Schedule 6A to the 2000 Act (details to be given in transaction reports)

A2 (1) In paragraph 2 of Schedule 6A to the 2000 Act (identity of authorised participants: quarterly reports), after paragraph (b) of sub-paragraph (10) there is inserted—

“(c) the names and addresses of all members of the association and donors donating £1,000 or more annually to the association.”.

(2) In paragraph 2A of Schedule 6A to the 2000 Act (limit transactions), after paragraph (b) of sub-paragraph (11) there is inserted—

“(ba) the names and addresses of all the members of the association and donors donating £1,000 or more annually to the association;”’.

We have just completed our scrutiny of clause 8, which is designed to improve transparency in systems. The amendment would extend that transparency to unincorporated organisations. We have had much discussion and debate—some of it seemingly interminable—about transparency. The amendment addresses an omission in clause 8. Although we have amended the clause to set new monetary thresholds, it requires people to provide information about the source of donations. Amendment No. 149 does the same thing for unincorporated associations. I recognise that it may not be perfectly drafted.

The Electoral Commission, in the paper that it circulated to members of the Committee, states that the commission sees merit in increased transparency in this area. It goes on to say that it may be helpful to introduce greater transparency about those who provide substantial donations to unincorporated associations. However, it recognises that that imposes an additional administrative burden on those organisations, which was the debate we had about clause 8.

There is cross-party consensus that there should be greater transparency in the membership and source of funds through these unincorporated associations. For example, although he is not in his place, the hon. Member for Chichester said on 20 October this year:

“I am fully in favour of transparency...I completely agree with the point made earlier that nor can we allow vehicles”—

by that, I assume he was referring to unincorporated associations—

“to be created especially for the purpose of concealment.”—[Official Report, 20 October 2008; Vol. 481, c. 105.]

The shadow Leader of the House, in an exchange with the Leader of the House at business questions in March 2007, said:

“We are happy to discuss...greater transparency on donations, such as those by unincorporated associations, and new powers for the Electoral Commission.”—[Official Report, 15 March 2007; Vol. 458, c. 469.]

Sir Hayden Phillips, who in his report referred to unincorporated associations, has said:

“Unincorporated associations and companies that make donations to political parties should be required to identify the people involved in making the decisions.”

There seems to be general consensus that that is an area where we need to improve transparency. Amendment No. 149 may not be perfect, but it addresses the need for us to legislate and extend transparency to the source of donations and the individuals who make donations in excess of £1,000 through unincorporated associations.