Westminster Accounts: Middlemen, brokers, and clients – who really pays MPs for their other jobs?
Thirty-eight MPs have taken on second jobs where the ultimate party paying them is unclear, according to Sky News’ analysis of the MPs’ Register of Financial Interests.
The jobs mainly involve MPs being paid through a broker – a consultancy business, a communications firm, or a speakers’ bureau – while not declaring the clients they are working for.
It casts doubt on the systems which are supposed to ensure transparency around MPs’ earnings.
The analysis was conducted as part of the Westminster Accounts – a Sky News and Tortoise Media project that aims to shine a light on money in UK politics.
But this light has made the remaining shadows all the more stark.
Read more:
Search for your MP
Why the Westminster Accounts matter
Ex-cabinet minister Sir John Whittingdale provides one of the clearest examples of these cases, but two current ministers – Andrew Mitchell and Johnny Mercer – also appear to fall into this category. Some MPs told Sky News they had signed contracts restricting them from being transparent about the clients they’d worked with.
It begs the question of who is really influencing UK politicians, with Transparency International saying the findings could suggest there’s a “culture of opacity” among some MPs.
MPs are supposed to give details about their non-parliamentary earnings in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.
On the face of it, that is what Sir John has done.
He’s a former culture secretary and a long-serving MP with a wealth of political experience. He’s been offering his insight, as MPs are entitled to do, via a company called AlphaSights, which connects experts like him with its clients.
But it remains unknown who the clients Sir John spoke to are.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Sam Coates explains how and why the Westminster Accounts tool was made
He’s reported in his public filings that he’s received more than £10,500 from AlphaSights to tap into his expertise across 17 different engagements.
He was quizzed earlier this year on two of these dealings by the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACOBA), the watchdog overseeing ex-ministers’ jobs, after he failed to seek approval for this work from the committee.
He was deemed not to have broken any rules, however, as he told the chair of ACOBA that he had no long-term relationship with AlphaSights and they were separate “one-off” speeches he delivered. Prior approval is not necessary for one-off speeches.
However, this seems hard to reconcile with the fact that Sir John has had 15 other engagements with AlphaSights since 2017, as the Westminster Accounts help reveal. And an ex-AlphaSights employee has told Sky News that rather than “speeches”, the work typically involves attending a meeting or having a call with two or three people from the client company.
These clients, who pay a fee for the privilege, are usually investment firms and consultancies looking for insight from experts to help make business decisions.
Sir John did not respond to questions from Sky News regarding who these clients were.
Read more:
Westminster Accounts: Following the money
How to explore the database for yourself
It is a clear example where the companies paying to contract an MP’s services, and the company reported publicly in the Register of Interests – AlphaSights in this case – differ.
Sir John’s case is just one of many where these questions apply.
Defence minister Mr Mercer, for example, declared payments of £3,600 and £1,110 in 2021 for two speaking engagements from Chartwell Speakers, a speaker agency.
No details are given in the register as to who the clients acting through the agency were, as MPs are usually expected to report in these instances.
Beyond speeches and individual engagements, there is a wider group of 11 MPs who are on the books of communications or political consultancies who often don’t give details about the clients they work with.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
MPs’ second jobs – what are the rules?
International development minister Mr Mitchell, for example, had been working as an advisor to Montrose Associates until last October, when he returned to government as a minister.
Montrose Associates is a strategic consultancy which, according to its website, draws on “access to privileged networks of decision-makers” when advising its clients.
Mr Mitchell received more than £340,000 for around 75 days of work since taking up the role in 2013. Exactly which clients he worked with and what he did cannot be known from the cursory description of his work given in the Register of Interests.
This lack of transparency creates particular problems for holding ex-ministers to account. They often undertake new roles on the condition they refrain from lobbying government on behalf of clients of their employers.
Tracey Crouch, another former minister, received approval from ACOBA to become a senior advisor to communications firm The Playbook between February 2018 and March 2020. Her role was to advise some of The Playbook’s clients in the technology and energy sector.
