Tag Archives: poltiical party donations

“Comment is free, but facts are sacred” wrote The Guardian’s editor CP Scott in 1921. A century and a bit later, the story of Reform UK’s £72 million of donations shows how Westminster has become a battleground of comment where facts get trampled underfoot. 

What are the facts? On 25 March, Steve Reed, then Secretary of State for Housing, Communities & Local Government, announced that there would be “an annual £100,000 cap on total political donations” made by any overseas elector. He said the government would apply the restrictions retrospectively to donations received from that date. The changes would be tabled as amendments to the Representation of the People Bill.  

The letter said that once the law was in force, political parties would have 30 days to return any donations received on or after 25 March.

And what would happen if an overseas elector moved back to the UK? That was cleared up on 6 July when Samantha Dixon, Minister for Elections, announced that any such person would remain subject to the cap “until they have been resident in the UK for a whole calendar year.” 

All pretty clear. The only loose end I can see is that the bill would still allow UK-based donors to donate eye-watering sums and the government is reportedly considering whether to propose a cap on all donations. The Lib Dems have been ahead of the game again in calling for such a cap already.

Meanwhile, months after the proposed law was set out, Reform are claiming  that their £36m donations from Ben Delo and Christopher Harbourne are legitimate. 

Reform’s Richard Tice said: “These donations are made in accordance with the rules and the regulations, and you’ve now got a hyperventilating hypocrisy from the socialists ruining this country, who are trying to change the rules retrospectively, which is it’s not the fair way, it’s not the British way…”

Did you see what he did there? Tice is of course right to say that the donations are in accordance with the current rules. But then he says the government is “trying to change the rules retrospectively” as if they had done this after the Reform donations, rather than before them – and whistles to his fans by ranting about “socialists” and “the British way”.   

The trick is simple. Garnish distortion with a sprig of truth. Then whip up so much heat that emotion drives the story and cold hard facts get left behind.