LONDON (Labour Buzz) - The paper found that a small group of donors had pumped hundreds of thousands of pounds into a campaign to topple the so called ‘red wall’. The same donors handed £200,000 in cash to Conservative candidates in a string of marginal seats. These were predominantly held by Tory rebels over Brexit or Labour MPs.
The revelations go against Johnson’s claim to be a people’s government as it has been revealed he drew on the help of millionaires to produce slick campaigns and produce literature. One donor even has links to the secretive organisation, the Freemasons.
Rebecca Long Bailey said that the news showed the Conservatives were the party of privilege rather than aspiration and was ‘funded by those who wanted to protect their privilege.”
She said that unless we ‘kick big money out of politics’, the system would continue to be rigged in favour of the few over the many.
According to the documents, a group which refers to itself as the Stalbury Trustees gave more than £100,000 to 26 Tory candidates including £60,000 to 15 who were fighting in close run seats across the North and Midlands. According to the firm, its founding focus is to promote ‘conservative principles’ for the benefit of the Tory party.
Among Stalbury’s directors are such men of the people as Robert Gascoyne Cecil (also known as the Marquis of Salisbury). He formerly led the Tories in the House of Lords and a former Investment banker, Ulric David Barnett. He lists his occupation as ‘Gentleman.’
Among the goodies sent to the target seats were a £5,000 fight to 26-year-old Dehenna Davison’s campaign in Bishop Auckland where she defeated former Labour minister Helen Goodman. Another favourite was Bassetlaw which has been a favourite topic in the Labour leadership election. This was held by the one time Labour MP John Mann who now sits as an independent in the House of Lords. The group pumped £3,000 into the now MP Shaun Bailey’s campaign.
If nothing else, the revelations prove that money talks in politics, especially when the Conservatives are involved. They may claim to be the party of the working class, but it doesn’t take too long to see that they are as they always have been, the party of the 1%, pandering to the 0.1%.
(Written by Tom Cropper, edited by Michael O'Sullivan)