The Parliamentary Funding Loophole Allowing Murdoch To Dodge Scrutiny
Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system
Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features
SUBSCRIBE TODAY
A new tool collating data on the funding of All Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) over the last three years highlights transparency loopholes in the rules surrounding their funding.
The tool, from the consultancy Cast From Clay, alerted Byline Times to two loopholes in the transparency rules of APPG funding.
Companies such as Murdoch's News Corp and defence contractors like Lockheed Martin are able to conceal how much funding they are giving to APPGs by funding the secretariat, but not the APPG itself. Byline also found that the number of Policy Liaison Groups (PLGs) which act as APPGs without having to obey transparency rules has doubled since they were first established last year.
The Loopholes That Allow MPs' Corrupt Conflicts of Interests to Go Undetected
New research exposes the gaps in parliamentary rules which allow MPs to hide their donations, financial interests and client relationships from voters
Josiah Mortimer
APPGs, informal groups in Parliament which conduct research and make policy recommendations, have come under fire in recent years for acting as a form of lobbying integrated into the Westminster system.
APPGs are made up of MPs and peers, but can have secretariats staffed or funded by third parties meaning various special interests such as think tanks, companies, or campaign groups can gain regular access to MPs.
In 2023, new rules were introduced to improve transparency, including increasing the minimum numbers of members an APPG must have, mandatory yearly declarations of funding above £1500, and a ban on funding from foreign governments. Despite these attempts, ways remain to skirt the rules and avoid scrutiny.
Currently it is impossible to know how much a company is giving to an APPG when they are funding the secretariat, but not the APPG directly.
This means that there is no way of knowing how much money defence firms and News UK are donating to parliamentary research.
What the Tool Revealed
The APPG on Defence Technology received £61,000 from APPG Secretariat Services Ltd.
The public record states who the secretariat is funded by, but does not reveal the proportions of the funding.
Consequently, there is no way of knowing if the bulk of the funding came from the data services firm Capita, the engineering firm Ultra Electronics, the Story Homes construction company, or the arms manufacturers Leonardo and Lockheed Martin who also fund the APPG secretariat, or if all firms donated similar amounts.
Similarly News UK, which owns The Times and The Sun, funds Whitehouse Communications which acts as the secretariat for the Media APPG but it is unclear if the bulk of the £112,000 the APPG has received over the last three years comes from Murdoch, or from Bauer and the creative agencies that also fund the secretariat.
Tom Hashemi of Cast From Clay explained: "This masks who wields real influence: one company might provide £20,000 while another gives £1,000, but they appear identical on the register. The implications of this could be serious.
MPs engaging with these groups may have no idea whose interests dominate the funding, potentially championing policies that favour specific market players without realising it, or allowing wealthy interests to quietly steer the policy conversation while smaller contributors create an illusion of broad support
Tom Hashemi of Cast From Clay
Hashemi added: "The 2023 rule changes intended to make APPGs transparent. This loophole seems an oversight".
A second loophole is the rebranding of certain APPGs as Policy Liaison Groups (PLGs), a term with no official status, but which is not covered by the rules.
In 2024, Peter Geoghegan reported for The Times that three APPGs had been repackaged as PLGs by College Green Group, a political consultancy run by Thomas Borwick, formerly the chief technology officer for the Vote Lea...
Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features
SUBSCRIBE TODAY
A new tool collating data on the funding of All Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) over the last three years highlights transparency loopholes in the rules surrounding their funding.
The tool, from the consultancy Cast From Clay, alerted Byline Times to two loopholes in the transparency rules of APPG funding.
Companies such as Murdoch's News Corp and defence contractors like Lockheed Martin are able to conceal how much funding they are giving to APPGs by funding the secretariat, but not the APPG itself. Byline also found that the number of Policy Liaison Groups (PLGs) which act as APPGs without having to obey transparency rules has doubled since they were first established last year.
The Loopholes That Allow MPs' Corrupt Conflicts of Interests to Go Undetected
New research exposes the gaps in parliamentary rules which allow MPs to hide their donations, financial interests and client relationships from voters
Josiah Mortimer
APPGs, informal groups in Parliament which conduct research and make policy recommendations, have come under fire in recent years for acting as a form of lobbying integrated into the Westminster system.
APPGs are made up of MPs and peers, but can have secretariats staffed or funded by third parties meaning various special interests such as think tanks, companies, or campaign groups can gain regular access to MPs.
In 2023, new rules were introduced to improve transparency, including increasing the minimum numbers of members an APPG must have, mandatory yearly declarations of funding above £1500, and a ban on funding from foreign governments. Despite these attempts, ways remain to skirt the rules and avoid scrutiny.
Currently it is impossible to know how much a company is giving to an APPG when they are funding the secretariat, but not the APPG directly.
This means that there is no way of knowing how much money defence firms and News UK are donating to parliamentary research.
What the Tool Revealed
The APPG on Defence Technology received £61,000 from APPG Secretariat Services Ltd.
The public record states who the secretariat is funded by, but does not reveal the proportions of the funding.
Consequently, there is no way of knowing if the bulk of the funding came from the data services firm Capita, the engineering firm Ultra Electronics, the Story Homes construction company, or the arms manufacturers Leonardo and Lockheed Martin who also fund the APPG secretariat, or if all firms donated similar amounts.
Similarly News UK, which owns The Times and The Sun, funds Whitehouse Communications which acts as the secretariat for the Media APPG but it is unclear if the bulk of the £112,000 the APPG has received over the last three years comes from Murdoch, or from Bauer and the creative agencies that also fund the secretariat.
Tom Hashemi of Cast From Clay explained: "This masks who wields real influence: one company might provide £20,000 while another gives £1,000, but they appear identical on the register. The implications of this could be serious.
MPs engaging with these groups may have no idea whose interests dominate the funding, potentially championing policies that favour specific market players without realising it, or allowing wealthy interests to quietly steer the policy conversation while smaller contributors create an illusion of broad support
Tom Hashemi of Cast From Clay
Hashemi added: "The 2023 rule changes intended to make APPGs transparent. This loophole seems an oversight".
A second loophole is the rebranding of certain APPGs as Policy Liaison Groups (PLGs), a term with no official status, but which is not covered by the rules.
In 2024, Peter Geoghegan reported for The Times that three APPGs had been repackaged as PLGs by College Green Group, a political consultancy run by Thomas Borwick, formerly the chief technology officer for the Vote Lea...
Activity