KPMG stops providing MPs with free researchers

“KPMG has quietly abandoned a longstanding practice of making donations in kind to MPs and political parties by providing researchers to help in formulating policy and legislation.

The decision by the accounting giant, which has been criticised for its role as auditor to the collapsed construction giant Carillion, comes after figures released by the Electoral Commission in March showed that donations by the big four auditors tumbled by 91% during the 2017 election campaign compared to that of 2015. …

Donations in kind from KPMG, PricewaterhouseCoopers and Deloitte were widespread in the 15 years running up to the 2015 election, with KPMG making £198,093 worth of donations in kind in 2015, falling to £40,575in 2017.

The practice has been criticised by outsiders, who argue that it helps secure long-term political influence, although the firms say they are politically neutral. Prem Sikka, a professor of accounting at the University of Sheffield, said: “The firms don’t make donations. The money is an investment to secure desirable outcomes.”

He cited as an example the abolition of the Audit Commission under the coalition government, which allowed the big four firms into the £100m-a-year local government market for the first time from 2015.

However, such political donations have tumbled after the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, decided to abandon them. Secondments have traditionally been provided to opposition parties, sometimes in considerable numbers, because they do not have the same access to the civil service as government.

… Instead, political donations by the big four firms have become increasingly concentrated on paying former ministers to speak at corporate events. George Osborne, the former chancellor who now edits the Evening Standard, reported in April 2017 that he expected to be paid £65,901 for giving a speech to PwC in Ireland; Nick Clegg, the former deputy prime minister, received £18,000 in December 2016 for giving a speech to PwC. Ken Clarke received £11,500 in fees for giving speeches to KPMG in Leeds and Manchester in May 2016 while Michael Gove collected £5,000 from PwC in December 2016 and £4,000 from Ernst & Young in May 2017, again for speeches.

The big four came under fire earlier this month as part of a highly critical report by MPs on the business and work and pensions committees on the collapse of the construction giant Carillion. Rachel Reeves, the business select chair, said they had a “parasitical relationship” with companies, getting paid even if they went under and called for the Competition and Markets Authority to look at breaking them up “to increase competition and deal with conflicts of interest”. …”

http://flip.it/IEmOHP

[Tory] “Council invested in fracking company behind controversial planning approval”

“A council which gave planning permission for a controversial scheme to bring fracking to North Yorkshire had at the time of the decision pensions investments in one of the companies set to benefit – the US oil giant, Halliburton.

The Conservative-led North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC) gave the green light for exploratory drilling by Third Energy UK Gas Ltd at Kirby Misperton in May 2016. In turn, Third Energy UK Gas Ltd signed a contract with Halliburton “to support its onshore development activities”.

That same year the council – through its North Yorkshire Pension Fund (NYPF) – had £572,000 invested in Halliburton. North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC) has since jettisoned its stake. However, it still invests in fracking concerns.

Conflict and injustice

Elaine Williams, a spokesperson for NYCC, told The Ecologist: “We appoint fund managers for North Yorkshire County Council’s pension fund and they determine which investments to buy and sell – decisions which are outside of the council’s day to day control.

“The pension fund committee is completely separate to the county council’s planning committee. The pension fund committee is charged with delivering value to members of the pension fund, independent of council business.”

The Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust (JRCT), which is a stakeholder in the NYPF, has called for the council to review its investment policies. The trust is an admitted member of the scheme – it has taken on some council responsibilities where transferred staff still have pensions managed by the council.

Susannah Swinton, operations manager at JRCT, said: “The trust has raised the issue of ethical and responsible investment with NYPF. We are currently an admitted member of the North Yorkshire Pension Fund, which is part of the Local Government Pension scheme. Decisions on the fund’s investment policy and strategy are the responsibility of NYCCPF and are not under the control of JRCT.”

In 2014, JRCT – the philanthropic Quaker group funding people who address the root causes of conflict and injustice – was one of 17 of the world’s largest funds to say they would divest from fossil fuels and reinvest their money in clean energy.”

https://theecologist.org/2018/may/23/special-investigation-council-invested-fracking-company-behind-controversial-planning

“Oligarchs’ ‘influence and dirty money threaten UK’”

“A rising Tory MP warns that government inaction on laundering is a gift to Putin and has let rich Russians think they own Britain.

