should political parties be state funded essay

Advantages and Disadvantages of Public Funds to Political Parties and Candidates

Public funding are funds or resources provided by the State/Government for political parties and/or candidates. Provisions often state that political parties and candidates should have an equitable access to public funds. Oftentimes, the rules regarding public funding are not clearly stated in law, and even if they are, there is often a (real or perceived) misuse of public resources by the incumbent party or candidate. The legal framework can be drafted in a way as to encourage the founding and sustainability of a multi-party system.  Ongoing oversight from a responsible government body combined with public (civil society) oversight through CSO watchdog capacity also can improve the monitoring and full disclosure of funding across party lines and in lines and consistent with the intent of full disclosure and fairness in campaign financing. [1]

Depending on the form in which public resources are made available, public funding is divided into direct public funding or indirect public funding.

Direct public funding is given to political parties and/or candidates in the form of money – usually as bank transfers but at times in cash or cheque.

Indirect public funding is when resources with a monetary value is provided by the Government to political parties and/or candidates.

Arguments against public funding

Those who oppose public funds to political parties or candidates often use one or several of the following arguments:

• Public funding increases the distance between political elites (party leadership, candidates) and ordinary citizens (party members, supporters, voters)  

When political parties and candidates do not depend on their supporters or members neither for monetary contributions (membership, donations) nor for voluntary labour, they might be less likely to involve them in party decisions or consult their opinions on policy issues.

• Public funding preserves a status quo that keeps the established parties and candidates in power  

Public funds are often allocated among political parties and candidates in the national legislature. This may make it more difficult for new political forces to gain representation. The legal framework can limit this negative influence by providing special funds for new political parties or candidates.

• Through public funds, taxpayers are forced to support political parties and candidates whose views they do not share

Many believe that ordinary taxpayers should not be forced – through the public purse – to support political parties or candidates that they would never choose to vote for. Instead they should have the possibility to decide if and when they want to donate money to a political party or candidate. 

• Public funds to political parties and candidates takes money away from schools and hospitals to give to rich politicians

When introduced, public funding is often unpopular among the public. Public resources are scarce and needed for everything from schools and hospitals to roads and salaries for staff. To many people, using public funds to give to political parties and candidates would be far down their list of priorities.

• Political parties and candidates both take the decision and collect the money

The decision to allocate public funds to parties and candidates is most often taken in the national legislature (or in some cases in the Government). This means that the political parties and candidates who will collect the money, also take the decision.

• Political parties risk becoming organs of the State rather than parts of civil society

If all or a substantial amount of the party income comes directly from the State rather than from voluntary sources, political parties risk losing their independence and become organs of the State, thereby losing their ties to the civil society.

Arguments for public funding

A majority of the countries in the world give some form of public funds to political parties and/or candidates. Convincing enough as the arguments above might seem, there are also several good arguments for public funding.

• Public funding is a natural and necessary cost of democracy

Political parties and candidates need money for their electoral campaigns, to keep contacts with their constituencies, to prepare policy decisions and to pay professional staff. If a country wants to have stable political parties and/or independent candidates, some argue that they also need to be prepared to help pay for them.

• Public funding can limit the influence of interested money and thereby help curb corruption

If political parties and candidates get at least a basic amount of money from the public purse this has the potential to limit the likelihood of them feeling the need to accept “interested money” from donors who want to influence their policies, rhetoric or voting behaviour in the legislature.

• With public funding the State can encourage or demand changes in for example how many women candidates a party fields

In the same way as private donations can come with demands on party or candidate behaviour, the State can use public funds to level the playing field and encourage (or force) political parties to undertake reforms, hold internal elections or field a certain number of women candidates, youth or persons from an ethnic minority on their ballots.

• Public funding can increase transparency in party and candidate finance and thereby help curb corruption

If political parties and candidates receive a substantial amount of their income from the State, they can more easily be required to disclose their income and expenditure. If their financial statements are made publicly available, voters can decide which sources of funds are acceptable to them, and they will also have better opportunities to hold politicians accountable.

