'Register of Interest Representatives'.  

Public  affairs  consultancies,  corporate  lobby  units  ("in-house  representatives"), 
NGOs,  think-tanks, trade associations and law  firms  will  be  encouraged  to  join  the 
register and offered the opportunity to indicate to which category they belong.  

2.1.2.  Proposals in the Green Paper 

In  its  ETI  Green  Paper,  the  Commission  suggested  a  new  framework  for  lobbying 
activities which would be based on: 

–  A  voluntary  registration  system  with  incentives  for  lobbyists  to  register.  The 
incentives  would  include  automatic  alerts  of  consultations  on  issues  of  known 
interest to the stakeholders. 

–  A  common  code  of  conduct  for  all  lobbyists,  or  at  least  common  minimum 

requirements. 

–  A  system  of  monitoring,  and  sanctions  to  be  applied  in  the  event  of  incorrect 

registration and/or breach of the code of conduct. 

2.1.3.  Register of interest representatives 

Many contributions supported the establishment of a voluntary register. However, a 
considerable  number  of  those  consulted,  in  particular  NGOs,  advocated  a 
compulsory approach as the only way of ensuring full transparency. 

For  the  Commission,  full  transparency  means  first  and  foremost  covering  the 
landscape  of  European  interest  representatives  as  comprehensively  as  possible.  To 
reach  this  objective,  the  Commission  proposed  a  voluntary  and  incentive-based 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
approach.  Lobbyists  that  register  certain  information  about  themselves  would  be 
given  an  opportunity  to  indicate  their  specific  interests  and,  in  return,  would  be 
alerted to consultations in those specific areas. 

It  has  been  argued  that  as  an  incentive  to  register  voluntarily  this  is  still  relatively 
weak.  In  the  context  of  the  consultation  process  it  appears  that  the  automatic  alert 
function will probably not provide a sufficient incentive to register, particularly for 
Brussels-based  interest  groups  that  follow  the  Commission's  activities  on  a  daily 
basis. 

An additional incentive should therefore be added to the system which at the same 
time would strengthen both the application and enforcement of existing Commission 
policy  on  consultation  (see  also  Chapter  2.2.).  The  Commission's  consultation 
standards require that interested parties who wish to submit comments in the context 
of internet consultations must be prepared to provide the Commission and the public 
at large with information about their objectives and structure. It is the Commission's 
stated policy that "if this information is not provided, submissions will be considered 
as individual contributions"8. 

template  for 

The  Commission  therefore  intends  to  combine  the  voluntary  register  with  a  new 
standard 
their 
contributions in the context of such a consultation they will be systematically invited 
to  use  the  register  to  declare  whom  they  represent,  what  their  mission  is  and  how 
they are funded. 

internet  consultations.  If  organisations  submit 

This  is  justified  because  having  sufficient  information  about  the  organisations 
participating  in  a  consultation  is  clearly  a  precondition  for  any  meaningful 
assessment of the relevance and usefulness of the contributions they submit.  

The new system will not only increase overall transparency but also contribute to the 
achievement  of  the  Commission's  'better  regulation'  aims.  Open  and  inclusive 
stakeholder consultations are essential tools for carrying out impact assessments and 
strengthening the knowledge-based approach to policy making. 

With  regard  to  financial  disclosure  required  to  join  the  register,  the  Commission 
considers  it  necessary  and  proportionate  to  request  registrants  to  declare  relevant 
budget  figures  and  breakdown  on  major  clients  and/or  funding  sources.  The  main 
objective  of  revealing  how  interest  representatives  are  funded  is  to  ensure  that 
decision-makers  and  the  general  public  can  identify  and  assess  the  strength  of  the 
most important driving forces behind a given lobbying activity.  

In  line  with  the  self-regulatory  approach,  it  will  remain  the  responsibility  of 
registrants to accurately and objectively calculate and disclose how they are funded. 
On  this  basis,  the  Commission  will  apply  the  following  minimum  criteria  in 
assessing whether the information supplied is sufficient to join the register: 

8 

COM(2002) 704. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
–  For professional consultancies and law firms involved in lobbying EU institutions, 
the turnover linked to lobbying EU institutions, as well as the relative weight of 
the clients in this turnover, should be declared.  