The Tory chairman of the foreign affairs select committee has launched a withering attack on the government’s failure to tackle the effect of Russia’s “dirty money” on Britain, ahead of the publication of a damning report this week.

Tom Tugendhat, one of the Conservative Party’s brightest hopes, criticised the UK’s “lethargic response” to Russian money-laundering and organised crime that has been enabled by London’s financial and property markets.

The MP said the government had failed to deal with oligarchs who cleaned their illicit wealth by buying townhouses in Belgravia and Mayfair, while also allowing Russian companies to raise money in London despite being under sanctions.

Writing on The Sunday Times website, Tugendhat said the regime of President Vladimir Putin had been emboldened: “Our lethargic response . . . is taken as proof that we don’t dare stop them. This is no longer just a financial problem,” he writes. “Over the years Moscow has turned from being a corrupt state to an exporter of instability. London’s markets are enabling the Kremlin’s efforts.”

Tugendhat spoke out ahead of an excoriating select committee report tomorrow entitled Moscow’s Gold: Russian Corruption in the UK. The findings will embarrass Theresa May’s government, which has professed to take a tough line with Moscow over the poisoning of the Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, in Salisbury.

However, the MP for Tonbridge and Malling points out that Gazprom, the Russian gas giant, was able to “trade bonds in London days after the attempted murders”.

He said there was a link between “oligarchs’ wealth and the power of the Kremlin” and highlighted evidence to his committee that some rich Russians now believe “they own Britain”. “Russian corruption and influence has become a matter of national security,” he writes.

Tugendhat is particularly concerned about lax controls fostering Russian influence including the London flotation of EN+, an energy company controlled by Oleg Deripaska, one of Russia’s wealthiest men who is closely linked to Putin.

MI6 is known to have been enraged when the firm was able to use the London Stock Exchange last year to raise an estimated £1bn. The company, chaired by Lord Barker, a former Tory energy minister, has been linked to the Russian military, including the production of a Buk missile that Dutch investigators said downed flight MH17 over Ukraine in 2014, killing 298 people.

The float was waved through by regulators despite EN+ being part-owned by VTB, a Russian state-owned bank subject to EU and US sanctions. The bank lent the firm £697m to help fund the flotation.

Deripaska was himself hit by tough US sanctions imposed after the Skripal poisoning. Last week, he stepped down from the EN+ board in an attempt to free it from sanctions.

“Oligarchs, who depend on Putin no matter how rich they are, have been encouraged to invest in everything from real estate to pharmaceuticals, providing Russia with leverage,” writes Tugendhat.

“It isn’t just about theft through tax evasion but enabling entire nations to be robbed of their democratic rights.”

Garry Kasparov, the Putin critic and former world chess champion, said the flow of corrupt money from Russia into the West was part of a “subtle” Kremlin strategy to “launder and spread influence”. Kasparov, who stood for the presidency in his homeland in 2007, also criticised Europe for failing to wean itself off Russian oil and gas reserves following the war in Ukraine in 2014. He said this had handed Putin leverage over the EU.

“Much of Europe still depending on Russian energy over four years after Putin invaded a European country is damning, as is the willingness of many in Europe to continue with pipeline plans that would only increase Putin’s leverage and cash flow,” Kasparov said. “It’s a war, and your enemy cannot be your partner at the same time if you want to win.”

Source “The Sunday Times” (pay wall)

“Cambridge councillor claims he can do his job over Skype after moving 400 miles away to Scotland ‘because of Brexit’ “

“A county councillor has faced heavy criticism after moving 400 miles away from his constituency and claiming he “can do his job over Skype”.

Donald Adey, a Cambridge councillor living in Fife, Scotland, also blamed Brexit for the move, saying English people were “too right wing” and not as friendly as the Scottish.

Mr Adey recently resigned from the Liberal Democrats to stand as an independent on both Cambridge city council and Cambridgeshire county council.

