Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The Government’s plans to constrain the activities of what modern parlance might term the “lobbying community” are suffering from many of the same problems as its proposals for press regulation: difficulties of definition, industry recalcitrance, and the worry that, even after all the wrangles, there will remain a lack of transparency about the real relationship between politicians and those who seek to influence them. No wonder, then, that the Committee on Standards in Public Life has dismissed them as “feeble”.
As with the press, state action in this area will always be untidy and unsatisfactory; such is the nature of the beast. However, one simple move would do much to allay pervading public cynicism about lobbying and the feeling that too many ministers are feathering their own nests. We have seen ex-ministers describe themselves as taxis for hire and the like; an outright ban on politicians becoming lobbyists or advisers to companies for sufficient time for any “favours” to remain unpaid must, therefore, to be a part of the legislation. The committee suggests a gap of two years; that should be an absolute minimum.
Second, many of the arguments about recognition and inclusion could be resolved by a more comprehensive requirement on ministers, and their advisers, to declare submissions from, and meetings with, interested bodies on general policy or legislation. Much the same goes for MPs and peers, including shadow ministers.
The public would then be able to take a view on which interventions are trivial and benign, and which more serious, even potentially corrupting. The lobbying scene is one of legitimate public interest. No one is suggesting prying into politicians’ private lives, or invading their privacy. The documents on their desks, the meetings in the diaries, and the parties to which their special advisers are invited are a different matter. They belong in the public domain.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments