Offices In Brussels Research Articles

The determinants of direct corporate lobbying in the EU: A multi-dimensional proxy of corporate lobbying

This article argues for a more thorough analysis of the dynamics of corporate lobbying within the European Union (EU). Although there is broad consensus among scholars on the emergence of a new type of European lobbying, studies have not sufficiently addressed the underlying economic rationale. Indeed, many authors emphasise the shift towards a system based on direct lobbying; however, these concentre only on systemic and non-economic causes. Direct lobbying dynamics are perceived mainly in two ways: either as a consequence of a conscious political strategy of the European institutions in response to the ‘interest overload’ of the mid-1990s or as a normal phase of the development of interest group populations. Advocating an economics-based analytical approach to European corporate lobbying, this contribution to the debate provides one of the very first attempts to uncover the influence of economic factors on direct corporate lobbying by building on the seminal work proposed by Bernhagen and Mitchell. These authors, very familiar with the American tradition of corporate lobbying studies, were the first to apply a ‘standard model of corporate political behaviour’ to the European context by examining the various determinants of direct lobbying. This article goes further: it analyses the empirical database constructed by Bernhagen and Mitchell, with a multi-dimensional proxy of corporate lobbying. Indeed, the main contribution of this study is in its analysis, namely, the operationalisation of the dependent variable ‘direct lobbying’. It proposes a multi-strategy/multi-venue operationalisation of the dependent variable aiming to overcome the pitfalls that characterise dichotomous and uni-dimensional operational definitions, in order to answer the research question: ‘What are the economic determinants of direct corporate lobbying in the EU?’ Such a multi-dimensional operationalisation of the dependent variable has required the unpacking of some of the elements taken for granted in the discussion on corporate lobbying. This article argues that the researcher needs to take into consideration the various direct lobbying strategies and their relative weights (that is, the multi-strategy operationalisation). For example, accreditation to the EP is not equal to the establishment of a company representation office in Brussels. Furthermore, another possible level of action of a firm's strategy, namely, the industry one, should also be considered (that is, the multi-venue operationalisation): direct lobbying should be analysed as a preference over other lobbying approaches rather than in absolute terms. The findings show how such an expanded operationalisation casts light on the economic determinants of European corporate lobbying. First of all, the Olsonian argument finds empirical support: industry concentration determines lobbying strategies. Second, asset mobility/specificity influences a firm's preference to lobby directly vis-a-vis other venues.

Paradiplomats Against the State

Literature on substate mobilization in Europe has provided some useful insights into the factors and mechanisms shaping territorial interest representation in Brussels. Although recent studies have enhanced our understanding of the determinants of cooperative and bypassing paradiplomacy, those underpinning conflict have remained rather obscure. Using a new data set with information on more than 100 substate offices in Brussels, this article sheds some light on the determinants of conflict between member state diplomacy and substate paradiplomacy. It argues that they are very different from those of bypassing and cooperation and that resource richness and diplomatic accreditation significantly affect its frequency. These findings not only are robust to multilevel modeling and nonparametric bootstrapping but also are of theoretical import as they highlight that devolution and party political incongruence fail to affect the frequency of conflict in Brussels.

European Law – Liberalisation of postal services in the EU

Article looking at ways in which the postal service sector was at the forefront of the evolution of EC competition law through wider liberalisation. Article by Richard Eccles and Robert MacLean of the Cameron McKenna office in Brussels, published in Amicus Curiae - Journal of the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies and its Society for Advanced Legal Studies. The Journal is produced by the Society for Advanced Legal Studies at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London.

Urgent memo to the EU: don't let transit be a safe harbour

Carl De Meyer is a Partner based in the Brussels office of Hoyng Monegier LLP. Carina Gommers is Senior Associate with the same firm and also an Affiliated Junior Researcher at K.U. Leuven. In Philips/Nokia, the ECJ held that goods coming from a non-member state, and declared to customs under a suspensive procedure, can be intercepted by customs when there are indications that the goods may be put on sale in the EU. In the subsequent proceedings on the merits, however, these goods cannot be classified as counterfeit or pirated goods merely on the basis of the fiction that the goods are to be considered as having been manufactured locally. The obvious downside for intellectual property owners is the extremely high burden of proof in the substantive proceedings. Where the mere existence of an indication that the goods may be put on the market in the EU will be enough for customs to suspend release of the goods, an order establishing and enjoining the infringement in the substantive proceedings will require evidence that the goods will effectively be put on the EU market. This requires evidence of an actual sale, an offer for sale or advertising addressed to a consumer in the EU. In most cases, the intellectual property owner will not have the information to meet this burden of proof. The only ones that have the relevant information are the parties interested in the transshipment. We therefore call upon the Commission to provide for a rebuttable presumption in the new Customs Regulation that goods detained by customs, will be assumed to be put on the EU market in violation of the intellectual property right and that the parties interested in the transshipment shall be allowed to rebut that presumption by providing conclusive evidence that the goods are legitimate and have a destination where the intellectual property right shall not be violated.