His position on each council allows Mr Adey to claim expenses of £14,500 in taxpayer money.

He told the Courier: “I am quite confident that I can well cover the needs of the constituents there by using the internet, phone, Skype and such things.”

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/cambridge-councillor-claims-he-can-do-his-job-over-skype-after-moving-400-miles-away-to-scotland-a3839291.html

What a surprise! “Outsourced public services ‘still not adopting ethical standards’ “

“Little significant progress has been made on reinforcing ethical standards in outsourced public services, a Lords committee has cautioned.

It also suggested a consultation be set up looking at whether the Freedom of Information Act should apply to private sector providers working on public sector contracts, the Lords committee on standards in public life also said in report out yesterday.

Chair Lord Bew noted “very little progress” had been made on implementing the recommendations of the committee’s 2014 report, aimed at enhancing the ethical standards of contractors commissioned by the public sector.

“Disappointingly, very little progress has been made on implementing these recommendations and evidence shows that most service providers need to do more to demonstrate best practice in ethical standards,” Bew said.

He called for services providers to “recognise that the Nolan Principles apply to them, for moral courage among key financial and other professionals in securing and maintaining high ethical standards”.

The Nolan Principles were drawn up in 1995 and are seven ethical standards people in public office are expected to uphold: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership.

Bew added: “Some [service providers] remain dismissive of the Nolan Principles or adopt a ‘pick and mix’ approach which is not in the public interest.”

The committee noted one-third of government spending is on external providers and that “the public is clear that they expect common ethical standards”. But some providers were not applying these public sector ethical standards in their work, the Lords concluded.

Bew said the committee called for a “consultation on the extension of the application of the Freedom of Information Act to private sector providers where information relates to the performance of a contract with government for the delivery of public services”.

The committee recommended that service providers should acknowledge the Nolan Principles applied to them.

Bew also said: “The committee remains of the view that more must be done to encourage strong and robust cultures of ethical behaviour in those delivering public services.”

The CSPL report suggested commissioners of services should include a ‘statement of intent’ in addition to contracts to set out the ethical behaviours expected by the government.

In the light of the collapse of Carillion, the committee suggested it is “essential” that ethical standards are reinforced for those delivering services with public money.

The report released yesterday is one in a series being done by the committee on ethical standards of providers of public services.”

https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2018/05/outsourced-public-services-still-not-adopting-ethical-standards

The new sleazy politics: “shadow lobbying”

A new one to add to cash for questions, conflicts of interest, payments in kind and direct lobbying:

“The disclosure that Donald Trump’s legal fixer Michael Cohen was quietly paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to advise corporations highlights the inability of US laws to prevent secretive “shadow lobbying”, analysts said.

Companies such as the telecoms giant AT&T and Novartis, a major pharmaceuticals firm, confirmed they paid Cohen, the president’s personal attorney, large sums last year in return for what they describe as guidance on navigating the new administration. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/10/payments-to-michael-cohen-show-how-shadow-lobbying-eludes-us-law

Lies, damned lies – and election leaflets!

Should you get one of these, feel free to ask a few questions!

“Conservatives are standing for election in east London on their record of “ISSUES WE’VE DONE” for “AREA NAME”, according to their leaflet.

The leaflet, promoting the Tory candidate for Ilford Town, sets out in blue capitalised letters “WHAT WE’RE DOING/HAVE DONE FOR WARD/AREA NAME”.

Underneath, it lists issues one to four that “we’ve done” for Ilford. In what appears to be an embarrassing copy-and-paste error, the leaflet reads: “Three lines of text about what issues/projects/policies you’ve already done or are doing or will be doing in your ward/area name.”

The latest in a series of leaflet gaffes ahead of the local elections on Thursday, images of the leaflet quickly went viral on social media.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/election-leaflet-ilford-conservative_uk_5ae9983de4b022f71a038ce3

“Ex-Tory MP And His Floating Dog Inexplicably ‘Photoshopped In To Road Junction Protest’ “

Yet another “you couldn’t make it up” Tory fiasco!

“A row has broken out over an ex-Tory MP being photoshopped in to a picture of local people campaigning about a dangerous road junction in north London.

