
Ex-army chief Lord Dannatt lobbied ministers for millions to support commercial deal
A member of the House of Lords lobbied the government to get financial support worth millions of pounds for a commercial deal he was steering, documents reveal.
It is the second time that Richard Dannatt, a former head of the British army, has potentially broken parliamentary rules that forbid lobbying.
He is under investigation by the House of Lords authorities over a separate set of allegations, following undercover filming by the Guardian.
The new documents reveal Lord Dannatt personally pressed ministers and a senior official to give political and financial backing to a venture he was chairing that was seeking to buy a Cheshire factory from a US owner in 2022.
After the owner announced they intended to shut it down, Dannatt increased the pressure, urging the government to help.
The crossbench peer made three key approaches. First, he contacted a minister he knew, asking for an introduction to the minister who was best placed to make the decision. Second, he sent an email pressing a civil servant to set up a meeting. 'My intervention is to elevate the discussion to ministerial level,' he wrote.
Less than two weeks later, Dannatt and an executive behind the bid met Lee Rowley, the relevant business minister, to push for government backing.
At issue is whether Dannatt broke the House of Lords rules that bar peers from lobbying ministers and officials in return for payment or financial incentive.
Dannatt said he was not paid for engaging with the government. He said he helped a friend, a leading businessperson in the consortium, attempt to buy the factory as he believed it would save jobs and help the country. 'Put simply, I was helping a friend achieve an outcome very much in the national interest,' he said.
Dannatt later received four payments during the period he was chairing the venture. He described these as 'honorarium' payments, but would not say how much he received.
He was also the public face and 'chairman' of the 'embryonic' venture.
Dannatt said his name and position added credibility to the discussions with the US company. 'I am not sure how else a retired four-star general who sits in the House of Lords could be described to the Americans,' he said, but he had agreed to take the title despite there being 'no board to chair, no meetings to attend or other business to conduct'.
His involvement with the consortium, which was ultimately unsuccessful in its bid, ended in February 2023.
Dannatt has been under investigation by the House of Lords authorities since March after the Guardian revealed he had offered to secure meetings with ministers for undercover reporters pretending to be commercial clients wanting to lobby the government.
He had been secretly filmed telling the undercover reporters he could make introductions within the government and that he would 'make a point of getting to know' the best-placed minister.
He is being investigated by the House of Lords commissioner for standards, the watchdog who scrutinises claims of wrongdoing in the upper chamber.
Dannatt, 74, has previously denied the allegations, saying: 'I am well aware of … the Lords code of conduct … I have always acted on my personal honour.'
He is one of five peers to face conduct inquiries after a months-long investigation by the Guardian.
The Lords debate project examined the commercial interests of members of the House of Lords amid concerns their activities were not being properly regulated. It revealed that 91 peers had been paid by commercial companies to give political or policy advice.
The new documents regarding Dannatt's communications with the government in June 2022 were disclosed under freedom of information legislation.
At the time Dannatt was fronting a group of investors who wanted to buy a fertiliser factory in Cheshire. CF Industries, the US owners, planned to permanently close the factory after energy prices made it unprofitable.
The consortium of investors argued that their proposal would save 500 jobs and keep important products used in the agriculture and hospitality industries within the UK.
On 10 June 2022, Dannatt emailed a junior business minister he knew, asking if he could tell him who was the minister with responsibility for this area. 'If you could point me in the right direction, ideally with an introduction, and I can take it from there.'
Sign up to First Edition
Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
after newsletter promotion
He promoted his UK-based consortium as a better 'economic and political alternative' to the closure of the factory.
'The alternative scenario is that a hedge fund buys the factory, sells off its assets and exits with a profit, allowing 500 workers to become redundant, the UK dependent on imported CO2 and no increase in fertiliser production thus the price remaining high.'
