LibDem's Bung May Be Needed Soon
Tory and Labour loyalists will never eat another fruit pastille again after the Rowntree Trust recently bunged the Libdems £2m to help out with their troubles. A bung of this scale suggests to Guido that LibDem sympathisers have infiltrated the Rowntree Trust to such an extent that it has become a fellow-travelling organisation.The money is earmarked to balance up our tilted democracy blah blah blah, more likely it will be needed to pay off the dirty money defrauded by the LibDems biggest donor. The Electoral Commission has put out a statement
The LibDems are bleating that"Under section 58 of the Political Parties and Referendums Act 2000, the commission has the power to apply to a court for forfeit to the Consolidated Fund an amount equal to the value of any impermissible donation.
"We are considering the evidence and expect to reach a decision on whether to apply for such an order in the next few weeks."
"Our independent auditors, having seen legal advice, have been satisfied that we do not need to make any provision for repayment of these funds."They must be the same auditors who calculated Charlie Kennedy's election losing Local Government Financing Plans...
35 comments:
Aren't Rowntrees owned by the dreaded Nestle corporation these days? Obviously A couple of million quid can overcome any scruple.
did the Rowntree Trust fund the POWER Commission.
Having stopped buying Cadbury's following the contaminated chocolate fiasco, the choice of confectionery is now getting smaller.
It's enough to drive you to drink.
I suppose this Rowntree donation will be seen as a £2m sweetener?
Good to see the Lib Dems are maintaining their principles:
Three ingredients to consensus on party funding - Lamb
19 October 2006
Responding to the publication of Sir Hayden Phillips’ interim report on state funding for political parties, Chief of Staff to Sir Menzies Campbell, Norman Lamb MP said:
"Consensus regarding party funding requires three vital ingredients.
"There needs to be proper capping of individual contributions, strong procedures to prevent the abuse of spending in constituencies outside of elections, and proper transparency.
"Transparency is the only way we will allay the public’s mistrust and suspicion about how parties are funded."
LINK:
http://www.libdems.org.uk/news/story.html?id=11101&navPage=news.html
Having had a bit of a look, it appears to be The Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust Ltd, which bunged them the dosh - its not connected anymore to the sweets or anything else. Its a limited company set up by Rowntree to get round the charitable giving law - and its board is stuffed full of Lib Dems. I'd be quite interested if anyone can shed light on who owns the shares - and how it is they can get around the donation cap like this...
According to their site "From the Trust's present capital of about £25m, Directors allocate a potential grant budget of around £750,000 each year, excluding administrative expenses and tax. Directors also have the power to spend capital to boost grant expenditure if the need arises."
So the Lib Dems get their mates onto this and vote 3 years worth of grants (nearly 10% of its capital), to their party!
Gobsmacked.
The Liberal Democrat Party - now a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust Ltd....
Prentiz - what donation cap? As far as I understood, there is no maximum for a donation. When did the rules change?
From Mark Williams post on Iain Dale
http://www.jrrt.org.uk/history.htm
"The Trust was formed in 1904 but didn't actually give any money to the Liberal Party until 1935, 9 years after Joseph Rowntree died. The history says that Rowntree was a supporter of liberal with a small "l" causes, and that he viewed a thriving Liberal Party as essential to the country. It doesn't actually say that he was ever a member, supporter or donor to the Liberal Party.
Between 1904 and 1939 the Trust only gave 0.89% of its grants to the Liberal Party. Now it gives 50% annually of its grants to the Lib Dems, and its board of directors (for it is a company) is stuffed with LibDem apparatchiks headed by Lord Kirkwood (a Lib Dem Peer and former Lib Dem MP)."
Something smells here.........
and it's not the crap dribbling from oatens mouth in the caption competition
I owe a lot money to objectionable people as well and I could pass as a liberal - so I am applying to the Rowntree Trust for a grant. Its easy why not have ago yourself?
I was trying to think of a joke about that weirdo in the photo caption competition and "dirty money" - but I can't
From the JRRT website:
What we do not fund
The Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust Ltd is not a charitable trust and therefore only provides grants for non-charitable political and campaigning activities. Examples of work for which the Trust does not make grants are:
. The personal support of individuals in need
So the Lib Dems will have to give it back, then?
What Joseph Rowntree actually said he wanted his Trusts to do...."Ordinary subscriptions to political organisations will, I believe, be inexpedient, but occasional crises might arise when the funds of this Trust might
rightly be drawn upon."
So the Lib Dems seem to have become an "occasional crisis" every year!
How else can they say that JT's wishes are being followed?
Unfortunately once M. Thatcher's government let Nestle get hold of Rowntree in 1986 the Trust became a little more flush with cash and seemingly the only place that the Rowntree name lives on.
