Wednesday, December 11, 2024
How national insurance increase will undermine homeless services
He has warned of hundreds of possible job losses among youth homelessness charities due to the employer national insurance hike in the latest Budget:
Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced in her autumn statement that the rate of employer national insurance would rise from 13.8 per cent to 15 per cent in April next year.
The secondary threshold, meaning the level at which employers start paying the tax on each employee’s salary, will also be reduced from £9,100 a year to £5,000.
Mr Connolly said EveryYouth’s network of youth homelessness charities across the UK is set to lose £1.73m from collective budgets – the equivalent of axing more than 60 frontline workers from the network’s government-funded services.
“Our services have already been cut down to the bone,” he told The Independent. “There is already a very minimal standard of support available, and this national insurance increase will only make the charities’ situation worse.
“This will affect the network’s ability to help young people learn independent living skills and navigate the transition to adulthood.
“It will also make it more difficult to provide additional wrap-around support, addressing childhood trauma and educational deficits, which is funded by donors and is essential if we want our most disadvantaged young people to thrive.”
The charity network has helped 327 people aged between 16 and 25 move into a home this year and has assisted a further 564 young people into employment.
Mr Connolly has called on the government to protect youth homelessness services from the national insurance increase and requested an urgent meeting with the deputy prime minister.
“The young people we support are some of the most disadvantaged in the country, and a very high proportion are care leavers,” he wrote in the letter. “Many are neurodiverse and have faced discrimination due to their sexuality, gender identification, or race. It cannot be right that the overall increase in investment in public services results in the most vulnerable young people being penalised.”
This is yet another example of the impact that Labour's employers' national insurance hike is going to have on the third sector and key services for disadvantaged and vulnerable individuals. How can they justify allowing these organisations to go to the wall, like this?
Tuesday, December 10, 2024
Big brother state
They say that in 2012, the high court ruled that keeping the images of people who faced no action or who were charged and then acquitted was unlawful. However, despite the ruling, custody images of innocent people are still on the Police national database, which is available to all UK police forces and selected law enforcement agencies. They add that the images can be used for facial recognition checks of potential suspects:
The annual report of the biometrics and surveillance camera commissioner stated: “Forces continue to retain and use images of people who, while having been arrested, have never subsequently been charged or summonsed.
“The use of these custody images of unconvicted individuals may include for facial recognition purposes.” The report said work was “under way” to ensure the retention of images was proportionate and lawful.
Charlie Whelton, policy and campaigns officer at Liberty, said: “It is deeply concerning that people who have never been charged with a crime are finding their sensitive biometric data not only unlawfully retained by police, but used to fuel the unregulated and deeply invasive use of facial recognition technology as well.
“The police need to answer as to why they are still holding this highly personal data more than 10 years after the courts said this is against the law. This is even more concerning as police forge ahead with dangerous facial recognition technology that makes our photos as sensitive as our fingerprints.” He called on parliament to “urgently act to regulate the use of this technology”.
It was reported in 2012 that police may be forced to destroy custody images of innocent people after the high court ruled the Metropolitan police had breached the human rights of a woman and a boy they arrested by keeping their custody pictures.
Forces failed to comply with the ruling, and the government published a review in 2017 that reported there were more than 19 million custody images on the database, with more than 16 million in a searchable “facial recognition gallery”.
The review concluded those who had not been convicted should be able to apply to have the images deleted, but campaigners want stricter rules to prevent the images being used in a facial recognition database.
In Scotland, custody images are only uploaded to the Police National Database if a person has been charged with an offence. Police Scotland also reviews custody images to delete those not linked to a live prosecution or conviction.
The previous government urged police forces to make wider use of facial recognition searches against the police national database. Big Brother Watch, a campaign group, has described the deployment of the technology as “dangerously authoritarian surveillance”.
Jake Hurfurt, head of research and investigations at Big Brother Watch, said: “Police and the Home Office have no idea how many people’s photographs they hold unlawfully, and more than a decade after the high court demanded these be deleted, look to have made next to no effort to comply with the law.
“Removing these images is not impossible, as Police Scotland have shown, and other forces must do the same rather than remain complicit in a decade-old breach of privacy rights on an industrial scale. Facial recognition searches must not be conducted against images that are held outside of the law.”
If the police can't keep to the letter of the law then what hope is there for the rest of us.
