What is there to say about the announcement made yesterday that Reform has been given two donations of £36 million, or of £72 million in total, both coming from cryptocurrency billionaires?
The first is that the sums in question are considerably more than any party is allowed to spend during the course of a UK general election. This means the money would have to be spent before any election, and the flood of misinformation from Reform on social and other media will, then, become little short of a torrent if it is all spent.
The second is that we know that Elon Musk is now no lover of Reform, and does instead favour the even more extreme form of neo-fascism promoted by Rupert Lowe and his Restore party. I have little doubt that we will see significantly increased funds flowing in his direction as a consequence.
Third, this means that all the arrangements that we might have thought existed around the funding of political parties in this country have now ceased to be relevant. The UK's democracy has now become a plaything for people whose ethics have been questioned, and whose relationships with this country are equally questionable.
Fourth, Labour's prevarication has let this happen. As I have said time and again on this blog, in the face of the obvious threat from the far right, their funding, and their use of misinformation in pursuit of their toxic politics, reform to our democratic processes - from the way in which parties are funded, to what spending they might be allowed to undertake, to the way in which people are permitted to express their democratic preferences via the electoral system - was in need of urgent reform, and Labour has dismally failed to do anything to address these issues on a timely basis, meaning that this abuse is now taking place.
So, what can be done, presuming that these donations will now be made before any change in the law might happen?
The first, and most obvious thing to say, is that all private donations to political parties in excess of relatively modest sums, such as £10,000 per annum, should now be banned. By definition, democracy is about representation of people, and money should not be able to influence that.
State funding for political parties should also be considered, either in addition to or in place of private donations, although I would certainly not want to exclude the possibility of membership fees and reasonable levels of gifts.
Secondly, given what has happened, and that Reform, and maybe others, may now be funded excessively, the obvious change to make in the law is to restrict the amount of money that any political party may spend during the course of a period.
The aim would be quite simple. These parties may have these funds, but we should be able to prevent them from being spent in a way intended to undermine the democratic process. If we can limit spending during election periods, I see no reason why we cannot do this. The legislation is relatively straightforward to imagine.
Thirdly, we do, of course, need electoral reform. The time for introducing proportional representation on a single transferable multi-constituency basis passed long ago, and that need is urgent now. The time to prevaricate is long past. We are facing an emergency. It is Labour's duty to act.
Fourthly, the activities of think tanks and other organisations need to be tightened to prevent these funds moving on to proxies. Their funding must become apparent. They must have registers of interests. These should include registers of contacts in the case of larger organisations regularly noted in the public arena.
Would these moves be sufficient? If appropriately drafted, I think they might be, but I am open to suggestions. The key point, however, is that inaction is now utterly unacceptable.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
There is already a modest amount of state funding for UK political parties, in the form of Short money and Cranbourne money, paid on the basis of the number of MPs and number of votes won in the previous election. The total is over £11 million per year. That is on top of salaries and reimbursement of parliamentary expenses.
But that is to fund parliamentary work, not to seek election.
The front page of the Sunday Times has a story on Rupert Lowe claiming Musk has offered Restore “as much as we want”.
Representative democracy is broken by design. Participatory democracy is the solution.
Why is Labour incapable or more to the point not prepared to deal with the structural issues facing the UK?
It would be nice to think that now this funding was out the bag, people would come to their senses.
However, the democracy we have been living in has stopped functioning as one a long time ago and is thoroughly discredited in the eyes of too many. Saviours are accepted.
We do need action, and what we need is proportional representation – a system that will make the likes of Restore and Reform work with other politicians and keep them where we can see them. But this funding business needs to be addressed. This sovereign country does need to be like America.
And finally, have we forgotten what enabled the Germans to become Fascists? It was economic turmoil and uncertainty. We remember WWII regularly but are we actually overlooking what caused it? Are you kidding me!?
