It was strange being at the Institute of Insurance Brokers' final Parliamentary Reception this lunchtime, not least because a few people reminded me that I was at their first such event which was way back in 1988. It was also clear that many people were there almost 'signing off' from their long association with the broker trade bodies, not least IIB president John Greenway, former chairman Graham Gomm and other other IIB luminaries such as Mike Slack.

But it was also a forward looking occasion, carefully stage-managed by Barbara Bradshaw and Eric Galbraith to demonstrate the that IIB's merger with the British Insurance Brokers Association has strengthened the broker voice in government and Parliamentary circles, underlined by the presence of Treasury minister Mark Hoban. Both spoke powerfully of the challenges facing the broker market and how important the relationship with policymakers and politicians has been and will continue to be in the future.

This was echoed by the chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Insurance & Financial Services, Jonathan Evans, who highlighted the work done by the group with the broker trade bodies to shift opinion on the need for a review of the Financial Services Compensation Scheme as an example of what unified, consistent and coherent lobbying can achieve.

Of course, the broker trade bodies are not quite united as there is still some fragmentation in the London Market but in terms of the issues that matter to MPs and Parliament - largely the issues that affect their constituents - there is now a single voice and they will welcome that. 

I was deeply saddened earlier this week to hear of the recent death of Digby Jacks, who many in the insurance industry will remember as assistant general secretary of AMICUS (and before that the Manufacturing, Science and Finance union). He was also the long-serving secretary of the trade union federation Alliance for Finance and worked tirelessly in that capacity to ensure that the views of ordinary workers in the financial services sector were properly represented to Parliament and ministers.

Despite his left-wing background - he was a high profile Communist when he won the presidency of the National Union of Students in 1971 - his easy manner and natural charm ensured that he could establish friendly and intelligent working relationships with the Conservative MPs who have inevitably tended to dominate the debates on financial services over the years. He quickly built one such constructive rapport with John Greenway when John was elected chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Insurance & Financial Services in 1993 and over the years Digby arranged several dinners for representatives of Alliance for Finance with the group. These were always highly informative as well as remarkably convivial occasions, a reflection of Digby's personality.

It was at one of these dinners that MPs were first put on notice of the looming payment protection (PPI) insurance scandal when the trade unions representing bank and building society counter staff complained of the pressure that their members were being put under to sell PPI, saying that the only way they could reach the targets they were set would be to miss-sell the product.

Digby was also a good supporter of Post Magazine, rarely missing one of our Parliamentary receptions (he is pictured here at one in 2003) and often contributing to the magazine.

He is still held in high regard in the worlds of student and education politics as the tributes on the National Union of Students website eloquently demonstrate.

The dramatic announcement at the opening of this week's British Insurance Brokers' Association conference in Manchester that it will be merging with the Institute of Insurance Brokers brings to an end almost 25 years of division in the representation of insurance brokers.

In the run up to the General Election last year I was asked on innumerable occasions: "How are you going to replace John Greenway as chairman of the All Party Group?". The group in question was, of course, the All Party Parliamentary Group on Insurance & Financial Services and the questions prompted by the fact that John Greenway was standing down at the election after 18 years as chair of the group.

The All Party Parliamentary Group on Insurance & Financial Services started work at the beginning of 1991 and I recently reviewed its first 20 years for Post.

The world of parliamentary politics looked very different 20 years ago when the All Party Parliamentary Group on Insurance & Financial Services arrived on the scene. It wasn't just that there were another six years to go in the long years of Conservative government, or that there weren't any devolved governments and such widespread influence of the European Union in daily life. The insurance industry and the wider financial services sector had a patchy, if not downright poor, relationship with parliament.

The previous few years had seen several pieces of legislation passed that had an adverse impact on the industry and it was frequently the target of unjustified criticism from MPs and Peers. It was also suffering badly from the fall out from the years of scandal at Lloyd's of London, which directly affected more than 60 MPs and Peers who were still Names at the market. Led by vociferous critics like Conservative MP Tom Benyon, they were constantly berating the beleaguered insurance market.

The industry had friends in parliament, however, and they were quick to throw their weight behind the attempt to form a new backbench group to help the industry communicate with parliament better, none more so than the late Sir Robert McCrindle, who was to be elected the group's first chairman in January 1991. Sir Robert, or Bob, as he was universally known, was already a high profile figure in the insurance market, as he was the British Insurance Brokers' Association's parliamentary adviser.

Bob McCrindle, of course, had plenty of contacts on the Conservative benches in both the Commons and the Lords and recruiting from their ranks in a Tory-dominated parliament was never going to be a problem. More of a challenge was finding sufficient opposition members to conform to the rules about opposition representation in all party groups. This is where Post's reputation for always fairly covering the staff side of issues in the industry paid off.

Labour Peer Baroness Turner of Camden was a former trade union official in the sector, having worked at the Prudential and risen to be deputy general secretary of one of the larger unions representing staff in financial services. She saw the value of such a group and encouraged many Labour MPs and Peers to join. She served a deputy chairman from its launch until she stood down from that post after the May 2010 General Election, although she still remains a member.

So much for the background and history: what has the group done and how to assess its value? Its first and foremost aim was to improve communication between the industry and parliament. No one who has had any dealings with the group over the past decade and a half can doubt that it has achieved that, not merely through its own work by helping all the major trade associations and professional bodies understand the importance of good lobbying and how best to achieve results in the often fast running currents of policy formation and political debate.

The second chairman of the group was another Conservative MP -- and former insurance broker -- John Greenway. He took over when Sir Robert McCrindle stood down at the 1992 General Election and served until he too stood down last May

 "It is unthinkable now that there was a time when there wasn't such a group. It has provided a focal point for the industry," says Mr Greenway. "You can take any major issue that has faced the industry during the past 20 years and see that MPs and debates in both houses of parliament have been better informed because of the group: terrorism, both Irish and Islamic; flooding; regulation; employers' liability; Europe; home income plans; the compensation culture; and, more recently a myriad of regulatory challenges are all issues where the role the group has played has proved crucial."

One of the group's early triumphs was to persuade the government to set-up Pool Re when the commercial insurance market withdrew cover following the Baltic Exchange and Canary Wharf bombs in the early 1990s. This initiative was led by another of the group's founder members, John Butterfill - now Sir John - who also stood down last May.

Working in partnership with the Association of Insurance and Risk Managers, the group lobbied the Treasury, eventually convincing it that the market could no longer carry the huge property risks posed by modern terrorism and that a government-backed solution was the only way forward.

The group is more than just about acting as a lobbying point for the industry, however, Mr Greenway says: "The group acts as a focal point in parliament but it is very much about two-way communication. There have been many occasions when the group has been critical of the industry. I believe it has enabled the industry to understand where parliamentarians are coming from in a way that it didn't understand before."

He cites the severe flooding that affected large parts of the UK several times in the last few years as a good example of the value of this two-way communication. "The industry had to warn that it couldn't go on insuring properties in flood prone areas for ever. Previously, this would have brought storms of criticism from backbench MPs but the group, working with the Association of British Insurers, larger companies, the Chartered Institute of Loss Adjusters and damage management specialists, ensured that there was a proper debate and an adequate chance for MPs representing flood prone areas to hear first hand what the issues were. Equally, it gave those MPs ample opportunity to explain to the industry what their constituents needed in terms of policy coverage and claims support. The industry listened and acted."

This partnership undoubtedly helped turn the pressure back on the government to act to improve flood defences, a debate that will continue to rage for some years to come and has already been tackled by the group under its new chairman Jonathan Evans, a former trade minister and MEP.

The employers' liability crisis earlier in the last decade was another opportunity for the group to show the invaluable role it performs in ensuring that parliament is well-informed rather than mis-informed about such problems. It organised a series of meetings over six months at which employers, trade unions, insurers and brokers could come together - often in the same room for the first time - to explain and discuss the problem. Again, it is not hard to imagine how, just a few years previously, the insurance industry would have been portrayed as the big bad wolf in such a crisis, finding itself the subject of stinging and ill-informed criticism in parliamentary debates. The APPG, living up to its founding ambition of providing a better channel of communication, did much to ensure that this did not happen.

