Andrew Giuliani, head of the White House team tasked with organising the 2026 World Cup, defended the US authorities’ decision to bar Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan and a number of administrative officials from the Iranian national team from entering the United States, stressing that these measures were taken for “very valid reasons”, according to AFP, reporting on a seminar organised by the Atlantic Council think tank in Washington.

The comments come at a time of growing questions regarding the security measures taken by the US in the days leading up to the start of the tournament, which it is co-hosting with Canada and Mexico, particularly following the barring of Artan from entering the country despite holding a valid visa, and the refusal to grant visas to a number of officials accompanying the Iranian national team.

Why did the US bar the Somali referee from the World Cup?

Giuliani has reignited the controversy surrounding the case of Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan, after he was detained at Miami airport for several hours before being returned to Turkey, thereby preventing him from officiating at World Cup matches.

The US official refused to disclose the specific reasons that led the authorities to take the decision, but he stressed that the ban was not a random measure.

He said:

There was a referee who was not allowed to enter. I cannot go into details, but what I can say is that it was for a very good reason.

He added that US authorities are balancing the hosting of a global event open to the public and sporting delegations with the need to uphold national security requirements.

He explained:

We are trying to strike a balance between welcoming everyone and ensuring that any malicious actors attempting to enter the country under the guise of the World Cup are unable to reach the United States.

Artan, who was named African Referee of the Year for 2025 and has officiated matches in major continental and international tournaments, was set to make his World Cup debut before being barred from entering the US.

Iranian officials denied entry to the US

On the Iranian front, Giuliani confirmed that all members of the Iranian national team’s coaching staff had been granted entry to the United States, whilst a number of administrative officials had been denied visas.

He said:

All members of the Iranian national team’s technical staff are allowed to enter. There are Iranian officials who cannot enter, and that is also for very valid reasons.

He noted that some people might identify themselves as part of sporting or technical delegations, whilst having links to other entities, adding:

As you can imagine, there are people who claim to be coaches, but they may not be.

He continued that some of the names subject to scrutiny may be directly linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, without providing further details or public evidence to support those claims.

Giuliani also revealed that 35 teams have so far managed to enter the United States without any players or coaches being barred from participating, emphasising that the bans were limited to a small number of officials and administrators.

These statements mark the first public justification by a senior US official for the decisions that sparked widespread controversy ahead of the biggest World Cup in history, at a time when US authorities continue to refrain from disclosing the detailed reasons behind the ban on the Somali referee and certain Iranian officials from entering the country.

Featured image via Jay Biggerstaff/Getty Images

By Alaa Shamali

Source link

The Green Party has opened up a staggering lead with 18-24 year olds according to one poll:

POLL | Greens lead with 18-24 year olds:

Grn: 35% (+17)
Lab: 19% (-22)
Ref: 17% (+8)
Con: 8% (-)
Lib: 7% (-9)
Your: 4% (+4)

(Source: @focaldataHQ)
—
+/- vs GE2024 data pic.twitter.com/L0LBqjcjGP

— Stats for Lefties (@LeftieStats) June 9, 2026

It’s almost as if they’re the only party which is acknowledging the issues young people face.

Meeting needs

The above isn’t the only poll to have shown the Greens leading with young people. This, from March, shows the party leading with everyone under the tender age of 65:

NEW | Greens lead with all voters under 65, reveals latest YouGov survey:

— 18-64s —
Grn: 26%
Ref: 20%
Lab: 17%
Con: 13%
Lib: 14%

— Over 65s —
Ref: 33%
Con: 26%
Lab: 15%
Lib: 14%
Grn: 6%

Poll: @YouGov, 1-2 March pic.twitter.com/Kaa1pBYBJ3

Advertisement

— Stats for Lefties (@LeftieStats) March 3, 2026

It’s not hard to see why.

Reform and the Tories mostly target retirees. This older generation is largely secure, having bought their houses at rock bottom prices. While that’s great for them, it does also make them more vulnerable to the message that ‘people are coming to steal what’s yours‘. Young people, meanwhile, can’t afford to buy their own homes, and as such they’ve nothing to conserve – excluding them from the conservative instincts of their grandparents.

