•Guaranteed he could leak a copy of a forthcoming white paper on gambling reforms to the company at least 48 hours before it went public, potentially allowing them to profit from market-sensitive information.

•Offered to submit parliamentary questions and said he had done it on behalf of companies before.

•Boasted of his “easy access to ministers” and said he was prepared to “literally sit outside” a minister’s office if the company needed an urgent answer to a question.

•Claimed many MPs who accepted corporate hospitality were willing to table a written question or make a point during oral questions in return.

•Said he could “call in favours” from colleagues who would be happy to support the company’s interests and offered to host a dinner at the House of Commons.

MPs have long been banned from acting as paid lobbyists and accepting money to raise issues with ministers or ask questions in parliament on behalf of clients.

Under rules changed in the wake of the Owen Paterson lobbying scandal, they are now also barred from serving as a parliamentary adviser or consultant and giving advice on how to influence parliament. A previous loophole that allowed MPs to take part in meetings or parliamentary proceedings that might benefit a client, if they hadn’t initiated them, has also been closed.

Benton’s proposed actions would amount to a breach of the longstanding rules prohibiting “paid advocacy” as well as flout the new restriction on providing parliamentary advice that came into effect several days before the meeting.

A fake company

Benton’s official parliamentary portrait

Benton believed he was talking to two employees of Tahr Partners, a British-Indian family office interested in investing in the betting and gaming sector.

In reality, they were undercover reporters from The Times investigating allegations from senior political sources that, despite a string of lobbying scandals, MPs were still willing to break the rules by doing favours for companies in return for financial rewards.

Betting companies have launched an extensive lobbying campaign in Westminster, spending more than £180,000 on corporate hospitality for dozens of MPs since 2021, amid moves to toughen regulation to tackle problem gambling.

A much-delayed white paper setting out the government’s proposals for legislation is expected to be published after the Easter recess.

To test the allegations that MPs were prepared to break the rules, the newspaper set up a fake company, complete with a logo, website and office addresses in London and Chennai and contacted eight MPs by email.

•Ascot and concerts: How the gambling industry tries to win over MPs

MPs were told the investment fund was seeking an “expert adviser” because of concerns about the “turbulent political and regulatory landscape” amid a significant review of gambling laws. They said that “gaining insight from policymakers is a key part of our strategic investment strategy”.

The work would take a day or two a month, they were told, and there would be a compensation package.

Several MPs ignored the email while one recognised that the job was likely to breach parliamentary rules banning paid lobbying. Another, Craig Whittaker, initially agreed to a meeting but then pulled out saying he thought the company wasn’t genuine and mentioned “negative press this last week from bogus companies scamming high-profile MPs with job offers”. The campaign group Led by Donkeys had just published secretly recorded videos showing Matt Hancock and other MPs discussing their fees for a fake job. Whittaker told this newspaper he was exploring opportunities for after his retirement as an MP at the next general election.

Scott Benton, however, was only too happy to meet.

‘Direct access’ to ministers

Benton, 35, is chairman of the all-party parliamentary group for betting and gaming and has been a vocal supporter of the industry’s interests in parliament. He is a former local councillor who won the red wall seat of Blackpool South for the Tories in 2019.

Over the past two years he has accepted tickets and hospitality at Ascot, Wimbledon, football matches and the Brit awards from gambling companies and the Betting & Gaming Council (BGC) worth more than £8,500.

After discussion of the MP’s recent trip to Ukraine, he began by briefing the undercover reporters on the state of play of the government’s gambling white paper.

He said the industry had been successful at getting “the vast majority of what we wanted” but things were once again up in the air with the appointment of a new culture secretary, Lucy Frazer, a few weeks earlier.

Scott Benton became an MP in 2019

TWITTER

The undercover reporters explained that they were looking at investing in the sector and wanted “behind the scenes” knowledge of how the government was planning to change gambling regulation, and to influence policy decisions in ways that would benefit their investment strategy.

What, they asked him, could he offer that a PR or lobbying outfit couldn’t?

