BNP accounts under investigation

by Sonia Gable | Thursday, 15 April 2010

Today’s announcement by the Electoral Commission that it had upgraded its review of the British National Party’s accounts to a formal investigation came as no surprise to HOPE not hate.

The BNP has already been fined £1,000 because the 2008 accounts were submitted nearly six months late. They came with a report from the party’s auditors, Silver & Co, stating that they did not give a true and fair view and did not “comply with the requirements of the Political Parties Elections and Referendums Act 2000 as adequate records have not been made available”.

The statement was so devastating that even Nick Griffin, the BNP leader, described the accounts as “inadequate”. In his introduction to the accounts Griffin claimed that “the task of maintaining central office accounts had become too big for any one individual”. However the problem had now been solved, he said, because the job had been “outsourced” to “an independent Chartered Accountant and Accounts Technician with the aim of presenting acceptable accounts for the accounting year 2009”.

The independent chartered accountant was John Thompson, a close business associate of Jim Dowson, the man whose web of financial links with the BNP is such that he in effect “owns” the BNP.

At the end of March the BNP accused its publicity officer, Mark Collett, of “financial irregularities and scamming” and relieved him of his job. He was also accused of “conspiring with a small clique of other party officials to launch a ‘palace coup’” against Griffin.

Collett’s allies retaliated by saying that Collett had uncovered financial wrongdoing against the BNP by Griffin himself and Dowson.

Whether any of this is connected with the “inadequacy” of the 2008 accounts is unclear at present.

The Electoral Commission emphasised that the fact that an investigation had been launched did not mean that electoral rules had been breached. A statement by the commission explained: “it is important to note – particularly during an election period – that no conclusion has been reached and therefore no assumption should be made as to whether a breach of the rules has occurred”.

An investigation is opened when the commission needs to use its statutory powers to obtain information and conduct interviews. In January the commission had requested more detailed information from the auditors because it had “a number of concerns” about the financial statements and the inadequate records.

Under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act (PPERA), which governs political finances, parties must file annual accounts that give an accurate overview of income and expenditure. There is a range of penalties for giving inaccurate or incomplete information to the Electoral Commission. They include prosecution, with a maximum penalty of a £5,000 fine or one year's imprisonment for the party treasurer in place at the end of the period. That was Jenny Noble, who stood down in summer 2009.

The investigation comes at a time when the BNP is trying to convince voters that it is a credible alternative to the main parties, which have been tainted by the MPs’ expenses scandal. However the BNP has suffered a series of accounting problems. Its 2006 accounts were lodged late, attracting a £1,000 fine, while its 2007 accounts also received an adverse audit report.

Earlier this year it emerged that the BNP had put most of its leading officers on the EU payroll, as constituency workers for its two MEPs.

The BNP is currently appealing to supporters to give £455,000 to fund “by far the biggest and most professional General Election campaign undertaken by this party”. Griffin claims already to have raised £275,000 of this, much of it no doubt the result of the party’s general election candidates being required to fund their own £500 deposits.

“What will you give”, asks Griffin. For anyone in their right mind there can be only one answer to this request to pour yet more money into the political and financial disaster zone that is the BNP.