comment To register or not to register
At the beginning of this year the government issued a consultation document asking for comments on their plans for a statutory register of lobbyists. This month Douglas Herbison, AMDEA’s chief executive, looks at the pros and cons of such a register and what it might mean for trade associations.
oliticians have never been the most popular section of society but in recent years there has been a growing concern about how they are briefed and by whom, and whether the influence of professional lobbyists is distorting the democratic process. The current coalition government is committed to introducing a statutory register of lobbyists and is consulting on how best to do this. There is already a voluntary register run by the UK Public Affairs Council (UKPAC) which was set up a few years ago in response to earlier concerns about lobbying activities. They define lobbying
P
need to include “all those who lobby, including those in management consultancies, law firms, trade associations, trade unions and charities”. However the government is insisting that the register should not include “the normal interaction between constituents and MPs… between business leaders and the government”.
The consultation distinguishes between commercial lobbyists and bodies such as trade associations who represent their members and separates 'those who undertake lobbying activities on behalf of a third party client or whose employees
“The main drawback of a statutory registration scheme for lobbyists is that it inevitably favours bigger organisations with a larger (and more affluent) client base”
as “in a professional capacity, attempting to influence or advising those who wish to influence the UK government, Parliament, devolved legislatures or administrations, regional or local government or other public bodies on any matter within their competence.”
However the government thinks that “attempting to influence” is too broad a concept for a statutory register and is asking for helpful suggestions as to what it ought to be instead. They are also asking what information should be provided (a list of clients is potentially an issue for some companies offering confidential services) and what the penalties should be for non- registration (fines or a custodial sentence). UKPAC has welcomed the consultation but argues that a statutory register would
conduct lobbying activities on behalf of a third party client’ and those who engage in lobbying activities on their own behalf. What is clear from experiences of such
registers in other parts of the world is that, whatever the agreed definition, there are going to be people and organisations whose activities are not clearly identifiable within or outside this definition. The UK government favours the definition used by Australia which allows a number of exemptions, including not for profit organisations constituted to represent the interests of their members. However, it could be argued that while
a religious organisation or a trade union represents certain views, these interests are open and obvious. Public consultations list respondents and attribute their comments so there is no
12 The Independent Electrical Retailer March 2012
secrecy about the degree to which those comments have influenced the final outcome. The problem arises when meetings are held with politicians or their representatives where the degree of influence is obscured; where other, opposing views are not heard; because some interested parties have more money to pay lobbyists than others; or where an organisation is lobbying on behalf of vested interests without those interests being apparent.
The main drawback of a statutory
registration scheme for lobbyists is that it inevitably favours bigger organisations with a larger (and more affluent) client base. And this one is intended to be funded by registration fees. A suggestion that companies with fewer employees should be exempt just complicates the definition. It is difficult to argue that a trade union should register while a trade association should not. Or that a company with ten employees must register but one with only nine need not. But if small companies (and those with poorer clients) are excluded the end result is the distortion of the process that the register is intended to protect. However, the key argument is not really one of definition but of result. As with any statutory register it is important that the registration is not an end in itself. A company might well pay to put their name on a list that gave them access to government officials but how would this guarantee transparency and accountability? Registration merely proves that a particular company could afford the fee and thought it worth paying. The question of whether they get their money’s worth is another issue altogether. ■
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32