---

Political Parties and Elections Bill

I have a few points on the amendments. It is difficult not to be sympathetic with many perspectives represented this afternoon. This is a very difficult issue to raise but none the less essential, and it is for this reason that we felt that this was a missed opportunity not to have a cap on donations—and a cap on expenditure. We proposed a reduction in expenditure from £20 million to £15 million; we were very supportive of that proposal, and we remain supportive of it. However, there has to be equality in a political system; everybody has to abide by the same rules. I have sympathy for the position in which the Labour Party finds itself. I have sympathy, for example, with the position that Tony Blair doubtless took in initiating this whole process to try to free himself from the binds and obligations to the trade unions. In 2006, when this process began, Labour’s donation income from the trade unions amounted to £9 million. On top of that, the unions provided £8 million a year of affiliation fees to the Labour Party. Further funding is provided by the trade unions under the radar to local associations through constituency development plans. In fact, trade union literature stated that the unions made huge donations nationally in excess of 2001, and to regional Labour parties. Union offices were given over as phone banks to local constituencies; union members acted as leafleters, canvassers, endorsers and drivers in local campaigns, sending 6 million direct mails—1.8 million in key seats—16,000 postal votes, 188 key co-ordinators and so on. One understands the links, which are to be respected, with the history of the Labour Party, and the feeling that those links with the trade unions can be distanced with regard to raising funds and accepted when it comes to spending funds. In that regard, some fears are perhaps unjustified. Sir Hayden Phillips himself mentioned that a limit on donations may not challenge the Labour Party’s constitutional relationship with the trade unions. That would be something we would support. It is to that extent that we see deficiencies in the amendments that have been proposed today, despite the case argued for them by the noble Lords, Lord Tyler and Lord Rennard. They do not go far enough, and the detail of the difficulties that we have with them is contained in Amendment 109—particularly in the conditions listed in subsections (2)(d) and (3)(a) of the amendment. Subsection (2)(d) says that, ""consent has been obtained either of all the members … or … the relevant proportion"." However, subsection (3) defines consent as being when a, ""member was afforded during the 12 months … a reasonable opportunity to be exempted"." In many ways, the amendment contains an opt-out clause. We would be very much in favour one that allowed for opting in. People should be able to opt in; we very much support that. Mention was made by the noble Lord, Lord Tyler, of my friend Andrew Tyrie who, in another place said: ""I want to allude to the Hayden Phillips negotiations, which centred on the treatment of affiliation fees. Throughout that period, the Conservative position was absolutely clear, as it still is. ""Special treatment of affiliation fees can be considered as part of the introduction of a £50,000 cap. I mean "special" treatment, because logically a £50,000 cap should be accompanied by a complete restriction, meaning that only direct payments by individuals should be permitted as a legitimate source of funding for political parties"." And then he made a moot point, which was: ""That, no doubt, accounts for the absurdity that, when polled, a majority of affiliated trade union members turn out to vote for political parties other than Labour. It beggars belief that they should want to donate to Labour while voting for the Scottish National Party, the Liberal Party or the Conservative Party".—[Official Report, Commons, 2/3/09; col. 634.]" That relates to a point to which I note the noble Baroness, Lady Gould, referred: that there was some legitimacy in the fact that people—