Monday, December 09, 2024
Brexit putting England and Wales tap water safety at risk
The paper says that people in the industry have called it a “Brexit problem” because EU countries will share laboratory capacity from 2026, meaning that if the UK was still in the EU, water companies would be able to use products that passed tests on the continent. However, UK rules mean products cannot be tested abroad; they have to be tested in the country in a certified lab, of which there are now none:
If companies are unable to keep contaminants out of the water supply, it can cause a danger to health. This year, thousands of people in Devon became unwell after the cryptosporidium parasite was detected in the supply. Schools and businesses had to temporarily close and it negatively affected the local economy. Some households had to boil their tap water for a month to remove the contaminant.
Under the rules of water regulators across the UK, including the Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI), every item or chemical that comes into contact with drinking water has to be tested in stringent conditions, under an EU-derived law known as regulation 31. This ensures these products are safe to use, do not leach dangerous chemicals into the drinking water supply and do not encourage the growth of dangerous microbes.
Laboratories have to be regulation 31 certified, meaning they carry out all the tests on chemicals, pipes or other items to a certain standard. There used to be three such laboratories in the UK, but since 2021 there have been none as they all shut down because they are expensive to run.
This means new products cannot be tested or used to clean water, and that products that have to be retested every five years also cannot be approved. Whistleblowers at water companies havesaid this “limits the availability of products in the market which both risks safety and reduces competition, which will drive up prices and reduce service quality”. There is a backlog of dozens of products awaiting testing.
There are no plans for new labs. The DWI could not give a date for when a new lab could be opened or when the problem will be solved. Water company insiders say the rule has indefinitely stopped the use of all new products that remove contaminants from the water supply.
Those charged with cleaning the UK’s tap water at water companies said the gap in testing capacity has caused the compliance of existing products to lapse, and that they have since come off the market. They said many of these products that cannot now be used actively prevent contamination from entering the water supply.
The trade group British Water has told the industry: “The closure of laboratories offering this vital testing service has not only disrupted production lines but also left suppliers struggling to meet the stringent requirements of their clients.”
Yet another fine mess Farage and his cronies have got us into.
Update: it transpires that Scotland have two testing labs, one in Edinburgh and one in Inverness. So lazy journalism by the Guardian. The point about Brexit not allowing us to use EU tested products remains however. And no doubt the Nats will be pleased that the whole of the UK is now reliant on Scotland to ensure their drinking water is safe.
Sunday, December 08, 2024
Winter fuel cuts worsening poverty
The paper says that the fresh study also suggests that millions are already cutting down on their heating, with warnings about the impact on the NHS.
Meanwhile, a spike in applications for pension credit, currently running at 10,000 new claims a week, which enables people to receive the winter fuel payments, also means that even some of those who qualify are having to wait up to 12 weeks to receive it because Whitehall has been “overwhelmed” with claims:
With Storm Darragh ravaging parts of Britain this weekend, more than 7 million pensioners say they are turning down their heating or reducing the hours they turn it on to help them cope financially.
The research by the Age UK charity also estimates that the figure includes two-thirds of those over 66 living with long-term health conditions.
More than 1 million people aged 66 or over have been skipping meals, according to Age UK’s data. Again, vulnerable groups are seriously affected, with 620,000 pensioners suffering long-term conditions estimated to be missing meals.
Similar numbers were found to be reducing the number of hot meals they had. Four in nine pensioners – about 5.5 million people – said they were worried that they would not be able to heat their home enough this winter. More than 900,000 pensioners with long-term conditions said they were worried about getting into debt.
The Lib Dem Work and Pensions spokesperson, Steve Darling is quite right when he says: “The government needs to swallow its pride and reverse these reckless cuts that will leave millions of vulnerable people having to choose between heating and eating this winter,” said Steve Darling, the Lib Dem work and pensions spokesperson. “We are reaching the point of no return.”
This is not what most people expected from a new Labour government.
With Storm Darragh ravaging parts of Britain this weekend, more than 7 million pensioners say they are turning down their heating or reducing the hours they turn it on to help them cope financially.
The research by the Age UK charity also estimates that the figure includes two-thirds of those over 66 living with long-term health conditions.
More than 1 million people aged 66 or over have been skipping meals, according to Age UK’s data. Again, vulnerable groups are seriously affected, with 620,000 pensioners suffering long-term conditions estimated to be missing meals.