Apple Inc. Business Policy v. Competition Law

Competition policy rules consist of a mechanism providing to consumers production, which they want to acquire in the best and cheapest available way. This mechanism ensures that the undertakings seek the innovation of their production and push the prices down . In the official European Commission’s Competitive Law webpage it is clearly stated, that: “In order to be effective, competition needs suppliers who are independent of each other, each subject to the competitive pressure exerted by the others”. It is already clear, that free commercial market is very sensitive to any distortions from any destructive sources. Markets are especially being distorted in the most possible way when monopolies (derived from Greek monos, alone or single and polein, to sell) are being established. Abuse of dominant position is also a very complicated matter and significantly distorts competition while decreasing general welfare of consumers.This Article dedicated to quite specific and complicated issue. Apple Inc., a company that worldwide known for its achievements in technological innovations, is holding dominant position in the area of portable music players, digital online music distribution and is gaining dominant position in the mobile phones market area . Nicolas Petit , an associate in Howrey's Brussels office, where his practice focuses on EC competition and French competition law, prepared several articles where he talks about the abusive of dominant position of Apple Inc. in musical industry. In his presentation “Apple’s refusal to license its DRM - Fair-Play competition” Nicolas Petit argues, that Apple Inc. is abusing and violating the Fair-Play rules of commercial market in several ways . European Commission is also suspecting Apple Inc. of violating Competition Law because of the restriction of consumers’ choice, e.g. songs from the iTunes online store (owned by Apple Inc.) are not freely available to download across Europe, and that the prices vary between countries. Could it be concluded, that Apple Inc. uses its leading position in innovation, design and popularity of production in order to act abusively in the commercial market? On the other hand, maybe there are some strong arguments for the defence on the Apple Inc. side?Apple Inc. usually by lawyers, consumers, rival competitors considered as the second most visible actor in the role of abusive behaviour of a dominant position. Another legal entity - Microsoft Corporation is well known worldwide for its software production and unfavourable license terms. Microsoft Corporation stood against the European Commission in the case T-201/04 Microsoft v. Commission . In this case Microsoft Corporation was fined of EUR 497.000.000 because of tying one product into another (Windows Media Player 9 was included into the Microsoft Windows operational system). Can it be said, that Apple Inc. is starting to act similarly as Microsoft Corporation or other worldwide giant companies? Does Apple Inc. abuses its dominant position (in what ways) and what is the dominant position in particular? These are the main goals of the Article. However, any defending arguments for Apple Inc. position is highly welcome and to be considered. In addition, in this way of analyzing the particular situation of the dominant position (Apple Inc.) it is necessary to analyze the European Competition Law itself.While writing this topic, it is necessary to use various internet sources, because many internet (including official ones of the European Commission etc.) webpage covers useful and official information in this matter. In addition, several literature books, treaties and other valuable sources listed.The structure of the Article is as following (note that each section is written in the context of the Apple. Inc anticompetitive activities): firstly, legal basis of dominant position and abuse of dominant position is required. This chapter due to its scope is limited to European competition law. Secondly, profound legal overview shall be provided from the Competition Law position of the Apple Inc. production (iTunes, iPods, and iPhones) and business activities with it. In these 2 chapters shall be put all the efforts to fully uncover the situation - whether Apple Inc. really abuses its dominant position (it is already clear that Apple Inc. holds dominant position in the media market) , in what ways and what can be listed down for the defence of Apple Inc. itself? Is Apple Inc. really limiting the choice of consumers and their general welfare? These are questionable objects of discussion and analysis. Quick summary of conclusions is covered in the third chapter of Conclusions.

Offices and planning in Brussels, a half-century of missed opportunities?

The relationship between offices and planning in Brussels could be summed up as a series of missed opportunities. Decisions were taken blow by blow, without truly taking account of what had been planned. This real estate game, which has been going on for half a century, has had sometimes obscure causes, often unspoken motives, but reasons that have always been logical for at least one of the four players involved in the overall misunderstanding, i.e., promoters, national government (and then federal and regional governments), local officials, and the residents themselves. Planning long remained officious, with attempts made to intervene in strips. Even though the authorities made a relevant planning proposal starting in 1958, the future European Quarter was created in silence and without directives. With the country’s subdivision into regions planning became official, but the building of offices nevertheless came in for little supervision. In 1999, more than twenty years after the adoption of Brussels’s first area plan, 47% of the some 10 million square metres of offices in Brussels (in edifices with at least 1 000 m² of office space, and thus very often monofunctional buildings) was outside the administrative zones that the area plan had set. Another form of planning went into effect in 1995, but the relationships amongst the players of the real estate game remain ambiguous. The four-party misunderstanding continues.

The European Respiratory Society, 1990-2010: a 20-year anniversary story of success

In 2010, the European Respiratory Society (ERS) celebrates its 20th anniversary. Since its foundation, the ERS has generated an impressive reputation and history of which our relatively young Society can be proud. The “genesis” of the ERS was the merger of two European scientific societies: the Societas Europaea Physiologiae Clinicae Respoiratoriae (SEPCR), founded in 1966, and the European Society of Pneumology (SEP), founded in 1981. The merge took place in London in 1990 during the joint meeting of SEPCR and SEP; the late Stewart Clark was the President of the unified Society. This unification brought together the basic scientists of SEPCR with the clinicians of SEP in a harmonious relationship, and is considered the driving force behind the successful story of the ERS. The structure of the new Society was based on the scientific assemblies of SEPCR with the addition of a new, large clinical assembly from SEP. Those who envisioned and took part in the merge should not only be gratified by the ERS’s achievements over the last 20 years, they should also be extremely proud of its standing as one of the leading respiratory societies in the world. In the initial years, the ERS leadership focused its efforts on building the structure of the Society, developing its missions and objectives, recruiting the appropriate staff, and establishing the ERS Headquarters. The first ERS office (in 1992) was a small flat in Paris (France) and was run by a few staff members. Within a few years, the office had moved to larger premises in Lausanne (Switzerland). Today, the ERS owns two beautiful buildings: the Headquarters, in Lausanne; and the Publications Office, in Sheffield (UK). In addition, the ERS runs an EU office in Brussels (Belgium). Thanks to the efforts of the ERS’s inspired leadership, the Annual Congress became one of …

Preconditions for Foreign Activities of European Regions: Tracing Causal Configurations of Economic, Cultural, and Political Strategies

This article traces international activities of regional governments in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Great Britain, and Italy. We describe how intensively the regions are investing in economic, cultural, and political activities, and how broad the different activities are spread. Then we analyze preconditions for strong activities by using the fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. Two assumptions about causal configurations are confirmed. First, high economic interdependencies in combination with large financial capacities are in most cases sufficient for setting up many promotional offices abroad. Second, a high level of policy autonomy, in combination with strong competencies in foreign affairs, is almost always sufficient for having a well-staffed office in Brussels. In contrast, partnerships with foreign political entities are not a result of a cultural causal configuration.

Governing Europe: the Status and Networking Strategies of Finnish, Estonian and German Subnational Offices in Brussels

This article examines and compares the status of Estonian, Finnish and German regional and local EU offices. The research data stem from structured interviews. We are interested in the status of different actors and their strategies for positioning their ideas in the policy-making and law-making procedures. While local and regional actors established new forms of representation and co-operation with EU institutions, these new channels and institutions are not equally open and accessible to all. Whilst the number of actors in Brussels has increased, this does not necessarily mean that they are all included in the decision-making process itself. Furthermore, it is not only institutions that matter but the actors themselves, the people involved in the day-to-day construction of Europe and the personal networks they create. In contrast to German regional offices, the regions' power houses in Brussels, the institutional position of Finnish and Estonian offices is rather weak. However, to the extent that interaction takes place between the EU institutions and the regions, without the involvement of state actors, it is easy to see how certain decisions are pulled towards a regionally acceptable content. While size and institutional status matters, this is a world where a skilful actor can build his or her own networks, if he or she is in the right place at the right time and knows the right people.