• If parties and candidates are financed with only private funds, economical inequalities in the society might translate into political inequalities in government

In many countries, the support base of political parties and candidates are divided along socioeconomic lines. The support base of labour or dalit parties for example, are traditionally less wealthy than the support base of other parties. If political parties receive all their income from private donations, there is a risk that (mostly accepted) socioeconomic differences in the society will translate into (mostly not accepted) differences in representation and access to political power.

• Political parties and candidates need support in meeting growing costs of campaigning

Politics and political campaigning is an increasingly costly business. While parties and candidates used to rely heavily on voluntary labour for door-to-door canvassing, they now need to pay for expensive advertising in newspapers or on posters, or buy time on radio or television to get their message through to the voters. Staff costs have risen in many political parties over the last decades.

• In societies with high levels of poverty, ordinary citizens cannot be expected to contribute much to political parties

In societies where many citizens are under or just above the poverty line, they cannot be expected to donate large amounts of money to political parties or candidates. If parties and candidates receive at least a basic amount of money from the State the country could have a functioning multi-party system without people having to give up their scarce resources.

[1] See also ICNL and international  law regarding NGO/CSO oversight of government and governing bodies: http://www.icnl.org/research/journal/vol12iss1/special_1.htm

• EISA - Promoting Credible Elections & Democratic Governance in Africa
• Elections Canada
• International IDEA
• United Nations. Electoral Assistance Division (EAD)
• INE - Instituto Nacional Electoral
• United Nations Development Programme
• The Carter Center
• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use
• Accessibility
• Copyright and Disclaimer

© 1998-2024 ACE project

Political Parties

What is a political party?

Do UK political parties still fulfil their functions?

What is the British party system?

Party Organisations

How are UK political parties organised?

How do the UK Conservative and Labour parties compare?

What is a political party faction?

What are the roles of UK political party members?

What is an electoral professional party?

Do UK political party members still matter?

How are parliamentary candidates selected?

Party Funding

How are UK political parties funded?

Should UK political parties be funded by the State?

Political Ideology

What is political ideology?

What is political Liberalism?

What is the ‘left’ in British politics?

What is the ‘right’ in British politics?

Consensus Politics

What are UK consensus and adversarial politics?

Has there been political consensus in Britain?

Was there a political consensus after Margaret Thatcher?

Where did the 2010 UK coalition government have consensus?

Where did the 2010 UK coalition government disagree?

Party Ideologies

Has the UK Labour Party stayed close to its roots?

Competing Ideas: One Nation Conservatism vs Thatcherism?

What was David Cameron’s Conservatism? (overview)

Was David Cameron more ‘One Nation” or Thatcherism in style?

What ideological divisions have there been in the UK Conservative Party?

Focus On Political Parties

Should UK political parties be funded by the state?

Most western democracies have state funding of political parties.

In Australia this is for the cost of elections, in Germany state funding matches what the parties raise in donations and in the Netherlands it is for research.

Both the Phillips Report, commissioned by the last Labour Government and the Committee on Standards in Public Life, in 2011, recommended state funding based in part on numbers of votes and in part on matching donations or making them tax deductible.

Arguments between the two main parties about whether Labour’s funding by trade unions should be included and whether the limit on individual donations, from which the Conservative benefit more, should be set at a low level have prevented any agreement.

In the current climate when there is a distrust of politicians and public expenditure is being cut back, it makes it more difficult to gain public support for the idea.

Arguments for state (public money) funding

• Parties play a key function in a democracy, by recruiting candidates, developing policies and stimulating public debate and it is important that they are properly funded to do this. If parties had more money to spend in financing a wider range of people to apply for Parliamentary selections it would make Parliament more diverse.
• It would end the dependence of political parties on wealthy donors and firms and therefore the suspicion that they can use donations to parties to buy influence and change policies and government decisions.
• The era of mass membership, when parties had millions of members, is over and far fewer people identify strongly with any of the political parties.  This means that parties cannot hope to fund all their activities from membership fees alone. Secure public funding would allow the parties to plan their activities over the long-term and give more job security to staff.
• It would allow Labour to become more independent from the trade unions and would also mean that trade unions would not have to support Labour Policies when their interests diverge.
• If parties had state funding which matched their vote it would encourage them to campaign in all seats to increase the party vote and not just in the key marginals.  Equally if funding was matched to small donations then it would encourage parties to seek more money from all their supporters.
• State funding would make it easier to limit the spending on elections, much of which goes on advertising, as part of the overall deal on the future of party funding.

Arguments against state (public money) funding

• Funding based on the existing share of the vote strengthens the larger parties further and makes it more difficult for smaller parties, who may represent new patterns of support, from breaking through, especially given First Past the Post system for Parliamentary elections.
• People will object to their taxes going to parties that they do not support, especially extremist parties.  It would be possible, however, to devise a scheme whereby people chose which party they would like to fund.
• Firms, interest groups and wealthy individuals are able to get access to politicians anyway, whether or not they donate to parties.  In countries with state funding of parties there has still been corruption.
• If there is secure public funding then parties may feel less need to recruit members and reach out to various groups in society for support.
• If there is State funding of parties there will be increased calls for the regulation of what the money is spent on and parties will be less independent of the State.  The Party in Government will have the power to change the rules on funding to their advantage.
• Some party spending goes on advertising, attacks on other parties and ‘spinning’ stories and these are, by and large, not activities than enhance democracy.
• With all the information that is available on the internet about policies and issues and the various political blogs, the role of parties in informing voters is less necessary than it was.

Previous Next

Privacy Overview

Political party funding: Why transparency is the key

Electoral bonds and after: What eminent personalities say about state funding too

Geetanjali Minhas | March 25, 2024 | Mumbai

On February 15, the five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court declared the government's electoral bond scheme as unconstitutional. It also struck down amendments the government had made to facilitate passage of EBs wherein the Finance Act 2017 made amendments to the Representation of the People’s Act, 1951, the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the Companies Act, 2013. The Supreme Court based its judgment on two issues: It described the level playing field amongst political parties, the logic being that free and fair elections are the bedrock of a democracy and for elections to be free, the level playing field should be same for all contestants. In the present case the level playing field was disturbed by secrecy of bonds or secrecy of donor. The other issue, the SC observed, was that the scheme violated the voter’s fundamental right to information about the sources of funding for political parties. A voter, in order to make an informed choice on which party should he or she vote for, needs information as also information about from where the party get this money. The judgment stands on these two pillars. The electoral bonds scheme introduced in January 2018 promised transparency by way of donations and allowed anonymous donations by individuals and organisations to all political parties through banking channels. The scheme allowed unlimited donation to political parties and removed the requirements to declare and maintain a record of donations through electoral bonds. The government was criticised for breeding corruption on the premise of anonymity. With the top court restoring the status quo that existed before the Finance Act, 2017 was passed in statutes, we go back to the question of the funding of political parties. The issue of the funding of political parties has been long discussed, requiring urgent reforms. Several committees through the years since 1998 have suggested state funding for elections. Political parties need money to run their offices throughout the country, establishment costs, staff salaries, travel, election campaigns, tours, publicity etc. How should political parties raise funds? How transparent should be funding to political parties or how much transparency is ideal? Governance Now spoke with three eminent personalities on these issues:     Transparency had to be forced Professor Jagdep Chhokar, founder member, trustee ADR, the main petitioner in the EB case  I have no problem with corporations giving donations to political parties, but it should be done transparently. That most money goes to BJP was already known as those figures were available from the statement of income and expenditures that political parties give to the Election Commission. However, now the data shows who gave how much money to the BJP or who has donated to which political party. But it is the belief of people that when money is given in exchange of favour, it is quid pro quo and it is important for people to know of it because they have to decide whether a particular decision or action of the political party is taken to benefit any company or any individual or to benefit the people and the country. The government reasoned that the donor wants anonymity to avoid vindictive action from the ruling party if donation has been given to an opposition party. But who takes vindictive action? It is the political party. In state A, party X is taking vindictive action. In state B, party Y is taking vindictive action and in state C, party Z is taking vindictive action. So, vindictive action is taken by political parties against the donors of other parties. The only way to solve the problem of vindictive action is that political parties have to accept that people will donate to all parties and they should stop taking vindictive action. But they will not stop. So the stand of the parties is that we will keep taking vindictive action. People or the society should find a solution. Political parties have to behave responsibly. Therefore, transparency has to be forced. The problem is not created by the corporates. The problem is created by political parties. Of course, corporates may also be partners in this crime – they want to get undue benefit, so they give money. And since they don't want to make it public that the benefit is a return for money, both parties are guilty. So transparency is the only answer, which is what the court has ordered. The Central Information Commission has said that six national political parties are public authorities under the RTI law but the parties don't follow that direction. For that reason we are in the Supreme Court. Parties have to learn to follow the law of the land.   With the electoral bonds scheme now closed, Indian democracy will be where it was in 2016. Till that time, democracy in India was functioning quite well.   To say that before electoral bonds came Indian democracy was absolutely useless is not correct. At that time too, we were we were trying to make Indian democracy better. There were problems in funding arrangements and we were fighting against them; we were correcting them or trying to correct them which will continue. The only difference was if somebody was caught giving money to political parties it was considered a crime. Electoral bonds made that legal. Now it will be a crime again.  

A beginning can be made for state funding of parties Prithviraj Chavan, former chief minister of Maharashtra , former member of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha    With as many as 5,000 registered political parties, the state funding will not work. First of all, political parties have to be registered, adhering to and running their party as per their own constitution, filing of regular returns to income tax and to election commission authorities. All these things have to be made compulsory. Registering a new political party has to become a lot more difficult. The national status to a political party could be given as per the formula that is currently in vogue which makes about five-six parties ‘national parties’. Funding should only be provided to national parties and not to the smaller parties, to take part in national elections. If that works, it can be carried further to state-registered parties for assembly elections in the next step. The first step to try to make sure that national elections are funded through the state exchequer to the percentage of voted polled last time and in that ratio a common minimum should be given to every party. And then top it up with the percentage of votes obtained in the last civil elections. This should be tried for Lok Sabha elections also. Simultaneously, an attempt should be made to make sure the number of registered parties is in tens, that is, 40-50 or even 100. It will be unwieldy and impractical if everybody wants funding. That will be ridiculous. So funding should be provided only to the national parties and votes polled in last elections should be the criterion to receive state funds. Some money could be given as per votes polled by national parties. That could be a beginning. It is not a perfect system like EVMs, it is an evolutionary process (people still don't believe that EVMs are completely transparent). But somewhere a beginning has to be made of actually giving of cash to nationally registered parties on the condition that their accounts will be examined by income tax authorities as any other corporate account. While parties do not have to pay taxes as per tax provisions, their accounts have to be audited. The source  of funds are to be identified, sources of funds from the corporate sector are to be identified with a limit on cash donations audited by income tax thoroughly just as corporate accounts are audited. Both expenditure and income should be checked and only on that condition should state funds be distributed to national parties. The money should be spent only for recognised political purpose and any money received by the party should be identified. Party-internal elections are to be held transparently and even if the election commission can be given some role to supervise the party elections, I would not be averse to that, as that too is a process that has to evolve over a period of time.   As long as parties are run as per their own constitutions and office-bearers are elected democratically as per their own constitutions they should be eligible for receiving state funds. Lot more needs to be done. Free coupons for petrol, diesel, advertisements, etc. could be provided and cash should be given to the political parties subject to the condition that accounts are thoroughly examined like corporate accounts. If their accounts are properly audited and there is no violation, only then income tax exemption should continue.   Not state funding but crowd funding could be the answer Pavan Varma, author, former diplomat and former Rajya Sabha member In a country where parties have different majorities, I am against state funding for political parties. If that were to happen, funds will be disproportionately distributed and it will still not obviate the additional role that cash has to play which means there will be cash influence. The only way out that I see in the future is that all political parties must compulsively select funds or donations through digital transfers which has to be put up on websites of the respective  party. Because parties need money to fight elections, crowd funding is the only way to ensure some level of transparency. Today because of the digital revolution almost anybody can donate to a party digitally. It leaves a financial trail and that amount must be displayed on the website, so the public knows how much money a party has collected. Later when we observe by any objective assessment, a political party’s vast amounts of spending over and above what has been revealed through legitimate digitally transferred donations which are the only avenue to transfer money , people can question where the money is coming from? This was done successfully by Bernie Sanders, the former US president hopeful. He said he will not take any donations from corporate houses but he will do crowd funding through which any individual can send any amount to his cause and fund through digital transactions. And through this process he received as much as $250 million, details of which were transparently available on his website with the name of the sender and the amount. Now ultimately these are the reforms which have been recommended by the election commission. Accounts of candidates are audited, but accounts of public political parties are not even audited. All they have to do is to submit a statement of accounts. The EC has said that there should be a panel of chartered accountants recommended by the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) who must compulsorily audit the accounts of political parties. These measures along with compulsory funding only through digital transactions are the only way to provide transparency. Electoral bonds were a total fraud in the name of reforms. The Supreme Court has rightly nullified them. But, that is still not an answer, because now, instead of bonds, the same donors will have to generate black money to pay money in cash.   The answer lies only by way of digital transactions where citizens have the right to know who has given what and parties have to do to display these details compulsory on a public website.

