National Crime Agency: Reform Party Funding

The Government do not comment on the submission of suspicious activity reports. The National Crime Agency is operationally independent and has been clear in its statements that it does not confirm or deny the receipt of a suspicious activity report nor comment on how such reports are used. Suspicious activity reports are confidential and breaching that confidentiality risks committing a tipping-off offence under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

Notwithstanding the Minister’s honest Answer, perhaps he can advise the House on how many suspicious activity reports the Government would expect to be lodged against political parties annually as a result of political donations. Does the Minister agree with me that it is extraordinary for a party, Reform UK, which pitches itself as being anti-establishment and always claims the moral high ground in politics, to be reliant on funding from questionable—not to say dodgy—donors?

I always try to be helpful, but, for the reasons I have mentioned, I cannot give information to the House or to my noble friend on the number of reports that are taken. I can say that it is in the interest of all of us in this House to make sure that our politics is clean and not funded by illegal sources, and that we take action to make sure that all political parties are held to account for the funding they receive to exercise their political activity and to get themselves elected—or not, as it may be. I am very happy to talk through the details of the Rycroft review; the Government have received the review and have accepted all the recommendations made. That includes a range of measures, which I think my noble friend will welcome, that will put great pressure on a number of political outlets, which will find that their involvement in some of the areas that the Rycroft review is trying to tighten will make it much more challenging for them to receive donations from various sources.

My Lords, on the subject of alleged dodgy donations, can the Minister update the House on whether the Cabinet Office or the Electoral Commission is able to commence or conclude inquiries into the £740,000 of secret, undeclared donations generated by Labour Together and funnelled to Labour Party members, including MPs Nick Thomas-Symonds, Darren Jones and others? Is he aware that calls for an independent inquiry were backed by Labour MPs in the other place via an EDM in May? Failure to properly deal with this scandal definitively simply undermines faith and trust in party funding and politics.

What I will say to the noble Lord is that I think it is important we have clean financing of political parties. I refer him to the Rycroft review—let me say some of the things we have agreed and accepted that we will have: a cap on donations from overseas electors; a tightening of corporate donation rules; a moratorium on crypto donations, which will be of interest to my noble friend Lord Bassam; strengthened non-party campaigner and candidate controls; strengthened “know your donor” checks; and standardised political financing reporting. Any political party that wishes to adopt clean funding should sign up to those principles, and, when we bring measures before the House, I trust that the noble Lord will support them. I will look at what he said with regard to Labour Together, but I also say to him that we should try to take the party politics out of this and have an even and level playing field, so that all political parties know who has been funded, why and how, and ensure that those fundings are clean, transparent and open.

My Lords, is it not the case that one thing that has allowed Reform and Nigel Farage to get off a little here is the sheer complexity of electoral law and the whole area around this? We are about to start consideration of the 27th Representation of the People Bill, and the 26 others are not consolidated; is there not a good case for the Government to decide that we need to consolidate electoral law? In the simplicity that might follow that, there would be greater control over dodgy dealings in party funding.

The Bill that the noble Earl mentions will probably now go before the House of Commons in September: it was due this week, but we have put the Hillsborough law in place this week, which I welcome, and that has been moved back. It is important that we have clear electoral law. He tempts me to talk about issues that are not my direct departmental responsibility, but I will reflect on what he has said, listen carefully to representations and pass them on to the appropriate Minister.

My Lords, the National Crime Agency gave evidence to Parliament earlier this year in which it said: “There are quite a lot of our covert powers … that we can only use if the sentence is three years or over”. However, many political finance offences do not have a tariff of three years or over. Therefore, the NCA is not currently able to use its full range of investigatory powers to ensure that it is playing its role in keeping our politics clean. That is a topic that the Rycroft review raised, but so far the Government have not tabled any amendments to the Representation of the People Bill to rectify this loophole in our investigatory framework. Will the Minister commit to looking at this issue again with colleagues over the summer and make sure that amendments are tabled in the autumn so that we can close this loophole?

As I said to the noble Earl, Lord Kinnoull, Report and Third Reading of the Representation of the People Bill will take place as soon as parliamentary time allows. I am not the Minister directly responsible for that Bill, but I will pass on the noble Lord’s comments. I hope that I share with the noble Lord the aspiration of ensuring that we put as tight a ring as possible around those donations, so that there is transparency, clarity and openness, and so that, if any amendments are made, the National Crime Agency has the independent policing ability to follow through.

My Lords, as I understand it, the Electoral Commission will be given the power to share information with third parties, which is very welcome and long overdue. But will it also be given the power to require information from third parties, which is normal for any regulator that one can think of, with tough sanctions for non-compliance?

One of the Rycroft recommendations is that we standardise political finance reporting, and the Government have accepted that. Accepting that means that we have given the Electoral Commission powers to prescribe standardised reporting formats. We are continuing to work with the Electoral Commission on a number of other areas. I will reflect on what the noble Lord has said.

My Lords, the Labour Together episode has already been mentioned. Not only did that organisation fail to declare donations but it paid to have journalists investigated. Does the Minister agree that it would be inappropriate for anyone involved in these scandals to be given a senior role in government?

Ultimately, who gets senior roles in government is a matter for the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister will make a judgment on that and, with due respect, I do not think he will be taking advice from the Conservative Front Bench on whom he appoints.

My Lords, no matter what action is taken by the Government, dodgy people will try to find a way around it. Will the legislation be drafted in such a way that it is flexible enough to take into account things that might happen in the future?

The acceptance of the Rycroft recommendations means that the Government have accepted a whole range of measures on tightening up political donations from overseas, crypto currency, reporting and transparency. We have yet to put those measures into effect, but we have accepted the recommendations and will bring forward legislation to give effect to them at the earliest opportunity. That will help everybody in this House, from His Majesty’s Opposition to the Government to other political parties represented here, to have that transparency. I look forward to taking that forward in due course.

My Lords, further to the question from the noble Earl on the Representation of the People Bill, pages 104 to 193 of that Bill are there only because the legislation has not been consolidated. The people who have spent their time preparing all those pages could have spent their time preparing consolidation. When the Bill comes to our House, we will waste time debating things that would have been much better considered as a consolidated piece of legislation. I have had a very good discussion on this subject with the noble Lord, Lord Lemos, because it appears to be an enormous waste of time.

The department I am responsible for is about making sure that, through the National Crime Agency and policing, we catch those people who are committing offences under legislation. The framing of future legislation, which the noble Lord just mentioned, is a matter for another government department. But, with the involvement of the Home Office, the Rycroft review recommendations have been accepted, we have introduced a moratorium on political donations through crypto assets, and we are progressing wider reforms through the Representation of the People Bill. The point about consolidation, which he and the noble and Earl mentioned, is one that I am sure my noble friend Lord Lemos will reflect on.