Reform, and the death of the Tory Party

[First Aspect]

1. Why should he get preferential treatment?
2. Is he so despised that he needs personal protection?

Now he has made that claim, someone will follow the money.

Not being an expert on laws regarding political donations, I don't know for certain, however it seems to me a rather gaping loophole if donations can be deemed not donations by referring to them as personal gifts.

Quick bit of research suggests it will depend whether or not he was at the time standing for election anywhere, and whether any of that money ended up being used for an election campaign. Hard to tell whether the supposed spending on personal protection during campaigning would be captured.

 

[C R]

Fagash claims the £5 million donation was for personal protection as the Home Office had refused to provide him with a protection team.
Yes the BBC do try to expose Fagash

My understanding was that one of the attacks he claims to have motivated the donation happened about a year after he got the money. Some clairvoyancy there, Shirley.

 

[briantrumpet]

“I've been the most attacked, physically, politician of modern times," Farage said. 🤔….

Yeah, a couple of milkshakes are so much more traumatic than, you know, being murdered. More like having an egg thrown at you. I don't remember Prescott being given £5mn for lifelong protection.

 

[First Aspect]

Yeah, a couple of milkshakes are so much more traumatic than, you know, being murdered. More like having an egg thrown at you. I don't remember Prescott being given £5mn for lifelong protection.

He could take care of himself. The crowd needed protection though.

 

[Beebo]

Fagash claims the £5 million donation was for personal protection as the Home Office had refused to provide him with a protection team.
Yes the BBC do try to expose Fagash

I have two comments on this.
Firstly he has said he can’t do MPs surgeries in Clacton due to safety issues. But has £5mill to pay for security.
Secondly, does anyone remember when Coutts refused to offer him personal banking. I wonder if this payment had anything to do with that decision?

 

[Pblakeney]

Now he has made that claim, someone will follow the money.

Not being an expert on laws regarding political donations, I don't know for certain, however it seems to me a rather gaping loophole if donations can be deemed not donations by referring to them as personal gifts.

Quick bit of research suggests it will depend whether or not he was at the time standing for election anywhere, and whether any of that money ended up being used for an election campaign. Hard to tell whether the supposed spending on personal protection during campaigning would be captured.

Good point.
Surely he can provide receipts to show that this personal protection has been paid for? He'd have them to claim back expenses. 😉

 

[briantrumpet]

Now he has made that claim, someone will follow the money.

Maybe, but it needs to be relentless and dogged, as with all of his dodgy stuff (house etc.) A couple of days and a bit of tut-tutting, and he'll just move on to the next ephemeral scandal.

 

[Psamathe]

I think a significant aspect to Faräge's "security" is publicity and image (and ego). A very obvious team of large men in matching white shirts & dark suits wearing earpiece radios forming a wall around him at public appearances makes him look "presidential", like he's so important. Even Starmer has nothing so obvious. For Faråge it's part of the public image.

 

[Dorset Boy]

There's a (I think) Newsnight clip on this. IIRC the donation was made eithr the day before Rishi called the general election, or the day before Fagash decided to stand in Clacton.
Sky News had a piece on it last night too, and the overwhelming opinion is that the donation needed to be declared.

The House of Commons code of conduct states that new MPs "must register all their current financial interests, and any registrable benefits (other than earnings) received in the 12 months before their election within one month of their election".

The rules say "purely personal gifts or benefits" from family or commercial loans would not normally have to be registered.

The rules also say "both the possible motive of the giver and the use to which the gift is to be put should be considered", adding "if there is any doubt, the benefit should be registered".

 

[Psamathe]

There's a (I think) Newsnight clip on this. IIRC the donation was made eithr the day before Rishi called the general election, or the day before Fagash decided to stand in Clacton.
Sky News had a piece on it last night too, and the overwhelming opinion is that the donation needed to be declared.

The House of Commons code of conduct states that new MPs "must register all their current financial interests, and any registrable benefits (other than earnings) received in the 12 months before their election within one month of their election".

The rules say "purely personal gifts or benefits" from family or commercial loans would not normally have to be registered.

The rules also say "both the possible motive of the giver and the use to which the gift is to be put should be considered", adding "if there is any doubt, the benefit should be registered".

And when the various investigating bodies find against Fårage we'll get the "They're out to get me, can't accept me highlighting their policies are failing, want to stop me representing your wishes ...".

He'll make himself out as "the victim" of deep state. He's probably already prepared the speeches and press releases.

 

[briantrumpet]

There's a (I think) Newsnight clip on this. IIRC the donation was made eithr the day before Rishi called the general election, or the day before Fagash decided to stand in Clacton.
Sky News had a piece on it last night too, and the overwhelming opinion is that the donation needed to be declared.

The House of Commons code of conduct states that new MPs "must register all their current financial interests, and any registrable benefits (other than earnings) received in the 12 months before their election within one month of their election".

The rules say "purely personal gifts or benefits" from family or commercial loans would not normally have to be registered.

The rules also say "both the possible motive of the giver and the use to which the gift is to be put should be considered", adding "if there is any doubt, the benefit should be registered".

That rather aligns with the ministerial code that references that ministers should ensure that "no conflict arises, or could reasonably be perceived to arise, between their public duties and their private interests."

The very act of not declaring such a significant 'gift' could reasonably be perceived to be a deliberate omission and an awareness of its dubious nature. It wasn't Farage's place to make that judgement, as an MP.

 

[secretsqirrel]

There's a (I think) Newsnight clip on this. IIRC the donation was made eithr the day before Rishi called the general election, or the day before Fagash decided to stand in Clacton.
Sky News had a piece on it last night too, and the overwhelming opinion is that the donation needed to be declared.

The House of Commons code of conduct states that new MPs "must register all their current financial interests, and any registrable benefits (other than earnings) received in the 12 months before their election within one month of their election".

The rules say "purely personal gifts or benefits" from family or commercial loans would not normally have to be registered.

The rules also say "both the possible motive of the giver and the use to which the gift is to be put should be considered", adding "if there is any doubt, the benefit should be registered".

This?

 

[Dorset Boy]

This?

That looks like it

 

[Xipe Totec]

“I've been the most attacked, physically, politician of modern times," Farage said. 🤔….

Is he referring to that time he presumably stood too close to a gaggle of exciteable MSM pundits?

 

[briantrumpet]

Copium, maybe.