David Cameron was asked during PMQs today whether or not he would continue hosting dinners at Downing Street with a man named Ian Taylor. He was also urged to return the money Mr Taylor has donated to the Conservative Party.
David Cameron was asked during PMQs today whether or not he would continue hosting dinners at Downing Street with a man named Ian Taylor. He was also asked whether he would be giving back money the same Mr Taylor had donated to the Tory Party.
Mr Cameron gave a curt response, accusing the MP who asked the question – Angus Robertson of the SNP – of playing a “cheap political card”.
So just who is Ian Taylor?
Well first off he is the president and chief executive of the world’s largest oil trader, Vitol, and he has been involved in the oil business for more than 30 years. Since June 2006 he has donated £555,100 to the Tory party. He also dined with David Cameron at Downing Street on 2 November 2011.
In 2001, The Observer revealed that Vitol paid £1 million to Serbian war criminal Željko Ražnatović (better known as Arkan) to arrange an oil deal with the regime of Slobodan Milosevic. For its part Vitol said no illegal conduct was involved in this transaction. According to the the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Arkan was responsible for at least 24 crimes against humanity, including the murder of civilians, rape and ethnic cleansing.
According to Herald Scotland, Vitol, the company which Ian Taylor head, has also in the past used Employee Benefit Trusts to avoid tax on the incomes of its UK staff and has been in discussion with HMRC about a deal to pay this off.
Is it really acceptable for Mr Cameron to dismiss concerns about donations from someone whose company had a relationship with one of Serbia’s most notorious war criminals in so blase a manner?
64 Responses to “David Cameron’s dodgy money”
Iain S
I could mention the work I’ve done with teenagers having sexuality issues. And my stint on Switchboard.
I still don’t think ‘gay-baiting’ is on a moral par with war atrocities though, and I think I should be allowed to say that without accusations of homophobia.
I do find it strange how accusations of homophobia can be played like a trump card in an online argument. It’s too often used to close down a debate as there is no defence when we’re all strangers online.
You asked me questions – I answered them. So easy to ask before jumping to the accusations.
Mary Lockhart
Is this the same Ian Taylor who is bank rolling the Better Together campaign in Scotland?
Mary Lockhart
Is this the same Ian Taylor who is bank rolling the Better Together campaign in Scotland?
Richas
You falsely accused of gay baiting, Taylor falsely accused of being a war criminal.
Me I never accused you of anything, i asked you to clarify your position on clause 28 and gay marriage, which you did and thank you for that. we seem to agree on section 28 and equal marriage.
meanwhile you again imply something about someone being a war criminal. well Arkan was accused, there is lots of evidence against him but he was murdered before he was indicted never mind convicted. Meanwhile nobody else involved in this discussion was even accused of being a war criminal.
Iain S
I wasn’t looking to start the argument up again, but…
I never accused Taylor of being a war criminal, as I explained above, I thought it obvious I was talking about Arkan. If you seriously think otherwise you’re an idiot.
I never said that you accused me. I said that you asked me questions which I answered.
No. I brought up something about morality there and of accusations of homophobia being used to close down debates.
You’re being deliberately pedantic about Arkan. It’s widely accepted that he was a war criminal. I really hate to say it, but, Hitler died before he could be put in the dock too. No one would suggest that he was innocent. To suggest that Arkan isn’t culpable for the atrocities he committed because he wasn’t tried in a court does his victims a disservice.