The House of Lords has become a lobbying network for hire

Almost one in six members of the House of Lords holds a paid political advisory role that, on Transparency International UK's analysis, carries a significant lobbying risk. At least six peers go further still, sitting as directors or senior partners in lobbying and political advisory firms.

This investigation comes as the police continue to investigate whether Peter Mandelson passed market-sensitive information to the convicted sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein while he was a minister and a member of the Lords, and as lobbyists themselves call for tougher laws. But the question our research raises is a simpler one: how did the rules ever allow this in the first place?

What we found 

Using official data, we identified 128 peers holding paid political advisory roles that risked breaking parliamentary rules on lobbying. Two thirds of them, 84 in total, have spent their careers in politics, as former MPs, party candidates, party officials or members of other legislatures such as the European Parliament. These are people with exactly the contacts and insider knowledge a paying client wants. 

The analysis follows a series of investigations that found peers acting as lobbyists in breach of the rules. Lord Dannatt and Lord Evans of Watford are currently suspended from the House after investigations by the Guardian. Lord McNicol, the former Labour general secretary, lobbied on behalf of the crypto firm Astra Protocol while working for them as an adviser. Lord Duncan of Springbank lobbied while advising the nuclear company Terrestrial Energy. 

We also found there are at least six peers running lobbying and political advisory firms acting as directors or senior partners rather than simply advising them. There is no suggestion that any of them has breached the code of conduct; the concern is that the code lets them hold these positions at all.   

Lord Wharton of Yarm, Lord Jones of Penybont and Lord Callanan are directors and senior counsel at NorthPoint Strategy, a consultant lobbying firm whose registered clients include the UK Cryptoasset Business Council, the Heat and Building Business Council and the AI-skills company Lumi.Network. NorthPoint said Lord Callanan had not worked there for some time and that, as they understood it, he was updating his register of interests. Lords Wharton, Jones and Callanan did not respond to requests for comment. 

Lord John of Southwark is founder and director of Quoin Partners, which offers "senior advisory services to organisations and businesses who need to understand and influence local authorities, combined authorities and central government". Lord John said he fully understands and respects his obligations under the Code of Conduct, and that there is undue attention on peers working for lobbying firms when the recent breaches involved people advising clients as sole traders. 

Lord Barwell, who was a minister and Chief of Staff to former Prime Minister Theresa May – is founder and director of NorthStar Advisory, a geopolitical consultancy whose website claims the firm do not lobby government. 

‘Because of our previous roles, we do not lobby government, but if you want to influence government policy we can advise you on who you should talk to, and what arguments are most likely to work.’ - NorthStar Advisory

Lord Barwell said NorthStar does not in fact advise clients on how to influence government policy, that he recognises he is not permitted to, and that the firm did not want to offer those services. 

Lord Mott heads the advisory board at Trafalgar Strategy, which boasts of leveraging an ‘extensive political network’ to give clients ‘insider intelligence, insight-led campaigns, and ongoing political advisory services’. Trafalgar said Lord Mott's appointment was cleared by the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments, that he has never lobbied for the firm and will not do so. Lord Mott did not respond personally. For full disclosure, Transparency International UK has commissioned Trafalgar in the past, to help promote reports on corruption risks in Covid-19 procurement to the media. 

Why the rules let this happen 

The current rules let peers keep interests in lobbying firms, provided they do not try to influence Parliament or Government on behalf of clients, and do not advise clients on how to do so themselves. They can still seek to influence ministers or debates, so long as the aim is not to benefit only the people paying them. 

That sounds like a meaningful line until you try to walk along it. In practice it means a peer can engage in a range of activities that the public would likely see as problematic, yet do so within the rules or under a cloak of secrecy.  

Being a peer and working for a firm that advises on how to influence policy is a straightforward conflict of interest. The Lords is meant to be a place of independent scrutiny. It should not double as a network of political advisers available for hire. 

What needs to change 

We are calling for the rules to be tightened so that peers face a plain choice: drop any interest that involves lobbying on behalf of clients, or leave the House of Lords. Specifically, the Code of Conduct should be changed to: 

• require Lords to leave the House of Lords if they want to retain an interest in organisations involved in parliamentary lobbying on behalf of clients (such as public relations firms), or provide paid services on behalf of a foreign state and/or its connected entities 
• narrow the exclusions to the rule on paid lobbying so they align more closely with those for the House of Commons 
• align the general misconduct clause in the Lords’ code with the more succinct clause for the House of Commons 
• require Lords to continue reporting registrable interests while on a leave of absence, including any consequential changes