Political and Constitutional Reform CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by Mark Ramsdale

Introduction

1. Below is a summary response to questions asked by the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee’s call for evidence1 in relation to the Cabinet Office’s consultation Introducing a statutory register of lobbyists.2

2. It is my intention to submit a response to the Cabinet Office consultation.

About

3. My name is Mark Ramsdale. I act as an independent public affairs consultant, often referred to as a lobbyist. I have worked for a Member of Parliament and as a public affairs and policy specialist for over 10 years, including for several organisations responsible—directly or indirectly—with the regulation of those who lobby, including the Chartered Institute of PR (CIPR) and the Public Relations Consultants Association (PRCA). I held the position of Executive Secretary to the UK Public Affairs Council from July 2010 to December 2011 and prior to that provided support to the working group tasked with its creation.

4. I have worked as an independent consultant since 2008, operating via a limited company since April 2010. I am a member of the Professional Contractors Group (www.pcg.org.uk).

5. I currently provide advice and services to a range of clients, details of which on my website: www.markramsdale.com.

6. All responses are provided on a personal basis, independent of my current or previous employers or clients and may not reflect their views.

Registration and Regulation of Lobbyists

7. I agree with the Government when it states in its consultation that “lobbying serves an important function in politics—by putting forward the views of stakeholders to policy makers, it helps in the development of better legislation. But it needs to be open and transparent.”

8. However, I disagree that a register containing solely “third party lobbyists” would be open and transparent. To be truly transparent, all lobbyists, regardless of whether they practice independently (as in my case), in-house or as part of an agency should appear on a register. Furthermore, they should do so irrespective of whether they are employed by or represent commercial or charitable bodies, trade unions, religious groups or any other professional organisation that lobbies as part of its activities.

9. Constituents, including ad hoc groups that come together on constituency issues should not be required to register as they are dealing with the Member of Parliament they elected and whose duty it is to represent their wishes.

10. The key element—one which is difficult to prescribe—lies in the definition of lobbying. This affects who should register. An unclear definition that is open to interpretation could cause some to question whether they should register and offers the potential for others to challenge whether they lobby. A definition of lobbying must make clear to whom it applies and it should stand up to legal scrutiny.

11. By appearing on a register, a lobbyist or their employer or clients is demonstrating their commitment to transparency. This is to be welcomed. However, whilst a register (containing details of all those who lobby, not just “third party lobbyists”) addresses issues around transparency, it is of little use without a regulatory framework, adherence to codes of practice, and appropriate sanction regime.

12. Explicit codes relating to public affairs practice exist within the three PR and public affairs industry bodies (APPC, CIPR and PRCA). Therefore, a register without any adherence to these or other suitable codes offers a retrograde step for the industry. I believe it would be preferable to ensure people agree to at least a common standard of practice, a requirement of which is to appear on a register. Failure to adhere to that requirement, including registration would result in penalties. Whilst sanctions are discussed in the Cabinet Office paper, the focus is on failure to register rather than on failure to behave ethically.

13. In terms of the approach to the consultation and the next steps the Government will take, the Minister for Political and Constitutional Reform has stated publically his approach to contacts regarding lobbying on a statutory register of lobbyists. In response to a questions posed by a Member Political and Constitutional Reform Committee during a Westminster Hall debate on Parliamentary Lobbying on 2 November 2011,3 the Minister stated he had “one meeting with the independent Chairman of the UK Public Affairs Council on the subject. I have had no meetings to discuss the issue with lobbying companies and no meetings with anti-lobbying companies either.”

14. The Minister sanctioned meetings between the lead Cabinet Office official and the Executive Secretary of UKPAC. As Executive Secretary of UKPAC I took meetings with said official in September 2010, October 2010 and June 2011. Meetings are referred to in minutes of UKPAC Board meetings which are published on the UKPAC website and were used as a means to share the experience of UKPAC and its working group in order to understand better the technical and other logistical issues faced in creating a register of lobbyists. The meetings were not used as a means to lobby or put forward UKPAC position.

15. The Minister has reiterated publically that the Cabinet Office consultation is the first step in creating a register and I am aware that he has taken meetings to discuss the paper. As such, I feel the consultation document provides a focus for debate both within the industry and without. A White Paper, further consultation and impact assessment would be appropriate.

February 2012