Labour Attempts to Push Through Inquiry Into Tories’ Co-Chair Amid Allegations of Cronyism
18:58 GMT 08.08.2021 (Updated: 15:15 GMT 28.05.2023)
© AFP 2023 / ANDREW H. WALKER
Subscribe
This is not the first time that the government of Boris Johnson has faced accusations of cronyism. In February, it became known that a neighbour of ex-Health Secretary Matt Hancock received a $42 million contract for the supply of vials for COVID tests. Local media said that prior to the contract, the firm had no experience with medical equipment.
The Labour Party has put pressure on co-chair of the Conservative Party Ben Elliot as it attempts to push through an inquiry into activities of the government that critics have claimed amount to cronyism. The party wrote a letter to the independent Committee on Standards in Public Life asking it to investigate whether Elliot’s behaviour conforms "with the ethical standards promoted" by it.
Anneliese Dodds, the Labour chair, said the official should not “keep ducking scrutiny over his activities” as she accused the Conservative Party and its leader Prime Minister Boris Johnson of creating a "cash for access" culture.
"It was Boris Johnson who appointed him to that post – so responsibility for Elliot’s actions ultimately falls on the prime minister. The longer the prime minister stays quiet, the more obvious it becomes that there is one rule for senior Conservatives and their chums, and another rule for everyone else", said Dodds.
Secretive Advisory Board for Wealthy Donors
At the beginning of August, the Financial Times (FT) reported, citing sources, that Ben Elliot, who is the nephew of Camilla, wife of Prince Charles, had mixed his political role with business interests.
According to the outlet, his company, Quintessentially - which provides a luxury concierge service, acted as a secretive advisory board for wealthy donors of the Conservative Party, with individuals gaining access to high-ranking officials and even members of the royal family.
Mohamed Amersi, a British businessman and philanthropist, told the Financial Times that Elliot had introduced him to Prince Charles, heir to the throne, after he paid thousands for membership in Quintessentially.
"[The club was] like the very elite Quintessentially clients membership: one needs to cough up 250,000 [pounds] per annum or be a friend of Ben", said the businessman.
Elliot responded to the report by saying that he introduced Amersi to Prince Charles for the purpose of raising money for charity.
FT reported that Elliot hosted a drinks party at a donor’s house, at which Prime Minister Boris Johnson was also present and where members of the board also held discussions with Rishi Sunak, Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The Conservative Party confirmed that Quintessentially’s donors had met with senior party figures, but dismissed allegations of a conflict of interest.
"Donations are properly and transparently declared to the Electoral Commission, published by them, and comply fully with the law", said the party’s spokesperson.
Further Questions
Following FT’s story, local media reported that the PR company Hawthorn Advisors, co-founded by Elliot, had lobbied the government on behalf of various firms, including Chinese telecoms giant Huawei. A spokesperson for Hawthorn Advisors said that the official, who continues to hold a minority stake in the company, "was never actively involved" in its business.
These revelations prompted more questions from the Labour Party, whose lawmakers have called for an independent inquiry into Elliot and Quintessentially.
"This appears to be less of an advisory board than a means for a select group of elite donors to gain privileged access to the prime minister and the chancellor. The Conservative Party needs to explain what access this group had, what they have used that access to lobby for, and why they think it’s OK for there to be one rule for high-ranking Conservatives and another rule for everyone else", said Anneliese Dodds, the Labour chair.
The party also said it wants to know if government ministers had met with the "advisory board" and if so, what they discussed.
