The case uncovered by the NZZ about the practices of former ambassador Thomas Borer is a good example of the need for rules for lobbyists.
The Public Affairs Society SPAG has defined rules of conduct and thus imposed obligations on its members.
For example, clients must be disclosed, but not the amount of remuneration (which I think is a good thing).
However, this requirement does not apply to non-members.
This also does not apply to Thomas Borer, whose employee apparently did not want to disclose his client to the NZZ.
The Public Affairs Society SPAG has defined rules of conduct and thus imposed obligations on its members.
For example, clients must be disclosed, but not the amount of remuneration (which I think is a good thing).
However, this requirement does not apply to non-members.
This also does not apply to Thomas Borer, whose employee apparently did not want to disclose his client to the NZZ.
Of course, I am aware that the SPAG Code of Conduct has not yet been put into practice and that there are gaps in it.
For example, the code makes no mention of exerting influence in ongoing criminal proceedings.
And rightly so: lobbying aims to influence legislation and official enforcement.
That is not what criminal proceedings are about.
By definition, this area is not part of lobbying, it is rather a lawyer’s activity.
We lobbyists have to distinguish ourselves from this because attempting to influence the third estate is an absolute no-go and damages the reputation of our profession.
Seeking the support of councillors to influence criminal proceedings is even worse.
The Public Affairs Society would be well advised to set out the do’s and don’ts of our profession in writing and to have the practice reviewed by a professional ethics committee.
The SPAG has recognized the signs of the times.
It will ensure that members adhere to the guidelines.
It can and should clearly distinguish itself from non-members who engage in unfair practices.
The more members the Public Affairs Society has, the more effective voluntarily imposed self-regulation will be.
However, this can only work if sanctions are imposed and communicated against offending members.
An independent commission will be set up for this purpose at the upcoming general meeting.
Otherwise, there is a threat of state regulation that does not prevent our profession, but relegates it to the dark antechamber, which is exactly what we want to prevent.
For example, the code makes no mention of exerting influence in ongoing criminal proceedings.
And rightly so: lobbying aims to influence legislation and official enforcement.
That is not what criminal proceedings are about.
By definition, this area is not part of lobbying, it is rather a lawyer’s activity.
We lobbyists have to distinguish ourselves from this because attempting to influence the third estate is an absolute no-go and damages the reputation of our profession.
Seeking the support of councillors to influence criminal proceedings is even worse.
The Public Affairs Society would be well advised to set out the do’s and don’ts of our profession in writing and to have the practice reviewed by a professional ethics committee.
The SPAG has recognized the signs of the times.
It will ensure that members adhere to the guidelines.
It can and should clearly distinguish itself from non-members who engage in unfair practices.
The more members the Public Affairs Society has, the more effective voluntarily imposed self-regulation will be.
However, this can only work if sanctions are imposed and communicated against offending members.
An independent commission will be set up for this purpose at the upcoming general meeting.
Otherwise, there is a threat of state regulation that does not prevent our profession, but relegates it to the dark antechamber, which is exactly what we want to prevent.