I posted this video on YouTube this morning. In it I argue that whilst the first-past-the-post electoral system is a massive obstacle to democracy in the UK, but corporate donations are almost as significant. The time when corporate donors can buy power in the UK should be over, for good.
The audio version is here:
This is the transcript:
Politics in the UK should not be for sale.
I would have thought that's glaringly obvious to anyone who believes in the democratic process and yet we all know that there is a massive influence on politics and politicians in the UK as a consequence of corporate donors - people who give their money because, let's be blunt about this, they want to influence the outcome of elections.
Why else would they do what they are? It's either that or they want contracts from government and either way the smell is rotten.
Now, I've talked often, including in videos in this series, on how we need to change the electoral system in the UK to have a proportional representation system to get rid of the rotten first-past-the-post system, but at the same time we need to make sure that we get rid of the influence of companies on the system on politics in the UK.
Let me give you some simple examples in the forthcoming UK general election.
We know that Wes Streeting who wants to be the health secretary in a forthcoming Labour government has received significant donations from private health companies.
As, by the way, has Yvette Cooper, who wants to be Home Secretary.
As has also Keir Starmer, who wants to be the Prime Minister.
Are these acceptable? No, of course they're not.
And we know that in the past people like Boris Johnson got very large donations from some corporate sponsors.
This is not acceptable. I'm not saying it's the route to corruption. It could be but I don't know that. But it is the route to corrupting democracy because what this means is that those people who are able to direct these funds towards these politicians have undue influence on the outcome of the democratic process which should be determined by one person, one vote.
So I believe that it is time that any party that gets into power in the UK does two things.
First of all, it gets rid of the first-past-the-post electoral system and replaces it with a proper multi-constituency, in terms of current constituency size, single transferable vote, proportional representation system.
And secondly, it bans corporate donations.
How do we overcome the problem of funding political parties?
One, we actually limit the amount that they can spend on elections. Good ideas can travel quite simply. They do not need the expenditure of vast sums of money.
Secondly, we make sure that only individuals can donate. We cap the donations at a reasonable sum. £10, 000 would seem to be more than adequate to me.
And thirdly, we do provide state assistance to political parties and politicians who've stood before. What happens if we get a new candidate? They can make an application and a returning officer can make a decision as to how much they should be funded by based upon their likely electoral appeal.
And yes, that will bias against independent candidates, I know, because they tend not to get elected. But that's the way that outcomes are always going to happen in the UK.
My point is very simple though. We shouldn't be relying on corporations and any other system is bound to be better than the one we've got, and it will reduce corruption, it will produce better electoral outcomes, it will leave us with politicians free from corporate interests and we will therefore get better government.
That has to be the goal.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Money corrupts. Follow the money.
Mr Tresman, I agree – & it also helps if one buys one’s hypocrisy wholesale as LINO does. Compare & contrast. Guardian on Sunday:
“Rishi Sunak must face questions about the fortune he earned at a hedge fund which engineered a deal at the heart of the financial crash, Labour has said, as it prepares to launch its first major attack on the prime minister ahead of the election debates.”
& this in one of the Scottish papers – on the same day.
“…. billionaire hedge fund manager Martin Taylor – who gave more than £1.3m in the past two months alone ……to Labour. His two single donations of £825,000 and £500,000 in March and April respectively are the largest recorded in Electoral Commission data for regulated donees since their online public records began in 2013.”
So hedge funds OK when giving to LINO, not so OK when – making money. Speaking of 2007/2008, Brown (& Mandelson) both perfectly happy with big finance (pass me another PFI would you darling..) until 2007, with Brown lecturing other EU finance minister how it was all peachy with US finance casinos ……..until it wasn’t (Brown went terribly silent then). Corrupt & hypocritical, most of the political elite, most of the time.
Having been a school governor at a couple of schools, I could never understand how an MP can declare an interest and then continue to be involved in any debates or votes on issues that might be influenced by their association.
As a governor you have to declare any interests and then recuse yourself from any discussions or votes relating to your financial interest.
The Nolan principles of standards in public life state that people must avoid placing themselves under any obligation to people or companies.
@sjf
Amazingly, exactly the same applies at my Parish Council. An Agenda starts with Declaration of Interests, and Parish Councillors declaring any significant interest are not only not allowed to vote, they have to leave the chamber/Committee Room!!
And their budget will be the equivalent of 2/6, compared to what is discussed in the House of Commons. The Parish Council is right and Parliament is wrong.
And I’m with you on this post too 🙂
I must say from where I’m sitting £10k seems a very large personal donation. I believe median household income in the UK is £32k so for over half the population a donation that size represents going without food and shelter for 4 months.
ONS tells me that £14k is the median disposable income. So represents 70% of the choices that household could make.
Perhaps a % of the median disposable income is the way to go, say 10%, echoing the thithe of times past. So this year it would be £1,400. Still seems a lot to me, but popular candidates with thousands following them should have no trouble reaching the limit, which I would aver needs tobe linked the median wage too.
You also didn’t say how often the donation can given, annually? Every 5 years? Every Parliamentary term? After Election is called?
Mere details, but the devil is always in the detail.