When required the group has produced in depth reports on key topics, helping to shape legislative and regulatory change in such areas as the Compensation Act and the operation of the Financial Ombudsman Scheme. Nowadays, many companies and organisations in the insurance and retail financial services sector see the group as their first port of call when they have important messages they want to get across to MPs.

Often the lobbying of backbench MPs and Peers goes hand-in-hand with discussions with ministers and civil servants as the industry has developed a sophisticated approach to lobbying that is far from the fragmented, almost shambolic, mess that was commonplace when the group started work in 1991.

The full article includes comment on the work of the group from leading figures in the industry.

I lost count of the number of times that I was asked before the election and during the campaign about the future of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Insurance & Financial Services. Commonly, these questions focussed on the need to replace the group's long-standing chairman, John Greenway, who stood down at the election after 23 years as Conservative MP for Ryedale.

The next House of Commons will be a very different place. So far, almost 150 MPs have announced that they are not standing at the election, more than at anytime since before the Second World War. Rumours suggest that another 20 could decide not to stand on 6 May even at this very, very late stage.
Of course, the expenses scandal has been a huge factor in this unprecedented exodus but it is important not to fall into the trap of tarring every MP with that shameful brush. Many of those standing down have given years of valuable, untarnished service and will leave a gap that will need to be filled.
Take the trio of Labour MPs on the important Treasury Select Committee who are standing down, none of them touched by the expenses scandal. John McFall (pictured) has chaired that committee since 2001 and built up a reputation as a consumer champion and a scourge of the financial services sector. He was often dismissed in the early days of his chairmanship, almost patronised by big hitters in the banking sector but he came into his own with a series of highly critical but well argued reports on the aftermath of the financial crises of the last few years. He frightened many people in the financial services sector who would rather demonise him than talk to him. When they did bother to engage him they found him a surprisingly receptive listener with a clear understanding of their sector.
Two other long-standing Labour members of the 14 strong Treasury Select Committee are also standing down - Jim Cousins and Mark Tood. Also going is Liberal Democrat Colin Breed and one of the Tories, Sir Peter Viggers, who did get caught up in the expenses scandal. His rejected claim for a duck house became one of the most potent symbols of the whole saga.
If you also take into consideration that one of the other Labour members of the committee, Sally Keeble, has a marginal seat in Northampton you are suddenly looking at almost half the members of a key committee having to be replaced.
Two other MPs whose knowledge and understanding of the financial services sector will be missed in Parliament are Sir John Butterfill and John Greenway. The former was almost a permanent - and very diligent - member of the standing committee that scrutinised the Finance Bill every year after the Budget and also chaired the All Party Occupational Pensions Group. Sadly, he found himself almost unwittingly caught up in the expenses scandal and stands down with a reputation perhaps a little harshly tarnished.
John Greenway, a former insurance broker elected as Conservative MP for Ryedale in 1987, is standing down because he lost out in some major boundary changes in Yorkshire. He was a founding member of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Insurance & Financial Services and succeeded the initial chairman, the late Sir Robert McCrindle in 1992. Everyone who has dealt with that group since then has been impressed with John's grasp of the issues facing the sector. He will be a hard act to follow.
I know it is fashionable to knock MPs, and goodness knows many of them deserve the severe criticism that is thrown their way, but it is important to note that there are many who have a decent record of public service. The anti-MP mood has now gone so far that many are saying that no former MPs should be made Lords after the election. What blinkered nonsense. Who would argue that the House of Lords (while it still exists - an altogether different issue) wouldn't be strengthened if John McFall and John Greenway were among its members?
Having said all that, the House of Commons desperately needs fresh blood, a new generation of MPs who have some sense of understanding why the public are angry over the appalling abuses of a very lax system and who understand why much greater transparency is a pre-requisite if politics and politicians are to stand any chance of rebuilding respect.

The colourful, shaming saga of the abuse of Parliamentary expenses just refuses to go away. It is hard to see how it can until several things happen. A new Parliament has to be elected; a new expense system has to be put in place that is fair to MPs and also acceptable to the people who elect them; the perpetrators of the worst abuses have to be held to account; and, greater transparency has to be applied in the future.