A parliamentary private secretary (PPS) is an MP appointed by a government minister to act as their unpaid assistant. A PPS acts as an unpaid parliamentary assistant, providing a link between the senior frontbencher and backbench MPs.

The role is widely regarded as the first step on the ministerial ladder.

A PPS acts as the minister’s “eyes and ears” in the House of Commons, providing political support, taking soundings from colleagues and acting as a two-way channel of communication between the minister and other MPs.

Although they cannot speak for the government in debates, a PPS is bound by collective responsibility and becomes part of the so-called “payroll vote”, expected to support the official line in all divisions.

Shadow ministers who make up the official opposition may also appoint parliamentary private secretaries to provide political support.

What does a PPS do?

‘Eyes and ears’

A PPS is the primary link between their minister and backbench MPs. They keep the minister informed of the mood and opinions of the parliamentary party and can provide an early warning of any potential backbench rebellions or concerns. Simultaneously, they help their minister build support for policies among parliamentary colleagues and explain the government’s position to backbenchers.

PPSs therefore form part of the government’s parliamentary intelligence operation.

The role of PPS to the prime minister is seen as especially important in this regard. Desmond Swayne, who served as PPS to David Cameron as Conservative leader and prime minister, was regarded as an able parliamentary ally who helped maintain communication between the prime minister and his sometimes unruly Conservative backbenchers. In 2006, a series of emails sent by Swayne to Cameron containing candid assessments of fellow Conservative MPs were leaked to the media. Swayne reportedly claimed there was “lots of unease about political funding and policy on the hoof, but my estimate is this is manageable”.

Similarly, Ian Gow, PPS to Margaret Thatcher, is regarded as having played an important role during her ministry as a reliable ally.

Note passer

In the House of Commons chamber, the PPS will often sit directly behind their minister during debates or questions to pass notes and provide information. It is also expected that a PPS should be on hand to pass notes to the minister on duty during Westminster Hall debates and select committee hearings.

The PPS to the prime minister sits behind the prime minister at prime minister’s questions (PMQs).

Parliamentary chicanery

A PPS may involve themselves in the parliamentary “dark arts” to highlight favourable issues and avoid unexpected political difficulties. This can include coordinating supportive interventions and managing parliamentary messaging. For example, in June 2025, the parliamentary private secretaries at the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Kim Leadbeater and Matthew Patrick) circulated suggested questions that backbench MPs could ask ministers during departmental question time. The questions were designed to shed a positive light on government policy.

Restrictions on activity: what can a PPS not do?

Although parliamentary private secretaries are unpaid and not technically members of the government, they are subject to the requirements of the ministerial code.

The code places limits on the parliamentary activity of parliamentary private secretaries.

PPSs can make statements and ask questions from the backbenches – but not on matters affecting the department with which they are connected. This does not necessarily prevent PPSs from asking sycophantic-sounding questions at PMQs or other significant parliamentary proceedings. (A PPS who demonstrates their loyalty and competence may find themselves in line for promotion.)

PPSs are not precluded from serving on select committees, but they are expected to recuse themselves from any involvement with inquiries related to their appointed minister’s department.

They are also not given access to information classified at “secret” or above.

On top of this, as outlined in the ministerial code, overseas travel by a PPS on official business “should be exceptional” and must be approved by the prime minister.

PPSs, collective responsibility and the ‘payroll vote’

Critically, PPSs are bound by the constitutional convention of collective responsibility.

The ministerial code states: “Parliamentary private secretaries are expected to support the government in divisions in the House. No parliamentary private secretary who votes against the government can retain his or her position.”

In July 2012, Conservative MP Conor Burns resigned as a parliamentary private secretary in order to vote against the House of Lords Reform Bill, which was proposed by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government. Angie Bray was also dismissed as a PPS after voting against the bill.

Parliamentary private secretaries were among those to resign in July 2022 as part of the mass ministerial exodus that forced the collapse of Boris Johnson’s government.

In November 2021, Tory MP Angela Richardson was sacked as parliamentary private secretary to Michael Gove after abstaining on a key vote concerning the Owen Paterson scandal.

As such, parliamentary private secretaries form part of the “payroll vote” – the bloc of all government ministers and their PPSs who are expected to vote with the government in every parliamentary division. Appointing PPSs, therefore, is an extension of the prime minister’s patronage powers. (A PPS is personally appointed by a cabinet minister or ministers of state. However, according to the ministerial code, the appointment of a PPS must be approved by the prime minister.)

In September 2025, the payroll vote was reported to number over 160 MPs.

• 92 ministers (including whips) in the House of Commons
• 55 parliamentary private secretaries
• 16 Labour trade envoys.

