This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/02/camerons-tory-donor-peers-poor-lords-speaking-attending-records

The article has changed 11 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Cameron's Tory donor peers have poor Lords attendance records May will award honours in different way to Cameron after row over 'cronies' list
(about 2 hours later)
A string of Conservative donors granted peerages under David Cameron have poor speaking and attendance records in the House of Lords, Guardian research has found. Allies of Theresa May have indicated she will award honours differently to her predecessor, David Cameron, after a row over his decision to reward donors, aides and pro-EU campaigners in his resignation list.
Six of the donor peers have contributed just a handful of times to debate in the chamber since entering the Lords, and one has already retired, allowing him to keep the title without doing any work. The prime minister has come in for criticism from Labour and the Lib Dems for refusing to block the honours proposed by Cameron, with Downing Street saying that would set a very bad precedent.
The figures will raise questions about whether peerages are being handed out effectively as titles without the expectation of a significant contribution to the work of parliament. In a clear attempt to distance May from the row engulfing Downing Street, Conservative allies said she would be more careful than Cameron not to open herself up to the charge of cronyism when she hands out rewards for public service.
They come as Theresa May, the prime minister, and Patrick McLoughlin, the new Tory chairman, face fresh calls to reopen talks on reforming funding of political parties, after Cameron was criticised for recommending honours to party donors, aides and pro-EU campaigners. “Anyone who has worked with her knows there will be no abuses of the system,” one government source said.
Lord Bew, the chair of the public standards watchdog, urged the main parties to embark on new talks to reform political funding. The attempts to disassociate May from Cameron’s choices comes as she is under pressure herself over the list proposed by Cameron because the prime minister has the power to block the recommendations before they reach the Queen.
Bew, a politics professor and chairman of the committee on standards in public life, said he would be making a fresh push for progress, after cross-party talks aimed at ending big money influencing politics failed under Cameron’s premiership. At least one Conservative party donor, Michael Spencer, is believed to have been stopped from getting a peerage by Whitehall after a last-ditch attempt by Cameron to secure him entry to the House ofLords. But the many of the other honours on the list, leaked to the Sunday Times, are expected to go through.
The chair wrote after last year’s general election to Cameron, Harriet Harman, then acting Labour leader, and other party leaders, asking them to get back around the table and address the issue of big money influencing politics. A year on from that call, Bew told the Guardian he would be writing to the new party leaders, including May and Jeremy Corbyn, calling on them to restart the talks aimed at bringing greater integrity to the funding of political parties. Related: The honours list shows the Tory Brexit wars are nowhere near over | Anne McElvoy
He is issuing the reminder as his committee prepares to publish new figures and a report this week on party funding. Last night, May was also facing calls to reopen cross-party talks on reforming funding of political parties, as campaigners claim the current system opens up politics to being influenced by big money as many major donors end up rewarded with peerages or other honours.
Lord Bew, the chair of the committee on standards in public life, said he would be making a fresh push for progress after such talks aimed at bringing greater integrity to the funding of political parties reached stalemate during Cameron’s premiership.
Bew wrote after last year’s general election to Cameron, Harriet Harman, then acting Labour leader, and other party leaders, asking them to get back around the table.
A year on from that call, Bew told the Guardian he would be writing to the new party leaders including May and Jeremy Corbyn, as well as the others, reminding them of his call for discussions as his committee prepares to publish new figures on party funding this week.
Bew said the debate was fractious and difficult to resolve but there was some opportunity for progress, starting with small areas of agreement between the parties.Bew said the debate was fractious and difficult to resolve but there was some opportunity for progress, starting with small areas of agreement between the parties.
Related: David Cameron’s dishonourable list devalues true service | Letters
“There are controversies about the Sunday Times story [on honours]. But the big question that links it all up is this one on party funding,” he said. “The British people themselves think you would only give money to a party unless you expect a peerage or some such goody but they also believe they should not have to contribute a penny towards funding political parties – which would solve the problem.”“There are controversies about the Sunday Times story [on honours]. But the big question that links it all up is this one on party funding,” he said. “The British people themselves think you would only give money to a party unless you expect a peerage or some such goody but they also believe they should not have to contribute a penny towards funding political parties – which would solve the problem.”
At least one Conservative party donor, Michael Spencer, is believed to have been blocked from getting a peerage during a last-ditch attempt by Cameron to secure him entry to the Lords. Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat leader, issued a challenge to May to get back round the table. “With a new leader and a new Tory party chairman, I now challenge them to join me to restart the cross-party talks on funding for political parties,” he said.
“Big money from union barons and big money from rich donors must not continue to warp our politics. This whole sorry saga of Cameron’s cronies shows how we must kick big money out of politics.”
A Conservative spokesman signalled the party could be willing to make some progress, after the stalemate of the last parliament.
He said: “The numerous inter-party party funding talks over the last decade have failed to reach any consensus – they were too focused on complex and controversial structural changes. Neither is there any public demand for more state funding of political parties. During the trade union bill, the Conservative party suggested reforms to promote small-scale fundraising that would command broad support, rather than trying and failing to achieve an all-or-nothing, ‘big bang’ solution.”
During his time as prime minister, Cameron recommended at least a dozen party donors to sit in the House of Lords, triggering persistent accusations of cronyism.During his time as prime minister, Cameron recommended at least a dozen party donors to sit in the House of Lords, triggering persistent accusations of cronyism.
Research by the Guardian has found a string of Conservative donors granted peerages under Cameron have poor speaking and attendance records in the House of Lords.
Six of the donor peers have contributed just a handful of times to debate in the chamber since entering the House of Lords, and one has already retired, allowing him to keep the title.
Anthony Bamford, who had personally given more than £100,000 while associated companies provided £4.7m, has spoken just twice in the main chamber since joining in 2013. In the year to February – the last month for which data are available – he is registered as having attended five times.Anthony Bamford, who had personally given more than £100,000 while associated companies provided £4.7m, has spoken just twice in the main chamber since joining in 2013. In the year to February – the last month for which data are available – he is registered as having attended five times.
Michael Bishop, who became Lord Glendonbrook and has given the party more than £1m, has made just one contribution on the floor of the Lords and is registered as turning up just 16 times in the year to February. Michael Bishop, who became Lord Glendonbrook and has given the party more than £1m, has made just one contribution on the floor of the Lords and is registered as turning up only 16 times in the year to February.
Related: From Lloyd George to the lavender list: the history of honours scandals
Other examples include George Magan, who gave the party almost £1.5m. He has spoken twice since joining the Lords in 2011. Robert Edmiston, another major donor whose companies have contributed around £4.5m, spoke just five times before retiring as a working peer four years later, while being allowed to keep his title.Other examples include George Magan, who gave the party almost £1.5m. He has spoken twice since joining the Lords in 2011. Robert Edmiston, another major donor whose companies have contributed around £4.5m, spoke just five times before retiring as a working peer four years later, while being allowed to keep his title.
A minority of peers who are also major Tory donors have made significant contributions to the House of Lords. These include Dolar Popat, who has given the party more than £200,000, but became whip and has made more than 340 speeches in the Lords since 2010.A minority of peers who are also major Tory donors have made significant contributions to the House of Lords. These include Dolar Popat, who has given the party more than £200,000, but became whip and has made more than 340 speeches in the Lords since 2010.
May has declined to block new honours recommended by Cameron as one of his lasts acts as prime minister, as Downing Street has said it would set a bad precedent. But she is now coming under pressure to help reform politics by committing to new talks on party funding.
Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat leader, issued a challenge to the new prime minister to get back round the table. “With a new leader and a new Tory party chairman, I now challenge them to join me to restart the cross-party talks on funding for political parties,” he said.
“Big money from union barons and big money from rich donors must not continue to warp our politics. This whole sorry saga of Cameron’s cronies shows how we must kick big money out of politics.”
Will Brett, head of campaigns at the Electoral Reform Society, also called for the parties to start negotiating again.
Related: From Lloyd George to the lavender list: the history of honours scandals
“The big donor culture of politics is a dark cloud that hangs over our democracy. People see the sums of money being donated from single sources and they understandably start to question the integrity of our political parties,” he said.
“And of course that’s not helped by the various cash-for-honours scandals which seem to come around like clockwork. Our party funding system is bringing politics into disrepute.
“We desperately need to clean up the way parties finance themselves, starting with a cap on donations, a lower spending limit for campaigning and an increased element of public funding. It’s high time that party leaders get round the negotiating table and bring Britain into line with most other developed democracies – where parties are funded cleanly and transparently.”
A Conservative spokesman signalled the party could be willing to make some progress, after the stalemate of the last parliament.
He said: “The numerous inter-party party funding talks over the last decade have failed to reach any consensus – they were too focused on complex and controversial structural changes. Neither is there any public demand for more state funding of political parties. During the Trade Union Bill, the Conservative party suggested reforms to promote small-scale fundraising that would command broad support, rather than trying and failing to achieve an all-or-nothing, ‘big bang’ solution.”
The talks would also need to involve Labour, which was set to lose millions of pounds in funding under reforms proposed by Cameron’s Conservative government, but the party did not have a comment on Tuesday about whether it was willing to re-engage.