Labour accused the Tories of “secrecy rather than transparency” after the figures showed the clubs have provided £642,634 to its key battleground seats since the last election.
Jon Ashworth, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, said the Tories were exploiting a loophole in the law, which permits anonymous donations of up to £7,500 to “unincorporated associations”. Individuals who give more than £1,500 to a local party have to reveal their identity.
Tory candidates and agents in the 40/40 seats at the heart of the party’s election campaign – its 40 most marginal seats and the 40 most marginal seats it is targeting – have been encouraged to set up such associations without the need for “Conservative” or “Tory” in their title. Names include the No Balls Ball, the North West Patrons Club, the Trevelyan Campaign Fund and the Prescription Club.
Local Tory associations are encouraged to set up the funding vehicles, often called business or patrons’ clubs, to give donors anonymity. The party warns that direct donations to MPs must be registered with Commons authorities. Its official guidelines say: “If the MP receives the donation directly, they will need the names and addresses of all donors who gave the club over £1,500, as additional requirements apply at the house. We advise that donations should be made to the constituency fighting fund instead, where this additional reporting does not apply.”
Labour analysis of Electoral Commission figures found such associations have given 40% of funding for key marginal seats this year – £293,630 of the £742,947 raised by the Tories, a big increase on the £21,014 given by unincorporated associations to the Tories in 2010. According to Labour, 27 of the seats are entirely dependent this year on funding from the associations.
The official party advice also suggests that Tories should keep the party’s name out of the title of the association. It says: “The club should not be named after a specific candidate, and does not need to have the word ‘Conservative’ in the name.”
The No Balls Ball, apparently a spoof on Ed Balls’s name, has provided £32,516 apiece to the cause of two Tory candidates, David Warburton and James Heappey, fighting the Liberal Democrat marginal seats of Somerton and Frome, and Wells. Donors to the fund, which is registered at a residential property in the safe Tory South West Wiltshire constituency, remain anonymous.
The party advises local associations that setting up business and patrons’ clubs improves links with businesses which, in turn, can “help provide vital campaign funds”.
According to an email published by Inside Croydon, guests were invited to attend the launch of the Croydon Business Club and on each occasion the “small and select invitation-only group” would meet a speaker either from an interesting and relevant business background or a senior MP or government minister.
Labour said the arrangements raised questions about whether the Tories were abiding by the MPs’ code of conduct, which says donations linked to an MP should be declared. It says a donation is permissible if would have been made regardless of the identity of the candidate – and the MP had no role in soliciting it.
Ashworth said: “The Tories are trying to buy the election through secretive supper clubs. The Tories can’t beat Labour on the number of activists campaigning on the ground in key seats, but they have a steady stream of big donors willing to bankroll their campaign. David Cameron is encouraging his candidates to use these secretive clubs to fund their campaigns and official Conservative party guidance seems to encourage secrecy rather than transparency.
“We know hedge funds and bankers are backing the Tories, but we don’t know who is bankrolling certain clubs. David Cameron should come clean about who is behind all aspects of Tory funding.”
A Tory spokesperson said: “All donations to the Conservative party are properly and transparently declared to the Electoral Commission, published by them and comply fully with Electoral Commission rules. Any suggestion of impropriety by the party is malicious and defamatory and will be treated as such.”
Original Article
Source: theguardian.com/
Author: Nicholas Watt
No comments:
Post a Comment