Public Affairs Links

Some oddness from the Corrigans

2010-02-21T19:28:00.002Z

Occasionally, something from left field drops in to our inbox. This falls in to that category...

"There's no one as Irish as Dave Cameron"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJc1JJBKtBM

"On December 5th 2005 Debrett’s Peerage released the research that confirmed that current Conservative leader David Cameron is William IV’s great, great, great, great, great grandson. He is related to the 19th-century monarch through Elizabeth FitzClarence, the King’s illegitimate daughter, one of at least ten children he had out of wedlock with Dorothy Jordan, an Irish actress from County Waterford, his long-term mistress, who is in fact Mr Cameron's IV’s great, great, great, great, great grandmonther. The family tree by Debrett’s Peerage, the genealogists, shows that the link between Mr Cameron, 39, and William IV makes him the fifth cousin twice-removed of the Queen.

So Dave Cameron is Irish, Univeral Music and Decca Artists, Ireland's Corrigan Brothers who had an international hit with "There's no one as Irish as Barack Obama" return with "There's no one as Irish as Dave Cameron."

Bankers gear up for major lobbying campaign

2010-01-25T18:58:00.001Z

Published by the Guardian

23 January 2010

"Banks are mobilising a smooth-running lobbying machine in Washington to battle Barack Obama's plans to limit the size and scope of Wall Street institutions, as financial services firms gear up to stop a shake-up that could slice away large chunks of their operations.

Their influence on Capitol Hill is broad – the top eight US banks spent $26m (£16m) on lobbying efforts last year, an increase of 6% on 2008 despite their financial woes, according to Congressional records. And in the first 10 months of 2009, the financial industry donated $78.2m to federal candidates and party committees – more than any other business sector – according to political research institute the Centre for Responsive Politics.

"The power of the financial services sector in this city has not dissipated at all … they've just done things in a quieter way," said Ethan Siegel, an analyst at financial consultancy The Washington Exchange, who monitors Congress for big investors. "They haven't pulled back on their lobbying just because they've become piñata [punchbags] in the press."

Wall Street lobbyists argue that scaling back the size of banks misdiagnoses the cause of the financial crisis, jeopardises jobs, damages America's competitiveness and could inhibit growth.

The Financial Services Forum, which represents 18 top banks including Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and Citigroup, says the problem of institutions becoming "too big to fail" ought to be tackled through more effective supervision, and by creating an authority able to wind down failing firms, rather than by forcing them to shrink. Spokeswoman Erica Hurtt said: "This was not a trading crisis and these proposals miss the mark. They won't get to the causes of the crisis."

Banks' persuasiveness has already had significant impact on the Obama administration. Plans for the creation of a consumer financial protection agency are meeting staunch Senate opposition and may be watered down to get the 60-40 support needed to override objections.

One widely used strategy by the financial industry has been to deploy representatives of smaller high-street banks to make the case to lawmakers. Organisations such as the Independent Community Bankers of America tend to get a sympathetic hearing because they can point to members in towns and cities in almost every Congressional district, rather than purely in lower Manhattan.

Douglas Elliott, a non-partisan expert in financial services at the Brookings Institution, said JP Morgan and a few other firms were likely to be particularly alarmed at the prospect of a tightening of the existing cap preventing a bank from holding more than 10% of America's insured deposits: "They may already be over any limit under consideration. If they are, they'll probably be allowed to stay unchanged but it will mean they have to eschew acquisitions."

He added that banks will not succeed in defeating restrictions entirely: "Everybody hates banks now and my intuition is that bank lobbyists overplayed their hand last year. It would have been better for them to work out some compromises rather than trying to destroy reform bills entirely."

Full article published here http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jan/24/wall-street-lobbyists-banks-obama

US Lobbying going Underground?

2010-01-18T19:05:00.002Z

Published by the New York Times
18 January 2010

"Ellen Miller, co-founder of the Sunlight Foundation, has spent years arguing for rules to force more disclosure of how lobbyists and private interests shape public policy. Until recently, she herself registered as a lobbyist, too, publicly reporting her role in the group’s advocacy of even more reporting. Not anymore.

In light of strict new regulations imposed by Congress over the last two years, Ms. Miller joined a wave of policy advocates who are choosing not to declare themselves as lobbyists.

“I have never spent much time on Capitol Hill,” Ms. Miller said, explaining that she only supervises those who press lawmakers directly. “I am not lobbying, so why fill out the forms?”

Her frankness makes Ms. Miller a standout among hundreds of others who are making the same decision. Though Washington’s influence business is by all accounts booming, a growing number of its practitioners are taking a similar course to avoid the spotlight of public disclosure.

“All the increasing restrictions on lobbyists are a disincentive to be a lobbyist, and those who think they can deregister are eagerly doing so,” said Jan Baran, a veteran political lawyer who has been fielding questions from clients hoping to escape registration. “It is creating some apparent contradictions.”

Before the new rules, the number of advocates who registered as lobbyists appeared to have grown steadily, peaking in late 2007. A tally by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics (another group founded by Ms. Miller) put the count at about 13,200. The number fell by nearly 2,000 by the fall of last year.

The falloff began shortly after Congress passed a sweeping ethics and lobbying law that imposed on registered lobbyists both heavier reporting requirements and potential criminal penalties. The law required lobbyists to report four times a year instead of two, and to detail any campaign contributions and certain meetings with public officials. The law also made it a crime for registered lobbyists to provide gifts or meals to lawmakers or their aides.

But for all its penalties, the law left the definition of a lobbyist fairly elastic. The criteria included getting paid to lobby, contacting public officials about a client’s interests at least twice in a quarter and working at least 20 percent of the time on lobbying-related activities for the client.

Enforcement is also light. Lobbyists suspected of failing to file receive at least one official letter offering a chance to rectify their status before any legal action is taken.

After the rules changed, private companies and nonprofit groups immediately began to rethink their registration.

The Union of Concerned Scientists, which advocates on arms control, energy policy and environmental issues, had previously registered almost anyone who went to Capitol Hill on its behalf, said Stephen Young, a senior analyst for the group. That changed after the new law.

“We thought: ‘Hmm, this is now not such an easy thing. Let’s see if we are required to do it. We are not? Let’s take them off,’ ” he said. The group terminated the registrations of “virtually all” its former lobbyists, he said.