Similar numbers were found to be reducing the number of hot meals they had. Four in nine pensioners – about 5.5 million people – said they were worried that they would not be able to heat their home enough this winter. More than 900,000 pensioners with long-term conditions said they were worried about getting into debt.
The Lib Dem Work and Pensions spokesperson, Steve Darling is quite right when he says: “The government needs to swallow its pride and reverse these reckless cuts that will leave millions of vulnerable people having to choose between heating and eating this winter,” said Steve Darling, the Lib Dem work and pensions spokesperson. “We are reaching the point of no return.”
This is not what most people expected from a new Labour government.
Saturday, December 07, 2024
Those gaping loopholes in our democratic process
Byline Times reports on warnings by anti-corruption experts that outdated regulations leave the door open for hugely wealthy foreign donors to interfere in UK elections:
They say that the sheer scale of Musk’s mooted donation should not be underestimated, given it is close to the total amount donated by all other political donors put together in the UK last year:
However, as things stand there is little to prevent it happening. Although current UK electoral laws prevent foreign nationals donating to British political parties, there is nothing stopping the money being funnelled through a UK-registered company, like Tesla.
Questions over just such an arrangement surfaced during the recent Conservative leadership contest when Robert Jenrick received £40,000 from two companies – one owned by an Israeli billionaire and another owned by an Australian hedge fund scion – as well as further donations from a company that received funds from an untraceable British Virgin Islands company.
Following the reports of Musk’s potential donation, Keir Starmer is facing calls to urgently overhaul the system.
Starmer so far appears resistant to act, with a Downing Street source insisting this week that it was “not a priority” to implement a cap on donations.
Senior figures in his party are starting to raise the alarm, however.
At an event in Westminster on Wednesday, attended by Labour MPs, campaigners from Transparency International revealed that almost a tenth of the cash recently donated to parties and politicians came from unknown sources.
Proposed reforms include restricting corporate donations, and strengthening the Electoral Commission’s independence and enforcement powers which were scaled back under the previous Conservative Government.
Other key recommendations from the campaigners include a £10,000 annual cap on individual donations, and banning public contractors from donating to parties.
Transparency International’s CEO Duncan Hames revealed that UK political parties raised £85 million from private donations in 2023, while £115 million over the past 20 years came from “questionable” sources. More than two thirds of that went to the Conservatives.
Meanwhile, two thirds of the donations to parties last year came from just 19 individuals giving over £1 million each.
<
Hames noted that foreign interference appears to be growing in Europe: “Those with great wealth have used it to claim great power in Georgia, in the Caucasus, where citizens protest the theft of their election daily.
“Now the country’s wealthiest man commands his ‘Georgian Dream’ party and controls the direction of the country. In Moldova, an oligarch flew voters to Russia, who then returned with suitcases full of cash.
“And in Pennsylvania [US], one of the world’s richest men [Musk] created the spectacle of making people millionaires, through a lottery for those engaging in a political campaign. It was perhaps most influential in persuading ordinary Americans that he and his billionaire friend would just love the chance to make them rich too.”
The report also identified £48 million from donors alleged to have bought privileged access or honours, and £42 million from those linked to allegations of corruption or fraud, since 2001. Foreign governments like Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain also spend heavily funding visits to their countries for MPs, stoking concerns about foreign influence and the PR-washing of dictatorial states.
Public trust in political financing is also declining, with only 30% believing party funding is fair and transparent, down from 37% in 2011, according to Transparency International.
Former Public Accounts Committee chair Baroness (Margaret) Hodge emphasised the need to fully ban foreign donations and strengthen criminal enforcement of rule-breaking.
Concerns were also raised about third-party campaigning and “super PAC” style influence by non-party groups developing in the UK, imported from the United States. Falling voter turnout is seen as linked to the perception of wealthy donors’ influence on politics.
The time for reform is long overdue.
Friday, December 06, 2024
Raking in the cash
They say that 17 companies which supplied £119m of PPE marked “do not supply” during the pandemic are still making vast profits supplying equipment to the NHS, landing work for the supply of goods worth some £83.6m since January 2024:
Analysis of official spend records shows that many of these have bagged long-term contracts as part of group awards, with some of them due to run until 2028. Some of these companies had little or no experience selling to the NHS before the pandemic, and some are owned by people who have made massive donations to the Tories.
