The Conservative Party is “in talks” about an additional £5m from a Tory donor embroiled in a race row, Sky News understands.
Two sources said discussions are ongoing about the extra money from Frank Hester, which if received, would take the amount he has donated since 2019 to £15m.
The businessman has been embroiled in a race row over comments he is reported to have made about left-wing MP Diane Abbott, including that she “should be shot” and that she makes him “want to hate all black women”.
Reports emerged on Thursday that the donor – who had already given £10m to the party personally and through his firm The Phoenix Partnership (TPP) – may have given another £5m which has not yet been published by the Electoral Commission.
The watchdog only publishes lists of donations every three months but according to Tortoise Media,a Tory source said the party is “sitting on” a further £5m of cash.
However, Sky News understands the money has not yet been handed over.
There has been no official comment from the party on the reports.
Earlier, Chancellor Jeremy Hunt said the Conservatives are “absolutely” transparent about declaring donations – while refusing to confirm if his party had received more money from Mr Hester.
Advertisement
Asked if that was the case, Mr Hunt did not answer the question directly but said: “We absolutely are transparent. We follow all the rules, the regulations. We believe in that transparency.
“Many of the laws about that we actually passed ourselves and the Conservative Party fully complies with all the requirements to be transparent about all donations.”
Meanwhile, on Thursday the British Medical Association’s general practice committee, which represent all UK GPs, voted in favour of an emergency motion calling on Mr Hester to stand down from the TPP, a healthcare software provider.
The motion read: “This meeting is disgusted by the reported violent, openly racist and misogynistic comments, made by Frank Hester, director of The Phoenix Partnership (TPP), and directed at the Rt Hon Ms Diane Abbott MP.”
X
This content is provided by X, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable X cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to X cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow X cookies for this session only.
The Tories were already under pressure to hand back the £10m in donations Mr Hester is known to have made since 2019.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:53
‘Remorse of donor should be accepted’
In a sign of internal divisions over the row, the Scottish Tories have called for a “review” into the donations with deputy leader Meghan Gallacher saying it would determine “what the party knew and how we can actually move forward”.
Speaking to BBC Radio Scotland on Friday, she said she could not comment on the “unverified” donation, but that she would seek clarification from the UK Conservative Party on the report.
While Mr Sunak has condemned Mr Hester’s remarks, he has said his apology should be accepted.
He appeared to rule out handing back the cash during Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, saying he was “pleased” the businessman was supporting “one of the most diverse governments in this country’s history”.
Responding to the latest reports, Anneliese Dodds, the Labour Party Chair, said: “It is frankly staggering that, after his repugnant racist and sexist remarks, the Conservative Party are still trying to arrange a donation from Frank Hester. It shows the depths to which the Tory Party has fallen.
“The Conservatives need to pay back every penny, cut ties with Frank Hester and apologise unequivocally to Diane Abbott.
“And Rishi Sunak needs to grow a backbone and deal with the extreme views that appear to be tolerated in his party.”
Sir Keir Starmer has insisted the “vast majority of farmers” will not be affected by changes to Inheritance Tax (IHT) ahead of a protest outside parliament on Tuesday.
It follows Chancellor Rachel Reeves announcing a 20% inheritance tax that will apply to farms worth more than £1m from April 2026, where they were previously exempt.
But the prime minister looked to quell fears as he resisted calls to change course.
Speaking from the G20 summit in Brazil, he said: “If you take a typical case of a couple wanting to pass a family farm down to one of their children, which would be a very typical example, with all of the thresholds in place, that’s £3m before any inheritance tax is paid.”
The comments come as thousands of farmers, including celebrity farmer Jeremy Clarkson, are due to descend on Whitehall on Tuesday to protest the change.
And 1,800 more will take part in a “mass lobby” where members of the National Farmers’ Union (NFU) will meet their MPs in parliament to urge them to ask Ms Reeves to reconsider the policy.
Speaking to broadcasters, Sir Keir insisted the government is supportive of farmers, pointing to a £5bn investment announced for them in the budget.
Advertisement
He said: “I’m confident that the vast majority of farms and farmers will not be affected at all by that aspect of the budget.
“They will be affected by the £5bn that we’re putting into farming. And I’m very happy to work with farmers on that.”
Sir Keir’s spokesman made a similar argument earlier on Monday, saying the government expects 73% of farms to not be affected by the change.
Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs Secretary Steve Reed said only about 500 out of the UK’s 209,000 farms would be affected, according to Treasury calculations.
However, that number has been questioned by several farming groups and the Conservatives.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:28
Farming industry is feeling ‘betrayed’ – NFU boss
Government figures ‘misleading’
The NFU said the real number is about two-thirds, with its president Tom Bradshaw calling the government’s figures “misleading” and accusing it of not understanding the sector.
The Country Land and Business Association (CLA) said the policy could affect 70,000 farms.
Conservative shadow farming minister Robbie Moore accused the government last week of “regurgitating” figures that represent “past claimants of agricultural property relief, not combined with business property relief” because he said the Treasury does not have that data.
Agricultural property relief (APR) currently provides farmers 100% relief from paying inheritance tax on agricultural land or pasture used for rearing livestock or fish, and can include woodland and buildings, such as farmhouses, if they are necessary for that land to function.
Farmers can also claim business property relief (BPR), providing 50% or 100% relief on assets used by a trading business, which for farmers could include land, buildings, plant or machinery used by the business, farm shops and holiday cottages.
APR and BPR can often apply to the same asset, especially farmed land, but APR should be the priority, however BPR can be claimed in addition if APR does not cover the full value (e.g. if the land has development value above its agricultural value).
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Mr Moore said the Department for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Treasury have disagreed on how many farms will be impacted “by as much as 40%” due to the lack of data on farmers using BPR.
Lib Dem MP Tim Farron said last week1,400 farmers in Cumbria, where he is an MP, will be affected and will not be able to afford to pay the tax as many are on less than the minimum wage despite being asset rich.
A split is emerging in the cabinet, with Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson revealing she will join several of her colleagues and vote against the bill to legalise assisted dying.
Ms Phillipson told Sky News she will vote against the proposed legislation at the end of this month, which would give terminally ill people with six months to live the option to end their lives.
She voted against assisted dying in 2015 and said: “I haven’t changed my mind.
“I continue to think about this deeply. But my position hasn’t changed since 2015.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:41
Details of end of life bill released
MPs will be given a free vote on the bill, so they will not be told how to vote by their party.
The topic has seen a split in the cabinet – however, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has yet to reveal how he will vote on 29 November.
Ms Phillipson joins some other big names who have publicly said they are voting against the bill
These include Deputy PM Angela Rayner, Health Secretary Wes Streeting, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood and Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds.
Advertisement
Border security minister Angela Eagle is also voting against the bill.
Senior cabinet members voting in favour of assisted dying include Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, Science Secretary Peter Kyle, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy, Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn, Transport Secretary Louise Haigh and Welsh Secretary Jo Stevens.
The split over the issue is said to be causing friction within government, with Sir Keir rebuking the health secretary for repeatedly saying he is against the bill and for ordering officials to review the costs of implementing any changes in the law.
Sky News’ deputy political editor Sam Coates has been told Morgan McSweeney, the PM’s chief of staff, is concerned about the politics of the bill passing.
He is understood to be worried the issue will dominate the agenda next year and, while he is not taking a view on the bill, he can see it taking over the national conversation and distracting from core government priorities like the economy and borders.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Details of the bill were published last week and include people wanting to end their life having to self-administer the medicine.
It would only be allowed for terminally ill people who have been given six months to live.
Two independent doctors would have to confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and a High Court judge would have to give their approval before it could go ahead.