Keir Starmer faces new sleaze row over Labour caught offering access to influential figures for cash
Since last summer a group linked to the party has been flogging sponsorship packages costing £9,500 to private firms.
In exchange business leaders are invited to private meetings with 'key policymakers' where they can 'shape the conversation'.
Sponsorship packs offered to companies include a £7,850 deal, where buyers can enjoy a 'private breakfast/dinner roundtable with an influential Labour figure'.
There's also an £11,750 option to sponsor a 'parliamentary panel event with key policymakers' or £30,000 choice to pay for a 'Westminster drinks reception'.
The cash for access, revealed by The Times, is organised by a group called the Labour Infrastructure Forum (LIF).
Because it's run by lobbyists and a council of Labour bigwigs, but isn't itself a lobbying company, it is exempt from usual anti-sleaze rules.
The organisation so far refuses to reveal which firms have signed up to its lucrative deals and who the influential Labour figures are that have taken part in back-room meet ups.
A spokesperson for LIF said the group uses sponsorship cash to cover costs and 'any LIF activity that is supported by sponsors will be made publicly available at the time and in our annual report, as is common across the industry'.
A Labour Party spokesman said: 'Commercial partnerships at events are a longstanding practice and have no bearing on party or government policy.
The party fully complies with all rules relating to the reporting of donations.'
Sir Keir Starmer red-faced AGAIN after Commons opens sleaze probe into his earnings
1
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Tax gambling industry more to lift 500,000 children out of poverty, government urged
Around half a million children could be lifted out of poverty through reforms to UK gambling laws, a leading think tank has found. The Institute For Public Policy Research (IPPR) is urging the government to look at measures which could raise £3.2 billion from changes to how gambling is taxed. This would be the amount of funding needed to scrap the two-child limit and benefit cap, a new report from the group finds, which would lift 500,000 children out of poverty. Eliminating these two policies would be 'the most effective single step' the government could take to reduce child poverty, it adds. Backed by former Labour prime minister Gordon Brown, the IPPR's proposals focus on raising duties on online gambling firms, especially online casinos, slot machines, and high-stakes betting. The think tank says harms are especially concentrated in this sector, with over 60 per cent of profits coming from just five per cent of users – many of whom are vulnerable. Henry Parkes, principal economist and head of quantitative research at IPPR, said: 'The gambling industry is highly profitable, yet is exempt from paying VAT and often pays no corporation tax, with many online firms based offshore. 'It is also inescapable that gambling causes serious harm, especially in its most high-stakes forms. Set against a context of stark and rising levels of child poverty, it only feels fair to ask this industry to contribute a little more.' The findings come as the chancellor is under pressure to raises taxes at Labour's upcoming autumn budget to address poor economic performance. The government is facing an 'impossible trilemma' caused by Labour U-turns, higher borrowing and sluggish economic growth, economists from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) said on Wednesday. Its economists say the chancellor must look to raise £51.1 billion at her upcoming fiscal event, arguing that both tax rises and spending cuts will be necessary to deliver the funds. Treasury officials are reportedly already considering ways to raise taxes on the gambling sector, including simplifying the varying rates of duty applied to gambling products. Lobbyists for the gambling industry have begun pushing back on these proposals, reports The Guardian, with representatives understood to have already outlined their objections to the Treasury and have reached out to Labour MPs and staff. Lending his support the the IPPR's recommendations, Gordon Brown said: 'There are many reasons why the highly profitable betting and gaming industry should pay a fairer share towards the cost of UK's unmet needs. Most important is that it would enable half a million children to be lifted out of poverty in this autumn's budget, and so help to build our country for the next generation.'
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
Gordon Brown backs gambling tax reform to tackle child poverty
Online casinos and slot machines should be taxed more to raise some of the money needed to cover the cost of lifting children out of poverty, according to a new report backed by a former prime minister. Reforms to gambling taxes could generate the £3.2 billion needed to scrap the two-child limit and benefit cap, the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) said. The think tank said axing the policies could lift half a million children out of poverty and 'reverse years of rising hardship for low-income families'. The two-child limit restricts child tax credit and universal credit (UC) to the first two children in most households, while the benefit cap sees the amount of benefits a household receives reduced to ensure claimants do not get more than the limit. The Government is expected to publish a child poverty strategy in autumn, and a multitude of campaign groups have said it must contain a commitment to do away with the two-child limit. The IPPR argued that, in the face of covering the costs of scrapping the policy, it feels 'fair' to ask the 'highly profitable' gambling industry to contribute more. Echoing this, former prime minister Gordon Brown said: 'Thanks to IPPR's report, we now know that taxing gambling more fairly would fully fund the first crucial step in the war we must wage against child poverty: ending the two-child limit and lifting the benefit cap. 'There are many reasons why the highly profitable betting and gaming industry should pay a fairer share towards the cost of UK's unmet needs. Most important is that it would enable half a million children to be lifted out of poverty in this autumn's budget, and so help to build our country for the next generation.' The IPPR suggested increasing taxes on online casinos from 21% to 50% and raising those on slots and gaming machines from 20% to 50%. The organisation also proposed raising general betting duty on non-racing bets from 15% to 25% which it said would bring other sports in line with the rates paid by horseracing. The IPPR said raising gambling taxes in the way they suggested would be unlikely to reduce overall government revenue. Henry Parkes, principal economist and head of quantitative research at IPPR, said: 'The gambling industry is highly profitable, yet is exempt from paying VAT and often pays no corporation tax, with many online firms based offshore. It is also inescapable that gambling causes serious harm, especially in its most high-stakes forms. 'Set against a context of stark and rising levels of child poverty, it only feels fair to ask this industry to contribute a little more.' But a spokesperson for the Betting and Gaming Council said they rejected the 'economically reckless, factually misleading' proposals which they insisted 'risk driving huge numbers to the growing, unsafe, unregulated gambling black market, which doesn't protect consumers and contributes zero tax'. They added: 'Further tax rises, fresh off the back of Government reforms which cost the sector over a billion in lost revenue, would do more harm than good – for punters, jobs, growth and public finances.'
The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
The website that helps reunite people with unclaimed cash prizes
A website designed to reunite people with forgotten funds has seen an unprecedented surge in traffic, attracting tens of thousands of visitors in a single day. The My Lost Account service, run by finance and banking body UK Finance, recorded more than 75,000 visits on Tuesday – a dramatic increase from its typical 1,000 daily users. The platform, which helps trace lost bank and building society accounts and NS&I products, posted a notice warning of potential delays for registration and login emails due to "high volumes of user registrations". While the site remained operational, the advisory addressed some issues with new registrations. This heightened interest follows recent media coverage, including savings giant NS&I's disclosure that over 2.5 million Premium Bond prizes, worth more than £103 million, remain unclaimed. This includes 11 £100,000 prizes, 19 £50,000 prizes, 38 £25,000 prizes, and 75 £10,000 prizes, underscoring the significant sums awaiting their owners. An NS&I spokesperson said on Wednesday: 'We often see increased demand for these services when there is heightened publicity around NS&I products.' NS&I said previously that in the financial year 2024-25, more than £166 million was reunited through 52,693 NS&I accounts for holders who had lost touch with their savings and investments, thanks to NS&I's tracing service and My Lost Account. The free My Lost Account Service is available for tracing UK-based personal accounts. My Lost Account aims to help those who do not know the provider that holds their account. Its website says that if someone is aware of the bank or building society that holds their account, or if they are aware of the NS&I account or any Premium Bond or other product numbers, they should approach the organisations directly. The website says people should 'not pay a fee of any kind' to undertake the search for their lost bank, building society or NS&I account. Consumer group Which? has previously called for NS&I to sign up to the Government's Tell Us Once service, to help simplify the process of notifying different organisations after a death. NS&I said previously that it is not part of the service, which it said 'focuses on updating government departments that provide services such as benefits, passports and pensions, rather than banking services and investments, which often require more individualised contact with executors'. The Treasury-backed provider said earlier this week: 'We recognise that dealing with bereavement can be challenging and are committed to making our services as easy to use as possible, especially during difficult events such as the death of a loved one.'