But who these clients were has not been reported in the public record. This was despite ACOBA advising Ms Crouch she couldn’t lobby on behalf of The Playbook’s clients for two years after leaving government.
There is no suggestion Ms Crouch – or any other MP – has broken lobbying rules. But Steve Goodrich, head of research and investigations at Transparency International UK, has cast doubt on the systems designed to ensure politicians aren’t being unduly influenced.
“ACOBA is a paper tiger – it has no teeth, no ability to enforce the advice that it gives,” he said.
“And there’s a broader question about whether these omissions reflect a wider culture of opacity within parliament, at least among some members, that needs challenging. That’s more of a cultural issue, which may be harder to shift.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
How you can explore the Westminster Accounts
There is also another group of MPs who have financial interests that may not be apparent from public disclosures.
Ten MPs have had employment with investment or private equity funds where there is a reasonable expectation they will be advising or making investment decisions about firms within the portfolios of these parent companies.
Yet the current rules – or the enforcement around them – put little onus on MPs to report these details.
David Davis, for example, the former Brexit secretary, sits on the advisory board of THI Holdings GmbH, an investment firm that declares holdings in seven companies on its website.
One of these companies is Oxford International Education Group – where Conservative MP Chris Skidmore sits on the advisory board. Were Mr Skidmore to speak in parliament on higher education issues, he would be expected to draw attention to his financial interest in this area.
But from what Mr Davis has disclosed, it is far more difficult to understand how ACOBA’s advice – which stated that Mr Davis should not lobby on behalf of THI’s subsidiaries in the two years after leaving government in 2019 – could be easily enforced.
Mr Davis is far from alone in working for one of these firms. Andrew Mitchell, Johnathan Djanogly, Richard Fuller, Bim Afolami, Alun Cairns and Stephen McPartland have all had positions with boutique investment firms in the past three years. There is no suggestion these MPs have broken any rules.
A spokesperson for Mr Mitchell told Sky News that all his outside business interests have always been properly registered in the normal way. Mr Mercer, Ms Crouch, and Mr Davis did not respond when asked for comment.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘We all welcome transparency’
MPs more likely to ask questions in parliament after taking up jobs in finance
Recent research from Dr Simon Weschle, author of Money In Politics, shows that MPs in certain types of second jobs behave differently.
He found that MPs were more likely to ask questions in parliament after taking up jobs in finance or the legal profession.
Dr Weschle said the lack of detail disclosed around these jobs makes it difficult to know if this amounts to lobbying, which would break the rules.
He said: “They could be asking more questions for a number of other reasons or for a reason directly relating to their work… but because we don’t know who they’re advising, who they have holdings in – who they’re ultimately working for – it’s really hard to make that connection.”
One reason MPs may not disclose further details is if doing so may conflict with professional practices.
Ten current MPs, for example, have worked as lawyers and accountants this parliament without naming their clients. Some may feel it inappropriate to disclose the firms or individuals contracting their services.
Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer, for instance, is one MP who has reported payments for giving legal advice with little detail offered as to the source of these funds. Sir Geoffrey Cox, who has earned more than £2m in legal fees this parliament, is another who provides details of the chambers who pay him, but rarely his clients.
Sky News understands there are no professional standards rules in the legal or accountancy profession that would stop MPs disclosing their clients, unless they expressly requested anonymity.
Some MPs involved in business consulting have told Sky News they have signed contracts that prevent them from naming clients publicly.
Yet if these obligations are sometimes the reason for a lack of disclosure, it calls into question the rules which at times seem to put MPs’ private interests above the transparency of the system. In some places, like the US, this problem has been solved by banning politicians from having second jobs.
Dr Weschle thinks there’s room for reform in the UK: “It seems to be that second jobs clearly undermine the public’s trust in politicians… so we should think about whether certain kinds of jobs should be more restricted, or whether MPs should be made to be more transparent about what they’re doing.”
Additional reporting: Ganesh Rao
World
‘At least 59 killed’ in Gaza after Israeli military opens fire near aid centre and carries out strikes
At least 59 Palestinians have reportedly been killed after the Israeli military opened fire near an aid centre in Gaza and carried out strikes across the territory.
