evaluate the view that party funding should be reformed to a state funding model

Question 1

evaluate the view that party funding should be reformed to a state funding model

Answer 1

intent: no, it wouldn’t help

-end trend of donor interests
-however, less influence of membership (heighten: participation crisis)
- judgement: don’t want to reduce participation further

-prima facie end two party system
-however, would actually trap us in two party system

-add accountability
-wouldn’t add accountability

Question 2

donor influence recent

Answer 2

frank hester gave 5m of own and 5m to company (also said diane abbott makes him want to hate all black women), got some nice IT contracts

Question 3

donor influence historic

Answer 3

bernie ecclestone

(used in conjunction with modern influence, this shows a trend)

Question 4

change in labour funding

Answer 4

megadonors, TU donors are 7m for lab now, but 14m from donations

Question 5

labour membership

Answer 5

360k
however declining, 4 percent 1979, 0.8 percent 2010, to 1.8 percent 2023

Question 6

change in trend of membership

Answer 6

4 percent 1979 to 1.8 percent 2023

Question 7

example of party incorrectly reporting donations

Answer 7

2015 edstone 8 foot 6, limestone, heaviest suicide note in history, incorrectly reported as labour party

Question 8

evidence that parliamentary sovereignty would allow incumbent to change law in their favour

Answer 8

e.g. 2016 trade union act, workers must opt into their money going to labour
⬇️
2019 11m
 2023 6.9m lab money from tu’s

Question 9

how much money do the big parties get

Answer 9

so much, in 2023:


LAB 21m

CON 44.5m

LD 6m

Question 10

evidence of a smaller party being discriminated against by funding

Answer 10

lib dems when in gov in 2010 were no longer in receipt of short and cranbourne money
had to sack researchers bc didn’t have the money