Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Politics
Original poster

Is changing donation laws for Reform retrospectively unfair or politically justified?

455 replies

Gav1961 · 15/09/2026 08:19

I wonder if others have a view on this:

I should start by saying I am no supporter of the Reform Party… not by any measure… but it sometimes we all have a right and indeed a duty to speak up when we see injustice. Even when done to those we might dislike. An old-fashioned notion I know, but a valuable one none the less.

So… The Labour party (temporality constituting the government) , who have received tens of millions of pounds from union member subscriptions over the years… so effectively from one body… have decided that whilst the massive donations to Reform are currently legal, they, the labour government with the approval of all the other parties, will make the receipt of such currently legal gifts, retrospectively illegal.

Mmmm…

Last month I saw that same government protest that the convicted ringleader of the Rochdale grooming gang, cannot be sent back to Pakistan when he is released from prison… because any law made to do this could not be retrospective…. It just would not be British.

OK I have my disagreements and issues with Reform… but does a legitimate UK political party really deserve to be treated worse than a convicted gang leader of groomers?

Anyone else see that as a bit odd, a bit contradictory, a bit self-serving… unconstitutional and illogical? Come on, don’t be shy… it’s just an opinion.

Funny thing is that whilst the cash would undoubtably have helped reform in its bit to run the UK there is one thing that would be more effective in swelling its ranks…. That is a blatantly unfair and self-serving retrospective law hamstringing their attempts to grow.

For anyone who doubts the unintended effects of grossly and manifestly unfair treatment of a one group over another (regardless of its actual merit)… study internment in N Ireland. The single most effective recruited campaign for any organisation… ever. But then not one had at the time tried to bribe the voting public with £5000 dollars each… 😊

People do not like unfairness. I would go so far as to say that Labour are walking into a trap… So predictable was this reaction. Think about it… maybe these guys never thought their £36m was at risk… or am I now getting a little conspiracy theorist?

What are the strategists thinking? Apart from being unfair, non-democratic and blatantly self-serving… There could be no better way to swell the ranks of Reform. The very thing they want to avoid.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
LoremIpsumCici · 15/09/2026 08:45

Last month I saw that same government protest that the convicted ringleader of the Rochdale grooming gang, cannot be sent back to Pakistan when he is released from prison… because any law made to do this could not be retrospective…. It just would not be British.

Where did you see this? Apart from the UK immigration law saying he arrived in the 1970s so can’t be deported, I read another issue is also that he was a British and Pakistani citizen but he renounced his Pakistani citizenship prior to the hearing where he was informed that his British citizenship would be stripped. Pakistan is refusing to accept his deportation as he’s no longer Pakistani. UK would be in violation of international law if it did move forward with stripping his British citizenship by making him stateless so his last & only citizenship governs - he is still British- so he cannot be deported.

Even if we changed our laws, we can’t change international law.

Danhausenrocks · 15/09/2026 08:37

I agree with @PerkingFaintly and I think that the two huge donations are an attempt by Reform to get the £5m bribe and the Channel 4 doc buried by the media, by giving them something else to talk about.

But I personally believe that ALL political donations to ANY party should be capped at a max £1,000, so that it's accessible to everyone, and not just for the rich. And before anyone comes at me about people on low incomes, I completely agree that £1,000 is a lot of money - it's just an abritrary figure

PerkingFaintly · 15/09/2026 08:33

Making the ban retrospective isn't something new that's only been suggested after the billionaires' donations last week.

The Representation of the People Bill already had provision for the ban to be retrospective to 25 March 2026, at the time it was passed to the House of Lords on 3 September,

(You can find the Bill in its various stages here:
https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/4080/publications )

So Delo and Harborne already knew that their donations would become impermissable as they stood their announcing them. (Well, either that or they're billionaires who can't afford decent legal advice.)

This isn't the sort of law they could be sent to prison for breaching. They'll just get their money back.

Dancingonlies · 15/09/2026 08:24

No, no it is not. It’s essential to maintain any semblance of democracy.

Hope that helps.

Selkin · 15/09/2026 08:23

I think this is silly really. It's not about fairness like this is a theoretical game. It's not a game it's our country.

No ordinary voter wants this sort of money in politics. Nobody wants to be bought and paid for by billionaires. We can see with our eyes what happens to ordinary people when politics goes this way, across the sea. Two men should not be allowed to buy our democracy.

We should get rid of all these donations. For all the parties. Put an end to it. Let's make it as hard as possible to buy votes in this country.