A firm founded by Rishi Sunak’s father-in-law signed a billion-dollar deal with BP two months before the prime minister opened hundreds of new licences for oil and gas extraction in the North Sea.
In May, the Times of India reported that Infosys bagged a huge deal from the global energy company which is thought to be the second-largest in the history of the firm.
The Indian IT company is owned by the prime minister’s wife’s family although Sunak has insisted the matter is of “no legitimate public interest”.
I think the rules for when politicians have to disclose a potential conflict of interest need to be significantly tightened. Sunak can technically say he has “no interest” in this business deal because InfoSys is owned by his father-in-law (and his wife only has a very tiny share), not him personally, and therefore he personally doesn’t gain any benefit from the deal with BP.
But looking at it in practical terms, for literally everybody else on the planet, if they don’t own a business themselves but a close family member does, any reasonable person would say they do, in fact, have an “interest” in that company. It is normal, predictable human behaviour that people will want their friends and relatives to succeed, and our laws need to recognise that people will act to benefit friends and family, not just themselves.