lobbying

Nigel Farage Dubbed ‘MP for Washington’ for Parroting Trump in Parliament

Spread the love

Article by Adam Barnett republished from DeSmog

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage. Credit: House of Commons (CC BY-3.0)

Reform leader boosted the president’s attacks on UK Chagos Islands policy more often than raising the cost of living.

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage used a quarter of his speeches in Parliament to boost U.S. President Donald Trump’s attacks on the UK’s Chagos Islands deal – three times more than he raised the cost of living.

DeSmog’s analysis of parliamentary records finds that the former Clacton MP – who resigned last month in response to a series of financial scandals – raised the UK’s proposed deal with Mauritius in 10 of the 40 times he spoke in the House of Commons.

Farage, who was first elected to Parliament in July 2024, mentioned Chagos more than any subject except immigration. This compares with only one speech about winter fuel payments, one on energy policy, and one about UK budget measures, all topics with a direct impact on the cost of living.

“Seeing how often Farage has voiced views that line up perfectly with Trump’s interests, you might think he was the MP for Washington DC, not Clacton-on-Sea,” said Graeme McGregor, campaign manager at the Good Law Project.

“He ought to spend more time focusing on issues that matter to people in Clacton, rather than his pastimes of grandstanding, jet-setting and schmoozing.”

A version of this article was published by The Mirror.

Most of Farage’s Chagos speeches also mentioned Trump, whose opposition to the deal saw it shelved in April. Negotiated by the previous Conservative government, it proposed giving Mauritius control of the islands, which are located in the Indian Ocean, with a 99-year lease for the UK to run the Diego Garcia military base, which is seen as a crucial asset by the U.S. government.

In December 2024, Farage told the Commons he had “just returned, hotfoot, from a very full Mar-a-Lago”, Trump’s resort in Florida, and that “several members” of the incoming administration had expressed “deep disquiet” about plans to “surrender the sovereignty of the islands”.

This was echoed in February 2025, when Farage claimed the agreement could destroy hopes of a UK-U.S. trade deal, claiming Britain’s chances of avoiding American tariffs would “evaporate”.

“The special relationship will be dangerously fractured if the government carry on with this,” he added.

The Reform leader also used the Commons to boast of his close relationship with Trump.  “I think I am in a fortunate position. It is not just that for 10 years I have stood up and defended President Trump – I was very much on my own in those days – but that I know half his Cabinet,” he said in February 2025.

Farage has also campaigned against the Chagos deal in meetings with U.S. government officials, and tried to visit the Islands in February on a trip funded by Christopher Harborne, the donor at the centre of his resignation scandal.

DeSmog has previously reported that Farage mentioned his constituency just twice in Parliament in the past 12 months, and only six times since his 2024 election. Over the same period, he has received £2.3 million in non-parliamentary income.

He has also made a series of trips to the United States to speak at pro-Trump events, and has addressed Trump-aligned conferences in London, including the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship (ARC), and CPAC Great Britain.

Reform, which has received more than £24 million from oil and gas interests, has vowed to emulate Trump’s policies – campaigning for the “mass deportations” of immigrants and dramatically increased fossil fuel extraction.

https://infogram.com/farages-commons-speeches-1h0n25ojjqv7z4p


Chagos Lobbying

In an interview on his GB News show in January, Farage urged Mike Johnson, the Republican Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, to build opposition to the Chagos deal in the United States. Farage has also reportedly raised the issue directly with the White House on several occasions.

In February, he attempted to visit the Chagos Islands via the nearby Maldives to support four Chagossians who are opposed to the deal. He has claimed he was blocked from entry by the UK government, which said it had no prior knowledge of Farage’s visit.

The £25,000 trip was paid for by Harborne, the crypto billionaire whose £5 million undeclared “gift” to Farage before the 2024 election was being investigated by parliament’s standards commissioner when the Reform leader resigned last month.

The investigation is expected to resume if he wins the by-election on 13 August, which all major parties have boycotted.

