The Bench Report

UK Lobbying: Regulation, Scandals, and the Push for Transparency

• The Bench Report • Season 2 • Episode 11

Share episode

This episode looks at the world of lobbying in UK politics, exploring its definition, perceived benefits and drawbacks. We discuss the existing regulatory framework, primarily the Transparency of Lobbying Act 2014, which focuses on consultant lobbyists. Drawing on scrutiny and academic analysis, we highlight key criticisms of the Act, such as its narrow scope and perceived lack of transparency. The impact of the Greensill Capital collapse and subsequent inquiries is examined. Finally, we look at suggested reforms aimed at enhancing transparency and accountability in the UK lobbying landscape.

Key Takeaways:

  • Lobbying involves individuals or groups trying to persuade those in Parliament or public office to support specific policies or campaigns.
  • Lobbying can provide policymakers with diverse perspectives and expert input, potentially leading to better-informed decisions.
  • It can also be problematic if privileged access leads to policies favouring select interests over the public good, potentially undermining public confidence.
  • The primary legislation, the Transparency of Lobbying Act 2014, requires consultant lobbyists to register their clients, aiming to increase transparency.
  • The Act has been widely criticised for being too narrow, missing most lobbying activity (like in-house lobbyists).
  • Incidents like the Greensill Capital collapse have led to calls for reform, including proposals to broaden transparency requirements and strengthen rules.
  • Recall petitions can be triggered by lobbying activity that breaches parliamentary rules, although this process doesn't always result in a by-election.
  • Academic rankings suggest UK lobbying regulation has "low robustness" compared to countries like the USA.

How can we balance the democratic good lobbying can represent (introducing diverse perspectives) against the problems of privileged access and potential for undue influence? How can a regulatory system best navigate this tension to ensure transparency and maintain public confidence?

Source: Lobbying in UK Politics - Research Briefing.

Support the show

Follow and subscribe to 'The Bench Report' on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and YouTube for new episodes Mon-Thurs: thebenchreport.co.uk

Extended shownotes for selected episodes can be found at: thebenchreport.substack.com

Shape our next episode! Get in touch with an issue important to you - Producer Tom will grab another coffee and start the research!

Email us: thebenchreportuk@gmail.com

Follow us on YouTube, X, Bluesky, Facebook and Instagram @BenchReportUK

Support us for bonus episodes and more.

No outside chatter: source material only taken from Hansard and the Parliament UK website.

Contains Parliamentary information repurposed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

Amy:

Hello and welcome to The Bench Report. You're listening to Amy and Ivan. Today, an episode on parliamentary procedure.

Ivan:

And specifically, we're going to be looking at lobbying in the UK.

Amy:

Yes. Using a recent research briefing as our guide, it feels crucial really to understand how different groups try to influence parliament if you want to grasp how the whole system works

Ivan:

absolutely and this briefing gives a pretty solid overview what lobbying actually is how it's regulated or perhaps meant to be regulated here and some of the debates around it

Amy:

okay let's start there then how does the uk parliament itself define lobbying what are we actually talking about

Ivan:

well the briefing puts it as trying to persuade someone in parliament Could be an MP, could be a lord about a particular policy or campaign.

Amy:

And that persuasion can happen in lots of ways.

Ivan:

Oh, yes. Face-to-face meetings, emails, you know, even social media now. Fundamentally, it's about building a relationship, creating influence with a public office holder.

Amy:

Right. And who's doing this influencing? Who are these lobbyists?

Ivan:

It's quite a mix, actually. You've got the professional lobbying firms, the ones you might think of first. Sure. But also... Trade unions fighting for their members, think tanks pushing research findings, NGOs campaigning on specific issues.

Amy:

And companies themselves.

Ivan:

Exactly. Corporations often have their own teams doing this and their goal. Ultimately, it's about shaping policy, maybe landing government contracts, or sometimes even influencing key appointments.

Amy:

This doesn't sound like a new phenomenon. Have people always been a bit worried about the potential downsides?

Ivan:

Oh, for centuries. Seriously. The briefing points to parliamentary resolutions way back in 1695. And again, in 1858, condemning things like bribery or offering MPs rewards for acting in a certain way. So this concern about lobbying being used for private gain rather than, you know, the public good, it's got a long history.

Amy:

And they don't just aim for the top people like ministers.

Ivan:

No, not at all. The targets are really varied. It could be ministers, yes, but also individual backbench MPs, influential select committees looking into specific topics.

Amy:

Political parties.

Ivan:

Political parties themselves trying to get things into manifestos. Civil servants, too, the ones actually grafting the details of legislation, and even the media trying to shape the public conversation around an issue.

Amy:

So what techniques do they actually use to, well, get their point across?

Ivan:

A whole range. Direct contact is big. Setting up meetings, sending emails or letters. Participating in official government consultations is another way.

Amy:

Engaging with the media, too, you mentioned.

Ivan:

Yes. Media campaigns. And then there's political financing. Donating to parties or campaigns. Forming alliances with other like-minded groups can also amplify their message.

Amy:

And timing must be key. It's not just about when a law is being debated.

Ivan:

Absolutely crucial. Lobbying happens before legislation is even drafted that pre-legislative stage. It happens intensely during a bill's passage through Parliament when amendments can be made.

Amy:

And even afterwards.

Ivan:

And even after a law is passed to influence how it's implemented and enforced. It's really a continuous process for many.

Amy:

Is it always seen as problematic, though? The briefing mentions arguments that it can actually be, well, good for democracy.

Ivan:

It's definitely seen as a bit of a double edged sword. The positive argument is that lobbying brings diverse perspectives to policymakers. It can flag potential problems of the policy, you know, unintended consequences.

