DOCSLIB.ORG

Donations and Loans Received by Campaigners in the European Union Referendum Fourth Pre-Poll Report: 10 June 2016 to 22 June 2016

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Donations and Loans Received by Campaigners in the European Union Referendum Fourth Pre-Poll Report: 10 June 2016 to 22 June 2016 Donations and loans received by campaigners in the European Union Referendum Fourth pre-poll report: 10 June 2016 to 22 June 2016 Under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendum Act 2000 as amended by the European Union Referendum Act 2015, donations received and loans entered into by registered campaigners, and those who later become registered, must be recorded and reported on a regular basis before and after the date of the poll. Registered campaigners, excluding political parties who report their donations on a quarterly basis, must complete and submit four pre-poll reports. These cover all donations received and loans entered into over £7,500 during each reporting period. Date Electoral Deadline for pre- Reporting period Commission will poll reports publish donations 1 February 2016 – 21 April Thursday 28 April Wednesday 11 May 2016 22 April 2016 – 12 May Thursday 19 May Thursday 26 May 2016 13 May 2016 – 9 June Thursday 16 June Tuesday 21 June 2016 10 June 2016 – 22 June Wednesday 29 Wednesday 6 July 2016 June This document is a summary of donations and borrowing reported to us in the first reporting period, 10 June 2016 to 22 June 2016. Campaigners must submit pre-poll reports even if they have not received any reportable donations and/or loans. These are called ‘nil reports’. In addition to the pre-poll reports, after the referendum has taken place, registered campaigners will also have to report: All donations and loans over £7,500 that they accepted (unless the campaigner is a registered political party). Their campaign spending during the referendum period (15 April 2016 up to and including polling day, 23 June 2016 - the period where campaigners are limited in how much they can spend. Donations summary Total donations of over £7,500 received by registered permitted participants received in the reporting period 10 June 2016 to 22 June 2016 Outcome: Remain Total: £2,342,345 Campaigner Total Best For Our Future Ltd £245,000 Conservatives IN Ltd £84,000 DDB UK Limited £25,000 Social Market Foundation £12,500 The In Campaign Ltd* £1,689,845 Virgin Management Limited £210,000 We Are Europe £76,000 * In addition The In Campaign Ltd received £400,000 of public fund grant Outcome: Leave Total: £2,099,747 Campaigner Total Brexit Express £145,796 Democracy Movement £422,807 Global Britain Limited £233,329 Grassroots Out Ltd £47,500 Labour Leave Limited £85,000 Mr Darren Grimes £675,315 Muslims for GB Limited £10,000 The Bruges Group £10,000 Trade Unionists Against The European Union £20,000 Vote Leave Limited £450,000 Top 10 Donations Donor Received by Total Liberty Global PLC The In Campaign Ltd £500,000 Vote Leave Mr Darren Grimes £400,000 Mr Crispin Odey Democracy Movement £300,000 Mr David Harding The In Campaign Ltd £250,000 Mr David Sainsbury The In Campaign Ltd £250,000 Mark Coombs The In Campaign Ltd £250,000 Mr Crispin Ooey Global Britain Limited £233,329 Mr David Sainsbury Best For Our Future Ltd £210,000 Mr David Sainsbury Virgin Management Limited £210,000 Vote Leave Mr Darren Grimes £185,315 Over 100 individual donations were reported, full details of all donations to registered campaigners can be viewed on PEF Online: Summary of loans and credit facilities Total of loans and credit facilities of over £7,500 entered into by registered permitted participants in the reporting period 10 June 2016 to 22 June 2016 Outcome: Remain Total: £0 Outcome: Leave Total: £0 Full details of creditors can be viewed on PEF Online: Total reportable donations received : Remain Campaigner Pre-poll 1 Pre-poll 2 Pre-poll 3 Pre-poll 4 Total Another Europe Is Possible £7,820 £7,820 Best For Our Future Ltd £179,000 £245,000 £424,000 Conservatives IN Ltd £362,534 £108,926 £321,792 £84,000 £877,252 DDB UK Limited £120,000 £25,000 £145,000 European Movement of the UK Ltd £57,494 £120,000 £62,000 £239,494 Friends of the Earth Trust £30,000 £30,000 Michelle Ovens Ltd £95,000 £95,000 Mr Edward Izzard £8,250 £8,250 Mr Wolfgang Tillmans £9,000 £9,000 Scientists for EU Limited £60,000 £200,000 £260,000 Social Market Foundation £12,500 £12,500 The In Campaign Ltd £6,888,684 £1,044,476 £1,886,055 £1,689,845 £11,509,060 Virgin Management Limited £210,000 £210,000 Wake Up And Vote £100,000 £100,000 We Are Europe £100,000 £164,000 £76,000 £340,000 Total £7,463,712 £1,573,402 £2,887,917 £2,342,345 £14,276,376 Total reportable donations received: Leave Campaigner Pre-poll 1 Pre-poll 2 Pre-poll 3 Pre-poll 4 Total Brexit Express £480,000 £145,796 £625,796 Democracy Movement £422,807 £422,807 Economists for Brexit £30,000 £30,000 Global Britain Limited £233,329 £233,329 GO Movement Ltd £12,000 £10,343 £22,343 Grassroots Out Ltd £2,039,925 £100,000 £125,000 £47,500 £2,312,425 Green-Leaves £10,000 £10,000 Imaginexit Limited £10,000 £15,000 £25,000 Labour Leave Limited £215,000 £100,000 £85,000 £400,000 Leave.EU Group Ltd £3,200,000 £3,200,000 Mr Darren Grimes £675,315 £675,315 Muslims for GB Limited £10,000 £10,000 The Bruges Group £10,000 £30,000 £10,000 £50,000 The Campaign For An Independent Britain Limited £30,000 £10,000 £40,000 Trade Unionists Against The European Union £22,000 £46,000 £18,000 £20,000 £106,000 Veterans for Britain £50,000 £50,000 Vote Leave Limited £2,686,500 £3,355,000 £2,708,994 £450,000 £9,200,494 WAGTV Limited £110,000 £15,000 £20,000 £145,000 Total £8,080,425 £3,781,343 £3,596,994 £2,099,747 £17,558,509 For more information, see our media handbook: http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/199357/Media-Handbook-EU-Referendum.pdf Top 10 donations over the regulated period Donor Received by Total Mr Peter Hargreaves Leave.EU Group Ltd £3,200,000 Better For the Country Ltd Grassroots Out Ltd £1,952,375 Mr David Sainsbury The In Campaign Ltd £1,614,454 Diana Van Nievelt Price Vote Leave Limited £1,000,000 Trailfinders Limited The In Campaign Ltd £1,000,000 International Motors Ltd Vote Leave Limited £850,000 Mr David Harding The In Campaign Ltd £750,000 Mr David Sainsbury The In Campaign Ltd £750,000 Mr Lloyd Dorfman The In Campaign Ltd £500,000 Patrick Barbour Vote Leave Limited £500,000 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Roots and Consequences of Euroskepticism: an Evaluation of the United Kingdom Independence Party
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Scholarship at UWindsor University of Windsor Scholarship at UWindsor Political Science Publications Department of Political Science 4-2012 The roots and consequences of Euroskepticism: an evaluation of the United Kingdom Independence Party John B. Sutcliffe University of Windsor Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/poliscipub Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Sutcliffe, John B.. (2012). The roots and consequences of Euroskepticism: an evaluation of the United Kingdom Independence Party. Geopolitics, history and international relations, 4 (1), 107-127. https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/poliscipub/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Political Science at Scholarship at UWindsor. It has been accepted for inclusion in Political Science Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholarship at UWindsor. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Geopolitics, History, and International Relations Volume 4(1), 2012, pp. 107–127, ISSN 1948-9145 THE ROOTS AND CONSEQUENCES OF EUROSKEPTICISM: AN EVALUATION OF THE UNITED KINGDOM INDEPENDENCE PARTY JOHN B. SUTCLIFFE [email protected] University of Windsor ABSTRACT. This article examines the causes and consequences of Euroskepticism through a study of the United Kingdom Independence Party. Based on an analysis of UKIP’s election campaigns, policies and performance, the article examines the roots of UKIP and its, potential, consequences for the British political system. The article argues that UKIP provides an example of Euroskepticism as the “politics of oppo- sition.” The party remains at the fringes of the political system and its leadership is prepared to use misrepresentation and populist rhetoric in an attempt to secure sup- port.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit Reading List: No Deal Subject Specialist: Stefano Fella