• #Jagdeep Chhokar
• #Electoral bonds
• #Election Commission

J&K, Haryana go to polls; results on Oct 4

The Election Commission of India (ECI) on Friday announced the schedule for the elections to the assemblies of Jammu & Kashmir and Haryana. While the border state will have elections in three phases, on September 18, September 25 and October 1, Haryana will vote on October 1. Votes will be counted on O

‘She killed her baby! Doctor, come quick!’

A transitioning journey from being a victim as well as a witness to sex-selection procedures to becoming a vocal advocate against them, Dr. Aruna Kalra, a leading obstet

EC reviews poll preparedness for Haryana elections

The top officials of the Election Commission of India (ECI) made a two-day of visit of Haryana ending Tuesday and held a detailed and comprehensive review of the preparedness for the forthcoming assembly elections. The term of the assembly is due to expire on 3rd November and elections are

How Bihar can revive its lost glory as hub of learning

No other state in India sees its government school teachers featured in viral videos as frequently as Bihar does. These videos, often amusing to outsiders, showcase reporters asking the simplest of questions — such as spelling a month’s name or naming the country’s president — only

An actor should be deeply empathetic: Adil Hussain

Critically acclaimed actor Adil Hussain is known for his award-winning performances in independent and commercial cinema as well as Indo-European art-house films and theatre. His body of work include films like Oscar-winning ‘Life of Pi’, ‘What will People Say’, ‘Mukti Bhavan&

“This Act empowers citizens to demand notified services as a matter of right”

The Maharashtra Right to Public Services Act, 2015 (MRTPS Act) was enacted for transparent, efficient and timely delivery of public services to citizens and to bring in transparency and accountability among the public authorities. Geetanjali Minhas spoke to Manu Kumar Srivastava, chief commissi

• narendra modi
• Arvind Kejriwal
• Arun Jaitley
• supreme court
• Digital India

• Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical Numismatics
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Social History
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Language Acquisition
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music and Religion
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Society
• Law and Politics
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Legal System - Costs and Funding
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Restitution
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Games
• Computer Security
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business Strategy
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Social Issues in Business and Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Systems
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Social Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Sustainability
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• Ethnic Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Politics and Law
• Politics of Development
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Qualitative Political Methodology
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Disability Studies
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

3 3 The Introduction of State Funding to Political Parties from a New Institutionalist Perspective

• Published: November 2010
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This chapter discusses existing hypotheses about the reasons for the introduction of state funding to political parties and links them to one of the main new institutionalist approaches. From a rational choice perspective, state funding to political parties is a response to rising costs of political competition. However, these costs have risen in all democracies, no matter whether state funding has been introduced. From a historical institutionalist perspective, the introduction of state funding is, for instance, linked to étatiste traditions. This explanation fails to explain why, in some countries, no state funding exists despite influential étatiste traditions, or why state funding was only introduced when these traditions were actually eroding. Normative institutionalist approaches link the introduction of state funding with a specific logic of appropriateness which, for instance, prompted a perception of parties as ‘public utilities’. In order to avoid such barely falsifiable arguments, the next chapter refers to actor-based institutionalism.

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Politics Review

Should political parties be funded by the state?

UK constitution: is it a sufficient check on executive power?

Gerrymandering in the usa.

Simon Brown and Nick Gallop debate the issue

• Volume 24, 2014/ 2015
• Democracy and Participation and Pressure Groups
• Elections, Referenda and Voting Behaviour
• Political Parties
• UK Politics

On a superficial level, a claim that the state funding of political parties is nothing more than the forced transfer of taxed income to disconnected Westminster elites seems credible. But a look below the surface reveals a compelling case that state funding would increase transparency in UK politics and limit the influence of corporate money in what should more appropriately be referred to as ‘state funding for democracy’.

The most convincing argument in favour of state funding is the need to diminish the influence of ‘big money’ donations to political parties. Since the 1997 ‘Ecclestone–New Labour’ affair there have been several legislative attempts to make party funding more transparent. However, it would be wrong to suggest that corporate or ‘big money’ donations no longer result in either excessive influence or an undermining of the democratic process.

Your organisation does not have access to this article.

Sign up today to give your students the edge they need to achieve their best grades with subject expertise

Related articles:

Nationalism

A return to hard power?

Anthony Giddens

UK party conferences in 2023

• Classroom Programme
• Interview Guidance
• Online Programme
• Drishti Store
• My Bookmarks
• My Progress
• Change Password
• From The Editor's Desk
• How To Use The New Website
• Help Centre

Achievers Corner

• Topper's Interview
• About Civil Services
• UPSC Prelims Syllabus
• GS Prelims Strategy
• Prelims Analysis
• GS Paper-I (Year Wise)
• GS Paper-I (Subject Wise)
• CSAT Strategy
• Previous Years Papers
• Practice Quiz
• Weekly Revision MCQs
• 60 Steps To Prelims
• Prelims Refresher Programme 2020

Mains & Interview

• Mains GS Syllabus
• Mains GS Strategy
• Mains Answer Writing Practice
• Essay Strategy
• Fodder For Essay
• Model Essays
• Drishti Essay Competition
• Ethics Strategy
• Ethics Case Studies
• Ethics Discussion
• Ethics Previous Years Q&As
• Papers By Years
• Papers By Subject
• Be MAINS Ready
• Awake Mains Examination 2020
• Interview Strategy
• Interview Guidance Programme

Current Affairs

• Daily News & Editorial
• Daily CA MCQs
• Sansad TV Discussions
• Monthly CA Consolidation
• Monthly Editorial Consolidation
• Monthly MCQ Consolidation

Drishti Specials

• To The Point
• Important Institutions
• Learning Through Maps
• PRS Capsule
• Summary Of Reports
• Gist Of Economic Survey

Study Material

• NCERT Books
• NIOS Study Material
• IGNOU Study Material
• Yojana & Kurukshetra
• Chhatisgarh
• Uttar Pradesh
• Madhya Pradesh

Test Series

• UPSC Prelims Test Series
• UPSC Mains Test Series
• UPPCS Prelims Test Series
• UPPCS Mains Test Series
• BPSC Prelims Test Series
• RAS/RTS Prelims Test Series
• Daily Editorial Analysis
• YouTube PDF Downloads
• Strategy By Toppers
• Ethics - Definition & Concepts
• Mastering Mains Answer Writing
• Places in News
• UPSC Mock Interview
• PCS Mock Interview
• Interview Insights
• Prelims 2019
• Product Promos
• Daily Updates

Make Your Note

State Funding Debate: A Path to Transparent Elections

• 18 Nov 2023
• 12 min read
• GS Paper - 2
• Government Policies & Interventions
• Right to Information
• Representation of People's Act
• Issues Relating to Development
• Transparency & Accountability
• E-Governance

This editorial is based on “Should elections be state funded? ” which was published in The Hindu on 17/11/2023. It talks about the absence of transparency in election funding, examining the prospect of state funding as a potential solution to augment transparency in electoral processes.

For Prelims: State funding of elections , Chief Justice of India , Indrajit Gupta Committee , Law Commission of India , Second Administrative Reforms Commission , National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution , Election Commission of India.

For Mains: About State Funding of Elections, Various Commissions about State Funding of Elections, Arguments in Favor of State Funding of Elections, Arguments Against State Funding of Elections, Way Forward.