David Burrowes, who represented Enfield Southgate until he lost his seat to Labour in 2017, was last month pictured protesting with local Conservatives … or was he?

The Enfield Independent reported that the local conservative group first sent the picture of the campaigners to illustrate its efforts to lobby for traffic islands at the junction.

In the picture above, Burrowes is pictured on the left with his Labrador, Cholmeley. The group later sent the image without Burrowes or his dog. …”

Links to the property industry? On the planning committee? No problem!

Does the reporter REALLY think this is only a London problem?

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/apr/29/nearly-100-london-councillors-have-links-to-property-industry?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Alas not, as we have proved in East Devon:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9920971/If-I-cant-get-planning-nobody-will-says-Devon-councillor-and-planning-consultant.html

Flagship Tory council may turn red due to councillors’ cosy relationship with developers

Owl says: If every Tory council with cosy relationships with developers turned red there wouldn’t be any left!!! Tory/developer, horse/carriage!!!

“It is the Conservatives’ local government flagship, blue since its creation in 1965. But in Westminster, amid a growing row about the influence of property developers, next month’s local elections are starting to look a bit tight.

In the ward covering London’s West End, some of the priciest real estate in Europe, two of the three sitting Tory councillors have been ousted by the party after opposing a wave of new building, which they say is overwhelming the area.

One of the councillors, Paul Church, said he had “tried to stand up for the communities I was elected to represent against the dominance of property developers and their agents, patronage and power in Westminster” but he had been “bullied, silenced and threatened by their powerful allies. Local government shouldn’t be like this.”

The other, Glenys Roberts, who has represented West End for 19 years, said: “I have tried to find out why I was deselected and they won’t tell me, so I feel as if I’m in a Kafka novel.” She said she had protested against “too much demolition” in Soho, part of her ward, adding: “If you completely get rid of the loucheness and the interestingness, do you just get rid of Soho and the reasons that anybody would ever come there?

“These are the issues I was very deeply involved with. They [the council leadership] didn’t like me being involved with State of Soho [a local group that campaigns against overdevelopment], but I just wanted the best for my area and the people I represent.”

Soho, a small area made up mainly of 18th and 19th-century houses, faces almost 20 large development schemes. Seven involve significant demolition of historic buildings, including the former Foyles bookshop in Charing Cross Road, a plan described by Historic England as doing “substantial harm” to the Soho conservation area.

The row will reopen concerns about developer influence at Westminster council, whose former deputy leader, Robert Davis, accepted more than 500 gifts or freebies, 150 of them from developers, while chairing the committee that decided on some of their planning applications.

Even the council leader, Nickie Aiken, admitted to The Sunday Times: “I do recognise that there was an historic issue in Westminster with the perception of these relationships. To date I have found no evidence of any wrongdoing or impropriety… [but] Westminster city council under my leadership will reassure residents about the integrity of the planning process.”

Davis left the planning job last year and “stepped aside” as deputy leader last month after it was revealed that he had taken gifts, meals or hospitality 514 times in three years, including nine free foreign trips, tickets to dozens of West End shows and hundreds of meals at top restaurants including the Ivy, the Ritz and Sexy Fish. He referred himself to a standards investigation but denies any wrongdoing and has been selected to stand for re-election as a Conservative.

In Mayfair, another part of her ward, Roberts said that “a lot of the rules [the council] have for keeping conservation areas in the right proportions and all the rest of it were being totally overruled”.

She said that Davis had once told her to “shut up” about a development and a number of other councillors “have told me he has tried [to silence them]”.

A third councillor who has been deselected in a different ward said Davis had telephoned to threaten them with “consequences” for their council career if they publicly spoke against controversial planning projects in their ward.

Davis said last night that he “never discouraged anyone from raising legitimate objections or concerns” but had “advised Mr Church that it is often sensible to air concerns with officers and members prior to a committee hearing, so as to allow them to be carefully considered and, ideally, addressed beforehand”.

He “expressly” denied threatening anyone with any consequences for opposing a planning application.

Roberts also said pressure was put on Westminster’s planning officers to change their recommendations to favour certain schemes.

“I was rung up by one of the officers saying there were meetings being held behind the scenes, off the record, no minutes taken,” she said.

“He was asked to change his recommendation and he refused . . . [but] the recommendations were changed subsequently.”

Roberts did not accuse Davis personally of pressurising officers and Davis said he had never asked any officer to change a recommendation.”

Source: Sunday Times (pay wall)

“GRUBBY CORRUPTION’ Tax officials refused to investigate money laundering at telecoms company ‘because they donated cash to the Tories’ “

“TAX officials are under fire after it emerged they refused to investigate a company for money laundering – saying the firm was a massive Tory donor.

HMRC was asked by French authorities to raid the offices of telecoms firm Lycamobile, but turned down the request.

BuzzFeed revealed that in an email to the French officials, a senior civil servant said: “It is of note that they are the biggest corporate donor to the Conservative party led by Prime Minister Theresa May and donated 1.25m Euros to the Prince Charles Trust in 2012.”

HMRC has admitted the reference to Lycamobile’s political links was a mistake – but insisted that was not the reason they refused to probe the firm.

Furious MPs accused the tax authorities of “grubby corruption” and demanded an explanation from Philip Hammond.

Prosecutors in France launched an investigation into claims that Lycamobile uses its phone business to launder money two years ago.

They asked HMRC to help out by raiding the company’s offices in London, but the British officials refused in an email sent in March last year.

The email included the information about the links between Lycamobile and the Tories – who have now stopped accepting donations from the company.

Asked about the letter, HMRC initially denied it was authentic, saying: “This is the United Kingdom for God’s sake, not some third world banana republic where the organs of state are in hock to some sort of kleptocracy.”

But they later admitted it was real and said it was “regrettable” that the line was included.

A spokesman told The Sun today: “HMRC always investigates suspected rule breaking professionally and objectively and is never influenced by political considerations.”

HMRC added that the reason the request to raid Lycamobile was refused was that French officials didn’t provide enough information.

Labour MP Wes Streeting blasted the revelations today, saying: “This sort of grubby corruption cannot be tolerated.”

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6091792/tax-officials-refused-to-investigate-money-laundering-at-telecoms-company-because-they-donated-cash-to-the-tories/

Jeremy Hunt didn’t tell Standards Commissioner he had bought 7 flats from an “a cquaintance” who was also a Tory donor

“Jeremy Hunt received a “bulk discount” on seven flats bought from a Conservative donor, the Guardian can disclose, as parliament’s watchdog opened an investigation into the health secretary’s admission that he breached money laundering rules.

The health secretary was forced to apologise for failing to declare his part-ownership of a company, which bought the luxury seaside flats in Southampton.

Kathryn Stone, parliament’s commissioner for standards, received a complaint about Hunt on Friday. The commissioner’s website confirms that Hunt is now under investigation.

Guardian inquiries established that the 82-flat block, called Alexandra Wharf, was developed by Nicolas James Group, a south coast property firm owned and chaired by businessman and Conservative donor Nicolas James Roach.

Neither Hunt nor Roach agreed to disclose the value of the deal but a source close to the health secretary said he had received a “bulk discount” for buying multiple apartments.

A spokesperson for Roach said that all sales at Alexandra Wharf were at “open market value”, adding that the businessman’s political donations had been properly declared on the Electoral Commission website.

They added that the pair had known each other for “several years” but had no business relationship beyond the purchase of the flats.

A spokesperson for Hunt said: “The owner of the development is a long-standing acquaintance.

“Jeremy paid standard market rates which would have been available to anyone else making an equivalent purchase.

“As Jeremy has been clear from the outset, the rental income from these properties will be donated to charity.”

Roach has made more than £50,000 in donations to Hunt’s South West Surrey constituency office since 2011, mostly in the form of complimentary venue hire.

The pair were pictured together in 2011 at a party to launch a £60m hotel in Guildford, Surrey, that was developed by Nicolas James Group.

