Why do they bother investigating political donations?
What’s the point when no action is ever taken? Both Jack Straw and Peter Hain have been “cleared”, despite obviously breaking the rules by declaring donations extremely late.
Jack Straw declared a £3,000 donation four years late, yet the Electoral Commission said that it would not be “appropriate nor proportionate” to take further action, which is plainly ridiculous since Straw has blatantly breached the rules. He should be required to forfeit the money he was given.
Peter Hain was not charged over the late declaration of £103,000 – not an easy amount to lose down the back of the couch – purely because the police couldn’t establish with “certainty… where responsibility for reporting donations lies in such circumstances”. So he’s got off the hook because his deputy leadsership campaign team was poorly organised – that’s not really an acceptable excuse on Hain’s part.
Some action should have been taken against both of these politicians. If no action is going to be taken, why do they bother investigating political donations at all? And why do they even bother having rules on declaring donations within 30 days and on whom they can be given by? What’s the point of having rules if they’re not going to be enforced?





I suspect that this has to do with the scale of the problem – if they went after everyone who broke the rules, they’d have a never-ending list of dodgy donations and it would get farcical.
Not that this is a reason not to prosecute them, but it’s worth entertaining the possibility that there is a lot more to this problem than meets the eye.
Great blog it’s good to see someone using a blog for what it is actually meant for look forward to seeing further comments.
Comments