    BRIEFING PAPER Number 8642, 5 November 2019 Compilers: Julie Gill, Antonia Garraway Brexit reading list: no deal Subject specialist: Stefano Fella Contents: List of 2019 publications www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary 2 Brexit reading list: no deal Contents Summary 3 List of 2019 publications 4 November 4 October 4 September 5 August 8 July 9 June 11 May 11 April 12 March 12 February 14 January 14 Cover page image copyright: Flagging support by Dave Kellam. Licensed under CC BY 2.0 / image cropped. 3 Commons Library Briefing, 5 November 2019 Summary As the possibility of the UK leaving the EU without a withdrawal agreement – or ‘deal’ – has become more likely, the commentary on and analysis of a no-deal scenario have increased. This paper provides links to a selection of 2019 publications on a no-deal exit from the EU by private and voluntary sector organisations, think tanks, research institutes and other academic institutions. The publications selected consider the general political, constitutional and economic implications of a no-deal Brexit rather than its effects in particular sectors. So, for information on Brexit and future trade options or specific parts of the economy or agriculture, for example, see the relevant papers on the Library’s Brexit website. 4 Brexit reading list: no deal List of 2019 publications November No-deal Guidance Dashboard – November 2019, British Chambers of Commerce October Claire Milne, Could we still have a “no deal” Brexit in 2020 at the end of the transition?, Full Fact, 29 October 2019 MEPs want to keep 2020 EU funding for UK in no-deal Brexit, European Law Monitor, 25 October 2019 Chris Curtis, No-Dealers think MPs should back Boris’ Brexit deal, YouGov, 24 October 2019 Simon Blackford, Negotiating Brexit, Briefings for Brexit, 22 October 2019 Patrick Benham-Crosswell, BoJo’s deal is not Brexit.
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft Outlook
    From: FOI Sent: 13 July 2017 16:17 To: Subject: FOI 59/17 Vote Leave and BeLeave EC Correspondence Response Attachments: 20160428 Vote Leave and Labour Leave ATTACHMENT REDACTED.pdf; 20160428 Vote Leave and Labour Leave REDACTED.pdf; 20160429 RE Vote Leave and Labour Leave (1) REDACTED.pdf; 20160429 RE Vote Leave and Labour Leave (2) REDACTED.pdf; 20160602 RE Material from other campaigners REDACTED.pdf Dear Our Ref: FOI 59/17 Thank you for your email to the Electoral Commission dated 12 May 2017. The Commission aims to respond to requests for information promptly within the statutory twenty working days and regrets that on this occasion we have not done so. Your request is in bold below followed by our response. You have requested: Please provide me with any document exchanged between either Vote Leave or BeLeave and the Electoral Commission, during the regulated period right before the Brexit referendum, and concerning 3rd party or joint funding of campaigns. Our response is as follows: We hold some of the information you have requested. We hold documents exchanged between Vote Leave and the Commission but we do not hold any information on the campaigner BeLeave. The Regulated Period for the UK General Election 2017 was from 15 April to 23 June 2017 and this has been reflected in the documents returned. Please find attached 5 emails attached, redaction has been applied to remove signatures and contact information where the individuals would not have reasonably expected their released to the public. Section 40(2) and (3)(a)(i) of the FOI Act In the information we are releasing, we have redacted some of the information in the documents.
