Greensill scandal: Parliamentary committee says lobbying rules are ‘insufficient’
A parliamentary committee looking into the Greensill saga has found that lobbying rules were “insufficient” and need to be strengthened
The Commons Treasury committee, which looked into David Cameron’s involvement in trying to secure finance firm Greensill Capital access to a government coronavirus support scheme, said the rules should be tightened to prevent any more scandals from occurring.
Mr Cameron sent many calls, texts and emails to ministers in an attempt to gain financial assistance for the bank which has since collapsed.
Greensill Bank filed for insolvency in March
His actions were deemed lawful under the current rules regarding lobbying which the committee said has created the “strong case” for them to be hardened.
MPs on the committee added that the Treasury was right to reject Greensill’s offer, but were critical of the department’s failure to encourage Mr Cameron to “more formal methods of communication”.
They add that his use of calls and texts “showed a significant lack of judgement on his part, especially as his ability to use an informal approach was aided by his previous position of prime minister”.
“We accept that Mr Cameron did not break the rules governing lobbying by former ministers, but that reflects on the insufficient strength of the rules, and there is a strong case for strengthening them,” said their Lessons from Greensill Capital report published on Tuesday.
MPs also called on the Treasury to reflect on the “number of lessons” that have arisen from the incident.
Formal processes to deal with lobbying attempt by ex-prime ministers or minister should be put in place and published in the future, they add.
The Treasury Committee report says the department should have encouraged Mr Cameron to use more ‘formal’ methods of communication
“We are very surprised about this, given that Mr Cameron was an ex-prime minister, who had worked with those he was lobbying, had access to their mobile phone numbers, and appears to have been able to negotiate who should attend meetings,” the committee’s report said.
“The Treasury’s unwillingness to accept that it could have made any better choices at all in how it engaged in this case is a missed opportunity for reflection.”
Conservative Chairman of the Treasury Select Committee Mel Stride said: “Our report sets out important lessons for the Treasury and our financial system resulting from both Greensill Capital’s collapse and David Cameron’s lobbying.
“The Treasury should have encouraged David Cameron into more formal lines of communication as soon as it had identified his personal financial incentives.
“However, the Treasury took the right decision to reject the objectives of his lobbying, and the committee found that Treasury ministers and officials behaved with complete and absolute integrity.
“We look forward to the conclusions of the other inquiries on the collapse of Greensill Capital, and will continue to follow developments closely.”
In a statement, Mr Cameron said he “always acted in good faith” but that he accepts communications should be done “through only the most formal of channels”.
‘While I am pleased that the report confirms I broke no rules, I very much take on board its wider points,” he said.
“I always acted in good faith, and had no idea until the end of last year that Greensill Capital was in danger of failure.
“However, I have been clear all along that there are lessons to be learnt. As I said to the committee, I accept that communications of this nature should be done in future through only the most formal of channels.
“I agree that the guidance on how former ministers engage with government could be updated and was pleased to provide some suggestions on this to the committee.”
Politics
Mark Menzies MP gives up Tory whip amid investigation into claims he misused campaign funds
An MP has lost the Conservative Party whip while newspaper claims about alleged misuse of campaign funds are investigated.
Mark Menzies, the MP for Fylde, disputes the allegations reported by The Times but the Conservative Party is looking into the claims.
A spokesperson for Chief Whip Simon Hart said: “Following a call with the Chief Whip, Mark Menzies has agreed to relinquish the Conservative whip, pending the outcome of an investigation.”
Losing the whip means Mr Menzies is no longer a member of the Conservative parliamentary party and will sit as an independent MP, rather than a Tory MP, in the House of Commons chamber.
In a statement to The Times, Mr Menzies said: “I strongly dispute the allegations put to me. I have fully complied with all the rules for declarations. As there is an investigation ongoing I will not be commenting further.”
A Conservative Party spokesman said: “The Conservative Party is investigating allegations made regarding a Member of Parliament. This process is rightfully confidential.
“The party takes all allegations seriously and will always investigate any matters put to them.”
Liberal Democrat deputy leader Daisy Cooper said earlier on Wednesday that it was “frankly appalling” that the Conservative Party had allegedly been aware of the allegations for more than three months.
