Further evidence has come to light on the extent of Tory funding for the 'No to AV' campaign, including its Labour subsiduary.
Further evidence has come to light on the extent of Tory funding for the ‘No to AV’ campaign, including its Labour subsiduary. Following this blog’s questioning of No to AV’s cross-party status, the Guardian have reported that 42 out of 53 of its named donors come from Tory sources.
The newspaper reports that contributers include John Nash, who as previously highlighted on Left Foot Forward, owns a healthcare company which is all set to benefit from the NHS reforms introduced by Andrew Lansley – to whom he has also donated. Other contributors include Jonathan Wood, the biggest shareholder in Northern Rock who tried to sue Gordon Brown’s government for the handling of the the bank’s nationalisation
Margaret Beckett who supports No to AV, and is also a member of the committee on standards in public life, which is reviewing political funding, said:
“The people who have the money are people who fund the Conservative party… It’s a necessary evil.”
In a previous statement from the No campaign speaking to Left Foot Forward they stated:
“NO to AV are the officially designated national ‘no’ campaign, Labour NO to AV are a permitted participant at the referendum targeting Labour Party supporters.
“NO to AV share staff, premises and other resources with Labour NO to AV.”
So we now know that, despite having support from a large share of the parliamentary Labour party, the Labour No campaign is almost completely funded by Tories.
Tessa Jowell, who is campaigning for a yes vote, pointed out that No to AV, still have not revealed all their donors:
“We have declared all our donors since the campaign was set up last summer. Now the no campaign have admitted they have not declared all their donors since they were set up. What do they have to hide? We already know they are 99% funded by Tory donors. What is it they are hiding?”
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
17 Responses to “It’s Tory money that owns No2AV – left, right and centre”
Ed's Talking Balls
What does it matter?
Ultimately, whatever the source of funding, the majority of Labour MPs, councillors and members, not to mention plenty of trade unions, are all opposed to AV. They oppose the miserable little compromise not because the Tories are paying them. They do it, presumably like any sensible opponents of the futile reform, because FPTP is preferable.
And if you’re worrying about donors, I would suggest you look at the beam in your own eye. ERS Ltd’s £1m donation looks decidedly dodgy.
Lastly, even if I didn’t genuinely believe that FPTP is better than AV, I would still be hoping that Yes2AV takes a pasting at the polls. I’d love to see the look on Chris Huhne’s face. What an obnoxious, self-important, self-righteous oaf.
Paul Douglas
@Comment 1: Labour No2AV are kidding themselves. AV is OUR Policy. It’s not a miserable little compromise, it’s the best solution to the problems with our political system without damaging the advantages of the current system. PR is the wrong choice for this country’s Parliamentary Elections. It would be better suited to the Reformed Second House. Meanwhile, FPTP is only a credible system if there are two, maybe three, Candidates. With the pluralist politics of the UK in modern times, FPTP does not cut it. It just returned a Coalition which has absolutely no mandate. Need I really spend any more time pointing out what makes it ill-suited to our great Union?
Modicum
Why should we care that AV is a compromise solution?
The argument goes like this: “Electoral reformers think that PR is better than AV. Therefore we should support FPTP”.
That’s a uniquely stupid argument.
Anon E Mouse
Because of Labour’s appalling lead in the polls and Ed Miliband currently less popular than Nick Clegg, the YES to AV will try absolutely anything to get a vote for this change but this is a truly pathetic article.
I am in favour of AV as a stepping stone to PR but this stupid article could make people think again -especially with Chris Huhne and his shenanigans…
Anon E Mouse
Oh here’s the link:
“Ed Miliband (36%) is less popular than Nick Clegg (41%)! They’re both equal on 51% for the proportion of the public who do not like them. The common narrative is that Nick Clegg is the most reviled man in Britain – this poll tells a different story”
http://www.totalpolitics.com/blog/153397/eyebrow-raising-poll-figures-for-ed-miliband-and-george-osborne.thtml