Press play to listen to this article
Voiced by artificial intelligence.
LONDON — Labour staffers working on the U.K. parliamentary estate have second jobs with a lobbying firm that offers “an on-the-spot interface between the client and MPs.”
Solidarity Consulting Ltd acts on behalf of unions, charities and campaign groups.
It states on its website that it is a “political and parliamentary consultancy service with a not-for-profit ethos.” The firm is a limited company with £211,000 in net assets, according to its most recent financial statements.
It openly advertises its presence in parliament as a selling point for its services — and four of its staff work in MP offices, entitling them to parliamentary passes.
“We provide an on-the-spot interface between the client and MPs and we are present in Parliament on a daily basis, organising briefings, lobbies and interventions,” the organization says.
“We ensure that each client has a vocal presence in Parliament and that their campaigns are effectively progressed.”
Parliamentary records show that Labour MPs Richard Burgon, Ian Lavery, Grahame Morris and Kate Hollern all employ staff working for the consultancy.
The four members of staff have declared their work with Solidarity on the register of MPs’ secretaries interests, and no parliamentary rules have been broken either by the firm or MPs.
But transparency campaigners argue that the rules on the use of parliamentary passes need urgent clarification to avoid the perception of a conflict of interest.
The House of Lords already has a code of conduct that expressly bans staff with passes provided by a member of the upper chamber from acting as paid political consultants or using their access to promote outside interests. No such code exists in the House of Commons.
Tom Brake, director of campaign group Unlock Democracy, said MPs have historically been advised they could apply for passes only for staff who “genuinely and personally” provide secretarial or research assistance.
“It would be highly inconsistent for MPs to be barred from lobbying if their staff were able to use their parliamentary passes, working for another employer, to lobby in Parliament instead,” he said.
“The House of Commons needs to issue, publicize and enforce strict rules on the use of parliamentary passes to ensure they are only used as intended.”
Rose Zussman, senior advocacy manager at Transparency International U.K., said MPs should not sponsor staff engaged in lobbying work.
“When lobbyists secure unfettered access to Parliament to give their clients greater face-time with politicians, political access is effectively up for sale,” she said.
“MPs should only be awarding passes to those supporting them in their role, and not fixers who have a side-job representing outside interests.”
Industry codes of conduct provided by the CIPR and PRCA lobbying trade bodies are also clear that any of their members working within Parliament would be in breach if they used their passes to advance lobbying activities.
Solidarity has registered its clients with the Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists, an official watchdog. But it is not signed up to either of the voluntary industry codes.
Alastair McCapra, chief executive of CIPR, said: “Professional lobbyists should not use access privileges to lobby, let alone use them as a unique selling point for commercial gain.
“Those who hold passes are not granted them for their lobbying work and therefore should not abuse this privilege by using them for that purpose.”
Burgon, Lavery, Morris, Hollern and Solidarity Consulting did not respond to multiple requests for comment.