---

Lobbying (Whitehall)

Yes, absolutely. If the organisations wish to change their code of conduct, it is open to them to do so. As I said, it is not a legal obstruction at all. The aim of the implementation team is to resolve the issues that need to be dealt with to set up the public affairs council. One of those issues is to oversee the appointment of an independent chairman for the council. In its further report, the Select Committee said that the council should be chaired by a""senior independent person of stature"." I agree. I understand that the chairman of the council will be appointed on merit through open competition and that the post will be advertised. I am sure that, in appointing the chairman of the council, the lobbying industry will wish to ensure that there is also an independent element in the selection process. I understand that the memberships of all three representative bodies are being consulted and the indications are that they will be broadly content with the proposals to form the council. The three representative bodies anticipate announcing shortly a detailed and agreed framework for voluntary self-regulation, and putting in hand by Easter arrangements to establish the council. In its latest report, the Committee picks out two aspects of the arrangements surrounding the proposed public affairs council: the desirability of membership of the council being open to as wide a range of people involved in lobbying as possible—that would include the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle about solicitors—and the desirability of a single set of ethical standards applying to all those who come under the umbrella of the council. Again, I agree. I consider that one of the main tests of the proposed new system will be universality—whether the vast majority of those involved in lobbying are taking part. That view is shared by Sir Philip Mawer, whom the Committee quoted in its original report as saying in April 2007 that""self-regulation only works if it is of general application throughout the industry"." I think that that is the quote that my hon. Friend the Member for Selby sought. I understand that the organisations working on the establishment of the public affairs council agree that membership of the council should be as open as possible and that a set of ethical standards should be applied—in my view, those are essential. It is for the industry to make a success of a system of voluntary self-regulation and to ensure that a single set of ethical standards are applied and quickly implemented. The Government remain of the view, as set out in response to the Committee's original report, that any system of regulation, whether voluntary self-regulation or statutory regulation, requires a register of lobbyists to ensure that lobbying activity is transparent. The Government believe—this might help the hon. Member for Ruislip-Northwood on the clarity point—that the industry should be given the opportunity in the first place to produce and maintain such a register. The industry ought to ensure that the register should, as a minimum, be publicly available and contain the names of individuals and organisations carrying out or advising on lobbying and the details of any third-party interests that they represent, as my hon. Friends the Members for Luton, North and Selby said. I appreciate that there was not a universal welcome for all aspects of the response from the entire Committee, but I welcome the general comments made and the broad welcome for it from my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase. I appreciated the tone of his response. My general impression, as someone who has been on both sides of the fence, even though in a slightly different capacity, as my hon. Friend the Member for Luton, North acknowledged—