BBC: ‘Political parties’ donations fall by almost £1m’

Here’s the BBC News report:

Donations to political parties fell by almost £1m during the second quarter of this year, official figures show. The Electoral Commission said £7,873,478 in funding had been reported – down £992,312 on the first three months of the year. The Conservatives received £3,785,579, Labour £2,964,471 and the Liberal Democrats £717,797.

The Lib Dem figure of £718k is the party’s lowest second quarter fundraising performance since 2006 (when it was less than half this year’s total, at £334k). This graph from the Electoral Commission which compiles the figures shows the disparity between the parties’ financial muscle, a gap which is compounded with every passing quarter:

Perhaps it’s not so very hard to see why neither the Tories nor Labour is keen on reform of party funding?

I have, by the way, uploaded the following Googledoc spreadsheets for viewing:

* Stephen was Editor (and Co-Editor) of Liberal Democrat Voice from 2007 to 2015, and writes at The Collected Stephen Tall.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

4 Comments

  • Richard Dean 21st Aug '12 - 2:20am

    Well, there’s a recession on, and it’s a principle of good management that people should not be rewarded for causing a problem.

  • Richard Dean 21st Aug '12 - 12:09pm

    If you say so, Simon, although perceptions are involved and perceptions are not always accurate. What kind of relation are you assuming between perceived blame and reduction in donations ? Linear is just one of many possibilities.

  • Matthew Huntbach 21st Aug '12 - 1:15pm

    @ Richard Dean
    If the recession were just in one country, and it was clear that it was due to the policies of the governing party of that country, you might have a point. However, if the political parties really are all bad for causing the recession, that implies there is some easy alternative way of governing they should have proposed that would not have caused it. It has to be an easy solution because one can hardly call people bad and punish them for not doing something that is so difficult it would be unreasonable to expect them to do it. So, just what is that easy solution the parties should have proposed but didn’t? And to what extent can we discount the electorate from responsibility for their free choice of voting for these naughty parties which did not propose the easy solution? If the answer is that the electorate did not vote for anyone else because no-one else could afford to do what is necessary to develop and promote something different, doesn’t that suggest the problem lies with the electorate for refusing to fund an alternative?

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • Helen Dudden
    Warm Spaces is not the answer. As flu and colds spread, people that have immunity and have disabilities wont find that a good idea. The real problem is the ...
  • Cassie
    I’ve just finished a novel where one character has a theory: that people who FIGHT for a cause are just angry and miserable (against people who WORK for a cau...
  • Caron LindsayCaron Lindsay
    Leon, thank you so much for sharing your experience when Noa was born. I really appreciate it and I hear how painful it was for you....
  • John Nicholson
    I totally agree with the phrase "malignant dishonesty" applied to the Home Office by @Anthony Durham. A few years ago, they refused a visa to a Professor from ...
  • Roland
    >we have relied somewhat on the assurances of Ministers at the Dispatch Box This seems to be a big problem with UK law making, too often much is seemingly a...