Labour Funding

[Olf]

I'll start with an attack on Labour because I detest them but this really applies to all of the parties:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7750155.stm

Quote 1: "The former PM, who has earned up to £12m since leaving No 10, gave £7,500 to the party in September this year" Nice one Tony. That's cute.

And then the loans issue:

Quote 2: "Labour also converted £2.25m loans into gifts - £2m from former science minister Lord Sainsbury and £250,000 from businessman Sir Gulam Noon, helping it to escape the financial crisis it was facing."

So surprise, surprise those 'loans' were disguised gifts. Fancy that - couldn't see that coming could you?


Anyway to the point....

I really think that the tax payer should now pay off the overdrafts ordebts (whatever they disguise them as) of the 3 or 4 main political parties and then those parties shold be funded by the country in the form of grants. At this point all external funding should be refused and any funds other than those granted funds would be declared illegal. No muddy water of interpretation - it's should be illegal to get your money from anywhere else, no loans, gifts, endowments, brown envelopes whatever.

Any existing endowments/investments should be held in perpertuity by the grant funding agency and used to offset the cost to the taxpayer.

Job done.

[Jasandjules]

Why?

Why not make them obey the rules.

I have no intention of paying taxes to fund some feckwit Labour scumbag to campaign to get elected.

[Einion Yrth]

Absolutely not. That would mean the death of minor parties, and the even further stagnation of what we laughingly term 'democracy'.

[turbobloke]

Labour funding now boils down to being dependent on Trades Unions.

With the occasional gift from one or two remaining and deluded fat wallet socialists on top.

[Jasandjules]

Einion Yrth said:

That would mean the death of minor parties,

Indeed, who would decide what constitutes a Political Party to provide funding? I bet Nu Laba would soon decide the BNP (and anything else they disagree with) would not constitute a Political Party etc..

[Olf]

Jasandjules said:

Einion Yrth said:

That would mean the death of minor parties,

Indeed, who would decide what constitutes a Political Party to provide funding? I bet Nu Laba would soon decide the BNP (and anything else they disagree with) would not constitute a Political Party etc..

Why would it mean the death of those parties? They could carry on obeying the rules that are currently in place (or at least trying to) I'm talkign about the big three of four parties limited to a set amount of funding which might even help the smaller parties to get their voices heard.

[kambites]

Olf said:

Jasandjules said:

Einion Yrth said:

That would mean the death of minor parties,

Indeed, who would decide what constitutes a Political Party to provide funding? I bet Nu Laba would soon decide the BNP (and anything else they disagree with) would not constitute a Political Party etc..

Why would it mean the death of those parties? They could carry on obeying the rules that are currently in place (or at least trying to) I'm talkign about the big three of four parties limited to a set amount of funding which might even help the smaller parties to get their voices heard.

The way the system works in the States, I believe, is that the parties can take a certain amount of state funding and add their own funding up to a particular point. If they go beyond that point, they lose the state money. I don't know whether it's a good solution, but it's certainly an interesting one.

[Iain328]

kambites said:

Olf said:

Jasandjules said:

Einion Yrth said:

That would mean the death of minor parties,

Indeed, who would decide what constitutes a Political Party to provide funding? I bet Nu Laba would soon decide the BNP (and anything else they disagree with) would not constitute a Political Party etc..

Why would it mean the death of those parties? They could carry on obeying the rules that are currently in place (or at least trying to) I'm talkign about the big three of four parties limited to a set amount of funding which might even help the smaller parties to get their voices heard.

The way the system works in the States, I believe, is that the parties can take a certain amount of state funding and add their own funding up to a particular point. If they go beyond that point, they lose the state money. I don't know whether it's a good solution, but it's certainly an interesting one.

Its the only way it can work IMHO. Otherwise, if they start handing out cash then how do they decide who gets how much? All the same? Great, I am starting the "Me for PM" party tomorrow - so I'll have the same funding as the Tories/Labour please .....!