Anti-Corruption and Integrity Outlook 2024
United Kingdom
Contextual factors
State structure | Executive power | Legislative system | Legal system |
Unitary | Parliamentary | Bicameral | Common law |
Strategy and institutions on anti-corruption and public integrity
The UK Anti-Corruption Strategy (2017-2022) was published in December 2017, with the aim of establishing a long-term framework to guide government efforts in tackling corruption. The strategy outlined six priorities: (i) reduce the insider threat in high-risk domestic sectors such as borders and ports, (ii) strengthen the integrity of the UK as an international financial centre, (iii) promote integrity across the public and private sectors, (iv) reduce corruption in public procurement and grants, (v) improve the business environment globally, (vi) work with other countries to combat corruption. The UK is currently developing a successor anti-corruption strategy.
In terms of institutions, the Propriety and Ethics Team in the Cabinet Office is responsible for integrity standards in central government, including the management of Ministers’ and Special Advisers’ private interests. Civil servants’ private interests are managed within departments. The Joint Anti-Corruption Unit oversees implementation of the Anti-Corruption Strategy. The Electoral Commission is the independent body that oversees elections and regulates political finance, and the independent Office of the Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists oversees transparency and conduct in lobbying. The Government Internal Audit Agency is responsible for internal audit in central government. The independent Information Commissioner is responsible for overseeing access to public information. The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards is responsible for MPs’ conduct, through monitoring the operation of the House of Commons Code of Conduct and Registers of Interest. The House of Lords Commissioners for Standards are responsible for the independent and impartial investigation of alleged breaches of the House of Lords Code of Conduct.
Overview
Greatest strengths | Areas to improve |
Anti-corruption strategy | Conflict of interest |
Transparency of public information - implementation | Transparency of public information – regulation |
Lobbying | Political finance - implementation |
Anti-corruption strategy
The United Kingdom fulfils 80% of criteria regarding the quality of the strategic framework, and 50% for practice, compared to the OECD average of 45% and 36%, respectively.
The United Kingdom is one of the top performers in terms of the adequacy of its Strategy's implementation plan. The Joint Anti-Corruption Unit is responsible for monitoring, reporting and evaluation of the strategy, and implementing institutions are responsible for reporting activities. The National Anti-Corruption Strategy considered for this analysis expired in 2022, and the UK is currently developing a new anti-corruption strategy.
Corruption risk management and audit
Data were not provided.
Lobbying
As measured against OECD standards on lobbying, the United Kingdom fulfils 50% of criteria for regulations and 56% for practice, compared to the OECD average of 38% and 35% respectively.
The online lobbying register includes instruction on how to register, information on the name and organisation of the lobbyists, the domain of intervention and the type of lobbying activities, but does not disclose the piece of legislation targeted. The Registrar of Consultant Lobbyists carried out at least one investigation for non-compliance with the regulation of lobbying activities or incomplete or erroneous disclosure of information during the latest full calendar year.
Conflict of interest
As measured against OECD standards on conflicts of interest, the United Kingdom fulfils 33% of criteria for regulations and 22% for practice, compared to the OECD average of 76% and 40% respectively.
While the submission rates of interest declarations from members of government and members of parliament are respectively 100% and 99%, not all members of the highest bodies of the judiciary are required to declare potential conflicts of interest. Although top-tier civil servants are required to declare their interests within their public entity, there is no centralised register to monitor or verify these declarations.
Political finance
As measured against OECD standards on political finance, the United Kingdom fulfils 80% of criteria for regulations and 57% for practice, compared to the OECD average of 73% and 58%, respectively.
While performing above OECD average, there is room for improvement in terms of implementing regulations for political finance. While the Electoral Commission oversees the financing of political parties, it does not have certified auditors on its payroll. Additionally, not all political parties have submitted annual accounts within the timelines defined by the national legislation nor submitted all financial reports on elections for the past two election cycles.
Transparency of public information
As measured against OECD standards on public information, which includes access to information and open data, the United Kingdom fulfils 56% of criteria for regulations and 77% for practice, compared to the OECD average of 67% and 62%, respectively.
The United Kingdom is among the top performers in terms of access to public information and open government in practice. The Cabinet Office publishes statistical data on requests for access to information and decisions. Additionally, the Information Commissioner’s Office conducts inspections on compliance and can impose sanctions. However, additional regulations could strengthen integrity safeguards. According to the Freedom of Information Act, restrictions on access to public information are not always aligned with the Tromso convention, such as provisions related to audit functions, parliamentary privilege and formulation of government policy. Additionally, the list of datasets to be disclosed and the mechanisms for government data to be “open by default” are found in guidance or principle-based documents, not enshrined in the regulatory framework. However, the United Kingdom fulfils 66% of criteria for the proactive disclosure of datasets in practice.