The Red Cross, which operates a field hospital in Rafah, said 25 people were “declared dead upon arrival” and “six more died after admittance” following gunfire near an aid distribution centre in the southern Gazan city.
The humanitarian organisation added that it also received 132 patients “suffering from weapon-related injuries” after the incident.
The Red Cross said: “The overwhelming majority of these patients sustained gunshot wounds, and all responsive individuals reported they were attempting to access food distribution sites.”
The organisation said the number of deaths marks the hospital’s “largest influx of fatalities” since it began operations in May last year.
The IDF has said it fired “warning shots” near the aid distribution site but it was “not aware of injured individuals” as a result.
It said in a statement: “Earlier today, several suspects were identified approaching IDF troops operating in the Rafah area, posing a threat to the troops, hundreds of metres from the aid distribution site.
“IDF troops operated in order to prevent the suspects from approaching them and fired warning shots.”
Palestinians mourn a loved one following the incident near the aid centre. Pic: Reuters
Mother’s despair over shooting
Somia Alshaar told Sky News her 17-year-old son Nasir was shot dead while visiting the aid centre after she told him not to go.
She said: “He went to get us tahini so we could eat.
“He went to get flour. He told me ‘mama, we don’t have tahini. Today I’ll bring you flour. Even if it kills me, I will get you flour’.
“He left the house and didn’t return. They told me at the hospital: your son…’Oh God, oh Lord’.”
Asked where her son was shot, she replied: “In the chest. Yes, in the chest.”
Somia Alshaar, pictured with her daughter, says her son was shot dead. Pic: Reuters
‘A policy of mass murder’
Hassan Omran, a paramedic with Gaza’s ministry of health, told Sky News after the incident that humanitarian aid centres in Gaza are now “centres of mass death”.
Speaking in Khan Younis, he said: “Today, there were more than 150 injuries and more than 20 martyrs at the aid distribution centres… the Israeli occupation deliberately kills and commits genocide. The Israeli occupation is carrying out a policy of mass murder.
“They call people to come get their daily food, and then, when citizens arrive at these centres, they are killed in cold blood.
“All the victims have gunshot wounds to the head and chest, meaning the enemy is committing these crimes deliberately.”
Israel has rejected genocide accusations and denies targeting civilians.
Two boys mourn their brother at Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis. Pic: Reuters
‘Lies being peddled’
The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), the controversial US and Israeli-backed group which operates the distribution centre near Rafah, said: “Hamas is claiming there was violence at our aid distribution sites today. False.
“Once again, there were no incidents at or in the immediate vicinity of our sites.
“But that’s not stopping some from spreading the lies being peddled by ‘officials’ at the Hamas-controlled Nasser Hospital.”
The Red Cross said its field hospital in Rafah has recorded more than 250 fatalities and treated more than 3,400 “weapon-wounded patients” since new food distribution sites were set up in Gaza on 27 May.
Read more:
‘At least 798 killed’ at Gaza aid points
’10 children killed’ waiting for Gaza health clinic to open
Israel says permanent ceasefire ‘questionable’
Palestinians inspect the wreckage after an Israeli airstrike in Deir al Balah. Pic: AP
It comes after four children and two women were among at least 13 people who died in Deir al Balah, in central Gaza, after Israeli strikes pounded the area starting late on Friday, officials in Al Aqsa Martyrs hospital in the territory said.
Fifteen others died in Israeli airstrikes in Khan Younis, in southern Gaza, according to Nasser Hospital.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has not responded to a request for comment on the reported deaths.
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
Israeli has been carrying out attacks in Gaza since Hamas-led militants killed some 1,200 people and took 251 hostages on 7 October 2023.
Hamas still holds 50 hostages, with fewer than half of them believed to be alive, after most of the rest were released in ceasefire agreements or other deals.
Israel’s offensive in Gaza has killed more than 57,000 Palestinians, more than half of them women and children, according to Gaza’s health ministry, which does not distinguish between civilians and combatants in its count.
US President Donald Trump has said he is closing in on another ceasefire agreement that would see more hostages released and potentially wind down the war.
But after two days of talks this week with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, there were no signs of a breakthrough.
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The latest fatalities in Gaza comes as a 20-year-old Palestinian-American man was beaten to death by settlers in the Israeli-occupied West Bank on Friday, the Palestinian Health ministry said.
Sayafollah Musallet, also known as Saif, was killed during a confrontation between Palestinians and settlers in Sinjil, north of Ramallah, the ministry said.
A second man, Hussein Al-Shalabi, 23, died after being shot in the chest.
Mr Musallet’s family, from Tampa Florida, has called on the US State Department to lead an “immediate investigation”.
A State Department spokesperson said it was aware of the incident but it had no further comment “out of respect for the privacy of the family and loved ones” of the reported victim.
The Israeli military said the confrontation broke out after Palestinians threw rocks at Israelis, lightly injuring them.
As investigators continue to piece together the full picture, early findings of the Air India crash are pointing towards a critical area of concern — the aircraft’s fuel control switches.
The flight, bound for London Gatwick, crashed just moments after taking off from Ahmedabad airport on 12 June, killing all but one of the 242 people on board the plane and at least 19 on the ground.
According to the preliminary report by India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), the two engine fuel control switches on the plane were moved from the “RUN” to “CUTOFF” position.
These switches control fuel flow to the engines and should only be used when the aircraft is on ground, first to start the engines before a flight and later to shut them down at the gate.
They are designed so they’re unlikely to be changed accidentally, pointing to possible human error on the Air India flight.
The findings include the final conversation between the pilots and show there was confusion in the cockpit as well.
When one pilot asked the other why he cut off the fuel, he responded to say he did not do so.
The Air India plane before the crash. Pic: Takagi
Moments later, a Mayday call was made from the cockpit, but the plane could not regain power quickly enough and plummeted to the ground.
Captain Amit Singh, founder of Safety Matters Foundation, an organisation dedicated to aviation safety, told Sky News: “This exchange indicates that the engine shutdowns were uncommanded.
“However, the report does not identify the cause – whether it was crew error, mechanical malfunction, or electronic failure.”
Previous warning of ‘possible fuel switch issue’
“The Boeing 787 uses spring-loaded locking mechanisms on its fuel control switches to prevent accidental movement,” Mr Singh explained.
But a previous bulletin from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) “warned that these switches might be installed with the locking feature disengaged,” he said.
This could “make them susceptible to unintended movement due to vibration, contact, or quadrant flex”, he added.
The plane’s tail lodged in a building. Pic: Reuters
Speaking to Sky News, aviation expert Terry Tozner said: “The take-off was normal, the aircraft rotated at the correct speed left the ground and almost immediately, the cut-off switches were selected to off, one then two.
“But nobody has said with any clarity whether or not the latch mechanisms worked okay on this particular aircraft. So we can only assume that they were in normal working order.”
In India, there has been a backlash over the findings, with some saying the report points to pilot error without much information and almost dismisses the possibility of a mechanical or electric failure.
Indian government responds
India’s civil aviation minister Kinjarapu Ram Mohan Naidu has been quick to respond, saying: “We care for the welfare and the wellbeing of pilots so let’s not jump to any conclusions at this stage, let us wait for the final report.
“I believe we have the most wonderful workforce of pilots and crew in the whole world.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
India plane crash survivor carries brother’s coffin
Both pilots were experienced, with around 19,000 flying hours between them, including more than 9,000 on Boeing 787s.
The report says the aircraft maintenance checks were on schedule and that there are no signs of fuel contamination or a bird strike.
So far, no safety recommendations have been issued to Boeing or General Electric, the engine manufacturers.
Concern over destroyed flight recorder
Mr Singh said “the survivability of the flight recorders also raises concern”.
The plane’s rear flight recorder, designed to withstand impact forces of 3,400 Gs and temperatures of 1,100C for 60 minutes, “was damaged beyond recovery”.