–  For "in-house" lobbyists and trade associations  active in lobbying, an estimate of 
the cost associated with the direct lobbying of EU institutions should be provided.  

–  For NGOs and think-tanks, the overall budget and breakdown per main sources of 
funding (amounts and sources of public funding, donations, membership fees etc.) 
should be declared. 

Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 on the application of the Aarhus Convention to the 
Community  Institutions  stipulates  that  NGOs  (fulfilling  a  number  of  specific 
requirements) will be entitled to request an internal review of certain administrative 
acts under environmental law. Therefore, as a possible further incentive to register, 
the Commission will examine to what extent the future register could serve as a tool 
for  identifying  NGOs  entitled  to  launch  such  a  procedure  (e.g.  in  the  form  of 
advanced recognition). 

2.1.4.  Code of conduct 

The Green Paper stated that applicants for the register "have to subscribe to a code of 
conduct, which would be enforced credibly and transparently". 

The  issues  of  how  such  a  code  should  be  drawn  up  and  exactly  how  it  would  be 
monitored in practice were not addressed in detail. There was some discussion as to 
whether  a  voluntary  common  code,  developed  and  monitored  by  the  lobbyists 
themselves (and including the imposition of penalties), might be a preferable option. 
However, the responses to the Green Paper suggest that it would be rather difficult to 
bring  the  various  parts  of  the  lobbying  community  together  in  such  an  exercise, 
especially as far as cooperation between the private sector and NGOs is concerned. 

It is clear that the Commission will always remain accountable for the soundness of 
its relations with representatives of outside interests. Therefore, it would be difficult 
to  envisage  the  Commission  outsourcing  the  responsibility  for  the  definition  and 
monitoring of a code to external bodies. Self-regulation of lobbyists is not seen as a 
viable  option.  Instead,  the  Commission  should  review  and  update  the  existing 
minimum requirements it adopted in 1992. The content of such a revamped code will 
be  discussed  with  the  stakeholders.  Subscribing  to  the  code  should  become  a 
requirement for lobbyists wishing to be included in the new register, in line with the 
example set by the European Parliament. 

It goes without saying that all factual information provided by interested parties with 
a  view  to  being  registered  must  always  be  accurate.  Registrants  found  to  submit 
inaccurate information will be invited, possibly in a public manner, to correct it. As a 
measure  of  last  resort,  the  Commission  can  exclude  registered  lobbyists  providing 
inaccurate information from the register. A similar procedure would apply to alleged 
breaches of the Code of Conduct. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
2.1.5.  Possible inter-institutional cooperation 

Many  of  those  taking  part  in  the  consultation  on  the  ETI  Green  Paper  argued  in 
favour of an inter-institutional approach to lobbying. They called for a future register 
and Code of Conduct to be common to the Commission and, at least, the European 
Parliament.  

The  Commission  fully  shares  this  view  and  believes  "one-stop-shop"  registration 
would  provide an  increased incentive  for stakeholders to register. The Commission 
therefore  invites  the  European  Parliament,  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  and  the 
European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  to  examine  the  possibility  of  closer 
cooperation in this area. 

2.1.6.  Timing and review 

The Commission considers that the new measures described in this Communication 
will be a balanced and proportionate framework contributing to greater transparency 
in  lobbying.  The  Commission  will  launch  the  discussions  with  stakeholders  on  a 
common  Code  of  Conduct  before  summer  2007,  and  open  the  Register  for  Interest 
Representatives  in  spring  2008.  Following  the  launch  of  the  Register,  Commission 
services will receive guidance on how to actively promote registration and deal with 
non-registered interest representatives. In spring 2009, the Commission will conduct 
a  review  to  examine  whether  the  new  system  has  produced  the  desired  results, 
including  in  terms  of  coverage  of  the  target  group  for  registration.  If  not, 
consideration  could  be  given  to  stricter  measures,  in  the  form  of  compulsory 
registration and reporting. 

