Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
tom;
if theres nothing to hide
publish the content
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
No! Never. "Trust me, I'm a Conservative."
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i don't see how this proposed £.50,000 cap on donations would work.
people have various different businesses that could each donate the top amount, also using family members would be another way around it.
Guest 660- Registered: 14 Mar 2008
- Posts: 3,205
The Lunches and Dinners with the PM would be cheaper!!!
If you knew what I know,we would both be in trouble!
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
A statement from the Prime Minster, made today:
-----
""""'Yesterday I said that what the former Treasurer of the Conservative Party, Peter Cruddas, said was completely unacceptable and wrong.
I want to make clear that no money was accepted from the exchange he had.
We have a robust and sensible system for raising money in the Conservative Party.
All donations to the Party centrally above £7500 are declared to the Electoral Commission and must comply with UK Electoral Law.
No donation is accepted before thorough compliance procedures have been gone through.
But as I said yesterday, in the light of these events, I have ordered a full Party inquiry.
This will be led by the Conservative peer Lord Gold, a distinguished lawyer and a former senior partner at Herbert Smith.
Let me deal with some of the specific points.
There has been much speculation about dinners in my flat in Downing Street.
The position is this.
In the two years I have been Prime Minister, there have been three occasions on which significant donors have come to dinner in my flat.
In addition there was a further thank you dinner, which included donors, in Downing Street itself shortly after the General Election.
We will be publishing details today.
None of these dinners were fund raising dinners, and none of these dinners were paid for by the taxpayer. I have known most of those attending for many years.
Let me add that Peter Cruddas has never recommended anyone to come to dinner in the flat; nor has he been to dinner there himself.
I already publish details of my external meetings as Prime Minister - the first Prime Minister ever to do so.
I also publish all meetings that I have with media editors and proprietors.
From now on, the Conservative Party will publish details every quarter of any meals attended by any major donors, whether they take place at Downing Street, Chequers or any official residence.
The Conservative Party is funded by private citizens.
I inherited a Party that was tens of millions of pounds in debt and dependent on a tiny number of big donors.
Since I have been leader we have significantly broadened the Conservative party's funding base to many more significant donors.
One way we do this is through the Leader's Group, where donors pay £50,000 a year and there are regular dinners attended by myself or other senior Ministers.
This fact is already fully known and transparent, and any donations are declared to the Electoral Commission. However, from now on, the Conservative Party will, in addition, publish a register of those major donors who actually attend these fundraising dinners.
On policy, let me make clear, no one in the No 10 Policy Unit has met anyone at Peter Cruddas's request.
And for the avoidance of doubt, there is no Policy Committee at No 10.
However, to avoid any perception of undue influence, from now on we will put in place new procedures in which if any Ministerial contact with a party donor prompts a request for policy advice, the Minister will refer this to his or her Private Office who can seek guidance from the Permanent Secretary.
Clearly there is an urgent need for party funding reform in this country, as I have consistently argued for the last six years.
No party is immune from these problems - indeed the Leader of the Labour Party has himself encountered controversy in recent days.
That the Government has invited Labour to re-start cross-party talks on reforming the current rules.
But today I make this offer, once again, to the Labour Party:
I am ready to impose a cap on individual political donations of £50,000, without any further need for state funding.
But to be fair this must apply equally to trade unions as well as private citizens.
We could do that tomorrow, and take the big money out of British politics once and for all.'"""""
------
Let us see if Labour agree to this funding restriction.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
how many unions donate to the reds and how much do each give?
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
All well and good...up to the last line or so.
Companies and Unions should still be able to fund any Political Party WITH the consent of share holders/members.
It is entirely disingenuous and infantile to seek cross party support for a measure that effects the one way more than the other.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
It affects both Parties and this kind of thing is best done by agreement. The talks were stalled by Labour because of their over dependence upon the Unions.
Last year - to answer Howard's question, 86% of Labour's donations came from the Unions with Unite alone giving over £765,000 which was about 25% of the total they received.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
"over dependence" is your phrase Barry, infantile, as I said.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Courtesy Sunday Times................
Peter Cruddas Billionaire,former tory treasurer,donated over £ 1 million to the conservative party told ``Donors give
£ 250,000 donation and things will open up for your business.....it will be awesome``
``the donation would come from a Liechtenstein fund belonging to middle east investors.....one option was to set up a
UK company to donate the money and it to be paid by a director of the company who is on the electoral register``
The investigation was advised by Sarah Southern former `Cameron` aide now working as a lobbyist......she would
know how Cameron`s conservatives work !!!!!!!...........
``the party makes well over £ 5 million a year selling `private` dinners with Cameron for such donors``Cruddas said.
``the prime minister entertains donors at No 10,Chequers,Highclere Castle`` Cruddas said,,,,,not chipping
norton???.....
He said ``dinners can have Osborne and Hague in attendance``................as waiters?????..............
The role of a conservative prime minister is to work with the party treasurer to raise funds for the party.....they have
regular meetings...are we to beleive they do not discuss the amount of donation and who by?......just like Cameron
does not involve himself with the BSkyB negotiations???....................
