Holyrood committee recommends review of widely ridiculed Lobbying Bill

Holyrood committee recommends review of widely ridiculed Lobbying Bill

A bill widely ridiculed for being tantamount to pointless has been recommended for review by a Holyrood committee.

The Lobbying (Scotland) Bill in its current form could leave a “great deal” of important information unregistered, said a majority on the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointment Committee.

It took the view that plans to include only face-to-face communication with ministers or MSPs in a lobbying register is an artificial distinction, and recommended that the Scottish government review the potential impact of including all forms of communication in the bill.

While the general principles of the bill are endorsed in the stage 1 report, the committee also recommended the Scottish government considers bringing forward amendments to broaden the definition of regulated lobbying to include communications with other public officials, as well as ministers and MSPs.

SPPA Committee convener, Stewart Stevenson MSP, said: “The committee listened carefully to those giving evidence to the inquiry, and as a result, the majority view is that the government should consider broadening the coverage of the bill in key areas.

“The committee understands that the definition of lobbying was restricted to oral communication in order to focus the scope of information to be captured and to produce a low burden, light touch regime.

“Nevertheless, the majority view is that restricting registration to oral communications is an artificial distinction which could leave a great deal of information unregistered.

“We recommend that the government reviews the potential impact of altering its definition to include communications of any kind, with a view to establishing what amendments to the bill might be necessary.”

The committee’s report also notes concern about the workability of exclusions in the bill for meetings initiated by MSPs or ministers.

It asked the government to re-examine the practicality of this and consider removing or replacing at stage 2 of the bill.


Share icon
Share this article: