Challenge

Within a climate of instigated political fear in the USA for China’s corporations, Huawei was starting to have a credibility problem in the EU, despite adherence to EU standards and a strong commitment to Europe. Huawei’s reputation and thus business development being at risk over its products’ cyber security concerns, Alber & Geiger was called to mitigate these concerns and build support in Europe.

A major focus was the 5G rollout under the EU toolbox in several European member states. The respective European cybersecurity strategy conflicted with the bilateral corporation agreement several EU member states had signed with the United States on cybersecurity, especially targeting Chinese suppliers like Huawei.

Strategy

Alber & Geiger targeted key Members of the European Parliament in all relevant committees and across the political spectrum, to emphasize Huawei’s commitment to Europe, adherence to EU standards and contribution to the European economy through leading products and services, jobs creation and investments in research and development. In that context we established an alternate strategy with the European Commission and related EU agencies to show that Huawei is fully integrated in the EU market and successful for business reasons only.

Results

Our engagement demonstrated to EU law makers that there was no Chinese government involvement in Huawei’s business strategies, let alone any cyber security issue with Huawei’s devices. By doing so, we advanced Huawei’s business interests in Europe.

Challenge

The EU had banned the pesticide Mancozeb as part of its Green Deal strategy. The ban on Mancozeb triggered a Maximum Residue Level (MRLs) review of the EU for imported bananas treated with Mancozeb, which could negatively affect the banana trade into the European Union. It was against this background that the leading banana companies including Dole, Delmonte and Chiquita reached out to Alber & Geiger, to provide regulatory and political support around MRLs in bananas.

Strategy

We were able – in a short period of time – to devise a strategy that put the spotlight on the necessity of Mancozeb and lack of efficient alternatives. We also helped put together evidence on the safety of the continued use of Mancozeb in bananas owing to the characteristics of bananas, and no associated dietary and health risks. Finally, our team brought to the attention of decision-makers trade and development arguments that emphasized further the importance of a balanced decision.

Results

The Rapporteur Member State Greece carried out an assessment of Mancozeb in bananas and proposed a Maximum Residue Level in line with the international standard under CODEX-CXL. In addition, we were able to garner support for our arguments and the preservation of the international standard for the use of Mancozeb in bananas with relevant lawmakers in the European Parliament, and key decision makers in the member states and European Commission departments.

Challenge

The patent holder of Teflon™, US Fortune 500 chemical company Chemours, approached Alber & Geiger seeking regulatory and advocacy support over a European Union proposal that would ban all per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Those PFAS are chemicals that came under regulatory fire as being the so called “forever chemicals”, which persist in the environment. The political turbulences in the EU started in the Netherlands, continued in Italy and Germany then, until they became an EU wide regulatory initiative in Brussels.

Strategy

On the one hand we were confronted with planned PFAS bans in The Hague, Rome and Berlin which we had to politically manage with the national governments. On the other hand we saw a regulatory initiative develop in Brussels under the EU chemicals strategy. We embarked on a defense for the Chemours specific PFAS named GenX and Teflon™, based on the planned PFAS restrictions. Considering the impact of the restrictions to the supply chains of various Member States, Alber & Geiger entered into discussions with the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), the European Commission, the European Parliament, the EU Permanent Representations and the Member States’ Ministries of Industry and Environment.

Results

We managed to stop the national PFAS bans in The Hague, Berlin and Rome. And we aligned them with the EU initiative. There, we made EU regulators and lawmakers understand that they needed to differentiate between different PFAS, such as PFAS of high or low concern, as a liquid, gas or solid material.