Spending by Remain and Leave groups investigated
THE two leading groups in the EU referendum campaign are being investigated by the election watchdog after failing to file enough information about their spending.
The Electoral Commission said it had launched investigations into Stronger In and Vote Leave after they failed to deliver “all the necessary invoices and receipts” documenting their spending during the campaign.
Figures published by the watchdog show that the various groups that made up the Remain camp outspent their Leave counterparts by £6 million, in what was the most expensive referendum ever fought in British political history.
Remain campaigners spent just over £19 million during the referendum battle, compared with the £13 million spent by groups arguing for Britain to leave the EU.
As it published the data yesterday, the Electoral Commission said it had opened formal investigations into four
campaigns, including the main Remain and Leave groups.
The regulator is investigating the Liberal Democrats, who spent £2.2 million campaigning for Britain to stay in the EU, because their “spending return also appears to be missing some details, including invoices, receipts and supplier names”.
Peter Harris, the multimillionaire Butlins owner and Leave campaigner, also faces an inquiry into his £421,000 of campaign outgoings, as he “delivered his spending return late and with- out the required audit report”. A spokesman for the Electoral Commission said it was considering launching investigations into five other groups.
The watchdog said the European Movement of the UK, which backed Remain, “declared a total spend of £329,000 but has supplied payment details of only £290,000”, while Conservatives IN “appears to have delivered a donation report late”.
Among the Leave campaigns, Labour Leave and the UK Independence Party “submitted returns with discrepancies in the way they reported the same campaigning activity”, while Grassroots Out “appears to have missing donation and/or loan reports in its return”.
Bob Posner, the Electoral Commission’s director of political finance and regulation, said: “It is disappointing that some campaigners, including both lead campaigners, appear to have not fully reported all their spending as they should have.
“Missing spending details undermines transparency and makes the returns harder for the public to under- stand. Where it appears campaigners have not fulfilled their legal obligations, we have begun and will continue to take action to deal with this.
“The commission has had to work with some campaigners to improve the quality of information originally submitted.
“This has included calling campaigners in to explain their returns. The commission will continue to examine campaigners’ spending returns until it is satisfied that they are complete and accurate.”
‘It is disappointing that some campaigners appear to have not fully reported all their spending as they should have’