I believe that like the Cadbury family the Rowntree family was Nonconformist which accounts for the reason it would be charitably disposed towards non-Tory causes
or what about using the JT funds to prosecute LDs for taking the Brown funds?
From JT "For this end it may occasionally be necessary to prosecute
offenders or to lodge petitions against the return of those who have been elected
through corrupt means. I should wish the funds of the Social Service Trust to be
available for such purposes.".
"Tory and Labour loyalists will never eat another fruit pastille again after the Rowntree Trust recently bunged the Libdems £2m to help out with their troubles"
Jesus, just how big was Charles Kennedy's drinks bill before he stepped, sorry, fell down?
Although this donation may mean that in return, the libdems logo may have reflect every colour of the rainbow. Maybe it will be scratch'n'sniff that smells all fruity too (add your own Mark Oaten joke here)
The JRF categorically specified that the money was not to be used to pay back the Brown donation. Do your research Guido!
The JRRT has always been a supporter of liberal democratic and constitutional reformist causes, particularly given Rowntree's historic concern for social reform (see Seebohm Rowntree's works on poverty).
The JRRT is a very respectable body, completely removed from the confectionery business (owned by Nestle), and to criticise it for making donations to the Liberal movement is fundamentally missing the point - it's an essentially Liberal trust founded and run by Liberals and the trust's raison d'etre post 1935 has been to support the continuation of the liberal tradition in British politics, and latterly to support the party and particular candidates who it deemed to be supportive of liberal democratic reform (they made a modest donation to my expenses in the 2001 election).
Its the part trustees that are liable for any money that will need to be returned and not the members - therefore your £31 headline is completely misleading.
what happens if the party trustees go bankrupt because they cannot cover the debt?
Why bother to bung the Liberals? They'll never have the power to help anybody.
Maybe it is to disguise the payment of a bet - The FibDims brought in Scroaten who was indeed able to suck one until the end.
I'll get me coat.
While any donation from, say, the Midlands Industrial Council or Bob Edmiston to a political party is a perfectly respectable donation.
Why is this blog listed as independent in Iain Dale's list? If you're going to spare one party and attack all the others at any opportunity, you're supporting that party.
The Times stated (so who knows if it's true or not), that the party CAN NOT use the donation to get us out of the Michael Brown 'situation'.
Indeed, £200,000 of the trust's donation is already being spent in the party's diversity fund.
Er- lets see what the electorate makes of this type of politics in a couple of years time, most are pretty disillusioned with this your sleazier than us stuff which is a major turn off, and with a system that produces landslide victories with less than 45% of those bothering to vote. Its hardly a battle of ideas and philosophy, just who is up to their armpits in sleaze.
Isn't it better for political parties to be funded from the sale of chocolate than from general taxation?
All of this begs the question......"Should political parties be properly funded by the tax-payer" *
* as if we aren't being screwed enough already.
Ming has no scruples when it comes to associating with unconvincing characters.
"The JRRT is a very respectable body, completely removed from the confectionery business (owned by Nestle), and to criticise it for making donations to the Liberal movement is fundamentally missing the point - it's an essentially Liberal trust founded and run by Liberals and the trust's raison d'etre post 1935 has been to support the continuation of the liberal tradition in British politics, and latterly to support the party and particular candidates who it deemed to be supportive of liberal democratic reform (they made a modest donation to my expenses in the 2001 election). "
Err but the Lib Dems aren't 'Liberal', they are a bunch of populist tosspots who will always contradict party policy at local level to squeeze any available vote.I think I'll apply for a Fruit Pastille grant if the Rowntree Foundation are that gullible...
Why bother with the Liberals? They'll never have enough power to really help anybody.
And there was I thinking that a 'Lib Dem' 'bung' was a device used by Belinda Oaten to restrict hubby's straying-power.
Bit of sympathy this morning for 'wor Blinny' since Amanda Platell is having a go at her in the 'Dirty Male'. If Blin has got a couple of those bungs spare then one for her own gob and one for the mare who makes Dianne Abbott seem to be both political genius and beauty incarnate would not come amiss, inserted in the appropriate orifice.
"Tory and Labour loyalists will never eat another fruit pastille"
& presumably Tories will never shop at Sainsbury's & socialists long ago gave up wearing Polly Peck stockings.
Would this be the same auditors who did for BCCI.
If the Lib-Dems had a scrap of a conscience that money would have been repaid by now.
They're very quick to criticise others, but are just as unscrupulous as the rest.
Bah, a pox on 'em.
The Lib Dem trustees are Lord Clement-Jones, Lord Dholakia, David Griffiths, Eric Lowry, Baroness Neuberger, Lord Sharman, Lord Vallance and Sir Ian Wrigglesworth. I sincerely doubt a £2.4 million debt split eight ways would bankrupt any of them. Even if it did, I guess it would then be split between seven as opposed to eight.
Post a Comment