Like Trump, Harborne — who has given Reform more than £25 million to date — also appears to oppose the Chagos deal. As well as bankrolling Farage’s visit to the region, Harborne has pledged to fund the small group of Chagossians trying to halt the UK government’s plan.

Nick Dearden of the campaign group Global Justice Now, told DeSmog: “Farage made his name lecturing us about British sovereignty, but he clearly has no idea what this means, because whenever British interests are attacked by Donald Trump, Farage sides with the bully-boy in the White House.

“Trump has repeatedly interfered in British politics, slamming our energy policy, forcing changes in our regulation of Big Tech companies and even fleecing the NHS,” Dearden added. “His poodle, Farage, has not stood up to him on one occasion. Instead, he has used his position to support a man who is so clearly trying to weaken us.”

Nigel Farage and Reform UK have been contacted for comment.

Farage’s Chagos Chatter in Parliament

“…how confident is the foreign secretary that Donald Trump, if he becomes the 47th President of the USA, will approve of this deal, given the importance of our relationship with America?”
7 October, 2024

“I assure the House, having been in America last week and knowing the incoming U.S. defence secretary very well, that there is outright hostility towards this deal. […] Diego Garcia was described to me by a senior Trump adviser as the most important island on the planet for America, so the minister will find outright hostility.”
13 November, 2024

“I have just returned, hotfoot, from a very full Mar-a-Lago. I spoke to several members—senior administrators, especially—of the incoming administration, which will be in the White House in 32 days’ time. Let me assure you that there is very deep disquiet among them all as to what this deal may mean for the long-term future of Diego Garcia and whether such a deal will hold […] They also cannot understand why we would surrender the sovereignty of the islands on an advisory judgment from a pretty obscure court.”
18 December, 2024

“Diego Garcia is probably the single most important thing that we give America right now. Without it, America does not have access to the middle east, India and much else.

[…] I genuinely fear that if this continues and the American administration wakes up to it – I could quote three members of the Cabinet I have spoken to personally about it – our chances of not just avoiding tariffs but moving on to a sectoral free trade deal will all but evaporate. The special relationship will be dangerously fractured if the Government carry on with this…”
4th February, 2025

“The Americans, by the way, have been pretty busy with foreign policy just lately, so it is perhaps no wonder that Diego Garcia has not been high on their agenda, but when they wake up to the fact that this has been done – wholly unnecessarily – I would not be surprised if we find ourselves, together with the European Union, in their tariff regime.”
5 February, 2025

“[Urgent question:] To ask His Majesty’s Government to give us an update on the situation with regard to the Diego Garcia American military base and the British Indian Ocean Territory, especially in light of the recent comments of the American President.”
25 February, 2026

Article by Adam Barnett republished from DeSmog

Nigel Farage is scathing at the £250,000 cost to the taxpayer of his unnecessary and ridiculous Clacton-on-Sea election campaign that he caused to avoid scrutiny and acccountability for the £5MILLION 'gift' that he didn't declare.
Nigel Farage is scathing at the £250,000 cost to the taxpayer of his unnecessary and ridiculous Clacton-on-Sea election campaign that he caused to avoid scrutiny and acccountability for the £5MILLION ‘gift’ that he didn’t declare.
Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an obviously insane, xenophobic Fascist.
Orcas discuss how Trump was re-elected and him being an obviously insane, xenophobic Fascist.
Nigel Farage explains the politics of Reform UK: Racism, Fake anti-establishmentism, Deregulation, Corporatism, Climate Change Denial, Mysogyny and Transphobia.
Nigel Farage explains the politics of Reform UK: Racism, Fake anti-establishmentism, Deregulation, Corporatism, Climate Change Denial, Mysogyny and Transphobia.

Continue ReadingNigel Farage Dubbed ‘MP for Washington’ for Parroting Trump in Parliament

Burnham aide’s lobby firm met government 38 times – but who did it work for?

