THE referendum campaign on whether the UK should leave the European Union will not be viewed by historians as this country’s finest moment.
Blatant untruths were told by Brexiteers about the benefits of leaving the EU and the official campaign broke the rules on spending.
Much of the campaign was also played out against the backdrop of a foul appeal to voters’ worst instincts on immigration.
David Cameron pulled his punches on his Brexit colleagues, Jeremy Corbyn was nowhere to be seen, and the Remain side was a shambles. All in all, it was a horror show.
One of the most mysterious aspects of the campaign was over-funding. As has been confirmed, the little-known Constitutional Research Council, chaired by former Scottish Tory candidate Richard Cook, donated around £435,000 to the Democratic Unionist Party.
However, most of the money was spent on an advert in a newspaper not sold in Ulster, which is odd given that the donation was made to a party in Northern Ireland.
What we know is that the CRC was formed in the year of the Scottish independence referendum and exists to fund pro-Union causes.
However, no other details have been offered by Cook. We do not know who sits on the CRC executive committee, or how much it has raised. Crucially, we do not know who gave the CRC the £435,000.
Cook is perfectly entitled within the law to say nothing about the CRC – he does not have to answer any questions – but the donation raises important issues about transparency and how weak our laws are.
SNP MP Brendan O’Hara’s call for Cook to be invited to speak to MPs before a select committee is therefore to be welcomed.
Cook should be asked questions about this secretive organisation and help shine a light on to one of the more bizarre aspects of the Brexit campaign.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here