For Snubbing Glyphosate Hearing, EU Parliament Bans Monsanto Lobbyists

"Those who escape democratic accountability must be excluded from access to lobbying."

Monsanto lobbyists were officially barred by the European Parliament on Thursday after refusing requests to participate in hearings about the U.S. corporation’s efforts to influence regulations of its controversial glyphosate within the 28-nation bloc.

The ban was announced by the parliament’s presidential council under rules designed to combat misbehavior by those lobbying the EU’s lawmaking body. It is the first time, the Guardian notes, that

“MEPs have used new rules to withdraw parliamentary access for firms that ignore a summons to attend parliamentary inquiries or hearings.”

The Greens/EFA Group in the parliament, which had requested Monsanto’s removal after the biotech giant’s refusal, welcomed the decision.

“This is strong democracy. Those who escape democratic accountability must be excluded from access to lobbying,” said MEP Sven Giegold, financial and economic policy spokesperson for the Greens/EFA and parliament’s rapporteur for Transparency, Accountability and Integrity. “If Monsanto does business in Europe, it must also face up to its responsibilities before the European Parliament.”

The Guardian reports:

The lobby ban will be a bitter blow to Monsanto’s advocacy campaign ahead of a decision later this year about the relicensing of glyphosate, which has been linked to cancer by one expert WHO panel.

Another deemed it safe for public use, but Monsanto’s outreach to regulatory agencies in the US and Europe sparked controversy and prompted the parliamentary hearing.

Philippe Lamberts, president of the Greens/EFA, added,

“Those who ignore the rules of democracy also lose their rights as a lobbyist in the European Parliament. US corporations must also accept the democratic control function of the parliament. Monsanto cannot escape this. There remain many uncertainties in the assessment of the pesticide glyphosate. Monsanto has to face the questions of parliamentarians and should not hinder the clarification process.”

In response to the decision in Brussels, critics of the powerful company wondered if the U.S. would ever take such measures:

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License


Articles by: Jon Queally

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]