Labour Together

[cirian75]

For those who remember this was breaking news when the Gov dropped its "Digital ID bombshell


Who the hell funds Labour Together?

99% of this post is a copy/paste from X (Twitter) account @jodymcintyre_

They funded big chunk of Labours 2024 Election campaign

123 Candidates in total

111 Elected

So they own those MPs



Nearly every member of Keir Starmer's cabinet was funded by Labour Together

And Morgan McSweeney is at the centre of it all

Quote starts


"https://x.com/jodymcintyre_/status/1973442225649623441

It seems that candidates in danger seats got extra support. Shabana Mahmood, whose majority dropped from 68% to 9%, received the most: a staggering £137,168

Imogen Walker, Morgan McSweeney s wife, was parachuted into the Hamilton and Clyde Valley seat.

She received £10k from Labour Together + £15k from lobbyist Gary Lubner, but her election returns only show £18k.

Now, she's the government's Assistant Whip.


Nick Thomas-Symonds, a close ally of Starmer, received £35,521.76 from Labour Together.

Four days after the election, Starmer made him Paymaster General.



Yvette Cooper received a healthy £47,842.24 from Labour Together, further supplemented by £210k from LT funder Gary Lubner.

One day after the election, Starmer made Cooper Home Secretary.

Last month, she was appointed Foreign Secretary.



Angela Rayner received £31,800 from Labour Together, as well as £21,200 from Starmer s suit + glasses supplier Waheed Alli.

One day after the election, Starmer made Rayner Deputy Prime Minister and, perhaps somewhat ironically, Secretary of State for Housing.



John Healey received £52,940.30 from Labour Together.

One day after the election, Starmer made Healey "Defence" Secretary.



Darren Jones received £57,441.58 from Labour Together.

Immediately after the election, he was appointed Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

Last month, he was made Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister, a totally new role created just for him.



Sarah Sackman received £5k from Labour Together, as well as tens of thousands from a range of pro-Israeli lobbyists including Jonathan Mendelsohn, Gary Lubner, Trevor Chinn, and others.

Starmer appointed her Solicitor-General.



Former intelligence officer Mike Tapp received £10k from Labour Together.

Three days after the election, the Guardian called Tapp one of five fresh Labour MPs to watch .

Last November, Labour Friends of Israel made him an honorary vice-chair .

This is not a Labour Starmer government. Rather, it is a Labour Together McSweeney government.

The files I have in my possession contain some shocking information.

But when McSweeney inevitably falls, he will take others with him."

[cirian75]

Apparently its

Trevor Chinn.

https://x.com/jodymcintyre_/status/197121793809199...

[Vsix and Vtec]

Interesting. Now do "Momentum", I wonder if that's similarly opaque.

[OutInTheShed]

Are there any political parties not funded by dubious donors?

[Ian Geary]

So, of 111 Labour mps elected with LT help, about 8 or 9 are in government.

So about 100 who are just on the back benches.

There's 22 government ministers (per google) and 400 odd labour MPs.

A third of the cabinet got LT support, whereas a quarter of their MPs did. So over-represented, but not excessively so.


It should be news to no-one who follows politics that political parties seek outside financial assistance to cover the massive costs associated with campaigning.

If indirect democracy were left to what an individual candidate could raise through cake sales etc, it would quickly depend into an exercise for only the very wealthy.

The spectre of a political being "owned" by their donor is real, which is why there are rules to disclose funding, limits who can donate, and on parliamentary standards.

If anyone wants to make this a "labour only" issue, then I'm not going to play.


All in all I can't get too excited/ worried/ scared/ outraged by the info copied from x-twitter.

[rodericb]

Ian Geary said:

So, of 111 Labour mps elected with LT help, about 8 or 9 are in government.

So about 100 who are just on the back benches.

There's 22 government ministers (per google) and 400 odd labour MPs.

A third of the cabinet got LT support, whereas a quarter of their MPs did. So over-represented, but not excessively so.


It should be news to no-one who follows politics that political parties seek outside financial assistance to cover the massive costs associated with campaigning.

If indirect democracy were left to what an individual candidate could raise through cake sales etc, it would quickly depend into an exercise for only the very wealthy.

The spectre of a political being "owned" by their donor is real, which is why there are rules to disclose funding, limits who can donate, and on parliamentary standards.

If anyone wants to make this a "labour only" issue, then I'm not going to play.


All in all I can't get too excited/ worried/ scared/ outraged by the info copied from x-twitter.

I think there's surprisingly few people that follow political parties to the extent that they ever contemplate how they are funded. They become aware of it when "the other side" is "exposed" and assume their own side would never do such a thing. But then, as you say, if candidates et al were subsisting on cake stall revenue to fund their political aspirations it'd soon be the domain of only the very wealthy but I'd say that is what's happening now anyway. But the very wealthy nowadays are busy doing the things which make them very wealthy and aren't going to sit around doing government stuff unless it's going to present returns to which they're accustomed. Which is why fund individuals, lobbyists and things like PAC's in the USA. Yes you can have funding limits but there are ways around it.

[hidetheelephants]

It should be against the law for candidates or parties to accept large donations, if you can't persuade normal people to fund you stay the fk out of electoral politics.