Spread the love

Article by Ethan Shone republished from OpenDemocracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

Credit: Toby Shepheard / AFP via Getty Images

UK’s weak lobbying laws leave public in the dark about Flint Global’s vast access to government under James Purnell

Flint Global, the lobbying firm run by Andy Burnham’s incoming chief of staff, James Purnell, held extensive meetings with ministers, senior officials and special advisers with minimal disclosure, openDemocracy can reveal.

Our analysis of public transparency releases revealed Flint’s staff members met with officials from at least nine government departments on 38 occasions – for meetings, breakfasts, lunches, dinners and roundtables – since Labour took office. Attendees included cabinet ministers Jonathan Reynolds, Douglas Alexander and Nick Thomas-Symonds. This figure is likely an undercount as records of such meetings are published months in arrears. 

While Flint Global opts not to reveal its client list in the UK, EU transparency disclosures reveal it has lobbied politicians in Brussels on behalf of  Microsoft, Apple, BP and Uber. In the UK, the firm is known to have advised Thames Water – the utility Burnham has said “should be” nationalised.

Our findings raise fresh questions about the interests of Purnell, a former Blair-era cabinet minister who is poised to become one of the UK’s most powerful unelected officials when Burnham enters No 10, and have sparked fresh calls for the UK’s weak lobbying laws to be reformed.

One government log appears to confirm just how routine its engagements with Flint were. 

A September 2024 meeting between the lobbying firm and the Department for Business and Trade’s then top-ranking civil servant, Gareth Davies, is described as a “regular meeting to discuss latest business updates”. Purnell is also recorded as having hosted “evening drinks to discuss latest business updates” with Davies in March this year.

Yet despite this regular access to government officials, Flint’s quarterly entries to the Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists have only ever declared lobbying for two clients. The firm said it lobbied on behalf of the British Standards Institution, which produces technical standards on a range of products and services, in late 2024, and Hellen Systems, a tech firm working on long-range navigation, between July and September 2025. 

Across the remaining six quarters that Labour has been in office – covering a total of 18 months – Flint declared having made “no communications which meet the definition of consultant lobbying”.

There is no suggestion that Flint has broken any rules. Rather, its near-empty register reflects major flaws in Westminster’s lobbying transparency rules. While few companies enjoy such extensive access to such wide-ranging government departments, much of Flint’s lobbying activity does not meet the threshold for statutory registration. 

The 2014 Lobbying Act requires consultant lobbyists to register only direct communications with ministers or permanent secretaries made on a client’s behalf. They do not have to declare meetings with government special advisers, director generals and senior officials, nor roundtables and briefings that they attend or organise, nor strategic advice they give clients about who to speak to in government, what to say, and when to say it. 

The result is that a firm such as Flint Global can maintain a regular presence across Whitehall – breakfasting with officials, dining with ministers, pre-briefing advisers – while lawfully declaring that it does no consultant lobbying at all. Many similar lobbying firms sign up to the industry body’s voluntary code of conduct, which requires them to publish a client list, but Flint has not opted to do so. 

This means the public has no way of knowing whether decisions that cross Purnell’s desk in No 10 could benefit his former clients.

Duncan Hames, senior director of policy at Transparency International UK, told openDemocracy: “That a lobbying company can have dozens of meetings across government with so little public information about the purpose of these engagements shows how opaque Westminster remains.

“If the next prime minister wants change from the broken politics-as-usual, they should recognise that keeping things behind closed doors and poorly managing conflicts of interest are recipes for disaster.

“Government should create a firewall between any new appointments and their past interests in the private sector, as well legislating to bring lobbying out of the shadows.”

Vast access to Whitehall

Purnell, who resigned from Flint Global last week, joined the company as chief executive in June 2024 – weeks before Labour’s election win. Although the lobby firm had previously secured meetings with Conservative government officials, its engagement with the government appears to have ramped up that summer.

In July 2024, the firm hosted a roundtable with then-business secretary Jonathan Reynolds alongside Barclays, Google and Virgin Atlantic to discuss “opportunities and challenges relating to business growth”. It is not known whether Flint counts these firms among its UK clients, though EU transparency records reveal it has lobbied for Google in Brussels. 

Over the following 20 months, Flint met ministers or officials from the Department for Business and Trade at least 13 times, including three meetings with trade minister Douglas Alexander and repeated meetings, breakfasts, dinners and drinks with civil servant Gareth Davies. 

Over at the Treasury, Flint discussed the contents of the chancellor’s January 2025 growth speech with a senior official the day it was delivered, attended a roundtable on financial services policy with then City minister Emma Reynolds, and met a senior official to “discuss policy for Autumn Budget” in October 2025.

Department for Transport special adviser Stef Lehmann, who previously worked in Flint’s transport team, accepted lunch or dinner from Flint on three separate occasions, while the department’s permanent secretary, Bernadette Kelly, recorded a “speaking commitment” with the firm.

Flint also hosted or briefed senior officials at the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology on digital policy; met officials from the Department for Energy, Security and Net Zero to discuss new publicly owned energy investment firm Great British Energy; and discussed planning “blockers” with Chris Stark, the head of the government’s clean power mission. 

The firm also had contact with the Cabinet Office, the Department for Education, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Department for Health and Social Care, whose special adviser, Heather Iqbal – another ex-Flint employee – was taken to breakfast by Purnell in August 2025.

Several of the engagements were roundtables organised around Flint’s corporate network. A March 2025 meeting with Douglas Alexander to discuss “the current trading environment” brought together more than 20 companies, including Amazon, Uber, Diageo, Unilever, GSK and Quadrature – the hedge fund that donated £4m to Labour before the 2024 election. The British Standards Institution, one of the only two clients Flint has ever been required to declare, was also present, although Flint did not declare any consultant lobbying for the company in this quarter.

Speaking to openDemocracy last week, Green Party leader Zack Polanski called for the publication of Flint’s clients if Purnell takes up the key role in No 10. 

Following Purnell’s resignation, Flint Global said Purnell “has recused himself from all client activity and has no ongoing financial interest in the company of any kind.”

Flint Global and Andy Burnham’s team were approached for comment.

Article by Ethan Shone republished from OpenDemocracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

Continue ReadingBurnham aide’s lobby firm met government 38 times – but who did it work for?

Revealed: Lobbying firm selling access to ministers for £30,000

Spread the love

Original article by Ethan Shone republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

Science, Innovation and Technology Secretary Liz Kendall is due to appear at the summit in July 
| (Photo by Jack Taylor/Getty Images)

Firms can get direct access to tech minister and No 10 advisers in exchange for sponorsing tech event, brochure says

A Labour-linked lobbying firm is selling access to government officials, including tech secretary Liz Kendall and “top advisers to the prime minister”, for tens of thousands of pounds, openDemocracy can reveal.

Businesses looking to sponsor July’s Future of Tech Summit, which is coordinated by Arden Strategies and tech industry lobbying group Startup Coalition, can choose from a tiered range of packages, according to a brochure sent out to prospective sponsors this week.

The most expensive costs £30,000 and entitles the sponsor to make a speech at the reception, be introduced to key policymakers and attend a “private post-conference tech dinner” with senior advisers to Keir Starmer and chancellor Rachel Reeves.

The half-day summit will take place at County Hall in Westminster and involve two panel discussions, private roundtables with MPs, a “fireside chat” with Kendall and a drinks reception. It will “bring together the brightest minds in policy, business and technology to discuss and shape a long-term vision for the UK’s role in the global tech landscape”, the brochure promises.

openDemocracy understands that the document, which we have reviewed, was sent to lobbying agencies and in-house public affairs teams in the tech sector. It has not been made public or reported elsewhere.

Arden Strategies and Startup Coalition hosted a similar event last year, where tech firms, venture capitalists and consultants mingled with then-tech secretary Peter Kyle and a dozen other Labour politicians and aides. One company that attended last year’s event now sits on a government panel shaping data policy.

Founded by former Labour minister Jim Murphy, Arden established itself as arguably the lobbying firm with the best connections to Starmer’s Labour Party in the run-up to the 2024 general election, when it hosted numerous private meetings introducing clients to members of the shadow cabinet.