Lobbyists were further motivated to adopt new tactics after President Obama limited their access to meetings and to government officials. He barred administration officials from talking to registered lobbyists about any projects involving federal stimulus money. He blocked lobbyists from working on his transition or taking jobs in his administration.

Some Democrats said the president’s prohibitions had motivated them to terminate their registrations and keep lobbying below the registration threshold; all insisted on anonymity to discuss the reasons for their decision.

“Lobbying isn’t a crime,” said one recently deregistered lobbyist who is looking for a job. “It is a profession, and in my view it is an honorable one. But this administration has made a decision about who can serve and who can’t.”"

The full article can be read here.
Distributued by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

Lobbyists Press EPA on Carbon Regs

2010-01-13T14:12:00.001Z

Published by The New York Times
12 January 2010

By Anne C. Mulkern

"Skeptical about the prospects of climate legislation in the Senate, energy companies and environmental groups have shifted their lobbying efforts toward U.S. EPA.

Energy businesses want to stop EPA from proceeding with its plan to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act, a move expected to come in March. If the agency does decide to impose restrictions, industry wants them delayed until 2012 or later. Meanwhile, environmentalists are urging the agency to move as quickly as possible to regulate major emission sources.

Both sides hope they can have an impact, but lobbying EPA is different from lobbying Congress.
Companies that make campaign contributions to lawmakers cannot do the same with EPA employees. Some key arguments made to lawmakers, such as how legislation would affect certain states, workers or consumer groups, are far less likely to influence EPA. And the agency is limited in how much it can factor in cost as it decides on regulations.

"It's a different ball game entirely," said David Bookbinder, Sierra Club's chief climate counsel. "When you're dealing with Congress, it's a political institution where political considerations loom large in any decision."

"EPA is clear, it is setting its own policy objectives," Bookbinder said. "We have no influence on that."

EPA in March is expected to roll out the first-ever federal standards affecting greenhouse gas emissions from automobile tailpipes. This follows the agency's move in December declaring greenhouse gases a danger to public health. The tailpipe standards would automatically trigger requirements that stationary sources -- such as power plants -- install "best available control technology," or BACT, according to EPA. The agency has proposed a separate rule to shield smaller facilities from those requirements, the "tailoring rule," which is also expected to be in place by March.

A large segment of the energy business, in conversations with EPA workers and in comments filed on EPA's notice of its proposed tailoring rule, is arguing that regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act will create havoc.

Federal regulations will conflict with state rules, industry advocates said, with many states forced to target carbon emissions from smaller sources that would be affected by the federal rule. As well, there is concern that EPA might try to govern what kinds of power plants can be built, favoring cleaner fuel sources like natural gas over coal.

Companies have realized that EPA is serious about regulation, and not merely making what many thought six months ago was a political threat to push Congress to act on climate, analysts said.

"There was a widespread expectation going into 2009 that this would be the year of domestic climate legislation," said Sam Thernstrom, who worked at President George W. Bush's White House Council on Environmental Quality and is now a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. "2009 didn't turn out that way."

"EPA is going to move forward," Thernstrom said. "Industry has woken up to that fact. Potentially regulated industries that stand to lose a lot of money here need to pay attention to the regulatory process right now."

Many of those industries are lobbying lawmakers and asking them to rein in EPA. They are expressing support for a proposed amendment from Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) aimed at blocking U.S. EPA's efforts to regulate greenhouse gases.

"It's merely a prudent way to say, 'Let's look before we leap,'" said Luke Popovich, spokesman for the National Mining Association, an industry trade group. "It strikes us as a reasonable approach to take."

Behind the scenes, energy companies and trade groups are talking to lawmakers about how EPA's plan could adversely affect utilities, coal companies, and the oil and gas industry.
"They're lobbying EPA, they're lobbying Congress, and they're hoping either Congress will act or EPA will act," said Jeff Holmstead, former EPA air chief during the Bush administration and now an industry lawyer. "If you get every member of Congress to lobby EPA, they may be forced to deal with it even if they might not otherwise be persuaded to deal with it on their own."

Holmstead, who has lobbied for Duke Energy Corp., Edison Electric Institute, Southern Co. and Arch Coal Inc., worked with Murkowski's staff on the wording of an EPA amendment she offered last fall, the Washington Post reported this week.

Environmental groups, meanwhile, are waging a counter-push. A coalition of 37 environmental, public health and liberal advocacy groups in a letter sent to senators last week urged opposition to Murkowski's amendment."

Full article published here.

Tobacco corporations lobbying EU hard on health

2010-01-12T11:57:00.002Z

Published by The Guardian
12 January 2010

Written by Sarah Boseley, Health editor

"Major corporations, led by British American Tobacco, waged a successful lobbying campaign to hamper the passing of public health legislation and weaken its impact, a group of academics claim today.

Proposals to restrict smoking in public were in BAT's sights in the 1990s but the changes the lobbying brought about to EU policymaking have been fundamental and enduring, say the academics.

They are now being used to undermine legislation designed to protect the public against toxic chemicals, they say.

The strategy is revealed in internal documents that BAT was forced to disclose during litigation on tobacco harm in the US.

Disguised behind respectable consultancies and thinktanks, the companies succeeded in getting a form of impact assessment made mandatory for every EU policy which – critics say – emphasised the financial costs to business and underestimated the impact on public health.

The manoeuvering behind the scenes is revealed in a paper published by researchers from the school of health at Bath University, the Centre for International Public Policy at Edinburgh University and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

Their paper, published today by PLoS (Public Library of Science) Medicine, says that "BAT and its corporate allies have fundamentally altered the way in which all EU policy is made".

They say it "increases the likelihood that the EU will produce policies that advance the interests of major corporations, including those that produce products damaging to health, rather than in the interests of its citizens".

The internal documents show that Bat began lobbying for what it called "structured risk assessment" in the mid 1990s.

"Our analysis reveals that BAT saw RA [risk assessment] as a means of precluding the introduction of public smoking restrictions, which it saw as a growing threat in Europe," says the paper.

"The UK consultancy firm Charles Barker appears to have then been asked to outline the advantages for BAT of embedding RA within UK and European policymaking processes and advised that BAT would need to tread carefully, lobbying through a 'front' organisation and enlisting 'big industry names in support'."

