Joe Egerton was Conservative Candidate for Leigh in Lancashire in 1992.
With Conservative Party members assembled in Manchester one item will not be on the agenda: the finances of the party.
As a regular attendee at the Annual Party Conferences of the National Union of Conservative and Unionist Associations between 1971 and 1998 I, like every other attendee. received with my pass a substantial annual report which contained details of how much each Conservative Association had contributed to Conservative Central Office. While the Party Conference did not discuss party finances, the contribution of party members through their associations was made available to all.
The avoidance of discussion of the party’s finances is, one fears, an example of the mortal sin of cowardice. The apparatchiks running – or should one say running down – the party doubtless calm their consciences with the thought that they are sparing the good burghers of Manchester, not to mention the abundance of lobbyists and corporate clones infesting the Conference Centre, the horrible sights of an outraged membership re-enacting what Lady Bracknell described as the “worst excesses of the French Revolution”.
The bulk of the Party’s assets are held by the Conservative Party Foundation Limited. Although its accounts for the year ending 31 December 2024 were signed off by the auditors, Begbies, on 20th May 2025, they were only made public by filing with Companies House shortly before 29th September.
Allowed the opportunity, members of the Party might want to know why there has been a change of auditors since May 2024. The accounts for the previous year were audited by CLA Evelyn Partners Limited and page 1 of the Annual Report stated “a resolution proposing that they be re-appointed will be put at a General Meeting”. If CLA Evelyn Partners were re-appointed they have subsequently surrendered the audit to allow Begbies to take their place.
The main difference between the accounts for 2023 and 2024 is in the treatment of Lord (David) Sainsbury’s bequest. In the 2023 accounts, this money is accounted for as “cash at bank and in hand”. In the 2024 accounts, on the balance sheet it is shown as a separate item: “Cash at bank: designated”. Furthermore under the heading “STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN EQUITY” not only is an item of £10,200,000 shown as “Transfer to designated reserve – restricted capital” but a further item of £399,586 is shown as “Transfer to designated reserve – income from restricted capital”.
This change in the accounting for the Sainsbury bequest is clearly linked to a change in the Memorandum and Articles of Association adopted on 16th September and unlike the accounts filed within a week. Article 4.9 has been amended to require that 75 per cent of the Members of the Foundation give their consent before the Foundation “sells, mortgages, leases or grants any option or encumbrance” over property it acquires as an HQ. Somebody has taken note that the proceeds of the sale of 32 Smith Square were transferred to CCHQ as a loan from C&UCO Properties without any proper arrangements being documented and dissipated.
Members of the party concerned with its long-term future might – if allowed to ask questions – want an explanation as to why proper arrangements were not made for the Sainsbury bequest from the day it was received.
The accounts for the party (CCHQ) as a whole were published by the Electoral Commission in August. The blogger Guido Fawkes has revealed that the Labour Party accounts, published the same day, were not just presented by the Party Treasurer at the Labour Conference but discussed in the NEC and that members had been able to suggest priority spending, such as maintain regional offices. If Conservative Party members were allowed to ask questions, a number of issues might have been ventilated.
An alert professional accountant might have wanted an explanation as to why the auditors – S&W Partners, the new name for Evelyn Partners – both assert that the accounts have been produced in line with FRS 102 and consolidate the assets of the Conservative Party Foundation Limited with those of CCHQ itself.
Paragraph 9.9 of FRS 102 states “A subsidiary shall be excluded from consolidation where: (a) severe long-term restrictions substantially hinder the exercise of the rights of the parent over the assets or management of the subsidiary;…” Article 3.1.3 (a) of the Foundation contains such a restriction: “the Company shall donate no more than 30 per cent of the capital value of the Fund in any one Electoral Period and if the Electoral Period is less than five years then the maximum amount to be donated to the Conservative Party shall be pro rated accordingly”.
The published accounts show CCHQ having net assets of £16,150,000. If the assets (Members’ Funds or Reserves) of the Foundation – £16,176,138 – were excluded as FRS 102 seems to require then CCHQ would have been shown to have negative net assets.
Members might also have some questions to ask about donations and fund raising.
Although the Electoral Commission’s published returns show the Conservative Party as having received more than any other party in the first half of 2025, around £4million of the £11million received is Short and Cranbourne money – public funds paid to an opposition party to cover the costs of the Leader of the Opposition and to finance research and travel for shadow cabinet members. The party remains alarmingly dependent on a few wealthy donors – over half the reported donations received by CCHQ came from just three donors, with one giving £2Milllion. Reported donations to Associations were in the order of £250,000. While the bulk of donations to Associations will have fallen below the reporting threshold, little progress seems to have been made in re-building the regional or area treasury function which was so important prior to the centralisation of functions and hollowing out of the party after 1998.
There would also no doubt have been serious questions over party membership. The 2024 accounts do indeed show a substantial increase in CCHQ’s share of membership income – from £1.5M in 2023 to £2M in 2024. However, it was in 2024 that a substantial increase in fees for existing members took effect. Further the surge in support for Reform – a significant part of which comes from former Conservatives – will not have had much impact on the 2024 numbers.
Some will doubtless say that revealing the reality to the members of the party – and therefore to the press and social media – could only cause further demoralisation. That seems to me entirely mistaken.
Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour government – like those of Wilson after 1967 and Callaghan after 1976 – has become very unpopular. There are many for whom the prospect of a Farage government is appalling. The 2024 Party Conference saw a surprising and encouraging attendance of younger members. There must be thousands who supported the party in 2010, 2015 and 2017 before things became – how shall we say – tawdry? – who see the need for a strong centre right party, committed to financial and fiscal responsibility.
Treating present and previous supporters as grown-ups and telling them the true state of the party’s finances would provide an incentive to get together and re-build the party on a secure foundation.
