Latest news with #LabourInfrastructureForum
Times
a day ago
- Business
- Times
Keir Starmer must let in sunlight to avoid further lobbying scandals
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton long ago predicted that lobbying would be 'the next big scandal' to hit politics, warning of the dangers of what happens behind closed doors. 'We all know how it works. The lunches, the hospitality, the quiet word in your ear, the ex-ministers and ex-advisers for hire, helping big business find the right way to get its way,' he said in 2010. It was somewhat apt that despite introducing the first real oversight for lobbyists, the former prime minister was caught in just such a scandal after he departed from office. Despite a repeated cycle of scandals involving what Lord Cameron spoke of, lobbyists have continued to work in the shadows. As this newspaper has exposed, the Starmer government is facing serious questions over 'cash for access' after businesses were approached by a Labour group offering private meetings with 'an influential Labour figure'. The Labour Infrastructure Forum (LIF), which is run by lobbyists from Bradshaw Advisory along with an advisory council of senior party figures, has offered businesses the chance to meet 'key policymakers' to help 'shape the discussion'. The forum has offered sponsorship packages for potential clients, including breakfast meetings for almost £9,500. Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the Treasury, has spoken at an LIF event. • Labour 'leaving public in the dark' about payments from lobbyists Although the LIF insists that the sponsorship money is used to cover costs, the group declined a request by The Times to disclose details of which companies had sponsored events at what cost until its next annual report. The Labour Party too has declined to say which senior figures had attended any LIF meetings. Yet undercover reporting has shown Gerry McFall, director of the forum alongside his leading role at Bradshaw Advisory, boasted of meetings between his clients and senior figures in government, including Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary. There is a clear problem here that must be addressed. The Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists, which was set up during Lord Cameron's premiership, governs lobbying and is supposed to ensure it is transparent and open. Businesses who regularly engage in lobbying, known as 'consultant lobbyists', are required to register their activities. Yet the LIF was not required to register as it did not fall under this category: in-house lobbyists who are employed directly by companies, think tanks or 'forums' are not required to register. This must be addressed: all lobbying activity should be recorded, along with the details of who exactly is meeting which ministers. That being said, ministers should show more common sense. Mr Jones should have done due diligence before speaking at an LIF event. The same goes for Mr Reynolds, the minister most exposed to the potential influence of businesses. The lack of records charting his meeting with a Bradshaw Advisory client at a Labour conference highlights another flaw in transparency rules, which does not require ministers to report meetings at such events not deemed to be in a ministerial capacity. Even if the party insists it was instead 'held in a political capacity', Mr Reynolds should have realised that he should strive for transparency. • How we exposed Labour's cosy links to lobbyists None of this is to say that all lobbying is inherently bad, or that onerous restrictions are required. It is essential to good policy making that ministers hear from businesses — particularly a government that has as little private sector experience as this one. But it must be done in an open and transparent manner, something lacking at present. According to an analysis by the Chartered Institute of Public Relations, registered Westminster lobbyists account for just 0.5 per cent of registered lobbyists across a host of similar countries. If Sir Keir Starmer is to avoid further such scandals, he must strengthen the oversight. By letting in as much sunlight as possible, it will go some way to curtail any sense of wrongdoing, real or perceived.
