Serina Shrestha
Evaluate the case for introducing the state funding of parties.
Introduction
Define- Political parties have various ways of receiving their funding. Most political parties gain their
funding from collecting subscription from their members, they hold fundraising events where they
receive donations from their supporters.
Discuss- Some political parties raise loans from wealthy individuals and businesses. State funding
suggest parties to receive donations from taxpayers and there is controversy surrounding it, as it
may be seen ad undemocratic. Some support the idea of state funding as the current funding
promotes political inequality as major parties put smaller parties at a disadvantage.
Direct- But the introduction to state funding can result in taxpayers objecting to funding what might
be considered “private” organization. Also, the money of the taxpayers may go to the political party
they might not support.
Para 1
Point- One of the main reason people are for the introduction of state funding is the idea that it ends
opportunities for corruption in funding of the political parties. Funding of the political parties agree
seen to come from private businesses and unknown donors.
Evidence- For example, some felt Bernie Ecclestone’s £1 million donations to the Labour party in
19197 may have prompted the subsequent delay in the introduction of the ban on tobacco
advertisement in formula 1 motor racing.
Analysis- Therefore, some argue the establishment of state funding would end the dependence of
political parties on wealthy donors and firms, also end the suspicion that they can use donations to
parties to but influence, change policies and government decisions.
Counter-point- However, some may oppose by stating that there is no certainty that state funding
will resolve the problem of wealthy individuals donating to parties.
Evaluate- But it may reduce the corruption of political parties as they may be less willing to accept
the donations of businesses that may be wanting something in-return, because now they have state
funding to rely on.
Para 2
Point- Furthermore, there are many attempts to regulate party funding which included the 2000
Political Parties, Elections and Referendum Act (PPERA, 2000) which put an overall limit on party
spending in general election campaigns and required parties to declare all donations over £5000 to
the Electoral Commission.
Evidence- The Political Parties and Election Act (PPEA) built on this by giving the electoral
commissions more powers for investigation and limiting donations over £7500 to those who could
prove they were UK residents for tax purposes.
Analysis- This overall supports the idea into resolving any manipulation that may affect the
donations that is given to parties.
Evaluate- Hence an introduction of state funding which is taken from taxpayers (although they may
not be willing to support a certain political party) is not needed as there are already acts that can
prevent the corruption.
Para 3
Point- The idea of state funding of political parties has pros and cons. Some believe the funding is
based on the existing share of the vote which strengthens the larger parties further and makes it
more difficult for smaller parties who may represent new patterns of support from breaking through,
especially with the FPTP system for parliamentary elections.
Evaluate the case for introducing the state funding of parties.
Introduction
Define- Political parties have various ways of receiving their funding. Most political parties gain their
funding from collecting subscription from their members, they hold fundraising events where they
receive donations from their supporters.
Discuss- Some political parties raise loans from wealthy individuals and businesses. State funding
suggest parties to receive donations from taxpayers and there is controversy surrounding it, as it
may be seen ad undemocratic. Some support the idea of state funding as the current funding
promotes political inequality as major parties put smaller parties at a disadvantage.
Direct- But the introduction to state funding can result in taxpayers objecting to funding what might
be considered “private” organization. Also, the money of the taxpayers may go to the political party
they might not support.
Para 1
Point- One of the main reason people are for the introduction of state funding is the idea that it ends
opportunities for corruption in funding of the political parties. Funding of the political parties agree
seen to come from private businesses and unknown donors.
Evidence- For example, some felt Bernie Ecclestone’s £1 million donations to the Labour party in
19197 may have prompted the subsequent delay in the introduction of the ban on tobacco
advertisement in formula 1 motor racing.
Analysis- Therefore, some argue the establishment of state funding would end the dependence of
political parties on wealthy donors and firms, also end the suspicion that they can use donations to
parties to but influence, change policies and government decisions.
Counter-point- However, some may oppose by stating that there is no certainty that state funding
will resolve the problem of wealthy individuals donating to parties.
Evaluate- But it may reduce the corruption of political parties as they may be less willing to accept
the donations of businesses that may be wanting something in-return, because now they have state
funding to rely on.
Para 2
Point- Furthermore, there are many attempts to regulate party funding which included the 2000
Political Parties, Elections and Referendum Act (PPERA, 2000) which put an overall limit on party
spending in general election campaigns and required parties to declare all donations over £5000 to
the Electoral Commission.
Evidence- The Political Parties and Election Act (PPEA) built on this by giving the electoral
commissions more powers for investigation and limiting donations over £7500 to those who could
prove they were UK residents for tax purposes.
Analysis- This overall supports the idea into resolving any manipulation that may affect the
donations that is given to parties.
Evaluate- Hence an introduction of state funding which is taken from taxpayers (although they may
not be willing to support a certain political party) is not needed as there are already acts that can
prevent the corruption.
Para 3
Point- The idea of state funding of political parties has pros and cons. Some believe the funding is
based on the existing share of the vote which strengthens the larger parties further and makes it
more difficult for smaller parties who may represent new patterns of support from breaking through,
especially with the FPTP system for parliamentary elections.
