Those interested in the funding of political parties might want to take a look at Dispatches on Channel 4 tomorrow night.
Dispatches reporter Antony Barnett investigates the funding of the Tories under Cameron and examines how the party is using its newfound resources to ensure its leader becomes the next Prime Minister. Barnett examines how funds are being ploughed into marginal seats that hold the key to a Cameron victory and his investigation raises fresh questions about some of the party’s largest backers. Barnett also scrutinises David Cameron’s promises of “openness and transparency,” with the methods the Tory leader is using to attract donations.
This sort of “openess and transparency”…
Peter Facey, director of the pressure group Unlock Democracy, said the Leader’s Club system raised questions of “cash for access”. He said: “We have a situation where a man with a good chance of being the next prime minister is offering people a high level of access, including dinner in his own house, for £50,000. A couple of years into a Conservative government, when there is a big contract in the offing and one of these donors is in the running for it, people would be justified in asking whether their connections with the party would have an impact on the final decision. Tony Blair came up against this problem.”
When I mentioned ‘sleaze’ in connection with Blair & ‘cash for honours’ you were having none of it because ‘he’d never been charged with anything’.
Cameron’s not even PM yet but you’re happily dropping hints here & there and pushing narratives about corruption.
Funny how things change depending on where your loyalties lie….
I fail to see the point you are desperately trying to score, Liam. I haven’t accused Blair of ‘cash for honours’ now and I didn’t then. But if Cameron claims to want openness and transparency… and then seeks to accept hidden donations he is being hypocritical.
I haven’t ‘dropped hints’ as you call it. My attitude towards donations from wealthy individuals is fairly well recorded, but if you can’t remember that, I’ll repeat what I wrote last November…
“One things seems quite clear to me about this whole fiasco of donations to the Labour Party; the Party should abandon this practice of dealing in donations from millionaires, philanthropists etc. It was something Tony Blair became very fond of as he deliberately took steps to put distance, if not break the link altogether, with the trade union movement.”
I referenced cash for honours in a post I wrote months back arguing that Labour sleaze was more serious and went higher up than anything under Major. You were having none of it on the grounds that no-one was charged or convicted and all that mattered to you was the formal record – fair enough I suppose. I assumed you’d be equally dismissive of anything allegations against the Tories until anyone was charged or convicted.
Here we are some 6 months later with your party c.20pts behind in the polls and when Cameron & co. indulge in the exact same thing (again with no charges or convictions) suddenly it matters and it’s worthy of a post with a cynical title.
You regularly taunt Dale for inconsistency or selective outrage (usually fairly I have to say) but as this shows it’s not something you’re immune from….
I intend to watch this.
And draw your attention to the following…
Sunday at 9pm on Ch4 there is a gathering of comics performing in aid of Amnesty International. It might be worth a laugh in this time of crisis.
We could reopen that stuff about Levy if you want, Liam, but that would involve you admitting that there was no evidence of sleaze, unless you know more than the police were able to get.
My charge (if I am making one) against the Tories is not one of sleaze in any event so it is a strange argument you are advancing. I wouldn’t expect Cameron to be charged or convicted of being a hypocrite… which is all this post accuses him of (If you are asking whether I thought Blair was a hypocrite, the answer is yes, on a whole umber of levels).
If you say you are in favour of openness and transparency and then it is demonstrated that you used a device to avoid that… it is hypocritical. I don’t know whether you are using the old Dale trick of changing the focus to avoid the allegation, but it is not something I would expect from you.