|
Re: Reform UK's chronicles
The story given was that the £5 million was for Farage’s "security" (amongst other explanations) - it would appear that someone else was already paying for that*…
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics...DAILY_BRIEFING
Quote:
We can also reveal that:
• The Reform leader received “in kind” benefits ranging from his back office to his private security, staff, transport and accommodation.
• Cottrell recruited and paid three staff to transform Farage’s social media presence, producing content on immigration, human rights law and political correctness, and that promoted Reform.
• Cottrell has been involved in a crypto-gambling platform implicated in potentially illegal betting in the UK.
• Two men — a friend of Cottrell’s and a Reform employee — owned UK companies which allowed illicit payments originally from or destined for the platform, which did not have a legally required UK licence.
• Since the election Cottrell has let Farage use a five-storey house he rents on a street near Buckingham Palace. His lawyer said: “As a close friend, our client did, and does, allow Mr Farage to stay in our client’s rental property.”
• The convict has applied for a presidential pardon in the US, where he pleaded guilty to wire fraud.
• Cottrell received an £8.5 million Chelsea property from the billionaire Reform treasurer Nick Candy in the last year. Land Registry documents say the price paid was zero. Candy said Cottrell paid him by buying shares in an offshore Guernsey company but would not specify the value of the transaction.
The code of conduct says MPs must disclose any benefit which “might reasonably be thought by others to influence [their] actions or words” on their register of interests. Its “overall aim” is to protect democracy by upholding the highest levels of transparency.
It says MPs must declare any gifts, benefits and hospitality received in the year preceding their election and which relate “in any way” to their “political activities”. The exception is “purely personal” gifts, such as presents from family. Even then, the code says “both the possible motive of the giver and the use [of the gift] should be considered”, clarifying: “If there is any doubt, the benefit should be registered.”
|
* no, that wasn’t declared either…
__________________
Thank you for calling the Abyss.
If you have called to scream, please press 1 to be transferred to the Void, or press 2 to begin your stare.
If my post is in bold and this colour, it's a Moderator Request.
|