Conclusions
25. It is clear that the donations made by Bearwood
to the Taunton and Orpington Conservative Associations were part
of a wider campaign of support by Lord Ashcroft for Conservative
candidates in marginal constituencies.
26. The House's rules on the registration of donations
to constituency associations require registration where the donation
is linked either to a Member's candidacy at an election or to
membership of the House. As Advice Note 5 reiterates, at the heart
of this requirement (and of the rules on the registration of interests
as a whole) is the belief that there should be transparency among
Members and between Members and the public in respect of the financial
interests of, and material benefits received by Members which
might reasonably be thought by others to influence them in carrying
out their parliamentary duties.
27. Significant financial donations to a local party
personally solicited by the Member clearly fall into this category.
Paragraph 26 of the Guide to the Rules (the essence of which is
repeated in the Advice Note) says that support should be regarded
as 'linked' "if it is expressly tied to the Member by name,
eg if it is … a donation which has been solicited or encouraged
by the Member". However, in order for the requirement to
register a donation under category 4(a) to be triggered, there
must be some clear and personal linkage between the Member and
the donation. Incidental involvement is not enough.
28. Mr Horam applied twice personally for financial
support from Bearwood on behalf of his constituency association,
after making inquiries to see if such support might be available.
Mr Horam agrees that he solicited the donations personally and
that he should therefore have included them in his entry in the
Register of Members' Interests.
29. Mr Horam says that his failure to register the
donations in the Register of Members' Interests was inadvertent.
The donations were reported to the Electoral Commission through
the Compliance Officer at Conservative Central Office. Information
about them was therefore in the public domain. I accept that this
is inconsistent with any suggestion of an attempt on Mr Horam's
part to cover up their receipt.
30. At the same time, Members are responsible for
ensuring that they comply with the House's rules on the registration
and declaration of interests, which are clearly and comprehensively
set out in the Guide to the Rules. I am disappointed that Mr Horam,
on his own admission, failed to read Advice Note 5 and, although
clearly aware of the requirement to register sponsorships, appears
not to have grasped the significance in this case of the guidance
offered in paragraph 26 of the Guide to the Rules.
31. Whilst information about the donations was in
the public domain through the Electoral Commission, the manner
in which this is held by the Commission reveals their existence
and the identity of the donor, but nothing of Mr Horam's part
in securing them. Appropriate entries in the House's Register
would have made his part in this clear.
32. Although the total of the donations received
by Mr Horam's association was significant, there has clearly been
no attempt to deceive. I accept Mr Horam's contention that his
failure to observe the House's rules was inadvertent. He has acknowledged
that he breached his obligations under the Code and has expressed
his readiness to apologise for this. In all the circumstances,
I therefore thought it appropriate, as I have previously indicated,
to exercise the discretion given me by the House to deal with
this matter under the rectification procedure.
33. Mr Horam declined to join in this process, however,
for the reasons set out in paragraph 19 above. I must therefore
reach a formal conclusion on the complaint against him.
34. I am satisfied that Mr Horam's obligations under
the Code were clear. By his own admission he was in breach of
them. Although he has correctly pointed to some duplication in
the requirements of the House, on the one hand, and of the Electoral
Commission, on the other, Mr Horam has not advanced any arguments
which, in my opinion, demonstrate any confusion between those
requirements such as would justify his failure to record in his
entry in the Register of Members' Interests the donations to his
constituency association by Bearwood. I therefore recommend
that Mr Whittle's complaint against Mr Horam be upheld.
35. I recognise that the issue of duplication of
reporting requirements raised by Mr Horam is a real one. It is
not simply an issue to do with assisting the convenience of Members
(although keeping the burden of regulation to the necessary minimum
should be an objective of all concerned) but also impacts on the
credibility of the regulatory system and on its effectiveness
from the point of view of the public. It is, I know, a matter
of which the Electoral Commission is already seized and I shall
continue to work with the Commission, and where appropriate others,
to seek a way of resolving it. Both the Electoral Commission and
I anticipate at present that a solution will include a requirement
for primary legislation, and this is likely to be a key factor
influencing progress. I shall also continue to work with the Commission
to improve, wherever possible, the operation of the existing arrangements
and to ensure that Members are fully appraised of their obligations
to both the Commission and the House.
14 July 2005 Sir Philip Mawer
3 
