This website was run on a volunteer basis from 2008-11. Unfortunately It is no longer active due to other commitments.
Skip navigation

Transparency: the TaxPayers’ Alliance must practise what it preaches

I recently asked for your views on what we should do next. One contributor, Brian Smith, offered a measured defence of the TaxPayers’ Alliance. Some of his comments I agreed with, including his final parargraph: “You will only defeat them intellectually, with facts. Yah booing across the interweb will get no one anywhere.”

But I profoundly disagreed with this: “Expecting the TPA to be only political organisation absolutely open about its funding is expecting too much.” As the TPA’s lack of transparency was one reason for starting the Other TaxPayers’ Alliance, I thought it was worth responding in more detail. And Brian, or anyone else, is welcome to reply.

Let’s look at the facts. It’s simply not true that all political organisations are secretive about their funding. Most declare their income and expenditure, and some give a break-down of income sources, including donors. The TPA does neither. It publishes abbreviated accounts which means income and expenditure are withheld. The last time it published full accounts was in 2006, when it recorded an income of £130,000. But the current organisation has ten full-time staff across two offices, which suggests either its income has jumped substantially or it is loaded with debt.

The centre-left campaign group, Compass, by contrast, publishes a great deal in its annual report (which can be readily downloaded from its publications page) - and goes beyond that which is statutorily required. Thus you can learn how much was earned through members’ subscriptions, members’ donations, grants from various sources, etc, and how that money was spent. And - “in the interests of transparency” - all donors who gave £5,000 or more are listed, along with the amount donated.

If Compass can do it, then the TaxPayers’ Alliance - which claims to stand for transparency and probity - can do it too. No, it is not legally obliged to do so, but the TPA should practise what it preaches.

The role of the Midlands Industrial Council

According to the Sunday Times, one source of TPA funding has been the shadowy Midlands Industrial Council. The MIC was founded in 1946 as a pressure group to fight the Attlee government’s nationalisation plans and to champion free enterprise. It has donated around £3 million to the Conservative Party since 2001, much of it targeted at marginal parliamentary seats in the Midlands. As an “unincorporated association” it is allowed to keep its membership secret - allowing donors to get around the legal requirement on political parties to reveal their backers’ identities.

In 2006 the MIC was forced to publish its membership list after it was leaked to the Sunday Times. The list was made up of wealthy businessmen and included a large number of TPA supporters, as recorded on the BBC Politics Show website. (Lincolnshire Labour councillor Phil Dilks usefully drew together much of the reporting of the time on his blog.)

In October 2008, the Electoral Commission cleared the Conservative Party of breaking electoral law by using an MIC-funded company, Coleshill Campaigning Services (aka Constituency Campaigning Services), as a front to provide millions of pounds of services to Tories fighting marginal seats. But in January this year, Labour MP John Mann made a further complaint to the Electoral Commission – that CCS had failed to declare donations of free office space to the Conservatives worth tens of thousands of pounds.

Readers can draw their own conclusions about whether the “pro-transparency” TPA is compromised by its relationship with an organisation as opaque as the Midlands Industrial Council. What we don’t know is how much the MIC gave the TaxPayers’ Alliance, and whether it still funds the Alliance. Why won’t the TPA tell us? As it recently told MPs who tried to prevent their expenses being published: “If you have nothing to hide then you’ve got nothing to fear.”

Posted by Other TPA at 11:26am on 19 May 2009
Tags: Not yet assigned

Share More ways to share

Comments

time for a campaign to get them to disclose their funding then?

Posted by Tom P at 03:36pm on 19 May 2009

We could do a tie-in with the Daily Mail.

Posted by Clifford Singer at 10:42am on 21 May 2009

My sympathies are with the aims of the TPA rather than with your organization.  However, I would never become a TPA subscriber or official supporter for the reasons you mention, namely their lack of transparancy.  If they were transparent and democratic, I’m sure they would attract a vast membership and become a real force to be reckoned with.  I would have thought that your best bet, in the meantime, would be to concentrate of policies rather than attaking the TPA.  You might goad them into reforming themselves, which wouldn’t be good news fior you.

Posted by Lance Kent at 04:46pm on 29 May 2009

There should be two prongs to our move onwards from this point:

1. Continue to press the TPA on their lack of transparency as well as the uncertain motives behind the organisation and its major backers.

2. Keep pushing to get our policies known in the national media. Our very long-term goal should be to push the TPA out of the media in favour of us.

Posted by David Austin at 12:47pm on 30 May 2009

The ‘Other Tax Payer’s Alliance’ should change its tag line from “fairer taxes not lower taxes” to “the alliance of PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY PAY TAX, AND PAY IT IN THIS COUNTRY”

Thus highlighting the stunning ironic comedy genuis of the ‘Tax Payer’s Alliance.’ A group which exclusively represents the intrests of people whose non-dom status, and army of accountants ensure they don’t actually pay tax.

Posted by William at 09:19am on 1 August 2010

Post a comment

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Share

Join us to receive regular updates

RSS feed   KWP test link