Cruddas...``In fact some of our biggest donors have had dinner in No 10 in the PM`s private apartment with
Samantha``
Cruddas ``You can ask any question you wish.....Donor says `could we ask about buying the Royal Mail?....Cruddas
replied ``that would be a very good thing``
``The Party do not pry into where the money comes from``
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
For Information.........
Yesterday, we got yet another glimpse of how corrupt our political system is. The co-treasurer of the Conservatives was filmed giving a rare honest account of how lobbying can work. Donate enough money and you get to have dinner with the Prime Minister.[1]
That's probably not most people's idea of a great night out, but the Tory treasurer was in no doubt it would pay off. "It'll be awesome for your business", he said.
A ban on secret lobbying would help weed out this kind of sleaze. New rules could force politicians to reveal who they're meeting and what they talked about. That's why 38 Degrees members have been campaigning to bring in these rules for ages.
After the MP expenses scandal, public pressure pushed all the parties to make big promises about tackling lobbying. But now it's time to write the new rules, Cameron has come up with weak rules that won't solve the problem.[2]
If we speak up together now, we can push him to go much further and bring in a real ban, not just a token gesture. Can you take 30 seconds to sign a petition demanding a ban on secret lobbying?
https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/stop-secret-lobbying
We know David Cameron is worried about public anger about secret lobbying. Back when a Labour government was the main culprit, he described it as a "scandal waiting to happen".[3] Now it's his own reputation on the line. A big petition will show him that the anger will just keep on growing if he doesn't introduce a proper legal ban.
38 Degrees members have voted to make it a priority to ban secret lobbying because we know the harm it does on other issues we care about. How many secret dinners with private health lobbyists did Cameron have whilst pushing through his NHS changes?
Help stop the rich and powerful whispering in the ears of MPs who are meant to be working for us - add your name to the petition now:
https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/stop-secret-lobbying
Thanks for being involved,
Marie, Hannah, Becky, David, James, Cian and the 38 Degrees team
PS: At the moment, David Cameron is proposing a "register of lobbyists" which wouldn't cover most lobbyists, and wouldn't include information on what they were lobbying about or how much they were spending. That's not good enough! Let's up the pressure for a real ban - sign the petition now:
https://secure.38degrees.org.uk/stop-secret-lobbying
NOTES
[1] Daily Mail: It'll be awesome for your business: Tory treasurer told donors they could have access to PM and influence policy
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2120287/Itll-awesome-business-Tory-treasurer-told-donors-access-PM-influence-policy.htm
[2] Telegraph: The MPs expenses scandal
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/
[3] Telegraph: How David Cameron predicted the lobbying scandal which now engulfs him
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9166206/How-David-Cameron-predicted-the-lobbying-scandal-which-now-engulfs-him.htmlKeith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
you have to applaud mr cameron on the future
so if he wants to be so transparant why not publish these latest substantial donors(mr camerons words)
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
how can a ban be put on secret lobbying?
if no-one other than those involved know about it then it would be impossible to police.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
i don't know how true this is but i heard that mr pickles was planning to host dinner parties for potential donors.
unfortunately the plan did not come to fruition when the donors found out it would be a buffet and they did not think they could compete with eric.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
It is absolutely true that this sort of thing has always gone on with all parties and should be stamped out in some way.
However I see this as an opportunity!
For about a fiver each we could all go up to number 10, get dinner, and get to have our say.
This would really be 'Big Society' at work.
It's what Mr Cameron wants, surely!?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
interesting proposition darren but dinner is not the right setting for communicating with dave and george.
they are much more at home with midnight feasts in the dorm, pillow fights and tuck shops.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
My view is as follows:
All members of Parliament are paid by the State to do their work, which includes legislating, be it in government or in opposition.
The PM is paid more by the State on account of his higher position.
Under no circumstances should party funding by individuals influence legislation.
The Tory co-treasurer made it clear that private funding to the Tory party would influence legislation, and this is a betrayal of the People of Britain, as we pay taxes to finance the Parliamentarians to legislate.
Under no circumstances should the PM use 10 Downing Street to give dinners in return for party funding, These dinners could be given at a Conservative office, or in a restaurant, or in a private house. 10 Downing Street is not a private house as such, and is considered the house where the British Prime Minister lives to serve Britain, by whom he is paid.
So it is unacceptable that 10 Downing Street be used in connection with the funding of one party, as clearly the PM is abusing his position as Prime Minister of this Country paid for by the whole State.
How the political parties should be allowed to fund themselves is a different issue, to which I know not the answer. But the ministers, and all Parliamentarians, are paid for by the People to legislate for the People.
The Prime Minister has clearly breached this trust and lost MY confidence in him!
That Labour did this, that and the other is a different issue, it doesn't make the PM's abuse of 10 Downing St. for party funding any better.
!0 D. Street belongs to the State and is maintained at the cost of the tax-payer, regardless of our political - or non political - views and allegiance.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
I don't know Howard, I think a simple three course would do.
It would probably be inedible, although I'm sure it would be blamed on your palate being ruined by your last meal.
I should imagine it would consist of:
A starter full of colour but lacking in substance.
A main that was failing because 'too many flavours'
And a dessert that had no finesse or quality...something like an Eton Mess.