Times
2 days ago
- Business
- Times
Fifty peers have worked for lobbying firms since last year
At least 50 members of the House of Lords have worked for lobbying firms since January last year despite MPs being banned from paid advisory roles, a Times investigation has found. These include Lord Wood of Anfield, a Labour life peer who was appointed as chairman of the influential Lords economic affairs select committee while also being employed by the lobbying firm Bradshaw Advisory. The findings raise questions as to why peers do not face the same restrictions as MPs on work with public affairs firms. Lord Wood of Anfield HOUSE OF COMMONS In July last year MPs voted to bar themselves from accepting roles advising firms on how they might change laws, after a series of sleaze scandals. There are increasing calls for an overhaul of Britain's lobbying rules, with proposed changes including that peers should be banned from taking paid roles at consultant lobbying firms. An investigation by The Times into the UK's lobbying industry has revealed some of the inadequacies in the current rules. It found that in recent months businesses have been offered private meetings with 'an influential Labour figure' as part of sponsorship packages costing almost £9,500. The group which has been offering these deals — the Labour Infrastructure Forum (LIF) — is not part of the government, calls itself a think tank and is run by lobbyists from Bradshaw Advisory alongside an advisory council of senior Labour figures. The findings have only come to light because a prospectus for the group was leaked to reporters. The UK's lobbying rules do not compel lobbying firms to publicly disclose their meetings. Wood, who advised Gordon Brown in government and served under Ed Miliband as a shadow minister in opposition, was initially employed last year by Bradshaw Advisory as a 'senior adviser on public policy issues', according to his parliamentary register of interests. He ceased this role on January 31 this year, but continues to be employed by the lobbying firm as a non-executive director. In January, Wood was also appointed as chairman of the House of Lords economic affairs select committee, which scrutinises the work of the government on economic regulation. The committee is currently overseeing an investigation into the financial consequences of an ageing society, including discussions on pensions. Bradshaw Advisory has previously listed lobbying clients with interests in this area, including a pension fund and a representative group for finance companies. Bradshaw Advisory said it was 'lucky to have the world-leading economics and public policy academic, Lord Wood' as its non-executive director. A spokesman said that he advised the firm on business strategy, growth, economics, policy and people development and that 'he is not, and never has been, involved in any lobbying activity'. The spokesman said that Wood followed the House of Lords rules of conduct at all times and his relationship with the firm was disclosed on the House of Lords register. • How we exposed Labour's cosy links to lobbyists Bradshaw Advisory also oversees the day-to-day running of the LIF. There is no suggestion that Wood has been involved with the running of the LIF or any of its sponsorship deals. Bradshaw Advisory said it had 'complied with the law and disclosure rules at all times'. Another senior Labour peer, the government whip Baroness Blake of Leeds, was a member of the LIF for a time before ending her involvement with the group several months ago. The LIF said that it was an independent legal entity to Bradshaw Advisory and it did not engage in lobbying. It said it developed policy proposals focused on growth, sponsorship was used to cover its costs and that details about its sponsored work would be made publicly available in its next annual report. The Times collated the names of firms which have declared lobbying activity on official registers including the UK's Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists (ORCL), the UK's Public Relations and Communications Association (PRCA) register and the EU's lobbying register. Reporters found that 50 peers have taken roles at lobbying firms included in these registers since January last year, including 19 who have previously served as government ministers. Baroness Vere of Norbiton faced criticism earlier this year when she announced that she would be taking a role as a partner of Stonehaven, which is registered as a consultant lobbying firm with the ORCL, and leading the firm's work on transport. She previously served in the Rishi Sunak government as a minister in the Department for Transport. After a day in the role Vere left the position, according to her Lords register of interests. The UK's Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba) bans former ministers from lobbying for two years after leaving office, but Vere is understood to have been assured that she could take the job because her role would not include lobbying. Vere said she has always abided by and would continue to abide by the ministerial code advice provided by Acoba, and the code of conduct for members of the House of Lords. A Stonehaven spokesman said it was a longstanding member of the PRCA and took the letter and spirit of its rules seriously. They added: 'On reflection, we shouldn't have offered a role to Charlotte Vere. Stonehaven and Charlotte mutually agreed that she shouldn't join us and Stonehaven also ended its relationship with all other peers at the same time as part of the same process.' Baroness Vere of Norbiton ROGER HARRIS/HOUSE OF LORDS More widely, analysis by The Times of the Lords register of interests found that 196 peers registered at least one advisory role to any business in the past year, making up more than one in five members of the House of Lords. This included Baroness Brown of Cambridge, who was hired last year by the UK arm of the energy firm Holtec as a senior adviser. At the time she was chair of the House of Lords science and technology committee and she continued in this role until January this year. She is a current member of the Lords intelligence and security committee, a role she has had since December. Bradshaw Advisory has declared Holtec as one of its lobbying clients, according to the ORCL. Holtec said that Brown was one of the UK's most prominent engineers, that it was proud she had advised Holtec Britain, this role was 'entirely appropriate' and she had always declared her interests clearly and appropriately. A spokesman said: 'She is not involved in any lobbying activity.' Holtec said it had not sponsored the Labour Party or the LIF. Gabe Winn, CEO and founder of public affairs and communications firm Blakeney, said: 'Other countries have cleaned up their rules, and the UK must now do the same. The answer is glaringly obvious: no legislator should be paid, in any form, by a lobbying firm. You can shape policy or be paid to influence it — not both.' The House of Lords said it had a robust code of conduct, enforced via an independent investigatory process, which ensured transparency in members' financial interests and banned lobbying the government or other parliamentarians on behalf of those interests. A spokesman said: 'Unlike MPs, members of the House of Lords are not full-time salaried politicians.'
