The lobbying register may be about to grow

A lot of lobbying does not look like a shadowy lunch in a dimly lit restaurant. Often it is an email, a meeting request, or a briefing from someone whose job is to persuade government on behalf of the organisation that employs them.

The question in the Lords is whether those in-house lobbyists should have to appear on the official lobbying register too.

What would change

The Lobbying Transparency (In-house Lobbyists) Bill [HL] is a private member’s bill from Labour peer Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town. Its long title is admirably direct: it would amend the 2014 Lobbying Act “to include in-house lobbyists”.

At the moment, the statutory register mainly covers certain consultant lobbyists: people or firms paid to lobby ministers or specified senior officials on behalf of third-party clients. If a large company, trade body, charity or campaign group employs its own public affairs team, that in-house work is generally outside the register.

That is the gap the bill is aimed at. It had its Second Reading in the Lords on 3 July 2026, passed unopposed to Committee, and is now listed by Parliament at Committee stage.

Supporters say the present system catches only a thin slice of what actually happens. Baroness Hayter cited around 5% of UK lobbying activity; the CIPR and Transparency International UK have put the figure at fewer than, or at most, 4%. The exact number varies, but the broad point is the same: most lobbying is not visible through the statutory register.

Agreement on the problem, not the fix

This is not a simple government-versus-opposition scrap. Baroness Anderson, speaking for the Government, said lobbying transparency is “unfinished business” and that the current system is widely viewed as insufficient. But ministers are not backing the bill yet. They want to wait for the Ethics and Integrity Commission’s work on lobbying, disclosures and access to government.

The Conservative front bench also said it could not support the bill in its current form. Baroness Finn accepted the principle of transparency, but warned the draft could be too broad and create a heavy administrative burden for businesses, charities and others who legitimately engage with government.

Lib Dem peer Lord Pack backed the direction of travel, calling the current regime “back-to-front”: smaller organisations using consultants may be covered, while larger bodies with in-house teams often are not.

The public mood

There is no recent UK poll found that asks this exact question. But the backdrop is chilly. A Transparency International UK / More in Common poll in June found 83% of Britons think wealthy individuals use political donations to influence government in their own interests.

Separately, Ipsos polling from 22–24 June found 50% agreed Britain is “ungovernable”; among them, 88% blamed political parties and politicians.

That does not prove voters want this bill. It does suggest that questions about who gets access to power are landing in a low-trust climate.