Advertisement

‘Lordy Me!’ Can donations buy you a British peerage? A study in the link between party political funding and peerage nominations, 2005–2014

  • Simon RadfordEmail author
  • Andrew Mell
  • Seth Alexander Thevoz
Original Article

Abstract

Trust in political institutions has declined across developed democracies. One of the main reasons cited for this lack of trust has been the role of money in politics, while standing up to ‘big money’ has been a common rallying cry of populists of both left- and right-wing variants. Political scientists have tried to examine the role of big money in two main steps: firstly, by showing that money can buy access to legislators; and, secondly, that legislators are thereby more responsive to the wishes of donors when writing and voting on laws. Researchers have used experiments and other techniques to show that Congressional staffs are more responsive to requests from donors compared to others and have also shown aggregate trends in responsiveness to the preferences of the wealthier. In this paper we try and go one step further: to show that donors can become legislators. We do this by looking at the example of the House of Lords. Compiling an original dataset of large donations and nominations for peerages, the authors show that, when the ‘usual suspects’ for a position, like former MPs and party workers, are accounted for, donations seem to play an outsize role in accounting for the remaining peers.

Keywords

Party funding Donations House of lords Populism Money in politics British politics Influence 

Notes

References

Primary Sources: Print

  1. Hansard, House of Lords debates.Google Scholar
  2. Propriety and Honours. 2006. Interim Findings—Fourth Report of Session 2005-06. London: House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee.Google Scholar
  3. House of Lords Appointments Commission (HoLAC), Freedom of Information response to Seth Thévoz on blocked peerage nominations, 12 June 2018.Google Scholar

Primary Sources: Online

  1. Database of Donations and Loans to UK Political Parties, Electoral Commission website, https://pefonline.electoralcommission.org.uk/search/searchintro.aspx.
  2. House of Lords Appointments Commission website, http://lordsappointments.independent.gov.uk/.
  3. Register of Lords’ Interests, House of Lords website, http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld/ldreg.htm.
  4. UK Companies House Beta website, https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/.
  5. Who’s Who and Who Was Who, online edition, http://www.ukwhoswho.com/.

