BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Should the funding of UK politics change from private to public?

 
 
Closed for Business Time
12:47 / 03.12.07
Given the recurrent sleazefests relating to the funding of UK parties by rich donors, what should be done with it?

One solution is to ban private donors altogether and rely on state funding. That could solve the transparency and accountability issues, and noone would have to worry that the Government was bought off by private interests.
Another argument is that it could weaken the current and longstanding duopolic UK political reality, potentially allowing a greater voice to truly dissenting voices.

Arguments against state funding include the problems some would have in funding parties they deem immoral or threatening - for instance, would ethnic minorities want to fund the BNP? Further, if state funding was dependent on prior election performances, it could prolong and cement the status quo of LabourTory duopoly.

Over to you.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
17:35 / 03.12.07
Hmm. What effect would it have on the BNP - in terms of strengthening or weakening them - if the public funding system was introduced?
 
 
Closed for Business Time
18:15 / 03.12.07
Well, I guess the devil is in the details. Without making explicit some assumptions as to how funds would be distributed it's not even possible to speculate. Care to make some assumptions and work from those? It's an important issue apart from how it would impact BNP performance. IMO it would be the crucial issue - largely because the distribution mechanism could be designed to alter the present political landscape through favouring non-LabTory parties with proportionally more money, with proportions measured by either members, votes in previous elections, a combo of the two or some other metric altogether.

I don't know that it's a given that BNP would grow, but it could well happen. Would that be a con too strong?
 
 
Not in the Face
08:46 / 04.12.07
The report on the review into party funding which can be found here.

It proposes funding parties based on public support and engagement so a party would receive money per vote (50 pence for the most recent general election, 25 pence for the others) and also a matched fund of £5 per 'subscriber' that the party recruits, capped at £5 million. However a party would need to have at least two seats at Westminster, Cardiff, Edinburgh or the European parliaments to be eligible.

Under these proposals the BNP wouldn't get public funding but wouldn't have any restrictions on private donations.

Although the report doesn't address specific scenarios, based on the 2005 election it would seem that this would probably increase the funding available to regional interest parties like SNP, Plaid Cymru but not for parties of a wider political base such as the BNP. Conversely that won't do much to challenge Labour/Tory dominance within England, merely force them to partner with local parties more.

The most interesting aspect is the subscriber method where parties are rewarded for recruiting new people which seems to somewhat try and address the current issues of a few wealthy people being the target and the lack of wider engagement. However a minimum £5 contribution from the subscriber might still create a problem in terms of civic participation. While not a great stand alone sum, for people on restricted incomes it still represents a chucnk of that week's money
 
  
Add Your Reply