I am aware £10k is a lot, but little in comparison with what is allowed now. I am a pragmatist.
Even a £1000 donation still stinks of buying influence beyond what your vote confers. If a political party wants or needs to spend money, it should spend the surplus from the subscriptions that its members pay. And no more.
Hi Richard,
perhaps if everyone standing for election, had to publish everyone who funded them, and by what percentage (eg Private health – 25%, trade unions – 25%, public – 25%, foreign Govt – 25%). It might be useful. It would have to be on all campaign material, all TV and Media appearances, all newspaper interviews, and social media and website front pages.
Regards
In another grubby development, illustrative of the sordid nature of UK Parliamentary politics in this decayed and repellant country; Robert Largan, Conservative MP defending the High Peak constituency has been using promotional material proclaiming ‘Labour for Largan’ (red); ‘Reform for Robert’ (blue). He protests it is clear that he represents the Conservative Party; but ‘The Independent’ reports that “Derbyshire Police posted on X: “We wish to confirm that we have received a number of messages in relation to claims of election fraud, raised due to concerns around marketing material. An incident has been created and will be reviewed.””
British politics. Classy. Polished. High-minded. An example to us all.
Agree absolutely. Look at America and the gazillions needed to become president. There should be a level playing field with no one party able to outgun the others.
It should be unbelievable that corporations can buy up politics – . especially as global corporations are bigger than many ‘sovereign’ countries. They should indeed be banned from donating – and 10K seems far to much for an individual .
It sould be part of the reform of the constitution.
Labour seems to have happily got rid of hundreds of thousands of members and their subscriptions – they would obviously prefer to be like Reform – a private company funded by oil, and US health companies not a democratic association.
It is indeed difficult to believe the apparent open encouragement to corruption in parliament, and – as people here are saying – in contrast to local councils for example. I think MP’s do have to declare interests – but they can still vote to enrich themselves – eg by wrecking the no fault eviction bill for tenants.
The multi billion corrupt syphoning off using PPE and VIP lane and track and trace during 2020 and 21 – so blatant – could be just as big as post office scandal or bigger – but no one turns a hair.
These pieces show that across the EU the ultra right get more than their share of private money.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/30/eu-countries-parties-private-donors-spain-france
https://www.ftm.eu/transparency-gap
It was George Monbiot who said – about 10 years ago – that “until political party funding is reformed and corporate power addressed, politics is a waste of time.” He was right.
In November 2010, Christopher Kelly produced his report on political party funding. Essentially, it recommended a ban on corporate donations and an annual cap on personal donations of £10k. The state would fund political parties which would be based on the size party membership – a brilliant idea because it would force politicians to engage with their constituents and force them to put their interests first.
Kelly estimated the cost his reforms would be the price of one first class stamp per constituent per year.
In February 2011, Nick Clegg dismissed the proposed changes as “too expensive”!
Until money is taken out of politics, we will NEVER have a true democracy. Because of the influence of money, our politics is both dysfunctional and corrupt.
The duopoly we have is not interested in changing anything. Our problem is how we are evercgoing to make change happen.
Christopher Kelly was quite philosophical about the reaction to his report. He felt that change would only happen as a consequence of crisis or scandal.
Best regards
John
Firstly I dont disagree
may I come up with a ‘But’ though
Many years ago I stood for The Greens in what was then Bristol South. Doable with our limited resources
I now live in Frome & East Somerset which stretches from Bath to Glastonbury.
The thought of campaigning in a rural multi member constituency is to say the least daunting.
Clearly there needs to be some sort of support available for candidates who can demonstrate a minimum level of support?
I suggested that possibility, did I not?
The late Robin Williams joked that politicians should have to wear the badges of their sponsors on their suits, like racing car drivers.
For me, I’d have parties soley funded by flat rate, membership fees. This would rule out independents in an election, so for them a small subsidy of £2,000 with no deposit to be paid providing they can get 200-300 nominations.
As usual, I agree with you wholeheartedly Richard! Politics has become so corrupt and depraved over many decades and has effectively brought the country to its knees with many nations across the globe suffering similar deprivations! Ordinary working people are at the mercy of big business, oligarchs and the arms, fossil fuel and pharmaceutical industries. We are rapidly regressing to a Dickensian era from which there will be no escape as there is no doubt, we will be crushed by the powers that be if we try to organise and resist! Most towns, across the country, including my beloved London, have been transformed into capitalist cesspits!
We urgently need good people like you in government and hence, I would seriously urge you to work towards standing as an MP in the next general election in 2029!! The best result we can hope for in the upcoming election is a hung parliament and for Keir Starmer to be ousted out of his seat in Holborn and St.Pancras which will of course prevent him from becoming Prime Minister!!
I will be 71
Too late to have an impact
Nigel Farage has made himself leader of the Reform Party, and is standing for election in Clacton-on-sea. Just like that; change of mind, and its done. He can do that, because Reform is not really a political party, in the conventional democratic sense, even as understood in the UK; it is, rather a private company, at it appears Farage possesses personal control of Reform, according to Companies House. Thus, he can do whatever he wants.
British politics. Classy. Polished. High-minded. An example to us all.
There will be a post in the morning….