De weg van Vlaamse 'daders' naar de Gestapo. De tolken van de Antwerpse Sipo-SD

Flemish Collaborators and their Route to the Gestapo. The Translators of the Sipo-SD in AntwerpDuring the Second World War, Nazi-Germany used the Geheime Staatspolizei (Gestapo) in its occupied territories and at the home front to maintain order and execute the racial policy of the regime. With a head office in Brussels and branches in Antwerp, Ghent, Liège and Charleroi, the Gestapo was also present in military occupied Belgium. The German agents were not completely up to their task. They lacked the knowledge of the regional languages and circumstances. The help of the local Belgian populace was therefore a necessity. What motivated these men to collaborate so assiduously with the German occupier? This research is based on the postwar criminal case files, compiled by the military courts in the context of the prosecution of those who collaborated. Several biographies of Flemish collaborators with the Gestapo office in Antwerp have been reconstructed. In this way, four major motivational groups can be distinguished: opportunists, ideological perpetrators, ‘traditional’ collaborators and former members of the resistance. Contrary to existing research into similar groups of men, financial or material gain was not their primary motive. Various psychological factors played a greater role. This article is part of the special issue 'A New Historiography of the Collaboration'.

Beyond Conditionality? Regions from the New EU Member States and their Activities in Brussels

Even before the 2004 European Union (EU) enlargement, regional authorities from Poland and the Czech Republic began establishing regional representative offices in Brussels alongside their counterparts from ‘old’ member states. Today, only a handful of regions from these new member states have not opened some form of representative bureau in the city. As informal institutions, regional representations never formed any part of EU ‘conditionality’ on accession; however, by drawing on the experience of regions from the EU15, through a process of ‘lesson-drawing’ institutional import, the new regional actors in Poland and the Czech Republic have moved to adopt this model of regional engagement. This article finds that the motivations for opening these offices come from the regions themselves, with encouragement from partner regions across the EU (‘bottom up’ impetus) rather than being promoted by Commission incentives or national governments’ encouragement (‘top down’ impetus). This highlights the fundamental importance of a Brussels presence within any region's strategy of engaging with Europe.

The Foreign Relations of European Regions: Competences and Strategies

The article traces the foreign relations of 81 European regions by looking first at the constitutional competences which these regions enjoy within their nation-states. We discover that the regions in federal states have expanded their competences in two directions: conducting autonomous foreign activities and influencing national foreign policy. How far the Belgian regions, as well as the German and the Austrian Länder go in both directions depends very much on the scope of their competences in domestic politics. In non-federal states (France, GB, Italy), regionalisation brought rather more leeway to conduct a certain level of autonomous foreign activity than regional influence in national foreign policy. When we – in a second step – trace the strategies or directions of international activities which the regions pursue it becomes obvious that setting up an office in Brussels in order to adapt to political integration is very common among West European regions. In contrast, much more variety can be observed when examining the regions' strategies to adapt to fundamental economic and cultural transformations. Some European regions invest heavily in economic promotion offices and in transnational partnerships while others lack the motivation or ability to invest in these forms of foreign relations.

The Impact of Devolution on EU-Level Representation: British Regional Offices in Brussels

Devolution has had a substantial impact on the way in which UK regions organize their representative activity in the EU. The model of stakeholder partnerships, focused largely on economic development issues, has been complemented by a set of devolved regional actors. Relations between the new representative offices in Brussels have been configured in such a way as to maintain the primacy of the UK negotiating stance; a framework of incentives links the new executive bodies to the UK's Permanent Representation, UKREP, in an effort to prevent the mediation of multiple policy positions. Nevertheless, the recent establishment of regional parliamentary representative offices alongside the executives of the devolved territories increases the complexity of British interest mediation in Brussels, and offers potential for fracturing of the existing system.

Conflicts in representing the regions in Brussels: The case of wales

Moore C. (2006) Conflicts in representing the regions in Brussels: the case of Wales, Regional Studies 40, 793–799. Regional representative offices in Brussels are today commonplace, and their number continues to grow. However, these offices vary in the scope and remit of their activities, with their function dictated by their end users, the home or sending authorities. In Wales, the shifting nature of regional governance has demanded a restructuring of the capacities for the representation of Welsh interests at the European Union level. A long and often contentious process of trial and error ultimately saw Welsh forms of interest mediation in the European Union post-devolution converge on a model established by Scottish actors in Brussels. This points to an emerging pattern of European Union-level engagement subsequent to the introduction of regional government. Moore C. (2006) Des conflits quant à la représentation des régions à Bruxelles: étude de cas du Pays de Galles, Regional Studies 40, 793–799. De nos jours, la présence à Bruxelles des bureaux chargés de représenter les régions se banalise et leur nombre ne cesse d'augmenter. Néanmoins, la portée et les attributions de leurs compétences varient étant donné que leur rôle se voit déterminer par les utilisateurs finaux, l'administration d'origine ou d'accueil. Au Pays de Galles, l'évolution de l'administration régionale a nécessité une restructuration des moyens de représenter les intérêts gallois au niveau de l'Ue. A terme, un processus par tâtonnement, à la fois long et souvent controversé, a fini dans une Ue d'après-régionalisation par la convergence des systèmes de médiation gallois sur un modèle établi à Bruxelles par des acteurs écossais. Cela indique une tendance naissante à l'engagement au niveau de l'Ue à la suite de l'établissement de l'administration régionale. Union européenne Pays de Galles Régions Régionalisation Représentation Moore C. (2006) Konflikte bei der Vertretung von Regionen in Brüssel: der Fall Wales, Regional Studies 40, 793–799. Heutzutage sind Regionalvertretungen in Brüssel etwas Alltägliches, und ihre Zahl nimmt weiter zu. Umfang und Aufgabenbereich dieser Büros sind jedoch verschieden, wobei ihre Funktion vom Endverbraucher, der Heimat- oder Entsendungsbehörde, bestimmt wird. In Wales hat die sich wandelnde Natur der Regionalverwaltung eine Umstrukturierung der Kapazitäten für die Vertretung der walischen Interessen auf der Ebene der EU verlangt. Ein ausgedehnter und oft umstrittener Prozess des Ausprobierens ließ schließlich walisische Formen der Interessenvermittlung in der EU nach der Machtübertragung in ein Modell einmünden, das in Brüssel nach schottischem Vorbild aufgestellt worden war. Dies zeigt an, daß ein Muster zur Mitarbeit auf EU-Ebene nach Einführung einer Regionalverwaltung entsteht. Europäische Union Wales Regionen Machtübertragung Repräsentation Moore C. (2006) Conflictos para representar las regiones en Bruselas: el caso de Gales, Regional Studies 40, 793–799. Las oficinas de representantes regionales en Bruselas son corrientes hoy día y su número sigue creciendo. Sin embargo, existen variaciones en el alcance y las competencias de las actividades de estas oficinas de modo que sus funciones son dictadas por los usuarios, es decir, las autoridades nacionales o de envío. En Gales, la naturaleza cambiante de la gobernanza regional ha exigido una reestruccturacion de las capacidades para la representación de los intereses de Gales en la Unión Europea. En un proceso largo y, a menudo, contencioso de ensayo y error, se observaron últimamente formas galesas de mediación de intereses en la convergencia después de la transferencia de competencias en la Unión Europea según un modelo establecido por protagonistas escoceses en Bruselas. Esto señala un modelo emergente de participación en la UE después de la introducción del gobierno regional. Unión Europea Gales Regiones Transferencia de competencias Representación

‘Schloss Neuwahnstein’? Why the Länder continue to strengthen their representations in Brussels

The establishment of representative offices in Brussels marked the start a qualitative new step in the engagement of the German Länder in European Union (EU) policy. Despite a contested birth, more than 20 years' operation in Brussels have seen these offices become full elements of the sponsoring Länder administrations. This article argues that in both functional and operational terms, the Brussels Länder offices have developed over time to approximate the role played by their federal level counterparts, the Länder representations in Berlin. Enhanced investment by the Länder in their EU presence underscores the increasing relevance of EU issues for the exercise of their domestic policy responsibilities. However, the Länder offices in Brussels remain disputed entities, as federal and Länder government views of their mission and appropriate engagement differ sharply. Thus, while direct engagement in Brussels has become the norm for the Länder administrations, tensions over access to the EU sphere continue to mark Bund-Länder relations in Brussels – more that ten years after a legal solution was established. The article concludes by considering the broader implications of this situation.