Labour’s plan in government has been to pursue changes so marginal that no one even notices them. They’ve also completely abandoned young people on issues like the minimum wage:

Page 45 of Labours 2024 manifesto stated: "Labour will also remove the discriminatory age bands so all adults are entitled to the same minimum wage"

Pat McFadden is asked, when are you going to do this?

McFadden says its not up to the govt to do it. pic.twitter.com/RSVJaZvf7x

— Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) May 31, 2026

Advertisement

Under this Labour government, young people are facing an under-employment crisis (one which began with the Tories, to be fair).

As Politics UK reported:

– Mid- and lower-skilled jobs have fallen by around 1.6 million over the past 20 years

– Hospitality vacancies have nearly halved in the last 4 years

Advertisement

– Apprenticeships for 16-24-year-olds have fallen by 35% since the Apprenticeship Levy was introduced in 2017

– The proportion of 16-17-year-olds in paid work has nearly halved from 35% in 2006 to 19% today

– If every current inactive 18-24-year-old was in full-time work, this would contribute an additional £38 billion to UK GDP

– 58% of inactive young people (6 in 10) have never had a job

Advertisement

And as we reported in turn:

As life has gotten more expensive in the UK, many young people are living at home for longer. This means fewer of them need to take the dead-end jobs that many of us accepted to ensure we could pay the rent. The knock-on effect is young people have less disposable income, and as a result they don’t go out, meaning fewer jobs in the hospitality sector. Increasing the minimum wage would better incentivise work, which would better drive economic activity.

So this is what the young can expect under Labour and the Tories:

• Live with your parents.
• Be in student debt for most of your working life.
• Struggle to get a job.
• Be blamed for everything wrong with the country.

In other words, it’s increasingly hard for young people to have hope for the future. And as such, it’s easy to see why the Greens are proving to be so popular.

Greens messaging

These are the sort of messages that Zack Polanski and the Green Party are putting out:

Rising rents, cost of further education, the climate crisis.

There's lots for young people to worry about.

Yet they have a plan & the determination to end Rip off Britain.

Join us: https://t.co/Q27Jy5eX7z pic.twitter.com/EBAKibIOu3

— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) May 28, 2026

Advertisement

"Austerity is a false economy. If you don't invest in young people, if you burden them with student debt rather than public investment, that's why we get the kind of problems we've got."

Zack Polanski on why investing in young people matters. pic.twitter.com/H7pqhJ1PhH

— The Green Party (@TheGreenParty) February 19, 2026

Advertisement

With the establishment parties implicitly arguing that ‘things can only get worse’, it’s easy to see why the Greens are cutting through.

Featured image via Jon Rowley (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Source link

A 14-year-old activist stood up to an Israel supporter’s aggression during an assault in Montreal, Canada yesterday, 9 June 2026. The aggressor was a woman known as Sandra allegedly associated with white supremacist media. The Canadian government continues to support Israel’s genocide.

Embarrassment in Montreal

As the young man filmed the assault, the woman tried repeatedly and unsuccessfully to grab his phone and intimidate him. Uncowed, he turned his attention to her companions, embarrassing one man enough to have him claim that he is “no bloody Zionist”:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by F̷R̷E̷E̷ P̷E̷O̷P̷L̷E̷ P̷O̷W̷E̷R̷ (@freepeoplepower)

One observer commented:

A Zionist woman named Sandra ATTACKED a 14 YEAR OLD activist in Montreal, Canada. A grown adult assaulting a CHILD, she definitely represents what Israel stands for.

Featured image via CityNewsMontreal

By Skwawkbox

Source link

Howard Leigh, a Tory peer, has asked the House of Lords why it was stopping Israel’s occupation forces (IOF) from being able to “finish the job” in Lebanon.

Leigh, disgustingly, said:

The only successful way of dealing with, in effect, Iran in Lebanon through Hezbollah, is through military action. At what point do the British Government stop spending British taxpayers’ money helping the Lebanese Government, and, instead, allow the IDF to finish the job?

His words were so shockingly genocidal that even Starmer’s ally and Cabinet MP Jenny Chapman had to respond with how wrong Israel’s actions were:

With respect, I fundamentally disagree with the noble Lord. I wonder what he means by “finish the job”, given what we are seeing and the numbers of civilians who have been killed. Over three and a half thousand civilians, including children, have been killed indiscriminately. I could, perhaps, understand a targeted action. There would be questions about that too, but what we are seeing now is wrong.

Clearly, the genocidal Lord concluded the only remaining option was military action: letting the IOF finish the job, regardless of Lebanese sovereignty or civilian life.

Leigh is a staunch Israel ally and a member of the Conservative Friends of Israel. Earlier this year, he protested in the HoL about the suspension of some of the arms sales by the UK to Israel.

UK complicity in war crimes in Lebanon

The Anglo-American Zionists’ ethnic cleansing in Lebanon is an extension of their genocide in Gaza and their wider war on Iran. What began with the flattening of Gaza has now spread north: the same doctrine of collective punishment, the same destruction of civilian infrastructure, the same forced displacement dressed up as self-defence.

In Lebanon, more than 3,500 civilians have been killed, including over 240 children. More than one million people have been driven from their homes, over one in five of the entire population.

As British historian William Dalrymple has noted, Israeli leaders have openly stated they will demolish villages, prevent displaced people, mostly Shia, from ever returning, and create a permanent security zone inside Lebanese territory. Under international law, deliberately displacing a religious group and making their return impossible amounts to ethnic cleansing.

Dalrymple also called out Sky News’ blatant misrepresentation of ethnic cleansing in Lebanon as Israel “taking a stronger stance.”

British politicians still being neocolonialists

Labour Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper confirmed in the House of Commons that the UK is carrying out counterinsurgency by proxy.

Responding to Conservative MP Mark Pritchard, who had asked about engaging non-Hezbollah Shi’a political movements, Cooper said:

…we need an inclusive process in Lebanon that brings all groups and communities together but excludes Hezbollah, Iranian-backed proxies and terrorist and extremist groups. The group that he mentioned is led by Speaker Berri, who met my hon. Friend the Minister for the Middle East as part of his recent visit. We will continue to engage with that movement and more widely with the Lebanese Government about the importance of bringing all communities together so that the Lebanese people are not exploited by Iran.

Hezbollah is a dangerous terrorist organisation. It is undermining the security of the people of Lebanon. We support the Lebanese Government and the Lebanese armed forces in taking action against Hezbollah. We are providing them with direct support, including funding and capabilities support, because we believe it is hugely important that they should be able to do this with international support.

Advertisement

Essentially, Cooper is confirming that Britain will bankroll and train the Lebanese state to fight Hezbollah, while excluding Hezbollah from any political solution. She is embracing the Amal movement (led by Speaker Berri) as a preferred partner instead, and ignoring that this strategy risks tearing Lebanon apart along sectarian lines.

Leigh’s language might be shocking, but it is representative of the whole British imperial establishment, from politicians to the media, who are backing ethnic cleansing in Lebanon.

Featured image via Getty/Adri Salido

By The Canary

Source link

Scotland looks set for an AI data centre crisis after plans were revealed detailing a massive number of data centres planned for construction on Scotland’s Central Belt.

ARPS, Scotland’s countryside charity, published an interactive map illustrating where the data centres are earmarked for.

The charity compiled the data over growing concerns about the impact of the data units on electricity prices, communities and the environment.

So far, at least 18 such data warehouse projects are seeking planning permission, the National reported, with a  further six in the pipeline.

ARPS is calling for the ­Scottish government to implement a moratorium on these centres until it does a “proper “assessment of the ­impacts on the electricity grid, ­climate emissions and communities”.

A spokesperson for the charity, Kat Jones, said:

Hyperscale data centres are some of the biggest buildings in the world and this is why we are seeing them being proposed mainly on greenbelt and Greenfield sites.

Their main requirements are large quantities of land and ­access to huge amounts of electricity and ­water. These buildings are huge, but the amount of energy they use is ­absolutely off the scale.

AI data centres: How might they impact you?

Kat Jones stated that the total demand for ­energy from the data centres in Scotland’s planning system is now 6,200 megawatts (MW).

Combined with the requirement for the six sites that haven’t completed all the ­planning stages yet, this would take the ­total to more than 11,000MW. That’s nearly three-times Scotland’s peak winter demand.

Jones didn’t hold back on stating the case clearly.

This is an inconceivable amount of energy that Scotland is being asked to divert to the use of hyperscale AI data centres, which will enrich a few billionaires in Silicon valley at the expense of the Scottish consumer.

No discussion on energy in ­Scotland can ignore the impact that these data centres would have on our electricity grid and energy prices.

We are calling for a moratorium to get some proper planning and ­policies in place.

Advertisement

Campaigners are rightly concerned about rising energy prices. In the US, areas with data centres have soared up to 267% according to Bloomberg data.

Communities must be consulted

Scottish communities are rallying against plans near them and have been encouraged by a recent UN report.

The report details the environmental impacts of AI and says communities must be included in discussions about data centres.

AI-sceptic, pro-democracy campaign group, Pull the Plug, told the Canary:

Data centres have become a key issue in our political conversation. They contribute to climate change, impact the wellbeing of our communities, undermine public services, and push up household bills and our general cost of living.

The public increasingly stomachs the costs of data centres without agreeing to them. That has to change.

Scotland resists the Datageddon

Scottish people are not taking the matter lightly. Hyper-local campaigns are emerging across the nation to resist the ugly, thirsty, energy-hungry monstrosities. Remember when wind turbines were “eyesores”?

Last week, more than 200 people attended a public meeting to oppose a data centre near Auchtertool village in Fife. The community council said it was “appalled” by Fife Council’s decision not to request even an environmental impact assessment.

Another campaign has been launched to halt a similar development in the Borders. They’ll hope to achieve a similar result as that in Edinburgh earlier this year.

Edinburgh councillors voted unanimously to refuse a proposed hyperscale centre at the former Royal Bank of Scotland headquarters in South Gyle.

One spokesperson for Save the ­Lammermuirs – Stop the Data ­Centre said afterwards that worries remained about the ­environmental impact.

We weren’t able to get any solid information and there is also the question of the local benefits – the numbers didn’t really hold up under scrutiny at this stage.

Sunlaws Development Company wants to build the Southside Data Centre on land near the village of Longformacus. The planned development on Roxburghe Estate is for three large, two-storey data centre buildings, each with a height up to 24m and ground footprint circa 27,000m².

Campaigners allege that it will lead to the “industrialisation” of the Lammermuir Hills, and are ­sceptical of the job and economic benefit ­estimates. About 100 members of the public attended an initial consultation at Longformacus Village Hall this week.

The SNP is already criticising the “great renewables robbery” where Scottish energy firms are forced to pay £1 billion to access the national grid. Companies in England and Wales get paid to do so.

But this massive, anti-worker construction madness — done entirely on the SNP’s watch  — must be counted as further theft of the people’s energy needs by unaccountable tech companies.

Featured image via the National

By Cameron Baillie

Source link

Source link

Source link

Politicians and social commentators from across the UK have taken to social media to condemn the racist riots that have swept Belfast – and the shameless far-right agitators who helped fan the flames.

As the Canary previously reported, rioters carried out a wave of pogroms in Belfast and nearby towns over the last two days, carrying out arson attacks on homes belonging to people of colour. The racists also attacked businesses they perceived as the property of ‘foreigners’, blocked roads, and set fire to vehicles.

The hate crimes followed a knife attack, reportedly perpetrated by a Sudanese man, on the evening of 8 June in North Belfast. Police charged the suspect, Hadi Alodid, with attempted murder. The victim suffered injuries to his neck, back and both eyes, losing use of the left eye.

In response, Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV) politicians, along with English race-baiters like Nigel Farage and Rupert Lowe carried out varying degrees of the familiar song and dance: condemning the violence whilst also using dogwhistles and whipping up further racial hatred.

Belfast: shameless exploitation

However, Green leader Zack Polanski condemned the ministers stoking the riots for political gain:

Politicians who fanned these flames should hang their heads in shame.

Time and again we've seen this story play out. Single incidents used to fuel a far right narrative – and communities across the nation paying the price. https://t.co/kyDQWoE9EB

— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) June 10, 2026

Advertisement

North Herefordshire Green MP Ellie Chowns also echoed similar sentiments:

Horrified by the attempts of bad-faith actors to use Monday's brutal attack as justification to enact violence, disorder, and the targeting of immigrants and people of colour across Belfast.

Hatred has no place in the UK – nor should politicians who seek to incite it.

Advertisement

— Dr Ellie Chowns MP (@EllieChowns) June 10, 2026

The Lib Dems’ Ed Davey voiced his shock, whilst also pointing out the far-right’s shameless weaponisation of fear:

I am horrified by the disorder and racist violence in Belfast last night.

Far too often now, we see extremists exploiting people’s anger and grief to spread hatred and violence – with the help of divisive algorithms on social media.

This has to stop.

— Ed Davey (@EdwardJDavey) June 10, 2026

A ‘chilling display of racist violence’

Labour’s Nadia Whittome, meanwhile, didn’t mince words:

The attempted murder in Belfast was an appalling act of brutality by one individual. It has been universally condemned and the perpetrator has been arrested and charged.

Torching the homes of innocent people because they’re not white is a truly chilling display of racist…

— Nadia Whittome MP (@NadiaWhittomeMP) June 10, 2026

Advertisement

A “chilling display of racist violence by organised fascists” – if only half our MPs were so willing to call these riots what they are. 

Your Party co-leader Jeremy Corbyn posted a statement on the “utterly sickening” violence on display. He also called out Nigel Farage’s dogwhistle for bringing us to this point:

When politicians demonise migrants and call for "pure, cold rage", people listen.

My statement on the sickening far-right violence in Belfast. pic.twitter.com/KLAuXR7XN1

— Jeremy Corbyn (@jeremycorbyn) June 10, 2026

Likewise, the Alliance Party’s Sorcha Eastwood turned her rage against Farage’s counterparts in Northern Ireland:

A child being rushed from a burning building by a riot police officer into a police landrover as everything goes up in flames.

I hope those who fanned the flames are content with themselves. Because they knew this violence was coming. You can't light the touch paper and expect… pic.twitter.com/kCOEQ5rnEH

— Sorcha Eastwood MP (@SorchaEastwood) June 10, 2026

Divided we fall

Meanwhile, outside the halls of Parliament, campaigning researcher Zoe Gardner set up a stark dichotomy:

Dress it up however you like – this racist violence has been deliberately whipped up by far right politicians & their cowardly wannabes in the supposed mainstream.

You are either fighting against the anti-migrant narrative or you are with these thugs. https://t.co/OOMmuvDU2W

— Zoe Gardner (@ZoeJardiniere) June 9, 2026

Advertisement

Turn Left Media editor Ben Mclaine pointed out the actual “two tier policing” at play:

Strange to think that the far right probably did more criminal damage in a single night than Palestine Solidarity movements have done in the past three years.

Two tier policing, indeed.

Advertisement

— Ben Mclaine (@BenMclaine) June 10, 2026

It seems that several commentators had it in for Farage’s talking points, at that. He threatened more riots, and now we’re seeing arson attacks on the streets of Belfast.

Journalist Owen Jones also pointed out the hypocrisy of the far-right’s reaction. However, his thread (and it is a thread) focused on the lack of riots following similar crimes by white extremists:

In 2024, a white neo-Nazi tried to behead a Kurdish barber.

