four key claims fact checked by an expert in political finance

It was prototypical Nigel Farage. A cryptic announcement that a statement is about to be made, a wholesale hijacking of the news agenda hinting at a “will he won’t he?” state of affairs, followed by a blistering attack on “the establishment” (or, at least, Farage’s conception of the establishment), and a big finish – he is resigning as MP for Clacton, therefore triggering a by-election – in which he will stand once more (though it appears the other main parties will not).

This news does rather bury the bigger story, which most would agree is actually the allegations being made about his finances; and particularly that he accepted gifts worth millions from businessmen.

It’s worth working through the various claims that he made about rules he may or may not have broken, to see how they stack up – before thinking about how the by-election itself might play out.

Claim 1: ‘I have not broken the law in any way at all’

This is accurate. The main investigation Farage currently faces is from the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards over a £5m gift he received from businessman Christopher Harborne. Farage did also seem to intimate that financial gifts made to him by George Cottrell, as reported in the Sunday Times, had triggered a second investigation. He insisted several times: “I have done nothing wrong.”

But it should be very clear – the investigation over the £5m gift from Harbourne was never a criminal matter. It is and always was a matter of whether the House of Commons Code of Conduct had been breached. He has not broken the law and no one is accusing him of doing so. But he may have broken the code of conduct for a man in his position.

The Labour Party has referred elements of the Cottrell case to the Electoral Commission (though this would be a civil, not criminal, matter).

Claim 2: ‘It was given to me as a gift, I can do with that money exactly as I wish’

This too, is correct. The Code of Conduct is very clear that there is (currently) nothing particularly wrong with holding outside interests or earnings – only that all these things must be declared. And many MPs have held significant outside interests and earnings and have received quite significant gifts in the past (you may remember Keir Starmer’s glasses).

There are no qualitative judgements made about what one does with this money, just that it is declared. Looking at the Register of Members’ Interests, you find any number of politicians’ gifts, with varying degrees of information about what the gift was for. Farage could very simply have written “£5m; Christopher Harborne; Security”. If that was too intrusive, he may even have been able to write “£5m; Christopher Harborne; Gift”.

The problem with the Harborne donation, as it relates to the Code of Conduct, is not – and never has been – about what is what for. It is about whether it should have been declared.

It is worth remembering that if Farage has indeed broken the MPs code of conduct, that one punishment is suspension from parliament. If that suspension is greater than ten days, then a recall petition can be called (which could lead to a by-election).

À lire aussi :
Why Nigel Farage is resigning as an MP, only to stand again – expert analysis

One view is, then, that Farage is getting ahead of a decision he thinks isn’t going to go his way and pre-empting the inevitable. There is, however, an added wrinkle that these investigations are now on hold. If he wins the by-election, is recalled to parliament as an MP, the investigation is then unpaused. It’s not beyond the realm of possibility, then, that we could be looking at two by-elections in one year in Clacton.

Claim 3: ‘The establishment has decided that they can’t beat us fairly, so they have chosen to use foul means’

Well, okay – but scrutiny follows success. And, indeed, this has been the problem for Farage and Reform. With the Tories on life support, and Labour barely faring better, over the past year they have become an established (and, whisper it, establishment) party, just look at all the former Conservatives they have among their ranks. To many, they are the government in waiting.

One might say, then, that Farage is a victim of this success. But he isn’t, he’s a victim of a laissez-faire attitude to transparency. When it comes to regulating standards – and this is particularly true of money in politics – the UK doesn’t ask much of our politicians. Compared with other countries it is incredibly permissive. The one thing that politicians are asked to be is open and honest about who is funding them and follow the rules for disclosure.

There have been questions asked again and again about Reform’s opaque financial arrangements. The easiest way to address these is to just be open and honest, and follow the spirit as well as the letter of the law. Transparency is not just an oversight tool for regulators, pen pushers and bureaucrats (as I suspect they view it) but the very tool politicians can use to cut difficult questions off at the pass with.

Claim 4: ‘This will be a people versus the establishment by-election’

Well, only if other parties make it one. I thought an analogy that BBC political editor Chris Mason drew after the speech was important – that of former Conservative MP David Davis. In 2008 he resigned as an MP to bring forth debate on what he thought were erosions of civil liberties by the then Labour government. However, as Mason outlined, neither the Liberal Democrats or Labour stood candidates because “they didn’t want to play into the self-delivery of theatre, as they saw it, that Davis chose to engineer”.

The same might be true here. There’s no reason that any party necessarily has to fight this by-election. They might see it as a similar piece of political theatre (from admittedly a master of the form) and prefer to let Farage duke it out with Rupert Lowe, Count Binface and the guy dressed as a fox from the Makerfield by-election.

Given that this might not be the only Clacton by-election fought this year, better – they might think – to keep their powder dry for a second when the facts of the various allegations swirling around Farage’s various financial arrangements may become clear. One thing is for sure: if we thought Makerfield was one of the most consequential by-elections in recent history, we haven’t seen anything yet.