Oliver Wright: MPs' heads would roll. So why is it different in the Lords?
Their lordships should grasp the nettle and sign up to the Commons rules on lobbying
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.When the Conservative MPs Neil Hamilton and Tim Smith were revealed to have taken cash from the former Harrods owner Mohamed Al-Fayed to ask questions in the House of Commons it caused a public outcry.
Hamilton lost his seat to the TV journalist-turned-sleaze campaigner Martin Bell, and the scandal led to the creation of the Nolan Committee on standards in public life.
In the 15 years since "cash for questions", the House of Commons has cleaned up its act significantly.
MPs are no longer allowed to lobby for any organisation with in which they have a financial interest.
Or in the language of Parliament, it is "inconsistent with the dignity of the House" for an MP to "advocate or initiate any cause or matter on behalf of any outside body or individual in consideration of any remuneration, fee, payment, or reward or benefit in kind, direct or indirect".
And the penalties for transgression are severe – as the former MPs Stephen Byers and Geoff Hoon found out when they were secretly recorded talking lobbying services they could provide after they stood down as MPs.
But a few hundred yards away from the green benches of the House of Commons, things are rather different. In the House of Lords – which still debates, votes on and influences legislation – rules are less clear.
Yes, peers have to declare their financial interests in the Register of Interests but beyond that it is a free-for-all. One senior Liberal Democrat described the scene in the lobbies and bar of the Lords on occasion as being like a "lobbyist's convention".
Even the Tories accept there is a problem. One said, when the Blencathra case was raised with him: "Oh he isn't the only one."
Blencathra says that he is meticulous in ensuring that he has no conflict of interest between his Cayman role and his duties in the Lords. But he shouldn't have to be. The rules should be clearer in not allowing a conflict of interest in the first place.
Their lordships should grasp the nettle and sign up to the Commons rules on lobbying. Those who refuse should be able to keep their title but stand aside from the legislative business of the house.
It is a simple point: law-makers should not also be lobbyists.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments