Latest news with #TomBrake
Daily Mirror
05-07-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mirror
Labour warned to fix trust as well as raising living standards to defeat Reform
The government has so far followed through on only 1 in 3 of its pledges to rebuild trust in politics, according to a new report from campaign group Unlock Democracy Labour hasn't made its first year count when it comes to restoring trust, campaigners say on the anniversary of Keir Starmer 's general election victory. The government has so far followed through on only 1 in 3 of its pledges to rebuild trust in politics, according to a new report from campaign group Unlock Democracy. Released as Labour marks its first year in office, the 'report card' follows the British Social Attitudes survey finding trust in government has fallen to new record lows in the last year. Tom Brake, Director of Unlock Democracy, commented: 'Trust is the lifeblood of democracy - and right now, it's almost entirely drained away. What limited action the government has so far taken has failed to stem the bleeding. 'Labour must move beyond rhetoric and deliver on its pledges to rebuild public trust in full.' Unlock Democracy gave Labour's move to scrap hereditary peers full marks against promises made in its manifesto. But the group expressed disappointment that the government's Elections Bill - which presents an opportunity to fix much of the issues around trust in the political process - has been delayed, possibly into next year. The report calls for Labour to act on tightening restrictions on MPs second jobs, gifts and freebies and lobbying rules. And it warns Labour's prospects of re-election may hinge on restoring public trust - with improvements to living standards not being enough to halt the rise of Reform UK. Mr Brake added: 'Without urgent, visible action to clean up Westminster and modernise our institutions, Labour risks deepening the crisis in mistrust it promised to solve.'
Daily Record
02-07-2025
- Politics
- Daily Record
Nigel Farage's Reform charging potential MSPs £200 to stand for party in 2026 election
Reform UK is charging Holyrood hopefuls who want to stand in next year's election - partly to fund their own vetting checks. Nigel Farage is charging Holyrood hopefuls £200 to apply to stand for his party - with some of the money funding their own vetting checks. Reform UK is asking members who want to put themselves forward for the next Scottish Parliamentary elections to pay to apply and for training. The party leader previously said Reform was sabotaged by a professional vetting firm in the general election run-up and threatened to sue. He claimed the company had been handed £144,000 to probe potential candidates and had produced nothing. A raft of negative stories later appeared about candidates, including those who made racist online posts. Despite promising to "rigorously" vet future candidates, more extremist social media posts have emerged from some of the party's 677 new councillors elected in the English local elections. Experts have said the party needs to tackle vetting and put forward serious candidates. In a recruitment email to members, Reform's head of campaigns said running for Holyrood was a "once in a lifetime opportunity" and they wanted "the best of Scotland to come forward". Those interested must "complete a short application form and pay a £50 fee to cover vetting and admin costs", and if successful they're charged £150 attendance fee for a "one-day, in-person Parliamentary Assessment Centre". It said it would "consider hardship waivers in some cases". None of Scotland's main political parties charge candidates to apply to stand. For Westminster elections, Lib Dems charge £75 for selection and assessment while the UK Tory party has previously charged £250 for an assessment centre day and £115 for "due diligence". The Scottish Tories charge a fee for attending an assessment centre day to "cover tea and coffee", according to a party source. Tom Brake, of campaign group Unlock Democracy said: "Politicians should be as representative of the population as possible. "Charging prospective candidates a fee to cover the cost of their vetting and assessment will act as a significant barrier for some, and risk reducing the talent pool of potential MSPs." Reform's application process asks candidates for details of all their social media accounts and usernames and if they have ever been members of online forums or newspaper comment sections. It also asks if they have been a "member of a proscribed organisation" such as "the BNP or Britain First" and if they have criminal convictions. After filling out the online form, prospective candidates must pay a £50 non-refundable fee to submit applications. Reform has previously come under criticism due to the way the party is structured. Unlike other major political parties, Nigel Farage registered Reform as a business in 2018 with himself, deputy Richard Tice and Zia Yusuf listed as shareholders. After complaints from members, party chiefs relinquished their shares in February, renaming the company Reform 2025 Ltd. Its overall owner is Reform UK Party Ltd, which has no controlling person, according to Companies House. Its directors are still Farage and Tice. Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. A Reform UK spokesman insisted it was normal for political parties to charge candidates and said: "All political parties charge for their parliamentary lists, we are just more honest. "If no party does it in Scotland that is just a sign that they don't treat the Scottish Parliament as seriously as they treat Westminster. The £50 covers vetting - something the other parties don't do. "The £150 is for a full day event assessment centre so we can ensure only the highest quality candidates are put forward, showing how seriously we take the Scottish parliament. "As a party we also offer hardship waivers so that anyone can apply and we are fair to all of our members regardless of their personal financial situations." "Reform are looking for those who can dig into their wallets and hand over a wad of cash."
