In December 2024, Elon Musk planned to donate US$100 million to Reform UK via one of his British companies, an amount of money which would have swamped our electoral system. After falling out with Nigel Farage, he now seems to be expressing an interest to back an alternative to Reform UK.
However, the possibility of such a huge donation – which would turn British politics upside down – does not seem to sufficiently worry the Labour government which – no hurry – only intends to introduce legislation for some limited election financing reform in 2026.
But now, potentially outflanking current UK electoral Law, we have the trans-Atlantic arrival on our shores of a newly-minted far-right Great British PAC (Political Action Committee) (which claims to be centre-right but its intention seems anything but once you read the website).
As stated in an accompanying article, the PAC’s mission is said to be “resolutely British: to unite the right, fortify it, and prepare it to govern by 2029” when they would indulge in “torching EU laws, axing 400+ bloated quangos and NGOs, restoring judicial accountability, and building a new cadre of patriotic leaders through nationwide training academies.”
An “Operation Shield” will, in the meantime, mount “robust legal challenges and procedural interventions to halt the implementation of legislation that undermines Britain’s sovereignty, economy, and traditional values”. This would be coupled once in power with an “Ultimate Repeal Act” which would introduce “a comprehensive legislative package designed to roll back the layers of bureaucratic overreach and damaging regulations introduced by this socialist Labour government.”
Now where have I heard something like that before?
The PAC is led by former Brexit party MEP Ben Habib, CEO of a property fund management company and bitter rival to Nigel Farage. It involves the likes of Claire Bullivant, Lord Hannan and other Brexiteer notables. Many regional directors, legal advisers and staffers are already in place. They will “identify patriotic candidates ready to stand in the next general election, regardless of whether they wear Tory blue, Reform turquoise, DUP red, TUV (Traditional Unionist Voice) navy, UKIP purple or a coalition colour of common sense.”
They plan to have a PAC App to connect supporters and have already set up a Policy Platform There will be a comms team, a rapid-response unit to counter what they consider to be “fake news”, and a digital ad agency “to blanket airwaves and timelines with bold, unapologetic patriotism.”
It is reported that Ben Habib and Claire Bullivant have been invited to Washington this summer to discuss the PAC.
This is clearly a significant warning shot for the Labour government to move much more quickly to shore up our electoral financing system – not waiting for 2026 to start the process, but now, before massive legal donations are made. Our MPs must press the government to do so.
A maximum £5,000-£10,000 donation cap seems the best and simplest way of shielding our democracy from what will be far greater donations than the UK has ever experienced. We also need to think how to regulate what are new political funding innovations such as PACs – and rapidly.
* George Cunningham is an elected member of the Federal International Relations Committee and on the executives of Lib Dems Friend of the Armed Forces and Liberal International British Group. Email: [email protected] Social media: @gfcunningham.bsky.social Twitter/X: @GFCunningham
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
#interrail2025: Day 6 - turning for home... but how?
Two Lib Dem gains in council by-elections
Lochee Park - free family fun day #dundeewestend
Labour failing on social care reform
Photo gallery
Raven (1977) - by the writers of Children of the Stones
Learning from the Zen masters
Jennie
Peter Wrigley
Mike Peters
Simon R
Jenny Barnes
11 Comments
George’s warnings must be taken seriously and urgently. The US VP and second lady are going shopping to Greenland today. Are they looking for souvenirs? No, they want to buy the country itself to make it part of the US. Panama and Canada are already in their sights. The UK could be further down the line. Elon’s money could be a useful deposit to help build their ambitions by putting an extreme right government in charge. Wake up, Britain!!
I agree with the author.
We need robust changes to political financing laws as a matter of urgency.
We regularly raise this issue in the Lords and a cap on the size of donations is crucial to limiting unfair foreign based financing of elections as I fear that huge funds may otherwise reach the U.K. from overseas whatever we try to do. I led for us in the Lords on the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Bill (PPERA) in 2000 and moved an amendment then to cap all donations at £50k in a year (now about £80k). I was responsible for this becoming policy. The party has since argued for a cap of £10k, whilst organisations such as the Labour friendly IPPR have argued for a £100k cap. We also need proper transparency of “think tank” funding as bodies such as the IEA receive funds from dodgy sources, including from overseas, without any of the transparency that applies for donations to parties. Companies and Unincorporated Associations are used as vehicles for donations in order to evade the rules which apply to donations from individuals on the electoral register. We need quick action to prevent unfair and secretive funding infecting our democracy. George is quite right to argue for this.
Might accepting any donations from any non-U K citizen be contrary to the duty of any British political grouping/party?
“You don’t need armed forces to take over a country. Politicians who value their pockets more than the quality of life of their fellow citizens and their children will do it much less obtrusively.” (From I. Ayivor)
The 2010 US Supreme court ruling in the Citizens United case has seen spending on federal elections balloon tenfold over the past 15 years from around $550 million to $5.5 billion largely as a result of the creation of corporate funded super pacs.
An election for a vacant seat on the Wisconsin State Supreme court next week is expected to see campaign spending of $100 million for this judicial appointment alone Trump, Musk go all in on Wisconsin Supreme Court race, with record-breaking price tag
It is not only campaign contributions that need to be capped but peripheral supporting material such as the partisan political documentaries that were the subject of the Citizens United Case.
“But now, potentially outflanking current UK electoral Law,”
how does it outflank UK law ?
@ Steve Trevethan
I agree, no donations from anyone who is not a UK citizen and not the UK electoral roll.
Plus individual donations should be capped at the Additional Rate of income tax threshold.
Additionally, we should ensure political parties remain as membership associations and not corporate entities.
@Roland ” no donations from anyone who is not a UK citizen”
so someone can stand as candidate, can vote , but can’t make a donation?
@Simon McGrath- Looks like another loophole that needs to be closed, before the Musk party decides to field candidates; all with a US citizenship…
However, agree the rules do need to allow for UK taxpayers, who may not be UK citizens to make donations. I suggest non-doms don’t get to vote or make political donations…
I think we all agree that we need to keep Musk’s money away from the UK far right as far as possible. But it’s going to be difficult. Where there’s a will there’s a way.
I sense a flexibility of principle in the Lib Dem attitude to UK citizenship on voting and funding issues. It’s not so important when non citizens are likely to support causes dear to LibDem hearts but it is when they aren’t!
It’s much more straightforward to make citizenship a requirement for all voting and funding purposes. We should encourage all UK residents to take up citizenship, dual if necessary, after a relatively short period of, say, 2-3 years.
Someone could do worse than compose a motion to autumn conference that details how we would control political donations. It has salience with the public and though only a small part of how our governance should be reformed, it would point us in the right direction.