B2L Public Affairs                             Darren Caplan

Cicero                                             John Rowland

Citigate Dewe Rogerson                    Mick Halloran

Cogitamus                                       Paul Beckford

Champollion                                     Laura Brodie

Connect                                           Laura Blake (Vice-Chair YCC)

Connect                                           Gill Morris

Edelman                                          Michael Burrell

EUK Consulting                                David Bertram

EUK Consulting                                Scott Brodie

EUK Consulting                                John Roberts

EUK Consulting                                Tom Thorpe

Foresight                                          Olivia Shaw

Green Issues                                    Gabriel Abulafia

Heathcroft Communications               Nicholas King

Heathcroft Communications               Craig Leviton

Helen Johnson Consulting                  Helen Johnson (Chair)

Tetra Strategy                                   Charli Collins

Weber Shandwick                             Luke Akehurst

APPC                                              Mary Shearer (Secretary)

 

APCO                                              College Public Policy

Fishburn-Hedges                               Fleishman-Hillard

Grayling                                           Hanover

Mandate Communications                 Positif Politics

Whitehouse Consultancy

 

The Chair thanked Edelman for hosting the meeting.

 

The Chair welcomed Elizabeth France, recently appointed independent Chair of UKPAC.

 

Ms France outlined the background leading to her appointment in June 2010. The UKPAC implementation team had achieved its objectives of a working definition of lobbying and had put in hand plans for a register. The Coalition’s announcement of a statutory register had required a change of gear since then, and the Chair’s role would be different from that envisaged, but nonetheless UKPAC’s aims remained transparency and high standards.

 

UKPAC was now an independent company, registered with Companies House, and working to its own Articles of Association. However, there might need to be changes, eg to voting provisions, for UKPAC to be acceptable to the government as the vehicle for a statutory register. UKPAC was working to a very tight budget, which would limit the time available to it from the Chair, the independent members and the secretary and hence the speed with which it could work.

 

However, UKPAC was on target to launch its quarterly register in its initial form in October 2010. This would provide all the information in one place for members, media, the public, etc, to ensure transparency. To ensure high standards, UKPAC had the guiding principles in place and would also have oversight of member organisations’ disciplinary processes.

 

As regards the statutory register, Ms France and Sir Philip Mawer had had an encouraging meeting with the Cabinet Office Minister, who had responded positively to using UKPAC as the statutory register. UKPAC’s challenge was to steer in the direction of the statutory register. It was hoped that the Cabinet Office’s consultation paper would be based on the UKPAC work to date, such as the definition of lobbying. She encouraged APPC and its members to respond to the consultation paper.

 

Noting the requirement for universality, the Law Society and the NCVO seemed more amenable to UKPAC since the announcement of a statutory register and meetings were being arranged. The problem in admitting individuals or companies direct to the register, rather than through a member organisation, was that they would not be covered by a published code of conduct backed up by disciplinary processes. However, this would be very clearly highlighted in the register, which it was hoped would encourage individuals or firms to join one of the member organisations. The member organisations would still have an important role to play in administering and enforcing robust codes of conduct. Ms France was confident that, with the right wording, the UKPAC register could become the statutory register. One advantage was that there would be no cost to government.

 

The Chair thanked Ms France for an informative and thought-provoking presentation and invited questions.

 

Gill Morris, as APPC’s director of UKPAC, asked about timing for publication of the register. Ms France expected that the UKPAC register would be running for about a year before legislation was enacted, with implementation of the statutory register some time after that.

 

Ms France felt there was no chance of the government not introducing a statutory register and therefore APPC and others should be supporting UKPAC’s position. UKPAC would support continuing self-regulation in the context of a statutory register, and she felt that the government would not wish to spend the money required on statutory regulation, even in the face of another scandal. Ms France emphasised the importance of a communications programme but pointed out that UKPAC’s own resources were too tight and so it would have to rely on the member organisations to demonstrate support for UKPAC to PASC, MPs and so on and to reiterate that UKPAC had been set up on the industry’s own initiative.

 

UKPAC’s role would not be to promote the interests of those individuals or firms on its register, for example in the current activities of the Department of Communities and Local Government. Nor would it respond to media enquiries in the event of a problem with an individual or firm on the register; such enquiries would be directed to the member organisation or it would be pointed out that the register clearly showed that the individual or firm had not held out to be following a published code of conduct.

 

As regards universality, Ms France expected that there would be a penalty for not joining the statutory register and, on the other hand, MPs, Ministers and civil servants would also be bound to use the register to filter lobbyists. 

 

Ms France pointed out that UKPAC’s budget was very tight.    There would probably be small cost to register (plus an administration fee) payable direct to UKPAC only by those entering the register independent of a member organisation. Member organisations paying a subscription to UKPAC might wish to identify the charge as such when issuing subscription invoices, noting that there would be no administration fee. As well as the costs of running the register, UKPAC would also have to finance a function to audit member organisations’ disciplinary processes.

 

Ms France expected that the consultation paper would use the UKPAC definition of lobbying. While some members felt that, as set out in UKPAC’s Articles, was too broad, they would have the opportunity to comment on that in responding to the consultation paper.

 

Whilst the format of the register on the UKPAC website was a draft, it was pointed out that it called for less and less precise information than the APPC register; APPC members would be reluctant to reduce transparency in this way and APPC could retain its own register in parallel. Ms France said the intention was for UKPAC’s to be the sole register. She did not think it likely that the register would require disclosure of fees, which she did not feel would improve transparency.

 

In concluding, Ms France emphasised the need for a good communication programme, ensuring that UKPAC is well supported and that relevant people are well briefed.

 

The Chair thanked Ms France for attending the meeting and for her reassurances about the forward plans for UKPAC, which would help to inform APPC’s own communications programme.

 

Members approved the minutes of the meeting held on 19 July 2010. There were no matters arising that were not otherwise on the agenda.

 

            Members felt Ms France’s discussion had been most useful and suggested that she should be invited to update APPC again in due course. The Chair pointed to the proposed two step approach to the register and to self-regulation which she felt was very useful and would encourage firms to join APPC.

 

 

            Referring to the aim of universality, and the definition of lobbying, it was suggested that APPC might draw up a list of target organisations, including think tanks.

            Since the last meeting, Martin Robeson PA had joined APPC and there was one new member application pending. However, DJH Associates had resigned due to their merger with Grayling. The number of members therefore remained at 63. Members of the Management Committee were continuing to actively pursue new members.

            The Chair said that the YCC had made a very thorough presentation to the Management Committee at its last meeting. 

 

Laura Blake gave a summary of that presentation. Members of the YCC had contacted all member firms and invited young consultants to complete two online surveys, one on the YCC’s work programme and the other on industry issues. As a result, the YCC had recommended to the Management Committee that the YCC should be more involved in Code training and that their work programme should focus on promoting the involvement of more young consultants through LinkedIn and networking events, the first being a joint event with pubaffairs on 28 October.

 

The Chair commended the YCC on the huge amount of work undertaken in the last three months and on the enthusiasm of the YCC members. Darren Caplan had volunteered to act as liaison with the YCC and would be attending their next meeting on 14 September.

The Chair reported that she had still not had a reply to any of the three letters she had written to Ministers, but trusted that this was because they were in dialogue with UKPAC. The Chair and Deputy Chair were working together on an APPC contact programme, including tracking EDMs and PQs, and on key messages to dovetail with UKPAC key messages.

 

            The meeting discussed the continuing attempts of the Department of Communities & Local Government to prevent public bodies from engaging public affairs consultants and the attendant publicity. It was pointed out that the Parties were happy to accept money from public bodies for conference passes, stands, etc, and also that many public bodies had a statutory duty to consult with stakeholders.

 

 

The next APPC Code training seminar would be held on 14 October 2010 at the offices of Hill & Knowlton.

 

6 December 2010 at 5.30pm at APCO