Sir Alistair Graham, the former chairman for the committee on standards in public life said: “In terms of public perception of ministerial priorities, Hunt seems more concerned with maximising his personal interests rather than ensuring that there are good public services.

“On a local level, there does seem to be an incestuous relationship between a local donor and a local politician in a way which will make the public uneasy.” …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/18/jeremy-hunt-investigated-breach-money-laundering-rules-luxury-flats

Being a councillor: a public service or a feather-bedded job?

“The ceremonial head of a cash-strapped council is set to be given a £2,500 pay rise just weeks after a decision to shut the county’s youth clubs.

A meeting of Gwynedd council’s democratic services committee today recommended that the council chair should see their pay upgraded to “band 1” status.

The role – known in some areas as the county mayor – changes hands every 12 months and involves presiding over full council meetings and representing the authority at various functions in a civic capacity.

At present, the holder is afforded “band 2” status, meaning they would receive £21,800 in 2018/19.

But, if Gwynedd’s full council accepts the committee’s recommendation when it meets on May 3, the chair’s pay will increase to £24,300.

The committee’s findings come just a month after the authority decided to introduce a new youth service model, which will see all 39 existing youth clubs replaced by a single county-wide offering in a bid to save £270,000.

Cllr Charles Wyn Jones, who proposed the pay rise during this morning’s meeting, said: “Having fulfilled the role myself, I know that the council chair usually has to attend at least 40 functions a year, many of which take place in the daytime.

“I feel the title holder should be paid more than the committee chairs, simply due to the number of hours they have to put into the role.

“I know the role only lasts a year, but it involves putting in many hours.”

Cllr Dewi Owen, also a former council chair, echoed his sentiments: “Living in Aberdyfi and having to travel to functions in places such as Bangor, it meant having to stay over in bed and breakfasts and many hours of travel time in order to do the job properly.”

The new council chair, succeeding Cllr Annwen Daniels, will be selected by county councillors next month.

Meanwhile, all 75 Gwynedd councillors will receive a £200 pay rise to £13,600 a year, in line with the Independent Remuneration Panel for Wales’ (IRPW) findings for the 22 Welsh authorities.

Questioning the panel’s findings, Menai Bangor councillor Catrin Wager said: “I do feel that at a time when cuts are being made, an extra £200 for every member is questionable.

“Is there anything we can do apart from accept this?”

In response, democratic services manager Vera Jones confirmed that members could choose to waive the automatic pay rise by informing the authority in writing.

There will be no change in the salaries of the council leader and deputy, which will remain at £48,300 and £33,800 respectively.

Members of the cabinet will be paid £29,300 a year, and £22,300 for committee chairs.

The final decision on member salaries will be formally rubber stamped during Gwynedd’s full council meeting on May 3.”

https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/gwynedd-council-pay-rise-chair-14524343

Cameron developer pal wants to build 28 luxury homes and use S106 to fund renovation of his derelict manor house “for the public”

David Cameron‘s multimillionaire friend has insisted the money earned from building 28 luxury homes will benefit the public by helping to restore his Grade II-listed manor house in the countryside.

Nicholas Johnston has claimed that despite owning two massive country estates, he doesn’t have the funds to restore his 4,000-acre Great Tew estate in the Cotswold Hills, Oxfordshire.

So the Old Etonian announced he plans to refurbish his manor with profits earned from a proposed £56million ‘world-class car museum’ that includes upmarket holiday lodges, as he says the restoration will be a public service.

The action has angered locals as it is common practice for big-time property tycoons to use a portion of the development funds to bankroll local parks, donate to schools or other initiatives for the community.

Mr Johnston told the [local] paper: ‘It is a very expensive thing to save. There isn’t the revenue from estate activities to allow the restoration of Tew Park.’

He added that if the Oxfordshire council rejects his plans, the hefty cost could fall back on the public, due to the council’s responsibility to protect listed structures, saying: ‘If I don’t have the money to do it … ultimately that falls back on the public purse.’

Mr Johnston is partnering with American billionaire Peter Mullin to build a ‘world-class car museum’ that has 28 holiday homes on site near an WWII airfield.

Mr Mullin is a vintage car enthusiast and owns a Bugatti Atlantic – there are only two in world.