Secondary Sources

  1. Ansolabehere, Stephen, John de Figueiredo, and James M. Snyder. 2003. Why is There So Little Money in US Politics? Journal of Economic Perspectives 17 (1): 105–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bartels, Larry M. 2008. Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Baston, Lewis. 2000. Sleaze: The State of Britain. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Baumgartner, Frank R., Christian Breunig, Martial Foucault, Christoffer Green-Pederson, Abel Francois, Bryan D. Jones, Peter John, Chris Koske, Peter B. Mortensen, Stuart Soroka, Frederic Varone, Stefan Walgrave, and Chris Wlezien. 2009. A General Empirical Law of Political Budgets: A Comparative Analysis. American Journal of Political Science 53 (4): 855–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beetham, David, and Unelected Oligarchy. 2011. Corporate and Financial Dominance in Britain’s Democracy. Democratic Audit: Liverpool.Google Scholar
  6. Bronars, Stephen G., and John R. Lott. 1997. Do Campaign Donations Alter How a Politician Votes? Journal of Law and Economics 40 (2): 317–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chin, Michelle L., Jon R. Bond, and Nehemia Geva. 2000. A Foot in the Door: An Experimental Study of PAC and Constituency Effects on Access. Journal of Politics 62 (2): 534–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Sam Coates, Bruno Waterfield, Theresa May Faces Growing Calls to Quit, The Times January 30 2018- online version https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/theresa-may-faces-growing-calls-to-quit-l3tbwx3xv
  9. Cook, Andrew. 2008. Cash for Honours: The Story of Maundy Gregory. Stroud: The History Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cook, Judith. 1995. The Sleaze File… and How to Clean Up British Politics. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  11. Robert, A. 1961. Dahl, Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Fedderke, Johannes, and Dennis Jett. 2016. What Price the Court of St. James’s? Political Influences on Ambassadorial Postings in the United States of America. Governance 30 (3): 483–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Flavin, Patrick. 2012. Income Inequality and Policy Representation in the American States. American Politics Research 40 (1): 29–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fouirnaes, Alexander, and Andrew B. Hall. 2014. The Financial Incumbency Advantage: Causes and Consequences. Journal of Politics 76 (3): 711–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Friedman, Bobby, and Democracy Ltd. 2013. How Money and Donations Corrupted British Politics. London: Oneworld.Google Scholar
  16. Steve Goodrich, Can You Buy a Lordship?, Transparency International. http://www.transparency.org.uk/can-you-buy-a-lordship/#.W0JM7RJKjEZ. Accessed 21 Aug 2015.
  17. Andrew Grice, Big Money is Poisoning British Democracy, Warns Anti-Sleaze Watchdog, The Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/big-money-is-poisoning-british-democracy-warns-anti-sleaze-watchdog-8327305.html. Accessed 19 Nov 2012.
  18. George Monbiot, How Corporate Dark Money is Taking Power on Both Side of the Atlantic, The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/02/corporate-dark-money-power-atlantic-lobbyists-brexit. Accessed 2 Feb 2017.
  19. Fox, Justin, and Kyle Rothenberg. 2011. Influence Without Bribes: A Noncontracting Model of Campaign Giving and Policymaking. Political Analysis 19 (3): 325–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gilens, Martin. 2012. Affluence & Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gilens, Martin, and Benjamin I. Page. 2014. Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups and Average Citizens. Perspectives on Politics 12 (3): 564–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gerber, Alan S., James G. Gimpel, Donald P. Green, and Daron R. Shaw. 2011. How Large and Long-Lasting Are the Persuasive Effects of Televised Campaign Ads? Results from a Randomized Field Experiment. American Political Science Review 105 (1): 135–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Green, Donald P., and Alan S. Gerber. 2008. Get Out the Vote: How to Increase Turnout, 2nd ed. Brookings Institution: Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  24. Jacob, S. 2010. Hacker and Paul Pierson, Winner-Take-All Politics: How Washington Made the Rich Richer and Turned its Back on the Middle Class. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  25. Hacker, Jacob S., Philipp Rehm, and Mark Schlesinger. 2013. The Insecure American: Economic Experiences, Financial Worries, and Policy Attitudes. Perspectives on Politics 11 (1): 23–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hall, Richard A., and Frank W. Wayman. 1990. Buying Time: Moneyed Interests and the Mobilization of Bias in Congressional Committees. American Political Science Review 84 (3): 797–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jr. Gary, E. 2015. Hollibaugh The Political Determinants of Ambassadorial Appointments. Presidential Studies Quarterly 45 (3): 445–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hollingsworth, Mark. 1991. MPs for Hire: The Secret World of Political Lobbying. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  29. Christopher Hope and Steven Swinford, Peerages for Multi-Millionaires who ‘Donated their Way Into the Lords’, The Daily Telegraph. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10217409/Peerages-for-multi-millionaires-who-donated-their-way-into-the-Lords.html. Accessed 1 Aug 2013.
