Questions mount for Tories over The Aschcroft Supremacy

Tax dodger Lord Ashcroft donated £4.7m - 78% of money spent by the Tories in key marginals, much higher than the 2% figure they've been spinning.

Our guest writer is Dan McCurry

Private polling by the Conservatives shows that their lead in the polls, which has been slipping nationally in recent months, is holding up well in key marginal seats, due to their massive financial resources, as compared to the Labour party’s active volunteers.

If they have such massive funds that they can buy the outcome of democracy, then what declarations of interests are contained on their campaign material? Do these employees tell the voters they are paid when they canvass?

Their marginal seat campaign is masterminded by the UK-tax-avoiding billionaire Lord Ashcroft. Of the £6m that the Tories have poured into these 117 key marginals, Ashcroft’s contribution to Tory coffers has totaled a massive £4.7m – 78%, 39 times higher than the mere “2%” figure the Tories claim he has donated.

Yet, not only does this foreign-based billionaire avoid UK tax, but he has avoided scrutiny which affects the legality of the donations as well as his right to bear his treasured title and to vote in the upper chamber, following the undertakings attached to the award of his peerage – to make the UK his permanent home for tax purposes by the end of 2000.

This persistent flouting of agreements brings into question the integrity of the £4.7m in gifts. The Tories confirmed last year that Lord Ashcroft was the party’s biggest benefactor in 2008, yet it took ten years to reveal his flouting of agreements.

What declaration of interests are displayed on their paid-for campaigning in these marginal constituencies?

Do they declare that the posters, phone-calls, canvassing and leaflets are funded by a foreign-based billionaire with a ten year history of avoiding transparency? If not, then why not?

If not, then are they arguing that he is a rogue deputy-chair, while the integrity of the party as a whole is not in question? If so, then they should demonstrate their transparency with declarations of interest in all paid-for campaigning.

If they are unwilling to do this, then perhaps we should conclude that they are still just the same old Tories?

Channel Four News has more on the use of the Ashcroft cash in key marginals, and Political Scrapbook reports on Michael Gove’s description of Ashcroft as a “comedian” who puts the Tories’ “entire strategy at risk”.

As you’re here, we have something to ask you. What we do here to deliver real news is more important than ever. But there’s a problem: we need readers like you to chip in to help us survive. We deliver progressive, independent media, that challenges the right’s hateful rhetoric. Together we can find the stories that get lost.

We’re not bankrolled by billionaire donors, but rely on readers chipping in whatever they can afford to protect our independence. What we do isn’t free, and we run on a shoestring. Can you help by chipping in as little as £1 a week to help us survive? Whatever you can donate, we’re so grateful - and we will ensure your money goes as far as possible to deliver hard-hitting news.

23 Responses to “Questions mount for Tories over The Aschcroft Supremacy”

  1. uberVU - social comments

    Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by leftfootfwd: Questions mount for Tories over The Aschcroft Supremacy: http://cli.gs/qgSY4

  2. Guido Fawkes

    Could you repeat the exercise for the Unite union?

  3. Henry

    And don’t forget to add in the £569,000 handed over to the Tories since 2003 by Ashcroft’s wife Susan Anstey. Presumably legal?

  4. Peter Kenyon

    Could David Cameron arrange for a cheque presenting ceremony for the repayment of all UK tax avoided since undertakings were given to the House of Lords Appointments Committee?

  5. Liz McShane

    Guido – Trade Union donations to the Labour Party are made up of individual donations/levies by their members and are voted on. There is no equivalence (moral or otherwise) between this and Lord Cashcroft – I don’t know why you keep conflating the two things.

Comments are closed.