Telegraph
2 days ago
- Business
- Telegraph
Labour faces questions over £30,000 ‘cash for access'
A Labour group is facing questions over 'cash for access' after offering businesses private meetings with 'an influential Labour figure' in return for thousands of pounds, it has been reported. The Labour Infrastructure Forum (LIF), which is run by lobbyists and has an advisory council of senior party figures, has reportedly been offering sponsorship packages to businesses since it launched last summer. Companies are said to have been approached and offered the chance to sponsor events at which they can meet 'key policymakers' in private and ' shape the discussion '. Deals on offer have included £7,850 plus VAT for a 'private breakfast/dinner roundtable with an influential Labour figure', £11,750 plus VAT for a 'parliamentary panel event with key policymakers', and between £21,500 and £30,000 plus VAT to sponsor a 'Westminster drinks reception', according to The Times. LIF describes itself as a think tank on its website and said its mission was to develop policy proposals focused on 'getting Britain building and growing again'. The group was launched in September at an event that featured speeches from Darren Jones, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, and Varun Chandra, a business and investment adviser to Sir Keir Starmer. Its advisory council includes three Labour MPs – Mike Reader, Kirsteen Sullivan, and Bill Esterson – alongside Ruth Kelly, a former transport secretary, and Lord McNicol of West Kilbride, who served as general secretary of the Labour Party from 2011 to 2018. Baroness Blake of Leeds, a government whip in the House of Lords, was also involved in the group until several months ago. According to The Times, the group is not a lobbying company or part of the Labour Party, meaning it does not have to abide by rules for lobbying firms or political parties. It also has no legal obligation to publicly disclose details of payments it has received from sponsors, or of who has attended its private events. It also does not have to register with the lobbying watchdog, the Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists (ORCL). Gerry McFall, the group's director, is also the director of the lobbying firm Bradshaw Advisory, which is said to have a strong relationship with government figures. He reportedly told undercover reporters that one of the firm's clients had been able to have a meeting with Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary, at last year's Labour Party conference. However, the LIF claimed it had told the undercover reporters it does not engage in consultant lobbying activity. An LIF spokesman said: 'LIF is a think tank, does not engage in consultant lobbying and does not have clients, and is therefore not required by law to register with the ORCL. This is clear on LIF's website and in any communications or contractual arrangements with potential sponsors. 'Like all think tanks, LIF seeks sponsorship to operate and cover costs, and does so on a case-by-case basis. 'LIF does not endorse any of its sponsors' products or services. LIF's policy work is entirely editorially independent from any sponsorship and solely expresses the views of LIF's executive.' The Times also reported that the Labour Party's events team offered lobbyists the chance to pay £15,000 plus VAT to partner with the party for winter receptions at which their staff could meet MPs. Officials reportedly emailed the companies saying any payments would not have to be publicised as they were a 'commercial transaction' rather than a 'gift to the party' and so was 'not a recordable donation'. A Labour Party spokesman said: 'Commercial partnerships at events are a longstanding practice and have no bearing on party or government policy. The party fully complies with all rules relating to the reporting of donations.'
