All Party Parliamentary Groups - internal parliamentary lobbying

[Chersfrozenface]

So the BBC News site has a story headlined "New lobbying scandal warning for MPs and peers"
www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-59307270

The Commons standards committee has launched an investigation into how APPGs are run and regulated.

The chairman of the standards committee, Chris Bryant, Labour, does not want to see these internal lobbying groups banned, according to the story.

He is the Vice Chair of the APPG on Global Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT+) Rights - details here
publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmallparty/211006/global-lesbian-gay-bisexual-and-transgender-lgbt-rights.htm

You will see some familiar names.

You will also see that it gets funding from the Baring Foundation and benefits in kind from Pink News and the Kaleidoscope Trust.

There's a link to the group's website on the parliament.uk details page.

Now I wonder why the Vice Chair of that APPG might not want lobbying groups banned?

Ban them. Ban them all. THIS is exactly the reason why. If an agenda cannot be achieved fairly, democratically, transparently through normal channels, then there is something fundamentally wrong with it and an MP should bloody well know this.

I don't want a ban on lobbying groups but I want restrictions and transparency. SW has taught me that charities can be just as problematic as the private sector.

Ah yes the APPGs. this is a much needed thread

Helpful reminder of the disbanded LGBT APPG

Crispin Blunt and Caroline Noakes did not like women who held GC views.

Crispin Blunt MP was ordered to apologise for breach of parliamentary rules over attempt to make secret deal on self-ID
sex-matters.org/posts/updates/crispin-blunt-mp-ordered-to-apologise-for-breach-of-parliamentary-rules-over-attempt-to-make-secret-deal-on-self-id/

"The investigation found a lack of adequate transparency around meetings, and funding for the APPG, whose coordinator’s salary was paid for with contributions from external organisations including Stonewall and the Kaleidoscope Trust."

"Publishing the document and making it open to public debate while the government was still considering its response “would have undermined our political strategy”."

previous thread
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4185487-Crispin-Blunt-MP-ordered-to-apologise-for-breach-of-parliamentary-rules-over-attempt-to-make-secret-deal-on-self-ID

I was part of an APPG for years. It was health based and brought together several charities, patients, HCPs, researchers, yes and a couple of pharma and medical device companies. All transparant and no back handers. That group was excellent and did amazing work that was life saving for thousands of people. What is important is transparency and accountability..

The personal bias of a certain speaker of the house and a role he held will also form part of the inevitable inquiry that will come into all this.

No internal lobby groups. At all. What all this has shown is that without very strong, well policed boundaries and a lot of accountability, people will play the system and MPs will not only let them get on with it but some will actively participate in an attempt to thwart democracy messing with their personal agenda.

Perhaps a women’s sex based rights APPG should be set up. A lot of these APPG’s get secretarial/admin support from outside bodies - who could do this - Sex Matters? It’s a nudge to me to make sure I’m donating more to women’s causes that I support.

I was just thinking this week that we really, really need an APPG for sickle cell disease. If I was still working I would be pushing for it. (I know that has nothing to do with sex and gender, but it is an example of the sort of APPG that does work).
There needs to be a robust system for vetting everyone involved.