Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill

Debate between Lord Hardie and Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts
Tuesday 5th November 2013

(10 years, 9 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hardie Portrait Lord Hardie
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Norton of Louth, and support the amendment proposed by the noble Lord, Lord Campbell-Savours, for the same reasons. I also support the amendment proposed by my noble friend Lord Martin of Springburn but for a different reason from that given by the noble Lord, Lord Tyler. The example the noble Lord gave of meeting the employer in the company of someone who was both a lobbyist and a newspaper reporter highlights the need for a code of conduct. What is there to stop the lobbyist in that situation from sitting in on a meeting and then rushing away and phoning his newspaper to tell them he has a scoop—or whatever it is called nowadays—that the factory in Springburn has or has not been saved. More subtly, he could tell one of his fellow reporters. Therefore it is important that the distinction is maintained. Of course, if there was a code of conduct I would hope that that would be contrary to the code and the lobbyist could be deregistered, or whatever the appropriate word is.

Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts Portrait Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I support this issue. If you are regulated by the Financial Services Authority you have to mention it. There is a very substantial series of penalties and enforcement procedures if you fail to comply with the authority’s regulations. We need to be clear in our own mind whether this is going to be seen as the kitemark, whether it is going to be permitted as the kitemark and, if it is, how we make sure the kitemark standards are achieved.