Amy:

And show levels of support or opposition.

Ivan:

Exactly. It helps policymakers gauge the potential impact and reaction to their plans, provides information they might not get otherwise. But

Amy:

the flip side is that nagging worry about unequal access, isn't it? That some voices just carry more weight.

Ivan:

That's the core criticism, really. Not everyone has the resources, the connections, the know-how to lobby effectively. So there's a real risk that powerful private interests, often corporate ones with deeper pockets, can drown out the wider public interest.

Amy:

Like the example mentioned with Lord Cameron and accessing former colleagues.

Ivan:

Precisely. Those kinds of examples fuel the concern about privileged access. and whether the playing field is truly level.

Amy:

What's the general feeling among the public about this? Are people suspicious?

Ivan:

Opinion seems pretty mixed, maybe leaning towards skeptical. There was a survey back in 2011 suggesting over half felt lobbyists had too much influence.

Amy:

And more recently... Especially after things like the Greensill story.

Ivan:

Yes. Surveys after Greensill definitely highlighted concerns, particularly around former ministers using their contacts after leaving office. It raised questions about propriety.

Amy:

So given these worries, what's in place to actually regulate lobbying in the UK?

Ivan:

Well, historically, it was very much based on the good chap theory, sort of informal understandings and self-regulation.

Amy:

Right, assuming everyone behaves properly.

Ivan:

Kind of. But more formal internal rules have developed. The Nolan Principles are key things like selflessness, integrity, objectivity they apply to everyone in public life.

Amy:

And specific codes for different groups.

Ivan:

Yes, there are codes of conduct for civil servants focusing on impartiality, for MPs in the Commons about not taking payment for advocating, similar rules for lords emphasizing the public interest, and the ministerial code for government ministers about avoiding conflicts.

Amy:

And that includes the cooling-off periods for ex-ministers.

Ivan:

Yes, there are usually rules limiting what lobbying roles former ministers can take up immediately after leaving government.

Amy:

Then we got the specific legislation in 2014, the Transparency of Lobbying Act. What was that meant to achieve?

Ivan:

The main aim stated was, well, transparency. To shine a light on some lobbying. It set up a register for what are called consultant lobbyists.

Amy:

OK, who counts as a consultant lobbyist under the act?

Ivan:

It's quite specific. It's someone paid to lobby government ministers or the most senior civil servants, permanent secretaries about policy, contracts or grants on behalf of a client. And they need to be VAT registered.

Amy:

So the register shows who they are and who they're lobbying

Ivan:

for. Essentially, yes. Their details and their clients' details.

Amy:

But the briefing highlights quite a few criticisms of this act. It sounds like it didn't go far enough for some.

Ivan:

That's a very common view. A major criticism is how narrow that definition is. It crucially misses out in-house lobbyists, people employed directly by companies or charities to lobby.

Amy:

So if you work for the company itself, you don't need to register.

Ivan:

Generally, no, not under this act. And it also doesn't cover lobbying of slightly less senior officials or, importantly, special advisors who can be very influential.

Amy:

And compared to other countries.

Ivan:

The U.K. system is often seen as, well... Less robust, lacking the scope and perhaps the enforcement teeth seen elsewhere.

Amy:

The green cell situation really brought these issues into focus, didn't it?

Ivan:

It certainly did. Although the investigation found Lord Cameron hadn't technically breached the lobbying act because he was classed as an employee, not a consultant lobbyist.

Amy:

Aha, that loophole.

Ivan:

Exactly. It highlighted that loophole and led to widespread calls for much greater transparency. Recommendations came forward for more frequent data releases, including special advisors in the scope, covering things like WhatsApp messages.

Amy:

And reviews were launched.

Ivan:

Yes. Nigel Boardman's review suggested strengthening transparency rules and potentially widening the definition The Treasury Select Committee also called for tougher rules after looking into Green Cell.

Amy:

It's interesting, too, the link mentioned between lobbying activities and recall petitions for MPs.

Ivan:

Yes, that shows how seriously Parliament and the public can view these issues when misconduct is alleged. We saw cases like Ian Paisley, Scott Benton more recently, and Owen Patterson previously, where lobbying-related conduct either triggered a petition or led to immense pressure.

Amy:

So breaking lobbying rules can have very direct consequences for an MP's career.

Ivan:

Absolutely. It underlines the ethical standards expected.

Amy:

And just finally, looking internationally, how does the UK stack up? You mentioned it's seen as less robust.

Ivan:

Well, only about 18 countries globally actually have specific lobbying legislation. There's a think tank, the Center for Public Integrity, that created a robustness score.

Amy:

How does that work?

Ivan:

It looks at things like how lobbyists is defined, the registration rules, requirements to disclose spending, and crucially, enforcement mechanisms.

Amy:

And the UK's score?

Ivan:

It's relatively low. The briefing mentioned a score of 28 for the UK compared to something like 62 for the USA, which has much broader registration and disclosure requirements. Canada is also often cited as having stronger rules. It suggests our framework maybe leaves quite a bit in the shadows compared to others.

Amy:

That gives us a really clear picture, thank you. Lobbying is clearly a complex part of parliamentary procedure with ongoing debate about how transparency works

Ivan:

Thanks for listening.

Amy:

Next episode, we look at select committees. Find us on socials at BenchReportUK. Take care.

Podcasts we love

Check out these other fine podcasts recommended by us, not an algorithm.

Parliament Matters Artwork

Parliament Matters

Hansard Society
Pod Save the UK Artwork

Pod Save the UK

Crooked Media