Did Corbyn activists break election law?
Momentum raised £120,000... but declared just £38,000 spending
‘Potential offences or contraventions’ ‘Significant public interest’
THE Jeremy Corbyn- backing Momentum group faced an official investigation into its election spending last night after it declared just £38,000 of expenditure – while raising more than £120,000.
The hard-Left grassroots organisation was credited with helping the Labour leader deprive Theresa May of a majority in June.
But yesterday the Electoral Commission said it had ‘reasonable grounds’ to suspect it may have broken spending limits – and therefore the law – by not properly declaring its donations.
Despite its pivotal role during the election campaign, Momentum claimed in its official return that it spent just £38,742. But documents uncovered by the Daily Mail reveal how it raised more than £120,000 during the four weeks before polling day.
In a video posted on Momentum’s online crowd-funding page and social media platforms a month ahead of the election, former broadcaster and arch-Corbyn cheerleader Paul Mason told supporters: ‘At Momentum, we’ve got a plan to use technology, mobilisation and the hundreds of thousands of people who support Jeremy Corbyn ... to deliver victory for the most radical Labour programme you have ever seen. ‘But we need money. A lot of it.’ More than £40,000 was raised on the crowd-funding page on the first day alone, with more than £120,000 raised online during the final four weeks up to polling day. Momentum is credited with helping Labour gain 30 seats. Ousted Tory MPs told how they had been outgunned on the doorstep as the group flooded their constituencies with hundreds of campaigners.
It organised mass campaign weekends in around a dozen constituencies that turned red, including Croydon Central, Derby North, Sheffield Hallam, Battersea, Leeds North West, and Brighton Kemptown.
The group developed a website, My Nearest Marginal, used by more than 100,000 people to direct activists towards their nearest key seat. It also reached millions online with slick videos seen by more than a quarter of Facebook users in the final week of the campaign. One film, ‘Daddy, Why Do You Hate Me?’ was viewed more than seven million times.
As a non-party campaign that told voters to back a specific party, Momentum was permitted to spend £39,000 during the election. It could have spent above the limit if Labour had granted it permission to use part of its expenditure allowance, however the party did not recognise the group as part of its official campaign.
Electoral Commission records show that Momentum reported total spending of £38,742.54 across the UK during the campaign, only £257.46 below the £39,000 limit.
The Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (PPERA) states any membership political group, such as Momentum, must declare any donations above £7,500.
No such donations to Momentum have ever been registered with the Electoral Commission.
The Commission said that after examining Momentum’s return it had decided to launch an investigation that will look at whether it spent in excess of the spending limits, submitted a return that did not include accurate donation information or submitted a return that did not include all invoices for payments of more than £200.
The watchdog added: ‘It is possible that during the course of the investigation, the Commission will identify potential contraventions and/or offences under PPERA other than those set out above.’ Its director of political finance and regulation and legal counsel, Bob Posner, said: ‘There is significant public interest in us investigating Momentum.
‘Once complete, the Commission will decide whether any breaches have occurred and, if so, what further action may be appropriate.’
Last night Momentum said it had delivered a ‘low budget’ campaign thanks to the ‘energy’ of its volunteers. A spokesman said: ‘Much of the Electoral Commission investigation refers to a series of administrative errors that can be easily rectified. Momentum put a lot of effort and resources into detailed budgeting and financial procedures during the election to ensure full compliance.
‘ Our election campaign was delivered on a low budget because it tapped into the energy and enthusiasm of tens of thousands of volunteers.
‘We will fully comply with the investigation going forward.’