www.lobbyfacts.eu

                                                                   

Platform URL: https://www.lobbyfacts.eu/

The COCOO-LobbyFacts Doctrine: A Strategic Model for Influence Warfare

This doctrine establishes the protocol for interrogating LobbyFacts.eu, a powerful database that aggregates and enhances data from the official EU Transparency Register and the European Commission’s high-level meetings register. This is not a simple directory; it is a strategic weapon for mapping the architecture of influence in Brussels. We will use this platform to conduct deep competitor intelligence, expose our adversaries’ lobbying priorities, track their access to power, identify their strategic alliances, and build the evidence needed to counter their narratives and advance COCOO’s own WPI (Public Interest) campaigns.

1. Core Principles of Interrogation

Our use of LobbyFacts is governed by the most sophisticated principles of the COCOO framework. We are not just looking at lobbyists; we are reverse-engineering their influence campaigns.

  • Mapping the Competitor Analysis Landscape: The mind maps demand deep Competitor Analysis and Benchmarking.1 LobbyFacts is a primary tool for this. By dissecting the lobby declarations of our corporate targets (e.g., Google, Microsoft, major banks, pharmaceutical firms), we gain direct insight into their annual lobby spend, the number of lobbyists they employ, and the specific EU files they are trying to influence. 2
  • Influence as a Simple Indicator: A company’s lobby spend and the number of high-level Commission meetings it secures are simple, powerful indicators of its influence and strategic priorities. 4 We will track these metrics over time to identify when a competitor is ramping up its efforts on a particular file, signaling a key battleground for COCOO.
  • Exposing Alliances and Networks: LobbyFacts allows us to see which lobby consultancies and law firms are working for which corporate interests, and which NGOs or trade associations are members of the same expert groups. 5 This is critical for mapping the hidden alliances and coalitions that shape EU policy, allowing us to anticipate coordinated opposition or find unlikely allies.
  • The WPI Counter-Narrative Engine: To win the public interest (WPI) battle, we must first understand the narratives being pushed by our opponents. 1 By analyzing the “Goals / Remit” and “Main EU files targeted” sections of their LobbyFacts profiles, we can deconstruct their arguments and build more powerful, evidence-based counter-narratives for our own campaigns and USPs. 2

2. Weaponizing the Platform’s Arsenal: Capabilities and Search Rules

Mastery of LobbyFacts’ search and filtering capabilities is essential. It allows us to dissect the EU lobby landscape with a precision the official register does not easily permit.

  • Official Search Rules & Functionality: The LobbyFacts platform is built around a powerful search interface with specific filters and data views. The rules for interrogation are as follows 3:
Search Field / Filter Function & Strategic Importance
Lobby organisation by name The primary search for a specific entity. It is a “type-ahead” search, requiring at least 3 characters. This is our starting point for any Competitor Analysis.
Accredited persons by name Allows us to search for individual lobbyists who hold or have held European Parliament access passes, helping to track the movement of key personnel between firms.
Lobby clients by name A critical tool for mapping networks. Allows us to see which lobby consultancies and law firms have been hired by a specific company.
Topic search A keyword search across the “goals/remit,” “main EU files,” and “client/topic” fields. Useful for identifying all actors working on a specific issue (e.g., “Digital Markets Act,” “merger control”).
Meetings search A keyword search of the subject line of high-level Commission meetings. Essential for seeing who is getting access to power on a particular topic.
Lobby register category Our primary filter for sectoral analysis. Allows us to isolate specific types of actors, such as Companies & groups, Law firms, Professional consultancies, or Trade and business associations.
Country Filters organisations by the location of their head office.
Date A unique and powerful feature allowing us to view the state of the lobby register on any given date since February 2012, enabling historical analysis of lobbying trends.

3. Strategic Interrogation: The Questions We Ask

We interrogate LobbyFacts to uncover the hidden machinery of influence in Brussels.

  • For Competitor Analysis & Benchmarking:

    • “What is the declared annual lobby spend of our key competitor, [e.g., Apple]? How has this figure changed over the last five years? How many accredited lobbyists do they have?” 2
    • “Which law firms and professional consultancies has “ declared as their intermediaries? What is the declared value of those contracts?”
    • “How does the lobby spend of the European Chemical Industry Council (Cefic) compare to that of environmental NGOs like Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth Europe?”