Globus Shetland didn’t manage to land a single contract with the NHS in the five years before the pandemic, but picked up contracts for more than £108m between April and July 2020. Between 2016 and 2020, the company gave the Tories more than £375,500. Its CEO, Haraldur Agustsson has also been spotted at meetings of The Leaders Group – a Tory members club that connects business people with politicians for a £50,000 annual fee.
According to the health department, £2.74m worth of the PPE that Globus supplied was unfit for use in the NHS. But the firm has made £455,338 from further contracts so far this year, and is one of the companies listed in a £260m group contract that runs to September 2027.
As the pandemic struck, Bunzl was one of the companies that the health department had removed from their list of approved suppliers. After the former Tory chair Lord Feldman intervened to put them back on the list, Bunzl snatched a £22.6m PPE contract.
More than £3.3m worth of the equipment Bunzl supplied was deemed unusable by the NHS. But its trading division, 365 Healthcare, has made more than £4m from the NHS in 2024, and appears on group contracts that run until 2025.
Other firms, despite their ongoing contracts with the NHS, are now in administration in the UK, like US-based Gojo Industries, which is closing down operations in Europe. Gojo supplied PPE worth over £66,000 that was deemed unusable in a front-line setting.
According to the health department, firms that provided unusable equipment marked “do not supply” can still bag further deals.
“There could be a number of reasons that products are placed in this category which is not an automatic bar to future public-sector procurement,” the department explained.
They conclude that with £8.7bn spent on unfit PPE, there’s already plenty of work for the newly appointed covid corruption commissioner to get through during his one year contract on only three days a week, but he must also examine the ongoing scandal of firms whose failure during the pandemic has been rewarded with contracts that will see them raking in cash far into the future.
Thursday, December 05, 2024
The true cost of the Rwanda farce
She provides a table showing spend in millions of pounds, reproduced at the top of this post. She says that of the £715m spent, which does not include wider costs to the asylum system such as slower decisions and rocketing hotels costs:
💷£270m was to Rwanda's Economic Transformation and Integration Fund (unrelated to people being sent) and £20m was for operational spending by Rwanda;
💷£95m was went on "investment to optimise capacity within the existing detention estate" and "options to increase detention capacity";
There wasn't enough room to hold asylum seekers the Tories wanted to send to Rwanda
💷£50m was spent on attempting, planning and training for flights to Rwanda that never happened. It included the cost to secure flights, hire and train escorts, prepare and police airfield;
💷The remaining £280m is under a very broad category called "other fixed costs". It includes spending on developing digital, IT and data systems required to operationalise the Rwanda deal, legal costs and staff working directly on the Rwanda deal and linked Illegal Migration Act.
AS she points out, £715m is far from the total cost of the Rwanda scheme. The way these figures are calculated mean they are mainly "direct" costs and don't take account of other impacts. She points out that the Illegal Migration Act was passed to enact the Rwanda scheme and drove spending on asylum up by billions.
She adds that the Illegal Migration Act was so wildly expensive because the govt effectively barred itself from deciding asylum claims from small boat migrants, but couldn't send them to Rwanda. It was, and remains, the most insane law she has ever seen.
She concludes that the initial Rwanda deal required a rare "ministerial direction" by Priti Patel to force it through in April 2022 because the Home Office permanent secretary said value for public money couldn't be shown, but after that there are serious questions about what safeguards were in place.
It is little wonder the government needs to raise taxes to fill the financial black holes they inherited.
Wednesday, December 04, 2024
The Muesli Assassins
Nation Cymru reports that Davies has quit as Welsh Tory leader and has blasted a “muesli and croissant brigade” of Welsh Conservatives for destabilising the party.
The site says that the leader of the Welsh Tories resigned on yesterday after narrowly winning a confidence vote 9-7 in his favour:
He claimed a “substantial minority” of his party opposing his continued leadership made it “untenable”.
Speaking to the PA news agency, Mr Davies suggested his detractors within the Welsh Conservatives had been “running to the press, leaking stories”, and undermining his leadership.
He also ruled out joining Nigel Farage’s Reform UK, which is hoping to win seats across Wales in the next Senedd poll in 2026.
Mr Davies, Senedd member for South Wales Central, denied “entirely” that his brand of Conservatism had been rejected by the party.
His critics have accused him of leading the Welsh Tories into culture-war-focussed politics, including when over the summer he said children should not be forced to eat halal meat in schools.
Criticism for his social media use has also been widespread, including one occasion when he asked constituents if they wanted to see the Senedd abolished.
“I do not accept that we have done culture war politics,” Mr Davies told PA.
He added: “What we, under my leadership, have always done is seek to speak to the issues that people find challenging in their everyday lives and addressing them head on.
“We speak firmly about our beliefs as Welsh Conservatives. I was offering a full Welsh fry up with extra black pudding. My detractors wanted more muesli and croissant.
“Obviously, the muesli and croissant was in the minority, were constantly running to the press, leaking stories, and that doesn’t do any good for a united party.”
It wasn't Brexit that got him in the end. It was breakfast.
Tuesday, December 03, 2024
Facing a Trumpian disaster
The Guardian reports that a cap on political donations and wider powers for the House of Lords Appointments Commission to block unsuitable peer nominations are among 54 proposals laid out in a paper from the campaign group Unlock Democracy:
Campaigners acknowledged that Keir Starmer has made changes to the ministerial code, including tightening the rules on gifts after a row over freebies.
But they argued the prime minister was still able to ignore recommendations made by the independent adviser on ministerial interests “without explanation” while former ministers could continue to seek jobs outside government.
The Unlock Democracy paper also recommends the introduction of a clear job description for MPs against which constituents and the standards commissioner would be able to measure their performance.
The UK’s “over-reliance on conventions and norms” is a source of democratic vulnerability, the paper argues. It urges the government to give the House of Lords Appointments Commission the power to block peerage nominations to address perceptions of cronyism.
A substantial reduction in party campaign spending and a cap on political donations had also been recommended to reduce the ability of wealthy donors to “wield outsized, unaccountable influence”.
Other recommendations suggested to reverse “democratic backsliding” include:
* Cabinet ministers must be confirmed by MPs’ select committees and parliament should ratify new prime ministers before the new government can bring forward a king’s speech.
* Close loopholes that allow unincorporated associations to conceal the source of their political donations or overseas residents to donate to political parties
* A £200 per-item limit on freebies for MPs or ministers and a cap on earnings from second jobs at half an MP’s salary.
* Amend the MPs’ code of conduct and the Recall of MPs Act 2015 so they can be sanctioned for failing to fulfil their responsibilities.
Tom Brake, director of Unlock Democracy and formerly a Liberal Democrat minister, said: “Donald Trump’s return to the White House should set alarm bells ringing for all of us who value democracy. We cannot just assume something similar could never happen here.
“Public confidence in the integrity of the political system is dwindling. Meanwhile, concerns continue to grow about the accountability of the government to elected representatives, and the accountability of elected representatives to their voters.”
The proposed measures “have the merit of being low cost, big impact”, he said.
Although a Trumpian disaster is to be avoided, that should not be the only reason to introduce these reforms. They are commonsense. The system has been abused for too long. It is time to put a stop to it.
Monday, December 02, 2024
Ongoing huge cost of Brexit divorce
The Independent reports that Britain has set aside more than £10bn for post-Brexit payments to the EU as the UK continues sending billions to Brussels despite leaving the bloc years ago.
The paper adds that to cover the cost of the UK’s divorce from Europe, the government has accounted for £10.6bn in future payments for Brussels staff and diplomats’ pensions, as well as Britain’s pre-existing financial obligations:
Official government figures this week revealed that the provision for ongoing “EU liabilities” has fallen from £31.7bn a year ago and £38.7bn the year before.
But the figure still stands at more than £10bn, with critics saying the UK is still “paying vast sums for a terrible Brexit deal”. The revelation comes after Rachel Reeves’ Budget piled £40bn of new taxes on households and businesses - with the chancellor claiming the changes were necessary to fill a black hole in the public finances left by the Conservatives.
SNP MP Stephen Gethins, an ardent anti-Brexit campaigner, added: “Not only is Brexit taking away our rights, hurting business and removing opportunities from young people, it’s also costing a fortune.
“We are unnecessarily crippling our economy and paying billions for the privilege.”
Former armed forces minister Sir Nick Harvey said that as well as ongoing payments to the EU, Brexit is still having a significant impact on the economy.
The Independent last month revealed that government estimates show Brexit will cut UK trade by 15 per cent in the long run. This paper then uncovered figures from the independent spending watchdog showing that just 40 per cent of the economic damage of Brexit has materialised, with the majority of the impact yet to be felt.