While this year’s event is unlikely to breach parliamentary rules, ‘cash-for-access’ style arrangements are controversial as they allow companies and interest groups with significant resources opportunities to influence government policy. This is especially concerning on issues like AI and social media, where companies stand to gain significantly from light-touch regulation or government backing.

Campaign group Spotlight on Corruption described the arrangement as “hugely problematic” and has called for the government to review “cash for access schemes”.

‘Guaranteed access?’ ‘Yes’

An FAQ section in this year’s brochure foresees prospective sponsors asking, “Will we be guaranteed a policymaker?” The answer is simply: “Yes”. The level of access afforded to a business, though, appears to depend on which sponsorship package they opt for.

For £7,500, companies can sponsor and co-host a 90-minute roundtable with a “VIP guest”. At last year’s event, the guests were generally MPs with an interest in tech and AI policy, including now-AI minister Kanishka Narayan and the chair of the influential Labour Growth Group of MPs, Chris Curtis, a former aide to Starmer.

For £20,000, a senior representative from a sponsoring business can join or introduce one of two panel discussions taking place on the day. The topics up for discussion are yet to be confirmed, but could include AI regulation and “cybersecurity in a time of geopolitical instability”, the document says.

It adds that while “the vision for the day [is] set in stone… different topics can be approached in different ways and we are happy to work with you to ensure the content is the best it can be”.

For £30,000, businesses can sponsor a drinks reception where attendees will network after the fireside chat with Kendall. This package includes the chance to make a “three-minute” speech during the reception and pose for photos with the minister.

Sponsors who have paid at least £20,000 will also receive “stakeholder introductions” at the reception – likely meaning they will be introduced directly to influential politicians and advisers.

The summit will be followed by an exclusive post-conference dinner for 25 guests, which the brochure describes as “a VIP dinner with top advisors to the prime minister, chancellor and other senior tech policymakers for sponsors and top UK business leaders.”

There are seemingly three seats at this dinner available to sponsors, one each for the businesses that spend £20,000 to sponsor one of the two panels or £30,000 to sponsor the reception.

Another question in the FAQs asks: “Are package pricing set?” To which the response is: “No, we are open to a conversation.”

Brochure Screenshot FAQ1
A screenshot of the brochure showing that sponsors are ‘guaranteed’ access to a policymaker

While transparency rules will require any ministers attending the event declare their attendance, the vast majority of the engagement that will take place will not be captured either by government transparency rules or lobbying regulation.

“When access to politicians is packaged and priced, it shows yet again that it is wealth that determines who gets influence,” Kamila Kingstone, senior campaigner at Spotlight on Corruption, told OpenDemocracy.

“Not only does it fuel public cynicism about who politicians really listen to, it risks distorting major policy decisions in favour of the tech sector rather than the public interest.

“The newly created Ethics and Integrity Commission should conduct a review of cash-for-access schemes to ministers, MPs, and advisers, examining who is selling access, who buys it, and the impact it ultimately has on decision making,” Kingston added.

These concerns were echoed by Jim Killock, the executive director of Open Rights Group, who said: “In recent years, the tech industry has successfully lobbied UK governments to halt AI regulation, weaken data protection rights and undermine competition law. The voice of the public and civil society, meanwhile, is kept out.

“The odds are already stacked in corporates’ favour. Promising paid access to policymakers entrenches that imbalance and is harmful to the public, effective policymaking and the wider economy.”

Arden Strategies

The document describes Arden Strategies as “an advisory and communications firm founded and led by former cabinet minister Jim Murphy”, which works to “ensure exceptional professionals from across the public and private sector get their voices heard by the right people at the right time”.

As openDemocracy reported in September 2024, Arden Strategies organised and sponsored fundraising events for around 40 prospective Labour MPs ahead of that year’s general election, the vast majority of whom were elected successfully.

In all but a handful of cases, these donations were never declared due to a loophole that allows a single donor to give several MPs donations that all fall just under the registrable threshold – even if the total amount donated is significantly above the threshold for individual declaration.

