“Serious questions as to how the Conservative Party is soliciting donations”

March 27, 2012 11:02 am

Jack Straw MP has written to the Chief Executive of the Electoral Commission today in response to reports on the Tory donor scandal. The letter can be read below:

————-

Peter Wardle
Chief Executive
The Electoral Commission
3 Bunhill Row
London
EC1Y 8YZ

Dear Mr Wardle,

Donations to the Conservative Party and the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000

I write to you following reports by The Sunday Times on 25 March, 2012 regarding donations to the Conservative Party alleged to have been solicited by the Party’s then co-treasurer Mr Peter Cruddas, and by a Ms Sarah Southern, a long-serving former Conservative Party staffer.

According to reports, undercover reporters told Mr Cruddas and Ms Southern that they were interested in making a donation on behalf of Middle Eastern donors. The reporters were allegedly told that money from foreign investors could be channelled through a company established by the reporters as they were on the UK electoral roll (See the accompanying Annex, note A, for the relevant quote from the Sunday Times report).

The Sunday Times has published a series of video recordings of both Mr Cruddas and Ms Southern. In one of these clips, Ms Southern says that she had spoken to the Conservative Party about the situation and that they said that money would have to come via “an individual, or individuals who are on the electoral roll”. Pressed by the reporters as to whether the Conservative Party would need to clarify this situation, Ms Southern said, “The Party, the Party won’t ask.” (A full transcript of this recording is attached in the Annex to this letter, note B).

The law is clear on the permissibility of donations to political parties. The Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (PPERA) stipulates that donations are only permissible if they come from individuals registered on the UK electoral roll, or from companies registered in the UK.

(2) For the purposes of this Part the following are permissible donors—
(a) an individual registered in an electoral register;
(b) a company—
(i) registered under the Companies Act 1985 or the 1985 c. 6.Companies (Northern Ireland) Order 1986, and S.I. 1986/1032
(ii) incorporated within the United Kingdom or another (N.I. 6).member State, which carries on business in the United Kingdom;
Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (page 42-43)

PPERA also stipulates that where a donation is received by way of another person, the party must be given details in respect of the original donor.

(5) In relation to each such separate donation, the principal donor must ensure that, at the time when the principal donation is received by the party, the party is given—
(a) (except in the case of a donation which the principal donor is treated as making) all such details in respect of the person treated as making the donation as are required by virtue of paragraph 2 of Schedule 6 to be given in respect of the donor of a recordable donation; and (b) (in any case) all such details in respect of the donation as are required by virtue of paragraph 4 of Schedule 6 to be given in respect of a recordable donation.
(6) Where—
(a) any person (“the agent”) causes an amount to be received by a registered party by way of a donation on behalf of another person (“the donor”), and
(b) the amount of that donation is more than £200, the agent must ensure that, at the time when the donation is received by the party, the party is given all such details in respect of the donor as are required by virtue of paragraph 2 of Schedule 6 to be given in respect of the donor of a recordable donation.
(7) A person commits an offence if, without reasonable excuse, he fails to comply with subsection (5) or (6).
Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (page 43-44)

These reports raise serious questions as to how the Conservative Party is soliciting donations, potentially in contravention of PPERA. A number of questions are worthy of further investigation:

  • In soliciting donations which they believed to come from an overseas source, were Mr Cruddas and/or Ms Southern, or others committing a criminal offence?
  • Is the reported method of soliciting donations from an overseas source as outlined by Mr Cruddas/Ms Southern standard practice within the Conservative Party?
  • Why did Mr Cruddas, and Ms Southern, evidently believe that this practice was legitimate?
  • Who at the Conservative Party advised Southern how the undercover reporters could get around electoral law?
  • Do other donations to the Conservative Party ultimately come from overseas?

It would also be helpful to know whether your Commission has been aware of the procedures which the Conservative Party have in place for ensuring full disclosure; and what if any precautions have they taken to ensure that sufficient disclosure is made to ensure that the donor is not acting for a third party.

As the body tasked with enforcement of PPERA, under the 2000 Act, I would be grateful if you would investigate this matter. I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible.

Given the public interest in this matter I am releasing a copy of this letter to the media. I am also sending a copy to the Prime Minister, and to Francis Maude.