2.2. 

Consultation Standards 

Over  100  contributions9  on  the  "minimum  standards"  chapter  of  the  Green  Paper 
were received, mostly from various business interest groups and NGOs. 

Those  taking  part  in  the  consultation  generally  welcomed  the  Commission's 
consultation  standards  and  the  efforts  that  have  been  made  by  the  Commission  to 
improve  its  consultation  processes.  At  the  same  time,  the  participants  pointed  to 
certain weak areas in the application of the consultation standards. In particular, there 
are weaknesses in providing general feedback explaining how and to what extent the 
comments  have  taken  into  account  by  the  Commission  and  also  in  observing  the 
minimum  time  limit  of  8  weeks  for  open  public  consultations  (for  example,  where 
the  period  included  a  major  holiday  period).  It  was  felt  that  targeted  consultations 
were not always sufficiently balanced between the relevant sectors.  

While  it  is  not  intended  to  review  the  content  of  the  consultation  standards  at  this 
stage10, a reinforcement of their application is necessary in order to raise further the 
general  level  of  quality  of  the  Commission's  consultations.  Such  a  reinforced 

9 
10 

Contributions are available at: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/eti/contributions.htm  
Without  prejudice  to  possible  measures  necessary  for  the  implementation  of  Regulation  (EC)  No 
1367/2006  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  the  application  of  the  provision  of  the 
Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to 
Justice in Environmental Matters to Community Institutions and Bodies. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
application will focus, in particular on providing better feedback, a more coordinated 
approach  to  consultation  and  the  need  for  ensuring  plurality  of  views  and  interests 
expressed  in  consultations.  This  approach  will  help  improve  the  quality  of  the 
Commission's impact assessments, thereby contributing to the implementation of the 
Commission's 'better regulation' policy. 

The Commission will therefore put more emphasis on measures such as: 

•  Training and appropriate awareness raising among staff; 

•  Sharing  information  and  good  practices  on  stakeholder  consultation  between  the 

Directorates-General; 

•  Reviewing the practical guidelines for stakeholder consultation; 

•  Creating a new standard consultation template to improve the consistency of open 

public consultations. 

Once these new measures have been put in place and tested, the Commission intends 
to submit its consultation policy to an external evaluation. 

2.3. 

Publication of Beneficiaries of EU Funds 

2.3.1.  The legislative process 

The publication of the Green Paper on Transparency led to intense media coverage of 
the issue of publication of information on beneficiaries of shared management funds. 
This enabled the Commission to engage in constructive discussions with the Member 
States, Parliament, interest representatives and civil society organisations, ultimately 
leading  to  a  consensus  on  the  desirability  of  publishing  the  relevant  data.  The 
Commission  was  very  encouraged  to  see  several  Member  States  abandoning  their 
explicit opposition in favour of cooperation with the Commission on the issue, thus 
allowing  the  rapid  adoption  of  the  basic  requirement  for  the  introduction  of  the 
system, namely the inclusion of the requirement in the Financial Regulation, which 
was undergoing its first triennial revision since its entry into force in 2003. 

A description of the amendments to the various legal acts concerned is provided in 
the annex. 

2.3.2.  Practical implementation 

The introduction of provisions in the relevant legislation is only the first step in what 
will  necessarily  be  a  complex  undertaking,  requiring  significant  cooperation  with  a 
wide range of implementing bodies across the EU as well as a step-by-step approach. 

Certain  comments  received  in  the  context  of  the  Green  Paper  consultation  process 
point  to  the  desirability  of  a  searchable,  centralised  database,  managed  by  the 
Commission, containing all relevant information on beneficiaries. 

