What Ireland can teach the UK about transparency and lobbying

“A new Government review is said to be targeting political lobbying by focussing on enhancing transparency. Adam William Chalmers and Thomas Aarheim argue that Ireland has some valuable lessons to offer. Enjoyed this post? Sign up to our newsletter and receive a weekly roundup of all our articles. Recent reporting suggests the UK Government is preparing a major review of lobbying transparency rules following renewed scrutiny of how political influence operates behind the scenes. Yet for over a decade, the UK has had a formal lobbying register that leaves much of that influence hidden in plain sight. Ireland offers an instructive comparison: its lobbying register is broader in scope, better enforced, and captures a far higher share of actual lobbying activity than its UK counterpart. The lesson from Ireland is that meaningful transparency requires not just a register, but the right design and the political will to enforce it. As the UK government reviews its own framework, the central question is whether it will settle for another round of symbolic reform or build something that genuinely works. A global trend with uneven results Over the past two decades, lobbying regulation has expanded significantly. Today, around 15 European countries and the European Union require some form of registration. Finland introduced its transparency register in 2024, and Sweden is moving in a similar direction. International organisations such as the OECD and Transparency International now treat lobbying registers as a baseline feature of democratic governance. The logic is straightforward. If citizens cannot see who is trying to influence public decisions, on whose behalf, and with what objectives, accountability is weakened. Yet the presence of a register does not guarantee meaningful transparency. The effectiveness of these systems depends on how they are designed and enforced. In practice, there is a wide gap between robust systems such as Ireland’s and weaker ones that offer only a limited view of political influence. The UK: transparency in name only The United Kingdom illustrates this gap clearly. The Transparency of Lobbying Act 2014 created a register of consultant lobbyists. In principle, this appears to provide oversight. In practice, it captures only a narrow slice of lobbying activity. If citizens cannot see who is trying to influence public decisions, on whose behalf, and with what objectives, accountability is weakened. The register applies only to third party consultants who contact ministers or permanent secretaries on behalf of clients. It excludes in-house lobbyists working for corporations, trade associations, charities, and think tanks. It also excludes most forms of informal influence, including meetings, messaging, and ongoing relationships that shape policymaking in less visible ways. The scale of this limitation is striking. As of early 2024, the register included just over 200 organisations. By comparison, Ireland’s broader system captures thousands of entries. Estimates suggest that the UK framework records as little as 4 percent of total lobbying activity. The remaining activity takes place outside any formal disclosure system. What is notable is that calls for reform now extend beyond civil society. Industry bodies such as the Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) have publicly supported a broader and more comprehensive register. CIPR, in their effort to maintain and raise professional standards among public relations practitioners, are calling for reforms that would close existing loopholes and ensure the UK’s lobbying register captures a fuller, more transparent picture of who is influencing government decisions. The current government review therefore represents an important test. The question is no longer whether reform is needed, but whether there is sufficient political will to deliver it. What effective transparency requires Comparative research on lobbying regulation highlights two core principles for effective systems. These are breadth and enforcement. First, the definition of lobbying must be broad. Systems that focus only on consultant lobbyists miss the majority of influence activity. Effective frameworks define lobbying in terms of the act of seeking to influence public decisions, regardless of whether this is done by consultants, corporations, or other organisations. Ireland’s Regulation of Lobbying Act 2015 applies this logic directly: it covers anyone communicating with designated public officials on relevant matters, whether they are a paid consultant, an in-house government affairs team, or a trade association. The result is a register that captures a genuinely representative picture of influence activity, not just a narrow slice of it. The real question is what meaningful transparency requires in practice. Second, disclosure must focus on activity as well as identity. It is not enough to know who is registered. Meaningful transparency requires information about what issues are being lobbied, which officials are being contacted, and how frequently interactions take place. Ireland’s system requires registrants to report the specific subject matter of each lobbying return, the public body targeted, and the outcome sought. This activity-centred design means that researchers, journalists, and citizens can trace not just who is lobbying, but what policy decisions are being shaped and by whom. Third, enforcement must be credible. Without meaningful sanctions, compliance becomes optional. Ireland provides a useful example, where the Standards in Public Office Commission actively monitors returns, investigates complaints, and can impose fines for non-compliance. This has produced consistently high levels of reporting. By contrast, weaker systems with limited penalties struggle to achieve the same effect. Finally, transparency systems must be accessible and usable. Registers should be searchable, standardised, and designed in ways that allow journalists, researchers, and citizens to engage with the data effectively. Ireland’s public register is freely searchable online, with returns organised by organisation, subject matter, and public body. This accessibility is not incidental. It is what converts disclosure into genuine accountability. The question has changed The debate over lobbying has shifted. The central issue is no longer whether lobbying should be regulated. Most stakeholders now accept that transparency is necessary. The real question is what meaningful transparency requires in practice. The UK shows that having a register does not guarantee visibility. Ireland shows that a well-designed one can. The outcome will shape not only national systems, but also broader expectations about how democratic accountability should operate in an era where influence is increasingly complex, networked, and difficult to observe. Enjoyed this post? Sign up to our newsletter and receive a weekly roundup of all our articles. All articles posted on this blog give the views of the author(s), and not the position of LSE British Politics and Policy, nor of the London School of Economics and Political Science. Image credit: Pressmaster on Shutterstock The post What Ireland can teach the UK about transparency and lobbying first appeared on LSE British Politics .

Summary generated from the RSS feed of LSE British Politics and Policy. All article rights belong to the original publisher. Click through to read the full piece on blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy.