UK (Parliament Politics Magazine) – Labour peer Lord McNicol broke Lords rules by promoting a crypto firm he advised, prompting an apology for offering paid parliamentary support.
As reported by The Guardian, a Labour peer and trade representative has apologised for breaking Lords rules by endorsing a crypto firm that retained him.
What led Iain McNicol to breach House of Lords rules?
Former Labour official Iain McNicol was found to have broken Lords rules by providing paid parliamentary support to crypto firm Astra Protocol while on its payroll in June 2023.
The Guardian’s investigation into the House of Lords led to a report to the standards commissioner regarding his actions linked to peers’ commercial dealings.
The investigation revealed that the Labour peer had written to the Treasury during his tenure as a paid adviser to Astra Protocol, praising the firm’s “esteemed team of industry veterans and prominent political advisers” with vast experience in crypto.
What did Lord McNicol write to the Treasury about crypto regulation?
Lord McNicol, in a final submission to a Treasury consultation, highlighted that Astra Protocol’s team was “uniquely placed to provide meaningful insights into the challenges and opportunities that come with regulating DeFi [decentralised finance] and other crypto assets.”
He warned that letting regulation hinder innovation. The tension reached its peak when he emailed and sent letters, which were disclosed under the freedom of information laws.
Writing to Lord Kakkar, chair of the Lords Conduct Committee, McNicol stated, “I would like to offer my full and unreserved apology for breaching the code.”
What did Margaret Obi say about Lord McNicol’s breach of Parliamentary conduct?
The Lords commissioner, Margaret Obi, in her findings, wrote,
“I consider that by writing a letter to HM Treasury officials in his own name on behalf of Astra Protocol, Lord McNicol provided a paid parliamentary service to Astra Protocol.”
She added,
“Although Lord McNicol stated he was not paid specifically for providing this submission to HM Treasury, he was paid a monthly retainer by Astra Protocol. I therefore consider that this retainer can reasonably be understood to cover the various tasks he undertook for the company at that time, including his submission to HM Treasury. I therefore find Lord McNicol breached paragraph 9(d) of the code of conduct.”
The commissioner said the breach was not substantiated, as it involved only a single letter and did not take advantage of any special access or connections earned through his peerage.
Ms Obi continued,
“Nevertheless, this was a clear example of providing a parliamentary service in return for payment. It is also not clear why the letter was sent specifically in Lord McNicol’s name, instead of in the name of the senior member of staff within the organisation, for example, the CEO or chair. I therefore consider remedial action to be appropriate and propose a letter of apology to the chair of the conduct committee.”
Who filed the complaint against Lord McNicol?
Tom Brake, head of Unlock Democracy and former Commons deputy leader, submitted the complaint about Lord McNicol. He raised concerns that McNicol’s outreach to Treasury officials may have breached Lords regulations.
What did the House of Lords say about standards and transparency?
A House of Lords spokesperson stated, “The code of conduct obliges members to adhere to high standards of transparency and propriety. It requires members to register and declare relevant interests and to maintain a clear distinction between their outside interests and their parliamentary activities.”
Peers with paid consultancies
David Blunkett
- Party: Labour
- Role: Adviser on public policy (DLA Piper)
Andrew Lansley
- Party: Conservative
- Role: Strategic counsel (Low Associates)
Natalie Evans
- Party: Conservative
- Role: Senior adviser on UK policy (Rud Pedersen)
John Woodcock (Lord Walney)
- Party: Crossbencher
- Role: Consultant (Purpose Coalition, Rud Pedersen)