However,  the  reality  is  that  the  data  on  beneficiaries  are  collected  by  the 
implementing bodies in the Member States to whom management is delegated. In the 
field of CAP direct aid and market measures, data are sent to the Commission under 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
the  responsibility  of  these  bodies  and  the  Commission  has  no  way  of  checking  the 
reliability of every single data information received. However, the Commission has 
just adopted a proposal amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 in order to 
oblige Member States to publish this data including rural development expenditure.  
In  the  field  of  structural  funds,  Commission  Regulation (EC)  No 1828/2006,  which 
sets out the rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 
on  Structural  Funds  and  the  Cohesion  Fund,  clearly  puts  the  responsibility  for 
collecting  and  publishing  data  of  beneficiaries  on  the  Member  States  and  the 
Commission does not even receive the relevant data sets. Moreover, the Commission 
is making determined efforts to obtain a positive "Statement of Assurance" from the 
European Court of Auditors, as required by Article 248 EC. This requires determined 
efforts  by  the  Commission,  in  particular  with  regard  to  direct  management,  but 
Member States will have a crucial role to play in addressing the shortcomings noted 
by  the  Court  in  the  area  of  shared  management.  The  Commission  would  therefore 
like  to  stress  the  importance  of  the  Member  States'  responsibilities  for  the 
implementation of the measures under shared management. 

To  achieve  the  goal  of  publishing  the  data  as  of  2008,  the  following  procedure,  in 
cooperation with the European Data Protection Supervisor, therefore seems the most 
appropriate: 

Step 1: Publishing the data in their current form 

In  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  amended  Financial  Regulation  and  the 
applicable sector specific legislation, those Member States who have not yet done so 
will grant public access to data, through national websites and other means they see 
fit, for all shared management programmes. 

The Commission will host a central web portal with links to the relevant websites in 
Member  States.  This  site  will,  in  turn,  be  linked  to  the  website  on  EU  funds  under 
direct management launched by the Commission in 2006. This will ensure equality 
of treatment as between direct and shared management programmes. 

Step 2: Ensuring the comparability and 'searchability' of data 

The  Commission  fully  acknowledges  the  need  for  searchable  and  comparable  data 
and,  as  a  further  step,  will  in  autumn  2007  propose  a  common  standard  for  the 
publication of data on shared management, so as to enable interested parties to carry 
out consistent analyses across the EU, accessing the data published by the Member 
States through the central Commission portal. This common standard will take into 
account the specific features of the various policies under shared management. 

3. 

CONCLUSIONS 

As  a  follow-up  to  its  Green  Paper  on  the  'European  Transparency  Initiative',  the 
Commission will: 

•  Create  and  launch  in  spring  2008,  a  new  voluntary  register  for  interest 
representatives with an "alert" function (the existing CONECCS database will be 
wound down); 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
•  Increase  transparency  through  reinforced  application  of  the  Commission's 
consultation  standards  based,  in  particular,  on  a  standard  website  for  internet 
consultations, and including scrutiny of the participants. This tool would be linked 
to the register; 

•  Draft a Code of Conduct to be discussed with stakeholders in 2007. The Code will 
be  a  requirement  for  entry  in  the  register  and  will  be  monitored  by  the 
Commission; 

•  Reinforce the application of the Commission's consultation standards by means of 

a series of practical, in-house measures (see under 2.2.); 

•  Pursue  and  implement  its  policy  on  the  publication  of  the  beneficiaries  of  EU 

funds. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
ANNEX  

Beneficiaries of EU Funds – Amendment of Legal Acts 

1. 

Amendment of the Financial Regulation 

Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006, which amends Financial Regulation (EC, Euratom) 
No 1605/2002, says in its introduction: 

"Whereas: 
(6)  In  order  to  ensure  the  transparency  of  the  use  of  funds  deriving  from  the  budget,  it  is 
necessary  to  make  available  information  on  the  beneficiaries  of  these  funds  within  certain 
limits necessary to protect legitimate public and private interests and taking into account the 
particular accounting period for the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund." 

A  new  paragraph  3  in  Article  30  requires  the  publication  of  information  on  beneficiaries 
under all types of programme management modes: 

"The  Commission  shall  make  available  …  information  on  the  beneficiaries  of  funds  as 
provided  by  the  entities  to  which  budget  implementation  tasks  are  delegated  under  other 
modes of management. 

