IPPR thinktank says £5m Farage gift highlights urgent need for cap on individual political donations
The IPPR, the left-leaning thinktank, says the Nigel Farage £5m donation revelation highlights the need for a cap on the value of individual political donations. It has been calling for a cap for a while, but Harry Quilter-Pinner, the IPPR’s executive director, said this story made the issue all the more pressing. In a statement he said:
It’s becoming harder to ignore the growing weight that extremely wealthy donors appear to carry in British politics, not just in scale, but in proximity to key political decisions.
Reports that Christopher Harborne provided Nigel Farage with £5m shortly before his change of stance on standing as an MP will inevitably prompt questions about influence, perception, and the standards we expect in public life.
Seven-figure sums entering politics were once exceptional, now they are commonplace. The government must act urgently, capping individual donations at £100,000, to protect the sanctity of our politics.
PMQs - snap verdict
That was scrappy, crude, score-draw sort of PMQs, influenced in part by the fact that the most important set of elections ahead of the next general election are taking place a week tomorrow. When Keir Starmer and Kemi Badenoch next face each, the political backdrop will be quite a different. Another reason why today’s proceedings will be quickly forgotten.
Badenoch chose to open with questions about welfare. We will be hearing a lot more about welfare policy during the next session of parliament and that won’t be easy for Labour. But in part there’s a silver lining; Badenoch and Nigel Farage (see 11.36am) are increasingly taking about this because, with legal migration falling steeply and small boat crossing numbers down significantly too, the issue that worked best for the rightwingers is losing its potency. (Migration Watch UK used to feature a tracker showing how small boat numbers were rising month by month very prominently on their website; they are still publishing the data, but now the figures are heading down, you will have to look a bit harder to find them.) On welfare, Badenoch was grotesquely simplifying the argument, but Starmer did not have an effective counterattack, and she was easily ahead at this point in the exchanges.
But the Tories are more interested in gunning for Rachel Reeves, the chancellor. Badenoch asked Starmer to sack Reeves and, when he ignored the question, she claimed his answer was significant. Today the Telegraph has splashed on a story speculating about a reshuffle after the May elections, and Sky’s Beth Rigby has a report saying there is a live debate in Starmer’s office about whether or not to go ahead with one. After PMQs the Tories released a comment from a statesman saying: “Everyone can see that Rachel Reeves is about to become the next person Starmer throws under a bus.” That is not impossible. But there was nothing in what Starmer said to Reeves that amounts to evidence for this (it was not surprising he ignored her question), and it is a stretch for the Tories to count his response on this as a win.
Starmer was empty-handed on welfare but in his exchanges with Badenoch, and across PMQs more generally, he spoke repeatedly, and with pride, about the legislation passed this session. The government has had its failures, but it has had legislative successes too and he made that case reasonably well. He was withering about Badenoch’s own record as a leader but he seemed to be more genuinely outraged when responding to Ed Davey, and ridiculing his decision to join the Tory privileges committee “stunt”. Davey is normally quite effective at PMQs, but today he was left deflated.
Labour claims Farage's undeclared £5m donation broke parliamentary rules
The Labour party is also accusing Nigel Farage of breaking the rules on declaring political donations. (See 12.45pm.) In a statement, Anna Turley, the Labour chair, said:
Nigel Farage appears to have broken the rules again by failing to declare this cash from his billionaire backer.
Reform have repeatedly tried to dodge scrutiny over their deputy leader Richard Tice’s tax scandal. It’s simply not good enough for Reform to gloss over these egregious acts and further erode public trust in politics.
It’s just the latest alarming example of Farage and his MPs believing there is one rule for them and another for everyone else.
Farage reported to parliament's standards watchdog over undeclared £5m donation, as Tories say 'this stinks'
The Conservatives have announced that they are referring Nigel Farage to the parliamentary commissioner over the Guardian’s report saying he was given £5m by the crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne shortly before announcing that he would be a candidate at the 2024 election.
Kevin Hollinrake, the Tory chair, said:
As a new member of parliament, Farage was obliged to report to the House of Commons all political donations and political gifts he had received during the previous 12 months.
The Conservatives are today referring Nigel Farage to the parliamentary standards commissioner.
This £5m from the crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne raises serious questions. What is Nigel Farage hiding? And why does Reform think the rules don’t apply to them? This stinks and Reform should come clean now.
PMQs is over, but Catherine West (Lab) uses a point of order to say MPs will be concerned about the report of two Jewish men being stabbed in north London.
