Lobby company Penta surveys Parliamentary assistants: how far should PA pro go for information?
Besides publically available information, what are the available options, and should you engage with them?
Interesting read in Friday’s Politico EU Influence newsletter.
The Left leader Manon Aubry MEP is accusing lobbying company Penta Group of “breaching the Transparency Register’s code of conduct.” A lobbyist from Penta group sent EP assistants a survey to “share [their] candid feedback” on the “most important opinions and trends in the EU”1.
Furthermore, in exchange for the information, Penta pledged to donate €20 to UNICEF’s Ukraine Appeal for every response it would get.
If you already feel nauseous about the idea of opening a similar email on a Monday morning, you’re not the only one. Manon Aubry wrote to Politico to denounce the manoeuvre:
[Manon Aubry’s] complaint to the Transparency Register secretariat accuses Penta of failing to identify which clients it’s operating on behalf of; dishonestly obtaining data and opinions under the guise of nonpartisan research; and pushing staff of the institutions to contravene rules and standards applicable to them.
… and also: “To add insult to injury, Penta instrumentalises the war of aggression by Putin against Ukraine and the remarkable work of UNICEF in support of victims of the war for its lobbying activities,” Aubry said in an email to EU Influence — urging everyone to donate to UNICEF regardless. — Politico
Before we dive in, subscribe to The Beubble. Don’t miss any important updates. Subscribe today.
This very problematic email raises an important question, that all lobbyists and public affairs practitioners should ask themselves, for the sake of the profession:
To which extent should Public Affairs professionals go for information collection?
The main resource, product, and currency of public affairs and lobbying is information.
Without it, one cannot work. If you don’t know who has influence, what the opinions and arguments of your adversaries and partners are, and what you should present to your stakeholders, you have nothing. Logically, intelligence gathering is the first activity of lobbyists.
Where does Information come from?
Information comes in layers.
There is information that is publically accessible: newspapers, white papers, opinion pieces, and social media posts. They give a full and broad picture of the issues at hand. But what if you need more details, an insider’s point of view?
Enter the lobbyists’ second tool: networking. Having chats and direct contacts with key stakeholders allows you to have more granular and precise information. But what if you can’t access a certain stakeholder or institution?
That’s what happened in Mrs. Aubry’s case. Whether Penta wanted to reach her assistant specifically or a wider audience at the European Parliament, it is clear that Penta’s survey was destined to fill in informational blanks that the lobbying company wanted to get rid of.
Flirting with the rules
The best lobbyists strive in the grey areas—or they say.
To get the best information possible, they walk in dark alleys, offer gifts, trade influence and enjoy revolving doors. Just the right shade: not too much (that would be illegal), not too little (one needs an advantage over competitors).
This was the technique of the days of old.
Nowadays, lobbyists must show trustworthiness, dutifulness, and care for their industry’s rules of conduct. If not for ethics, at least for reputation.
Look at Penta’s survey: it most probably backfired. They information collected is probably not very interesting, and now the names of its clients are accessible to all in the bubble, with the reputational damage that will ensue. Very bad practice indeed
Information that is not publically accessible is not information
A rule of thumb when it comes to using information: if you did not find it from a public source, don’t use it.
“But what’s the point of networking then?” I hear you say. Well, if your contact is not willing to support the information he gave you publically, don’t bother. You’ll sooner face a denial that gets the edge over those who don’t have the information.