This  information  shall  be  made  available  with  due  observance  of  the  requirements  of 
confidentiality,  in  particular  the  protection  of  personal  data  as  laid  down  in  Directive 
95/46/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  24  October  1995  on  the 
protection  of  individuals  with  regard  to  the  processing  of  personal  data  and  on  the  free 
movement of such data and Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of 
the  Council  of  18  December  2001  on  the  protection  of  individuals  with  regard  to  the 
processing  of  personal  data  by  the  Community  institutions  and  bodies  and  on  the  free 
movement  of  such  data,  and  of  the  requirements  of  security,  taking  into  account  the 
specificities  of  each  management  mode  referred  to  in  Article  53  and  where  applicable  in 
conformity with the relevant sector-specific rules." 

A  new  Article  53b  specifies  the  frequency  of  publication  and  the  fact  that  the  practical 
arrangements are to be fixed in the relevant sector specific regulations: 

"Article 53b 

1.  Where  the  Commission  implements  the  budget  by  shared  management,  implementation 
tasks  shall  be  delegated  to  Member  States.  That  method  shall  apply  in  particular  to  the 
actions referred to in Titles I and II of Part Two. 

2.  Without  prejudice  to  complementary  provisions  included  in  relevant  sector-specific 
regulations,  and  in  order  to  ensure  in  shared  management  that  the  funds  are  used  in 
accordance with the applicable rules and principles, the Member States shall (…) 

(d)  ensure,  by  means  of  relevant  sector-specific  regulations  and  in  conformity  with  Article 
30(3),  adequate  annual  ex  post  publication  of  beneficiaries  of  funds  deriving  from  the 
budget." 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
Under  the  terms  of  a  specific  transitional  provision  the  beneficiaries  of  aids  from  the 
European  Agricultural  Guarantee  Fund  (EAGF)  will  only  be  disclosed  as  of  payments 
charged to the 2008 budget:  

"Article 181 

4. Article 30(3) shall apply to the fund mentioned in Article 148(1) for the first time in respect 
of the payments charged to the 2008 budget." 

2. 

Sector legislation  

2.1.  European Fisheries Fund (EFF) 

The  EFF  Council  Regulation (EC)  No 1198/2006  was  adopted  on  27 July 2006.  The 
obligation of the managing authority for organising the publication of a list of beneficiaries, 
the names of operations and the amount of public funding allocated to the operation is clearly 
mentioned in the draft implementing regulation (Article 31), which is expected to be adopted 
by the Commission by the end of March 2007. However, there is already political agreement 
from the Member States in the EFF Committee. 

2.2. 

Structural Funds – ERDF, European Social Fund and Cohesion Fund 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1083/2006  lays  down  general  provisions  on  the  European 
Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund. Commission 
Regulation  (EC)  No  1828/2006  of  8  December  2006,  which  sets  out  the  rules  for  the 
implementation of the Council Regulation for the three funds, specifies in its Article 7.2.d that 
the managing authority shall be responsible for organising… "the publication, electronically 
or otherwise, of the list of beneficiaries, the names of the operations and the amount of public 
funding  allocated  to  the  operations.  Participants  in  an  operation  of  the  ESF  shall  not  be 
named". 

2.3.  Common Agricultural Policy (direct aid and market measures; rural development) 

A  proposal  to  amend  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1290/2005,  which  sets  out  rules  for  the 
financing  of  the  Common  Agricultural  Policy,  both  in  terms  of  direct  payments,  market 
measures  and  of  rural  development,  has  just  been  adopted  by  the  Commission  in  order  to 
include  a  provision  making  publication  of  the  names  of  beneficiaries  compulsory.  Once 
approved  by  Council,  the  Regulation  will  need  to  be  supplemented  by  the  relevant 
implementing rules. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
BUDGETARY IMPACT STATEMENT  
(cf. Article16 of the Internal Rules) 

POLICY AREA: COMMISSION'S POLICY COORDINATION AND LEGAL ADVICE 

ACTIVITY: RELATIONS WITH CIVIL SOCIETY, OPENNESS AND INFORMATION 

WORK PROGRAMME FOR: 2007-2008 

1. 

