The Guardian today reveals that a number of parliamentary passes issued by members of the House of Lords "have gone to consultants, lobbyists, or senior managers and executives in charities and businesses."

Lobbying - the 'next big scandal waiting to happen' as David Cameron put it, has been under the spotlight since investigative reports have uncovered the 'dark arts' employed by professionals seeking access and influence over politicians.

A report in The Times newspaper earlier this year into the support provided by external organisations to all party parliamentary groups, APPGs, found that "dozens of APPGs have received funding and other benefits from outside organisations during the past 12 months, reaching a total of more that £1 million a year.

"The funders include arms manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies and foreign governments."

The Conservatives in their election manifesto 2010 addressed the problem of 'sleazy lobbying practices' stating:

"Too much unacceptable behaviour has gone unchecked for too long, from excessive expenses to sleazy lobbying practices. The people of Britain have looked on in horror as revelations have stripped away the dignity of Parliament, leaving millions of voters detached from the political process, devoid of trust in the political classes, and disillusioned with our system of government.

"We will act rapidly to push through far reaching reforms to restore ethics to politics and revive the electorate’s faith in politicians. It will take nothing less than a deep clean of the political system in Westminster to root out the sleaze and dispel suspicion."

In January 2012, the Coalition Government opened a consultation on the introduction of a statutory register of lobbyists though campaigners have been left bemused at the lack of will and transparency by officials overseeing the policy. In a report published by the Political and Constitutional Reform on 'Introducing a statutory register of lobbyists', MPs found the terms of the consultation "lacking in clear intent from the Government..."

The committee argued that "a statutory register which includes only third party lobbyists would do little to improve transparency about who is lobbying whom, as these meetings constitute only a small part of the lobbying industry. The Government's proposals only scratch the surface when it comes to tackling public concern about undue access and influence over the policy making process, and they are unlikely to prevent lobbying from becoming the "next big political scandal".

"It is our view that the proposals in their current form will do nothing to improve transparency and accountability about lobbying. Imposing a statutory register on a small part of the lobbying industry without requiring registrants to sign up to a code of conduct could paradoxically lead to less regulation of the lobbying industry."

As The Guardian article today points out, the number of parliamentary passes issued to consultants, lobbyists or industry personnel remains unchanged from when the Coalition took office in 2010, despite a Coalition promise to tackle the problem.

The full list of parliamentary pass holders can be read in The Guardian's datablog here.

The Observer review yesterday carried a feature article on the newest member of the Le Pen family to enter French politics for the National Front, Marion Maréchal Le Pen.

Talking about FN policies on the economy, Europe and immigration, Maréchal Le Pen explains why the FN would like to strip second generation immigrants of French citizenship if they refuse to learn French or commit a crime.

From the paper:

“In June, Maréchal-Le Pen became the youngest MP in modern French history, at the age of 22, after topping the poll in her constituency of Carpentras in the south-eastern region of the Vaucluse, with 49.09% of the vote. And yet the most disconcerting thing about her victory was arguably not her youth but her politics: Maréchal-Le Pen is an MP for the Front National and the newest face of the French far right. Her grandfather, Jean-Marie Le Pen, founded the political party which she now represents, a party which is anti-Europe, anti-globalisation and which believes in stringent immigration controls and national protectionism.

“"Integration is no longer possible," she says. "When you're the single French person in the middle of 10 Tunisians, the majority will impose their way of life on the minority."

“…it is true that her presence on the political stage forms part of a broader attempt at rebranding the party. Maréchal-Le Pen's aunt, Marine, has been instrumental in dragging the image of the Front National into the modern era, moving away from racist rhetoric, reaffirming secularism and insisting that France should stand on its own two feet and leave the euro. In April 2011, Marine banned regional councillor Alexandre Gabriac from the party after a photograph of him giving the Nazi salute was leaked to the press, calling his behaviour "intolerable". In return, she has been rewarded with electoral success: the Front National is now the third largest party in France. When Marine stood as a candidate in the presidential elections earlier this year, she electrified the race by polling 17.9% in the first round – more than 6m votes – eventually finishing third behind François Hollande and Nicolas Sarkozy. But it has not all been plain sailing: although her niece was elected to parliament in June, Marine Le Pen lost her bid to win a seat by 118 votes.

“What, then, are her policies?

“On the economy, she wants France to abandon the euro and readopt the franc. She wants tighter regulation for financial institutions in the wake of the banking crisis and lower taxes for French businesses in order to regain consumer confidence. She is vehemently anti-EU – a position that has found favour with republican French voters who believe the integrity of their nation is endangered by federal government.

“"Then, of course, we have our policies on immigration," she continues. "More and more communities are asking for the introduction of their specific religious law and that is a threat to secularisation. It's particularly an issue among Muslim communities. Not all Muslims," she clarifies, hastily. "Most Muslims in France are not fundamentalists. What is surprising is that the first generation of immigrants were very well assimilated. They didn't wear the veil in public. “They kept their religion in the private sphere. Now whole immigrant communities are being created – because of past government policies – that are separate."

“In France, where the divorce of church from state underpinned the French revolution, secularisation is viewed as a basic tenet of the country's progressive thought. Since April 2011, women have been banned from wearing the burqa or the niqab in public. In this context, Maréchal-Le Pen's comments are not especially controversial. But then she goes even further, outlining a plan to strip second-generation immigrants of citizenship if they commit a crime or refuse to learn French.

“This is all so smoothly expressed, that it takes a moment for the impact of it to hit home: that the law, under the Front National, would mean one thing for those descended from immigrants and another thing entirely for what Maréchal-Le Pen views as the "true" French race.