The firm was later criticised for arranging private access to an event at the Treasury to meet with Ian Corfield, a Labour donor employed as a Treasury adviser after the election, but later stepped down.

“If we had a government meeting, we would always choose the cast list ourselves. We wouldn’t ask a lobbying firm to curate it,” said Henry Newman, a former political adviser to Tory ministers including Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, at the time.

Original article by Ethan Shone republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence.

Continue ReadingRevealed: Lobbying firm selling access to ministers for £30,000

Rachel Reeves softened non-dom plans after Blackstone CEO ‘raised concerns’

Spread the love

Original article by Ethan Shone republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. 

The Chancellor held meetings with a number of finance bosses in the weeks following the budget, including Blackstone’s Stephen Schwarzman 
| UK government / Treasury

Revealed: Head of world’s biggest asset manager lobbied chancellor on tax rules weeks before policy was tweaked

Rachel Reeves changed the government’s position on non-doms weeks after one of the world’s most powerful financiers asked her personally not to increase the tax burden on the super rich.

Documents released to openDemocracy under the Freedom of Information Act reveal Stephen Schwarzman, the CEO of leading asset manager Blackstone, raised “concerns” with Reeves about her plans to reform the tax treatment of non-domiciled individuals at a meeting in Downing Street in December.

The chancellor had previously used the autumn Budget in late October to re-commit to Labour’s manifesto promise to abolish the non-dom tax regime, which allows wealthy individuals who live in the UK to be domiciled elsewhere for tax purposes.

But around a month after meeting with Schwarzman, Reeves watered down this commitment.

Speaking at World Economic Forum in Davos in January, she announced that she had been “listening to the concerns of the non-dom community” and would soften the government’s plans.

The government blocked a request from openDemocracy for details of the discussion between Reeves and Schwarzman, as well as other meetings between senior ministers and major financial institutions, including BlackRock and JP Morgan, but has released a heavily redacted follow-up letter.

openDemocracy approached both the Treasury and Blackstone for comment, but neither had responded at the time of publication.

Reeves’ heavily redacted letter

Schwarzman and a senior lobbyist from Blackstone met with the chancellor and her top advisers on 5 December, as part of a series of meetings between the government and the finance sector.

The Treasury told openDemocracy that the meeting’s purpose was “to gather perspectives on the UK as an investment destination and how to strengthen the UK’s position as a world leading investment management hub”.

While the government has so far rejected openDemocracy’s Freedom of Information requests about what was discussed at the meeting, it did release a heavily redacted follow-up letter that Reeves sent to Schwarzman a week later.

Despite the redactions, the letter shows that the tax treatment of high-net worth individuals was a major topic of discussion between the pair.

“Dear Stephen,” the chancellor wrote, “It was my pleasure to meet with you last week. Thank you for your time and the ideas you shared on how I and the government may seek to achieve our ambitions for growth across the UK.”

A section titled “the tax regime for non-domiciled individuals” reveals that Schwarzman “mentioned concerns” about non-dom tax treatment and inheritance tax.

“You noted the significant contribution that non-domiciled individuals make to the UK and mentioned concerns around non-domiciled individuals leaving in response to the reforms announced at the Budget,” Reeves wrote.

“I want to reassure you that I do value the contribution that non-domiciled individuals make to the economy and want to encourage them to spend and invest more of their money in the UK.”

Reeves also used the letter to highlight that some non-doms will be able to “take advantage of a three-year Temporary Repatriation Facility”, a scheme created by the Conservative government that enables former non-doms to bring foreign income and gains into the UK at a discounted tax rate for the first three years.

Reeves also sought to assuage Schwarzman’s apparent concerns about the UK’s inheritance tax (IHT).

“New arrivals to the UK will benefit from 100% UK tax relief on their [foreign income and gains],” she wrote, “provided they have been non-UK tax resident for the previous 10 years.”

The majority of Reeves’ letter to Schwarzman was redacted, raising questions about what else the giant asset manager lobbied for during the meeting.