Full article published here.

More funding top charity demand

2010-01-11T13:59:00.003Z

Published by Third Sector
11 January 2010

In their recent 'State of the Sector' survey, Third Sector has found that at the top of charity policy change lists is an increase in state funding.

"There were noticeable variations in what respondents from charities of different sizes wanted from government. The most popular change - more lottery or government funding for small charities - was backed by 20 per cent of respondents from organisations with annual incomes of less than £1m, 15 per cent of those with £5m a year and 2 per cent of those with more than £6m.

On reducing or removing VAT, demand was highest among respondents from medium-sized charities, at 11 per cent, compared with 7 per cent from small charities and 9 per cent from large ones. But the level of demand for Gift Aid reform was fairly consistent across respondents from all charities."

Full article published here.

Lobbying a waste of time?

2010-01-07T18:57:00.002Z

Published by Money Marketing
07 January 2010

"It certainly promises to be an interesting year, with the final elements of the seemingly endless discussions over the retail distribution review finally slotting into place over the coming months.

Judging by the many comments I have read in Money Marketing and on websites that feature financial advisers’ comments, the overwhelming body of IFA opinion seems to be set against the RDR, at least publicly.

Shortly before Christmas, while on a visit to London, I took the opportunity of meeting a few IFAs whom I respect, even if I do not necessarily share their views. One, whom I had always thought of as opinionated but not remotely an activist, had gone so far as to lobby his MP about key aspects of the review, which he regards as highly dangerous to the future of independent financial advice.

His hope is that Conservative MPs will halt or seriously amend the RDR process if and when they win the general election.

Unfortunately, he told me, his own MP - a Tory - appeared to be highly ignorant about the RDR and what it entailed. Moreover, this particular MP told his constituent that when push came to shove, his “instinct” was to back the FSA because advisers were “renowned” for misselling financial products to clients.

The IFA then told his MP he was a disgrace to his party and he would never get his vote. Not a successful lobbying exercise, methinks.
Perhaps this helps explain why Aifa was pushed into warning IFAs last year that ill-conceived lobbying of MPs could have a negative effect in terms of achieving what they wanted.

The sad fact is that Aifa - and IFAs it has tried to arm with lobbying arguments - are unlikely to succeed. Parliament is highly febrile and it will be almost impossible, as we draw closer and closer to the election, to persuade anyone to listen to any point of view, sensible or otherwise.
Moreover, while many Tories may hate the FSA for all sorts of reasons, they almost certainly do not do so in this particular context. Tighter regulation of the financial services industry is a vote-winner, no matter what political party you belong to.
I have some sympathy with IFAs. Lobbying can be a useless exercise.

One of the problems, it seems to me, is not about the basic notion of lobbying as such but what it is that you tell your MP. Here, it strikes me that IFAs could be on a hiding to nothing in some areas.

For example, if you go to your Parliamentary representative and tell them that the proposed QCF level four qualifications you are required to obtain by 2012 are too onerous, do not expect much sympathy.

Similarly, trying to compare yourself favourably against banks in order to press the point that regulation of your activities need not be quite so onerous is not a tactic that is likely to work well.

Not that I can lay serious claim to being a successful lobbyist. Once upon a time, back in the days when I used to work as a nurse, our trade union asked its members to lobby their MPs as part of a campaign against low pay in the NHS.

Responding to our union’s request, about 20 of us toddled off to see an MP at his surgery meeting one Saturday morning, waving our pay slips.

The “lobby” degenerated somewhat and our little group started booing and shouting at our Parliamentary representative. Needless to say, the MP never really did sign up to our campaign against low pay.

My guess is that attempts to persuade MPs to get rid of some of the RDR’s worst aspects will meet with a similar fate."

Full writing credit to Nic Cicutti - article here.

Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

Not Lobbying - is it the New Lobbying?

2010-01-06T17:53:00.002Z

Published by Huffington Post
6 January 2010

Brien Bonneville and Larry Mitchell have officially deserted the lobbying profession. Lobbyists have become too despised and stigmatized, are banned from certain government jobs and subject to all sorts of onerous disclosure requirements. Bonneville and Mitchell needed out.

So they rented space in their former K-Street lobbyshop, KSCW, and founded a new "non-lobbying entity" called K Street Research.

It's the newest trend in lobbying: "not lobbying."

Mitchell and Bonneville are so eager to ditch the "Scarlet L," in fact, that they'd rather be called, of all things, journalists. "Part of it is old-fashioned journalism, shoe leather," said Mitchell, describing how the firm will gather information about government doings for its clients.

"We're almost like a small newspaper," said Bonneville.

A very, very small newspaper, maybe, that only circulates to a few corporate clients -- each of whom gets a different edition.

And it's a secret newspaper at that. Mitchell said they've already got several clients, but he declined to identify them. That's his prerogative as a non-lobbyist, unencumbered by disclosure requirements. "We actually have some privacy," he said. "We don't have to tell you."

Bonneville describes himself as an admirer of Gerald Cassidy, the pioneering superlobbyist who made a fortune after inventing the first modern "earmarked appropriation." Bonneville said that after reading Robert Kaiser's Cassidy book "So Damn Much Money: The Triumph of Lobbying and the Corrosion of American Government," he knew he wanted to leave his mark.

Full article can be read here.
Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

Lobbying by US banks linked to risky lending

2010-01-05T15:30:00.001Z

Published by The Guardian
5 January 2010

Powerful American banks spending lavishly on lobbying are more likely to engage in high-risk lending and their shares have performed less well than others, a groundbreaking study by the International Monetary Fund has found.

The in-depth research will prompt calls for a wholesale clean-up of Capitol Hill by the Obama administration. Lobbying by the finance, insurance and real estate (Fire) sector outstrips any other in the US economy.

The study, entitled A Fistful of Dollars: Lobbying and the Financial Crisis, published by the IMF, reveals a stark correlation between lobbying by lenders and high loan-to-income loans.

The paper, written by a trio of high-profile IMF economists, established that firms who spend more on buying access to politicians are more likely to engage in risky securitisation of their loan books, have faster-growing mortgage loan portfolios as well as poorer share performance and larger loan defaults.