Daily Mirror
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mirror
Huge number of missing voters sparks major call for automatic system
Major cities across the country face the highest levels of unregistered voters, specifically in areas of the city that are either the most deprived or ethnically diverse More than six million eligible voters are not signed up to vote in British elections, sparking calls for an automatic registration scheme, campaigners say. Major cities across the country face the highest levels of unregistered voters, specifically in areas of the city that are either the most deprived or ethnically diverse. Homeowners, older people and those living in rural areas are more likely to be on the electoral roll. One in six voters are not registered to vote in bigger cities, whereas just one in 10 voters in rural areas in Yorkshire or Wales are not on the electoral roll, analysis by Unlock Democracy found. More than 15% of eligible residents, especially young people, ethnic minority voters and renters, are not on the electoral register in cities such as London, Birmingham and Manchester, the campaign group said. Ministers are under pressure to introduce an Automatic Voter Registration (AVR) to make sure all eligible Brits are signed up to vote in elections. In a letter handed to the PM on Tuesday, which was organised by Unlock Democracy, around two dozen MPs called for an end to the UK's 'Victorian era voter registration system'. 'It's time to register every voter,' it said. 'The Government has the opportunity to bring voter registration into the modern era.' It called for an automatic system to be included in elections legislation, which is expected to be introduced later on in this Parliament. An Elections Bill would also include lowering the voting age to 16 years - a Labour manifesto pledge. Last year's General Election saw turnout at just 59.7%. Only 60% of 18- and 19-year-olds are registered to vote in England, compared to 96% of over-65s, according to the Electoral Commission. And just 72% of Black and mixed-race citizens are registered, compared to 87% of white citizens, it said. Many also face the barrier of not having a Voter ID. The Mirror launched a campaign last year(2024) to target voters who face being excluded at the ballot box. New photo ID rules led to thousands being turned away at the 2023 local elections, the first time the Tory rules came into effect. Tom Brake, Director of Unlock Democracy and former MP said: 'There is a real problem for democracy when the voices of millions of people are unheard: it deepens the already record levels of disengagement and disillusionment with politics. Fortunately, a tried and tested solution - Automatic Voter Registration - can ride to the rescue.'
The Guardian
10-03-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Foreign states including repressive regimes pay peers over £3m in two years
Members of the House of Lords have been paid more than £3m in the last two years by foreign governments including repressive Middle Eastern regimes. Many of the states paying peers have human rights records that have been highly criticised, such as Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan. In total, 27 peers have been paid by foreign states for services including consultancy and legal advice. They include Philip Hammond, the former chancellor and foreign secretary, who has declared payments totalling £816,000 during the last two years from Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Kuwait. The findings have drawn criticism from campaigners who say peers should not be working for any state whose 'priorities or values on issues such as human rights are at odds with the UK's'. There are no restrictions under the House of Lords rules on members taking up such consultancies, provided they declare who they are working for and how much they are being paid. In general, peers are not required to register the fees they receive for their consultancies and directorships. But in 2021 the Lords tweaked the rules and since then peers have had to declare how much they are paid if they are receiving money from foreign governments or institutions that are, or even appear to be, controlled by foreign states. This tightening of the rules followed worries that overseas governments, particularly Russia, were meddling in British democratic processes. The Lords authorities warn peers to be 'especially cautious when coming into contact with representatives of corrupt or repressive regimes'. Tom Brake, the director of the reform group Unlock Democracy, said: 'There should never be any doubt that a UK legislator's top priority is to defend UK interests. But UK politicians, paid by foreign states, will crash into unavoidable conflicts of interest, where their loyalties will be tested. 'To avoid any such risk, they could do worse than follow a self-denying ordinance and avoid working for any foreign state, particularly those whose priorities or values on issues such as human rights are at odds with the UK's.' The analysis is part of the Lords debate, a Guardian investigation into members of the Lords, at a time when the Labour government has made moves to raise standards and reduce the size of the upper chamber. Lord Hammond, the peer who has received the most money from overseas governments, said: 'I have a diverse portfolio of outside interests, none of which is related to my membership of the House of Lords.' He emphasised there were 'rigorous' rules that he closely followed and added: 'All my roles are fully compliant with both the letter and the spirit of the Lords' rules and guidance, and I have engaged extensively with the Lords' authorities over the years to ensure that each new role is fully compliant.' Fourteen peers have received payments from five authoritarian Middle Eastern regimes, including five peers who were paid nearly £700,000 by Bahrain. Gerry Grimstone, who was the minister of state for investment in Boris Johnson's government, was paid £150,000 to advise the Bahraini regime on its 'modernisation and reform efforts'. He works through a consultancy, Equilibrium Global. Before his two-year stint in the government, he had been a banker for many years, with jobs in the Middle East. When he took on the Bahrain post last year, Lord Grimstone said he saw the role as 'restarting my private sector career after a period of unpaid public service, and returning to a part of the world which I know well and where I believe I have been highly respected for many years'. Qatar, another Middle Eastern state with a poor human rights record, paid at least £100,000 over the last two years to Alex Carlile, the former independent reviewer of terrorism legislation. The peer has a consultancy with John Scarlett, the former head of Britain's spying agency MI6, providing advice on UK foreign and public policy. Lord Carlile told the Lords that he 'takes no part in any parliamentary proceedings relating to any client'. Peers who were paid by states in other parts of the world included Archie Hamilton, a former defence minister. He receives £60,000 a year as a director of FM Capital Partners, a UK investment company controlled by the Libyan government. It manages frozen assets that are under British sanctions and therefore needs to apply for official licences to operate in some cases. Hamilton is paid an extra £1,000 for every board meeting he attends. Mark Sedwill, a former cabinet secretary and national security adviser, has been paid at least £100,000 a year for advising Temasek, an investment fund owned by the Singapore government. Five peers who work as barristers have received payments from foreign regimes. David Pannick, a well-known barrister, has given legal advice to the Bahamas, and in the past has advised the Cayman Islands, a tax haven. Asked whether he thought this was appropriate, Lord Pannick said: 'It depends on what the peer is paid for. In my opinion, there can be no objection to a member of the House of Lords who is a lawyer advising and representing clients, including foreign governments, on legal issues provided that – as the code of conduct now requires – that interest is declared in the register.' Peter Goldsmith, the attorney general in Tony Blair's administration, was paid just over £95,000 in the last two years for legal work for the governments of Azerbaijan, Israel and South Korea. Grimstone, Carlile, Hamilton and Goldsmith declined to comment.