    [Show full text]
  • What the Eu Constitution Does
    WHAT THE EU CONSTITUTION DOES A 14-POINT CRITICAL SUMMARY With an Appendix listing the 69 further national vetoes that would be abolished by the Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe and increase the EU's powers Issued by The National Platform EU Research and Information Centre, Dublin, Ireland; affiliated to the European Alliance of EU-critical Movements(TEAM) 1 What some of the Constitution’s authors say about it: “The EU Constitution is the birth certificate of the United States of Europe.” – German Minister for Europe Hans Martin Bury, Die Welt, 25-2-2005 “The Constitution is the capstone of a European Federal State.” – Guy Verhofstadt, Belgian Prime Minister, Financial Times, 21-6-2004 “Our Constitution cannot be reduced to a mere treaty for co-operation between governments. Anyone who has not yet grasped this fact deserves to wear the dunce’s cap.” – Valery Giscard-d'Estaing, President of the EU Convention, Speech in Aachen accepting the Charlemagne Prize for European integration, 29-5-2003 “It wasn't worth creating a negative commotion with the British. I rewrote my text with the word federal replaced by communautaire, which means exactly the same thing.” – Valery Giscard d'Estaing, Wall Street Journal Europe, 7-7-2003 “We know that nine out of ten people will not have read the Constitution and will vote on the basis of what politicians and journalists say. More than that, if the answer is No, the vote will probably have to be done again, because it absolutely has to be Yes.” – Jean-Luc Dehaene, Former Belgian Prime Minister and Vice-President of the EU Convention, Irish Times, 2-6-2004 “In Europe one needs to act 'as if' - as if what was wanted was little, in order to obtain much, as if States were to remain sovereign to convince them to concede sovereignty ..
    [Show full text]
  • What Does Leave Look Like V5.Pdf
    2 Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3 No clear or credible plan for an alternative ..................................................................... 5 The Norway model? ........................................................................................................... 7 The Swiss model? .............................................................................................................. 9 Iceland and Liechtenstein? ............................................................................................. 11 Macedonia and Andorra? ................................................................................................ 13 The Isle of Man and the Channel Islands? ..................................................................... 13 Turkey? ............................................................................................................................. 13 Australia? .......................................................................................................................... 14 South Korea? .................................................................................................................... 15 Ukraine, Moldova, or Morocco? ...................................................................................... 15 Vanuatu, Brunei and Nicaragua? .................................................................................... 16 Canada? ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • BRIEFING 25 1 January 2020 1.ELECTION ANALYSIS
    ROSE BRIEFING 25 1 January 2020 1.ELECTION ANALYSIS ASHCROFT POLLS – 30,000 INTERVIEWS IMMEDIATELY AFTER POLLING ON 12 DECEMBER Most important issue Conservative voters: Get Brexit Done 72 per cent; NHS 41 per cent Labour: 74 per cent NHS; 28 per cent Stop Brexit SNP: 57 per cent NHS; 41 per cent Stop Brexit 2017 Leave and Remain voters Labour secured 84 per cent of 2017 Labour Remain voters but only 64 per cent of 2017 Labour Leave voters Age Labour secured a majority of 18-34 voters and the biggest share (45 per cent) of 35-44 voters. YOUGOV – 28,000 VOTERS AFTER ELECTION 2. LEGISLATION European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Act This was passed in slightly amended form on 20 December 2019. It was substantially the same as the Bill debated in October 2019 (outlined in Briefing Note 24) but with three changes. It removed additional procedural protections for workers rights; government liability for children seeking asylum with relatives in Britain; and some procedural safeguards for Commons scrutiny. It maintains all those elements committing to a ‘level playing field’ in economic relations with the EU and other countries. Jeremy Corbyn criticised: ‘it will not protect our manufacturing industry or vital trading interests’ as well as the ending of liability for refugee children and removing protections for workers rights. Legislative programme outlined in the Queen’s Speech 19 December In addition to the European Union Withdrawal Bill (now Act) this included Agriculture Bill promising a new system of subsidy based on land use and environment needs Fisheries Bill promising fair access to territorial waters Trade Bill maximising continuity for business and continuing access to £1.3T public procurement in 43 countries through ratification of WTO procurement regulations Financial Services Bill ● Ensure that the UK maintains its world-leading regulatory standards and remains open to international markets after we leave the EU.