“The direct ear of a minister who is actually going to make these decisions,” Benton replied.

“There’s probably ten different PR firms I know who are trying to get meetings with the minister . . . The beauty of politicians, if you like, are we vote in the House of Commons two or three times a day, and we’ll be voting later.

“You will literally stand at the beginning at the entrance to the voting lobby. And if you wait there for five minutes, the minister has to pass you. And then you’ve got ten minutes while you walk around to the next vote to have his ear.”

Sipping from a cup of tea, he laid out the services he could provide if hired, promising “real-time information” and “easy access” to ministers, including when they were queueing up to take part in parliamentary votes.

If the company wrote to the culture secretary and wanted an urgent response, “I could literally sit outside her office until she appears”, the MP offered. If it sent a formal response to a policy consultation, he promised to “sit down with the minister and go through it line by line” to ensure it wasn’t given a “ten-second cursory glance”.

Written questions

Alongside his access to power, Benton volunteered other ways in which he could take advantage of his position as an MP in a manner that would break the rules.

“We can obviously put parliamentary questions on the table,” he told the reporters, referring to oral questions as well as written ones “where we can table things on the public record and get an instant response within five working days on any question whatsoever, which obviously nobody else outside the political realm can.”

“So if we had something we wanted to find out and wanted asked, you would be able to do that and get the answer in five days?” an undercover reporter asked.

“Yes. Absolutely. On the public record. And I’d probably get a private note [from the minister] as well giving you a bit more,” the MP replied.

Benton and Boris Johnson

TWITTER

Benton suggested he had already tabled questions on behalf of companies and named another MP he said did the same. He took out his mobile phone to read a question he’d tabled the previous month asking about the penalties that could be imposed on a regulator for repeatedly breaching the regulator’s code.

“Oh there we go, two weeks ago, 17th of February,” he remarked. “So there’s a written question that was sent in on behalf of one business, essentially.” It wasn’t clear whether he had accepted any financial reward for tabling that question or which company had asked him to do it.

When asked, the MP said that he would need to indicate he had a relevant registrable interest when tabling a question, but wouldn’t have to specify what that link was.

“As long as I’ve gone on public record and say I’m declaring an interest . . . I wouldn’t have to say Company X [has] asked me to [table the question],” he said. Benton said that the threshold for declaring an outside financial interest was “quite low unfortunately”.

Even if he declared an interest as he described, tabling a question at the request of a company paying or proposing to pay him would breach rules governing MPs’ conduct.

Confidential papers

Benton also boasted of his access to “papers and information which PR companies wouldn’t [have]”.

“So they can sort of shake the tree and see what falls out. We can go beneath the surface and get the specifics,” he said.

Later in the meeting, the conversation moved on to whether he could obtain a copy of the gambling white paper in advance of publication and leak it to the company.

Benton appeared to have no qualms about doing this even though it was likely to contain market-sensitive information and the undercover reporter made it clear that the fund could profit from this.

Previously, media reports about the likely contents of draft versions of the gambling review have had an impact on the share prices of gambling operators as markets reacted to whether it was more or less draconian than previously anticipated.

Benton said he could “guarantee” that he would be able to pass on a copy of the review at least 48 hours before it was made public, saying he would “make a song and dance” to make sure he was given the document.

Calling in favours

Despite a ban on MPs offering “parliamentary advice” — instruction on how to influence parliament — Benton outlined his proposed strategy for building support for Tahr Partners’ specific policy goals.

As well as seeking meetings with ministers and officials, the MP said he could “call in favours” from a group of colleagues who helped one another.

“I’ve supported other colleagues’ particular asks in meetings, when they’ve spoken to Company X, Y and Z, and I’m sure they would return the favour as well,” he said.

Benton proposed inviting colleagues to a dinner he would host at the House of Commons and said the company could also address members of the all-party parliamentary group that he chairs.

