How do political parties get their money?
Or, in more recent times, the question will be, where do political parties get the money to pay off their debts?
Well, it comes as no surprise to any of us, that party political fundraising is about as clean and honest as a lying poo. We know that parties receive 'foreign donations' through British companies. That loophole was deliberately left in by the parties when they created the guidelines. Is it right? No. Do we care? Unless the circumstances are properly dodgy, then not really. We know it goes on, we turn a blind eye to it.
But now, due to more media coverage of 'the murky world of political fundraising', we can look forward to yet another debate about STATE FUNDING FOR POLITICAL PARTIES.
Er, what? I don't fucking think so! Do I look like a Russian billionaire that wants to give money to organisations that, on their own, benefit me not a jot? No thank you.
State funding for political parties is the most ridiculous, yet probable solution to these problems. Society needs Government, not politics. We pay for the services of our country, from nurses and firefighters, to Ministers and MPs. These things are what we pay for, these are the things that make our country work. Our Government is not dependant on political parties, it is dependant on MPs/ministers/Prime Ministers working together to run our country. Political parties are not our responsibility.
The three main parties are in a heep of debt - would the state fund their 'bail-out' in the same way they did the banks? Would our money be going towards paying off Gordon Brown's desperate PR campaign recently and the thousands of pounds spent preparing for a General Election that never even happened? No fucking doubt about it if STATE FUNDING OF POLITICAL PARTIES takes hold.
I cannot see any justification, any benefit, any one good point that I would agree with in favour of state funding for them. If you have any, please let me know.
I have always viewed political parties as working (not deliberately) to the detriment of the country, where petty squabbles take precedence over national benefit...and if state funding for them comes in, then we are subsidising a tool that offers little benefit to us.
If the BNP gained a seat in the House of Commons, would everyone's taxes, in part, go towards funding the BNP? How would foreign nationals living here feel about our country then?
Political parties play no necessary part in running this country, they are an added activity that the MP chooses to take on, but being a member of Labour, Tory, or an independent makes no difference to his statutory role as a Member of Parliament. Much like if David Davis, a Tory MP, plays squash during his lunch break. Should we subsidise that? Of course we shouldn't and it's a childish point, but to me, it would be like funding something as irrelevant.
An MP doesn't HAVE TO be a member of a party.
A Minister doesn't HAVE TO be a member of a party.
Christ, even a Prime Minister doesn't necessarily have to be a member of a political party.
And the Civil Servants do the rest.
So the day we introduce state funding for them is the day when we consign ourselves, forever more, to this style of detrimental governance.
The truth behind DBS check myths
6 hours ago