    [Show full text]
  • A Way of Understanding Brexit
    Master Thesis The use of language as an influencing tool in leadership: a way of understanding Brexit Author: Jorge Ernesto Arango Terán, Pearl Bitanihirwe and Diego Emilio Arango Terán Supervisor: Mikael Lundgren Examiner: Lars Lindkvist Term: VT20 Subject: Business Administration with Specialization in Leadership and Management Level: Master’s degree Course code: 4FE41E Abstract New nationalist ideologies have permeated politics for the last decade. New leaders, followers, and conducive environments have emerged to cause the most controversial and unique episodes in recent politics. Brexit was selected by having a set of exclusive characteristics, factors, and social elements which resulted in the UK leaving the EU after 47 years. Additionally, two academic attributes were considered to be politically researched, which were leadership and communication techniques. The former established the relationship between two parts of society (leaders and followers) and how their roles developed during the Brexit referendum campaign, and the latter examined political language by extracting the most representative rhetorical means used by the British leaders to run it. The set of rhetorical techniques was thoroughly investigated using a specially adopted analysis. Several examples were included in how they were performed politically and strategically to create that democratic result. To execute this study, we developed qualitative research based on a study case strategy, descriptive purpose, and by having an inductive approach. Consequently, we selected a sampling method which met specific research criteria and allowed us to analyse this political phenomenon rhetorically. Besides, our empirical data was formed by using interactive and visual material which provided a credible source of study to approach, identify, and answer our research questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit Memes Brexit: Exploring Discourses of the Brexit Negotiations Through Social Media Visuals
    Brexit Memes Brexit: Exploring discourses of the Brexit negotiations through social media visuals Joanne Findlay Malmö University Media and Communications Studies MA Thesis 2019 1 Contents Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... 3 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Research Questions ........................................................................................................................ 4 3. Literature Review ............................................................................................................................ 4 3.1 Social Media and Participatory Culture ........................................................................................ 5 3.2 Meme Studies ............................................................................................................................... 6 3.3 Features of Memes ....................................................................................................................... 7 3.4 Discourse Theory........................................................................................................................... 9 3.5 Discourses of Brexit ....................................................................................................................... 9 4. Research Paradigms .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Illiberal Trends and Anti-EU Politics in East Central Europe
    PALGRAVE STUDIES IN EUROPEAN UNION POLITICS SERIES EDITORS: MICHELLE EGAN · NEILL NUGENT · WILLIAM E. PATERSON Illiberal Trends and Anti-EU Politics in East Central Europe Edited by Astrid Lorenz · Lisa H. Anders Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics Series Editors Michelle Egan American University Washington, USA Neill Nugent Manchester Metropolitan University Manchester, UK William E. Paterson Aston University Birmingham, UK Following on the sustained success of the acclaimed European Union Series, which essentially publishes research-based textbooks, Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics publishes cutting edge research-driven monographs. The remit of the series is broadly defined, both in terms of subject and academic discipline. All topics of significance concerning the nature and operation of the European Union potentially fall within the scope of the series. The series is multidisciplinary to reflect the growing importance of the EU as a political, economic and social phenomenon. To submit a proposal, please contact Senior Editor Ambra Finotello ambra.fi[email protected]. Editorial Board Laurie Buonanno (SUNY Buffalo State, USA) Kenneth Dyson (Cardiff University, UK) Brigid Laffan (European University Institute, Italy) Claudio Radaelli (University College London, UK) Mark Rhinard (Stockholm University, Sweden) Ariadna Ripoll Servent (University of Bamberg, Germany) Frank Schimmelfennig (ETH Zurich, Switzerland) Claudia Sternberg (University College London, UK) Nathalie Tocci (Istituto Affari Internazionali, Italy) More
    [Show full text]
  • Busting the Lexit Myths
    EMBARGOED UNTIL 30/01/18 AT 00:01 Busting the Lexit Myths Foreword by Heidi Alexander MP & Alison McGovern MP Authors: Catherine West MP, Nick Donovan, Dr Andy Tarrant, Richard Corbett MEP, Dr Mike Galsworthy, Sarah Veale CBE, Tom Burke and Lord (John) Monks. Edited by Francis Grove-White Labour Campaign for the Single Market EMBARGOED UNTIL 30/01/18 AT 00:01 Chapters 3 Foreword Heidi Alexander MP & Alison McGovern MP 5 Austerity Catherine West MP 8 State aid Nick Donovan 11 Renationalisation Dr Andy Tarrant 15 Immigration Richard Corbett MEP 18 The NHS Dr Mike Galsworthy 21 Employment rights Sarah Veale CBE 25 The environment Tom Burke 28 Trade deals Lord (John) Monks Open Britain is a national cross-party campaign, making the case for the UK to remain in the Single Market and the Customs Union, and for all options about our future relationship with the EU to be kept on the table. http://www.open-britain.co.uk/ The Labour Campaign for the Single Market is seeking to shift Labour Party policy towards support for staying in the Single Market and the Customs Union. It is co-chaired by Heidi Alexander MP and Alison McGovern MP. http://www.labour4singlemarket.org/ 1 Author biographies Catherine West MP is the Member of Parliament for Hornsey & Wood Green and a former Shadow Foreign Office Minister. Before being elected in 2015, she was leader of Islington Council from 2010-13. Nick Donovan is a Campaign Director and investigator at an anti-corruption NGO, and a director of one of the UK's largest credit unions.