The landmark paper will increase pressure on US politicians to regulate the mortgage industry, which Washington insiders say has so far been immune from meaningful financial reform in the aftermath of the bank crisis.

Highlighting 33 pieces of federal legislation that would have tamed predatory lending or introduced more responsible banking but were the target of intense lobbying, the IMF found that the efforts by banks to resist the legislation overwhelmingly succeeded.

"Our analysis suggests that the political influence of the financial industry can be a source of systemic risk," Deniz Igan, Prachi Mishra and Thierry Tressel wrote in their conclusion. "Therefore, it provides some support to the view that the prevention of future crises might require weakening political influence of the financial industry or closer monitoring of lobbying activities to understand better the incentives behind it."

The study also established that US business spends $4.2bn (£2.6bn) over the four-year election cycle on "targeted political activity", with Fire firms accounting for 15% of that total – equivalent to $479,500 a firm in 2006. The "lobbying intensity" of the Fire sector also "increased at a much faster pace relative to the average lobbying intensity over 1999-2006".

The IMF claims such a study is the first of its kind. It uses complicated algebraic equations to assess the effect of lobbying on policy makers, loan defaults and the overall financial performance of banks.

Jack Blum, one of the world's most respected investigators who uncovered the BCCI scandal and has 40 years experience tracking down mortgage fraud, said: "In my entire career investigating financial fraud, fraud was always explained away as perpetrated by a few bad apples. This is plainly untrue. There has been a systematic refusal to look hard at how this has happened. I'm delighted the IMF are using mathematical formula to look at something that has been obvious to so many for so long. There's nothing new and surprisinmg about this. The question is where was the IMF when this happened?"

Raymond Baker, director at the Washington DC-based thinktank, Global Financial Integrity, said: "The financial community has no hesitation when it comes to fighting against anything that they deemed would limit their freedom to carry out business in any way they saw fit. We have seen this vividly when it came to the prospect of anti-money laundering legislation and we have seen this with Capitol Hill moves to limit predatory lending and introduce responsible banking measures."

Many of the responsible banking bills targeted by Wall Street would have required them to evaluate consumers' ability to repay loans before cash is forwarded, stipulated that creditors must report consumers' payment histories to credit rating agencies and that loans should not exceed more than 50% of an individual's income.

An unfettered, liberalised mortgage market provided the backdrop for sub-prime mortgage market failure. The IMF will now be under pressure to formulate policy in response to its research. The IMF has not commented on the study.

Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

Labour and Tory election campaigns 'irrelevant'

2010-01-05T15:26:00.001Z

Published in PR Week
5 January 2009

A public affairs expert has branded the launch of Gordon Brown's and David Cameron's election campaigns 'irrevelant'.

PSA Communications managing director Phillip Snape said: ‘No one is listening to them. Everyone has already made their minds up and this is all background music. It is boring.'

He added: ‘The election is going to come down to the floating voters and key seats. But the main parties have not outlined how they plan to address them.'

Fleishman Hillard head of public affairs Nick Williams said: ‘David Cameron stole the campaign march on Brown with his agenda-setting speech on 2 January. Labour has been trying to catch up ever since.'

He added: ‘The Conservatives are clearly going to implement a campaign based around "President Cameron" with the Conservative leader promoted heavily throughout both the adverts and policy announcements. Labour, on the other hand, cannot decide who should front their campaign and following Brown's interview with Andrew Marr last Sunday, it is no wonder that the Labour election campaign is filled with apprehension.'

Both Labour and the Conservative Party have today laid out their food strategies, ahead of the Oxford Farming Conference.

The Tories say they plan to introduce a supermarket ombudsman to support the interests of farmers. Labour plans to introduce more allotments and says it will bid to cut waste and reduce emissions.

Weber Shandwick chairman of corporate communications and public affairs Jon McLeod said of the plans: ‘This is an example of what we will see going forward – namely the parties trading blows over policies. And it can be the case that both parties are talking sense.'

He added: ‘A strategy for food security is essential if Britain is to maintain control over the supply chain into the future and the Government is spot on with what it is proposing. Likewise, it is evident that the big supermarkets exercise a dominant position over their suppliers and meaningful moves to ensure an equitable distribution of returns along the supply chain are essential if we are to assure food security. So it's a score draw.'

Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

GM replaces retiring chief lobbyist

2010-01-03T16:11:00.001Z

GM replaces retiring chief lobbyist
December 30 2009

General Motors has hired two former AT&T executives to replace chief lobbyist Ken Cole, who is retiring after eight years at the automaker following a tumultuous year of Capitol Hill battles, bankruptcy and a government-funded rescue, the automaker said today.

The move is the latest in a series of executive shakeups over the past few months at GM as chairman and chief executive Ed Whitacre puts his stamp on the company’s executive suite.

John Montford, formerly a senior vice president of state legislative affairs for AT&T, was named a special adviser to Whitacre, overseeing government affairs. Bob Ferguson, who also oversaw state regulatory affairs for AT&T before working at a public affairs consulting firm, was named GM's vice president of government relations.

Cole, GM’s vice president for government relations, oversaw GM’s relations with governments around the world. Before joining GM in 2001, Cole worked in similar roles at Honeywell, AlliedSignal and Amoco.

Cole’s departure follows the resignation of Chrysler’s chief lobbyist John Bozzella, who took a job with Cerberus Capital Management, the private equity firm that shed its stake in Chrysler as part of its bankruptcy.

Both men were at the center of battles on Capitol Hill over fuel economy and aid to the auto industry. GM and other Detroit automakers eventually agreed to a compromise increase in fuel economy standards in 2008, along with an even higher boost to 35.5 m.p.g. by 2016 last year in a pact with the Obama administration.

GM, Ford and Chrysler were able to win $25 billion in loans from Congress last fall, but had to return for more aid as the economy worsened. The automakers and their lobbyists were sharply criticized for the November hearing.

The U.S. government has pumped some $50 billion into GM, including $30.1 billion from the Obama administration to fund GM's bankruptcy in return for a 61% stake in GM. Whitacre has committed GM to paying back a $6.7-billion government loan using a government-funded escrow account by June.

Reported by Detroit Free Press
Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

New groups join climate lobby fray

2009-12-28T11:42:00.001Z

Politico story
By MARIANNE LAVELLE - CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEGRITY

"The next round of the battle over climate change policy on Capitol Hill will involve more than the usual suspects – way more.