Starmer says he was told about this before PMQs. It is “deeply concerning”, he says. There is a police investigation, and the government will support it. He says the government is determined to stop attacks like this. There have been far too many of them recently, he says.
Updated
Sarah Gibson (Lib Dem) says she is trying to deal with a landfill site in her constituency producing sulphurous smells. But the Environment Agency is not doing anything about this?
Starmer says he will chase up this issue.
Pam Cox (Lab) says Labour MPs have passed 60 bills affecting all aspects of British life. Does the PM agree the best is yet to come?
Starmer says the government is only just getting started.
Lee Pitcher (Lab) asks about Doncast airport.
Starmer says he is deeply concerned about reports saying the Reform UK council is putting plans to reopen the airport in jeopardy.
Iqbal Mohamed (Ind) asks about the revelation that the Foriegn Office is closing a unit that monitors human rights breaches.
Starmer says the work of the Foreign Office’s human rights team will not end. “It not seem to be done by a different team under a restructure,” he says.
Starmer says the government is making real progress on the NHS. Waiting lists are at their lowest for three years, A&E waiting times their lowest for five years. This did not happen under the Tories.
Olly Glover (Lib Dem) asks if the government will abandon “the developer model” and look at Lib Dem plans for more social housing.
Starmer says the government is committed to building 1.5m new homes. He says the Lib Dems abstained on legislation for this.
Luke Evans (Con) asks why, if Starmer did nothing wrong, he got his MPs to vote against a privileges committee inquiry.
Starmer says it is because they can recognise a political stunt when they see one.
Natasha Irons (Lab) asks what Labour is doing for renters.
Starmer says he is proud to say no fault evictions will be illegal from Friday.
Anna Dixon (Lab) says when she campaigns, she is particularly proud of Labour’s record on breakfast clubs, free childcare and zero-hours contracts. What is Starmer most proud of?
Starmer says the government has extended workers’ rights, taken children out of poverty, and is dealing with a war on two fronts.
Rushanara Ali (Lab) asks about a life sciences investment.
Starmer says he is able to announce that AstraZeneca is confirming an investment in the UK today.
Updated
Stephen Flynn, the SNP leader at Westminster, says this may be his final PMQs. (He is a candidate in the Holyrood elections.) It might be Starmer’s final PMQs too, he says. He says Starmer “promised change but has delivered chaos”.
Starmer says he is proud of his achievements. But what did Flynn do? He kicked out his predecessor, and then lost 39 MPs at the election.
Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, says the UK ambassador said Israel is now the US’s strongest ally, and Starmer will soon lose his job. Having sacked one ambassador for lying, will he have to sack another for telling the truth?
Starmer says the ambassador’s words are the least of what he has had to worry about recently.
He says he was surprised the Lib Dems backed the Tory motion yesterday.
I expect frivolous accusations from the leader of the opposition. Clearly I was wrong to expect anything better from a man in a wetsuit.
Davey asks about food security.
Starmer says that is one of the issues he was talking about at Cobra yesterday. But instead of also focusing on this, Davey was wasting his time on a “baseless political stunt”.
Badenoch accuses Starmer of “pompous, tone-deaf moralising”. She claims all MPs saw Starmer “punch the speaker’s chair” after PMQs last week. She claims he is not a man i control. She says Starmer has lost all credibility. “How much longer do we all have to put up with his shambles?”
Starmer says he changed his party and won and election. He says Badenoch has changed his party too; it is now even smaller than when she became leader.
Badenoch says the PM did not say he would keep Reeves. She says Angela Rayner is on manoeuvres. And the PM is worried about the next move by the king of the north. It is like “a bad episode of Game of Thrones”.
Starmer accuses Badenoch of playing political games with the vote yesterday. Starmer was chairing a Cobra meeting, he says, dealing with the impact of the war in Iran. He says the Tories are just interested in “silly political games”
Badenoch says Labour has not got a defence investment plan. The government is borrowing to fund defence. And the chancellor is briefing out rent controls to curry favour with voters. Will the PM reshuffle the chancellor?
Starmer says interest rates have been cut. The cost of government borrowing has gone up because of the Iran war. And Badenoch wanted the UK to jump in with both feet.
Badenoch claims the government is spending more on welfare because of Starmer’s policy, and he says it cannot spend more on defence because of welfare spending.
Starmer says the Tories hollowed out defence.
Updated
Badenoch says 1.5m people are claiming universal credit since Labour took office.
(Many benefits claimants are being transferred from legacy benefits to UC, so the headline figure for increases in UC claims is misleading.)
