Connect with us

Published

on

All-party parliamentary groups (APPGs) have received over £20m worth of funding from external organisations since the 2019 general election, with registered lobbying agencies dominating the ranks of biggest benefactors.

Companies are required by law to sign the consultant lobbyist register if they engage in direct communications with ministers in relation to government policy or legislation on behalf of paying clients.

APPGs are informal interest groups of MPs and peers that facilitate cross-party work on an issue, a country or a sector, but the chair of one of Westminster’s ethics watchdogs has told Sky News they could represent “the next big scandal”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What is an APPG and why do they matter?

Search for your MP using the Westminster Accounts tool

The role of lobbying agencies is usually to provide MPs with a secretariat to administer the APPG.

The agencies are paid to provide the service by other outside organisations, which are listed in the parliamentary register.

But Lord Pickles, chair of the advisory committee on business appointments, said: “This is the next big scandal, and I think we need to take action now before it further develops.

More on Westminster Accounts

“We need to know when people are producing reports that they’re speaking for members of parliament and not for the lobbyists.”

He added: “By and large, the all-party groups are fairly harmless. They perform in a niche in which particular members of parliament are interested.

“But for a number of them, the secretariat comes from professional organisations or lobbying groups and from organisations that have a political axe to grind. And I don’t think there is sufficient transparency in terms of why they’re doing.”

Lobbying industry insiders have defended the role of APPGs in the democratic process as a “force for good” – but one conceded to Sky News “there are bad ones”, while another said a “minority” are funded by organisations “trying to unfairly influence parliamentary decisions”.

From banking, beer and Bermuda, to Christianity, climate change and China, there are now more APPGs than there are sitting MPs, with 746 active groups in the latest register update – a number that has almost doubled since 2015.

appg benefactors

The groups have come under greater scrutiny following MI5’s revelation in January last year that Christine Lee, a businesswoman identified as an agent for the Chinese government, had used donations to the Chinese in Britain APPG as part of political interference activities.

There has been a particular focus on how MPs have used the groups as justification for accepting gifted travel and trips abroad from foreign governments.

For example, £222,308 of the £242,000 that Qatar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has donated to MPs since the last election came in the form of flights, hotels and hospitality for APPG visits to the country.

But while groups dedicated to foreign countries have so far attracted the most attention, those focused on policy areas make up a much greater proportion of APPGs.

Appgs receiving most funding

Last spring, the Committee on Standards published a report that called on the government to look again at how APPGs are regulated, warning they could “all too easily become a parliamentary front for an external commercial entity”.

While the report concluded that lobbying was “an important part of a healthy democracy” and that it was “crucial that the interests of different sectors, organisations and communities can be brought to the attention of members and ministers”, it warned there were “few, if any, safeguards in place” for APPGs.

In September, the government responded by saying it agreed that “their informal structures make them potentially vulnerable to improper influence and access” and welcomed the committee’s proposals for a “gatekeeper” to be introduced to approve the establishment of any new APPGs.

Although APPGs can use the parliamentary meeting rooms and a portcullis logo on their publications, they receive no financial support from parliament and many are run with the assistance of external organisations – which include private companies, charities and academic institutions.

Some provide cash donations, but most of the backing comes in the form of benefits in kind. This often amounts to providing a secretariat which handles administrative work, events, trips and the publication of reports.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Rishi Sunak has reacted to the Westminster Accounts – a joint project from Sky News and Tortoise Media which is shedding new light on the way money and politics interact in the UK.

Who needs to register as a consultant lobbyist?

Analysis by Sky News shows 10 of the top 20 biggest sources of funding to APPGs are registered consultant lobbyists, who have provided millions of pounds worth of services to the groups.

According to the Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists, organisations are required by law to sign the register if they are VAT-registered in the UK and engage in “oral, written or electronic communications personally to a Minister of the Crown of Permanent Secretary” on behalf of a paying client in relation to attempts to “make or amend” legislation or policy.

Policy Connect – the biggest player in terms of the monetary value of the services offered – currently provides the secretariat for 10 APPGs on areas such as carbon monoxide, design and innovation, and climate change.

The company, which describes itself as a cross-party thinktank that operates as a not-for-profit social enterprise, has been on the register of consultant lobbyists since 2017 and declared more than 440 clients in that period – including trade and industry bodies, charities, educational institutions, local authorities and private companies.

For example, in the APPG register in 2021, Policy Connect said it was running the secretariat for the APPG on manufacturing based on funding it had received from trade groups such as Make UK, the British Aerosol Manufacturers Association and the Institution of Engineering and Technology; education institutions like the University of Bristol, and private firms such as BAE Systems, Tata Steel, Cummins and Deloitte.

On its website, Policy Connect lists organisations that have paid to join its “supporters programme”. It breaks them down into categories based on the size of their financial contribution, with brackets going from £5,000 up to £70,000.

Policy Connect defended this programme at a hearing of the Standards Committee last year, when challenged by MPs on whether this amounted to charging different rates for access to APPGs.

Claudia Jaksch, CEO of Policy Connect, told Sky News her organisation “provides the capacity to take on the administrative functions from parliamentarians so they can concentrate on the substance of the issues” and said money paid by clients had no connection to the amount of access or involvement they had in the APPGs.

“In relation to the different funding amounts Policy Connect receives, these reflect the size of the funding organisation to ensure a high level of diversity of supporters, and/or the interest of a funding organisation in supporting our work across multiple areas and programmes, and/or the different levels of administrative support and staff time required by different APPGs.

“Regardless of funding amount no organisation receives preferential treatment. Editorial control rests firmly with the parliamentary members of each APPG.”

Another major provider of secretariat services to APPGs is Connect Communications.

It has run the secretariats of 17 APPGs since the last general election, all of them on behalf of multiple clients – which are all declared in the parliamentary APPG register.

In its second-quarter return for the register of consultant lobbyists in 2021, the company recorded “lobbying done on behalf of” the APPGs on water, childcare, digital skills, hydrogen and apprenticeships.

It has also advertised its expertise in this area, offering courses for clients on “how to run an APPG”, including how to identify MPs to sit on an APPG and how to secure media coverage for an APPG’s work.

A website posting about a training course in 2016 says: “APPGs are increasingly seen as an effective means to shaping policy… Connect has unrivalled experience in setting up successful APPGs – come learn from us about how your organisation would benefit from working with APPGs.”

In a statement to Sky News, a spokesperson said: “Connect ensure that groups we are involved with operate in an open and transparent way, fully compliant with the strict rules set by the parliamentary authorities. It is important to note that MPs and peers set the agenda for an APPG and must approve all activity, including the involvement of outside organisations.”

The spokesperson said the lobbying the company had registered on behalf of APPGs relates to things like sending speaking invitations to ministers for an event, adding “this is a technical point and does not reflect an active ‘lobbying’ role”, and that its provision of client training for “setting up successful APPGs” has a “particular focus on ensuring compliance with the strict 32-page rule book set by the parliamentary authorities, including around the required composition of groups, with MPs and peers participating from all parties.”

In the case of both Policy Connect and Connect Communications, the APPG secretariats they provide are funded by multiple clients, but that is not always the case in other APPGs.

Wychwood Consulting runs the secretariats of a number of APPGs on behalf of single clients.

For example, it runs the recently established Central Bank and Digital Currency APPG on behalf of Portdex, a company creating a decentralized digital economy platform using blockchain technology; the Digital Identity APPG on behalf of Yogi, an ID verification company, and it also provided the secretariat for the now disbanded Business In A Pandemic World APPG on behalf of Cignpost, a COVID diagnostics firm.

While there is no suggestion Wychwood Consulting or the APPGs in question have broken any rules, some in the wider industry have raised concerns about the potential problems that could arise from having a single financial backer.

Liam Herbert, who chairs the public affairs group at the Public Relations and Communications Association (PRCA), told Sky News: “The potential problem is where you have an organisation that might be promoting one single issue from their point of view alone. That’s not the purpose of an APPG.

“The purpose of an APPG is to inform parliamentarians about a wider issue. So if you take one, your sole area of interest, and promote that through an APPG, that’s not very democratic, it’s not very clear and it’s not very transparent.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Who is donating money to MPs?

Lobbying is not a bad word

The lobbying industry has recently started the Lobbying for Good Lobbying campaign, calling for greater openness.

Speaking to Sky News at the launch event, Gill Morris, the CEO of DevoConnect – which has provided £192,000 worth of secretariat services to six APPGs since the last election – said: “People need to understand that lobbying is not a bad word, it’s a good word.

“When you have a government of an 80-seat majority, having all-party consensus on an issue is really important … we bring a collaboration together which actually makes sense for government. I know our APPG helped influence getting more money for northern culture in the levelling-up fund. We did that. We know that.”

“Yeah, there are good ones, there are bad ones, but when we get that collaboration and bring them together it’s all-party – and that does have voice.”

Asked whether she believed some APPGs are being used to push a particular corporate agenda, Ms Morris said: “There are really good APPGs and there are others where it’s quite clear that they are a direct point of access … I think it might be true [but] I think probably, most groups do things or operate the way we do.”

Sarah Pinch, a former president of the Chartered Institute of Public Relations, said the issue with APPGs was not about how they were funded, but the activity they undertook.

“I think there are a minority of APPGs that are funded by certain organisations who are peddling their line and they are trying to unfairly influence parliamentary decisions through a system that was not set up to do that,” she said.

“APPGs are a force for good. We need to be clear and transparent about who’s involved in them, who’s funding them and who’s influencing them. Because if we’re not, we run the risk, for example, that that could be a health APPG that is funded by the sugar industry, and that is wrong.”

While the data compiled in the Westminster Accounts provides insight into the amount of funding declared by APPGs and their sources, it only captures activity that is required to be registered.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

How you can explore the Westminster Accounts

What needs to be registered?

However, there are publicly visible examples of work by private companies in relation to APPGs that do not break any rules but are not reflected in the parliamentary registers.

One example is Firehouse Communications, which cites its experience dealing with APPGs as part of its pitch to prospective clients on its website.

In a case study, the company explains how it helped an unnamed “leading offshore tax jurisdiction” achieve its policy aims around Brexit.

In its list of challenges faced by the offshore jurisdiction, Firehouse Communications notes that the APPG related to the jurisdiction was “inert”.

Explaining its strategy for assisting the offshore jurisdiction, the company says it worked to “support liaison with [the] APPG and other groups”.

However, Firehouse Communications does not appear in the APPG register or in the register of members’ interests, other than a £3,000 payment it made to Sir Michael Fallon, the former defence secretary, for a speech to a Hungarian thinktank.

Firehouse Communications told Sky News it had provided “no benefit in kind to any APPG on any basis”.

There is no suggestion any of the work it conducted was registerable.

Some in the lobbying industry, however, say the rules around what should be registered and declared should be widened to capture more of the activity that goes on in relation to APPGs.

Liam Herbert, chair of the public affairs group at the PRCA, said: “At the moment, all that is regulated are what’s called consultant lobbyists – so professional companies who do lobbying and public affairs for a living.

“But everyone lobbies and lobbying is fundamentally a central part of our democracy. But a lot of it goes unrecorded and unchallenged and unseen. So almost everybody has an opportunity to lobby. But only the industry who says we lobby for a living is currently regulated.”

Continue Reading

UK

Prince Andrew’s Pitch@Palace branded ‘crude attempt to enrich himself’ as Chinese spy documents set to be released

Published

on

By

Prince Andrew's Pitch@Palace branded 'crude attempt to enrich himself' as Chinese spy documents set to be released

Prince Andrew’s efforts to make money from his Pitch@Palace project have been branded as a “crude attempt to enrich himself” at the expense of “unsuspecting tech founders”, as new documents may shed more light on what he and his team have been attempting to sell.

Today is the deadline for documents to be released relating to Prince Andrew‘s former senior adviser Dominic Hampshire and his interactions with the alleged Chinese spy Yang Tengbo.

In February, an immigration tribunal heard how the intelligence services had contacted Mr Hampshire about Mr Yang back in 2022. Mr Yang helped set up Pitch@Palace China, a branch of the duke’s scheme to help young entrepreneurs.

The alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo, has links with Prince Andrew
Image:
The alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo, has links with Prince Andrew

Pic: Pitch@Palace
Image:
Yang Tengbo. Pic: Pitch@Palace

Judges banned Mr Yang from the UK, saying his association with a senior royal had made Prince Andrew “vulnerable” and posed a threat to national security. Mr Yang challenged that decision at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC).

Since that hearing, media organisations have applied for certain documents relating to the case and Mr Hampshire’s support for Mr Yang to be made public. SIAC agreed to release some information of public interest. It is hoped they may include more details on deals that he was trying to do on behalf of Prince Andrew.

So what do we know about potential deals for Pitch@Palace so far?

In February, Sky News confirmed that palace officials had a meeting last summer with tech funding company StartupBootcamp to discuss a potential tie-up between them and Prince Andrew relating to his Pitch@Palace project.

More on Prince Andrew

The palace wasn’t involved in the fine details of a deal but wanted guarantees to make sure it wouldn’t impact the Royal Family in the future. Sky News understands from one source that the price being discussed for Pitch was around £750,000 – there are, however, reports that a deal may have stalled.

Photos we found on the Chinese Chamber of Commerce website show an event held in Asia between StartupBootcamp and Innovate Global, believed to be an offshoot of Pitch.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Who is alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo?

Documents, released in relation to the investigations into Mr Tengbo, have also shown how much the duke has always seen Pitch as a way of potentially making money. One document from 21 August 2021 clearly states “the duke needed money at the time, and saw the relationships with China through Pitch as one possible source of funding”.

But Prince Andrew’s apparent intention to use Pitch to make money has led to concerns about whether he is unfairly using the contacts and information he gained when he was a working royal.

Norman Baker, former MP and author of books on royal finances, believes it is “a crude attempt to enrich himself” and goes against what the tech entrepreneurs thought they were signing up for.

Read more:
Who is Yang Tenbo?
Virginia Giuffre says she has days to live
Emails between Andrew and Epstein revealed

He told Sky News: “The data given by these business people was given on the basis it was an official operation and not something for Prince Andrew, and so in my view, Prince Andrew had no right legally or morally to take the data which has been collected, a huge amount of data, and sell it…

“And quite clearly if you’re going to sell it off to StartupBootcamp, that is not what people had in mind. The entrepreneurs who joined Pitch@Palace did not do so to enrich Prince Andrew,” he said.

Rich Wilson was one tech entrepreneur who was approached at the start of Pitch@Palace to sign up, but he stepped away when he spotted a clause in the contract saying they’d be entitled to 2% equity in any funding he secured.

He feels Prince Andrew is continuing to use those he made a show of supporting.

He said: “It makes me feel sick. I think it’s terrible – that he is continuing to exploit unsuspecting tech founders in this way. A lot of them, I’m quite grey and old in the tooth now, I saw it coming, but clearly most didn’t. And a lot of them were quite young.

“It’ll be their first venture and you’re learning on the trot, so to speak. So to take advantage of people in such a major way – that’s an awful, sickening thing to do.”

We approached StartupBootcamp who said they had no comment to make, and the Duke of York’s office did not respond.

With reports that a deal may have stalled, it could be a big setback for the duke – especially with questions still about how he’ll continue to pay for his home on the Windsor estate now that the King no longer gives him financial support.

Continue Reading

UK

UK in talks with Brazil over ‘potential sale’ of two Royal Navy amphibious assault ships

Published

on

By

UK in talks with Brazil over 'potential sale' of two Royal Navy amphibious assault ships

The UK is in talks with Brazil over the “potential sale” of the Royal Navy’s two amphibious assault ships that are being ditched to cut costs, the Ministry of Defence has confirmed.

Defence experts said the fact HMS Bulwark – which has only just received an expensive refit – and HMS Albion are being flogged off underlines the pressure on the defence budget even though Sir Keir Starmer keeps talking up his promises to boost expenditure.

The two warships can be used to deploy Royal Marines to shore – a vital capability at a time of growing global threats.

News of the possible sale was first revealed in Latin American media.

One report said the Royal Navy and Brazilian Navy had signed an agreement that would see the UK giving information to the Brazilians on the state of the two ships prior to any purchase.

Asked about the claim that the UK would sell the assault ships to Brazil, a Ministry of Defence spokesperson said: “We can confirm we have entered discussions with the Brazilian Navy over the potential sale of HMS Bulwark and HMS Albion.

“As announced in November, both ships are being decommissioned from the Royal Navy. Neither were planned to go back to sea before their out of service dates in the 2030s.”

More on Brazil

James Cartlidge, the shadow defence secretary, appeared to question the wisdom of the move.

“At Defence orals [House of Commons questions] on January 6th Defence Secretary John Healey said: ‘HMS Bulwark and HMS Albion were not genuine capabilities’,” Mr Cartlidge wrote in a post on social media.

“They’ve just been sold to Brazil.”

Matthew Savill, the director of military science at the Royal United Services Institute, said the plan to sell the vessels demonstrates there “is still life in both these ships”.

He said: “The fact that the UK is prepared to sell off useful amphibious capability – which could be used in evacuation operations or other cases where air transport is difficult – shows just how tight finances are even with the promised budget increase.

“The replacements for these ships are still several years away and won’t be available until the 2030s.”

Read more from Sky News:
Prince Harry’s charity row explained
US seems content to cosy up to Russia instead of imposing tariffs

Mr Savill added: “As an aside, Brazil will probably have greater amphibious capacity than the UK, having previously bought HMS Ocean, the UK’s helicopter assault ship.”

HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark entered service two decades ago.

Both are currently held at lower readiness having not been to sea since 2023 and 2017 respectively.

HMS Ocean, a helicopter-landing vessel and once the largest warship in the Royal Navy, was sold to the Brazilian Navy in 2018 after 20 years in service.

Continue Reading

UK

Boy saved from burning car after M6 crash caused by suicidal ex-RAF pilot, inquest hears

Published

on

By

Boy saved from burning car after M6 crash caused by suicidal ex-RAF pilot, inquest hears

A workman saved a seven-year-old boy from a burning car in the aftermath of a deadly crash caused by a suicidal ex-pilot, an inquest has heard.

The schoolboy’s rescue came following the collision on the M6, which killed former RAF man Richard Woods and four others, in October last year.

Last week a coroner ruled that Woods, 40, took his own life by deliberately driving his Skoda the wrong way down the motorway while drunk and hitting a Toyota Yaris head-on.

The driver of the Toyota, Jaroslaw Rossa, 42, was also killed, along with his two sons, Filip, 15, and Dominic, seven, and his partner Jade McEnroe, 33.

Cockermouth Coroner’s Court heard on Thursday that Ms McEnroe’s son was also in the car but survived after workman Gavin Walsh came to his rescue at the scene, which was near Tebay services in Cumbria.

In a statement to the inquest, Mr Walsh said he was a passenger in a transit van travelling to Scotland when he witnessed the crash.

He jumped out of the vehicle and used a jack to smash the rear windscreen of the Toyota and pulled the boy out of the burning vehicle.

Mr Walsh said: “We really did try, I can assure everyone we did our best. We only had minimal time.

“I saved a life that day and I hope never to witness anything like that again.”

He added that he has never stopped thinking about the boy, and said: “I hope we will meet again one day and I will give you a massive hug.”

At the time, the family were returning to Glasgow from a trip to Legoland in Windsor, Berkshire.

The inquest heard that Wood, who was travelling at a speed of at least 65mph, would have been charged with manslaughter had he survived.

Recording conclusions of unlawful killing, Cumbria assistant coroner Margaret Taylor said: “I found that Jaroslaw, Jade, Filip and Dominic died as a consequence of the unlawful acts of another driver.”

The inquest heard how Mr Woods, from Cambridgeshire, had served a distinguished 14-year career in the RAF and was a flight instructor for BAE Systems at the time of his death.

Jade McEnroe and son Arran. Pic: Cumbria Constabulary
Image:
Jade McEnroe. Pic: Cumbria Constabulary

Dominic and Filip Rossa. Pic: Cumbria Constabulary
Image:
Dominic and Filip. Pic: Cumbria Constabulary

In Ms Taylor’s record of inquest, Mr Woods was said to have been experiencing “a number of stressors in his life” and had a “history of harmful use of alcohol”.

Following the crash, he was found to be nearly four times over the legal drink-drive limit and a two-thirds empty bottle of gin was found in his car.

On the day of his death, concerns had been raised over his behaviour at a work conference near Preston in Lancashire.

Mr Woods failed to return to his seat after lunch and was later spotted driving erratically and swerving across three northbound carriageway lanes on the M6.

After pulling onto the hard shoulder, he then proceeded to U-turn and drove southward on lane three.

Filip, Dominic and Jaroslaw Rossa. Pic: Cumbria Constabulary
Image:
Filip, Dominic and Jaroslaw Rossa. Pic: Cumbria Constabulary

Detective Sergeant Deborah Story, from Cumbria Police, told the inquest that Mr Woods would have been prosecuted on four counts of manslaughter had he lived.

She said hypothetical charges of murder were considered by detectives but not thought appropriate because of a lack of information that Mr Woods knew the family or anything that provided a link between them.

Ms McEnroe’s parents, Marie McEnroe and George McNellis, told the coroner they thought it was “murder”.

Read more from Sky News:
Luton Airport expansion approved
Prince Harry responds to charity row
Appeal launched to help earthquake victims

A statement from the mother of Filip and Dominic, and the ex-wife of Mr Rossa, Kamila, was read out at the inquest.

She said Mr Rossa, known as Jarek, was born in Poland where they became a couple and went on to have three boys.

He loved playing computer games and had “lots of friends”, she said, and worked at the Wagamama restaurant in Silverburn, Glasgow.

She said she was “devastated” over the deaths, adding: “Our lives will never be the same.

“I am heartbroken at the passing of my beloved angels Filip and Dominic.”

Marie McEnroe said her daughter, a spa therapist, had been in a relationship with Mr Rossa for about two-and-a-half years.

She said Jade had been a “brilliant mother” to her only child, was “really happy” with Mr Rossa and it was “lovely chaos” when all the boys were playing together.

Ms McEnroe added: “Life changed forever that day”.

Ms Taylor praised the “selfless acts of bravery” from those in the aftermath of the collision, including Mr Walsh, who she said went towards the burning car “without hesitation for his own safety”.

The coroner added: “Without his swift response, Jade’s child would also have perished.”

Addressing the bereaved family members, she said: “Your loss is unimaginable but you have conducted yourself with dignity and I thank you for that. I wish you strength for the future.”

Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK.

Continue Reading

Trending