On a freezing, foggy evening in December, the House of Commons finally formally responded to the last major financial sleaze scandal to hit parliament, and in doing so, sent an important signal about the way politicians look after themselves.
After more than a year of deliberation, the debate and vote late in the evening of Monday 12 December was the moment MPs would finally agree to a package of reforms in the aftermath of the Owen Paterson scandal.
Some might have expected fireworks, given they were collectively responding to the disgrace of one of their own found guilty of lobbying for cash during the pandemic – bringing the stench of political scandal back to Westminster and even hastening Boris Johnson’s departure after the former PM initially stuck up for Paterson.
The votes came shortly after 10.30pm and saw barely half of all MPs shuffling unenthusiastically through the division lobbies to register their position.
I spent much of the evening in central lobby next door and detected little passion or interest about the subject under discussion from all but a handful.
A year earlier, such a vote would have been electric because sleaze was in the headlines, but as the temperatures that night dipped below zero again, it was clear neither MPs nor commentators cared much.
More on Westminster Accounts
Related Topics:
What was agreed that night did amount to an important incremental tightening of the rules that was welcomed by campaigners. But the focus of the Westminster juggernaut had moved on with the change of prime minister. The vote was of little interest because many thought it of minimal practical consequence to them – it might mean up to 30 MPs have to reassess second jobs.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:00
How you can explore the Westminster Accounts
The Labour plan to ban second jobs had no chance of a majority after the Tories backed away earlier in the year. The debate, decision and votes generated not a single headline anywhere. Yet still, this moment sends a fascinating signal.
Advertisement
The real importance of what happened on 12 December 2022 was that MPs were telling the public that, in broad terms, the sleaze safeguards work well as they are. They were ultimately endorsing much of the status quo and deciding it was to stay in place.
The existing system to regulate MPs was, they were saying, fit for purpose and the current transparency declaration rules should stay as they are. And while there is genuine division over banning second jobs between the main parties, there was little sense of a need for other changes.
So what mattered that night was what was not on the table in the Commons and what was not discussed, but so many questions remain.
Is this the best system we could possibly have, given the Paterson affair happened as it did? Have MPs really come up with the best way to collect and publish data about outside earnings, gifts and donations? Is the register of members’ financial interests a sufficient guide to the financial dealings of MPs?
Why shouldn’t we be able to compare MPs’ outside earnings and rank them in order of what they get? Why shouldn’t we be able to work out who are the biggest donors to individual MPs, just as we can for political parties? Why shouldn’t we see more easily the networks donors give to? Who receives the largest sums, and which MPs appear to need no additional donations at all?
Just because there is no apparent appetite amongst MPs to explore these questions does not mean that others should not.
That is why today Sky News launches the Westminster Accounts. Built as a collaboration with our partners at Tortoise Media, it marks a major experiment in transparency and public accountability in an attempt to shine a light on how money moves through the political system. And unlike most other exercises in journalism, we are sharing our workings.
In a landmark move, we are publishing a new publicly available tool to give voters the chance to explore. Everyone will be able to play with the financial data we have collected from publicly available sources about each MP, explore a new universe connecting the financial dots across our political universe – and draw their own conclusions.
It is an enormous effort lasting over six months, involving dozens of journalists, data scientists and designers from both media organisations, and is ready to use right now.
The Westminster Accounts in three steps
The Westminster Accounts involves three steps. Firstly, using publicly available data from parliament’s register of members’ interests and the Electoral Commission, Sky News commissioned Tortoise Media to build a spreadsheet showing us data about MPs’ earnings, donations and gifts in this parliament, since December 2019, alongside party donation data from the Electoral Commission database.
We now, for the first time, have a single figure for how much each MP has earned in this parliament and how much has been donated and from where. Alongside this, we have taken the information from the parliament website about the financial benefits provided by private companies and other organisations to fund all-party parliamentary groups that support informal networks of MPs, to help look at business activity in Westminster.
