BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT. Consultation Response: HM Government Cabinet Office Introducing a Statutory Register of Lobbyists

Transcription

1 BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT Consultation Response: HM Government Cabinet Office Introducing a Statutory Register of Lobbyists Dated: 12 April 2012 BCS The Chartered Institute for IT First Floor, Block D North Star House North Star Avenue Swindon SN2 1FA

2 This page is left deliberately blank. Page 2 of 8

3 About BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT BCS is governed by a Royal Charter which defines our purpose: to promote the study and practice of Computing and to advance knowledge and education for the benefit of the public. We bring together industry, academics, practitioners and government to share knowledge, promote new thinking, inform the design of new curricula, shape public policy and inform the public. The Royal Charter enables the Institute to admit qualified members; without our 70,000 members we would be unable to undertake many of our charitable activities to promote IT at all levels. Under the Charter, BCS is required to establish and maintain standards of professional competence, conduct and ethical practice for information systems practitioners. As a professional body, BCS represents its members and the IT Profession as a whole on issues of importance, and liaises with other professional bodies, the government, industry and academics to initiate and inform debate on IT strategic issues. We also deliver a range of professional development tools for practitioners and employees and as a leading IT qualification body, we offer a range of widely recognised professional and end-user qualifications. Page 3 of 8

4 Consultation Document: Consultation Questions: Definitions What definition of lobbying should be used? The Institute agrees that current UKPAC definition of lobbying used for a voluntary register is an accurate description of the activity in broad terms. However, the accompanying definition of lobbyists is not wholly appropriate for a new statutory register due to the lack of differentiation between professional lobbying activity and normal interaction with Minsters, Government officials and Parliamentarians. The Institute notes that the Government does not intend for the statutory register to include the essential flow of communication between business leaders and Government, civil figures, community organisations and Government. The activities undertaken by BCS will therefore fall into this category; meetings between BCS and Ministers have indeed been published in the quarterly information about Ministers meetings and would continue to do so as required by the Ministerial Code The Australian scope of lobbying activities includes a list of exceptions, including communications with a Committee of the Parliament, in response to calls for submissions and statements made in a public forum, which could be usefully applied to a UK definition. The Institute would therefore recommend that the UKPAC definition of lobbying be reviewed in conjunction with the definition of lobbyists to ensure coherence prior to application to a statutory register, in light of this distinction between those who undertake professional lobbying activity on behalf of a third party client and normal interaction with Minsters, Government officials and Parliamentarians. How should lobbyists be defined? Whilst the UKPAC definition of lobbyists is an accurate description of the activities undertaken by any organisation working to influence or advise the institutions of government; the definition lacks specificity to be entirely appropriate to the activities of BCS and other such Chartered professional bodies. Recognition of the intention and reasons behind the lobbying activity must be apparent in a statutory register. The Institute agrees that the definition should not mean those who engage in lobbying activities on their own behalf, rather those who undertake lobbying on behalf of a third party client. In this respect, the definition used for Australian Register would indeed appear more appropriate for application to the UK, requiring only those who lobby on behalf of a third party to register. We note that the Australian Register also makes exceptions in its definition of lobbyists for charitable organisations and non-profit organisations constituted to represent the interests of their members and the Institute therefore recommends that the UK definition allows for similar exceptions to be made between those working for the public good versus those working for members self-interest. We also recommend that the Government considers incorporating a similar distinction to that within the definition of scope of the Canadian 2008 Lobbying Act which allows for two types of in-house lobbyists; in commercial corporations or not for-profit organisations. The requirement of in-house lobbyists within commercial business to be registered would provide transparency in the case of those corporations opting to employ an in-house lobbyist rather than an external consultant lobbyist. Page 4 of 8

5 Scope Should lobbyists or firms acting on a pro bono basis be required to register? As detailed above, the Institute recommends that the definition of lobbying established for the purposes of the statutory register should exempt charities; however it would seem appropriate that professional lobbyists or consultant firms acting on a pro bono basis should still be required to register. For example, agreements may be reached between a lobbyist and a client that involves no remuneration since the activity undertaken may produce beneficial results for both parties in other areas such as public recognition or media coverage. Such activity is a direct contradiction to the work of the Institute which is based on providing impartial, strategic and non-remunerated advice to Minsters, Government officials and Parliamentarians in fulfilment of its charitable objectives and governed by a Royal Charter for public good. Should organisations such as Trade Unions, Think Tanks and Charities be required to register? As stated above, the Institute recommends that the scope of the statutory register must clearly state which types of bodies would be expected to register and which should be exempt based on their intentions and reasons for lobbying according to the type of body and its legal status. Those organisations which exist for the direct benefit of their members, such as Trade Unions, should be required to register since any lobbying activity undertaken is with the intention of protecting or furthering individual members situations. There is clear distinction between the intentions of this type of activity and those of a body such as BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT, which exists for the promotion of the profession and the public good; protecting not only our members interests but also a protector of the public interest, with a strict ethical code governing our activities. Section Two of our Royal Charter, granted in 1984, notes that the Society is constituted to promote the study and practice of Computing and to advance knowledge and education therein for the benefit of the public. In furtherance of its objectives, Section Three of the Charter grants the Institute the powers, among others, Clause (g) to confer, consult, communicate or co-operate with any other scientific, professional or technical institution, institute, society or association or body whether incorporated or not or formed for purposes of profit with a view to the pursuit of common objects in Computing and related subjects and to represent the Computing profession both nationally and internationally Clause (m) to promote, establish and support standards and codes of practice for the handling, storage, acquisition, transmission, processing, protection and display of data relating to Computing and the information contained therein Clause (y) to do such other acts and things (including the promotion of a Bill or Bills in Parliament), whether incidental to the powers aforesaid or not as may be requisite in order to further the objects of the Society The Institute s engagement with Minsters, Government officials and Parliamentarians is therefore already legitimised by the Royal Charter and inclusion on a statutory register should not be necessary. Page 5 of 8

