Transparency Watch (TW): You are a leading force in the European Transparency Initiative. In your opinion, what role does transparency play in the EU’s legitimacy as a public institution?

Siim Kallas(SK): There is a need for the modern world to be transparent and for information to be made available. If you don’t, then you are lagging behind the modern world. The question is how to handle all the information – it is a natural part of modern administrations that information is open and publicly accessible.

TW: When the EU Commission’s register of lobbyists that seek to influence its policymaking was launched in June, you stated that voluntary registering would become obligatory if few lobbyists signed up. How is registering progressing? Are you optimistic that it can continue as a voluntary initiative?

SK: Yes, I am optimistic. The number is around 480 in our register. It is not satisfactory in the sense that we estimated there to be 1500 possible entries, so this is one third, but you can consider that this number is quite big and be happy as well.

It would have been an utter failure if there would have been just tens of entries, but now there are hundreds, and they are still coming. Some very big players have registered so others will follow. We will assess next spring whether there is enough or what should be amended. I am more and more convinced though, that this voluntary approach is the right one as it is clear that if you are part of this that you have nothing to hide and that you are reliable. Therefore, it creates a kind of moral peer pressure which convinces others to also sign up. I would not have started this operation at all if there had not been a common understanding that something must be done to create an additional level of legitimacy to this field and now it’s there.

TW: Currently the Commission and Parliament have separate lobbyist registers, while the Council has none. Are there plans for one register which will cover all three institutions?

SK: This is perhaps the plan with Parliament and we hope and propose to have a common register for all the institutions. The Council was not very interested in doing this, which I regret and we will try to convince them to go ahead with these ideas. In Parliament they have a completely different approach as registered lobbyists have access to Parliament, but we have a common understanding that if you are a lobbyist then you should not have two different applications – one application to Parliament and one application to the Commission. This information should be interchangeable. They [EU Parliament] have a different logic – they have a registry of people and we of organisations - but of course this can be combined and I believe that in the future we will have a common register with Parliament.

TW:In light of the highly critical reports recently issues by the Commission detailing Bulgaria and Romania’s lagging anti-corruption efforts, and, in Bulgaria’s case, the reported misuse of EU funds, does the Commission have plans to revise its policies/procedures?

SK: This is another part of my portfolio, the fight against fraud, securing and monitoring the proper use of money. It is part of our wider strategy to improve fiscal governance and the Commission has started to be much tougher on member states. This is not only Bulgaria and Romania, we have suspended payments to the UK, to Spain, to Greece, and this will be the case until member states take the necessary measures. Overall, the Commission has no competence in legislating anti-corruption rules in member states, but we, of course, try to be very active and have suggested several actions to fight corruption in member states. While we do not have the competence to legislate directly, there are numerous ideas on what can be done based on all our experiences. For example, we are working actively in Bulgaria, where we have suspended payments, with our anti-fraud office to see improvement.

Interview was conducted at 13th IACC held in Athens, Greece.