The Sun
2 days ago
- Business
- The Sun
Keir Starmer faces new sleaze row over Labour caught offering access to influential figures for cash
SIR Keir Starmer faces a new sleaze row over Labour offering access to 'influential' figures for cash. Since last summer a group linked to the party has been flogging sponsorship packages costing £9,500 to private firms. In exchange business leaders are invited to private meetings with 'key policymakers' where they can 'shape the conversation'. Sponsorship packs offered to companies include a £7,850 deal, where buyers can enjoy a 'private breakfast/dinner roundtable with an influential Labour figure'. There's also an £11,750 option to sponsor a 'parliamentary panel event with key policymakers' or £30,000 choice to pay for a 'Westminster drinks reception'. The cash for access, revealed by The Times, is organised by a group called the Labour Infrastructure Forum (LIF). Because it's run by lobbyists and a council of Labour bigwigs, but isn't itself a lobbying company, it is exempt from usual anti-sleaze rules. The organisation so far refuses to reveal which firms have signed up to its lucrative deals and who the influential Labour figures are that have taken part in back-room meet ups. A spokesperson for LIF said the group uses sponsorship cash to cover costs and 'any LIF activity that is supported by sponsors will be made publicly available at the time and in our annual report, as is common across the industry'. A Labour Party spokesman said: 'Commercial partnerships at events are a longstanding practice and have no bearing on party or government policy. The party fully complies with all rules relating to the reporting of donations.' Sir Keir Starmer red-faced AGAIN after Commons opens sleaze probe into his earnings 1
Times
3 days ago
- Business
- Times
Revealed: Labour group's £9,500 ‘cash for access' breakfasts
The Labour government faces questions over 'cash for access' after a Times investigation found that businesses have been offered private meetings with 'an influential Labour figure' as part of sponsorship packages costing almost £9,500. Since last summer, a Labour group has been approaching companies and offering them the chance to sponsor events at which they can meet 'key policymakers' in private and 'shape the discussion'. The companies have been sent a prospectus with a list of sponsorship packages, including a deal costing £7,850 plus VAT for a 'private breakfast/dinner roundtable with an influential Labour figure'. They have also been offered the chance to pay £11,750 plus VAT for a 'parliamentary panel event with key policymakers', and between £21,500 and £30,000 plus VAT to sponsor a 'Westminster drinks reception'. The day-to-day running of the group that has been offering these deals, the Labour Infrastructure Forum (LIF), is done by lobbyists, alongside an advisory council of senior Labour figures. It says that its mission is to develop policy proposals focused on 'getting Britain building and growing again' and it was launched in September at an event with speeches from Darren Jones MP, the chief secretary to the Treasury, and Varun Chandra, a business and investment adviser to Sir Keir Starmer. Its members have included Baroness Blake of Leeds, a government whip in the House of Lords, and its advisory council includes three Labour MPs — Kirsteen Sullivan, Bill Esterson and Mike Reader — as well as Ruth Kelly, a former Labour cabinet member, and Lord McNicol of West Kilbride, who was general secretary of the Labour Party from 2011 to 2018. Although the LIF is run by lobbyists and has an advisory council of senior Labour figures, it is not itself a lobbying company or part of the Labour Party. This means that it does not have to abide by any rules for lobbying firms or political parties, and has no legal obligation to publicly disclose details of payments it has received from sponsors, or of who has attended its private events. The Times asked the LIF to disclose details of the companies that had sponsored its events, the amounts they had paid, which organisation had received the money, and which Labour figures had attended, but the group declined to share all of this information. A spokesman for the LIF said the group used sponsorship money to cover its costs and that 'any LIF activity that is supported by sponsors will be made publicly available at the time and in our annual report, as is common across the industry'. The Labour Party also did not provide details of any Labour figures who had attended private LIF events, saying that it had no connection to the group and did not endorse its activities. When the LIF was approached by undercover Times reporters, its director, Gerry McFall, who runs the group alongside his regular job as a director of the lobbying firm Bradshaw Advisory, discussed the strength of his relationships with figures in government. Speaking about his work at Bradshaw Advisory, he said that one of the firm's clients had been able to have a meeting last year with Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary. He said the meeting, at last year's Labour Party conference, had been to discuss 'opportunities' and 'inward investment' and added that his client — a big player in the nuclear industry — had been able to meet 'all the key people in government'. However, when reporters checked ministerial records, they found that this meeting between the Bradshaw client and the business secretary had not been declared publicly. Transparency rules say that ministers' meetings during party conferences often do not need to be disclosed when they do not relate to government business. However, if these meetings held on the margins of party conferences are in an official ministerial capacity, they should be recorded and