This appeared last week:
Revealed: one in five peers advise private business while serving in parliament
Analysis finds 169 peers working as advisers and 15 paid by foreign governments
Sat 1 Jun 2019 02.00 AEST Last modified on Sat 1 Jun 2019 06.50 AEST
One in five members of the House of Lords are working as consultants or advisers to private businesses at the same time as serving in parliament, the Guardian can reveal.
An analysis of the Register of Lords’ Interests shows 169 peers reported working as advisers earlier this year, with more than a dozen registering that they were also paid by foreign governments on top of the expenses they are entitled to as peers.
The consultancies range from a former Conservative MP advising the company of a Romanian businessman facing extradition, through to a former chief of defence staff who advises the government of Bahrain.
The worlds of finance, energy, mining and defence are extensively represented among peers’ clients. Unlike MPs, peers are considered part-time public servants, which allows them to pursue other business. Peers are permitted to work as advisers for private interests, as long as they are properly declared.
The findings include:
· A leading Labour peer, Lord Levy, has apologised after admitting failing to register three private interests connecting him to a billionaire Russian businessman.
· Fifteen peers are working for or advising foreign governments, including a former coalition government cabinet minister and a former chief of defence staff.
· Thirty-eight peers indicated they provide public affairs or strategic advice, an area of particular sensitivity because such work can easily stray into lobbying.
· Eighty-three peers have declared an interest in finance or banking, with HSBC, Santander and Royal Bank of Scotland among those to have provided paid roles as directors or paid advisers to peers.
· Twenty-seven have declared an interest in energy firms, with the same number reporting an interest in companies working in the defence or security sectors.
The coalition government’s Cabinet Office minister, Francis Maude, listed a string of foreign government clients, including the governments of Lesotho, Omanand New South Wales, the Canadian treasury, and the Australian Digital Health Agency.
Lord Maude also advises the government of Bahrain on public sector efficiency, despite continued reports of human rights abuse.
His business partner, Simone Finn, was an aide to Maude during the coalition government. She is also now a peer. FMA Partners did not respond to invitations to comment.
There is a lot more here:
All well informed answers as to what the ADHA want from a British Peer to the comments section please.
I am able to confirm I have no idea! Even theories are welcome!
David.
3 comments:
Maybe they share a common interest in Digital wealth. They way the House of Commons has handled the extraction from Europe and Tim and this chaps involvement in early UK attempts to digitise government and healthcare I question the value.
A search of www.digitalhealth.gov.au/ for Francis Maude reveals nothing.
This is interesting:
https://sourcedigit.com/1244-50-most-influential-people-in-united-kingdom-europe-it-industry/
50 Most Influential People in United Kingdom (Europe) IT Industry
Dated November 26, 2012
16. Tim Kelsey – National director, patients and information, NHS Commissioning Board
17. Francis Maude – Cabinet Office minister
And Tim gave it all up to come down to Australia and help us with his influence and expertise.
We colonials should be so grateful.
Maybe Tim needed some help and guidance himself and engaged Francis Maude to suggest that Australia copy the UK:
Big ticket IT deals banned: Taylor’s $100m contracts cap in tech clean-up
23/08/2017
https://www.themandarin.com.au/82692-taylor-bans-big-ticket-tech-contracts/
Smaller portion sizes to slim contracts spending
It is understood the logic behind introducing the contract price caps is to break down government tech spending into smaller and more manageable chunks that can be delivered quicker, more cheaply and with more immediate effect.
The approach is broadly similar to that undertaken in 2014 in the UK where Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude instigated a £100 million limit to mitigate what he said was a scenario where “big IT and big failure have stalked government for too long”.
That's as logical as saying: instead of going once to the supermarket for your weekly shopping and buying $200 of groceries, go once a day for 10 days and limit your spending to $20 each visit. That will save you money, you'll only spend $140 per week instead of $200. You won't get what you need, but you will save money.
Simplistic and dumb. Should suit Tim very well.
Just Tim nice but common Kelsey wishing he was a member of the upper class M’Lord
https://www.fmapartners.co.uk/team
THE RT HON LORD MAUDE OF HORSHAM was a vocal advocate for making fOI redundant. Achieved by publishing everything. I am sure he must a distaste for this little mans secrecy at ADHA which is hardly classified information.
Post a Comment