Tories bankrolled by Non-Dom Lord

Sir_Humphrey

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8542744.stm

I'm a little surprised this has not been posted before. So for the sake of balance here it is.

Spartacus_Mills

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8542744.stm

I'm a little surprised this has not been posted before. So for the sake of balance here it is.

First of all Cameron confirmed on 5 Live yesterday that Ashcroft is not even in the top ten of donors.

"his millions make up less than 5% of their total donations."

That is hardly bankrolling.

For the sake of balance Labour are bankrolled/receive huge amounts of money from three non-doms.

Lord Paul
Lord Cohen
Lakshmi Mittal.

Still that does not fit in with the Labour narrative on this. The BBC, to their credit, wrote a fair and balanced article.

markharding557

All of these rich people are buying influence,it should not be allowed.
Donations should be capped

aelitaman

And Gordon Brown after taking Pauls millions made him a peer and member of the privy council.

Cash for Honours - Oh no ducky not us we are whiter than white.
Where's Eccelstone we need some cash to fight the election.

Spartacus_Mills

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100027867/lord-ashcroft-reveals-he-is-a-non-dom-but-intends-to-stay-in-the-lords/

. Lord Ashcroft has just issued a statement clarifying his tax position. He confirms he is a non-dom, but says he will abide by new rules to ensure he can remain in the Lords and continue to play a part in public life. Contrast that to Lord Paul, one of Labour’s biggest donors, who has indicated that he will leave the Lords rather than expose himself to UK tax requirements.

Rochdale_Pioneers

And this is why parties should be publically funded. All three parties have dodgy donors living abroad trying to buy influence in a country not of their residence. OK so Ashcroft has more of a role than the others mentioned - is Paul flooding millions in tax-dodged pounds into marginal seats like Ashcroft is? But the principle is the same, and frankly the Unions are just as bad.

To add some context to how much each person has donated it might be worth looking at how much cash Labour and the Tories have. If Lord Paul is as alleged as big a donor as Lord Ashcroft, its funny how Ashcroft's money is sloshing around in all the key marginals and Labour can't even afford posters.

But as a story this isn't news - we already knew Ashcroft had lied about becoming a UK resident. Its just unfortunate that it puts an end to 10 years of Osfucation from Tory front benchers every time the Ashcroft Question came up. Its not Ashcroft being a non-dom thats a shock, its Cam, Hague, Spellman et al saying repeatedly that they had no reason to believe Ashcroft was a non-dom.

So did they actually know and pretended not to, or dare they not ask the Deputy Chairman?

Pennywise

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

And this is why parties should be publically funded.

So you're advocating that the unions who are bankrolling the Labour Party instead give the money to a central "pool" that will share out the same pot of money among all the main political parties?

Rochdale_Pioneers

Pennywise wrote: »

So you're advocating that the unions who are bankrolling the Labour Party instead give the money to a central "pool" that will share out the same pot of money among all the main political parties?

No, I'm arguing that the Unions bankrolling the Labour party is just as wrong as hedge funds and tax liars bankrolling the Labour party. Happy for unions to be involved in politics - like the other think tanks they have plenty of ideas to contribute. Just not directly paying to influence the party.

Give all parties funding from a taxpayer pot based on seats contested and results. Have strict limits on how much can be spent (an end to leaflet wars and stupid posters), ensure that smaller parties can compete on a comparable basis. We complain that politicians are corrupt yet are happy to allow parties and their policy agendas to be sold to whomever writes the biggest cheque.

whathavewedone

I think Labour might have shot themselves in the foot going after Ashcroft like this.

Lord Paul is now going to be under the spotlight.

aelitaman

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

And this is why parties should be publically funded. All three parties have dodgy donors living abroad trying to buy influence in a country not of their residence. OK so Ashcroft has more of a role than the others mentioned - is Paul flooding millions in tax-dodged pounds into marginal seats like Ashcroft is? But the principle is the same, and frankly the Unions are just as bad.

To add some context to how much each person has donated it might be worth looking at how much cash Labour and the Tories have. If Lord Paul is as alleged as big a donor as Lord Ashcroft, its funny how Ashcroft's money is sloshing around in all the key marginals and Labour can't even afford posters.

But as a story this isn't news - we already knew Ashcroft had lied about becoming a UK resident. Its just unfortunate that it puts an end to 10 years of Osfucation from Tory front benchers every time the Ashcroft Question came up. Its not Ashcroft being a non-dom thats a shock, its Cam, Hague, Spellman et al saying repeatedly that they had no reason to believe Ashcroft was a non-dom.

So did they actually know and pretended not to, or dare they not ask the Deputy Chairman?

Labour can not afford posters because a certain Mr Brown is involved. It may have escaped you but he is very bad at managing money especially when it comes to controlling exenditure vs income.

cottonbelle

Taken form Iain Dale's online blog, Labour hyprocisy or what!


'The Labour mudslingers are already out in force, so let's compare and contrast what the Labour Party DOES re non doms, compared to its rhetoric.

Gordon Brown has previously claimed it is ‘a scandal’ that there is not greater transparency on the tax status of party backers. But latest figures show that since 2001, Labour have taken over £10 million from eight reportedly ‘non-dom’ donors:

• Lord Paul – £69,250 in donations to Labour, including £45,000 to Gordon Brown’s leadership campaign. A close friend of Gordon Brown and appointed to the Privy Council last summer, he has admitted to being ‘non-dom’.
• Lakshmi Mittal - £4.125 million in donations to Labour.
• Sir Ronald Cohen - £2.55 million in donations to Labour. Cohen was appointed chair of the Social Investment Taskforce, which was announced by the then Chancellor, Gordon Brown.
• Sir Christopher Ondaatje - £1.7 million in donations to Labour.
• Sir Gulam Noon - £532,826 in donations to Labour.
• William Bollinger - £510,725 in donations to Labour.
• Mahmoud Khayami - £985,000 in donations to Labour including £5,000 to Hazel Blears’ deputy leadership campaign. He has helped bankroll two flagship schools, one of which Gordon Brown opened, and was personally thanked for a donation by Tony Blair.
• Dr David Potter - £90,000 in a donation to Labour. He has previously delivered a lecture at Downing Street.'

Funny how the press and media are totally ignoring this, lets not be balanced eh!