published in the normal way. Reynolds declined to comment. The Times's investigation also found that, in the run-up to Christmas, the Labour Party's events team offered lobbyists the chance to pay £15,000 plus VAT to partner with the party for winter receptions at which their staff could meet MPs. Officials emailed the companies saying that the receptions would be for 'members from the front and back benches' and that the companies' payments to the party would not have to be publicised, saying: 'This is a commercial transaction and not a gift to the party, it is not a recordable donation.' No payments for any Labour Party winter receptions in partnership with lobbyists last year have been publicly disclosed. Electoral Commission rules say that donations to central parties of more than £500 — including sponsorship payments — have to be recorded by the parties, and if they are above £11,180, they have to be declared to the commission for publication on its website. The Labour Party does not disclose these payments publicly because it deems the payments for these events to be general 'commercial partnerships' rather than sponsorship for anything specific. The law appears to allow these payments not to be considered donations — so they do not have to be disclosed to the public. A Labour Party spokesman said: 'Commercial partnerships at events are a longstanding practice and have no bearing on party or government policy. The party fully complies with all rules relating to the reporting of donations.' Under the UK's lobbying rules, lobbying firms are not compelled to publicly disclose details of their meetings with politicians. The Electoral Commission said it was assessing the evidence from The Times. There have long been concerns about the influence of paid lobbying in parliament and that it could potentially allow some businesses and individuals to have unfair influence on policy for their own commercial benefit. Lobbying can be an important part of politics when it is done transparently, allowing an individual or a group to openly try to persuade someone in parliament to support a particular policy or campaign. There are rules to govern lobbying, and they are meant to ensure that the opportunity to lobby is fair. Political parties should be transparent about the money they accept and the meetings that lobbyists have with ministers and senior officials. The lobbying watchdog, the Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists (ORCL), is meant to ensure transparency in the work of consultant lobbyists. Although businesses registered with the watchdog regularly have to publicly declare general lists of the clients they are actively lobbying for, they do not have to publicly disclose details of any of the lobbying meetings they have. The register also applies only to consultant lobbying firms, not to in-house lobbyists employed directly by companies or to other organisations such as think tanks. The ORCL said it was considering the findings and renewed calls for legal changes to force lobbyists to be more transparent with the public about their work. It has said that there are 'significant deficiencies' in the UK's lobbying laws. The LIF has made some changes since The Times started its inquiries into the group. Its website has recently been updated with a new 'sponsorship policy' page. This says that the group does not lobby for its sponsors and that 'acceptance of sponsorship of the LIF does not imply any form of endorsement of the sponsor's products or services by the LIF, or by the Labour Party'. The group's homepage used to describe it as a network including Labour policymakers, but now says that it is a 'think tank'. The LIF's website has always included print at the bottom saying that the secretariat, research and policy work for the group is supported by Bradshaw Advisory. Lady Blake ended her involvement with the LIF several months ago. After McFall's call with the undercover reporter, he emailed to say that the LIF did not do lobbying and was 'editorially independent from commercial interests'. In the days afterwards, a version of the LIF's prospectus that did not include the page detailing its sponsorship deals was removed from the internet. McFall then met undercover reporters to discuss Bradshaw Advisory's work, stressing the importance of transparency, and told them 'nobody can promise that somebody's going to meet'. A spokesman for the LIF said it was 'an independent left-leaning think tank' that did not engage in consultant lobbying and so was not required to register with the ORCL, and that this was made clear to potential sponsors. He said that the LIF was 'an independent legal entity to Bradshaw Advisory' and that its advisory council members had never received payment for their involvement with the group and had no involvement in operational or sponsorship matters. The spokesman said the group made regular changes to its website and that, like all think tanks, it sought sponsorship to cover its costs. He said the group was 'committed to transparency' about its funding, journalists had attended its launch and that the group was 'trying to boost UK growth and create well-paying jobs around the country'. Bradshaw Advisory said it was proud of the work it had done with the LIF, that it had taken appropriate legal and compliance advice before doing the work and that it had 'complied with the law and disclosure rules at all times'. It said that it registered all relevant clients in the normal legal way, including its nuclear client. A spokesman added: 'All matters of government competition and transparency disclosures are a matter for the government. It will surprise nobody that a public affairs firm assists organisations in meeting politicians and senior civil servants.'