A Labour MP, who spoke to openDemocracy on condition of anonymity, said: “The chancellor needs to come clean about why she reversed the policy on non-doms. She was lobbied by Blackstone then the policy was quickly dropped.

“She had no similar response to pensioners or Waspi women when she decided not to fulfill their needs. Who’s side is she on?”

The government has also refused to release any records from a number of other meetings with leading financial institutions in response to a series of Freedom of Information requests by openDemocracy.

‘Listening to the non-dom community’

The previous Conservative government announced plans to phase out the non-dom system, which allows wealthy people who live in the UK but are domiciled elsewhere for tax purposes to only pay tax on money they earn in the UK, rather than on all their earnings.

Unveiling the plans in last year’s Spring budget, Tory chancellor Jeremy Hunt said there would be a two-year transition period in which existing non-doms would pay a reduced rate on their overseas income.

The following month, Labour went one step further, with Reeves promising that if elected the party would raise £2.6bn by closing “loopholes” in the plans to abolish non-dom exemptions.

The new chancellor repeated this pledge at the Autumn budget in late October. She said the non-dom tax regime would be replaced with “a new residence-based scheme with internationally competitive arrangements” and the transition period upped from two to three years.

Weeks after the Blackstone meeting, Reeves attended the gathering of the World Economic Forum in Davos, where she sought to reassure the international business community that the UK is an attractive place to invest.

She announced that the government would alter the policy, in effect allowing current non-doms to pay the reduced rate of tax on more of their earnings throughout the already-extended transition period.

“We have been listening to the concerns that have been raised by the non-dom community,” she said.

Many organisations and individuals have lobbied the government about the policy, including a group formed specifically to oppose the plans, the Foreign Investors for Britain, which has reportedly been in regular contact with No 10’s business adviser, Varun Chandra.

But an intervention from Schwarzman would carry considerable weight.

Schwarzman’s firm, Blackstone, is the largest asset manager in the world, controlling more than $1trn in assets globally. As CEO, Schwarzman’s personal remuneration package for last year was worth over $1bn, and a Forbes estimate in November 2024 put his net worth at around $53bn.

Schwarzman is a Republican donor who worked with the first Trump administration and backed the president’s re-election campaign in 2020. He said he would not support Trump at the 2024 election, calling on the party to “turn to a new generation of leaders”, but later U-turned on this to endorse the now-president.

Blackstone is believed to be the largest commercial landlord in history, holding huge swathes of residential real estate. In 2019, the UN’s special rapporteur on housing said in an open letter that the firm was “having deleterious effects on the right to housing” and accused it of “using its significant resources and political leverage to undermine domestic laws and policies that would in fact improve access to adequate housing consistent with international human rights law.” The firm disputed the contents of the special rapporteurs’ letter.

Original article by Ethan Shone republished from Open Democracy under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. 

Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves wear the uniform of the rich and powerful. They have all had clothes bought for them by multi-millionaire Labour donor Lord Alli. CORRECTION: It appears that Rachel Reeves clothing was provided by Juliet Rosenfeld.
Keir Starmer, Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves wear the uniform of the rich and powerful. They have all had clothes bought for them by multi-millionaire Labour donor Lord Alli. CORRECTION: It appears that Rachel Reeves clothing was provided by Juliet Rosenfeld.
Keir Starmer says pensioners can freeze to death and poor children can starve and be condemned to failure and misery all their lives.
Keir Starmer says pensioners can freeze to death and poor children can starve and be condemned to failure and misery all their lives.
Continue ReadingRachel Reeves softened non-dom plans after Blackstone CEO ‘raised concerns’

Peter Mandelson’s Consultancy Lobbied New Government on Behalf of Shell

Spread the love

Original article by Adam Barnett republished from DeSmog.

UK Ambassador to the U.S. Peter Mandelson. Credit: Credit: IMF / Flickr (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Labour’s new ambassador to the U.S. founded Global Counsel, a firm with major fossil fuel clients.

