Union Safety - Official Website of NW BT Union Health and Safety Coordinators Committee

At this morning's conference session, the SHA moved a Reference Back specifically over the CAC's refusal to allow debate on the question of Labour MPs receiving gifts, loans and financial contributions from private healthcare organisations and interests. This followed the CAC's rejection of the SHA's appeal against the exclusion of its motion from this year's agenda. Responding to the Reference Back, the CAC said only that it would email the SHA regarding the motion — offering no further substantive engagement.

The SHA's "Cash for Influence" amendment sought to preserve the long-standing right of affiliated organisations — trade unions and socialist societies representing party members and the wider labour movement — to fund MPs, while barring MPs from accepting donations, resources or loans from unaffiliated corporations.

Proposed Labour Rule Book Change Amendment

Chapter 5 Selections, rights and responsibilities of candidates for elected public office

Clause II. Rights and responsibilities of elected members

Sub clause 3. Members of Westminster Parliament

A. General.
Labour MPs are expected to meet the highest standards of probity and to take a lead in the Party’s campaigning and community engagement work both locally and nationally.
While our affiliates will quite properly donate money, resources and loans to MPs, unaffiliated corporate donation of money, resources and loans to MPs will not be accepted. Donations accepted from individuals must not exceed the amount set for declaration under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 rules.

The SHA said it first learned its rule change might be dropped second-hand, through a report by left NEC CLP representatives published on Labour Hub and other sources. The society said it wrote repeatedly over almost two months asking whether the change had indeed been ruled out, on what grounds, and whether an appeal or resubmission was possible.

According to the SHA, those enquiries went unanswered until two days ago, when it was told the ruling stemmed from unclear referencing in its submission. The society disputes this, saying its submission specified the exact location of the proposed amendment — Chapter 5, Clause II, Sub-clause 3, Section A, named in full — along with the precise wording of the text to be inserted and how the amended clause would read.

The SHA said it has since sought further clarification without success, and has been told the decision is final and cannot be appealed. It added that its only communication on the matter came from the party's Legal and Governance Unit, while the Conference Arrangements Committee declined to discuss the ruling directly, despite reportedly telling the NEC it would do so.

The society, which has been affiliated to Labour for 95 years, argues it is entitled to a written explanation and a right of appeal as standard practice, and has criticised the process as falling short of how the party's democratic procedures should operate.

The SHA said the issue carries particular weight in health policy, pointing to NHS trusts burdened by historic PFI debt, and arguing that politicians who shape health policy while receiving corporate funding undermine public trust regardless of individual intentions. It cited research linking outsourced clinical care to worse patient outcomes, including preventable deaths, longer waiting times for poorer patients compared with more affluent ones, the erosion of NHS services, and profit margins for private providers reported as high as 32% on some contracts.

The society said barring debate on the proposal would not resolve the underlying issue, and that the NHS would continue losing money to private profit while the question went undiscussed.

The extent of the 'buying of Labour' by people and companies, including venture caoitalists, linked to private healthcare companies and interests; can be judged by downloading the report to the right.

You can also access the Register Of Parliamentyary Interests here, to look up MPs such as Yvetter Cooper, Wes Streeting, Keir Starmer, Angeal Rayner etc; to find where their funding comes from!

E.G. Yvette Cooper, now Secretary of State for Health and Social Care received private healthcare related donations in 2023-2025: £165,439
Wes Streeting, was Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and received private healthcare related donations in 2023-2025: £224,575

About the SHA:
The association campaigns for a joined up healthcare system which reduces inequalities in health and is accountable to the communities it serves. They are affiliated to the Labour Party. Until 1980 they were called the Socialist Medical Association.

Source: Labour Party / Socialist Healthcare Association