Richest duke quits Tories over lease reform
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.THE RELATIONSHIP between the Duke of Westminster and the Conservative Party has until recently been satisfactory to both. The Duke is thought to have contributed handsomely to party coffers. And the policies of the Tories, particularly under Margaret Thatcher, did much to assist him to make the most of his property empire.
But then came the last Conservative Party manifesto and the innocuous-sounding Housing and Urban Development Bill. Suddenly, the accord started to fade.
First, the owner of 300 acres of Mayfair and Belgravia worth an estimated pounds 3.5bn is believed to have asked for some of his money back. Then on 3 February, it was revealed yesterday, he resigned as Conservative Party Association president in Chester, a post he had held for 16 years, withdrawing membership at the same time. A long family association - his father was a Tory MP and had preceded him as Chester president - was at an end.
What is the explanation? Yesterday, he partly blamed government policies, saying he could not 'morally stay within a party which I fundamentally believe has ideologically gone off the rails'. The real reason, however, as he said in his letter to his association chairwoman, Jill Everett, was legislation going through the Lords.
The Housing and Urban Development Bill seeks to give flat-owners with leaseholds the legal right to buy their property freeholds, a move which will cost the Duke dear. He said yesterday it was 'distressing from a personal point of view to have heritage over 300 years taken away'.
Whether the Duke, believed to be Britain's richest man, was thinking of heritage or money when he went to the House of Lords for the Bill's Second Reading on Tuesday is unclear. But, preoccupied with something, he took his seat without first swearing the oath of allegiance, which is necessary once in each Parliament. He could be fined pounds 500.
He had to be ushered from his seat to a non-member area of the chamber.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments