If “cash for access” breaks no rules, the rules are broken

A good lobbyist should arm lawmakers with facts, information, and data to help inform policy. In the mid-19th century, however, one lobbyist quite literally armed American lawmakers. Gunmaker Samuel Colt, seeking a patent extension for his revolvers, became a familiar figure on Capitol Hill not for the brilliance of his constitutional arguments but for the engraved pistols he gifted to friendly members of Congress.

At the time, it was entirely legal.

The United States has since introduced lobbying laws – including 1946’s Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act – yet the story still poses an uncomfortable question for modern politics. What happens when conduct that looks and feels unethical does not technically breach the rules?

When that gap opens up, the issue is no longer about the judgment of one individual or agency. It is about whether the system itself is fit for purpose.

That is the challenge we still face in the UK today. For instance, one only has to look at the recent ‘cash-for-access’ accusations – which technically broke no rules – to see how our lobbying system is so clearly inadequate

The CIPR has long argued for greater transparency and a comprehensive overhaul of the UK’s lobbying framework through our Lobbying for Good Lobbying campaign. It has brought together industry professionals, transparency advocates, and policymakers from across the political spectrum to call for reform. Our aim is to strengthen the lobbying environment by ensuring it operates within and to clear, credible, and enforceable standards and builds public trust in our political institutions and businesses.

This would provide a baseline of accountability and transparency around who is seeking to influence our politics. It would also broaden access for underrepresented groups and campaigners, as greater scrutiny over parliamentary engagement would incentivise a greater range of voices. At the same time, it would strengthen the UK’s international standing at a moment when the rules-based global order is facing mounting strain.

But no regulatory system can promise to eliminate scandals altogether. Long after 1946, America had to introduce 2007’s Honest Leadership and Open Government Act following lobbyist Jack Abramoff’s conviction for bribing politicians.

Reforming Westminster’s lobbying laws would not automatically prevent a minister from sharing market-sensitive information with a personal or business contact, for example, but stronger rules do change incentives and culture.

A recent report from the CIPR, Jericho Chambers and Ipsos – Navigating Growing Political Pressures – identified opaque lobbying practices as seen to benefit only the wealthy and powerful while corroding trust in both government and business. Restoring trust in politics matters and good lobbying is not the enemy of that goal; it is a vital part of it. When done well, lobbying improves policymaking by helping decision-makers test ideas, understand evidence, and hear from those affected.

Time and again, the CIPR’s work points to the same conclusion that Westminster’s lobbying laws are simply not fit for purpose and were never designed to capture the reality of modern lobbying. They focus on a narrow slice of activity, leaving significant gaps in what is regulated and what the public can scrutinise. Our Failure by Design report identifies major loopholes baked into the legislation. Our No Rules Britannia? report finds Westminster is an international outlier on lobbying transparency. The current rules are structurally incapable of meeting public expectations, providing only a partial picture of who is influencing political decision-making.

Much has been made of the government’s new Ethics and Integrity Commission, which the CIPR has welcomed and engaged with. It is an important body, but it is not a regulator. It has no remit to investigate individual cases, cannot close statutory loopholes, and has no authority over actors operating outside Parliament. If even MPs are mistakenly calling on the Commission to investigate matters, it shows how needed a full regulator is, and how much more attention should be given to the current flaws in the system.

The commission and other bodies in this space are vital but can only work within the framework provided. That is why the CIPR has consistently called on government to go further: to amend the Lobbying Act and introduce a comprehensive transparency regime that reflects how lobbying actually works and which captures and regulates all lobbying activity

If the response to each controversy is simply to tweak the rules, the outcome is predictable: the headlines fade, the incentives remain, and the next scandal arrives. If we want fewer scandals, we need stronger regulation.