THERESA May was asked to tell MPs why two men at the heart of allegations over Brexit referendum cheating were invited to Downing Street for a secret meeting.
The Tory leader was probed on the issue by SNP MP Deidre Brock during Wednesday’s Prime Minister’s Questions.
READ MORE: Ruth Davidson 'is refusing to be interviewed' as comms chief hits out
It followed a report by Channel 4 News broadcast earlier this year that revealed Jeff Silvester, and Zack Massingham of AggregateIQ had visited Number 10.
Questions have long been asked about the business who in April 2016 had no web presence and no track record of success but still became the Brexiteers data firm of choice.
Over the final two months of the EU referendum campaign, Vote Leave, the DUP, Veterans for Britain, and BeLeave, a little known campaign group led by a 23-year-old fashion student named Darren Grimes, spent over £3.5 million with AggregateIQ.
The official Vote Leave campaign, fronted by Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, spent 40% of their total campaign budget with the obscure Canadian firm.
Whistleblower Chris Wylie has claimed that all the Leave groups were working together, breaking the UK’s strict laws on coordination and spending between campaigning organisations.
The rules are designed to ensure that no one can get around campaign spending limits by setting up front groups.
AggregateIQ has long said it has done nothing wrong and has followed the law.
On Wednesday, Brock said she had raised these questions with May before.
“The Prime Minister refused to answer my written question about AggregateIQ visiting Downing Street so I will ask her here,” the MP said.
“Why did Jeff Silvester and Zack Massingham of AggregateIQ visit Number 10 last autumn? Who did they meet? who invited them? What was the purpose of the meeting, and most importantly, why was the meeting not recorded in the transparency database?”
Brock had first tabled the exact same question to May back in April, but all Downing Street would say then was that the transparency data “relates to official meetings with external organisations and individuals.”
Yesterday in the Commons, May told Brock: “Her letter has not be drawn to my attention. But following her question I will ensure that she receives a reply in writing.”
Commenting afterwards, Brock said: “There are serious questions to be answered by the Prime Minister over the UK government’s shady meetings and relationship with AggregateIQ – a company with links to shamed firm Cambridge Analytica, and at the centre of allegations of election spending violations.
“The Prime Minister’s dodging of my question today – on top of the lack of response to my written questions from March – is not a good look and raises further questions.”
She added: “Not recording a visit in the transparency data register is a serious breach of the rules and we must now be told what lies behind this. Invitations to Downing Street are not offered on a whim – Theresa May must come clean.”
Earlier in the session, SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford told May she “was unfit to govern and incapable of leadership”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel