Commissioner Kallas discusses the role of NGOs in Europe and stresses the importance of the role of NGOs in European society.
NGOs are important partners for the European Commission. We have a long tradition of structured cooperation with the NGO community. Over the last decades, this cooperation between the European Commission and NGOs has constantly been expanded and intensified, covering a range of issues, from policy dialogue and policy delivery, to project and programme management, both within the EU and in our partner countries.
Through these activities, NGOs prolong and complete the activities of the public authorities. And as a personal remark, I would like to express my admiration for the considerable amount of volunteering often involved. I have great respect for those talented individuals. I strongly believe Europe cannot do without a vibrant, organised civil society.
Having put that on the record, I believe I'm invited here today because of something I said in a speech more than three years ago (Nottingham in March 2005): Allow me to quote myself:
"Annually the Commission channels over 2 billion euro to developing countries through NGOs (...) Some of the NGOs receiving funds from the Commission describe on their website one of their main tasks as: ‘lobbying the Commission."
I then boldly added:
"People have a right to know how their money is being spent, including by NGOs. Currently, a lot of money is channelled to ‘good causes’ through organisations we know little about. Noble causes always deserve a closer look (...)"
My question to the NGOs was simply: "Who do you represent? Who supports you? For what?"
Why do I think these are fair questions?
They are fair, in my view, because NGOs also claim a role in the political process. They are often using the very same instruments as corporate lobbyists. Some even say they succeed in having much greater influence.
Of course, this is fine under certain conditions. NGOs are still different from those politicians, who find themselves a constituency and get elected.
Not everyone is attracted to party politics. That's fair enough, but in the absence of an electoral mandate, I also find it fair to ask NGOs about their other democratic credentials. Majority rule is a defining feature of democracy. Surely, the minority must be respected, but the minority view must also respect that it is — a minority view.
So if you don't have votes, but still expect to influence the political process, what about your "grassroots"? How strong are they?
I think, therefore, that NGOs wishing to join the public debate should be able to do so, but only if they — like other interest groups — declare who they represent and how they're supported, including financially.
Overall, I was very pleased to see most NGOs accepting that argument. During the transparency debate, many NGOs have — sometimes reluctantly — accepted the principle that they should be subject to the same requirements as corporate lobbyists.
A few organisations have resisted, arguing that those working to "save humanity" or "in the greater public good" should be accountable to no one in particular. I don't find this convincing. Many things, good and bad, have been done in the name of such greater goals.
Of course, history will judge us all, but while we wait for that, the Commission has introduced the Interest Representative Register, as a way of allowing everyone to display their "grassroots" credentials, under online, real-time public scrutiny.
The register opened on 23 June, and so far 330 entities have joined. Less than 20% are NGOs, and I expect this figure to increase. It puzzles me that some of the NGOs that campaigned for greater transparency have not yet joined the register. It puzzles me even more that NGOs receiving significant funds from the Commission hesitate to declare this publicly.
I believe the broader public has a right to know who gets EU funds for what.
Why should NGOs be less accountable for the sound use of EU funds than other beneficiaries? These funds are not given to charity. They are given to NGOs in order to produce a result. In fact, in external aid for instance, NGOs are often competing with private companies as "contractors" for EU development policy.
You may ask why the Commission would have to rely on its recipients to disclose where EU funds are going. It's a fair question, and we have in fact decided to organise that ourselves. By the end of this month, we will open a site with more than 24,000 entries containing the names of the beneficiaries of the € 10 billion or so of grants and other forms of support awarded by the Commission every year. This site will show who receives the funds, the beneficiary's postal code, the amount, the Commission DG awarding the grant, from which budget line, the year, the title, the name of the relevant EU programme, etc.
We launched the European Transparency Initiative more than 3 years ago. The Commission has delivered.
Typical of their independence, the NGOs are not praising us — on the contrary.
This is normal, and I have no regrets over this.
NGOs must remain independent, without which they become irrelevant. Likewise, Commission should remain independent, for the same reason.
The downside of that is that you can expect NGOs to attack from any angle that suits them:
If you disagree with NGOs, they're likely to call you "biased".
If you listen to their concerns, but decide differently, they may call you "unbalanced" and claim that you've "ignored their views" and "watered down" your proposals.
If you listen to informed expert opinions, they will accuse any political opponents among them of having "a conflict of interest".
If they do not like the end result of the political process, they'll call the whole process "flawed".
That's life, and the European Commission is not complaining. On the contrary, we intend to continue to listen to NGOs, and to support them financially when their objectives are identical to ours.
But we will also continue to expect a demanding open relationship, with complete transparency about who does what.
We hope history will eventually judge the European Transparency Initiative as an important contribution towards that.
