Transparency campaigners question former EU commissioner's ‘revolving doors’ appointment

Former EU financial services chief Jonathan Hill set to take up senior adviser post with multinational law firm Freshfields.

Jonathan Hill | Photo credit: Natalie Hill

By Martin Banks

Martin Banks is a senior reporter at the Parliament Magazine

31 Mar 2017


The European Commission has come under fire after it approved the appointment of the former British commissioner Jonathan Hill to a job with a top law firm.

Hill, a former commissioner for financial stability, financial services and capital markets union, was given the green light to take up the senior adviser post with Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP (Freshfields).

He was also cleared to become one of the independent national directors of The Times Newspapers Ltd in the UK.


RELATED CONTENT


The decision, however, has been condemned by transparency campaigners in Brussels.

Corporate Europe Observatory (CEO), a leading campaign group, said it was the latest example of the notorious “revolving doors” policy which has seen a number of ex EU commissioners, such as Neelie Kroes and former Commission president José Manuel Barroso, leave the Commission to take up lucrative and high profile roles in the private sector.

Another recent case was that of the former EU trade commissioner, Karel De Gucht.

Reacting to the Hill case, Margarida Silva, a campaigner with CEO, said, "The appointment of Hill at Freshfields is the kind of job that proper revolving doors rules would have prohibited.

“The firm is essentially a lobby actor and advisor on EU financial regulation with several UK financial industry clients.

"So assuming the weak conditions imposed on Hill would prevent any conflicts of interest is ridiculous. Instead of authorising his move with meagre, unenforceable conditions, the Commission should have rejected it.

"And with Article 50 having just been triggered the timing of the authorisation is also quite bizarre, as lobbying around the Brexit negotiations cannot be ruled out."

A Commission source, however, hit back by saying that the opinion of its ad hoc ethical committee had been sought before approval was granted for Hill to take up the law firm post.

The source said the appointment was compatible with EU rules and was still subject to three conditions.

These are that: during at least the 18 months “cooling-off” period, Hill “refrains from providing advice to Freshfields' financial services clients, refrains from providing advice to Freshfields itself or to its non-financial services clients on issues related to the financial services sector, and refrains from any lobbying activity on behalf of Freshfields or one of its clients with the Commission and its services on matters linked to his former portfolio.”

The commission source added, “Lord Hill's envisaged position as one of six Independent National Directors of The Times Newspapers is not linked with his former commission portfolio and does not present a risk of incompatibility either with his former function as member of the Commission or with the interests of the Institution.”

The problem has most famously been highlighted by the appointment of Barroso at global investment bankers Goldman Sachs. Campaigners argued for Barroso's EU pension to be withheld while the Commission was forced to refer his appointment to its ethics committee.

Read the most recent articles written by Martin Banks - New EU regulations on AI seek to ban mass and indiscriminate surveillance