BUDGET HEADINGS CONCERNED AND TITLE 

–  25.02.04.02 General publications 

–  and budget line covering auxiliary and contract staff. 

2. 

LEGAL BASIS 

Tasks resulting from the Commission's prerogatives at institutional level. 

3. 

◘ 

OVERALL FIGURES FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR (IN EUROS) 

3.a – Current year: 2007 

Initial appropriation for the 
financial year (budget)  

Transfers 

Additional appropriation  

Total appropriation 

Appropriations already set 
aside by another work 
programme 

Balance available 

Amount for the action 
proposed 

CA 

2 200 000 

--- 

--- 

2 200 000 

2 200 000 

(POP 2007) 

75 000 
(already included in 
POP 2007) 

+300 000 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
◘ 

3.b – Carry-overs 

Carry-overs 

Appropriations already set 
aside by another work 
programme 

Balance available 

Amount for the action 
proposed 

CA 

--- 

--- 

--- 

--- 

◘ 

3.c – Next financial year: 2008 

Amount to be included in the preparation of the 2008 PDB 

Initial appropriation for the 
financial year (budget) 

Transfers 

Additional appropriation 

Total appropriation 

Appropriations already set 
aside by another work 
programme 

Balance available 

Amount for the action 
proposed 

CA 

PDB 2008 to be 
prepared 

450 000 

4. 

DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION 

On  3  May  2006,  the  Commission  adopted  a  Green  Paper  –  COM(2006)  194  -  in 
order  to  drive  forward  its  "European  Transparency  Initiative"  (ETI).  The  objective 
was  to  launch  a  broad  public  consultation  in  particular  on  the  need  for  a  more 
structured  framework  for  the  activities  of  interest  representatives  (lobbyists). 
Following this consultation, the Commission will create a new voluntary register for 
lobbyists, with an alert function.  

This action generates two types of costs: 

•  Costs under budget line 25.02.04.02 to cover the production of the register (on the 

internet) and its maintenance. 

•  Costs for two A level equivalent contractual agents. This is an additional cost not 

yet covered by appropriations allocated to the Secretariat General. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
– 

– 

One  agent to support  the design, coordination and monitoring tasks of 
the overall project. 

One professional for all the specific IT-related tasks of the project 

5. 

METHOD OF CALCULATION ADOPTED (IN EUROS) 

Personnel 

2007 

8 months 

2 agents 

2008 

Full year 

2 agents 

2009 

1 for 6 months, 1 for 12 months 

Preparation and development of the Register 

2007 

Analysis, vision document, feasibility study, etc 
1 contract 

Development of management module, dissemination 
module: First phase 

2008 

Development Second phase (incl. production of 
version 1 and preparation of version 2): contract 

2009 
 and after 

Maintenance costs 

84 376

127 104

95 328

75 000

300 000

450 000

50 000
per year

Year 

2007 

2008 

2009 

TOTAL 

Agents 

84 376 

127 104 

95 328 

Development 

375 000 

450 000 

50 000 

6. 

PAYMENT SCHEDULE (IN EUROS) 

Heading 

Appropriations 

Payments 

25.02.04.02 

2007 

2008 

Total 

375 000 

450 000 

825 000 

14 

EN 

2007 

375 000 

375 000 

2008 

450 000 

450 000 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Agents 

2007 

2008 

Total 

84 376 

127 104 

211 480 

84 376 

84 376 

127 104 

127 104 

The  needs  for  human  and  administrative  resources  shall  be  covered  within  the  allocation 
granted to the managing service in the framework of the annual allocation procedure. 

Given the fact that the budget 2007 and APS2008 have already been adopted, the new human 
resources needs have to be covered by redeployment or seizing on the existing appropriations 
for external staff. 

EN 

15 

   EN