The development on the estate would include a demonstration track and a suite for corporate events, as Mr Johnston claims that only owners who put their luxury cars up for sale will be able to buy a home there.

Kieran Hedigan, project director for the car museum, shot down claims the development was elitist and that Mr Johnston had ulterior motives.

In another fight over the Great Tew estate, involving rights of way access, a judge blasted Mr Johnston and said he would say ‘whatever he thought was most likely to advance his case, without regard to the truth’.

The Great Tew estate has been owned by the Johnston family since the 1960s.

Mr Johnston purchased the entire seaside village of Bantham in Devon for more than £11.5million in 2014 because he felt a sense of ‘freedom and an independence’ there.

He fought off a rival bid from the National Trust to buy the estate – which features a golf course, shop, beach and about 20 homes – and hopes his children will one day take it on as a lifelong project.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5593447/David-Camerons-friend-says-money-building-homes-benefit-public-restoring-manor.html

Even the Daily Telegraph admits shameful child poverty situation – teachers washing kids clothes and buying them new underwear

When does this become unacceptable to the Tory Party?

“Teachers say they are having to wash their childrens’ clothes and loan parents money, as they complain of increased poverty.

Staff at some schools told how they keep a washing machine and tumble dryer on site, as well as clean underwear for pupils who are sent to school wearing dirty garments.

One in five schools now run a low cost food club, according to a joint survey of teachers carried out by the National Education Union and the Child Poverty Action Group. …”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/02/teachers-having-wash-childrens-clothes-lend-parents-money/

Children in Dickensian poverty – thank you, Tories

“… Headteachers from schools in deprived areas of England, Wales and Northern Ireland say they are having to provide basic services such as washing school uniforms for pupils from poor households, and are even paying for budget advice and counselling services for parents.

Teachers and school leaders also said they were regularly providing sanitary products such as tampons for pupils, buying shoes and coats in winter, and in some cases giving emergency loans in cash to families. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/apr/02/teachers-warn-of-growing-poverty-crisis-in-british-schools

“Cambridge Analytica files spell out election tactics” – one of which was “persuade people NOT to vote”

The files were released by the UK’s Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

They detail some of the work undertaken by Cambridge Analytica and companies it has been linked with, including SCL Group, Global Science Research and Aggregate IQ.

“In one document, SCL said that encouraging people “not to vote” might be more effective than trying to motivate swing voters.

Describing its work in a Nigerian election, SCL Global said it had advised that “rather than trying to motivate swing voters to vote for our clients, a more effective strategy might be to persuade opposition voters not to vote at all”.

It said this had been achieved by “organising anti-election rallies on the day of polling in opposition strongholds” and using “local religious figures to maximise their appeal especially among the spiritual, rural communities”.

It boasted of devising a political graffiti campaign to create a youth “movement” in Trinidad and Tobago and of disseminating “campaign messages that, whilst ostensibly coming from the youth, were unattributable to any specific party”. It said as a result “a united youth movement was created”.
In Latvia, it said it had recognised that “unspoken ethnic tensions” were “at the heart of the election”.

“The locals secretly blamed the Russians for stealing their jobs… armed with this knowledge, SCL was able to reflect these real issues in its client’s messaging,” the document said.

The files spell out how SCL helped the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office “in strategic planning to counter violent jihadism” in Pakistan.

“I wouldn’t only recommend them, I’d work with them again in an instant,” wrote an official, whose name has been redacted.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43581892

Weasel words on affordable housing from the government’s minister

Sajid Javid faces battle over 4% affordable homes in Sainsbury’s scheme

“The housing secretary, Sajid Javid, is facing a legal challenge after he approved a 700-home housing scheme by the supermarket chain Sainsbury’s, which includes just 4% affordable housing.

The 29-storey development in Ilford, east London, will be built in a borough that has a stated policy that 50% of all new homes should be affordable. It estimates it needs an extra 15,000 affordable homes in the next 15 years, but Javid backed a scheme with just 27 affordable homes. The rest are expected to be sold for about £400,000 for a two bedroom flat.

The London mayor, Sadiq Khan, branded the approval “outrageous” and said 4% was a “disgraceful” contribution. Labour’s shadow housing secretary, John Healey, said it was “a clear case of ministers backing private developer profit over the homes that local people need”.

A local residents group Ilford Noise is now preparing to request a judicial review of the decision after Javid accepted Sainsbury’s claim that the scheme would not be viable with any more affordable units. Javid’s report concluded: “There is no good reason to dispute the agreed conclusions of the financial experts.”

The decision came just weeks after Javid gave a speech insisting it is “totally unacceptable” for developers to claim they cannot afford to meet affordable housing promises.

He said: “It cheats communities of much-needed housing and infrastructure and gives new development a bad name.”

But in this case, where Sainsbury’s never promised more than 4%, he has allowed the developer to hugely undershoot the local target. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/mar/23/sajid-javid-faces-battle-over-4-affordable-homes-in-sainsburys-scheme

“Tory donors among investors in Cambridge Analytica parent firm”

“Conservative party donors are among the investors in the company that spawned the election consultancy at the centre of a storm about use of data from Facebook.

Filings for SCL Group, which is at the top of a web of companies linked to Cambridge Analytica, show that since its conception in 2005 its shareholders and officers have included a wine millionaire who has given more than £700,000 to the party, a former Conservative MP, and a peer who was a business minister under David Cameron. …

From its outset as a UK-registered company, SCL Group had investors from the upper echelons of British life. Lord Marland, a successful businessman who became a minister in 2010, held shares personally and through two related investment vehicles, Herriot Limited and a family trust. …

Sir Geoffrey Pattie, a former Conservative defence and industry minister, took a key role in the company for its first three years. In a Guardian article from 2005 he is described fronting the company’s stand – which is “more Orwell than 007” – at a defence show in London. Pattie is shown to have resigned as a director in 2008.

One of Marland’s fellow investors, and the person now registered as having “significant control” over SCL Group, is a Conservative party donor called Roger Gabb.

Gabb, who introduced the Volvic water brand to the UK then went on to make millions selling wines including the Kumala label, now owns more than 25% of the company. At its formation he was named as a shareholder, as was the Glendower Settlement Trust which is linked to him and his wife.

Gabb has given £707,000 to the Tories since 2004, making contributions to the main party and his local Ludlow branch. In 2006 he gave £500,000 to the party, making him one of its largest donors at the time.

He was also a campaigner for Brexit, signing letters on behalf of the campaign as a director of Bibendum Wine, and placing an advert in local newspapers. In October 2016 he was fined £1,000 by the Electoral Commission for failing to include his name and address in the advert.

The property tycoon Vincent Tchenguiz was also a shareholder via his company Consensus Business Group. Tchenguiz donated £21,500 to the Conservatives between 2009 and 2010.

For eight years from 2005 Consensus Business Group held just under a quarter of the shares in SCL, which was valued at around £4m at the time of the investment.

The firm said it had no role in the running of the company, and had sold off its stake in 2013. It appears that it received around £150,000 for the shares.

Julian Wheatland, a close associate of Tchenguiz, was involved with SCL Group from the beginning, and is still a director at the company.

The other main players at SCL Group are Nigel Oakes, an old Etonian from a military family – his father is Maj John Waddington Oakes – and a former boyfriend of Lady Helen Windsor. Oakes had previously set up a company called Behavioural Dynamics which made many similar claims to SCL about its ability to influence voters. In 2000, it worked for the Indonesian president, reportedly without great success.

Nix, a fellow old Etonian, is reported to have joined Oakes at an earlier incarnation of SCL in 2003. Companies House data shows he is linked to 10 firms, which all appear to be linked in some way.

On Wednesday, the Scottish National party’s leader in Westminster, Ian Blackford, asked May about her party’s links with SCL, which he said “go on and on”.

“Its founding chairman was a former Conservative MP. A director appears to have donated over £700,000 to the Tory party. A former Conservative party treasurer is a shareholder,” he said. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/mar/21/tory-donors-among-investors-in-cambridge-analytica-parent-firm-scl-group