Significant legislative changes are ahead in the area of legal regulation of critical infrastructure. These changes are related to the implementation of the European directive on the resilience of critical entities, known as CER (Critical Entities Resilience Directive). Its main goal is to strengthen the resilience of critical infrastructure against current threats such as terrorism, cyberattacks, or natural disasters. “This goal is primarily achieved by expanding the list of sectors considered critical infrastructure. Member states will then be able to independently adjust, beyond the scope defined by the directive, which areas will be included in critical infrastructure,” explains Barbora Vlachová, head of the legal team at the law firm PORTOS specializing in cybersecurity, digital transformation, and IT law.
Filip Drnec is the Executive Director of Access EU, a company that provides clients not only with legislative but also financial and relational consulting services in Brussels. In practice, he focuses primarily on issues related to European law and European policies. As the integration between the Czech Republic and the European Union deepens, he himself is dedicating more and more time to European activities.
“Many Czech companies have understood the importance of establishing a European strategy in recent years, which has been clearly reflected in our client portfolio. If someone is building a modern investment project worth hundreds of millions or billions, proper anchoring in the European context can also help with financing. And if the European Commission creates a financial instrument potentially interesting for our clients, we try to assist them with communication and fulfilling the necessary conditions. We know the Brussels environment and are able to put the needs of Czech companies into the context of European policies,” explains Drnec, who is also a member of the leadership of the second largest Czech law firm, Portos (formerly Císař, Češka, Smutný).
► What are Czech companies currently most focused on in relation to the EU?
A large part of what Czech companies need to do and how they should behave in managing their own companies stems from European policies. Topics like ESG, cybersecurity, or historically GDPR have made many consultants quick money. However, these are just trending topics that, when isolated like that, don’t really make sense to clients. Instead, we teach clients to understand the bigger picture, help them set their strategy and run their companies in compliance with European rules so that they avoid internal destabilization. A pleasant benefit is also the subsequent eligibility to obtain European funding. We can help with all this thanks to our long-term presence directly in Brussels and cooperation with other consulting firms.
► How difficult was it to build a position towards the EU?
Ten years ago, I started in Brussels as an intern at an international Public Affairs company, which laid the foundations for our long-term cooperation. Thanks to this partnership, today we can handle agendas that are key for our clients – right where legislation is created. Although it used to be common for even domestic law firms to have representations in Brussels, in many cases this proved to be ineffective in the long run. It was more about building an image than having a real impact. Moreover, over time, companies’ interest in the European agenda significantly declined. This trend only reversed with the arrival of the Green Deal and other policies that more significantly affected their daily operations. Thanks to our Brussels contacts, we were able to respond relatively quickly and offer tailored services to Czech companies.
► Do you think the once negative connotations of the EU towards the Czech Republic, and vice versa, are changing?
Definitely. Today people here know who leads the central EU bodies and know the names of Czechs who represent them in Brussels and do real work there. The Czech representation in Brussels has been “illuminated” from a different angle and lost its negative stigma. However, there is still a belief that Brussels dictates something to us and that we must adapt. But that is far from the truth. The Brussels legislative process is open, and there are several tools to get involved. If a company or individual can articulate reasoned positions and opinions, they can actively participate in this process. This procedure is regulated by law and has been tested over many years. But as Czechs, we have not yet learned how to work with it. A big change also happened in how the Union perceives us. It has become clear that after 20 years in the EU, we know how to behave, how to present ourselves, and even how to negotiate. The successful Czech Presidency in 2022 helped a lot with this. Thanks to that, Brussels is a much friendlier environment for us today. When we go with a client to a meeting in Brussels, we always find a partner to discuss with.
► Do national ties work in the European Parliament, or is it more about expertise in a given field?
There is almost no such thing as national ties in Brussels, except for elected MEPs. Contact with them, however, is definitely not what our clients pay us for. We communicate long-term with a number of people across member states and EU structures—from officials to MEPs to commissioners. Added value arises only when you manage to engage a broader group of people. Twenty-one Czech MEPs, often with quite diverse opinions, are definitely not enough for that. This involves creating strategies and mapping key actors and personalities in the process. Every activity must reach a wider range of people, whether in committees, political groups, specific politicians, or officials. From the expertise perspective, these officials are absolutely crucial. Although political representation changes with European Parliament elections, the civil service remains the same. This ensures continuity and ongoing work on projects.
► A month and a half has passed since the European elections. Has anything changed in the European Parliament or in client attitudes?
It’s clear that some expectations formed even before the elections have been fulfilled, for example regarding the aforementioned Green Deal. It has become apparent that for a large part of Europeans, this is such a fundamental issue that some of its parameters will need to be at least partially reconsidered. It is already clear that the continent will adapt more to industry requirements in the spirit of the European Industrial Deal, which was created this spring in Antwerp. This was one of the crucial milestones that set the willingness of Brussels to somewhat back down from the intense “Green Deal” campaign and rationalize the topic. The previous term of the European Parliament and Commission was unusually turbulent. First, the COVID pandemic, and then the war in Ukraine with the subsequent energy crisis. These are major issues the Union had to deal with – whether in the Commission, Parliament, or Council. Everyone had to accept crisis plans and solutions that will largely shape the new term. The next five years will therefore focus mainly on energy, industrial innovation, revision of the stance on the defense industry, and, of course, competitiveness, which is a common denominator for all these topics.
► You mentioned rationalizing the Green Deal. Have European politicians and officials realized that the continent would severely undermine a key economic sector?
Even previous supporters of the current form of the Green Deal now admit that its goals are unrealistic in some respects. The Antwerp declaration and its call to conclude a European industrial deal represented a huge step forward, with several thousand signatories from European companies and enterprises already signed under it. They clearly stated that the topic needs to be rationalized and given new parameters to ensure their long-term competitiveness.
Absolute decarbonization simply isn’t possible in some sectors at present, and others don’t have sufficient financial support for such a step. The automotive industry is of course a huge topic, not only regarding decarbonization but also the recent imposition of tariffs on imported Chinese electric cars. European car manufacturers mostly disagree with this step and expect a response from the Chinese side.
► Do you expect the newly composed European Parliament to insist on ending combustion engines by 2035?
Combustion cars will continue to run. Over time it has become clear that electromobility brings a number of problems. Its development is also hampered by a lack of infrastructure. The topic of automotive transport will be part of the revision of the whole decarbonization effort. It is not right to reject electromobility, but we must admit that there is still a lot of work left before it can be finalized. And the ban in 2035 certainly will not help with that. In the 1990s, we watched movies where cars flew by 2020, but the reality is very different and we don’t even have efficient road traffic solutions. We need to take a step back, focus on innovation, infrastructure development, and the entire system that will safely allow us to make such an important step. Only when these basic pillars are firmly established can we build the idea of 100% electromobility. For now, it is still more like ’90s sci-fi.
