Perhaps the most surprising pro-grouse shooting voice at Monday’s Westminster Hall debate on driven grouse shooting was Sam Rushworth, the Labour MP for Bishop Auckland.
Wild Justice described Rushworth’s arguments in the debate as being ‘less coherent’ than his Labour colleague’s (Olivia Blake MP):
‘Mr Rushworth’s arguments were less coherent, stating firmly his dedication to animal welfare and his stance against fox hunting, whilst also defending an industry known for its illegal persecution of birds of prey and its legal, yet unethical, killing of wildlife such as the routine killing of foxes, referred to by the industry as ‘vermin’‘.
Here’s what I wrote earlier today about Rushworth’s contribution to the debate:
‘Sam Rushworth MP (Labour, Bishop Auckland), whose constituency includes some notorious grouse moors in the North Pennines, which is another well-known raptor persecution hotspot, spoke about attending a recent ‘Lets Learn Moor’ event with primary-age schoolchildren. He also mentioned being “disgusted by the criminality that sometimes occurs on the moorland“. I wonder if he realises that these events, funded by BASC, are facilitated by the Regional Moorland Groups, many of whose members have been under police investigation into suspected and confirmed raptor persecution crimes? Awkward’.
It was all a bit odd.
But now things have become a whole lot clearer.
Here’s an excerpt from Rushworth’s list of Registered Interests on the Parliamentary website:
Well, well, well. Rushworth’s pro-shooting stance no longer looks surprising, does it?
This entry reveals that Rushworth received a £10,000 donation from the North Pennine Moorland Group in October 2023, for ‘campaign support’. Imagine that!
For those who might not know who the North Pennine Moorland Group is, it’s basically one of a large number of regional grouse moor groups that sprang up across England and Scotland several years ago, presenting themselves as ‘grassroots community groups’, purporting to represent ‘downtrodden country folk’ who were being unfairly attacked by some nasty people from the cities who didn’t understand country ways.
In reality, these groups appear to be part of a well-funded and co-ordinated astroturfing campaign for the driven grouse shooting industry, closely associated with the vile and abusive Campaign for the Protection of Moorland Communities (C4PMC) website, which specialises in publishing personal attacks and smears on anyone who dares to raise questions about the environmental unsustainability and criminality associated with driven grouse moor management. Indeed, the Chair of the North Pennines Moorland Group was listed as being one of ‘Our People’ when C4PMC lurched on to the scene in 2020 (see here).
Funny, I don’t recall hearing Rushworth making a declaration of interest about this £10,000 donation prior to his speech in the debate. As I understand it, ‘politicians must declare relevant interests that could be perceived as influencing their views or actions. This includes financial interests, gifts, hospitality, and any other interests that might create a perception of bias‘.
Perhaps, as this £10,000 donation was received in October 2023, prior to Rushworth’s election in July 2024, it doesn’t count as something he needed to declare before his speech? But then the donation is included on his official Registered Interests page on the parliamentary website so it does appear to be something he should have declared in the debate. Perhaps it was just an oversight and he’ll no doubt be grateful for the clarification here.
The donation raises a lot of questions.
The timing of it is interesting, as it was made around the same time as a £10,000 donation was made to the then Conservative MP for Hexham, Northumberland, Guy Opperman, by a company called GMS Partnership Ltd, whose sole director just happened to be one Andrew Gilruth, the Chief Executive of the Moorland Association, the lobby group for England’s grouse moor owners (see here) and prior to that he was Chair of the Regional Moorland Groups.
Opperman lost his seat in the July 2024 election.
Were these two £10,000 donations linked in any way? Are we uncovering a wider strategy of ‘donations’ from the grouse shooting industry, given to MPs in grouse moor dominated constituencies? I don’t know, I’m just speculating, but I think it’d be worth investigating the Registered Interests of other MPs in northern England, just to see if there’s a pattern.
It also raises the question of who is funding the regional moorland groups? Or are we supposed to believe that the gamekeepers in the North Pennines Moorland Group have been saving up their tips in a jam jar to then happily hand them over to support a prospective MP’s election campaign?
There have been rumours circulating for several months about who might be the actual financial backer(s) of these moorland groups, and I also have my own suspicions, but a bit more work is needed to be certain.
Meanwhile, if any of Rushworth’s constituents reading this are minded to make a formal complaint to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority about Rushworth’s failure to declare an interest during the driven grouse shooting debate (alleged breach of Code D (6) of the House of Commons Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament), you can find out how to do it here.
Many thanks to the blog reader who provided the tip off.
Raptor Persecution UK 
Wow! The plot thickens in the already murky waters! Do you have to live in the MPs constituency, or can anyone make a complaint?
I think anyone can make a complaint, I just thought his constituents might be the most interested in doing so.
Done!
MPs are already paid a handsome salary and generous expenses. They generally have the security of at least 4 years in the same job. All things that most of their contituents would give their eye teeth for.
Their job is to represent the interests of their contituents, not that of lobby groups, the governments of foreign countries, or anyone else.
Accepting money or favours in the form of “Donations”, second jobs or freebies is rank corruption and should be outlawed
[Ed: To be clear, accepting donations is currently lawful, but MPs do have a duty to declare their interests].
Are there no truly open, honest MP’s in this country?
These shysters are all the same – Labour’s record on the environment since returning to power leaves alot to be desired
just a note – the 2024 election was 4th July, not May
[Ed: Thanks, amended!]
I follow four or five of these Moorland Groups on social media. It would be untrue to say that they do not donate money to good causes now and then, as examples – to benefit things like air ambulance or local individuals that have had a life changing accident. This is often done very conspicuously by holding a charity clay pigeon shoot, and is trumpeted loudly on social media and in any local papers they can get into – often with a lengthy explanatory paragraph about themselves and their work. Fair enough – and it is even fair enough if a local landowner has actually given a healthy donation to boost the money raised, or given his gamekeeper workforces time and estate facilities up for free for the good of these events. There is a long tradition of small scale local squire paternalism, and it doesn’t particularly trouble me. What does trouble me and ought to trouble anybody who allows either themselves or their schoolchildren to be used for the Regional Moorland Group public relations – is there is no transparency (in fact just the opposite) as to where the ‘real money’ is coming from to fund the whole of the activities of these groups. It is clearly not coming from the ‘grassroots’. Where did the £10,000 to support Mr Rushworth to be elected come from? (And in my personal opinion there will be or will have been other donations like this elsewhere.) Where does the very significant costs of running the event days come from? Where does the wages for each groups regional coordinator come from? The regional coordinators are sometimes the spouse, partner or relative of a gamekeeper, sometimes living in the geographic area they coordinate and sometimes not, and – as exposed on this website previously – they are in fact sometimes remotely based PR agents employed to pose as a gamekeepers wife. But whoever they are – they are all paid presumably to the minimum wage at least. And who oversees the administration of these regional coordinators? An appropriately recompensed PR company is my personal opinion. Are we to believe all of the money to pay for all of this is raised purely from the ‘grassroots’ community ? This surely doesn’t add up. Until I see some transparency, I am afraid my suspicion is that the funding comes whistling through from suspected (though as yet unverified) wealthy sources probably via networks of management companies, in the same way that the capital interests of grouse moor landholdings are managed. Certainly, to me there is too much in shadow around these regional moorland groups to be able to take them at face value.
Googling the address on that donation shows it is a property let on behalf of Raby Estate, owned by Henry Francis Cecil Vane, 12th Lord Barnard
I didn’t realise, at the time, that he was a Labour MP. His blue tie suggested that he was a Tory, albeit a somewhat confused one. He should be ashamed of himself, not least for having apparently allowed himself to be hoodwinked by the dark side.
So a year ago we got rid of a Tory government that was always going to protect the “rights” of their friends to flout the law, not just wildlife and the environment but any and every law that they felt like breaking. We elected a Labour government that promised to stop the lie that is trail hunting, stop the obscenity that is the badger cull, to be firm on improving the environment, protecting peatlands, stopping wildlife crimes and, basically, not being bribed financially, in kind or on promises of lucrative employment opportunities.
One year on: it’s like the end of Animal Farm!
Im speechless and gob smacked impressed with the details of the report money again rules all evil it is shameful and awful that the country is so corrupted good comments as usual .
I see that the North Pennines Moorland Group is described as an unincorporated association. That makes it hard to examine any accounts and find out who is involved in it exactly. Is this a deliberate attempt to be difficult for people to see who is involved? It must have some reasonable funds if it is able to donate an amount of £10,000 to an MP. As you surmise it is unlikely to be funded by gamekeepers alone. Someone appears to be suing this as a smokescreen.
The registered address for the North Pennines Moorland Group’s donation is a cottage owned by Raby Estates.
Simon Kirkup (partner at Womble Bond Dickinson) is listed on Companies House for Raby Estate (RABY FARMS SHROPSHIRE LLP). Coincidentally, he’s also listed on Companies House as a Director of the Moorland Association.
I’ve no idea where they get the money, but all these organisations are all linked and all tend to move in the same circles. I doubt there’s any one particular figure behind it all, but rather there’s a number of figures with vested interests in protecting the future of their shooting estates with deep pockets who are prepared to use that money to spread their propaganda via a variety of different outlets.