Lords’ cash for questions probe – which party failed the test?

If you’ve got a few hundred thousand smackers and want something done, like a little change in the law or a question asked in the upper house, it seems there’s only one party whose peers can help you out – Labour.

The Times, posing as would-be lobbyists seeking a change in the law for a wealthy client, contacted five Labour peers, three Conservatives, one Liberal Democrat and one Ulster Unionist.

The results reflect badly not only on the House of Lords but also on the Labour party. Of the 10, four were prepared to do business with our “lobbyists” for fees of up to £120,000 a year. All four were Labour and two were former ministers.

Lord Taylor boasted that he could pick up the telephone and arrange meetings with Lord Mandelson, the business secretary, and that he had succeeded in changing legislation on behalf of Experian, the credit reference company. Lord Truscott, a former energy minister, said he had helped to change the energy bill on behalf of a company selling so-called “smart” electricity meters.

All four Labour peers – the others were Lord Snape, a former Labour whip, and Lord Moonie, another former minister – offered to help secure legislative changes by putting in a word with ministers, civil servants, or with the relevant members of parliamentary committees. One boasted of the huge amount of such business done in the Lords.

UPDATE: more detail including the excruciatingly awful transcripts here.

Read more by .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

7 Comments

  • Well, yes, but…See Donnachadh McCarthy’s attempts over the years to get the Liberal Democrats to enforce party policy with regard to peers working for lobbying companies. There is a very grey area here and the party establishment’s failure to implement policy agreed by Conference is what finally drove Donnachadh to leave the party.

  • Out of interest, which Lib Dem peer refused?

  • Alisdair Cameron 25th Jan '09 - 11:58am

    To be fair, if you have a system where places in the Lords can be bought (allegedly) by donating to labour, then there’ll be attempts to recoup that expenditure…(joke, but not as bad a joke as the grasping underhandedness of way too many in parliament, Lords and MPs alike)

  • Tony Greaves 25th Jan '09 - 7:36pm

    Well if we all got paid this amount of money (or anything at all) for putting down amendments to Bills both Sue and I would be millionaires by now!

    We might be looking more closely from now on, though, at any amendments that come from Labour backbenchers.

    Tony Greaves
    (due to move 60 amendments to the first bit of the ridiculous Local Democracy Bill tomorrow!)

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Peter Martin
    @ Iain, There is common ground on the federal question insofar as we agree that it could work. A federal system works well in Australia. The Aus...
  • Iain Donaldson
    Thanks Mim, That's fair as a description of the counting process, but I think it's worth separating the voter experience from the administrator experience. ...
  • Peter Martin
    @ Kira, I don't think many, if anyone, are seriously suggesting that we should all be exactly equal regardless of the effort we might put in. The question...
  • Iain Donaldson
    I think the main point of disagreement concerns the relationship between fiscal autonomy and monetary sovereignty. It is certainly true that only a currency ...
  • Iain Donaldson
    I think there is actually significant common ground between the comments by both Petyer and Kira, and the original article. The article does not argue that c...