Remote Control Research in Central Africa

This article explains how a project being implemented in peri-urban central Africa is coordinated from an office in Brussels. After an overview that addresses the conceptual challenges of defining ‘peri-urban’ and the question of why these social spaces are important from a development perspective, the article outlines ‘remote control research’ step-by-step: (i) conceptualisation, (ii) identification and recruitment of local experts, (iii) selection of research sites, (iv) the process of formulating a locally appropriate and detailed research protocol, (v) implementation and (vi) analysis of findings and presentation of results. The conclusion argues that research in central Africa will increasingly be influenced by donor priorities and will consequently need to respect the guidelines dictated by project cycle management strategies currently in vogue. The steps in the project cycle reflect the nature of the relationships between donors, researchers in the field and the intermediary project managers that link the two extremes. Accommodating the worldviews, expectations and constraints of these actors is something that, although not always easy, is possible when the right blend of conditions is respected.

A Europe of the Regions: Rhetoric or Reality?

Regional Institutions and Governance in the European Union. Edited by Jose M. Magone. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2003. 264 pp., $65.95 (ISBN: 0-275-97617-3). In the mid-1990s, scholarly interest in “federalism” surged, prompted both by globalization and by a push by subnational regions for greater autonomy. These developments seemed to threaten the future of the traditional nation-state by questioning whether it was the optimal unit of political organization. In Europe, this question attained greater salience because the process of European integration already held the potential for weakening nation-states in favor of other levels of government. Not only was the European Union (EU) gaining power at the expense of national capitals, but European regions were pressing for greater power as well. Western Europe's stateless peoples—such as the Scots, Basques, and Catalans—saw political opportunity in the European Union's often-stated goal of “subsidiarity,” which is the principle that governmental tasks should be executed at the lowest level of government possible. Many of Europe's regions created lobbying offices in Brussels, and much ink was spilled proclaiming the new era of a “Europe of the Regions” in which government could be smaller, more innovative, and closer to its citizens, and in which regional governments could wield real power at home and in Brussels. A decade later, this optimism appears to have been unfounded. European regions have indeed gained significantly more power in some countries, but largely as a result of domestic political reform. In Brussels, regions remain marginal players. The European Union's much-touted “Committee of the Regions” is only an advisory body, having no legislative authority. Although federalism remains an influential political development, its impact on European integration appears to have been overemphasized. The contributors to Jose Magone's Regional Institutions and Governance in the European Union , however, remain boldly convinced that we are witnessing nothing short of a political revolution in the role of regionalism in the European Union. Using the important work of Liesbet Hooghe and Gary …

Report from the ESICM ESICM March 2003 Brussels

This years Council meeting was held in the ESICM Offices out near the Airport which is an interesting drive from Gare Midi across the part of Brussels not advertised in the travel brochures. It is curious to note that the high speed link between Waterloo and the Brussels Office is still incomplete between London and the Tunnel but also between Central Brussels and the Offices. Hence the cab. However the weather was great with the sun shining over the rather modern Industrial Estate and with the cerulean blue skies reflected in the windows of the Erasme Hospital.

What Do Subnational Offices Think They Are Doing in Brussels?

Are subnational offices decorative or are they substantively important? What do subnational governments hope to gain by funding offices in Brussels? Are they listening posts to detect upcoming legislation? Are they means to situate particular regions and localities in European networks of similar (or different) actors? Finally, and for our purpose most importantly, are they intended to influence policy making in the EU? Answers to these questions promise to deepen our understanding of the politics of multi-level governance in the EU. We know that supranational institutions exert real authority in EU decision making, and we also know that the authority of subnational governments has grown to significant proportions across several EU countries. We know far less, however, about how subnational and supranational actors connect.

Surprises in European science policy

I recently participated in a daring experiment—I was a member of the selection committee for the European Commission's functional genomics projects under the 5th Framework Programme. And my experience of this experiment was quite surprising for two reasons. The first was that the EC has obviously listened to scientists’ opinions and the second was that they have shown the ability to change the selection process of their research projects in an unprecedented way. Most of the scientific community are resigned to the fact that Brussels' system of granting funding for research projects is crucially flawed. Clearly, the facts that the anonymous selection panels are appointed in a non‐transparent manner, that their work is time restricted, that access to relevant documents—when sequestered in an office in Brussels—and the clarification of some assertions in the proposal with an expert colleague is not possible, feeds the popular belief that decision making at the EC is not being done in an optimal way. And those who presented this litany of concerns to the Commission seemed to make no progress; instead, those responsible for the spending of EU money still defended the system. …