- political party practice essays
- evaluate the case for state funding of parties in the uk (introduction) -✔✔✔ - state funding - replace
all funding with state grants for parties which would be paid using general taxation measures
- ongoing debates and reform since 2000 where the funding of parties was regulated by the political
parties, elections and referendums act
- end opportunities for corrupt donations, end hidden influences through funding, it reduce the
advantage that large parties have and give smaller parties the opportunity to make progress
- state funding may lead to excessive state regulation of parties, difficult to distribute funding, parties
may lose their independence
- evaluate the case for state funding of parties in the uk (excessive state regulation/ensure wider
participation) -✔✔✔ - there are already limits to funding introduced in 2000 by the political parties,
elections and referendums act which led to people who were not on the uk electoral roll no longer being
able to make donations in addition to donations over £7500 being placed on the electoral register
- state funding may lead to large caps and limits on funding which is significant as there are already
restrictions, this could undermine democracy in the uk and lead to a further decrease in party
membership
- improve democracy by ensuring wider participation from groups that have a lack of funds
- for example, political parties such as UKIP which received funding of £5.8m in 2015 despite
representing 12.6% of the votes (third) compared to parties who have many wealthy donors and
therefore are likely to be more successful
- due to the current funding system based on party membership and donors in addition to some state
funding, smaller groups with few members are at a large disadvantage which prevents some views and
minority groups from being adequately represented formally and therefore improves diversity
- evaluate the case for state funding of parties in the uk (difficult to distribute fairly/end opportunities
for corrupt donations) -✔✔✔ - short money which is the funding given to opposition money shows the
difficulty of distributing funding as it is heavily biased towards large parties as it uses the seats won at
previous elections, this meant that since 2015 the labour party has received £6.7m per annum while
smaller parties receive far less (e.g. 500,000 to UKIP 2015)
, - it is difficult to decide how to distribute funding and how it should be decided as using factors such as
past performance would mean that large parties retain their advantage and using future aspirations is
too vague and unclear
- end opportunities for corrupt donations
- between 2015 and 2017, the conservative parties received £11.3 million from prominent figures and
companies in the financial sector
- funding by large donors represent a hidden and unaccountable form of political influence, parties are
not allowed to change specific policies or propose legislation as a direct result of donations but donors
often expect some kind of political favour such as trade unions and the labour party and business
interests and the conservative parties
- evaluate the case for state funding of parties in the uk (parties may lose their independence/large
parties have an advantage over smaller parties) -✔✔✔ - the current funding system means that parties
such as the conservative and labour party can run successful campaigns which enhance democracy by
educating the electorate about current issues and their manifestos in the run up to general elections
such as the huge leave campaign in 2016 for BREXIT vote
- it can be argued that greater transparency has already been achieved due to the limits already placed
on funding and therefore parties will become organs of the state if there any more restrictions on
funding
- large parties have an advantage over smaller parties
- for example, conservatives in 2015 had funding of £41.9 million while labour had £51.2 million
compared to DUP who only had £0.5million
- this means that major parties are at a large advantage and conversely small parties are put at a
disadvantage particularly during elections which causes political inequality
- evaluate the extent to which small parties have an impact on uk politics today (introduction) -✔✔✔ -
small parties - in the uk can be defined as the Green party, SNP and UKIP who receive fewer votes than
Labour, Conservative and the Liberal Democrats
- there has been a large increase in the impact which small parties have on current issues, debates and
policy making in recent years
- evaluate the case for state funding of parties in the uk (introduction) -✔✔✔ - state funding - replace
all funding with state grants for parties which would be paid using general taxation measures
- ongoing debates and reform since 2000 where the funding of parties was regulated by the political
parties, elections and referendums act
- end opportunities for corrupt donations, end hidden influences through funding, it reduce the
advantage that large parties have and give smaller parties the opportunity to make progress
- state funding may lead to excessive state regulation of parties, difficult to distribute funding, parties
may lose their independence
- evaluate the case for state funding of parties in the uk (excessive state regulation/ensure wider
participation) -✔✔✔ - there are already limits to funding introduced in 2000 by the political parties,
elections and referendums act which led to people who were not on the uk electoral roll no longer being
able to make donations in addition to donations over £7500 being placed on the electoral register
- state funding may lead to large caps and limits on funding which is significant as there are already
restrictions, this could undermine democracy in the uk and lead to a further decrease in party
membership
- improve democracy by ensuring wider participation from groups that have a lack of funds
- for example, political parties such as UKIP which received funding of £5.8m in 2015 despite
representing 12.6% of the votes (third) compared to parties who have many wealthy donors and
therefore are likely to be more successful
- due to the current funding system based on party membership and donors in addition to some state
funding, smaller groups with few members are at a large disadvantage which prevents some views and
minority groups from being adequately represented formally and therefore improves diversity
- evaluate the case for state funding of parties in the uk (difficult to distribute fairly/end opportunities
for corrupt donations) -✔✔✔ - short money which is the funding given to opposition money shows the
difficulty of distributing funding as it is heavily biased towards large parties as it uses the seats won at
previous elections, this meant that since 2015 the labour party has received £6.7m per annum while
smaller parties receive far less (e.g. 500,000 to UKIP 2015)
, - it is difficult to decide how to distribute funding and how it should be decided as using factors such as
past performance would mean that large parties retain their advantage and using future aspirations is
too vague and unclear
- end opportunities for corrupt donations
- between 2015 and 2017, the conservative parties received £11.3 million from prominent figures and
companies in the financial sector
- funding by large donors represent a hidden and unaccountable form of political influence, parties are
not allowed to change specific policies or propose legislation as a direct result of donations but donors
often expect some kind of political favour such as trade unions and the labour party and business
interests and the conservative parties
- evaluate the case for state funding of parties in the uk (parties may lose their independence/large
parties have an advantage over smaller parties) -✔✔✔ - the current funding system means that parties
such as the conservative and labour party can run successful campaigns which enhance democracy by
educating the electorate about current issues and their manifestos in the run up to general elections
such as the huge leave campaign in 2016 for BREXIT vote
- it can be argued that greater transparency has already been achieved due to the limits already placed
on funding and therefore parties will become organs of the state if there any more restrictions on
funding
- large parties have an advantage over smaller parties
- for example, conservatives in 2015 had funding of £41.9 million while labour had £51.2 million
compared to DUP who only had £0.5million
- this means that major parties are at a large advantage and conversely small parties are put at a
disadvantage particularly during elections which causes political inequality
- evaluate the extent to which small parties have an impact on uk politics today (introduction) -✔✔✔ -
small parties - in the uk can be defined as the Green party, SNP and UKIP who receive fewer votes than
Labour, Conservative and the Liberal Democrats
- there has been a large increase in the impact which small parties have on current issues, debates and
policy making in recent years
