By Sophie Gaston - 2nd November 2011
Paul Flynn MP condemned the "incestuous relationship between MPs and business" as he led a lively Westminster Hall debate on parliamentary lobbying.
There must be cross-party efforts to clamp down decisively on a pervasive lobbying culture within Parliament and to restore public trust following the MPs’ expenses scandal, Flynn declared.
He urged fellow MPs to take a "puritanical" approach with their conduct. "Our reputation is in a terrible state, and the public has a right to be suspicious of us," he said.
Flynn raised the recent Adam Werritty scandal as an example of the government's inaction on the issue, believing the actions of Fox had "blurred the ministerial code", and had in fact masked a "flagrant abuse" of conduct.
Despite a high incidence of personal mud-slinging across both sides of the table, the mood remained largely jovial throughout the debate.
The atmosphere reached fever-pitch as Flynn referred to the attendance of communities secretary Eric Pickles at a dinner hosted by public affairs agency Bell Pottinger.
The meeting was not declared on the register of members' interests as Pickles claimed he was eating as a private person, not in his ministerial role.
Flynn pushed for a blanket code of conduct to cover all ministerial meetings with external parties.
However, Simon Hart (Con, Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire) responded that he encouraged his constituents to lobby him, and feared any attempts at a wholesale ban would impede the relationship between MPs and their constituencies.
John Mann (Lab, Bassetlaw) countered that the current level of influence held by paid lobbyists within Parliament is already preventing constituents gaining access to their representatives by monopolising their time.
"We have become a parliament of paid professional lobbyists," he declared.
Mann called for an end to preferential access rights, particularly in the distribution of parliamentary passes, and condemned the "interchangeability" of associated political professions.
However, Mann himself came under fire for promoting a double standard in his refusal to concede that trade unions should be included in the proposed lobbying register.
It seems the most highly contested aspect of the register will relate to exactly which types of groups will fall under its jurisdiction.
Margot James (Con, Stourbridge) cautioned against "besmirching the entire public sector", and defended the contribution made by the lobbying of many charitable and industry groups in educating MPs on issues of public significance.
Indeed, Chris Bryant (Lab, Rhondda) reframed the distinction being made between lobbyists and politicians by declaring that the very role of an MP is to act as an advocate.
He even went so far as to declare lobbying to be "a British tradition", and stressed the important role groups outside of Parliament play in providing information to support opposition parties, which lack the resources of the civil service.
During the debate, the previous lobbying positions held by a number of MPs present in the hall were exposed, some through their own volition and others at the hands of their political opponents.
The issue became even muddier when Mark Harper (Con, Forest of Dean), the minister overseeing the coalition's plans to introduce a lobbying register, announced that the proposals for the consultation process would be released this month.
Labour MPs queried how a consultation process on parliamentary lobbying could itself be immune from influence of lobbyists, and the full enormity of the task ahead was revealed.
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.