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

[Gav1961]

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.

Sometimes it’s not worth it. That answer reminded me.

That’s why Ben Delo wants to donate to Reform. Not why Reform depends on these billionaires.

Ethnicities are not countries, no.

Were you upset when this Indian woman did this? Or were you pretending she wasn't Indian?

The fuss made by the political left (and the wider public) over Rishi Sunak’s wife, Akshata Murty, holding "non-dom" tax status boiled down to allegations of massive hypocrisy and economic unfairness. 1, 2]
The controversy erupted in April 2022 when it was revealed that Murty—an heiress to a multi-billion-pound Indian tech fortune—was using the legal loophole to avoid paying UK tax on her massive overseas earnings. 1, 2]
The primary arguments and complaints raised by the political opposition include:

• "Breathtaking Hypocrisy": At the exact same time the news broke, Rishi Sunak (who was Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time) was actively raising taxes for millions of ordinary working people across the UK through National Insurance increases to address the cost-of-living crisis. Critics found it unacceptable that the minister in charge of setting the nation's taxes lived in a household shielding millions from those same rules. 1, 2, 3, 4]

The first woman MP to take her seat in parliament as an elected MP was Lady Nancy Astor, Unionist Party (now Conservative Party) member for Plymouth Sutton in 1919. Born in Danville, Virginia, USA, daughter of American businessman Chiswell Langhorne. She was born in 1879 moving to England in 1905.

Are the Conservative Party chill about it then? I haven’t seen that reported.

Kebabs are Turkish in origin aren't they? Although obviously a staple British favourite now. One of the joys of multiculturalism is the vast array of cuisines we have now.

Idk you can find info, but most of the peers in the HoL pushing for more amendments were Labour.

It was her non-dom status that was the issue. White British people can be non-doms too.

How is this relevant to anything? Akshata Murty is an Indian citizen. Why on earth would I pretend that she is not Indian?

We are talking about British people from ethnic minority backgrounds. And it is deeply offensive - and plain wrong - for you to try to suggest that those people are not British.

Ethnicity and nationality are not the same. Please educate yourself.

I think he answers the question for them:

Labour and the Conservatives have occupied the commanding heights of British politics for a combined total of more than 300 years. Reform UK has been around for less than eight.

One of the reasons why the old parties have lasted so long is that they have made it very expensive to challenge them.

Right now it takes a thick skin to back Reform financially...

Labour and the Conservatives have built vast infrastructures using hundreds of millions of pounds. They have entrenched advantages that Reform cannot hope to match.

Apparently there is disquiet amongst some at the Telegraph about the way Reform related stories are reported.

Once a liberal tells you to "educate yourself" you know they have run out of road.

She has never taken British citizenship because Indian law strictly prohibits dual nationality. If she were to become a British citizen, she would be legally required to give up her Indian citizenship.

I know. So what?

That road definitely ran out. Just call me racist a few more times to make yourself feel better.

What? I'm asking you what the relevance is of the fact that India doesn't permit dual citizenship.

Please explain the point that you are trying to make. If there actually is one.

What has Piddington got to do with concerns about Reform's donors? Nothing at all.

It is hard for a new party to match that. I did think Baroness Hoey made a good point re the HoL not having any Reform peers. Just on a democratic level.

I think Donner was invented in Germany by Turkish immigrants. Very much the same as tika masala and balti were invented in Uk by Indian immigrants.

And I don't call you racist to make me feel better. Nor do I call you racist to make you feel shit, because I know you don't care anyway.

I call out racism when I see it because I think it needs to be called out for what it is.

Far from making me feel better, it makes me deeply depressed to see the kind of racism that you have exhibited. And incredibly angry that my British daughter will have to navigate her way through a world with people who think like you in it.

Jonathan Ames, Legal Editor
Tuesday September 15 2026, 8.52pm, The Times

Ministers will be bucking unofficial British legal conventions with their attempt to impose retrospective restrictions on donations to political parties.

It is extremely rare for governments to make citizens liable for actions that were lawful before legislation outlawing such behaviours comes into force. And retrospective legislation is almost unheard of in electoral law.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/law/article/reform-uk-donations-ban-law-changes-qlg7fvgcm

The clue was in my first sentence.

And yet we count ethnicity using the name of countries.

I did think Baroness Hoey made a good point re the HoL not having any Reform peers

Oh, yes - thanks, I had not seen that.

It's a bit tricky for the Torys - Badenoch and Gove in particular but also others who have been recipients of Delo's 'generosity' - don't suppose they want to upset him
Or show their true colours for that matter