This disciplined bloc of votes gives the government a significant advantage in passing its legislative programme.

In 2010, the House of Commons public administration select committee sounded the alarm about the payroll vote, arguing that “the ministerial side of government has now grown too large” – thereby strengthening the power of the executive in the House of Commons.

The report concluded: “The ever increasing size of the payroll vote should be addressed as a matter of urgency. We recommend that the ministerial code be amended to limit parliamentary private secretaries to one for each department or cabinet minister.”

The committee proposed a limit on the payroll vote of 15% of the membership of the House of Commons (97 MPs).

The ministerial hierarchy

There is a clear hierarchy of ministerial ranks within the UK government.

Secretaries of state

These are the most senior government ministers, appointed by the prime minister to head major government departments such as the Home Office, the Treasury, or the Department of Health and Social Care.

All secretaries of state are members of the cabinet, the government’s primary collective decision-making body. The chancellor of the exchequer is also considered to be among the most senior cabinet ministers.

Ministers of state

Ministers of state are mid-level ministers who work under a secretary of state in a government department. They are often referred to as a “deputy” to the secretary of state and are typically given responsibility for a specific policy area within the department’s remit. Some senior ministers of state may be invited to attend cabinet meetings.

Parliamentary under-secretaries of state

This is the most junior rank of minister. Parliamentary under-secretaries work as part of a ministerial team, supporting the secretary of state and ministers of state in their parliamentary and departmental duties. A large department may have several.

Parliamentary private secretaries

PPSs, unpaid and not formally ministers, sit at the bottom of this hierarchy.

The case of Craig Williams, PPS to Rishi Sunak

On 12 June 2024, the Guardian newspaper reported that Craig Williams, a Conservative candidate and PPS to the prime minister, had placed a bet on the timing of the general election. The revelation sparked a major political scandal that engulfed the Conservative Party’s election campaign.

Williams was standing for re-election in Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr.

He was reported to have placed a £100 bet at odds of 5/1 on a July election on 19 May, just three days before Sunak stood outside 10 Downing Street and announced the surprise 4 July polling day. The bet, placed with Ladbrokes, stood to return a £500 profit.

The Guardian reported that the Gambling Commission had launched an inquiry.

In a statement, Williams said: “I’ve been contacted by a journalist about Gambling Commission inquiries into one of my accounts and thought it best to be totally transparent.

“I put a flutter on the general election some weeks ago. This has resulted in some routine inquiries and I confirm I will fully cooperate with these.

“I don’t want it to be a distraction from the campaign, I should have thought how it looks.”

Speaking on 13 June, Williams added: “I’ve clearly made a huge error of judgment, that’s for sure. And I apologise.”

A Conservative party spokesperson said: “We are aware of contact between a Conservative candidate and the Gambling Commission.

“It is a personal matter for the individual in question. As the Gambling Commission is an independent body, it wouldn’t be proper to comment further, until any process is concluded.”

Lord Cameron, the foreign secretary, condemned Williams for making a “clearly very foolish decision”.

The former prime minister told BBC Breakfast: “His situation, having made this clearly very foolish decision, is that he’s being investigated by the Gambling Commission, and they have considerable powers in terms of what the consequences could be, and I think we have to let that investigation take place. And so I can’t really comment any further on it.”

Jonathan Ashworth, Labour’s shadow paymaster general, said: “These allegations are utterly extraordinary. Rishi Sunak has sat on this information for more than a week but has lacked any backbone to take action. Once again Rishi Sunak has been exposed as utterly weak.

“After all the Tory financial scandals, this is more evidence that the Tories have learned nothing, haven’t changed, and if given five more years, the chaos will just continue.”

The disclosure immediately derailed the Conservative campaign, raising difficult questions about standards in public life and contributing to a narrative of ‘sleaze’ at the top of the party.

It was suggested that Williams, as the prime minister’s trusty PPS, could have been privy to discussions about election timing.

Further revelations saw the scandal encompass Conservative officials and candidates, as well as a police protection officer.

On 25 June, some two weeks after the initial Guardian report, the Conservative Party announced it had withdrawn its support from those candidates implicated in what became known as ‘Gamblegate’. However, the Conservative branding and name remained on the ballot papers, as the suspension came after nominations for the election had closed.

Williams finished third in his former Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr constituency, having secured 7,775 votes (18.0%).

Steve Witherden, the victorious Labour candidate, secured 12,709 votes (29.4%). The Reform UK candidate, Oliver Lewis, won 8,894 votes (20.6%).

Nationally, the Conservatives lost a net 251 seats, returning a mere 121 MPs. The Labour Party under Keir Starmer’s leadership secured 411 seats and a 174-seat majority.