Attitudes to political funding “contradictory”
The chair of the Electoral Commission has suggested that public attitudes to the public funding of political parties are “contradictory”.
With the general election widely anticipated for next spring, the issue of political donations is likely to again become high profile. Labour has traditionally received most of its money from the large trade unions, but in recent years has increasingly attracted large individual donations. Some of these have attacked widespread controversy, for example the £1 million donation from Formula One boss Bernie Ecclestone, which was later returned.
The Conservatives have traditionally received most of their funding from private individuals, and again there have been allegations of access or favours bought with the cash.
Needless to say, both parties have consistently denied that political donations affect decisions or policies made whilst in power, and emphasise that strict rules cover those who can donate. However, the suggestion has been increasingly mooted in some quarters that political parties should receive a capped limit of state funding to remove any perception of unfair influence.
Speaking at a fringe event at the Conservative Party conference on “clean politics”, organised by the New Politics Network, Sam Younger said that whilst public opinion is suspicious of large donors, it contradictorily does not want to subsidise political parties.
Though Mr Younger noted the financial pressures on parties, and hinted that he might support some increased state funding, he was emphatic that public funding must only be used to stimulate individual participation and to encourage local activism.
He suggested widening eligibility for policy development grants, and a rebalancing of national and local spending limits, taking more campaigning to the local level.
Mr Younger pointed out that there are some significant concerns about public funding, including the legal caps on spending, the lack of public trust in politicians, the question of eligibility for funding (he pointed to the BNP as an example), and the danger that such a system would entrench existing parties at the expense of new movements.
Conservative economic spokesman Andrew Tyrie, speaking at the meeting, acknowledged that there is a serious and growing problem relating to the relationship between power and money, and he warned that it would be a tragedy if this were not checked.
He argued that the solution is more state funding, subject to strict spending caps, and suggested that a “matched funding” approach, where parties could opt in and out of state funding, in exchange for giving up large donations, could be a way forward.
Mr Tyrie insisted though that banning large donations would not prevent corruption.