Yours sincerely,

JACK STRAW

  • http://twitter.com/Jailhouselawyer John Hirst

    It’s a pity that Jack Straw did not write a letter to the Eectoral Commission explaining why he did not amend the law to take account of Hirst v UK (No2), the Prisoners Votes Case, when he was Secretary of State for Justice!

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Stephen-Collins/100000033820132 Stephen Collins

      If you wanted the vote John, why didn’t you just avoid killing that lady?

  • Robert_Crosby

    Regarding the related article on party funding, Michael Dugher is one of the people I keep hearing described as “highly capable” and “a rising star”, but he has some way to go to convince me.  He had a chance to nail Michael Fallon yesterday on BBC2 but didn’t take it.
    Fallon – and the nauseating Matthew Hancock – both attempted to skew the Tories’ grubby behaviour against Labour.  All they wanted to do was slag off Unite and rattle on about the tanker drivers’ strike ballot.  They claim that Labour is “in the pocket of the TUs”… all Dugher had to say was that unions donate to Labour because they agree with it’s broad aims and values and vision of a juster society.  These all come first and the donations follow… I have never seen any evidence whatsoever of a union donor receiving favours in return.  Most would argue that Labour has gone out of its way over the years not to do that.

    It’s about time Labour politicians argued that there is a positive case for trade unions (just as they should for immigrants).  The Tories will always “scapegoat” better than we can, so why play along with their narrative.  Quite apart from that, Dugher missed the open goal of hammering Cameron by allowing Fallon to twist the discussion as he did.

Latest

  • Comment Freelancing needs a policy agenda of its own

    Freelancing needs a policy agenda of its own

    The self employed are often the ‘most entrepreneurial, go-getting people in Britain’ . That is what Ed Milliband said during his conference speech when he placed a commitment to the self employed and albeit freelance workers at the heart of his election pledges for the general election. One of Labour’s six pledges is to provide equal rights to the self employment. As Ed Mililband noted ‘two out of three don’t have a pension, one in five can’t get a mortgage. […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Cameron’s pledge to scrap the Human Rights Act shows he’s legally illiterate

    Cameron’s pledge to scrap the Human Rights Act shows he’s legally illiterate

    In a crowded field, there is one issue which can always evoke splenetic outrage in the Daily Mail and the Tory backbenches: the Human Rights Act. And so it came as no surprise that its abolition ‘once and for all’ formed an integral part of David Cameron’s speech to the Tory conference. He had a simple pitch: the UK government is being told what to do, not by its own Courts but by Strasbourg. So we need a British Bill […]

    Read more →
  • Featured Cameron’s Tax Cut is a Tax Con – but it’ll be popular, and highlights Labour’s missed opportunity

    Cameron’s Tax Cut is a Tax Con – but it’ll be popular, and highlights Labour’s missed opportunity

    David Cameron’s conference speech today was well-delivered, punchy and memorable. It had a clear top line to grab the evening news headlines, and his populist tax cuts will be the overwhelming focus of tomorrow’s front pages. This was cheese to Miliband’s chalk. Whilst the Labour leader appeared to lack energy last week, and his headline announcement leaked in advance (and wasn’t sufficiently headline-grabbing to grab headlines), Cameron was surprisingly pumped up, energetic and forceful. He was also doling out policy like […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Dismantling Britain’s despotism

    Dismantling Britain’s despotism

    The fictional town of Dunchester is the scene for a right-wing science-fiction novel by nineteenth century author H. Rider Haggard. It is also the site for a fantasy game used to recruit and train British civil servants. The Tory novel is about radicals trying to block experts and professionals from saving Dunchester from an epidemic of plague. The civil service game allows players to spend £20 million in regenerating a fake town with the same name. Players take the role […]

    Read more →
  • News Video “This is who we resent” – David Cameron lets slip what he actually thinks

    “This is who we resent” – David Cameron lets slip what he actually thinks

    Unfortunate Freudian slip for David Cameron during his Conference speech today: “This party is the trade union for children from the poorest estates and the most chaotic homes; this party is the union for the young woman who wants an apprenticeship; teenagers who want to make something of their lives – this is who we resent.”

    Read more →
7ads6x98y