Last week DG Communications (headed by Margot Wallstrom) published a proposal to change EU Regulation 1049/2001 on access to documents. The proposed changes have been heavily criticised by Sweden’s justice minister, the Swedish union of journalists, and UK-based Statewatch.
So far so good. However, in a normal democracy this would offer the chance to start a dialogue. DG Comms would respond to the criticisms, perhaps by clarifying its position, perhaps by defending the proposals.
This is surely an important part of the legislative process, no? A bit of give and take. I see it happening at a national level in France, Italy, the UK… I presume it happens in the Nordic countries. You’d expect it all the more from an organisation whose remit is communication.
But the Directorate General for Communications is off. Not even on standby. Margot hasn’t published a press release, given an interview, or uttered a squeak.
I can think of two possible reasons.
One is that DG Comms doesn’t give a rat’s arse what anybody thinks of its proposals.
Two is that they don’t feel the criticisms have come through the proper channels. They’re waiting for parliament to say something, because it’s too difficult to cope with the chaotic nature of the press and the lobby groups.
My money’s on the second.
My recommendation is that DG Comms takes its life in its hands and gets involved in the fray. The Commission is constantly complaining about how the press aren’t engaged with EU affairs, but they do little to encourage them. Pulling up the drawbridge as soon as you’ve published a new proposal is the surest way to turn people off.
They should study how democracy happens at a national level, where the press is rowdy and may often get things wrong, but at least they get people talking.