Starmer says Labour is reforming the welfare system.
Kemi Badenoch says the end of the session is a contrast with the beginning of it. At the start Labour MPs were asking sycophantic questions. Yesterday Starmer had to beg them to save his own skin. Starmer has not grown the economy; the only thing that has grown is the welfare bill.
She asks how many people are claiming universal credit since Starmer became PM.
Starmer lists government achievements, and says he is proud of his record.
Keir Starmer starts PMQs by saying the state visit is a powerful reminder of the depth of the relationship with the US.
He says in this session of parliament Labour has delivered “the biggest upgrade in workers rights in a generation, the biggest improvement in renters rights in a generation,” and the biggest action by any government tackling child poverty.
Updated
Farage admits he had to 'admit defeat' on his original plan to lift two-child benefit cap because he was attacked as 'welfarist'
In his Today interview this morning, Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, also said that he had to “admit defeat” over a proposal to lift the two-child benefit cap for some types of families.
Last year Farage said Reform UK would lift the cap (now scrapped by Labour) to encourage families to have children. The Tories immediately attacked him as favouring high welfare spending, and Farage then revised the plan, saying his party would onnly lift the cap for British families with both parents working full-time. But even this left the party vulnerable to attack from the right, and in February Robert Jenrick said Reform UK would restore the two-child benefit cap in full after he was make Reform’s Treasury spokesperson.
Asked why he backed down, Farage said:
I made a mistake on this. I tried to do something pro-family. That’s obviously impossible in modern Britain.
What I said was I would like British working families where both people are in full-time work to get some tax credits if they had more kids. And, you know, for my sins, I was accused of being a welfarist. So I’ve had to admit defeat.
Asked who defeated him, Farage said “everybody” and “mass opinion”.
He also said his revised proposal was too nuanced for people to understand, and he sai that in politics it makes sense not to pick a fight on everything.
Starmer faces Badenoch at PMQs
Here is the running order for PMQs.
Exclusive: Nigel Farage was given undisclosed £5m by crypto billionaire in 2024
Nigel Farage was given £5m by the crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne shortly before announcing he would stand in the 2024 British general election, Anna Isaac reports.
For more on Harborne, do read Tom Burgis’s excellent feature about him published at the weekend.
Farage backs calls from Blair's thinktank for significant cuts to benefits paid to people with some mental health conditions
Nigel Farage has said that he agrees with Tony Blair on the need for significant restrictions on sickness benefits paid to people with some mental health conditions.
Yesterday Blair’s thinktank, the Tony Blair Institute (TBI) published a report proposing “an emergency handbrake for UK welfare”. It said:
On a daily basis, nearly 1,000 people in Britain sign on to benefits. As part of the government’s effort to restore trust in the welfare system, we believe it could and should pull an emergency handbrake now that will slow the rise of claimants.
The handbrake is based on a simple idea: there are certain conditions that in the vast majority of cases do not limit an individual’s ability to work, and the default presumption should be that these “non-work-limiting” conditions no longer attract cash benefits.
Many of these conditions are those that have proliferated since the pandemic, particularly mental-health conditions. It is a handbrake that can be pulled now, using secondary legislation ahead of more significant reform later in this parliament.
The report did not set out a full definition of what a “non-work-limiting” condition might be, but it said the government should draw up a list and it added:
Government should start with conditions where the evidence is strongest but where objective assessment is hardest. People with conditions such as depression, anxiety and some musculoskeletal problems show clear benefits from being in work.
Alongside the handbrake, there should be “targeted health and employment support for those no longer eligible for long-term incapacity benefits”, the report said.
Explaining the potential benefits, the report said:
The potential gains from strengthening the welfare system’s gateways are substantial. If incapacity benefit claimant numbers had remained at prepandemic levels – as in most comparable countries – the welfare bill would be around £11.5bn lower by the end of this parliament. 4 And had the number of working-age Pip [personal independence payment] claimants remained at pre-Covid levels, spending would be around £19bn lower.
In an interview on the Today programme this morning, asked about the Blair proposals, Farage said that he agreed with the Blair report. He said:
Where I do agree, unusually, with Blair’s Institute is that conditions like mild anxiety just cannot qualify for disability benefit. We’re going to have to get tougher on this and not everyone’s going to like it.
Farage claimed people were being put on disability benefit with no need to look for work. He went on:
They can be signed on at a young age to these things. They can be told effectively as young men and women that they’re victims. And if you do that to people, they’re likely to stay victims for the rest of their lives. That is the point that I’m really trying to address.
The TBI report has been strongly criticised by disability campaigners. Charles Gillies, policy co-chair at the Disability Benefits Consortium and senior policy officer at the MS Society, said:
We’re really concerned that the Tony Blair Institute (TBI) are trying to force harmful benefit cuts onto the government’s agenda – something the PM was forced to backtrack on less than a year ago.
These plans are practically unworkable, would involve no parliamentary scrutiny and are based on a highly regressive view of disability.
The proposals would push many disabled people, potentially including those with MS, further into poverty and worsen their health.
We urge the government to remember that disabled people, campaigners and MPs didn’t stand for such harmful cuts last time, and to reject these proposals.
Updated
A reader asks:
Good morning all!
Remember to get your sunshine - it’s good for your sleep (regulates your body clock), your mood, your bones and teeth, just 10 minutes outside, on a cloudy day a little more
Let’s celebrate the sun and this wonderful planet we call home.
(yes I am for the first time listening to Radio Two - ‘Good News Wednesday’ with Vernon Kay and listeners giving voice notes of their good news experiences )
Andrew - might The Guardian have similar ?
We do. We have a weekly newsletter with good news updates, called the Upside. You can sign up here.
And you can read the Upside archive here.
Pension schemes bill to become law after Lords drop opposition following ministerial concessions
Peers backed down last night in a deadlock over the government’s proposed pension reforms after ministerial concessions, the Press Association reports. PA says:
The upper chamber had repeatedly refused to let the government take on powers to tell pension funds how they should invest a certain amount of savers’ money, with the aim of encouraging economic growth in the UK.
Following ministerial amendments on Tuesday intended to assuage peers’ concerns, the House of Lords has accepted a final draft of the pension schemes bill.
The portion of funds would be limited to 10%, by value, of all assets of the scheme in main default reserves, or 5% of assets to be held in UK-specific description.
Pensions minister Torsten Bell said earlier in the Commons that the government had tweaked the power since peers last reviewed it.
He proposed “a new requirement on regulators, in this case, the Pensions Regulator and the Financial Conduct Authority, to make an assessment of barriers” to pension funds investing their money into private assets.
The government would also be unable to use the power before 2028 and it would be repealed in full by 2035.
He pointed to the government’s pensions review, which found the defined contribution pensions market “is operating with an excessively narrow focus on cost”.
The probe found that “the excessively narrow focus can be detrimental to saver outcomes”.
Bell told the Commons: “That is where the reserve power comes from – it exists because the review found and the industry itself has told us that competitive pressure focused on cost minimisation is the single biggest barrier to diversifying in savers’ long-term interest”.
The changes were accepted by peers.
Liberal Democrat peer Lady Bowles of Berkhamsted told the Lords that she was “still no fan of mandation, but I think we have got it now suitably under control”, saying there were now “reasonable guardrails” in place.
Shadow minister Viscount Younger of Leckie said: “The government have consistently argued that mandation is necessary to address a collective action problem, they will now need to substantiate that claim with robust independent evidence, and for the Secretary of State to have regard to this assessment before they make regulations.”
Lady Sherlock, the work and pensions minister, said the bill would “help reshape the pensions landscape” and help savers get a better return.
Updated
Reed says government won't impose rent freeze, after Reeves suggests option not ruled out
On Monday Kiran Stacey revealed that the Treasury is considering imposing a one-year rent freeze on private sector homes as part of its response to the economic shock caused by the Iran war.
Yesterday the government’s response was varied; while Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, would not rule out the idea when she was asked about it, No 10 said it had “no plans” to do this – a standard government formula which can mean something will never happen, or that it’s an option being considered but government is not yet willing to discuss it.
Today the government has come out with a third position on the story; Steve Reed, the housing secretary, flatly ruled out the proposal.
Asked if the government was floating the idea to appeal to potential Green voters, Reed replied: “No. I think I’ve just been crystal clear, we’re not doing it.”
Reed rejects ambassador's claim Starmer might be forced out after May elections, saying 'he's not Mystic Meg'
In his interview with Times Radio this morning, Steve Reed, the housing secretary, said the UK ambassador to Washington, Christian Turner, was wrong to suggest in a private conversation that Keir Starmer may lose his job after the May elections.
Asked about the comment, Reed said:
[Turner] was speaking to a group of school kids. I don’t know whether he meant it seriously, lightheartedly, but whatever it is, it’s not going to happen. He’s not Mystic Meg. We saw in the vote last night, our parliamentary Labour party, our MPs are fully behind our prime minister.
