Key Highlights

  • MPs have declared around £11m in outside earnings since the 2024 general election, with the top ten earners accounting for more than £7m.
  • Conservative MPs represent around 66% of declared outside earnings, while Reform UK and Labour account for much smaller shares.
  • Reform UK leader Nigel Farage is the highest individual earner, while Sir Geoffrey Cox remains the highest-earning Conservative MP.
  • The Labour government has acknowledged that progress on second-jobs reform has been slower than expected.
  • Debate continues over balancing transparency, professional expertise and public confidence in Parliament.

The debate over MPs' second jobs has returned to the forefront of Westminster politics, fuelled not by a fresh scandal but by renewed scrutiny of declared outside earnings. Nearly two years after Labour pledged to strengthen the rules governing MPs' external work, campaigners and opposition figures argue that meaningful reform has yet to materialise.

Fresh figures discussed during a Westminster Hall debate have once again highlighted the scale of earnings generated by a relatively small number of MPs, prompting renewed questions over transparency, accountability and public trust.

Where the Money Sits

During a Westminster Hall debate on 1 July 2026, Labour MP Richard Burgon stated that MPs had declared approximately £11m in outside earnings since the July 2024 general election.

According to figures presented during the debate, the ten highest-earning MPs accounted for more than £7m of that total.

The political distribution of those earnings has attracted particular attention.

Conservative MPs account for roughly 66% of all declared outside earnings, while Reform UK members account for around 20% and Labour MPs approximately 7%.

Eight of the ten highest earners sit on the Conservative benches, with the remaining two representing Reform UK.

Much of the Conservatives' outside income comes from legal, professional and advisory work rather than activities already prohibited under parliamentary rules.

Sir Geoffrey Cox, the Conservative MP for Torridge and Tavistock and a practising barrister, remains one of the most prominent examples. During the debate it was noted that he recorded around 500 hours of outside employment over the previous year and received approximately £60,000 from a Luxembourg bank during a single month. Separate analysis by the Good Law Project estimated that his declared outside earnings since July 2024 totalled around £686,000.

However, the highest individual earner is Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, who has declared close to £2m in outside income through broadcasting, speaking engagements, ambassadorial roles and other commercial activities.

The figures also indicate that 18 MPs earned more through outside work than the current parliamentary basic salary.

Why This Matters

The renewed focus comes as Prime Minister Andy Burnham inherits an unfinished reform agenda following his appointment in July 2026.

Labour's 2024 general election manifesto committed to reviewing MPs' outside interests through the House of Commons Modernisation Committee, while the Committee on Standards was asked to examine the existing rules in late 2024.

No final recommendations have yet been published.

During the July debate, Minister without Portfolio Anna Turley acknowledged that progress had been "glacial" and argued that reform should move more quickly.

The government has outlined three broad principles for future rules:

  • Outside work should not interfere with constituency responsibilities.
  • External employment should not become an MP's principal source of income.
  • Outside interests should not influence parliamentary duties or decision-making.

Current rules were strengthened following the Owen Paterson controversy in 2021, introducing restrictions on paid parliamentary lobbying and consultancy. However, existing regulations do not limit either the number of hours MPs may work outside Parliament or the level of income they may legally earn, provided those interests are properly declared.

An Accountability Question, Not Just an Earnings One

Critics argue that the issue extends beyond the size of MPs' incomes.

Large external commitments inevitably raise questions about whether elected representatives can devote sufficient time to constituency work, parliamentary scrutiny and legislative responsibilities.

Others point to potential conflicts of interest where earnings originate from major corporate clients, financial institutions or overseas organisations, even when no parliamentary rules have been breached.

Campaigners increasingly argue that transparency through the Register of Members' Financial Interests, while important, may no longer be sufficient on its own to maintain public confidence.

Risks, Limitations and the Case Against a Ban

There are also substantial arguments against imposing sweeping restrictions.

The Committee on Standards has previously concluded that Parliament should not impose fixed limits on either the time MPs devote to outside work or the income they earn, provided all interests are properly declared and paid parliamentary advocacy remains prohibited.

Supporters of the current framework argue that allowing MPs to continue practising as lawyers, doctors or business professionals helps ensure Parliament benefits from real-world expertise rather than becoming dominated exclusively by career politicians.

There are also practical challenges.

The headline £11m figure combines income from very different activities, including legal practice, broadcasting, public speaking and rental income from property. Critics of blanket reforms argue that these activities involve very different levels of potential conflict and should not automatically be treated in the same way.

Importantly, none of the MPs referenced in the debate has been found to have breached the Parliamentary Code of Conduct. The earnings under discussion were disclosed through the official register in accordance with existing parliamentary requirements.

Outlook

Pressure for reform is unlikely to fade.

With a substantial parliamentary majority, the Burnham government has the ability to introduce new legislation if it decides further restrictions are necessary. Ministers have already acknowledged that reform has progressed more slowly than anticipated.

At the same time, opposition parties continue to defend the principle that MPs should be permitted to maintain legitimate professional careers outside Parliament, provided appropriate safeguards remain in place.

The renewed debate highlights a broader question about public expectations of elected representatives. Whether future reforms focus on limiting earnings, restricting working hours or strengthening transparency, the issue of MPs' outside interests is likely to remain an important part of Westminster's political agenda.