Commission meeting with Peter Geoghegan 19 December 2023

The Commission met with Peter Geoghegan as part of its inquiry into financial corruption in politics. Peter Geoghegan is an investigative journalist and writer.

Peter Geoghegan started by telling the Commission that there has been a massive increase in donations being given to both main political parties. He questioned why an individual would give millions to a political party that was so far behind in the polls and unlikely to win the next general election unless it was in order to get an honour. He said it was concerning that some donors are facing allegations of corruption in other countries and some donors have used 'strategic lawsuits against public participation' to stymie media scrutiny.

He said that London was gaining the reputation as the money laundering capital and is now becoming a 'reputation launderer'.

He said there is evidence that a not insignificant number of people donate not because they believe in what a party stands for, but for personal gain. The British unregulated systems means that even a small amount of money can be influential.

Membership of political parties has plummeted in recent decades so parties are dependent on donors. Most ordinary people do not give money to political parties.

The Commission discussed some possible solutions. 

State funding is the norm across European democracies. State funding forms a core for political parties in the UK. In order to bolster that and make it more democratic, the state could match small donations, thereby incentivising small gifts.

Companies would be prevented from donating. Currently foreign states and individuals set up shell companies in order to donate and buy influence.

The Electoral Commission has been emasculated and should be strengthened.

There should be a publicly available register of all donors, currently a gift does not have to be registered if it is less than £11,500.

It is worth looking at 'democracy dollars', a scheme in Seattle which encourages small donations. A UK system would be different in that it would be separate to the actual ballot in order to maintain confidentiality of the vote. One of the problems of the Seattle scheme is that it is in addition to big donations, in the UK we could stop all big donations.

Political parties need to be funded and we need to invest properly in politics, the questions is how to do that without generating corruption but in a way that enhances confidence in politics and democracy.