An introduction to the right minister was made. Six days later, the peer emailed a senior official in the business department, saying: 'I am aware that [Dannatt's friend] has been talking with officials but my intervention is to elevate the discussion to ministerial level. There are some quite key issues at stake here relating to jobs in the north-west and the price of some key commodities.'
On 27 June, Dannatt and Mark Law, his friend who was also leading the consortium, met Rowley, then a minister in the business department. The Financial Times has previously reported that the consortium sought a government loan of up to £10m to help restart the factory.
The government refused, arguing that it was purely a commercial matter. The consortium later collapsed.
Dannatt said he had not had any formal arrangements or contract with the consortium, nor had he discussed with Law what his future role might have been if they had managed to buy the factory. 'My motivation and purpose was to get a deal over the line, in the national interest,' he said.
He said any assumption that he 'would have developed a substantive and remunerated role as chairman and taken an active role in the work of the company' was wrong. He added that if the bid had been successful, 'it would have been a very different matter'.
As well as the continuing investigation by the House of Lords authorities, another watchdog has examined Dannatt's conduct. Last month, it cleared Dannatt of being paid by the consortium to lobby the government.
Harry Rich, the registrar of consultant lobbyists, is responsible for investigating whether individuals have broken the law by failing to declare that they have received money from a third party to lobby ministers or Whitehall's most senior officials.
However the House of Lords watchdog is considering the matter under a different set of rules which take a wider view of lobbying than the registrar of consultant lobbyists.
The question now is whether, as the consortium's chair, he advocated for the venture on the understanding that he could at some point benefit personally. This could be a breach of the Lords rules.
Dannatt has passed his correspondence with the Guardian about his involvement with the consortium to the House of Lords commissioner who is investigating his conduct when speaking to undercover reporters.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
42 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Keir Starmer branded a 'hypocrite' for condemning 'disgraceful' raid on UK airbase after previously defending RAF protesters in court
Sir Keir Starmer was last night accused of being a 'hypocrite' by Kemi Badenoch for condemning an attack on RAF Brize Norton – having previously defended airbase protesters and used them to build support for his Labour leadership campaign. The Prime Minister described the raid on the base by Palestine Action as 'disgraceful' and an 'act of vandalism' after the group posted footage showing protesters spraying red paint into the engines of two Airbus Voyager aircraft. But Sir Keir has not only argued, during his legal career, that breaking into an airbase and sabotaging its aircraft should be legal – he actually featured an activist in the video used to launch his successful leadership bid in 2020. When he was working as a human-rights barrister, Sir Keir defended Josh Richards, who was arrested after cutting the fence at RAF Fairford while carrying a petrol mixture intended to set fire to the aircraft. In stark contrast to his words on Friday, Starmer argued that Mr Richards' action was legal on the grounds that he was acting to prevent a wider crime – the Iraq war. Sir Keir also represented Lindis Percy, who was arrested over 500 times for breaking into and protesting outside RAF and US bases. In January 2020, when he was running for the Labour leadership, Sir Keir featured Ms Percy in his campaign launch video, in which she said, against the backdrop of images of campaigners: 'Keir defended me, and many others, to bring public scrutiny and awareness to the presence of the US visiting forces so that we can live in a more peaceful and less secretive society. Keir never asked for anything in return.' After Friday's attack, Sir Keir posted a message on X, formerly Twitter, saying: 'The act of vandalism committed at RAF Brize Norton is disgraceful. 'Our Armed Forces represent the very best of Britain and put their lives on the line for us every day. It is our responsibility to support those who defend us.' Last night, after No10 tried to justify the Prime Minister's actions by saying that under the 'cab rank rule' barristers were obliged to accept any case they were offered, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said: 'This is nothing to do with the barristers' cab rank rule or a lawyer defending their client. 'It's about integrity. I believe that those who aim to damage the British military are extremists and criminals who deserve to be thrown in jail. 'Keir Starmer is so proud of them he puts them in his campaign videos for the Labour leadership. 'This might help explain why, from paying £30billion to surrender the Chagos Islands, to signing several bad trade deals, when this Labour Prime Minister negotiates, Britain keeps losing. Starmer is a hypocrite and represents everything that is wrong with politics.' Home Secretary Yvette Cooper will move to proscribe the Palestine Action group in the coming weeks, effectively branding it as a terrorist organisation. It comes as the intelligence services are investigating whether Palestine Action has been covertly funded by Iran. A security review is now under way at military bases across the UK. A spokesman for Palestine Action said: 'When our government fails to uphold its moral and legal obligations, it is the responsibility of ordinary citizens to take direct action.' UK defence industry representatives have met with ministers on five occasions, appealing for them to take action against the group, arguing that the cost from the protests is running into tens of millions of pounds. Kevin Craven, the chief executive officer of ADS, the trade association for the UK's aerospace defence security and space sectors, said: 'We have repeatedly engaged with government and policing services, who are responding to a complex and evolving situation in a considered, encouraging and appropriate manner. 'But the scenes from Brize Norton are extremely worrying, and are indicative of a wider environment that our defence sector has been facing for some time. 'Regrettably, this type of violence and criminal damage is not new to our sectors; our members have been increasingly targeted over the past two years.'


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Broadcaster Selina Scott 'stabbed' in the leg by gang who stole her purse in 'traumatising' daylight robbery on busy West End street
Veteran broadcaster Selina Scott has revealed she was viciously attacked and robbed by an organised gang in broad daylight in London last week. Amid growing concerns about the spiralling crime epidemic in the capital, the former ITN News At Ten anchor has described how the terrifying assault – which took place on busy Piccadilly in Central London – left her 'shattered and traumatised'. Ms Scott, 74, a stalwart of British TV since the 1980s, was leaving a branch of Waterstones on Tuesday afternoon when she was struck on the back of her right knee, leaving her feeling as if she had been 'stabbed'. It was then she was set upon by a gang who attempted to grab her backpack. With astonishing bravery given they were carrying what appeared to be a weapon, Ms Scott fought back and was able to keep hold of the bag – only for one of the practised thieves to deftly unzip it and remove her purse before running off. She lost her bank cards, driving licence, and cash in the robbery, which left her feeling 'embarrassed and stupid'. But the incident raises damning questions about the Metropolitan Police's failure to robustly tackle such crimes amid a staggering 23.5 per cent increase in similar thefts in the last year alone. Ms Scott says she felt 'furious' at the lack of a police presence to deter or capture the criminals, despite being told by officers that such muggings were 'rife'. Speaking to The Mail on Sunday, Ms Scott said: 'I still feel shattered after what has happened. I can't believe it happened to me. 'I'm mentally resilient and physically fit, but if they can attack me in such a brazen way they can attack anyone. You're left feeling not just traumatised but stupid that you have somehow let it happen. 'I'm also furious about the lack of police on our streets. No wonder the gang who set about me have a sense of impunity – they can do anything they want because they know no one will stop them.' Ms Scott, who spends most of her time on her 200-acre estate in North Yorkshire, said she was attacked by 'around seven or eight' smartly dressed men and women, who appeared to be of East Asian origin. Ms Scott did not require medical attention but suffered severe bruising to her leg in the assault. 'I am now only too relieved it wasn't a knife they used,' she says. A Met Police spokesman said: 'While we understand that the victim was frustrated that she couldn't see any police officers on the street, a significant number of officers patrol the West End every day – not just in uniform on foot, but also in plain clothes and in vehicles to have the best opportunity to identify and apprehend suspects. 