To respond to the final sentence. I was educated in 1950s and 60s England. My High School was built in 1950s. The curiculum was constructed with your very question in mind. Our public exam ( O level and A level ) History syllabuses were home-made along with a couple of other subjects. We were ground breakers of the time. The History majored on both world wars – *and their causes*. Designed I guess by educators who had returned from action and hoping my generation would experience ‘never again’. My work years did not inhabit the education system so I have no idea when that dream died – or why. May be it is true that no generation learns from the mistakes of its forebears ? I keep looking for wisdom to flourish but the older I get I still see none.
I fully agree.
In his book ‘Masters of the Universe’ by Stedman-Jones, he shows the role of think tanks in promoting neo-liberalism from outside the party structure. Their influence is why we have neo-liberal parties-along with the media which is funded by the very rich.
This blog also promotes a different approach from outside the party structure but there is a huge difference. You are not subsidised by multi-millionaires. Vested interests can always find the money. As you say, their funding should be declared and they should not be allowed on BBC/ITV etc if they have not.
But what Manbiot calls ‘dark money’ remains a threat. We need all you suggest and maybe more.
Thank you
Your financial ideas are very good, imo, but I’d still like to add this:
What’s also needed to beat parties like Reform is an offer of identity from progressive parties that really talks to the people that vote that far-right because of their feeling of being outsiders, not heard in the current political system.
I’ve read about this in an article about the AfD in Germany from Adam Tooze in his Substack (https://adamtooze.substack.com/p/chartbook-473-germanys-democratic)
“[…]
To my mind, if progressive policy hopes to engage with such voters at all – and it is open question whether it should – it must address not just the material realities of relative economic disadvantage, but above all the “outsider” credentials of the AfD.
[…]
To believe that the answer to such a political project can lie reinforcing, reforming and improving the mainstream through improved socio-economic policies is, to say the least, a bold hypothesis. The more obvious conclusion is that to contest the political terrain with the AfD, if that is indeed something we want to do, we need to offer not more of the same (just better), but an “alternative to the Alternative”, an “alternative to the Alternative”, furthermore, that can produce something more than just material benefits. That can produce identity.
[…]”
Creating identity is, however, only a short-term thing that can help being elected.
I think, it only works until a party needs to govern.
In my opinion a good socio-economic policy is then needed to stabilize it for long-term stability of a government.
And here pretty much all right-wing parties lack massively.
Maybe would be interesting to have a discussion with him, I’m under the impression that he has quite some things in common with you 🙂
I think I have been trying to address those issues for a long time….
Very much agree richard<p>
Some of us – including Richard, have been trying to bang on about the corrupt money that all main parties are now dependent on. It has been growing steadily as member ship of political parties has declined – and it has become easier and easier for corrupt money to buy a party via well funded factional take over as with the McSweeney/ Starmer coup in Labour.<p>
But money is now so well-entrenched, beyond ‘donations, by corporations, billionaires, Zionists, paid trips abroad, etc etc -now spills over into 2nd jobs, MP’s faux lobbying via APPGs, insider contracts, revolving doors, bribes for honours etc etc.<p>
All this is perfectly legal provided it is ‘declared’. Only the British could convince themselves that ‘declared’ corruption is fine.<p>
The Reform £72m donations have done a service by showing how corrupt the system is. But of course – BBC this morning – just did their usual performative knock about – the odd politician and the odd quirky donor instead of experts – no Open Democracy Transparency International, Institute for Govt, Electoral Reform society etc.<p>
The present parliament will do the minimum – maybe a cap on donations and/or spending – but most of the corruption will continue. As someone said – they should have to wear shirts with their sponsors names listed!
Much to agree with
The fauxmocracy we have is a primary driver of ‘death cult capitalism’ and as a primary driver it’s well worth pursuing – especially as the sickened silent majority lies waiting to be harnessed.
My suggestion is a collective response with others like Monbiot and grow it to an unstoppable tipping point. https://www.monbiot.com/2026/05/03/get-the-money-out-of-politics/
IHO this is how most structural change has occurred – a key, clear moral issue and solidarity.
Agreed
A more updated one https://www.monbiot.com/2026/09/08/self-disposal/
2 great minds………
stand together or hang together…
Indeed! Thank you.
In dealing with those of us who believe that Farage and Restore are the answer I find it useful to firstly empathize with their feelings/concerns and then try to draw their attention to things like Cameron’s austerity drive and how the the State prints money for the banks through the CBRA. It is also worth pointing out that Farage et al, are very rich and how come they think the rich actually care about them? All you can do is try to make them think. I frequently end by saying that the old working class always knew who it was that was shafting them; the new working class have no idea because its all done behind their backs in the financial and political system and they are encouraged to blame anyone but those who rule over them. It’s an indirect way of saying ‘You’re being had’.
A much valued colleague was moaning to me recently about the amount of money being given to the Ukraine. My view was that they could treble that money for all I care if it stopped them sending my kids over there to fight in what is just a charnel house/sausage machine of a war. She has a son in the army…it made her think. She just had not considered that at all, such is the obsession with a ‘lack of money’.
The other day in town I was stopped by a ‘Christian’ who wanted to tell me how evil Islam was. I told him that he was not following Jesus at all. But it goes to show just what is happening to many of us – we are becoming narrowed down, parochial, reactionary and emotional because of the bestial treatment by Neo-liberal capitalism.
To me, there’s no excuse for the working class of today to not know who’s shafting them. You and I and countless others know. Those supporting/voting for Farage and his ilk have racist views; there’s no getting away from that.
I have a friend, I like her as a person, she’s kind to people, including me, but, she’s very racist! Says awful things about Muslims, ethnic minorities in general, said a while back Starmer was giving all the country’s mobile to immigrants. Voted Reform at the last GE. I’ve given up on her politically. Her views are longstanding and deep rooted. There are millions I think with her views.
I strongly disagree with you regarding Ukraine. It’s a deeply corrupt fascist state and the war should end. Zelensky and his mates have pocketed millions for themselves while sending Ukrainians to their deaths in a proxy war provoked by the warmongers in the US and their lapdogs in the UK, Germany and other European states.
We’re in deep trouble.
I am sure there is corruption in Ukraine.
I am not a fan of much of NATO policy.
I think you seriously overstate your case.
You Cannot Buy Your Way Out of Grievance Politics
Reform UK has suddenly acquired something most insurgent parties can only dream of: enormous amounts of money.
That money can buy organisers, offices, advertising, better research and improved candidate vetting. It may turn what has often looked like a personality-led movement into a formidable national machine.
But it cannot change what Reform’s politics is built on.
Yes, Reform has policies. Tax, the NHS, energy, immigration, welfare and defence are all there. My problem is with the thread running through so much of it.
Britain is broken. You have been betrayed. Somebody has taken something from you. The establishment failed you, and only Reform is prepared to say so.
That is grievance politics, and grievance always needs someone to blame.
Migrants, asylum seekers, judges, civil servants, universities, “woke” institutions or the political establishment itself. The target changes more easily than the message.
That can be very effective politically. Governing is harder.
Eventually you have to deal with housing, hospitals, schools, wages, pensions, energy and social care. Choices have to be made and responsibility accepted.
People are perfectly entitled to be angry about immigration, failing services or politicians who ignored them.
But there’s a crucial difference between saying:
“Your life is harder and government must make it better.”
and:
“Your life is harder because these people took something from you.”
The first requires government to deliver.
The second only requires another enemy.
So I am not relying on Reform collapsing under the weight of its new wealth. The money may make it far more effective.
That makes the real question even more important.
What is the machine actually for?
If its fuel remains grievance and othering, millions of pounds do not create a serious philosophy of government.
They simply make the grievance louder.
Agreed
But there are no solutions.
I am meeting tonight (with a bunch of Commission people) to discuss the book “Dark Money” by Jane Mayer. It is focused on the USA which is no longer a democracy given that “private foundations” have $800bn of assets (nope the number is not wrong) and most/many have a political focus representing the interests of the very rich. UK not quite there, but getting there.
The Tyranny of Finance. That is what I might call that.