“It depends entirely what you want to achieve,” he said. “If it’s . . . what government regulatory changes are going to impact on A B and C, that probably would be better with a small group of colleagues who could all go away, speak to ministers individually, do some digging and come back to you directly.”

Addressing the all-party parliamentary group, he said, would be better “if you were looking to sort of influence a wider group, more broadly, on less specific points”.

Corporate hospitality

The MP said it was common for companies to pay for corporate hospitality at race days or other sporting events so they could lobby politicians.

It was “very, very easy” to persuade MPs to accept these invitations, he said. “Talk about pushing at an open door. In fact you’ll have people chasing you saying colleague X, Y, and Z wants to come, is there any more room.”

Benton said it was reasonable to expect many of those MPs accepting a company’s hospitality to be willing to help them in return by tabling a written question or submitting an oral question. Doing so would amount to a breach of parliamentary rules.

The undercover reporter asked: “If we invite someone along, is it reasonable to then expect them, we’ve given you a nice day out, we kind of expect something in return?”

“Generally. Most colleagues would do that, not everybody would,” Benton replied.

“You would get some people who would say it was a lovely day and will never pick up the phone and call or send an email afterwards.

“But most would, especially if the ask wasn’t too onerous, which would be can you try and find out X, Y and Z from members of staff, file a parliamentary question, or submit this question next time oral questions come up in the House of Commons.

“Those asks would take an MP 30, 60 seconds out of their time,” he continued. “Considering we have about five staff who would probably do it for me anyway it’s not asking the earth.”

Ban on paid lobbying

The rules governing MPs and outside financial interests date back to the “cash-for-questions” scandal in the mid-1990s when politicians were caught by a newspaper sting.

New standards in public life were introduced. The Nolan principles held that elected politicians should act in that position solely in terms of the public interest and not for personal financial gain. MPs were prohibited from carrying out “paid advocacy” and couldn’t lobby ministers or initiate parliamentary proceedings, such as asking questions, which would benefit a person or company that has given them a financial reward such as hospitality or payment.

Tighter rules on outside jobs were drawn up last year. These banned MPs from providing parliamentary advice — advising on how to influence ministers — and extended a prohibition on lobbying to include participating, and not just initiating, in meetings or parliamentary proceedings.

These changes came into effect at the start of March, just days before Benton met the reporters, but the MP appeared to pay them little regard.

One of the new requirements is that MPs taking an outside job must lodge a contract with parliament’s standards commissioner showing they are not required to advocate a particular matter in the Commons, make approaches to ministers, advise on influencing parliament, or use their position to financially benefit an employer. The actions Benton indicated he was willing to carry out if hired would amount to breaching all four.

Benton was willing to work towards Tahr Partners’ “particular policy goals” and to help even in areas where he admitted having limited knowledge.

The reporters said the company was interested in pushing for certain visa changes as part of the free-trade agreement with India that is being negotiated.

“I have to admit trade, international trade isn’t one of my areas of expertise . . . [but] I could get up to speed on [it] pretty quickly,” the MP said, adding that he knew Kemi Badenoch, who is leading the negotiations, “very, very well”.

“So I’ve already got those links,” he said, adding that it was “all about transferable knowledge”.

Up to £2,000 a day

As the conversation wrapped up, talk turned to Benton’s potential compensation. Asked if he had a fee, he said he would “leave that to you”.

The reporter proposed a fee in the range of £2,000 to £4,000 a month for two days’ work, to which Benton replied “yes, I think that’s, yeah”, and nodded.

The reporters told him they were due to travel to India and would report back on whether the company wanted to hire him in early April. The MP said he was available for an additional meeting before then if required.

When contacted by this newspaper, Benton said he had agreed to meet to find out what the role entailed. He said he had not provided his CV as had been requested during the meeting because “I was concerned that what was being asked of me was not within parliamentary rules”.

He said he later “contacted the Commons registrar and the parliamentary standards commissioner who clarified these rules for me and had no further contact with the company”.

“I did this before being made aware that the company did not exist and the individuals claiming to represent it were journalists,” he said.