Watch soup makers face off against steel companies. Witness the folks who pump gas from the ground fight back against those who dig up rock. And watch the venture capitalists who have money riding on new technology try to gain advantage in a game that so far has been deftly controlled by the old machine.

An analysis of the latest federal records by the Center for Public Integrity shows that the overall number of businesses and groups lobbying on climate legislation has essentially held steady at about 1,160, thanks in part to a variety of interests that have left the fray. But a close look at the 140 or so interests that jumped into the debate for the first time in the third quarter shows a marked trend: Companies and organizations who feel they’ve been overlooked are fighting for a place at the table.

The amount of money involved likely rose as well. Although amounts spent on lobbying by issue are not disclosed, if the groups involved spent just 10 percent of their lobbying budgets on climate, they shelled out $30.5 million in the third quarter — up nearly 13 percent over the previous quarter.

Of course, the framework for climate change legislation developed by a trio of senators — Massachusetts Democrat John Kerry, South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham, and Connecticut Independent Joe Lieberman — already makes clear that the climate debate will expand into new realms. Incentives for nuclear power construction and more offshore oil and gas production are key proposals they’ve floated for gaining Republican and moderate Democratic votes for a climate change package. But beyond what are sure to be high-profile battles over those issues, the lobbying records also reveal that a host of smaller battles are brewing — sure to greatly complicate the already immense challenge of writing a successful bill. It’s one of the reasons that — despite the pledge by President Obama and other world leaders of “strong political will” on climate — it likely will be months before the Senate moves on a measure to curb fossil fuel emissions."

Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

Lobbyist or not, it's disclosure that matters

2009-12-28T11:39:00.001Z

Editorial: San Jose Mercury News

"Everybody believes in open government, or at least says so.

But nobody wants to be labeled a lobbyist. As one lawyer says, it's the Scarlet L.

The semantics of sunshine have become an issue in San Jose, with Mayor Chuck Reed's proposal to require nonprofits affiliated with advocacy organizations like the South Bay Labor Council or the Chamber of Commerce to register as lobbyists.

Like it or not, the lobbyist ordinance is San Jose's mechanism for requiring special interests to report contacts with city officials, so that it's clear to the public who is influencing whom. The new advisory group that's been asked to analyze Reed's proposal next year will be pretty much stuck with that reality — and its goal must be full disclosure, regardless of how people feel about the labels.

The immediate candidate to be labeled a lobbyist under Reed's proposal would be Working Partnerships, the labor council affiliate. Its policy director, Bob Brownstein, not only testifies at public meetings but also works behind the scenes with some City Council members to help them write proposals and memos. Brownstein and Cindy Chavez, who heads both Working Partnerships and the labor council, say they don't object to disclosure, just to the Scarlet L for their nonprofit. But unless the city wants to come up with some new labels, we don't see an alternative.

And if the Chamber of Commerce, labor's most frequent opponent on city issues, had a nonprofit policy arm whose head was helping council members write policy proposals behind the scenes, we'll bet labor would want that to be disclosed. As it should.

The semantic problem is rooted in the origin of the city lobbying ordinance. It originally was aimed at lobbyists for hire, who gained significant power during former Mayor Ron Gonzales' administration. Several had worked in the mayor's office before hanging out their shingles to sell influence; the mayor's staff and some council members in turn would encourage developers and others to hire lobbyists.

But as the lobbying law was crafted, it became clear that these were not the only people whose influence should be disclosed. Others included groups like the labor council and the chamber as well as business owners, such as developers.

These people generally hate registering as lobbyists. They say they're doing what they believe in, not hiring out to anyone who pays them. Lawyers say that when they visit council members, they're representing clients in a legal capacity, not as lobbyists. Professional engineers and planners say they're consultants, not lobbyists, because clients hire them for their technical expertise. But they have to register anyway.

So, Working Partnerships — welcome to the club.

The advisory group that will be reviewing this and other Reed proposals might want to look at the lobbying rules more broadly — although the better group to do this work would be the city's elections commission, which enforces the rules.

Regardless, the result needs to be greater public disclosure of behind-the-scenes influence. No matter what you call it."

Published by San Jose Mercury News
Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

SCVO appointment

2009-12-28T11:36:00.000Z

The Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations (SCVO) has appointed John Downie as its new director of public affairs.

Downie, who is also a director of New Media Corp, will formerly take up his role in the New Year.

He has twenty years experience of working in communications having acted as head of public affairs at The Federation of Small Business in Scotland and has also worked with consultancy New Media Corp as a director for over a year.

Downie said: This is an exciting and challenging sector, especially in the current economic climate and the SCVO will be hoping to protect the sector through the current public sector cuts over the next few years. That makes this job all the more interesting to me.”

Public Affairs Links
www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

Stuart Wheeler: Tories offer a 'cowardly selection of weasel words'

2009-04-29T14:24:00.002+01:00

Businessman, political philanthropist and record donor to the Conservative Party Stuart Wheeler will tomorrow talk on the EU and what the Conservatives should be doing about it.

Stuart Wheeler will say at the Bruges Group meeting;"Will Ken Clarke vote against the Lisbon Treaty if there is a referendum on it? William Hague says that he expects, expects, mark you, that he will. What kind of language is that? Why doesn’t William Hague know how Clarke will vote? Did he and David Cameron not ask him that simple question before they appointed him to the shadow cabinet? Ken Clarke himself was quite specific on the subject as a backbencher; he said that “calls for a referendum were absurd”.

“William Hague indicated that the Conservatives were likely to attempt to scrap the treaty – possibly by calling a retrospective referendum. Heavens above! What the voters want is categorical commitments, not a cowardly selection of weasel words”.

Published by the Bruges Group.
Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

Vodafone appoints new Legal and Government Affairs Director

2009-04-29T14:21:00.002+01:00

Vodafone UK announced yesterday that Justine Campbell is joining the company on July 1 as Legal and Government Affairs Director.

Justine has worked in the telecommunications industry for more than ten years and most recently was General Counsel and a Director on the Telefonica Europe Board. Before this, she was Chief Counsel, Competition Law at 02, following two years at BT as Competition and Regulatory Counsel and five years at Freshfields, where she first qualified.