“Rishi Sunak must suspend the whip for Mark Menzies immediately, while all the relevant authorities investigate the matter,” she said.
Read more from Sky News:
Lords delay Rwanda bill again
Chancellor insists UK’s economy has ‘turned corner’
Mr Menzies has served as the MP for Fylde in Lancashire since May 2010.
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Last week William Wragg, MP for Hazel Grove, Greater Manchester, also gave up the whip after he admitted to The Times that he had given his colleagues’ phone numbers to someone he met on a dating app.
Scotland Yard said it is investigating reports of the so-called “honeytrap” scam after it was suggested at least 12 men in political circles received unsolicited messages, raising security concerns.
Mr Wragg also resigned as vice-chairman of the 1922 committee of Tory backbenchers and stepped down from his role heading the Commons’ public administration and constitutional affairs committee.
Politics
Rwanda plan blame game begins over latest delays – with plenty more showdowns to come for Rishi Sunak
This was the week it was meant to be done.
Having forced the House of Commons to vote down the Lords’ amendments to the prime minister’s flagship illegal immigration bill three times, peers would typically have bowed out of the battle this time around and passed the Rwanda bill.
Instead, they sought to amend the legislation again.
Politics latest:
Rwanda bill delayed after government suffers surprise defeats
There is obvious frustration in government, with one senior figure saying: “We wanted to get it done today, but it shows Labour for their true colours.”
The Rwanda bill now comes back to the Commons next week, and could finally be passed on Monday.
All the while, the clock is ticking down on the prime minister‘s promise to get flights away by the end of spring.
With that timetable already in doubt, at least this ping pong can help ministers pin this on peers should that deadline be missed.
But there is also huge frustration amongst some MPs with Number 10.
‘We need to get it through’
Many are asking why the government didn’t just table late night sittings and force Lords to sit into the night to ram through the legislation.
Tory MP Rehman Chishti spoke for many colleagues when he told me he didn’t understand why the whips hadn’t chosen this course.
“I think the programme motion could easily have ensured that we had a vote tomorrow because at the end of day the public want us to get on and get it done. Labour have delayed, dithered, delayed. We’ve got a plan, but we need to get it through,” he said.
“If you would have asked me, I would have put it in tomorrow and I would have a vote on it. And therefore we get those planes off and make sure that this policy delivers what it needs to be delivering, which is deterrence.”
Another senior minister told me it was “clear” to them that these were “delaying tactics because they know the version of the policy doesn’t work and they want more time and to put off the day of reckoning”.
Read more:
Government ‘operationalising’ Rwanda flights
Rwanda enforcement officers told all leave is cancelled
The UK’s Rwanda bill has been delayed again. Pic: AP
Labour ‘terrified it will work’
As Labour blames the government for refusing to compromise on amendments, and “going home” instead of looking again at the bill this evening, the government blames Labour for delaying the bill because – to quote minister Steve Baker – “they are terrified it will work”.
There is talk that had the government accepted the amendment to exempt Afghans who served alongside UK forces from deportation to Rwanda, the Lords might have passed the bill.
Labour had received an assurance from the Home Office that this amendment, tabled by former Labour defence secretary Des Browne, was going to be accepted – only for it then to be blocked.
For all the drama and irritation, it is likely that the prime minister will still have his moment.
At some point, the House of Lords will have to cave. Unelected peers cannot keep ignoring the will of the Commons.
But the question then is whether he can assuage the frustration of voters who are watching the small boats still coming, with the most crossings in a single day this year – 534 people – happening this week.
‘Another failed thing they promised’
In our Sky News election target town of Cleethorpes, part of a key bellwether seat in the next general election, voters we spoke to are sceptical the government will deliver the flights at all.
One resident told us: “They tell you what they think you want to hear but when it comes down to it, they don’t deliver that.”
Another said: “No one’s gone to Rwanda. They get on the plane, and they take them off. So that’s another failed thing they’ve promised.”
And really that’s the rub of it – the prime minister will get this legislation passed.
Then the challenge is to get those planes off the ground. Anything less won’t be acceptable.
