A code of conduct and a register of lobbyists should help defuse the 'cash-for-amendments' scandal - but MEPs should know to resist temptation, says Vice President.

Interview: Fighting corruption

https://api.multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/documents/20125/15529217/N003-0114-EN.srt

Diana Wallis,  Vice-President of the Parliament

This latest scandal seems  to have undermined

the reputation of  this house even further.

The Parliament didn't need this, did it?

I think it's very sad.  This Parliament is rightly proud

of the new powers it has  under the Lisbon Treaty.

But that rightly brings us  more into the spotlight.

This doesn't look good, although  I think it should be seen in context.

These were journalists  who were out to entrap MEPs.

That in no way excuses the reaction  of some of those concerned

and what they did, which is totally  unacceptable and criminal behaviour.

After scandals like this, and others about  expenses in the UK National Parliament

and in other countries too,  it does leave the political classes

without a lot of credibility  amongst the public.

This is reflected in the tailing off  of people voting. That's worrying, isn't it?

It's worrying because we've accepted  a system of representative democracy,

where we elect people  to make decisions for us.

The problem is, if those people aren't  independent or properly paid,

there is an argument that  they are open to corruption.

But the idea of them being open to  corruption when they are properly paid

It seems some MEPs do openly accept  that they are partially lobbyists

and some MEPs have second salaries  from various companies in Europe.

Again, we need to be careful. Some  MEPs will keep a second profession.

If you're a doctor and you sit  on the Legal Affairs Committee,

Whether you can do both  is another matter.

that exposes whether what a member  chooses to do as a second profession

is in conflict  with his or her duties here.

If you're working for a lobby company,  that's almost certainly in conflict.

Likewise, it would bring out  conflicts of interest

when you were voting  or shaping bits of legislation.

by any rules that we make now,  in the immediate future.

Do you feel there's too much  influence by lobby companies,

by industry and special interest groups  within the Parliament?

There are so many lobbyists. I remember  a press conference at the Commission,

where journalists had to give  their names to a lobby company,

with the consent of the Commission.  That can't be right.

No. The Parliament and Commission  have put in place a joint lobby register,

which will be activated and was due  to be activated in June of this year.

This means all proper lobby companies  will be registered and known about

and will have to adhere to  an institutional code of conduct

when they are walking our corridors.  We're not without control.

The point was that the characters  who carried out this recent operation

were not proper lobbyists  and were not on the register.

It should be a very large warning  to members of this house:

'Please check on the register  before you see anybody'.

What about the Parliament's  reaction to this?

Lobbyists now have to be registered and  explain their need to be in the Parliament.

That won't stop real lobby companies  exercising an influence

or indeed buying the interests  of particular MEPs.

It'll stop journalists getting in  and pretending to be lobbyists.

There is, and has been  for some time, a move

suggesting we need more control  over who is in Parliament's buildings,

when you think that the Commission  operates on a day pass system.

Those lobbyists that are on the register  that we know everything about

should have some sort  of preferential entry.

Whether they should have an entry badge  that entitles them to walk in

and wander about  in the same way as an MEP

is another question and that  may be something we need to look at.