“Isn't her stance racist? "That accusation is largely used by our opponents to discredit us. I don't see how it's racist to prioritise French nationals. We're not talking about black or white. It's normal that French people who pay taxes should be prioritised, just as an Algerian who is naturalised will have priority [in social housing and employment]."

“Immigration, she concedes, "has also been good" for France. The problem, as she sees it, is that past government policies have failed, causing resentment among those who believe their country is being overrun by "outsiders". She goes on to claim that a number of Muslim women, who feel pressurised into wearing the veil within their communities, are also supportive of her position.

“"There are women who say to me, 'I can't wear a skirt,' or 'I'll be insulted if I don't wear a veil or don't go to the mosque.' There's a pressure within the community imposed by others. Those people, more and more, are calling on us to act because we are the only ones who see secularism as fundamentally important."

“Perhaps Maréchal-Le Pen is right that immigration needs to be discussed and that MPs are wary of doing so in case they are accused of racism. Some of her opinions have the sheen of plausibility. She is not unlikable. But the tone of her last answer suggests a more disturbing set of beliefs at play beneath the surface: a whiff of something rotten at the core of her politics and a sense that the world is made up of people who can be divided easily into "us" or "them".”

Bradford local paper The Telegraph and Argus reports on a letter sent by MP for Keighley, Kris Hopkins, to the Justice Secretary seeking rejection of plans for shari'ah councils by Bradford Council of Mosques on the basis of their having "neither jurisdiction nor legitimacy in this country".

Mislabelling the councils as 'courts', Hopkins has written to Chris Grayling, Secretary of State for Justice, stating:

“There can only be one set of laws in this country, and we must not countenance the concept of different ethnic groups setting up their own court rooms of convenience.

“As the Cabinet Minister with responsibility for our judicial system, I trust you will use your offices to protect its integrity by rejecting any approaches to recognise or give any credence to Sharia courts which have neither jurisdiction nor legitimacy in this country.”

Bradford Council of Mosques has issued a statement clarifying its views, expressed earlier this week, which appear to have prompted Hopkins' intervention.

The Council of Mosques said: “Mr Hopkins has gone for popular sound bites misquoting our press statement. This could be either that he does not fully understand the issues involved or that he has deliberately chosen to eschew the debate to suit his purpose, whatever that may be.”

“We do not talk about ‘Shariah Courts’. ‘Courts’ have very specific role in the British legal system. No one is talking about establishing a parallel competing court structure.

“Council for Mosques’ statement talks about Shariah councils which as advisory bodies give information and guidance to individuals on religious matters.”

The debate on the role and use of shari'ah councils in UK frequently misrepresents their work with claims of a 'parallel' legal structure - itself a violation of the basis on which the councils are mandated in the Arbitration Act, 1996. Such claims have been repeatedly refuted by Cabinet ministers responsible for overseeing their operation. Something that many, like Hopkins, either wilfully ignore or fail to grasp. Further, the criticism takes an unusually selective stance by focusing only on shari'ah councils and not those established by other religious communities, for example the Jewish Beth Din courts - which are invariably referred to as 'courts' and not 'councils'. No mention of this, however, in Hopkins' intervention.

Indeed, the former Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, in a speech given at the East London Mosque in 2008, clearly stated, "There is no reason why sharia principles, or any other religious code, should not be the basis for mediation or other forms of alternative dispute resolution.

"It must be recognised, however, that any sanctions for a failure to comply with the agreed terms of mediation would be drawn from the laws of England and Wales."

It is not the first time Hopkins has courted controversy or stirred up racial bigotry. In a debate in Parliament last November the MP for Keighley spoke of “gangs of Muslim men … going round and raping white kids” blaming “sexist behaviour by Muslim men towards women” for child sex exploitation.

News agency Reuters publicises the results of a poll published in French newspaper, le Figaro, which shows that "an increasing majority of people in France believe Islam plays too influential a role in their society and almost half see Muslims as a threat to their national identity".

From the Reuters report:

"The survey by pollster Ifop in Le Figaro newspaper showed that 60 percent of people believed that Islam was “too important” in France in terms of its influence and visibility, up from 55 percent two years ago.

"It found that 43 percent of respondents considered the presence of the Muslim community as a threat to their national identity, compared with just 17 percent who said it enriched society. Forty percent of those questioned were indifferent to the presence of Islam, Le Figaro said.

"“Our poll shows a further hardening in French people’s opinions,” Jerome Fourquet, head of Ifop’s opinion department, told the newspaper.

"“In recent years, there has not been a week when Islam has not been in the heart of the news for social reasons: the veil, halal food, for dramatic news like terrorist attacks or geopolitical reasons,” Fourquet said.

"The prevalence of halal food and rising immigration – particularly from Islamic north Africa – were hot topics in the campaign for the presidential election as Nicolas Sarkozy sought to appeal to voters of the far-right National Front.

"The publication of the poll also came after a far-right group occupied a mosque in the western city of Poitiers at the weekend and issued a “declaration of war” against what it called the Islamisation of France.

"The survey, carried out on October 15-18 on 1,736 people, showed a growing resistance to the symbols of the Islamic faith. Some 43 percent of those questioned were opposed to more mosque building, up from 39 percent in 2010.

"Sixty-three percent opposed Muslim women wearing the veil or Islamic headscarves in public, compared with 59 percent two years ago. Sarkozy’s previous conservative banned the wearing of full-face veils."

Recent research on the effects of legislative measures to eradicate Islamic symbols in public life, particularly the veil, found that the veil is increasingly viewed as an ‘unwelcome racial or cultural presence’. The negative impact on Muslim women is supported by research by Irene Zempi of Leicester University which shows that the banning of the niqab in France has increased hostility towards veiled Muslim women in the UK.