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
Mr Taylor has donated £500k to the No Campaign in Scotland, Mr Darling personally went to Stornoway to ask for the cash.
Alec
It’s a bit rich of you to demand propriety when you’ve just shoehorned in summat about Better Together. That may be a discussion to have (well, yes there is), but not here on a piece without even a tangential relevance to Better Together. Also, I may be wrong, but I detect an implicit remark that gays should be grateful for small mercies that they’re not being excessively persecuted.
No-one here is asking you to choose between the Souter and Taylor. Just to show a bit a self-awareness that if you start demanding high standards of probity from others, you ought to be pretty certain you’re squeaky clean.
I mean, it’s not as if someone brought-up the fact that Salmond and the SNP opposed the military smashing of the war-machine which Arkan and Milosevic represented, eh?
On topic, it’s a bit like dismissing bank robberies as a crime worthy of concern because there are a few unsolved murders out there. (This comparison was chosen deliberately, as before he joined the fascist murder gangs of the noveau-Chetniks, Arkan was a bank robber.)
~alec
Iain S
It’s obvious to anyone, I would have thought, that Angus Robertson, who has been raising the matter of the donation to Better Together a lot lately, questioned Cameron hoping to get a response with which to attack Better Together with. What do you ascribe his sudden interest in old Tory donations to?
I do expect high standards, and I wouldn’t take money from Souter, but I don’t believe that taking money from someone who mouths off about gays is remotely akin to taking money linked to ethnic cleansing and mass rape. Do you?
I’m not in the SNP and they didn’t represent my views in that situation.
You’ve got your analogy the wrong way round: you’re trying to minimise the seriousness of the unsolved murders by concentrating your energies on the bank robbers. (And I’m perfectly aware of Arkan’s history. That’s why I don’t like the Tories and Labour accepting money linked to him).
Alec
Not entirely out of noble principle, frankly. As also has been observed, Taylor has invested heavily in the Harris tweed industry… shall we here a statement from Bute House that that should be withdrawn, or is this considered to be more nuanced?
Funny old world, innit?
Sorry, why are we talking about this? Has James Bloodworth explicitly dismissed concerns surrounding the donation to BT?
There are ample blogs and forums out there discussing Taylor’s other donations… this is one about him and the Tory Party. Given the alacrity you and others – including several with demonstable histories of pursuing BT above all others – have descended upon it to shoehorn in BT, I get the impression that your concern is less towards Taylor himself than it is with getting one over on BT.
That’s your prerogative, of course. Just not necessarily a high-minded ideal.
Once again, no-one here is asking you to choose between the two.
I know a loaded question when I see it. Do you think gays should put up with a bit of gay-baiting in this country because there’s an unpunished leader of a fascist murder-gang in another country?
No. I was giving the point to anyone uneasy about relations with Taylor. Then again, in any half-way decent police division, there’d be enough detectives to concentrate on more than one type of crime at a time.
One serious point… afaict, Taylor most definitely has not been guilty of tax-dodging. He’s employed tax-avoidance measures (and the way in which he’s done it would require the revoking of numerous trans-national treaties to rein-in).
~alec
Iain S
As you say, Taylor made an ‘investment’ in Harris Tweed which he enjoys a financial return from. If that is to be equated with his donation to Better Together can you advise what profit he hopes to make?
I didn’t realise that you were working for the blog police. I’m sure if the author of the article has a problem with this exchange being off topic he’ll remove it.
I responded to someone who sought to downplay the seriousness of taking money from Ian Taylor and sought deflection by equating it to taking money from a mouthy homophobe. They’re not remotely similar.
Thank you for trying to tell me what my political pursuits are. Let me guess yours. I’m guessing that, by being so ‘on message’ with the Harris Tweed excuse, and the speed with which you jumped on any mention of the Tory funded Better Together campaign, that you’re a Labour sell out who has trouble telling her Left from her right.