Former Lib Dem MP Sir Nick told The Independent the government is “tinkering around the edges” and that “addressing the economic damage done by Brexit must become a priority”.
And, amid Sir Keir Starmer’s post-Brexit reset with the bloc, Sir Nick said a return to the single market and customs union must be on the table.
This money could be better spent on public services, instead we are having to pay out vast sums, without getting any of the benefits of membership in return, while at the same time crippling our economy by not being part of the single market.
Sunday, December 01, 2024
Buying influence?
The paper says that cash from companies that have never turned a profit, from unincorporated associations that do not have to declare their funders, and banned donations from overseas donors via intermediaries are all entering the system, according to research by Transparency International (TI):
Foreign governments are also donating millions in the form of flights, food and hotel stays. The gifts and hospitality from governments including those of Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Azerbaijan are allowed, even though all other types of donations must come from a permissible UK source. “It is increasingly clear that this loophole presents a reputational and security risk to our democracy,” TI said.
The findings are revealed in a report by the campaign group to be published this week. TI researchers analysed 78,735 donations worth £1.19bn reported to the Electoral Commission between 2001 and 2024. They found that £115m came from unknown or “questionable” sources – equivalent to almost £1 in £10 donated to parties from private sources.
Of the £115m from unknown or questionable sources, more than two-thirds – £81.6m – went to the Conservatives, partly explained by the party’s greater reliance on private donors than Labour, which gets more from membership fees and unions.
In response, the Electoral Commission, which regulates political finance in the UK, said reform was needed to “strengthen the system further”. A spokesperson said: “We stand ready to work with government and parliament on delivering improvements.”
The analysis, seen by the Observer, also reveals that the total donated privately to parties has risen dramatically, from £30.6m in 2001 to £85m in 2023. Meanwhile, between March 2001 and July 2024, £48.2m was given to UK politicians and parties by donors alleged or proven to have bought privileged access, influence or honours; £42m came from donors alleged or proven to have been involved in other corruption, fraud or money laundering; £38.6m came from unincorporated associations that have not reported the source of their income, despite parliament introducing new transparency rules in 2010; £13m came from donors alleged or proven to be intermediaries for foreign funds or a hidden source; and £10.9m was from companies that have not made sufficient profits to support the political contributions they made.
Beyond financial donations, the researchers analysed transparency registers since 2001, finding that MPs have accepted £11.6m of visits abroad, including £4.5m from foreign governments, parliaments and regime-linked groups.
Among the biggest funders of overseas trips was Qatar, which spent £460,000 on gifts and hospitality for UK politicians, mostly in the run-up to the 2022 World Cup; Saudi Arabia, which spent £400,000; Bahrain, which spent £200,000; and Azerbaijan, which spent £140,000.
TI said this was possible due to a “gap in legislation which allows foreign governments, including hostile states, to court UK politicians through all-expenses-paid overseas visits”.
Other comparable democracies such as that of the US have explicit rules to manage the funding of overseas trips funded by foreign governments.
In some cases, politicians went on to promote the interests of the governments that gave them gifts and hospitality. In 2022, the Observer revealed how Alun Cairns, then chair of the Qatar all-party parliamentary group (APPG), made a Commons speech praising Qatar before the World Cup.
The former Tory MP had received £9,323 worth of donations from the Qatari government in 2022 for two trips to Qatar. A statement via Cairns from the since dissolved Qatar APPG said it played an “active role in scrutinising all aspects of UK-Qatar relations, including human rights, ethics, education, energy and infrastructure”.
TI’s analysis further reveals how companies can donate even if they have no clear record of doing business in the UK. They must be registered with Companies House, incorporated in the UK and should be “carrying on business here”.
But TI said this was a “low bar” because while political parties are supposed to check for suspicious activity, such as a company being dormant, there is no ban on accepting money from them.
Another “loophole” means that since 2010, unincorporated associations – groups with no legal entity or requirement to disclose their funders – have donated huge sums to UK political parties and MPs. This includes private clubs linked to both the Conservatives and Labour.
Campaigners say the findings show the UK’s vulnerability to “undue influence from large donors, suspicious and corrupt individuals and foreign governments”.A briefing from Spotlight on Corruption this year concluded that “our electoral finance laws are riddled with loopholes and the enforcement regime is not robust enough”.
This is a major contribution to the debate on funding politics and highlights how badly reforms are needed.
