MEPs have received a partial disclosure from the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, in reply to an Access to Documents request, which was made following three successive delays to the Commission proposal on Sustainable Corporate Governance, including two negative opinions of the RSB.

The request, made on the 15th December 2021, asked for all correspondence and (e)meetings with stakeholders and members of the RSB, related to the proposal, as well as the RSB opinion and the Commission Impact Assessment.

The disclosed documents reveal that the Board was subject to persistent and seemingly coordinated lobbying, making spurious claims that elements of the Commission’s Impact Assessment went against principles of proportionality.

Regretfully, the Board declined to disclose their opinion on the Impact Assessment, leaving us in the dark about the exact reasons they gave a negative opinion, and how these correlate with the lobbying campaign. It is also unclear as to whether all relevant documents and correspondence have been disclosed, with the Commission citing privacy concerns regarding a partial disclosure.  

MEPs Wolters, Hautala, Aubry and Durand are now carefully examining the disclosed documents, in order to ascertain whether a confirmatory application or other clarifications are needed. For instance, the RSB’s own public transparency register appears to declare a meeting on the Sustainable Corporate Governance proposal, yet no details of meetings were included in this disclosure.  

Notes to Editors

• Lara Wolters, Heidi Hautala, Manon Aubry and Pascal Durand acted as rapporteur and shadow rapporteurs on the Parliament’s initiative report on Corporate Due Diligence for the S&D, Greens EFA, The Left and Renew Europe groups, respectively.
• They undertook an Access to Documents request on the 15th December 2021, asking for all correspondence and (e)meetings with stakeholders and members of the RSB, related to the Sustainable Corporate Governance proposal, as well as the RSB opinion and the Commission Impact Assessment on the proposal.
• The RSB gave access to correspondence received from stakeholders, but refused access to their Opinion and the Impact Assessment, and claimed not meetings have taken place with stakeholders.