  • For Challenge Discretion & WPI Framing:

    • “Which lobbyists have held the most high-level meetings with DG COMP or the Cabinet of the Competition Commissioner in the last 12 months? What topics were discussed?” 4
    • “In the Closed consultation on the Digital Markets Act, what were the key arguments made in the submissions by Big Tech firms? How did they frame their ‘public interest’ arguments?” 3

  • For FOC DAM & Coalition Mapping:

    • “A new environmental regulation is harming a specific industry. Which companies are members of the main trade association for that sector (e.g., ACEA for automotive)? Their submissions on LobbyFacts will reveal their collective position and identify potential allies for a FOC DAM campaign.” 6
    • “Which NGOs are members of the same European Parliament ‘Intergroup’ or Commission ‘Expert Group’ as our corporate adversaries? This reveals potential channels for counter-influence.” 7

4. The COCOO-LobbyFacts Strategic Playbook: A Model for Action

The following playbooks provide standardized workflows for using LobbyFacts to generate high-impact strategic intelligence.

Playbook A: The “Lobbyist Dossier” (Competitor Autopsy)

  • Objective: To create a comprehensive intelligence dossier on the lobbying activities, budget, and influence network of any key corporate or regulatory adversary.
  • Execution:
    1. Target Search: Use the Lobby organisation by name search to find the target entity (e.g., Google). 9
    2. Extract Core Metrics: From the target’s datacard, extract and log the key metrics: current lobby spend, number of lobbyists, number of EP passholders, and number of high-level Commission meetings. 2
    3. Analyze Historical Trends: Use the “Lobbying Costs over the years” graph to identify significant spikes or drops in spending. Correlate these changes with major legislative battles (e.g., GDPR, DMA) to understand their response to regulatory threats.
    4. Map the Network: Scrutinize the “Intermediaries” section to identify all external law firms and consultancies they have hired. Note the “Clients” section if the target is a consultancy itself. This maps their paid influence network.
    5. Review Stated Goals: Forensically analyze the text in the “Goals / Remit” and “Main EU files targeted” sections. This is their publicly declared mission statement and list of legislative priorities.
  • Strategic Outcome: This playbook produces a detailed “Influence Map” of any target. It tells us how much they spend, who they hire, what they want, and who they talk to. This intelligence is invaluable for predicting their moves and crafting effective counter-strategies.

Playbook B: The “Topic Warfare” Analysis

  • Objective: To map the entire lobbying landscape for a specific policy issue, identifying all key players, their relative power, and their arguments.
  • Execution:
    1. Define the Topic: Choose a policy area of strategic importance to COCOO. Example: “Open Finance” or “Financial Data Access Framework (FIDA)”.
    2. Conduct Topic & Meetings Search: Use the Topic search and Meetings search functions with relevant keywords ("Open Finance", FIDA, PSD3). 10
    3. Generate Actor List: Compile a list of all organisations that appear in the search results.
    4. Rank by Influence: For each organisation on the list, use Playbook A to extract their lobby spend and number of high-level meetings. Create a ranked list showing who the most powerful players are on this specific issue. Example: We might find that while many fintech startups are interested, major banks and payment providers like Klarna or associations like the European Banking Federation are spending more and getting more meetings. 13
  • Strategic Outcome: This playbook provides a complete “balance of forces” analysis for any policy debate. It shows us who our allies and adversaries are, who has the most resources and access, and whose arguments we need to counter, allowing us to enter any policy battle with superior strategic awareness.

Playbook C: The “Historical Ghost” Search

  • Objective: To use LobbyFacts’ unique historical archive to find information about a company’s past lobbying activities that is no longer available on the official EU register.
  • Execution:
    1. Select Target and Date: Choose a target company and a historical date of interest (e.g., during a past merger or legislative fight).
    2. Use the Date Filter: On the main search page, select the target Lobby register category (e.g., “Companies & groups”) and set the Date filter to the specific historical date.
    3. Find the Historical Entry: Search the resulting list for the target company. The datacard presented will show the information as it was declared on that date.
    4. Compare and Contrast: Compare this historical entry with the company’s current entry. Have their declared goals changed? Was their lobby spend significantly different? Did they use different lobby consultancies?
  • Strategic Outcome: This playbook can uncover crucial historical intelligence. It might reveal a company previously lobbied against a regulation they now publicly support, providing powerful evidence of hypocrisy. It can show which law firms they relied on for past crises, giving us insight into who they might call upon in a new one. This is intelligence that simply cannot be found anywhere else.

Leave a Reply