| Summary: | Sweden currently has no legislated regulation of lobbying, but the professional lobbyist can voluntarily subscribe to, among others, the professional code of standars created by the trade association of Public Relations, Precis. There is an ongoing discussion in Sweden to regulate lobbying, both in mass media and in politics. This study examines this debate and focus on which arguments there are for and against lobbying regulation in Sweden. It also attempts to identify the differences, if there are any, between left and rights parties with regards to their views on regulation of lobbying. Tha main method used was document analysis of parliamentary bills which have been raised concerning a lobbying regulation in Sweden. In the theory section, I include four different types of requirements placed on democratic lobbying (se for example Jaatinen 1998, Kitchen 1999, Larsson 2005, Möller 2009 and Naurin 2001). The research showed the need for transparency to be the most prominent, followed by requirement of equal acces to diffrent social groups to lobby. The document analysis focus on the arguments that are given to regulate lobbying in Sweden. The arguments for regulating lobbying presented of the parliamentary bills include measures taken to prevent covert lobbying, to create more equal opportunities to lobby, to that the kind of self-regulation practiced by the proffesional lobbyists by Precis proffesional standars has shortcomings, to that the PR industry will expand and that lobbying is at least commom in Sweden as in other parlaments. Therefore, there is a need to review how other countries have regulated lobbying. The study shows that among the parliamentary bills, The European Parliament regulatory system is the largest role model of other parliaments regulating lobbying. Furtheremore it shows that a registration system is the type of regulation advocated by the most of the politicians behind the researched parliamentary bills. The counter-arguments to a lobbyng regulation in Sweden, identified trough the document analysis and interviews in this study, are that ethics and morality of the individual are more important than rules and laws and a skepticism that a registration system can record people's lifes, which from a democratic point of view is not desirable. Other counter-arguments are that the community allready has so many rules and laws and that a regulatory system can discriminate less economically affluent groups in society. The study has shown that one can devise some differences between left- and right-wing views concerning policies for regulating lobbying in Sweden. This because no parliamentary bills has brought on a lobbying regulation by any of the so- called red parties and the majority of the bills are raised by politicians from the right-wing Moderate Party. One can also see diffrences in the arguments of regulating lobbying by politicians. The bourgeous side seems tho think that the most important requirement of lobbying from a democratic perspective is transparency while the Swedish Green Party is focusing on the lack of equal access between different social groups to lobby.
|
|---|