6 Should the case arise whereby the Government does indeed require charitable and not for-profit organisations to be included on a statutory register, the Institute would require that consideration be given to the distinctions between the different legal status of such organisations which provide different degrees of legitimate engagement in furtherance of their objectives. We therefore advocate the introduction of a tiered list system covering the range of organisations involved in engaging with Minsters, Government officials and Parliamentarians, from governed Professional Bodies through to commercial third party lobbyists, as follows: Category A) Professional Bodies governed by a Royal Charter which have therefore already been granted powers to engage as a Body Corporate and Politic. Examples of bodies that we propose to be included along with BCS, The Chartered Institute for IT, would for example be the Royal Academy of Engineering and the Royal Society. The activity of such bodies has already been legitimised through their legal status and therefore enforcement of additional regulation should not be deemed necessary. Category B) Other professional bodies which are indeed acting for the public good, but whose activities are not governed by way of a Royal Charter. Examples here would be associations such as the Association of Business Executives, the British Association of Social Workers or the Institute of Information Security Professionals. Whilst many such bodies operate as not for profit organisations, there is no legitimacy in their governance structures by way of a Royal Charter. Professional bodies in certain professions may also have direct links to trade unions or indeed a trade union arm. There is therefore a clear distinction between the Category A and Category B bodies and the latter must be subject to a greater level of control. Category C) Other organisations whose lobbying activity is solely for the direct personal benefit of members such as trade unions, for example the National Union of Teachers, UNISON or Unite the Union; and trade associations representing businesses in a specific industry, for example Intellect in the technology industry. The motivations of these bodies behind any engagement with Minsters, Government officials and Parliamentarians clearly differs from the engagement purposes of those bodies which we have categorised as A or B. Category D) Professional or consultant lobbyist firms acting on behalf of a third party for commercial gain. This category must include lobbying firms already listed on the UKPAC voluntary register as well as others who do not appear on this list. The proposed statutory register is clearly destined to regulate this category and therefore full registration should be mandated. How can public participation in the development of Government policy best be safeguarded? The Institute agrees that transparency is of the utmost importance and that the register must not adversely affect public participation in Government policy. Communications in responses to public consultations or calls for evidence should not need to be included since submissions made in these areas are already published and available online. Careful consideration should be given to the exceptions required within the definitions of lobbying and lobbyists to avoid that registration represents an increased burden. Information to be included in the register Should the register include financial information about the cost of lobbying and about any public funding received? Based on our recommendation that charities governed by a Royal Charter should not be required to register as per Category A, we do not feel it would be necessary to provide a return. Since the Page 6 of 8

7 Institute does not receive public funding and any advice provided to Minsters, Government officials and Parliamentarians is impartial and most usually undertaken by volunteer representatives, there would be no financial information concerning the cost of lobbying to be published. Furthermore, Category A bodies, such as BCS are registered charities which are regulated by the Charity Commission and are already required to submit an annual return. This financial information is already in the public domain. Inclusion within a statutory register of lobbyists would therefore be a duplication of this information and incur additional administrative burden on the Institute. Frequency of returns Should returns be required on a quarterly basis? As above, consideration must be given to returns which organisations are already required to make according to their legal status in order to avoid unnecessary duplication. Should a return be deemed necessary, the recommended frequency would depend on the information required. As proposed, the Institute agrees that any returns to be made by those listed on the register should not incur additional administrative burden and should constitute information which is already required for other purposes. Additional functions Should the register s operator have any additional functions besides accurately reproducing and usefully presenting information provided by the registrants? The Institute agrees with the Government s proposal that the operator of the register should not act as a regulator for the industry since these are two separate functions. Funding Should the lobbying industry meet the costs of the register and any associated functions? As detailed in our responses above, we believe that the register must reflect the different legal status and existing regulations of all organisations engaging with Minsters, Government officials and Parliamentarians; reflecting the distinct categories we have listed above. Any fee structures should therefore be representative of the type of organisation and the type of lobbying which can be attributed to that organisation. It would not be unreasonable to expect professional lobbyists acting as a commercial business to meet a fee to be registered. However, in the case of organisations such as BCS deemed as Category A, strategic advice and influential engagement is in accordance with our Royal Charter to the benefit of society and frequently a non-remunerated activity undertaken by volunteer representatives. It would therefore seem illogical for BCS to be required to register and pay a fee for doing so. Sanctions Should penalties for non-compliance apply? If so, should they be broadly aligned with those for offences under company law? It would seem counterproductive to introduce a statutory register with no sanctions applicable for non compliance and the Institute therefore agrees that appropriate penalties should be available. The Institute agrees that non compliance must be categorised as per the Government s suggestions and financial penalties similar to those provided for under company law could be applied. However, if returns are due on a quarterly basis, we would recommend that the sanctions be adapted to reflect the higher frequency of returns to be made. The Institute also recommends that consideration be given to inclusion of potential sanctions of de-registration for a defined period, along the lines of the Australian model. Page 7 of 8

8 The register s operator Who should run the register a new body or an existing one? What sort of body should it be? The Institute agrees that the key objective of the statutory register is to increase transparency and public trust and therefore the register and its operator must be independent of the lobbying industry and of Government. Creating a new organisation for this purpose would appear a costly solution and the Institute would therefore recommend extending the remit of an existing Parliamentary or nondepartmental public body to run the register. End Page 8 of 8