From dark and mysterious reader, Ludo Thierry:
This story contains plenty of ghastly ghouls and anti-social behaviour and ‘dark money’ but is only carried on beeb N. Ireland page (not seeing it anywhere on beeb Scotland – yet again – despite the heavy Scottish involvement). Link and snippets below:
DUP’s pro-Brexit advertising money was ‘permissible’
The Electoral Commission has told MPs that it is satisfied that a £435,000 donation to the DUP was permissible under UK law.
Some £425,000 of the money from the Constitutional Research Council (CRC) was spent on pro-Brexit advertising throughout the UK.
The CRC is thought to be a group of pro-union business people chaired by Richard Cook.
Mr Cook is a former vice chairman of the Scottish Conservatives.
The commission’s chief executive, Claire Bassett, and head of regulation, Louise Edwards, gave evidence to the Commons’ Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee on Tuesday as part of the committee’s inquiry into disinformation and fake news.
Ms Edwards told MPs that during the referendum period when the DUP received the controversial donation from the Scottish-based Constitutional Research Council the commission had received quarterly reports from the party about the donations they had received.
Under the rules which applied to donations to Northern Ireland parties at that time, the commission is not allowed to publish the identities of donors.
Questioned by SNP MP Brendan O’Hara about whether the Electoral Commission had done everything it could to check the money which went to the DUP was not of foreign origin and was permissible under UK law, Ms Bassett replied “we were satisfied that the donors were permissible”.
Mr O’Hara questioned the Electoral Commission about allegations made in a recent BBC NI Spotlight programme regarding whether there was a common plan between the DUP and the referendum campaign group, Vote Leave.
Ms Edwards said the Commission had taken the view there was insufficient evidence to warrant an investigation into the matter.
Now, now – move along there – nothing to see here – move along, move along.
The sad thing is that the spokesperson for the Electoral Commission was probably being entirely truthful, because so much of the legal system and of the apparatus of Whitehall has been designed to serve the interests of a relatively small, wealthy group.
London has been for many years one of the major money laundering centres of the world and so, money, from whatever provenance could be directed to the ‘entirely legal’ bank accounts of ‘bona fire UK Citizens, who then chose to donate it to the DUP, a UK Party, although, one benefitting from different electoral finance laws to the rest of the UK.
Without any recognition of the contradiction, the DUP opposes any (Brexit related laws, such as customs borders which are different to the rest of the UK. A paradigm example of having cake and eating it.
The Labour Party deludes itself into thinking it can use the powers of the UK state to implement its policies, which is why Abour opposes any serious electoral reform and any power-transforming constitutional change. The institutions of the state are peopled at the senior level by ‘people like us’, as Mrs Thatcher, with frankness, called them. Over a relatively short period they subvert the intentions of Labour, and, by flattery and bribes (I.e. directorships), they recruit senior Labour figures into their camp.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Exactly Alasdair, the whole electoral and political system is corrupt top to bottom and it’s very form and laws governing it make it near impossible to act otherwise. And all those in Westminster are complicit?
The reason why Barclays managed not to need public bailing out in the Crash is reputedly because they had a huge influx of seriously dodgy money from the likes of the Russian Mafia and other such types who took the opportunity when regulators were losing their heads to clean their cash. We aren’t talking tiny amounts either and it was skin of the teeth time but it seems word got around very quickly and the funds kept flooding in and Barclays was so desperate and knew nobody was watching that it accepted it.
Some of it came into Barclays’ American arm and they have paid fines on that, as has Lloyds but feck all here in the UK. Of course a large chunk of Barclays is based in the Channel Islands. If you move overseas they automatically move your accounts there. And we all know how lax bank regulation is over there. Her Maj really should get her possessions in order, except she won’t and neither will HMG with all the Hal8 powers. Why kill the golden goose?
If I remember correctly, Barclays received more money from the U.S. Federal reserve than RBS and Lloyds put together.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Barclays did indeed get more than RBS 446 bn BoS 181 bn Abbey Nat 19 bn and HSBC 10 bn. Barclays a cool 863 bn..not bad little earner… 😀