Trevor Fisher on the threat of big money buying up British politics
With Reform UK challenging the two main parties in the opinion polls, the danger of Nigel Farage becoming Prime Minister after the next election has to be taken seriously. Indeed, Labour is waking up, as was shown on 28th March – when Reform had a major rally in Birmingham, and the Birmingham Mail had a wrap-around four-page feature with Farage on the front claiming “WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE TO AN INSURANCE BASED SYSTEM OF HEALTH CARE”. The message of an expensive system of care under a Reform government, matched with two pages on Labour claims of NHS improvement, was a clear sign Labour is awake to the danger Reform poses.
However, not as awake as is needed. The great danger of Reform is that it will bring Trump style politics into Britain, and not just because Farage is closely linked to Trump and is a frequent visitor to Trump’s home in Florida. The most immediate danger is from Elon Musk, who, before Christmas, appeared to be on the verge of donating £100 million to Reform UK, which sent Farage and other leading figures to negotiate. The discussions broke down on Musk’s criticism of Farage, whom he regarded as not up to the job and also not favourable to Tommy Robinson, who Farage regards as too extreme for Reform UK and likely to lose votes. While the money remains in America, the alarming discovery that a sum of this size could arrive in the coffers of the most extreme party with any real chance of winning a General election should concentrate minds.
Debate emerges
Concern has been actively expressed for some time, and a commitment to legislate to remove loopholes in the existing law was in Labour’s 2024 manifesto. It was not seen as a priority and by autumn 2024, an epetition was started, gaining over 140,000 names. This was preceded by a similar debate on 6th March and the coincidence led to a statement by the head of the Electoral Commission on 31st March. Vijay Rangarajan said there was currently “a problem of political trust in political finance” and called for the rules to be tightened up in the next year.
The Electoral Commission has seen its position affected by Conservative devised changes in recent times, including a maximum fine limit imposed of £20,000 per issue, which would hardly affect the Elon Musk’s of the current world. Overall, the Commissioner’s main point was that the law passed in 2000 (and subsequently amended) was not up to scratch. He specifically said to BBC Radio’s Westminster Hour that the perception was developing from the activities of mega donors that “politicians are not acting on behalf of voters, they are acting on behalf of people who have given them a lot of money”. He commented on the ability of foreigners who own UK-based companies to donate large sums of money through the company finance they control, that “companies should only be able to donate something like the last couple of years’ worth of profits that they’ve made in the UK”.
This is only one aspect of the two debates that took place in parliament in March, covering an impressive body of topics. On March 6th the debate of the apparently dry topic of Political Finance Rules, led by Lloyd Hatton MP with an exemplary grasp of the subject, focused on the loopholes which allow donations from corrupt individuals or a foreign government. The continuation on March 31st of the discussion on the epetition, led by Irene Campbell MP, dealt with the need to “remove loopholes which allow wealthy foreign individuals to make donations into UK political parties… Cap all donations to a reasonable amount…review limits on the fines that can be levied for breaking the rules”.
However, the government’s response when the petition reached 10,000 names and had to generate an official response said, “only those with a legitimate interest in UK elections can make political donations. Foreign donations are not permitted”. This is clearly untrue. Foreign interests with companies registered in the UK – whether mere shell companies with money flowing through without having to generate the money being handled are allowed. This is why Musk could think of funnelling $100 million into Reform UK and paying Tommy Robinson’s legal bills while in prison. This has to be stopped.
Does the Starmer government realise this? Despite a manifesto commitment, nothing has been done. There are many aspects to the problem, but this simple task is to stop money not being made in the UK from being sent in. Or does Starmer want to be the premier who allowed the far right to buy up British politics?