Recently, I was asked what I do as a lobbyist and how I could help someone who faced an upcoming EU legal proposal.
I’ve refined the answer below.
It is likely a narrow definition. It excludes many activities that I realise many lobbyists offer. Here it is:
“I help influence the outcome of EU public policy, legislative and regulatory decisions.
My job is to help you put your best case forward to the right people, at the right time, in the right way.
In my day to day work, I focus on EU legislative campaign management, and a niche focus on chemical regulation (where I spend most of my time).
I help translate your case so it lands with right decision-maker, and guide you through the process, so you step in at the right time.”
1. EU Legislative Campaign Management
I support people obtain the laws and policies that they want.
This means I work on the development and adoption of:
- Ordinary legislation
- Delegated acts
- RPS Measures
- Implementing acts
I see my job is to help you put your best case forward to the right people, at the right time, in the right way.
This is often necessary. Too many decision makers receive a flood of position papers, submissions, etc, that are charitably gibberish, off point, and irrelevant.
I can help you develop the necessary materials and products including:
- Lobby Plan
- Key decision-makers and opinion formers mapping
- Position Papers
- Submissions to public consultations
- Amendments and justifications
- Shadow Impact Assessment*
- Elevator Pitch
- Value Mapping /Script Adaptation
- Infographics*
- Legal opinion*
- Media training*
- Coaching for meetings
- Political intelligence
- As and when needed, I’ll pick up the phone and make your case for you to the right person in a way that speaks to them.
I will help you execute your campaign, ensure you stay on the right path, and provide you with the right level of political intelligence to maximise your chances of success.
Due to some Catholic guilt issues that plague me, I’ll tell you, likely too bluntly, at the start, when your case is weak, and the chances of success are between nil and low, and what you can do to improve your chances of success. You have the option to ignore these recommendations.
The points in * I’ll not do. I don’t provide technical, scientific or legal advice. I recommend some genuine experts who can do that.
I don’t do monitoring. It is a reportage of what’s happened. It does not help infuence decisions, and tells you what’s happened. It provides a record of the past. Providing actionable political intelligence enables you to take the right actions to influence outcomes.
What it is not
It means there are some ‘products’ that many lobbyists produce, which are needed as part of the overall lobbying toolbox (see above). I won’t make them. I know what good is, and they are beyond my limited skill set.
It is not political campaigning. That is the work to get the issue onto the public agenda. I did it for a long time. There is too little work in Brussels to sustain a living doing this.
-
Chemical Regulation
My chemical regulatory work is focused on providing guidance to help people secure the best possible outcome they they can.
At the moment I focus on:
- CLH Classifications
- REACH Restrictions
I have worked on:
- REACH Authorization
- REACH Substance Evaluation
- OEL legislationThese involve some standard (non-exhaustive) products:
- Hazard identification submission to the CLH Public Consultation*
- Presentation to the RAC*
- Regulatory submission to the authorities*
- Risk Assessment*
- Assessment of Alternatives*
- Risk Management Options study*
- Shadow Impact Assessment*
- Legal assessment*
- Correspondence with authorities
- Again, the most useful I can do, is give you an honest assessment of the strength of your case. When you case is weak, and the chances of success are between nil to low, I can let you know what you can do to improve your chances of success. You have the option to ignore these recommendations.
- As and when needed, I’ll pick up the phone, and make your case for you, to the right person, in a way that speaks to them
What I won’t do
I don’t provide technical, scientific or legal advice.
For the points marked with an * I can recommend some excellent experts that I’ve worked with. These are experts who are respected and trusted by the Authorities and who have a good track record of success in front of them. There are not many of them.
I know what a good submission to the RAC Public Consultation feels and looks like, what points Competent Authorities will want addressed, and what a persuasive Shadow Impact Assessment deals with.
Here I help by highlighting the points that will land with technical and political decision-makers, what points will land, and those that won’t. I see little benefit in raising points that are weak or disengenuous.
Systems and Models
For both areas of work, I use tried and tested best practice guidelines, incorporated into SOPs, checklists, process charts, and case studies. The checklists tend to be very long.
I focus on what can and has worked, and refine the best practice for the case at hand.
The experience is borne from working on legislation for two British Labour MEPs, in DG Environment, running political campaigns for IFAW and WWF, and a lot of substance defence work at Fleishman-Hillard and Cefic.
Dear Aaron
I am curious as I am a regulatory specialist with “scientific background”, I often see or hear “experts” talking on topics for which they do not deeply understand the science behind ” the global picture” , and the potential impact on some uses, applications etc…
Most of the time, the audience ( top managers) want to hear “simple messages” which they will remember and most importantly they will eb able to repeat them…Over simplified messages and they take decisions on “inaccurate” sources…
About chemical regulation & policy (REACH, CLP, TSCA etc..): I believe true advocacy is about building trust and credibility—grounded in active listening, humility, and curiosity—to foster meaningful dialogue and influence responsible, “science” evidence-based change.
Lobbyists are great story tellers ? most probably
You need a blend of scientific rigor, strategic thinking, emotional & political intelligence to build a long lasting trust to lead advocacy not as a defensive tactic, but as a proactive, principled force for public good ( most of the time is “industry benefits”), ready to serve a mission you genuinely believe in.
The expertise, the know how are key, not enough to open the right doors ( networking abilities are even better)
Without a proper “communication style, posture” you won’t attract attention…
Next step career : I am working on my weak points : emotional & political intelligence which are key for a “storytellers” to craft compelling advocacy that resonates with decision-makers and the public.
Regards