THERE WAS a whiff of desperation in the fool’s pardon Tory politicians were yesterday seeking for resigned party treasurer Peter Cruddas. An innocent carried away by his own bluster, treasury committee chairman Sir Michael Fallon suggested. Of course no one knew what he was at. A rogue player cut off at the knees as soon as he was discovered. Ho, hum!
Millionaire Cruddas, recently promoted to the job, and scarcely the naif suggested, had been caught on film in a Sunday Times sting not only offering potential donors “premier league” access to prime minister David Cameron and chancellor George Osborne, but suggesting means by which they could circumvent rules on overseas donations. (Noteworthy subtext: Murdoch paper bites back against Leveson by demonstrating that press underhand methods are sometimes justified!)
Yet the Tory party openly advertises membership of its Leader’s Club – dinners and drinks with senior politicians in return for donations of over £50,000. And Cameron has accepted that big donors do get invitations to parties where they are “going to be able to meet Members of Parliament and ministers and possibly the Prime Minister at functions – that’s part of the interaction. But what you won’t get is any particular favours as a result.”
But Cruddas, whose real crime seems to have been that he was over-frank, was not explicitly promising favours beyond face time and the possibility that a donor’s “issue” would get referred to the No 10 policy unit. A bit more select than the old days of the Galway Tent, but only by a matter of degree.
Could it happen here? In truth, times and the climate have changed. Business people still want face time with ministers and are prepared to pay for it. But, while some party fundraisers may not be unhappy to allow ambiguity to linger about the possibility a generous donation may smooth the way to a more sympathetic hearing, business people are increasingly conflicted about what they should do. How will it look when the accounts are published? Perhaps a donation to more than one party is advisable. Perhaps it’s not such a good idea to appear to reward a governing party for the contracts that are flowing our way. Appearances matter.
Cameron says now he is going to publish details of all donor meetings. It’s a welcome first step but more important, both in London and here, is the reform of party funding through the severe capping and publication of significant contributions, and the registering of lobbyists. As Judge Mahon might say.