A Constitution Bench led by the Chief Justice of India has recently concluded its hearings that challenge the legitimacy of the electoral bonds scheme. The discussions primarily revolved around the conflicting aspects of voters' right to information and the confidentiality of donors.

The central concern in these proceedings is the need for transparency in election funding. In this context, the reconsideration of the state or public funding of elections has emerged once again.

What is State Funding of Elections?

• State funding of elections refers to a system in which the government provides financial support to political parties and candidates to facilitate their participation in the electoral process.
• This funding is typically derived from public resources and aims to reduce the reliance on private donations, minimizing the potential influence of vested interests in political campaigns.
• The objective is to promote transparency, fairness, and equal opportunities for all participants in the electoral arena.
• Direct Funding: This involves the government providing direct monetary assistance to political parties and candidates to support their election campaigns
• Indirect Funding: Indirect funding encompasses subsidized or free media access, tax advantages, complimentary use of public spaces for campaign materials, and provisions for utilities, travel expenses, transport, and security, among others.
• Existing state funding measures comprise allocating free airtime on public broadcasters for national parties during general elections and for registered state parties in state legislature elections.
• National Parties receive certain benefits such as security, office space, and utility subsidies.
• Another form of indirect state funding in India is that registered political parties are exempted from paying income tax, as stipulated in Section 13A of the IT Act.

What have Various Commissions said about State Funding of Elections?

• Endorsed state funding of elections for constitutional, legal, and public interest reasons.
• Aimed to create a fair playing field, particularly for parties with limited financial resources.
• Concluded that total state funding is desirable, provided political parties refrain from taking funds from other sources.
• Emphasized the need for a regulatory framework for political parties before attempting state funding.
• Advocated partial state funding to curb "illegitimate and unnecessary funding" of election expenses.
• Addressed the issue of ethics in governance and recommended measures to reduce undue financial influence.
• Did not endorse state funding of elections.
• Agreed with the Law Commission report (1999) on the prerequisite of implementing a robust regulatory framework for political parties before considering state funding.

What are the Arguments in Favor of State Funding of Elections in India?

• State funding aims to reduce the influence of money in politics, creating a more level playing field where political parties can compete based on ideas and policies rather than financial resources.
• State funding may encourage more individuals to participate in politics by removing financial barriers for potential candidates who may not have personal wealth or access to significant private funding.
• By providing public funding, there is a potential to decrease the reliance on private donations, minimizing the scope for corrupt practices and reducing the influence of vested interests in politics.
• State funding can contribute to greater transparency in political financing, as public funds are subject to regulations and scrutiny, providing clearer insight into the financial aspects of political campaigns.
• State funding can foster fair competition by preventing certain parties or candidates from gaining undue advantages based solely on their financial resources.
• Reduced dependence on private donors may lead to greater independence for elected representatives, allowing them to focus on public interests rather than catering to the interests of major donors.
• Public funding can contribute to the financial stability of political parties, allowing them to focus on long-term goals and policy development rather than short-term fundraising for each election cycle.
• State funding has the potential to address economic disparities among political parties, ensuring that smaller or emerging parties have a fair chance to participate in the democratic process.

What are the Arguments Against State Funding of Elections in India?

• Using public funds for elections places an additional burden on taxpayers, who may not want their money allocated to political activities.
• India has limited financial resources, and allocating funds for state-funded elections may divert resources from other essential public services.
• Skeptics express concerns about the potential misuse of state funds, emphasizing the need for stringent regulations and accountability measures to prevent misuse or diversion of public resources.
• There are concerns that state funding could be manipulated for political advantage, with the ruling party having control over the allocation and distribution of funds, potentially influencing the electoral process.
• The state funding may lead to political parties becoming overly dependent on public funds, potentially stifling financial independence and innovation in fundraising.
• Opponents contend that state funding may diminish the incentives for political parties to engage in grassroots fundraising and connect with their constituencies on a local level.
• Critics highlight the practical challenges in implementing state funding, such as determining eligibility criteria, distributing funds equitably, and establishing effective monitoring mechanisms.
• Some argue that state-funded initiatives may lack efficiency and accountability compared to private funding, as public institutions may not be as responsive or transparent.

