State Funding Is A Bad Idea
Lord Ashcroft has said that political parties should not be allowed to “poke their little fingers” further into the public purse,” and argued that parties should be able to take money from “any quarter” and that “barmy” restrictions on donations (such as, presumably, David Cameron’s policy of a £50,000 cap) should be resisted, in further to a Times articles last year. This is his own personal opinion, and not Conservative policy.
I agree with this to a certain extent, to the extent that state funding should not extended much further.
State funding currently exists in the form of Short money, which is given to the opposition parties to enable them to oppose the government in the House of Commons, and Cranborne money which does in the same in the House of Lords. This is what state funding should be used for - to provide a means for opposition parties to challenge the policies of the government from a well-researched and supportable stand-point.
State funding should not be provided for political parties to run the rest of the party. If a party cannot arrange enough income from its own supporters in order to operate at its level of expenditure it does not deserve to exist.
I agree with ConservativeHome, that allowing too unlimited business financing and state funding of political parties is not good for democracy, since it separates the electorate from the parties. But big business at leads gives its own money, rather than the state which would give ours.
Sources: BBC, The Times, ConservativeHome
This entry is filed under Uncategorised. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
-
No Comments
Post your comment