Tories bankrolled by Non-Dom Lord

cottonbelle

If you go onto the Electoral Commision website it shows you the donations to The Labour Party by the unions!

And basically this is stamping there feet because The Conservative Party have more money than them, and incidentally individual donations to the Labour Party dropped when GB took over which really says a lot about the way this party is perceived by the ordinary investor.

blueboy43

Despite the desperate muddying of waters, it doesn't look good does it. The man to all intents and purposes running the campaign in the top 100 marginals with his own money, channelled through a company that appears not too trade in the UK.

And this after almost 10 years of questioning about it.

baileysbattlebus

cottonbelle wrote: »

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!

Lord Ashcroft uses a company called Bearwood Corporate Services to make donations to the Conservatives, and has donated over £5million since 2003 and is by far the biggest donor.

There are questions about the legality of the donations because the money allegedly originates in Belize and is channeled through various companies until it reaches the Tory coffers.

There has been a letter written by Libdem MP Chris Huhne asking that the enquiry into the donations be completed before the election.

http://stevebeasant.mycouncillor.org.uk/2010/02/27/chris-huhne-says-the-electoral-commission-investigation-into-bearwood-corporate-services-limited-should-now-come-to-a-conclusion/

This is worth a look too.
http://thegeneralelection.wordpress.com/2010/02/10/if-you-go-down-to-the-bearwood-today/

Lord Ashcroft has stopped making personal donations - you need to be on the electoral roll to make a personal donation.

dealsearcher

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

But as a story this isn't news - we already knew Ashcroft had lied about becoming a UK resident.

No he didn't. He was resident. He just wasn't domiciled. So tax paid on all UK earnings but not on worldwide earnings. Just like Labour's Lord Paul.

cottonbelle

You mean the same Chris Huhne who said this morning that the Lib Dems couldn't pay back the money given to him and them from a convicted fraudster who funded campaigns for the Lib Dems because they didn't have that money to repay because they had spent it and had no money in the bank to do so!

And the rest of the Iain Dale's blog concerning Bearwood can be seen here.

• Only one per cent donated by Bearwood this year. In the last calendar year, Bearwood’s donations contribution to the Conservative Party amounts to just one per cent of all donations – £329,859 donated out of £32,508,866 received by the Conservative Party (Electoral Commission register).

• Less than five per cent donated by Lord Ashcroft and Bearwood since Cameron became leader. Since David Cameron became leader, less than five per cent of cash and in-kind donations have come from Bearwood Corporate Services, a company in which Lord Ashcroft has an interest. Since Q1 2006, Bearwood has donated £4,131,995 in cash and in-kind out of a total £90,723,018 donated to the Conservative Party in the same period (Electoral Commission register).

• At most 10 per cent of marginal seat funds donated by Bearwood. Of the funds spent in marginal seats, the amount received from Bearwood is no more than 10 per cent at most (Electoral Commission register). The Independent put this at 18% in their Saturday edition, but those who have done the calculations disagree and out it at a maximum of 10%.

---

So my - cottonbelle- opinion for what its worth this is all about the other parties not getting the same sort of funding, but most of all for me it is about the hyprocrisy of the media only putting one side of it and maybe the media would also like to enlighten everybody about Lakshmi Mittal donations and the so called Cash for Influence affair with Tony Blair.

I am not saying what has happened is right, but maybe doing a bit more research on the Labour non doms might show how this is so one sided and unbelievably hypocritical!

cottonbelle

Interesting blog regarding funding provided by the unions to fight marginal Labour seats!

http://blogs.notw.co.uk/politics/2010/02/unions-75m-plot-to-seize-control-of-labour.html

StevieJ

cottonbelle wrote: »

Interesting blog regarding funding provided by the unions to fight marginal Labour seats!

http://blogs.notw.co.uk/politics/2010/02/unions-75m-plot-to-seize-control-of-labour.html

From the Sunday Sun, and their vote Tory campaign

dealsearcher

StevieJ wrote: »

From the Sunday Sun, and their vote Tory campaign

Says News of the World at the top.

The important point is whether the facts are correct or not.

blueboy43

cottonbelle wrote: »

You mean the same Chris Huhne who said this morning that the Lib Dems couldn't pay back the money given to him and them from a convicted fraudster who funded campaigns for the Lib Dems because they didn't have that money to repay because they had spent it and had no money in the bank to do so!