Secondly, Tortoise Media has turned this spreadsheet into a snazzy, carefully curated online tool accessible to everyone via the Sky News website and app. This allows anyone to, in the first instance, search the financial information of any MP and understand their financial affairs in comparison to colleagues.
Then in a powerful and unprecedented move, once users have explored one MP’s financial affairs, they then have the ability to search by donor, MP and party in the political-financial universe represented by a series of globes. This tool will be updated every few weeks with the latest data provided by the authorities, at least up until the next general election.
Thirdly, Sky News has studied the data collected and used it to tell a series of interesting stories both about what we discovered and what the numbers reveal – but also about where the transparency promised by our leaders falls short.
Today we look at second jobs data, publishing a league table of the highest earners since December 2019, a feat not possible until now. But by treating the data as a starting point for our enquiries, we go deeper by examining company accounts of leading politicians and comparing second job promises with reality.
The significance of the stories in the coming days will be the discovery of what politicians have not told us, as well as what they have.
Risks of the project
This project is not without risk. We have created league tables of donors and earners, something the political system disliked. We will be told we have ignored context – some earnings are donated to charity, some MPs will earn more than others for less work, and MPs in marginal seats will have to raise more funds for campaigning than those in safe seats.
But we defend our right to look at the numbers in this way; and encourage the conversation that will follow, however difficult.
The most complex task, in crude terms, has been to turn the register of members’ interests into a spreadsheet. This involved turning the register’s complex written entries into stark figures for spreadsheet cells, stripped of the context which appears in their preferred format to allow us and our viewers to compare like with like. MPs will inevitably object, assert the project unfair and hunt for discrepancies.
This is not a process that – yet – can be done automatically and has involved hundreds of man-hours to check and double-check the entries. Given the volume of data on that scale, human error is an inevitability, and we will correct those and listen carefully to complaints.
However, we have assembled the data based on information MPs are required to submit, based on a methodology which has been externally validated and is available on this website. We profoundly believe and would justify our right to attempt such an exercise, to compare and contrast MPs – something by their nature they often feel uncomfortable about.
But rather than avoiding the exercise, Sky News is attempting to help shine a light on how money works in politics, so the public better understands what is going on.
If MPs are to defend what they believe are reasonable, legitimate practices, explaining them clearly rather than hiding them away might be a better answer.
Hannah White, director of the Institute for Government, goes further, suggesting it would have been entirely possible for MPs to do what we have – but avoided this for a reason.
“I think it’s a really good question why parliament hasn’t done this before for itself and the answer really is hiding in plain sight. There’s no incentive. For MPs really to make it easy to do the sort of comparison that you’ve done in this exercise.
“It’s much easier for them to say we’ve been transparent data is out there. People can go and look for it if they want to. But in fact, that data isn’t very easy to use, and it’s not real transparency.”
“I think the value of this tool is it enables us to see what real transparency might look like and hopefully, parliament and the Electoral Commission, will reflect and think, are we actually achieving the end that we’re trying to achieve? When we require transparency from our politicians, from our political parties, should we be doing this better ourselves? Should it be up to Sky and Tortoise to be doing this data analysis?”
Transparency is the best disinfectant
After every Westminster scandal, we are told that “transparency is the best disinfectant”. That is what we are testing in this exercise, and looking at the information they are required to submit to evaluate what it tells us.
We started from an important set of principles. There is no assumption money in politics is a bad thing, just a political reality. This project has not set out to find a scandal and nor have we stumbled across one.
We make no judgement on MPs’ holding second jobs or getting money from outside sources, just defend our right to try and compare MPs with each other on the basis of their earnings. (We note Sir Geoffrey Cox, who is happy to provide a lengthy explanation of his barrister work, was elected by the voters of West Devon and Torridge with healthy majorities at each of the last five general elections.)
Our only goal has been to understand better what goes on as money flows through the system.
But as viewers will see from our reporting this week, that transparency has felt like it too often falls short, and when MPs are asked questions about donations, earnings, donors or gifts, they shy away from the camera and try and ignore the questions. Far too often evasion is the default response when questions involve money.
Politicians always tell us that we can trust them because they are transparent – that they are upfront about all of their dealings.
Last month MPs quietly made clear they were broadly content with the level of transparency the public is offered, tinkering with rather than transforming the system. This week the Westminster Accounts will pose the question of whether the rest of us are too.
Chrystal Hendry finished her psychology degree in 2021 and was excited to move to the next phase of her life – working towards becoming a counsellor – when she first became homeless.
Chrystal, 30, has spinal muscular atrophy and uses a wheelchair. She needs round-the-clock care, as well as home adaptations, such as a bed hoist and wet room, to live comfortably.
Several months after being evicted in 2021, and following a “really awful” period in inappropriate housing, she managed to find somewhere to rent in a different town, where she now lives.
It has never been the ideal home – the temporary ramps are a struggle. But it was better than the alternatives suggested by her council, including moving her live-in care team and equipment into one bedroom in an elderly dementia care home.
Four years on, she’s being evicted again.
Chrystal is one of the 70,000 households with a physical disability in England now facing homelessness.
Her landlord wants to redevelop the home she lives in and has issued a ‘no fault’ eviction notice, which has progressed to a court repossession order.
More on Data And Forensics
Related Topics:
Now, she’s waiting for the bailiffs to arrive.
“It just never ended, it’s still not ended four years later. I still can’t even think about building a career or giving back to anybody because I’m so consumed with it,” Chrystal told Sky News.
“At this moment in time, I have no idea where I’m going to go,” she said.
“For anybody a bailiff knocking on your door is scary, but when you’ve got fundamental pieces of equipment that you cannot live without it’s even scarier.”
Chrystal’s experience is not unique.
Among households who approached their local council for homelessness assistance in the latest year, one in five had physical ill health and disability support needs.
It’s a growing issue – there were nearly 70,000 such households in 2024/25, up from around 40,000 four years earlier, according to Sky News analysis of government data.
This represents a 72% increase, more than three times the 20% rise in the overall number of households seeking homelessness support.
The number of homeless or at-risk households with a physical disability support need increased more than any other demographic over the period.
They now represent 21% of households, up from 13% of households in 2020/21.
Councils ‘not taking it seriously’
Sky News and housing campaigner Kwajo Tweneboa sent Freedom of Information requests to English councils asking how many people were waiting for accessible social housing, and how long they wait on average.
Their responses reveal a troubling lack of understanding of accessible housing needs in their areas.
Two in three couldn’t say how many people with disabilities were waiting, while four in five weren’t able to estimate how long they could expect to wait.
Kensington and Chelsea Council disclosed one of the longest waits among those who did respond.
It said people waited more than six and a half years for accessible social housing, a year and three months longer than for one-bedroom properties.
But we don’t have the full picture, as most simply couldn’t provide figures.
“The fact most didn’t provide data on this issue shows the lack of seriousness shown towards those with disabilities and their needs,” Mr Tweneboa said.
“All it takes is for any of us to have an accident and we may need those services.
“We also have an ageing population; no doubt more and more people are going to have additional needs,” he added.
Image: Kwajo Tweneboa says councils’ poor response shows a ‘lack of seriousness’
There are five million more people in the UK with a disability than there were a decade ago, according to the government’s Family Resources Survey.
Mobility issues are most common, affecting just under half of those with a disability.
Home builders bypassing ‘very simple things’
“We currently do not have enough accessible homes here in England,” Millie Brown, deputy director for the homes team at the Centre for Ageing Better, told Sky News.
“We know that 20% of people are currently living with a disability, but only 13% of homes across England are built to accessibility standards which support them to live healthy and independent lives.
“Things such as step-free access to the home, a toilet on the ground level, doors that are wide enough to fit wheelchairs, for example.
“Very simple things that make it so disabled and older people can live in their homes independently.”
These criteria, alongside a ‘flush threshold’ – where the floor on either side of doorways are level – are outlined as the four basic criteria for accessibility, which 13% of homes in England meet as of the latest data for 2022.
It’s not always possible to retrofit existing homes to these standards, but campaigners argue they should be mandatory for new-build properties.
Plans under the previous government to raise accessibility standards for new homes never materialised and there has been a “lack of action from both the previous government and the current government”, said Ms Brown.
Image: Millie Brown from the Centre for Ageing Better says we don’t have enough accessible housing for those who need it
‘Couldn’t even get through the door’
Many councils told us they operate a “choice-based letting system” – meaning people waiting for social housing can bid for properties that suit their needs – but that they don’t actively monitor applicants’ accessibility requirements.
Constantly bidding for properties can be an exhausting process, especially for someone like Chrystal.
After her first eviction, when she was on North Hertfordshire’s housing register, she said she bid for over 100 properties but only secured viewings at six.
“None of them were accessible in any shape or form,” she said.
“In five of them I couldn’t get through the front door. Only one of the properties was adapted, but they told me my needs weren’t enough, so I was turned down.”
Image: Only one property Chrystal viewed was adapted – but the council turned her down
Now, she doesn’t even have the luxury of joining a housing register.
Because she moved to a different local authority in 2022 in search of housing, she is now ineligible for support in either her old area, where she hasn’t lived recently enough, or her new one, where she hasn’t lived for long enough.
‘Affordability problems compounded’
“The picture across the board is that it’s a struggle for everyone at the moment to find a suitable rented home,” Deborah Garvie, policy manager at Shelter, told Sky News.
She said the biggest difficulty is affordability, especially for those relying on housing benefit, which has been frozen and not kept up with inflation.
People with disabilities, or those caring for them, may be particularly affected as they are less likely to be working full time.
“There’s that big affordability problem which is likely to be compounded for people who either have disabilities themselves or have a household member with disabilities,” added Ms Garvie.
“And then on top of that you have the physical access problems as well.”
A parliamentary inquiry into disabled people in the housing sector ended earlier this year and the government has said it intends to set out policies on the accessibility of new homes soon.
A Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesperson said: “Cases like Chrystal’s are unacceptable and is why we are taking urgent and decisive action to ban section 21 evictions, build 1.5 million new homes and give people housing security.
“Through our Plan for Change, we will build more accessible housing so everyone has a home that meets their needs, alongside delivering the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation backed by £39bn investment.”
Broxbourne Council, which is responsible for housing in Chrystal’s area, responded: “At present, there are more than 1,600 households on the Housing Register.
“Ms Hendry has been provided with a personalised plan to support her to resolve her housing situation which acknowledges that specialist accommodation is required.
“It sets out what the council is doing to support Ms Hendry and also details other housing options that she can pursue.”
Chrystal acknowledges the council has given her a plan, but argues it doesn’t provide any real solutions.
“I’ve been told numerous times that they have no housing in the area,” she said.
“They have told me to look for places to rent, but finding private rentals that I can live in is like finding a needle in a haystack – and even if I do, housing benefit won’t cover it.
“I’m lucky enough that I can advocate for myself, but there are loads of people in my position that can’t do that.
“Trying to wade my way through these broken systems is upsetting and frustrating. I get angry because it seems like nobody wants to fix the problem.”
Production and additional reporting by Emily Jennings, social affairs producer.
The Data and Forensics team is a multi-skilled unit dedicated to providing transparent journalism from Sky News. We gather, analyse and visualise data to tell data-driven stories. We combine traditional reporting skills with advanced analysis of satellite images, social media and other open source information. Through multimedia storytelling we aim to better explain the world while also showing how our journalism is done.
In a small hut next to Newlyn Harbour at the bottom of Cornwall, the next generation of fishermen are quite literally learning the ropes.
Around a dozen students are on the eighth day of a two-week intensive course to become commercial fishers.
From knot and ropework to chart plotting, navigation to sea survival, by the end of the course they’ll be qualified to take a berth on a vessel.
While many are following in the footsteps of their fathers, others are here to try an entirely different career.
Image: Elliot Fairbairn
Elliot Fairbairn, 28, is originally from London and has been working as a groundworker.
“I’m not from a fishing family – I just like a challenge,” he says.