'We would be happy to talk to the victim to better understand her concerns.' London reminds me of lawless New York when I worked there in the 1990s. Why won't Sadiq Khan emulate mayor Bloomberg's zero tolerance crackdown? By Selina Scott Stepping out of Waterstones bookstore on Piccadilly in Central London on Tuesday afternoon, I felt a sudden blow to the back of my right knee, and a sharp jab of pain. It was so unexpected, and hurt so intensely, that the force of it propelled me forward. I stumbled, narrowly avoiding a fall. My initial reaction was simply that I had been stabbed. Then, as a young woman barged by, I wondered if the large bag she was carrying had caught me. It appeared to have sharp metal edging around the corners. A careless accident then, souring what was an otherwise gorgeous summer's day in which I'd come down from my farm in North Yorkshire and planned to visit the Royal Academy of Art and perhaps dip inside the cool interior of London's most beautiful church, St James's. Only, what happened next proved me horribly wrong. The events of the next few seconds were so swift and practised that it was clear it was a coordinated assault. A casually dressed group of seven or eight men and women of East Asian origin who had been walking in front of me, dressed in expensive sportswear, had turned and hemmed me in. One grabbed the straps from a designer Tumi backpack I had slung over my left shoulder and attempted to wrench it off. Shock and instinct made me hold on to the bag with a tight grip, as another member of the group barged into me. I realised, with growing alarm, that I was being attacked from both sides at the same time. I was right by a busy bus stop, although no one would have known what was going on. It was slick, brief and clearly engineered to happen in the middle of a crowd. Then it was over, as quickly as it had begun. I'd held on to my bag, still over my shoulder, and the gang, laughing, walked briskly ahead in the direction of The Ritz hotel. Feeling battered, confused and a little humiliated, I sought the sanctuary of Fortnum & Mason, a few hundred yards ahead. There, I realised, to my horror, that my bag's zip had been pulled back, it was wide open, and my purse, which held all my cash and cards had gone. My driving licence had also been taken, which gave the thieves my address. My heart dropped. I felt sick. Furious, too – the victim of targeted and well-rehearsed attack. Had the jab to the back of my leg meant to floor or distract me? My heart dropped. I felt sick. Furious, too – the victim of targeted and well-rehearsed attack. Had the jab to the back of my leg meant to floor or distract me? Either way, suddenly alone in the centre of a city I no longer recognised, I couldn't have felt more vulnerable. I resolved to find a police officer, but despite walking up and down some of London's busiest central areas – down Jermyn Street, along Piccadilly and over to Leicester Square – I saw none. West End Central police station, which would have been a ten-minute walk away, had closed permanently in 2021 after being sold to developers for a reported £50 million. No wonder opportunistic crimes like these are on the rise when bobbies have all but abandoned their beats. Giving up, I headed home, walking the three miles to my flat in Kensington because I had no cards with which to pay for a bus or taxi. Dazed and shattered, and with the pain in my leg only growing, I took a breather in Hyde Park to register the crime on my phone using the Met's online form. The next day I received a call to say that officers from Hammersmith police station would come to take a statement from me at 8am the following morning. But at the time they were due to arrive, they rang to say they couldn't come because they couldn't find an available police car. Really? The station is barely a half-hour walk away. Disappointed, I had to make do with discussing it over the phone with the officer instead. Such muggings were, he said, 'rife' in the capital at the moment. He asked if I wanted to take it any further and, honestly, I didn't. The pointlessness of reporting a crime so long after the event is infuriating – it's a tick-box exercise, nothing more. The chances of the police catching a gang with my vague description of their clothes and ethnicity must be almost nil. Ultimately, pursuing a report would mean me enduring a bureaucratic hurdle – filling in more forms online, having more phone calls. And for what? All of this could have been avoided if there were more police on our streets, which would serve as a deterrent to these thugs. It's futile having a police force at all in London if they can't adequately react to something like this. No wonder that gang had such a sense of impunity – they can do anything they want because they know no one will stop them. I've since learned that the CCTV outside Waterstones hasn't been operating for a year because of works on the building, so there will be no record of my assault. Did the gang know that? Thinking back, I wonder if I was targeted after one of the gang watched me pay for the books I'd bought in Waterstones. When I returned to Yorkshire on Friday morning, I passed through King's Cross station and there were big notices and announcements on a regular basis saying, 'Please take care, thieves are operating', and assuring travellers they were working closely with the police. What