  30. Kalla, Joshua L. 2016. Campaign Contributions Facilitate Access to Congressional Officials: A Randomized Field Experiment. American Journal of Political Science 60 (3): 545–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kalla, Joshua L., and David E. Broockman. 2014. Congressional Officials Grant Access to Individuals Because They Have Contributed to Campaigns: A Randomized Field Experiment. American Journal of Political Science.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12180.Google Scholar
  32. Langbein, Laura. 1986. Money and Access: Some Empirical Evidence. Journal of Politics 48 (4): 1052–1062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. George Lardner Jr., The Nixon Tapes: Nixon’s Fateful Reversal. Washington Post, 30 October 1997.Google Scholar
  34. Leigh, David, and Ed Vullamy. 1997. Sleaze The Corruption of Parliament. London: Fourth Estate.Google Scholar
  35. Levy, Lord Michael. 2008. A Question of Honour: Inside New Labour and the Cash for Peerages Scandal. London: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  36. James Lyons, Land Gubbers: David Cameron faces Claims Wealthy Donors are Influencing Policy on Planning Laws, The Mirror. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-sleaze-david-cameron-faces-774353. Accessed 28 March 2012.
  37. McCarty, Nolan, and Lawrence S. Rothenberg. 1996. Commitment and the Campaign Contribution Contract. American Journal of Political Science 40: 872–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McCarthy, Donnachadh. 2014. The Prostitute State: How Britain’s Democracy Has Been Bought. London: Four Acorns.Google Scholar
  39. Michels, Robert. 1915. [trans. Eden Paul and Cedar Paul], Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  40. Nixon, Richard. 1990. In the Arena: A Memoir of Victory, Defeat and Renewal. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  41. Philp, Chris. 2006. ​The Price of Dishonour, Bow Group policy briefing.Google Scholar
  42. Pickard, Jim. The Very Candid Tory Property Donor, The Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/4cd203b3-4ff7-38f2-ae1b-88eaf037840b. Accessed 11 Sept 2011.
  43. Piketty, Thomas. 2014. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pinto-Duschinsky, Michael. 1981. British Political Finance, 1830–1980. American Enterprise Institute: Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  45. Ridley, F.F., and A. Doig (eds.). 1995. Sleaze: Politicians, Private Interests & Public Reaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Rowbottom, Jacob. 2010. Democracy Distorted: Wealth, Influence and Democratic Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Russell, Meg, and Meghan Benton. 2010. Analysis of Existing Data on the Breadth of Expertise and Experience in the House of Lords. London: The Constitution Unit, UCL.Google Scholar
  48. Michael Savage, New Centrist Party Gets 50m Backing to ‘Break Mould’ of UK Politics, The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/07/new-political-party-break-mould-westminster-uk-brexit. Accessed 8 April 2018.
  49. Stratmann, Thomas. 1992. Are Contributors Rational? Untangling Strategies of Political Action Committees. Journal of Political Economy 100 (3): 647–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stratmann, Thomas. 2005. ’Some Talk: Money in Politics - A (Partial) Review of the Literature’. Public Choices 124: 135–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Thévoz, Seth. 2015. Electing the Lords: How Did That Work Out for the Lib Dems? A Study into the Effectiveness of the Interim Peers Panel System for Electing Liberal Democrat Nominees to the House of Lords, 1999-2015. London: Social Liberal Forum.Google Scholar
  52. Torres-Speliscy, Ciara. 2012. How Much is an Ambassadorship? And the Tale of How Watergate Led to a Strong Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and a Weak Federal Election Campaign Act. Chapman Law Review 16: 71.Google Scholar
  53. Transparency International, 2016. Take Back Control: How Big Money Undermines Trust in Politics. http://www.transparency.org.uk/publications/take-back-control/#.W0JE3xJKjEY.
  54. Maegan Vazquez, WaPo: Pruitt Enlisted EPA Aide, Donors to Find His Wife a Job, CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/13/politics/scott-pruitt-marlyn-donors-job/index.html.
  55. Timothy Werner and John J. Coleman, ‘Addressing the Potential Effects of Citizens United: Evidence from the States’ (2013). APSA 2012 Annual Meeting Paper, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2108171.
  56. Walker, John. 1986. The Queen Has Been Pleased: The British Honours System at Work. London: David & Charles.Google Scholar
  57. Winters, Jeffrey A., and Benjamin I. Page. 2009. Oligarchy in the United States? Perspectives on Politics 7 (4): 731–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wright Mills, C. 1956. The Power Elite. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Yong, Ben, Robert Hazell, and Special Advisers. 2014. Who They Are, What They Do, and Why They Matter. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Limited 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simon Radford
    • 1
    Email author
  • Andrew Mell
    • 2
  • Seth Alexander Thevoz
    • 3
  1. 1.University of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Corpus Christi CollegeOxford UniversityOxfordUnited Kingdom
  3. 3.Nuffield CollegeOxford UniversityOxfordUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations