Cabinet ministers have condemned former colleagues who were secretly filmed apparently offering to try to influence government policy in return for cash.

In the Channel 4 and Sunday Times film Stephen Byers apparently says he will try to change policy for up to £5,000 a day and is like a "cab for hire".

Patricia Hewitt allegedly says she would need up to £3,000. Both firmly deny any wrongdoing.

Chancellor Alistair Darling says what happened was "ridiculous".

And Foreign Secretary David Miliband told Sky News Sunday Live he was "appalled" by the apparent actions of his former colleagues, saying "there is absolutely no room for anyone to trade on their ministerial office".

Mr Miliband said Labour had tightened up the rules on lobbying by former ministers already.

"But the Labour manifesto is going to say more about the need for a statutory register of the lobbying industry, because there is absolutely no room for the sort of innuendo or promises that seem to have been floated in this case."

'Nothing improper'

The former trade and industry minister told an investigative reporter that he had secured secret deals with ministers, could get confidential information from Number 10 and was able to help firms involved in price fixing get around the law. He also suggested bringing clients to meet former Prime Minister Tony Blair, the investigators claim.

The next day Mr Byers retracted his claims, saying he had "never lobbied ministers on behalf of commercial interests" and had exaggerated his influence.

The investigators claim that on two separate occasions Mr Byers put pressure on the relevant minister to change policies on behalf of rail and bus operator National Express and of supermarket giant Tesco.

Tesco denied any links with the former minister. A spokesman said: "We did not speak to Mr Byers on food labelling, regulation or indeed any other issue. These claims are completely fictitious and Mr Byers has acknowledged this to us."

'Ridiculous'

Mrs Hewitt said she "completely rejected" the suggestion she helped obtain a key seat on a government advisory group for a client paying her £3,000 a day.

The former health secretary said the role she had been discussing would only have been taken up after she stepped down as an MP at the next election.

There was "nothing unusual or improper in the business appointments that I have taken up since leaving government", she added.

Former defence secretary Geoff Hoon is also named in the investigation, which claims he offered to lead delegations to ministers, and said he wanted to make use of his knowledge and contacts. He said he charged £3,000 a day.

A lawyer for the former defence secretary said his comments had been misrepresented and he denied ever offering to give confidential information.

Questioned about the newspaper's claims by Andrew Marr, Mr Darling said: "The best answer when you get a call like that is to put the receiver back down again. It's obvious.

"There are rules about serving MPs - we've said that we're going to have to, I think, get a statutory-backed code of conduct to deal with former ministers.

"But really, what on earth did they think they were doing?

"And equally for a company, you don't need a lobbyist. If you've got something to say, go directly to the government department and make your case.

"It's just ridiculous."

The investigation also claimed Luton MP Margaret Moran said she could call a group of female colleagues on behalf of clients.

'Public confidence'

A Labour spokesman said: "There can never be any suggestion that companies and businesses can only speak to government by buying access through MPs or anybody else.

"What this case shows is that we need more transparency in the entire lobbying system.

"That's why we believe that the time has come to support a Statutory Register of Lobbyists and we will bring forward proposals to that effect in our manifesto, building on the work we have already done to create a voluntary code.

"Just as the government has ended the old discredited system of self-regulation in MPs expenses, we need to act now to stop self-regulation of lobbyists and give the public greater confidence in the whole system."

Labour said any rule breaches would be dealt with "in a firm manner" but that it had been assured by those involved that none had occurred.

Conservative leader David Cameron wants the amount of time before former ministers are allowed to lobby the government to be doubled to two years - with tougher penalties for breaking the rules.

Last week he said secret lobbying on behalf of businesses was the "next big scandal waiting to happen" in Westminster after expenses.

It has to be expected. They know that they are going to be out of work soon or many of them are and are so looking to cash in while they can.

Byers can be sorted out easily enough just leave him tied up on the forecourt of Euston Station. The 7000 members of Railtrack staff that he screwed will ...............................

Many of them are unemployable outside in the real world. Maybe that would be a fair fate for them. To see them having to go through the process of applying for benefits in a system that they created.

Was thinking more along the lines of hanging him from flag pole on top of station

By neck, ankle or waist like a Piñata?

Business Secretary Lord Mandelson said he had "no recollection" of any meeting with Mr Byers about food labelling - the policy area in which he is said to have been interested in.

Ex-Transport Secretary Stephen Byers has asked for an investigation into claims that he worked for companies to secure secret deals with ministers.

He said he hoped standards watchdog John Lyon would find he had "complied with MPs' code of conduct" and "fully disclosed" his outside interests.

The price I wouldn't pay

o Roy Hattersley
o guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 23 March 2010 21.30 GMT
o Article history

Caution requires me to begin with what the Commons calls a personal statement. Forty years ago I was on IBM's payroll for 14 days. At the end of a year in which I had given "lectures" to the company's employees on "how parliament works" and similar fascinating subjects, I accepted the offer of "a more permanent relationship". When I discovered that this involved giving advice on how to avoid recognising trade unions, I resigned.

The idea of "advising" companies never passed through my head again – not because of an innate nobility of spirit but because it was not the way I wanted to spend my time. I was a politician – successful or failed, wanted or rejected. When Labour lost office in 1979, the only use to which I wanted to put my cabinet experience was getting the party back into government. I was lucky to have journalism as a sideline which, for years, subsidised the wage bill of my staff. But the real reason I never bummed for jobs was neither affluence nor moral principle. "Advising" was not my preferred occupation.

I suppose that New Labour is more business friendly than we were – though Eric Varley, secretary of state for industry, made an honourable clean break and went off to run a great national company. But the real difference today is the shift in attitude towards politics, rather than towards business. Perhaps it was even more pronounced in an earlier generation. Dick Crossman – more gifted and experienced than any of this week's job applicants – died within months of leaving the House of Commons. Denis Healey – equally distinguished – turned down the chairmanship of one of Britain's few multinationals and fought for the leadership and deputy leadership of the Labour party. Then he became shadow foreign secretary under Neil Kinnock. He believed in the political vocation. We did in those days.

There is, of course, an ideological dimension to Geoff Hoon, Patricia Hewitt and Stephen Byers's enthusiasm to put their talents at the disposal of hedge funds and private pharmaceutical manufacturers. When I wrote a column for this paper, I regularly accused Tony Blair of wanting to run "Great Britain PLC". No doubt his disciples took the same view. It is neither unreasonable nor dishonourable for ex-ministers, with no ideological view, to offer their services to any organisation which operates within the law. It just confirms that they should not have been ministers in the first place. Of course they ought to hawk their wares with more common sense and self-respect than was displayed on television on Monday night. But their behaviour was consistent with the New Labour view that politics should be taken out of politics and that, for the party to prosper, it must become more like the Conservatives.

I make no claim of moral superiority for my generation of ex-ministers; I regarded lobbying as so degrading and uncongenial an occupation that I never even contemplated offering myself for sale at £5,000 a day. So it was distaste not virtue that kept me from temptation. In any case, I would have had no influence that was worth having. Thirty years ago, politics did not work in that way. I served in Jim Callaghan's cabinet and I decided to leave the Commons when John Smith was party leader. Everyone knew that both of them would rebuff any approach from a commercial emissary. That was the tone of their leadership. That tone changed in 1994.

The fundamental difference between then and now is revealed in what the three applicants will regard as an admission of my sentimentality. When I left the government, I would have been mortified by suspension and possible expulsion from the Labour party. I suspect that Hewitt, Hoon and Byers regard it as a price worth paying.