police? Where? It was galling. The truth is that London is not the city I used to know. Crimes like mine have rocketed more than 23 per cent in a year. It reminds me of lawless New York in the 1990s when I worked for CBS television. Times Square was so crime-ridden it was a no-go area. Yet the first priority of the Mayor of London should be to protect the public from lawlessness and keep police stations open in crime hotspots. Sir Sadiq Khan has instead overseen their wholesale closure. He would do well to learn from Michael Bloomberg who, when he became New York's mayor in 2002, said there would be zero tolerance of violence and robberies on the street. He launched a public safety initiative and dramatically increased 'stop and frisk' searches. The city became a place where you felt safe once more. Thankfully, although I'm licking my wounds from the attack, I am strong and fit from working every day on the fields and woodlands at my home. What chance do the frail and the weak have in London when confronted by the same thing? Certainly I'd advise anyone not to carry anything that might make them a target; be it a bag, a watch or jewellery. I will have, for some time, a visible reminder of the day I was mugged in London. What weapon my attackers had used to cause the bruise behind my knee, I don't know but at least it wasn't a knife. My bruise will pass but the mental scar will linger. Unless crimes like these are tackled, however, others may not be so fortunate.


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
FLOURISHING AFTER 50: My son, his partner and their kids have moved in with us to save - but now they want our money as well
Dear Vanessa, Our son is 32 with two young children. He and his partner have been renting for years, but with the cost of everything going up, they can't seem to get ahead. They've been slowly saving for a house deposit but it could take years. Recently, they asked if they could move in with us for a while to save more money. We agreed - it makes sense and we want to support them where we can. But now our son has taken it a step further and asked if we would consider contributing to their deposit so they can buy sooner. My husband and I are both 61 and still working. We've got retirement savings and some extra put aside, but we're not retired yet - and we don't have unlimited resources. My husband is very cautious and thinks helping financially is a bad idea. He's worried that once the money is gone, we won't get it back - and we might end up needing it down the track. I can see both sides, and I'm torn. We want to help, but not at the expense of our own future. What's the right thing to do? Christine. Dear Christine, You've described a dilemma so many families are facing right now. With housing unaffordability, high living costs, and interest rates biting, adult children are under enormous financial pressure- and often, their first thought is to turn to mum and dad. It's understandable. You're the generation who built up savings, paid down debt, and likely bought property at a more achievable price. To your children, you may look financially secure. But what they often don't realise is that retirement is getting more expensive, we're all living longer, and your money has to stretch much further than it used to. Opening your home to help them save is already a generous act - and likely to be a huge help. But giving away money, especially before you've even retired, is a completely different decision. Once you gift a lump sum, it's usually gone for good. And if something changes - your health, your job, or even their relationship - you can't always get it back. That doesn't mean you can't help. But it does mean being crystal clear about what you can safely afford to give, and what impact it will have on your lifestyle for the next 20 or 30 years. That's where a conversation with a good financial adviser can make all the difference. They can model what a gift or loan would do to your future income and help you structure it properly, so it's protected. For example, if your son and his partner were to split up, would you want your contribution to be part of a legal agreement or loan that's repaid? Or is this money a gift with no expectations? These are emotional decisions, but they have real financial consequences. And just as importantly, you and your husband need to be on the same page. If one of you feels uneasy, that's a sign to slow down and gather more information before making any commitments. Money given under pressure or guilt often causes long-term resentment - especially if it later affects your ability to live the retirement you planned. If you need help finding an adviser in your area, I offer a free referral service to connect you with someone experienced and independent. Supporting your family is a wonderful thing - but so is securing your own future, so you can enjoy your retirement, your freedom, and the time you've earned with your grandkids.