Malcolm Rifkind and Jack Straw would use their political influence to lobby for a putative Hong Kong firm in return for handsome fees, according to a journalistic sting by Channel 4 and the Daily Telegraph. Both are former UK foreign secretaries and veteran members of the House of Commons. The story led rapidly to Rifkind's resignation as chairman of its security and intelligence committee and of Straw's likely disappointment as a future member of the House of Lords after May's general election. They each deny wrongdoing but their readiness to benefit was damningly culpable.
Their exposure opens up yet another front in a running battle between Britain’s established political system, its challenger parties and disenchanted voters. Already earning about 2½ times the average wage at £60,000, MPs are widely perceived to inhabit a political cocoon shielded from ordinary life and gilded with privileged conditions and expenses. However true that was in the past, it is less so now because of tighter regulations and a greater need to interact with more demanding constituents. Research shows only a small minority of MPs earn huge sums as lobbyists, company directors or from other kinds of outside earnings. But funding of the overall political system and easy access to decision-makers are more open than before to rich lobbyists and companies.
That is true throughout the democratic world. Media and public scrutiny in Britain helps temper excesses but is left struggling to make political representation properly accountable when pressured by well-endowed interest groups. Growing inequalities of wealth and power reinforce such trends, as does greater international competition from emerging states and regions.
Not surprisingly, a new populism on the left and right counterposes corrupt political elites and virtuous peoples confronted with these issues. It should encourage those who take representative government seriously to explore and close off their vulnerability to such lobbying as scrupulously as they can.