And the rest of the Iain Dale's blog concerning Bearwood can be seen here.

• Only one per cent donated by Bearwood this year. In the last calendar year, Bearwood’s donations contribution to the Conservative Party amounts to just one per cent of all donations – £329,859 donated out of £32,508,866 received by the Conservative Party (Electoral Commission register).

• Less than five per cent donated by Lord Ashcroft and Bearwood since Cameron became leader. Since David Cameron became leader, less than five per cent of cash and in-kind donations have come from Bearwood Corporate Services, a company in which Lord Ashcroft has an interest. Since Q1 2006, Bearwood has donated £4,131,995 in cash and in-kind out of a total £90,723,018 donated to the Conservative Party in the same period (Electoral Commission register).

• At most 10 per cent of marginal seat funds donated by Bearwood. Of the funds spent in marginal seats, the amount received from Bearwood is no more than 10 per cent at most (Electoral Commission register). The Independent put this at 18% in their Saturday edition, but those who have done the calculations disagree and out it at a maximum of 10%.

---

So my - cottonbelle- opinion for what its worth this is all about the other parties not getting the same sort of funding, but most of all for me it is about the hyprocrisy of the media only putting one side of it and maybe the media would also like to enlighten everybody about Lakshmi Mittal donations and the so called Cash for Influence affair with Tony Blair.

I am not saying what has happened is right, but maybe doing a bit more research on the Labour non doms might show how this is so one sided and unbelievably hypocritical!

its all a bit transparent when new posters seem remarkably well informed about political funding, but neglect to mention that the quoted Iain Dale's (who I quite enjoy reading) publishing company is funded by the very same Lord Ashcroft.

No doubt we will have further Tory & Labour activists popping up to spin the party line. All very sad, and patently obvious.

And you wonder why people are heartily sick of the major parties in this country.

baileysbattlebus

cottonbelle wrote: »

You mean the same Chris Huhne who said this morning that the Lib Dems couldn't pay back the money given to him and them from a convicted fraudster who funded campaigns for the Lib Dems because they didn't have that money to repay because they had spent it and had no money in the bank to do so!

And the rest of the Iain Dale's blog concerning Bearwood can be seen here.

• Only one per cent donated by Bearwood this year. In the last calendar year, Bearwood’s donations contribution to the Conservative Party amounts to just one per cent of all donations – £329,859 donated out of £32,508,866 received by the Conservative Party (Electoral Commission register).

• Less than five per cent donated by Lord Ashcroft and Bearwood since Cameron became leader. Since David Cameron became leader, less than five per cent of cash and in-kind donations have come from Bearwood Corporate Services, a company in which Lord Ashcroft has an interest. Since Q1 2006, Bearwood has donated £4,131,995 in cash and in-kind out of a total £90,723,018 donated to the Conservative Party in the same period (Electoral Commission register).

• At most 10 per cent of marginal seat funds donated by Bearwood. Of the funds spent in marginal seats, the amount received from Bearwood is no more than 10 per cent at most (Electoral Commission register). The Independent put this at 18% in their Saturday edition, but those who have done the calculations disagree and out it at a maximum of 10%.

---

So my - cottonbelle- opinion for what its worth this is all about the other parties not getting the same sort of funding, but most of all for me it is about the hyprocrisy of the media only putting one side of it and maybe the media would also like to enlighten everybody about Lakshmi Mittal donations and the so called Cash for Influence affair with Tony Blair.

I am not saying what has happened is right, but maybe doing a bit more research on the Labour non doms might show how this is so one sided and unbelievably hypocritical!

It's irrelavent how much - it's the legalilty of it that's being questioned, the fact the money probably originates in a foreign bank that he owns.

I personally couldn't give a toss where they get their money from.

If the Labour non doms are not legally able to donate I'm sure that will be investigated too. Isn't the Electoral Commission non political?

The cash for honours did the labour party no favours - nor did the cash for questions for the tory party - neither will this - Lord Ashcroft said in 2000, when he got his peerage that he would become a UK tax resident - before he took his peerage - he didn't. Which is probably why there has been so much evasiveness from the tories over the whole thing for the last 10 years.

Could this damage the Tories - without a doubt.

The freedom of information act is a wonderful thing -

Here is Lord Ashcrot's letter of today - at the end is the undertaking to William Hague in 2000

http://www.lordashcroft.com/pdf/01032010_statement_from_lord_ashcroft.pdf