Did Patrick Christys say:

"I preferred our country before white men started trying to behead people in the street"?

No. He said zilch.

Advertisement

Both the perpetrator and the victim had the wrong skin colour for condemnation https://t.co/ljKO6vwXxI pic.twitter.com/R1EFts9TFW

— Owen Jones (@owenjonesjourno) June 9, 2026

Last but not least, the Good Law Project hit several of the same notes we’ve seen so far:

An isolated tragedy in Belfast is being used as an excuse for racist thuggery, all in the name of patriotism.

Musk, Farage and their cronies are spreading hate, and trying to divide our communities.

But we won't let them. We know the truth: there's many, many more of us than… pic.twitter.com/Gw3pgJ3xGw

— Good Law Project (@GoodLawProject) June 10, 2026

Advertisement

The UK is currently speeding along head-first in its descent into fascism. The far-right is using any and every excuse they can to stir up white-supremacist violence and racial hatred.

We cannot fight this tide by offering watered-down versions of Reform’s talking points, packaged up as the ‘moderate alternative.’ Those of us who oppose these racist riots must stand with immigrants and people of colour in the UK.

Divided, none of us can hope to win out.

Featured image via Getty/Charles McQuillan

By The Canary

Source link

On 9 June, we reported that ex-Reform councillor Charlotte Kelly had defected to the Tories. Kelly blamed the move on sexism and bullying from her former colleagues. And since then, she’s come forwards to provide more information on what went down:

Ex-Reform UK councillor Charlotte Kelly admits she’s embarrassed to have ever joined the party.

She defected to the Conservatives yesterday – claiming she was bullied and faced sexism.

Reform UK says she was the source of ‘disharmony’ within the Staffordshire group. pic.twitter.com/kAtcvcVHfR

Advertisement

— Lewis Warner (@LewisJWarner) June 9, 2026

Former Reform councillor feels ’embarrassed’

In the video above, Kelly says:

I feel really sad and I feel embarrassed that I believed everything that they said because I fully bought in. I did. Now I just feel very let down.

It should be pointed out that the things Reform promises publicly are also very bad. And given the party’s hostility towards various minority groups – and women – Kelly shouldn’t be all that surprised to have discovered they were hostile towards her.

At the same time, this obviously doesn’t excuse the alleged bullying she had to put up with. We just hope Kelly’s experience helps others to avoid what she describes having experienced.

When asked how the last few days have been, Kelly said:

Stressful.

ITV’s Lewis Warner then explained:

Charlotte Kelly joined Reform UK hoping to make Leek a better place. But she says her time in the party has only made her own life worse. She alleges bullying, sexism and a culture that left her feeling isolated and ignored.

It would be interesting to know which Reform policies Kelly thought would improve her area, but the interview doesn’t get into that. Kelly responded:

It just seems to always be targeted at me. It’s not the men, it’s always me.

Kelly claims a female colleague told her the male Reform councillors couldn’t help themselves because of their age. We’re not sure how old they all are, but if this statement is true, they’re too old to be in the workplace.

Freeing

Kelly claims Reform does not tolerate any dissent whatsoever, and when asked how the party treats councillors, she answered:

I would say that as long as you do as you’re told, they’re fine, and as long as you don’t expect anything from head office, you just pretty much get left.

Kelly added that she had no freedom to express opinions, and that:

They want you to vote and say and just do as you’re told and whether or not you think it’s right, which isn’t… And I started to ask questions and speak out. And when I did, I was, especially from one particular person, reacted with swearing, abuse and… are really awful behaviour.

Kelly isn’t the first Reform councillor to make such claims, as we reported in this piece:

• Councillors claim Reform stopped them acting in local interest.

Defector Rob Parsonage said of the party:

He added: “We were being sent orders from above – they wanted us to vote down everything net zero and fight DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion] – but in the end it turned into a conflict between the national agenda and the role of a councillor.”

Councillor Nick Brown, meanwhile, said:

When we took control [of Durham Council], I believed the messages from Nigel Farage that we would make big changes for people living locally.

But really, whenever we had a local issue, we were told to follow the party line. Not to rock the boat, bring press attention on the council. We all turned into Nigel’s yes-men – ordered to be on best behaviour to help him get to power.

Vetting issues?

Seemingly talking about the systemic issue of sexism, Kelly said:

they are not vetting correctly to see whether or not people have these views. When you present these issues and say that they’re there, that they’re not doing anything about it.

Reform definitely has an issue with sexism, much like it has an issue with every other form of bigotry. We don’t think the issue is that the party’s vetting is ‘failing’, however; we think Reform simply doesn’t care if its politicians hate women or people from minority groups.

Featured image via Leon Neal (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Source link

4 min read34 min

We were promised a statutory register of lobbyists.

Advertisement

“We were promised a statutory register of lobbyists. Instead, we have a skeleton register of only consultant lobbyists, exempting 80 per cent of the industry. The word ‘transparency’ in the title is a misnomer. It misses most lobbyists.”

Those were my words in 2013, as the shadow cabinet office minister, in the Second Reading of the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill (now the 2014 Lobbying Act) because, by failing to include in-house lobbyists on the register, the legislation was doomed to fail. The law would fail to provide a sufficient level of transparency for a healthy democracy, and also fail to prevent lobbying scandals, thus fuelling public suspicions about the cosy relationship between business and government. 

In the 13 years that followed, I have regrettably been proved right. Lobbying scandals continue to make the front pages while public trust in our political institutions further declines.

The Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) – the professional body for lobbyists – said something similar in 2013, that “the lack of engagement with the industry is reflected in a poorly drafted and narrow definition which does not accurately reflect the work undertaken by lobbyists”. It has therefore campaigned to strengthen Westminster’s lobbying laws and for greater transparency, its own polling finding that over two-thirds of lobbyists would welcome greater scrutiny of their work. When an industry body and its members are calling for greater regulation, you know things need to change.

Advertisement

Working closely with the CIPR over the last few months, I’ve seen how scandals like the Greensill affair damage the public’s view of politicians but importantly also undermines organisations which need to engage with government, as well as individuals who work for them. We all benefit from our politics being informed by real-world experience but done in a way that is transparent and accountable. As a parliamentarian and a former lobbyist, I understand that better than most. My own scrutiny of legislation has been greatly enhanced by hearing directly from those it impacts. Such dialogue, however, should be in the open and not under the radar.

This is why I was delighted to introduce my Private Members’ Bill in the Lords to expand the register of lobbyists to include in-house lobbyists. It is extraordinary that the present legislation only captures four per cent of lobbying of government, according to Transparency International, since only consultant lobbyists have to register, ignoring those employed in-house whose work is completely opaque. Adding this more significant (in size and scope) activity will give the public, journalists, academics and other interested parties, a truer picture of who is seeking to inform and influence government.

It’s embarrassing – and wrong – that anyone can find out more information about who is lobbying in Ireland, Scotland, Germany, Canada, the EU, the USA, Australia and France than about who is lobbying in Westminster, the so-called Mother of Parliaments. We should demand better. Those democracies have more records on their lobbying registers than ours. The UK register has 291 records, the Scottish one 1,754.

In opposition, Labour pressed amendments to the-then bill to ensure in-house lobbyists were included on the register, and before the election Labour promised a different kind of politics, with the-then deputy leader, Angela Rayner, promising movement on lobbying. However, we’ve yet to see tangible action on this. Successive high-profile scandals led the Prime Minister to ask the Ethics and Integrity Commission to review lobbying, disclosure and access to government. We should hear its recommendations next month. 

Advertisement

What is clear to Parliament, the public and lobbying professionals is that the status quo is unsustainable, and can’t be solved by tinkering or better enforcement. It needs legislation that is fit for purpose to help ensure we have no more scandals to undermine trust in politics. My bill, which will have its Second Reading on 3 July, is the first, but important step, in this arena. 

Source link