But Reed said he did not think there was a need for Turner to apologise. Asked about this, Reed said:
I don’t think people have to apologise for every single comment that they make. No.
My colleague Jessica Elgot posted this on Bluesky last night about Darren Jones’s closing speech in the privileges committee debate.
Keir Starmer had a lot to thank Darren Jones for today - he reminded his backbenches of their real enemies. Reminiscent of the Michael Gove speech at the no confidence vote called by Jeremy Corbyn, which brought his warring party (briefly) back together.
Here is an extract from what Jones said.
Regrettably – we see this again today, time after time – the opposition are just trying to expand their interpretation of the prime minister’s words in bad faith, because their previous claim that the prime minister must have known about Peter Mandelson’s clearance has fallen apart in front of their eyes, and now they are grasping at straws …
[Privileges committee] investigations cannot be done every week off the back of PMQs on an interpretation of the wording of the prime minister. Instead, they must be done on very significant cases that warrant the work of the privileges committee. That is why it is important to contrast the allegations and accusations of the opposition parties, as many Members of the House have done today, with the seriousness of the situation when Boris Johnson was referred to the privileges committee in the last parliament.
This is an important precedent. In those circumstances, Boris Johnson knowingly told this House that there were no parties in Downing Street during Covid lockdowns, only for it to emerge that he had personally been at five of them and received a police fine for attending them. That is the nature of lying to this House, which he was proven to have done in the work of the privileges committee. It is not about the interpretation of a question and answer at prime minister’s questions.
This all begs the question: if there is no substance to the allegations in the motion today, what is it that is driving the behaviour of opposition parties? That question goes to the very basis of the motion before us. I have to ask: what is it precisely about this Labour government giving rights and powers to workers, renters and the disadvantaged that they do not like? What is it about this Labour government standing against unearned wealth and people who use their privilege to extract value from the system, rather than adding to it, that they do not like? What is it about a Labour government raising taxes on private jets and non-doms to raise money for our state schools, our NHS and our police and to lift children out of poverty after years of neglect by the Conservative party that the opposition parties do not want to hear? We all know why – because they are on the side of the vested interests, and we are on the side of the British people.
You can read the full speech here.
Steve Reed dismisses Labour rebels as ‘usual suspects’, as Starmer prepares for final PMQs of 2024-26 session
Good morning. Originally Keir Starmer was hoping that there would not be a need for a PMQs today, but we have got one, and it will definitely be the last of the 2024-26 parliamentary session. It will be a chance for Starmer to reflect on all the legislation passed.
There is some relief that the government won the vote on Kemi Badenoch’s call for Starmer to be referred to the privileges committee with ease. Here is our overnight story by Pippa Crerar, Ben Quinn and Jessica Elgot.
Labour MPs were also cheered by Darren Jones’ speech winding up the debate, of which more later.
Some 53 Labour MPs did not take part in the division last night – some because they were authorised to be away, others because they were abstaining deliberately because they did not want to vote against the motion – but only 15 voted with Badenoch. Here is the list.
At the start of this session of parliament, Starmer removed the whip from seven Labour MPs who voted for an SNP amendment to the king’s speech motion calling for the two-child benefit benefits cap to be abolished. Subsequently this was seen as an overreaction (not least because abolishing the cap later became government policy), and in an interview this morning Steve Reed, the housing secretary, played down the prospect of last night’s 15 rebels having the whip withdrawn. Asked if they should lose the whip, he told Times Radio:
There was a handful of usual suspects who did what they tend to do. I’m not in charge of discipline, I’m not too bothered about them to be honest.
And he told Sky News:
You’ve got a handful of usual suspects that will repeatedly vote against the government. They’re not going to distract us.
You know, we’ve got the renters’ rights reforms coming in this Friday, which gives renters, people who rent their home, the biggest increase in protections and rights that we’ve had for a generation.
That is what voters want us to focus on, not a handful of people that go off and don’t play the team game with the rest of us.
Ninety nine percent of us are united with the prime minister so that we can focus on the issues that matter.
Reed’s maths is a bit off; the 15 rebels amount to about 4% of the PLP, not 1%. But you get the point.
Here is the agenda for the day.
Noon: Keir Starmer faces Kemi Badenoch at PMQs.
1.15pm: Parliament prorogues with a ceremony in the House of Lords.
2pm: Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, holds a press conference on plans to “keep Trump, Musk and Putin out of our politics”.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (between 10am and 3pm), or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Updated