Read more:
Everything you need to know about the crash
Air India’s lone survivor is nothing short of miracle
“The Ram Air Turbine (RAT), which deploys automatically when both engines fail and power drops below a threshold, was observed as deployed in CCTV footage when the aircraft was approximately 60ft above ground level,” Mr Singh said.
“This suggests that the dual engine failure likely occurred before the official timestamp of 08:08:42 UTC, implying a possible discrepancy.”
India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi visiting the crash site. Pic: X/AP
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
Mr Singh said it was also “of particular note” that the plane’s emergency locator transmitter (ELT) did not send any signal after the crash.
“Was the ELT damaged, unarmed, mis-wired, or malfunctioning?” he said.
The report has generated more questions than answers on topics including human error, power source failures and mechanical or electrical malfunction.
The final report is expected to take a year. Meanwhile, families grapple with the unimaginable loss of loved ones in one of the worst disasters in India’s aviation history.
Donald Trump has announced he will impose a 30% tariff on imports from the European Union from 1 August.
The tariffs could make everything from French cheese and Italian leather goods to German electronics and Spanish pharmaceuticals more expensive in the US.
Mr Trump has also imposed a 30% tariff on goods from Mexico, according to a post from his Truth Social account.
Announcing the moves in separate letters on the account, the president said the US trade deficit was a national security threat.
In his letter to the EU, he wrote: “We have had years to discuss our trading relationship with The European Union, and we have concluded we must move away from these long-term, large, and persistent, trade Deficits, engendered by your tariff, and non-Tariff, policies, and trade barriers.
“Our relationship has been, unfortunately, far from reciprocal.”
In his letter to Mexico, Mr Trump said he did not think the country had done enough to stop the US from turning into a “narco-trafficking playground”.
The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, said today that the EU could adopt “proportionate countermeasures” if the US proceeds with imposing the 30% tariff.
Ms von der Leyen, who heads the EU’s executive arm, said in a statement that the bloc remained ready “to continue working towards an agreement by Aug 1”.
“Few economies in the world match the European Union’s level of openness and adherence to fair trading practices,” she continued.
“We will take all necessary steps to safeguard EU interests, including the adoption of proportionate countermeasures if required.”
Ms von der Leyen has also said imposing tariffs on EU exports would “disrupt essential transatlantic supply chains”.
Meanwhile, Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof said on the X social media platform that Mr Trump’s announcement was “very concerning and not the way forward”.
He added: “The European Commission can count on our full support. As the EU we must remain united and resolute in pursuing an outcome with the United States that is mutually beneficial.”
Mexico’s economy ministry said a bilateral working group aims to reach an alternative to the 30% US tariffs before they are due to take effect.
The country was informed by the US that it would receive a letter about the tariffs, the ministry’s statement said, adding that Mexico was negotiating.
Read more US news:
Trump plans to hit Canada with 35% tariff
More than 160 missing after Texas floods
Robot performs realistic surgery
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
How ‘liberation day’ unfolded
Trump’s tariff threats and delays
On his so-called “liberation day” in April, Mr Trump unleashed “reciprocal tariffs” on many of America’s trade partners.
The US president said he was targeting countries with which America has a trade imbalance.
However, since then he’s backed down in a spiralling tit-for-tat tariff face-off with China, and struck a deal with the UK.
The US imposed a 20% tariff on imported goods from the EU in April but it was later paused and the bloc has since been paying a baseline tariff of 10% on goods it exports to the US.
In May, while the US and EU where holding trade negotiations, Mr Trump threated to impose a 50% tariff on the bloc as talks didn’t progress as he would have liked.
However, he later announced he was delaying the imposition of that tariff while negotiations over a trade deal took place.
As of earlier this week, the EU’s executive commission, which handles trade issues for the bloc’s 27-member nations, said its leaders were still hoping to strike a trade deal with the Trump administration.
Without one, the EU said it was prepared to retaliate with tariffs on hundreds of American products, ranging from beef and auto parts to beer and Boeing airplanes.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike