Skip to main content

Ashcroft: the sky is dark with chickens coming home to roost

In May 2008 I blogged about the power of money in British politics, and how it has reshaped the forms and methods of political parties, especially the Conservatives. The point of the post was to highlight the sinister role of Michael Ashcroft as a major source of finance to the Conservatives.

The news that the electoral commission has launched an investigation into the donations offered by the Belizean billionaire rather underlines my point at the end of that first post: that the Conservatives may rue the day that they entered into such a close relationship with such a controversial figure.

More widely, it underlines the increasing urgency for a major reform of the House of Lords. Michael Ashcroft refuses to confirm whether he is a resident in the UK or Belize- and he has even served as ambassador for the tiny country to the United Nations. After several very large donations to the Conservatives, he was nominated for a peerage. It is hard to avoid the idea that essentially this man, who refuses to confirm whether he even pays taxes in Britain, bought his way into the lawmaking body of the United Kingdom.

Given that the ex-convict Jeffery Archer continues to be a member of the House of Lords, and the certain rather questionable deals of four Labour peers the upper house is beginning to resemble a rogues gallery. The time has come for the reform of the House of Lords to be completed as soon as possible. It should not be possible for foreigners to seemingly buy a seat and it should not be impossible to expel a convicted criminal from the Upper House of our Parliament.

As for Lord Ashcroft- we must of course await the results of the investigation, but should the commission find against the Conservatives, the consequences would be serious, and they ought to be.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and ...

The Will of the People

Many of the most criminal political minds of the past generations have claimed to be an expression of the "will of the people"... The will of the people, that is, as interpreted by themselves. Most authoritarian rulers: Napoleon III, Mussolini, Hitler, have called referendums in order to claim some spurious popular support for the actions they had already determined upon. The problem with the June 2016 European Union was that the question was actually insufficiently clear. To leave the EU was actually a vast set of choices, not one specific choice. Danial Hannan, once of faces of Vote Leave was quite clear that leaving the EU did NOT mean leaving the Single Market:    “There is a free trade zone stretching all the way from Iceland to the Russian border. We will still be part of it after we Vote Leave.” He declared: “Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market.” The problem was that this relatively moderate position was almost immediately ...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...