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
👉 Listen above then tap here to follow the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts 👈
But with even some of his own backbenchers believing the policy won’t work, a parliamentary win is only the end of the beginning.
The next question is will he, if he has to, not just take on the Lords, but take on the European courts – and those in his own cabinet – and if necessary ignore court rulings to get flights away.
There are plenty more showdowns to come.
The House of Lords has delayed the passing of the government’s Rwanda bill until next week – in a blow to Rishi Sunak’s attempts to get planes off the ground deporting illegal migrants to the country.
MPs overturned Tuesday’s attempts by the House of Lords to dilute the plan – but peers have now put forward even more changes to the proposed new law.
It is now expected that the Commons will consider the changes on Monday next week, dashing No 10’s hopes to get it through today.
Downing Street has been unwilling to concede any ground on the areas that peers are trying to amend, including on the treatment of people who served with or for the British armed forces abroad.
Politics latest: Tory MP who made Rayner complaint faces awkward questions
No 10 had set its sights on passing the legislation this week as part of its plans to get planes in the air in the spring.
The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill was tabled last year after the Supreme Court ruled the previous scheme to deport asylum seekers who arrived illegally in the UK was unlawful.
The current bill aims to declare Rwanda safe and not allow courts to consider the safety of the nation during appeals.
This is being done based on a new treaty agreed between the UK government and the government in Rwanda.
Speaking earlier on Wednesday, the prime minister’s spokesperson ruled out doing a deal on any of these changes. “We are not considering concessions,” they said.
“We believe the bill as it stands is the right bill and the quickest way to get flights off the ground.”
Read more:
Beth Rigby analysis: Plenty more showdowns to come as blame game begins
What are the latest amendments suggested by the Lords?
Of the four amendments added on Tuesday, three were tabled by Labour peers and one by a crossbencher.
The proposed changes sought to:
• ensure the bill complies with domestic and international law;
• that Rwanda would not be declared safe until a report was completed;
• that appeals based on safety would be allowed;
• and that exemptions would be allowed for people who served with or for the British armed forces.
Peers want to insist on the amendments about people who assisted the UK’s armed forces, and a report advising on the safety of Rwanda, in particular.
The government was defeated on the first by 245 votes to 208 – a majority of 37, and the second by 247 votes to 195 – a majority of 52.
Labour and crossbench peers – those who do not associate with a political party – worked together to outvote the Conservatives.
A government source told Sky News: “We wanted to get it done today, but it shows Labour for their true colours.”
Responding to the latest defeats, Northern Ireland minister Steve Baker told Sky News that he was “extremely disappointed” with the delays.
He denied the government had “slammed the door” on people like interpreters in Afghanistan who worked with UK armed forces.
But Mr Baker said people wanting to come to the UK who had served with British armed forces had to go through the Ministry of Defence.
“They shouldn’t be travelling with people smugglers illegally across the channel – and that’s what we’ve got to break,” he said.
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
👉 Listen above then tap here to follow the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts 👈
Approach to military interpreters ‘shameful’ – Labour
The amendment on people who helped the armed forces has been at the centre of a heated debate – with the government saying it is waiting for a report on the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) before setting out its steps.
But Labour’s shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said: “Tory MPs just voted to insist that Afghan interpreters who served British armed forces can be sent to Rwanda.
“A scheme which costs £2m per asylum seeker. A £500m plus scheme for less than 1% of asylum seekers. Which now includes those who worked with our troops
“Shameful and shambolic.”
Read more:
Rigby: Rwanda win not automatic victory for PM
Cost of Rwanda scheme could soar to £500m
Johnny Mercer, a former soldier and the government’s veterans minister, replied: “My team have worked night and day to find permanent accommodation for circa 25,000 Afghans who the UK have provided sanctuary to, without you lifting a finger to help.
“We want them to use safe routes, not undertake lethal channel crossings. Your concern is fake.”
-
Sports1 year ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Environment11 months agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports6 months agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Environment1 year agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Technology3 years ago
Game consoles were once banned in China. Now Chinese developers want a slice of the $49 billion pie
-
Politics2 years ago
Have the last few wobbly weeks seen a turning point for Johnson as PM?