Labour’s top diplomat to Donald Trump’s United States leads a public affairs firm that has attempted to influence the new UK government on behalf of the oil and gas giant Shell, and the coal mining company Anglo American.

Peter Mandelson – who was a Cabinet minister under former Labour prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown – has been accepted as the UK’s ambassador to the U.S. by Trump’s new administration.

In addition to his new diplomatic role, which he will formally begin in February, Mandelson is president and chair of Global Counsel, a London-based political consultancy and lobbying organisation. He will retain shares in the company even after taking up his new position in Washington DC, the Financial Times has reported.

According to official records, after July’s general election Global Counsel lobbied the new Labour government on behalf of Shell, one of the world’s most polluting companies.

Shell is still committed to exploring for new sources of oil and gas and does not have any plans to reduce the overall amount it produces by 2030, in contravention of climate science. In 2021, the District Court of the Hague found that the total CO2 emissions of the Shell group exceeded the emissions of many states, including the Netherlands.

Lobbyists must declare if they have attempted to arrange meetings or influence ministers or senior civil servants on behalf of their clients. However, the contents of these discussions are not publicly available.

Global Counsel seemingly has close ties to the Labour Party. Prior to the 4 July election, the company supplied a staff member to Tulip Siddiq, who served as financial secretary to the Treasury until 14 January, a donation in kind worth £35,835, according to the register of MPs’ financial interests. 

Global Counsel is one of seven consultancies with a history of donating to Labour that have lobbied on behalf of fossil fuel clients since July’s election.

The client list at Mandelson’s lobbying firm also includes Anglo American, a British mining multinational which is a major producer of coal, and U.S. multinational bank JP Morgan, which has financed $430 billion in fossil fuel projects since the 2015 Paris Agreement, including $40 billion in 2023, according to the NGO Banktrack.

Another client, UK bank Standard Chartered, has financed $71 billion in fossil fuel projects in the same period, including $7 billion in 2023. 

Other Global Counsel clients include food and beverage giant Nestle, which has emissions three times the size of its home country Switzerland, and the controversial tech firm Palantir, founded by Trump ally Peter Thiel. 

Mandelson, who called Trump “reckless and dangerous to the world” in 2019, this week told Fox News his previous remarks were “ill-judged and wrong”, and that he has a “fresh respect” for the new U.S. president.

Global Counsel, and the Cabinet Office were approached for comment.

Transatlantic Ties

Mandelson’s appointment comes at a crucial time for climate policy, with a transatlantic network of political actors working increasingly closely to derail global action to achieve net zero emissions. 

Since his inauguration last week, President Trump has removed the U.S. from the flagship 2015 Paris climate accord, banned offshore wind farms, and declared a “national energy emergency” in order to open new oil and gas projects. 

His plans could add an extra four billion tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent to U.S. emissions by 2030, according to the climate publication Carbon Brief. 

Trump received more than $32 million from the oil and gas sector for his 2024 campaign. The fossil fuel industry spent $445 million on political donations, lobbying and advertising between January 2023 and November 2024 to influence Trump and Congress, according to the green advocacy group Climate Power. 

As DeSmog revealed last month, Mandelson’s counterpart, Trump’s ambassador to the UK Warren Stephens, runs a firm with investments in several oil and gas companies, including one wholly owned by his family business. 

The UK government is committed to removing fossil fuels from the UK’s power system by 2030, but this week approved a third runway at Heathrow Airport – the second most polluting airport in the world, according to a 2021 study – and pledged to remove environmental regulations on new building projects. 

According to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the world’s foremost climate science body, the next few years are crucial if we want to limit the worst effects of global warming, including drought, flooding, and heat waves.

To keep within the 1.5C warming limit set by the Paris Agreement, the IPCC says that emissions need to be reduced by at least 43 percent by 2030 compared to 2019 levels, and at least 60 percent by 2035.

Original article by Adam Barnett republished from DeSmog.

Continue ReadingPeter Mandelson’s Consultancy Lobbied New Government on Behalf of Shell