On the campaign trail in Makerfield, Andy Burnham told a democracy activist that he favoured a political donations cap of around £500,000 and wanted it reduced over time. His government is now resisting amendments that would move in precisely that direction. Mr Burnham was right in May.
It is difficult to argue that restricting a single person to giving half a million pounds a year to a political party would damage democracy. Such a cap would only affect the mega-rich. Reducing the cap would force parties to wean themselves off the present regime that allows the rich too much say.
There are two contra arguments swilling around Labour. The first is that there should be room for wealthy, progressive donors – whose cash helps rebut claims that Labour is in the pocket of the trade unions. The second is the warning from unions that a cap could undermine their ability to contribute to the Labour party.
Neither of these arguments holds much water. Whatever benefit Labour might derive from rich friends is dwarfed by the wider damage caused by parties being bankrolled by a few rich individuals. Mr Burnham has registered £345,000 of donations over the past year, including £164,000 from billionaire Lord Sainsbury.
In comparison, Thai-based crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne gave Reform UK a single £9m donation in August 2025 – a sum which exceeds the £8m in trade union donations that Labour will get this year. The timing makes Labour’s retreat baffling. This newspaper’s revelation of Nigel Farage’s undisclosed £5m gift from Mr Harborne in 2024 has turned big money in politics from an abstract concern into a live issue.
Reform’s support has fallen markedly in recent months. Mr Burnham could recover the situation by backing amendments from two Labour MPs. Stella Creasy’s changes, which have cross-party support, start with a £500,000 cap – Mr Burnham’s own figure – before reducing it, while allowing parliament to alter the level.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
