Once in a while a newspaper exposes abuses that weaken our democracy. Sometimes, such abuses have become so commonplace that no one has thought to question them. In January a series of articles in The Times by our political correspondent Sam Coates highlighted alarmingly close relationships between MPs and lobbying firms on some all-party groups. It revealed levels of secrecy and dissimulation unbecoming of our elected representatives. This week the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Sir Philip Mawer, has moved swiftly to stamp out such behaviour, by making recommendations that could have far-reaching consequences.

In theory, all-party groups (APGs) are independent groups of MPs that meet to exchange information and advance a cause. They have no statutory power. But, in practice, they have significant influence. In the Parliamentary Commissioner’s own words, “those with a special interest in a particular issue have the potential to gain considerably from access to an AllParty Group which focuses on that issue”. The Times discovered that some groups, such as the All-Party Fire Safety and Rescue Group, were being funded by lobbyists who had not revealed for whom they were working. Others, such as the All-Party Pharmacy Group, were giving their name to policy reports written by unnamed industry organisations. And there were further conflicts of interest. The APG on Identity Fraud, which claimed that Christmas cards were a target for fraud and should be shredded, was funded by Fellowes, a company that makes shredding machines.

Some lobbyists seem to be taking advantage of self-regulation. About 20 per cent refuse to give the name of their clients. Sir Philip suggests that MPs should avoid these firms. Lobbyist Doug Smith, for example, claimed that his assistance for the Fire Safety Group was unrelated to his client, a group of building companies called the Fire Safety Development Group, despite the latter listing the APG on its website.

MPs should be sensitive to the risks of being compromised by commercial or charitable links. In brusquely dismissing the suggestion that he should investigate his group’s backers more fully, the chairman of The Export Group, Ken Purchase, MP, was adhering to the letter of the law. But he was clearly not sticking to its spirit. Sir Philip has recommended that the APG Register should carry the names of those who provide secretariat assistance, and also any client with a direct interest in an APG’s work. He also recommends that every APG report should state who wrote and funded it. Both are essential to open government.

There is a wider question about the merits of having nearly 300 parliamentary groups focusing on a wide range of subjects and acting as though they have institutional status. It might be more honest to rename these bodies “all-party pressure groups”. This goes further than Sir Philip’s recommendations, but it would support the spirit of transparency that he rightly seeks to uphold.