    [Show full text]
  • What Happens Next? 2
    1 BREXIT WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? 2 FOREWORD DAVID LAMMY MP When I entered Parliament in 2000, I came with a clear set of objectives - objectives that I still hold close to my heart today. As a Labour MP, I expect you share them with me. I entered Parliament to fight for a fairer, more balanced Britain, with opportunities open for all races, all genders and all social classes. I entered Parliament to fight for a Britain with an economy that creates jobs for my constituents in Tottenham, and maintains a generous safety net to look after those who need help. I entered Parliament to stand up for an internationalist vision of Britain that engages with the modern world, not one that retreats into nostalgia and managed decline. Finally, I entered Parliament to oppose our adversary, the Conservative Party, whose damaging, closed-minded ideology prioritises the interests of a handful of billionaire donors over the vast majority of working people. Friends, the aims and values we hold dear have never faced such a fundamental threat as Brexit. No single policy in our history has promised to wreak as much havoc to jobs, workers’ rights, the environment, and our role in the ‘The aims and values we world as leaving the EU. No single policy has hold dear have never faced had the power to set our country on the such a fundamental threat as wrong path for as long as this. Once we leave, Brexit.’ we leave, and it will be very difficult to rejoin. When you make the decision on whether or not to oppose Theresa May’s deal, I ask you to consider just one, simple question: will this deal serve my constituents’ interests better than our current institutional arrangements inside the EU? 3 This is the real choice our country faces – not the false one between Theresa May’s very poor deal and no deal at all.
    [Show full text]
  • Gawain Towler
    Gawain Towler Director of Communications, Brexit Party January 2019 – December 2019 Press Officer/Director of Communications, UK Independence Party June 2004 – February 2018 10 August 2020 UKIP, 2004 – 2016 UK in a Changing Europe (UKICE): Just thinking back to the first stage of your UKIP career: when would you say that politicians and the media started to take the idea of a referendum on membership seriously, and why? Gawain Towler (GT): I think that there was a momentary flash in the pan over Maastricht. Obviously, the Lib Dems had their policy of ‘We support a referendum until we’re going to have one.’ There were also a few Tory backbenchers and a couple of Labour backbenchers who were minded in that direction, but it was not serious. I suppose going backwards; Jimmy Goldsmith scared the pants out of everybody, forcing the Government to offer a referendum in the likelihood of us joining the Euro, and thus effectively scuppering our entry into the Euro. Period. So, the existential threat of a referendum was taken seriously significantly earlier, but that had gone away. As long as nobody in Government seriously considered the Euro. And Gordon Brown’s five tests were just essentially, ‘I’m going to make up what they are at the time, to ensure this doesn’t Page 1/29 happen, because we can’t afford to leave or have a referendum.’ So, I would say a referendum only really started being taken seriously again when Cameron three-line whipped against one. Cameron put a three-line whip against a Private Members Bill for a referendum.
    [Show full text]