OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Ekō

Ekō is a community of people from around the world committed to curbing the growing power of corporations.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Manon Aubry (Member of the European Parliament)

23 Sept 2025 · UE Mercosur UE Etats-Unis UE Israel, accord commerciaux

Meeting with Manon Aubry (Member of the European Parliament)

5 Sept 2025 · EU Mercosur EU US EU Israel trade agreements

Response to Export and import of hazardous chemicals

5 Aug 2025

Any amendments to Regulation (EU) 649/2012 should result in stopping the trade of all hazardous chemicals that have been banned because they have been found too dangerous to be used in Europe. Under the current proposed amendments, this is not the case. Simply requiring prior informed consent for these substances is not enough to prevent harm to people and the environment. There's really no excuse for this double-standard. I refer you to the attached joint statement.
Read full response

Meeting with Markus Ferber (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

9 Jun 2023 · Insurance Regulation: Solvency II

Meeting with Brando Benifei (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

8 Mar 2023 · Discussion on the AIA

Meeting with Elena Montani (Cabinet of Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevičius)

19 Dec 2022 · Implementation of the commitment in the Chemicals Strategy to ban the export of hazardous chemicals not authorised in the EU

Meeting with Virginijus Sinkevičius (Commissioner) and

1 Dec 2022 · To accept petition signed by more than 210 000 citizens which requests to stop the export of hazardous chemicals which are banned in the Union, and to discuss on the status of this action of the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability.

Meeting with Brando Benifei (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

23 Mar 2022 · Discussion on the AIA

Response to Commission Delegated Regulation on taxonomy-alignment of undertakings reporting non-financial information

31 Aug 2020

The Commission Delegated Regulation on taxonomy-related disclosures should follow three key objectives to be environmentally sound and to prevent greenwashing: 1. Ensure that activities/investments included under the new taxonomy are “truly green”: a) Clearly distinguish green activities/investments that significantly contribute to carbon neutrality and uphold the “do no harm” principle from other activities. This entails that natural gas and nuclear energy must be excluded from the taxonomy: - Natural gas is a fossil fuel responsible for important GHG emissions, notably through methane leaks, and is not compatible with the taxonomy’s mitigation objective. The exploitation of current oil and gas reserves alone already breaks the carbon budget for a 1.5°C trajectory. The Commission should set a 50 gCO2/kWh threshold that would effectively exclude fossil gas from the taxonomy. - Nuclear energy cannot respect the “do no harm” principle. It produces large quantities of radioactive waste, with no reliable disposal solutions, and poses significant environmental threats (accidents, reconversion of plants…). b) Allow investors to identify more precisely which companies have a coherent climate policy, aligned on a 1.5°C trajectory, that both reduces their carbon footprint and develop low-carbon alternatives. All companies should disclose whether they commit to align on a 1.5°C trajectory or not and be required to explain and justify the contribution of taxonomy-aligned activities/investments to their climate strategy. 2. Prepare the implementation of a complementary taxonomy that identifies “polluting/high-carbon” activities by setting complementary disclosure requirements on the most polluting activities, starting with fossil fuels: a) Companies should disclose the proportion of their total investments (CapEx) and expenditures (OpEx) related to assets or processes associated with fossil fuel activities. b) Companies should explain how green activities/investments allow for the progressive phase-out of fossil fuel activities and the reduction of its overall carbon footprint. 3. Ensure a reliable and precise accounting of green activities and projects: a) Cover the whole production line for green activities. To do so, companies should disclose specific information regarding the role and activity of their subsidiaries involved in taxonomy-related activities. b) Provide detailed and easily available information on green projects. Companies should especially provide centralized and public access to environmental impact studies of their taxonomy-related projects. c) Precisely cover the share of green activities in the total activities of the company. In addition to information already specified in the Taxonomy regulation, companies should disclose information regarding the share of their revenues and absolute amount coming from taxonomy-related activities. We cannot stress enough that without any polluting/high-carbon taxonomy, the new EU sustainable taxonomy while not make a significant contribution to the European transition. Scaling-up green activities is important as it allows for the replacement of polluting/high-carbon activities such as fossil fuels. Alone it does not ensure the reduction of GHG emissions and does not allow investors to assess the environmental policy of companies. We need to fast-track the work on a polluting/high-carbon taxonomy.
Read full response

Response to Uniform principles for evaluation and authorisation of plant protection products

11 Jul 2019

Please find attached a file with responses to this consultation from 8854 European residents who are members of SumOfUs. Because of technical issues with the consultation website, we asked our members to submit their responses via a survey, and I am submitting them now for your review. Please consider each person's response as a separate entry to this consultation. I was in touch with your technical team on email and Twitter, so they are aware of the difficulties we had in using the Commission's website to take part in this democratic public consultation. The overwhelming feedback from SumOfUs members is that we want the Commission to do more to protect bees. The EU should assess all pesticides' impact on bees according to state-of-the art scientific methods, like the 2013 Bee Guidance document, as it did for three neonicotinoid pesticides that were banned last year. It should ban all pesticides that are equally dangerous to honeybees or wild bees. Otherwise the 2018 ban on bee-killing neonicotinoids will be undermined, as equally harmful chemicals will just replace them. The proposed regulation needs to include additional trigger values for chronic and larvae toxicity to honeybees. In light of the pollinator crisis, there also need to be trigger values for pesticides' toxicity to wild bees. Bumble bees and solitary bees must be protected too, not only honeybees. The EU should also ban the insecticides Sulfoxaflor and Thiacloprid, which have been shown to be harmful to bees. SumOfUs campaigns to hold big corporations to account and ensure a fairer, more sustainable economy. We use our power as citizens, consumers, workers and investors to hold the biggest companies in the world to account, and to make sure that citizens have as much of a say in their countries' governance and democracy as big business' corporate lobbyists. Sincerely, Rebecca Falcon Campaigns Manager SumOfUs
Read full response

Meeting with Léon Delvaux (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker) and Greenpeace European Unit and

20 Jun 2019 · Pesticides

Meeting with Miguel Arias Cañete (Commissioner) and Transport and Environment (European Federation for Transport and Environment) and

21 Jan 2019 · Implementation of the RED Directive