He’s put his current job on hold to see how fishing works out.
More on Cornwall
Related Topics:
“It makes you feel good doing a hard job.I think that’s what’s getting lost these days, people want an easy job, easy money and they don’t understand what it takes to be successful. Sometimes you’ve got to put that in the work.”
Elliot already has a job lined up for next week on a ring-netter boat.
“I’m ecstatic – I’m very pumped!” he tells me.
Image: Students take part in a two-week intensive course to become commercial fishers
Also on the course is 17-year-old Oscar Ashby. He’s doing his A-Levels at Truro College and training to be a healthcare worker at the main hospital in Cornwall.
“I’m part of the staff bank so can work whatever hours I want – which would fit quite well if I wanted to do a week’s fishing,” he says.
It’s his love of being outside that has drawn him to get qualified.
“It’s hands-on, it’s not a bad way to make money. It’s one of the last jobs that is like being a hunter-gatherer really – everything else is really industrialised, ” Oscar says.
The course was over-subscribed.
The charity that runs it – Seafood Cornwall Training – could only offer places to half those who applied.
‘A foot in the door’
“The range of knowledge they’re gathering is everything from how to tie a few knots all the way on how to register with HMRC to pay and manage their tax because they’d be self-employed fishermen,” manager Clare Leverton tells me.
“What we’re trying to do with this course is give them a foot in the door.
“By meeting our tutors, skippers on the quay, vessel managers, they start to understand who they’re going to have to talk to to get jobs.”
Getting fresh blood into the industry is vital.
Over the last 30 years, the number of fishermen in the UK has nearly halved – from around 20,000 to 10,000.
The average age of a fisherman in the UK is 55.
Aging workforce
Image: Mike Cohen, chief executive of the National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations
“I think we’re seeing the effects of having an aging workforce,” says Mike Cohen, chief executive of the National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations (NFFO).
“Fishing is a traditional occupation in most places around the country. A lot of family businesses, and as people are getting older, they’re starting to retire out of the industry.”
The decline comes at a time of frustration and anger in the industry too.
Many feel the prime minister’s post-Brexit deal with the EU back in May sold fishing out by guaranteeing another 12 years of access to EU boats to fish in UK waters, rather than allowing it to be negotiated annually.
“A large part of the effort the EU exerts in UK waters is within our territorial waters, so within 12 miles of the shore. And that’s the area that’s most pressured,” adds Mr Cohen.
“For new people getting into the industry it’s the area that they can reach in the sort of small boats that new starters tend to work in. They’re increasingly pressured in that space and by keeping all of those European boats having access to it for free, for nothing, that puts them under even more pressure.”
The government says it will always back “our great British fishing industry” and insists the EU deal protects Britain’s fishing access.
‘A brilliant career’
To further promote getting young people into commercial fishing, the Cornwall Fish Producers Organisation has helped set up the Young Fishermen Network.
Skipper Tom Lambourne, 29, helped set up the group.
“There’s not enough young people coming into it and getting involved in it,” he says.
“It’s actually a brilliant career. It’s a hard career – you do have to sacrifice a lot to get a lot out of fishing – your time is one of them. But the pros of that certainly outweigh it and it’s a really good job.”
Image: Tom Lambourne, from the Young Fishermen Network
Tom says the network supports new fishers by holding social events and helping them find jobs: “There’s never been a collective for young fishermen.
“For a youngster getting into the fishing industry to be sort of part of that – knowing there’s other youngsters coming in in the same position – they can chat to one another, it’s pretty cool really.”
A body has been pulled from a river in the search for a missing 12-year-old boy.
The body was found in the River Swale in Richmond late Saturday, North Yorkshire Police said.
Police launched a search for the boy after receiving reports at 5pm that a boy had entered the river and not been seen since.
Specialist search teams as well as fire and rescue officers were deployed to help with the search, with crews “recovering a child’s body from the water” at 10.45pm.
“The body is yet to be identified, but the boy’s family have been informed and are receiving support from specially-trained officers,” police said in a statement.