This appointment follows the move by existing Legal and Regulatory Director, Jonathan McCoy, to Vodafone Group Deputy General Counsel.

Published by Vodafone
Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

EPPA nominates new Chairman

2009-03-06T10:30:00.002Z

Sir Julian Priestley, former Secretary General of the European Parliament, was nominated by EPPA Partners as the new Chairman of the Board of Directors.

He replaces Dr. Stefan Schepers, former director general of the European Institute of Public Administration, who exercised the function for last 4 years.

Under the new leadership of Sir Priestley, EPPA will continue its own approach to public affairs by building workable compromises between the European public interest and the commercial interests of its clients and by making thus a constructive contribution to the EU.

Released by www.eppa.com

Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

Congressional Research Awards

2009-01-30T10:55:00.002Z

GRANTS: CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH AWARDS DEADLINE: All proposals must be received no later than February 1, 2009.

The Dirksen Congressional Center invites applications for grants to fund research on congressional leadership and the U.S. Congress. A total of up to $30,000 will be available in 2009. Awards range from a few hundred dollars to $3,500. The competition is open to individuals with a serious interest in studying Congress. Political scientists, historians, biographers, scholars of public administration or American studies, and journalists are among those eligible. The Center encourages graduate students who have successfully defended their dissertation prospectus to apply and awards a significant portion of the funds for dissertation research. Applicants must be U.S. citizens who reside in the United States.

The awards program does not fund undergraduate or pre-Ph.D. study. Organizations are not eligible. Research teams of two or more individuals are eligible. No institutional overhead or indirect costs may be claimed against a Congressional Research Award.

There is no standard application form. Applicants are responsible for showing the relationship between their work and the awards program guidelines. Applications are accepted at any time. Applications which exceed the page limit and incomplete applications will NOT be forwarded to the screening committee for consideration.

All application materials must be received on or before February 1, 2009. Awards will be announced in March 2009.

Complete information about eligibility and application procedures may be found at The Center's Web site: http://www.dirksencenter.org/print_grants_CRAs.htm. PLEASE READ THOROUGHLY. Frank Mackaman is the program officer -- fmackaman@dirksencenter.org.

The Center, named for the late Senate Minority Leader Everett M. Dirksen, is a private, nonpartisan, nonprofit research and educational organization devoted to the study of Congress and its leaders. Since 1978, the Congressional Research Awards (formerly the Congressional Research Grants) program has paid out $747,465 to support 369 projects.

Published by the Dirksen Center

Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

Women in Public Life awards 2009

2009-01-29T10:39:00.002Z

The winners of the 2009 Dods & Scottish Widows Women In Public Life Awards will be announced at the Commonwealth Club London WC2 on Wednesday March 4th 2009. The awards’ organisers and sponsors include The House Magazine, Whitehall & Westminster World, Psychologies, and the Civil Service Network

Categories

Political Journalist of the Year: Freelance Lesley Abdela, Sally Biddulph, Political Correspondent for ITV Westcountry/Thames Valley, and The Independent’s Yasmin Alibhai Brown. Past winners include the BBC’s Stephanie Flanders, and Polly Toynbee.
Peer of the Year: Baroness Hollis of Heigham, Baroness Pola Uddin, Baroness Glenys Thornton. Past winners include Baroness Finlay of Llandaff, Baroness Frances D'Souza and Baroness Amos, former Leader of the House of Lords.

Business Woman of the Year: Bryony Pawinska, Chief Executive of the College of Optometrists, Camila Batmanghelidjh, Founder and Director of Kids Company, and Pollyanna Pickering, Pollyanna Pickering Ltd. Past winners include Penny Newman, Chief Executive, Cafédirect plc, and Heather Rabbatts, Millwall Football Club.

MP of the Year: Sharon Hodgson MP, Dawn Butler MP, and Margaret Moran MP. Past winners include Karen Buck MP and Helen Southworth MP.
Entrepreneur of the Year: Gail Thomas, McConnell Thomas, Sumerah Ahmad, Club Asia Radio, and Samata Angel, Samata’s Muse.

Public Affairs Achiever of the Year: Dr Katherine Rake, Director, Fawcett Society, Teresa Perchard, Director of Policy, Citizens Advice, and Deborah Arnott, Director of Action, Smoking and Health. Past winners include Rowan Harvey, Parliamentary Officer, Terrence Higgins Trust, and Kate Jopling, Help The Aged.

Public Servant of the Year: Angela Gorman, Senior Sister, Welsh Regional Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Cardiff, Vanessa Nicholls, Crime Directorate, Home Office. Past winners include Dame Denise Platt, Commission for Social Care Inspection, and Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, Director General, The Security Service.

International Public Servant of the Year: Professor Brenda Gourley, Vice Chancellor, Open University, Maggie Correa, Programme Officer, and Children's Legal Centre & UN Consultant, Neena Gill MEP. Past winners include Hon Mrs Joke Orelope Adefulire, Honorary Commissioner of Women Affairs & Poverty Alleviation, Lagos State, Nigeria.

Voluntary Sector Achiever of the Year: Dr Aida Alayarian, co-founder and Clinical Director of the Refugee Therapy, Lucy Hurst-Brown, Chief Executive of Brandon Trust, and Mary Macmillan, volunteer for the Abbeyfield Carradale and District Society. Past winners include Sandra Horley, Refuge.

Local Government Personality of the Year: Councillor Joanna Gardner, Mayor of Kensington & Chelsea , Councillor Marie Pye, Waltham Forest Cabinet member, and Councillor Hilary Isherwood, Flintshire County Councillor for Llanfynydd Ward. Past winners include Edna Sutton, Executive Director, Education Services, Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council.

Published by WPLA 2009
Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

FEC Finalizes Bundling Rules

2009-01-05T19:15:00.001Z

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) has approved final rules regarding the disclosure of bundling by lobbyists and organizations registered to lobby on reports filed to the FEC by federal candidate committees and leadership PACs.

The rule stated that applicable PACs would be required to file a form, the FEC Form 3L if they received two or more bundled contributions which aggregate to more than $15,000 during a reporting period. The FEC defined the reporting periods for political action committees depending on how often they file reports.

