KEIR Starmer has declined to identify all of his donors, after coming under pressure to disclose who is funding his Labour leadership campaign.
The frontrunner in the race to succeed Jeremy Corbyn insisted on Wednesday that he was sticking by party rules on finances, but his rivals say they have gone further.
Rebecca Long-Bailey and her allies have called for greater transparency from Starmer, with shadow minister Jon Trickett suggesting the delays were "anti-democratic".
Shadow Brexit secretary Starmer criticised "this line of attack" when repeatedly pressed to reveal all of his donors during an interview for The Andrew Neil Show on the BBC.
"How can you say I'm hiding behind process when it's the Labour party process," Starmer said, when pressed on who his five biggest donors are.
"I've got a compliance team in place who are checking every donation is in accordance with the rules," he said.
"Once they've done that they pass it to the Parliamentary authorities for them to publish it. So two lots have gone up, another lot is with the Parliamentary authorities as of today, I'm following the rules."
While not saying who his biggest donors are, he did, however, say that the biggest donation he has received was £100,000 from fellow lawyer Robert Latham, which was published on Parliament's register of interests on Tuesday.
READ MORE: Rebecca Long-Bailey says Labour will compete with Dominic Cummings
Asked if she thinks Starmer is hiding something, Long-Bailey said that "I hope not".
"But I think it's fair to expect all leadership candidates to be transparent, come under scrutiny, because we will do as leader of the party and indeed as prime minister, so we should be as open as possible to show where our donations come from," she added.
"It's important to do that because there's always an assumption that you don't get something for nothing in this world and those who donate to your campaign will expect to be repaid in some way in the future."
Long-Bailey was subjected to her own grilling by the veteran journalist, during which she declined to revise her 10/10 rating of Corbyn, saying "it's not Top Trumps".
The shadow business secretary insisted she is not the "continuity Corbyn" candidate which some cast her as, dismissing claims she is the outgoing leader in a different wrapper.
"It's not the same old chocolate Corbyn bar," she said, before being grilled on the anti-Semitism that has blighted the Labour Party.
She admitted regretting not directly challenging a member at a recent event in Liverpool who claimed "members of the Israeli lobby" including Jewish Labour MP Dame Margaret Hodge had the greatest responsibility for preventing Corbyn from becoming prime minister.
"In my response I thought at the time that I had been implicit in explaining why this particular gentleman was wrong but with retrospect I should've called that out directly because it was anti-Semitic," she said.
"I should have challenged that specific element of that gentleman's contribution directly and I wish I had done that because it was an anti-Semitic statement to make."
READ MORE: Neil Findlay in vicious spat with Labour colleague Ian Murray
Starmer continued to decline directly criticising Corbyn, who led Labour to its worst general election defeat since 1935 but is still revered by some members who will choose the next leader.
But he did not deny that he was "appalled by the awfulness" of the outgoing leader, as has been claimed by Labour peer Lord Falconer.
And Starmer said it was "utter nonsense" that he had undermined Corbyn by not towing the leader's line when he said he would campaign to remain in any further EU referendum.
The final leadership contender, Lisa Nandy, subjected herself to Neil's scrutiny in January.
Members and supporters began receiving ballots on February 24.
Voting closes two days before the new leader is announced on April 4.
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 here