The FEC also defined a bundled contribution as one that is forwarded by a lobbyist, a registered organization, or a PAC controlled by a registered lobbyist or organization or as one that is received and credited, where the PAC credits a lobbyist who raises a certain amount of money. The types of items and records that the FEC defined as crediting include titles, tracking identifiers, access and mementos.

The disclosure of bundled contributions was mandated by the passage of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (HLOGA) in 2007.

To read the rule, please visit http://www.fec.gov/agenda/2008/mtgdoc08-48.pdf.

Published by Lobbyists.info
Distributed by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

APPC damned as PASC Says Lobbying Reform is 'Necessary'

2009-01-05T13:06:00.004Z

In the first parliamentary report on lobbying for more than 15 years, the Commons Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) calls today for a statutory register of lobbying activity to bring greater transparency to the dealings between Whitehall decision makers and outside interests.

The Committee’s central conclusion is that “reform is necessary”:

“Lobbying the government should, in a democracy, involve explicit agreement about the terms on which this lobbying is conducted. The result of doing nothing would be to increase public mistrust of Government, and to solidify the impression that government listens to favoured groups-big business and party donors in particular-with far more attention than it gives to others.”

In addition to a register, PASC also proposes that a “rigorous and effective” single body is needed to oversee and regulate the ethics of the activities of lobbyists. The committee describes the existing system of voluntary self-regulation as “little better than the Emperor’s new clothes”.

Committee Chairman Tony Wright MP said:

“Lobbying enhances democracy, but it can also subvert it. Government has accepted that it should be more open to outside interests and ideas, and this has brought benefits. But there are risks too around influence and public mistrust of government, and these risks have not been managed closely enough. Our proposals may seem radical, but they are designed to be proportionate and effective. They are in line with developments abroad, but rooted in our own political tradition. Transparency is key here. There is a public interest in knowing who is lobbying whom about what. Our proposals show that this can be achieved in a reasonably straightforward way”.

PASC identifies five key principles for a register of lobbying activity…

a) it should be mandatory, in order to ensure as complete as possible an overview of activity.

b) it should cover all those outside the public sector involved in accessing and influencing public-sector decision makers, with exceptions in only a very limited set of circumstances.

c) it should be managed and enforced by a body independent of both Government and lobbyists.

d) it should include only information of genuine potential value to the general public, to others who might wish to lobby government, and to decision makers themselves.

e) it should include so far as possible information which is relatively straightforward to provide-ideally, information which would be collected for other purposes in any case.

…and states that to meet these principles, the following information would need to be provided by lobbyists and by the targets of their lobbying:

a) the names of the individuals carrying out lobbying activity and of any organisation employing or hiring them.

b) in the case of multi-client consultancies, the names of their clients.

c) information about any public office previously held by an individual lobbyist.

d) a list of the relevant interests of decision makers within the public service (Ministers, senior civil servants and senior public servants) and summaries of their career histories outside the public service.

e) information about contacts between lobbyists and decision makers-essentially, diary records and minutes of meetings. The aim would be to cover all meetings and conversations between decision makers and outside interests.

Press notice from the Public Administration Select Committee
Published by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

The EU's Plans for 2009

2009-01-02T16:10:00.003Z

UK Eurosceptic lobby The Bruges Group has produced what it sees as the EU's plans for 2009.

"Here the Bruges Group exposes the policies that the EU wants to force on Britain over the coming year. These latest EU power grabs are the challenges that we must face in 2009 and are coming regardless of the fact that the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty has been rejected in three referenda and has not been ratified.

MORE UNCOMPETITIVE SOCIAL-MODEL ECONOMIC POLICIES

The EU plans to step-up its legislative agenda for a more ‘social’ Europe.The European Commission is increasingly pushing for the agenda which it describes as ‘European values’ (as opposed to Anglo-saxon values) as powerful evidence of the EU’s commitment to the ‘social dimension.’These policy proposals will make the economy of the EU even more uncompetitive in the global economy; and gives the lie to the claim that Europe is coming our way.

EU TO FURTHER UNDERMINE FLEXIBLE LABOUR MARKETS

The establishment of European Works Councils will enhance the power of trade unions and will mean employers shall be further hamstrung by EU law. This will make the EU less attractive to investors and drive jobs out of Britain to more adaptable labour markets, particularly those in Asia.

This policy proposal comes on top Article 138 of the EC Treaty which lays down that the EU must consult with ‘social partners’ (trade unions) when making social law.

MORE EU UNDERMINING OF THE FREE MARKET

The EU via Articles 136, 137, 140 and 144 of the EC Treaty has the power to force the UK to implement social measures. The EU wishes to expand its power here and produce more costly policies in the fields of social services, social security, housing and health care.

Here the European Commission reaffirms its commitment to make social policy issues the cornerstone and aim of all EU law making; leaving the elected British government with not very much to do in that important area.

EU PLANS TO TAKE OVER THE FIGHT AGAINST POVERTY

In the UK the issue on how best to tackle poverty and social exclusion has become an important debate; with different approaches and strategies emerging from the two main political parties. However, this debate in the UK will become less relevant as the EU plans to expand its power into this field.

The European Commission is proposing that:

it can begin dictating strategies for tacking poverty
that member states must create a National Implementation Body to apply the EU’s plans; alongside that body should be National Advisory Group

FURTHER EU CONTROL OVER THE WORK LIFE BALANCE

The European Union is intending to produce more laws to enforce its views on the work life balance. The proposed rules will see maternity leave, for both spouses and ‘life-partners’ increased. The spouses and ‘life-partners’ will also be able to gain more access to social security.

These measures will add more costs onto businesses and the taxpayer at a crucial time when they simply cannot be afforded.

Press release from The Bruges Group

Published by http://www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk/

(The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Public Affairs Links)

Twelve Days of US Lobbying

2008-12-22T17:56:00.002Z

"A Partridge in a Pear Tree: The Washington Tree Fruit Research Commission may not be able to provide you with a partridge, but its members help in promoting research of pear trees. In fact, the commission will hold its Northwest Pear Review Research in February. The commission has hired an outside lobbyist for work on agriculture issues.

Two Turtle Doves: Doves represent the National Peace Foundation, an organization that promotes conflict resolution.

Three French Hens: French hens do lay eggs, and the United States Poultry and Egg Association has retained lobbyists to represent its interests in front of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Four Calling Birds: The American Bird Conservancy's mission is to ensure that native birds and their habitats are protected, including calling birds. The organization has lobbied on its own behalf on several pieces of bird-related legislation, including the Bird Treaty Act and the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act.

Five Golden Rings: The Fashion Jewelry Trade Association has hired lobbyists to ensure that its members can afford to produce golden rings. Legislation proposed in some states would ban the sale of lead-based jewelry; the FJTA supports national lead standards.

Six Geese A-laying: The United Egg Producers surely have geese-a-laying eggs for its members. The association is represented by several firms on issues ranging from the Farm Bill to commodity futures legislation.

Seven Swans A-swimming: Black Swan LLP might not be a swan-a-swimming, but the firm does represent two groups wishing to benefit from this holiday season: Target and the Retail Industry Leaders Association. The firm has represented both organizations on trade issues.

Eight Maids A-milking: The National Milk Producers Federation are comprised of many maids (and men) a-milking. The association's in-house lobbyists have represented the organization on a number of issues, including carbon cap-and-trade programs, labeling of cloned animals and immigration issues.

Nine Ladies Dancing: Dance/USA lobbies on its own behalf to ensure that funds are available to keep ladies dancing. In its most recent lobbying disclosure report, the organization stated that it lobbied on funding for the National Endowment for the Arts, as well as for arts education funding in the Labor, HHS and Education appropriations bill.

Ten Lords A-leaping: LORD Corporation is just one of several lords-a-leaping. The company, which manufactures adhesives, coating and other technologies for the aerospace and defense industries, has retained outside counsel to lobby on the House and Senate defense appropriations bills.

Eleven Pipers Piping: DLA Piper is one of the biggest pipers piping when it comes to K Street revenue. One of its many clients is Amazon.com, a place many people go to shop for discounted holiday gifts. DLA Piper has lobbied on behalf of the online store on intellectual property issues.

Twelve Drummers Drumming: The Recording Industry Association of America represents many musicians, especially the drummers drumming, keeping the beat on songs like "Rockin' Around the Christmas Tree." While kids lobby Santa for a drum set, lobbyists representing those drummers have legislation regarding internet radio, intellectual property and net neutrality on their wish lists."

Courtesy of Lobbyists.info
Distributed by http://www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk/

The Bruges Group - "EU Economic Recovery Plan Costs UK £25 Billion"

2008-12-18T09:20:00.004Z

The EU’s CREDIBILITY CRUNCH - Creator of economic downturn, Impediment to recovery

After the EU agreed its 'Economic Recovery Plan' José Manuel Barroso said “Europe has passed its credibility test”. Yet, in the paper The EU’s Credibility Crunch the Bruges Group finds that the European Union has been a major contributor to the economic malaise in Europe and is not a credible body to face the challenges of the downturn.

Nevertheless, the European Union is using the economic crisis to expand its power; particularly by using it as an excuse to push for the Lisbon Treaty to be ratified and even to re-start the debate in Britain on joining the euro.Also in this paper, the Bruges Group sets out the policies that Britain must follow which including freeing-up trade, cutting taxes and government expenditure, and begin with leaving the shackles of EU control.

Click here to read the full analysis online

Robert Oulds, Bruges Group Director, says,“The European Union’s approach to the recession is one of top-down instruction by the elites to businesses and individuals of Europe. However, there is no better time to note that the eurozone’s economic performance is the worst in the developed world and wake-up to the benefits of being a free-trading economy, free of the EU’s costs and shackles“There is a need to defend businesses and the taxpayer from yet more regulation and wasteful EU spending.”

Damon Lambert, author of the report, says, "The EU, with its damagingly high interest rates, its regulations that weakens banks and a trade policy that isolates Europe from the benefits of globalisation, is a major cause of the recession. Yet, its Economic Recovery Plan is merely a wishlist for its pet projects that will cost each single UK resident £417. At a time when economic management skills are key, the EU has a major credibility crunch.”

Press release for The Bruges Group
Published by www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk

BERR DG appointed as new CEO of The Whitehall & Industry Group

2008-12-17T09:55:00.003Z

The Whitehall & Industry Group (WIG), the only organisation which exists solely to bring business and Whitehall closer together, is pleased to announce the appointment of Mark Gibson CB as its next Chief Executive from early 2009. He will take over from Sally Cantello, who led WIG from 2001 – 2008. Mark is currently Director General, Enterprise and Business Group at the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR).

WIG, established to answer a need for better cross-sector understanding and co-operation, is a membership organisation which helps top executives and senior civil servants engage and share skills, knowledge and experience in a variety of ways. WIG provides a forum for safe and respected cross-sector consultation and dialogue.

Commenting on the appointment, Miller McLean, Chair of WIG and Group General Counsel and Group Secretary, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc, said: ‘The need for close co-operation and understanding between the private and public sector has never been greater as we face the current economic challenge together. I am delighted that we have attracted someone of Mark’s calibre and commitment to the business of improving the interface between industry and Government and I greatly look forward to working with him. He brings to this opportunity experience, contacts and deep understanding of the issues. WIG has progressed and developed hugely over the last ten years under Sally’s leadership and our thanks to her are due. Income has doubled and participation in WIG’s activities has almost tripled with a far stronger engagement from the private sector in particular. As we prepare to celebrate our 25th anniversary this will be a key time for further growth."

Mark Gibson said: ‘I am hugely looking forward to the challenge of joining WIG. Good relationships between the public and private sectors have never been more important. In challenging and helping to break down traditional barriers between public and private sectors, WIG plays a vital role in supporting British industry and helping develop key skills and relationships for the future.’

Mark Gibson has a degree in Modern History from the University of Oxford and an MSc from the London Business School. Mark’s career in Whitehall has included roles in the DTI, HM Treasury and the Cabinet Office, where he was Deputy Project Manager for the Next Steps Team. He then joined the DTI’s Competitiveness Unit. In 1994 he became Private Secretary to Michael Heseltine. In 1997 he joined British Trade International where he was responsible for the organisation’s overseas marketing. He became Director General, Enterprise and Innovation, DTI in 2000 and then in 2002 took up his present role.

Press release for The Whitehall and Industry Group
Published by http://www.publicaffairslinks.co.uk/