What Should be the Way Forward?

• Enact and implement comprehensive legal reforms to regulate political party finances, election expenditures, and the sources of funding.
• This may include revisiting and strengthening existing laws or introducing new legislation to address loopholes.
• Encourage cross-party consensus on the need for electoral funding reforms
• Mandate political parties to disclose all sources of funding, including details of donors and the amounts received.
• Ensure that this information is easily accessible to the public and regularly updated.
• Introduce an upper limit on the amount that can be donated to political parties to curb the influence of large corporate contributions.
• Strengthen the role of independent electoral oversight bodies, such as the Election Commission of India, to monitor and enforce compliance with campaign finance laws. Provide these bodies with adequate resources and autonomy.
• Establish a robust auditing mechanism to scrutinize the financial accounts of political parties. This includes conducting regular audits of their income, expenses, and compliance with legal provisions.
• Implement strong whistleblower protections to encourage individuals with knowledge of illicit funding practices to come forward without fear of retaliation.
• Leverage technology to enhance transparency in electoral funding. Explore blockchain or other secure digital platforms to record and disclose financial transactions, ensuring an immutable and accessible record.
• Study and adopt international best practices in campaign financing and electoral transparency.
• Establish a mechanism for regular review and adaptation of electoral funding regulations to address emerging challenges and ensure continued effectiveness.
• Conduct public awareness campaigns to educate citizens about the importance of transparent electoral funding.

Conclusion :

By embracing transparency in electoral funding in India, the nation can fortify the foundations of its democratic institutions and empower citizens with the knowledge and confidence that their electoral choices are influenced by ideas and values rather than the undue influence of financial interests.

UPSC Civil Services Examination, Previous Year Question (PYQ)

Consider the following statements: (2017)

• The Election Commission of India is a five-member body.
• Union Ministry of Home Affairs decides the election schedule for the conduct of both general elections and bye-elections.
• The Election Commission resolves the disputes relating to splits/mergers of recognized political parties.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only (b) 2 only (c) 2 and 3 only (d) 3 only

Q. In the light of recent controversy regarding the use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVM), what are the challenges before the Election Commission of India to ensure the trustworthiness of elections in India? (2018)

State Funding of Political Parties

Should political parties be funded by the state rather than by individual and corporate donations?

All the Yes points:

Corruption is one of the most damaging elements in politics, as it involves a democratically elected…, at the moment, the amount of money needed to run a successful election campaign prevents new parties…, why should parties be funded out of the public purse when there are so many other pressing concerns,…, all the no points:, yes because….

Corruption is one of the most damaging elements in politics, as it involves a democratically elected representative serving his own interests rather than those of the people he was elected to serve. Sleaze brought down Major’s government, and the Ecclestone affair damaged Blair’s credibility immensely (Blair exempted Formula 1 racing from a ban on tobacco advertising. It was later revealed that Bernie Ecclestone, the Formula 1 boss, had donated 1 million to the Labour party). With state funding of political parties, perhaps proportional o average opinion poll ratings, the potential for corruption would be reduced.

No because…

On the contrary, state funding, with its lack of transparency to the average voter, actually encourages corruption by its complex nature. At the moment, French politics is engulfed in controversy over sleaze despite partial state funding, and British campaign spending limits are always ignored in practice. In the real world, groups will always find a way to influence politicians amenable to corruption, by secret donations to offshore accounts, or by setting up ‘research’ funds for specific concerns.

At the moment, the amount of money needed to run a successful election campaign prevents new parties, or smaller parties, even exerting their small proportion of influence on the outcome. Smaller parties are a vital part of a democracy, as they ensure that a complete spectrum of opinions is represented. The fact that the need for wealthy backers excludes them is unfair and unrepresentative; there has been many complaints about the way Lord Ashcroft is seen as one man bankrolling the Conservative party from his private fortunes, and thus exerting a disproportionate influence on politics. State funding provides a level playing field.

Why should parties be funded out of the public purse when there are so many other pressing concerns, such as education and healthcare ? Why should our taxes go to parties whose policies we may not support, and who we certainly will not vote for ? Indeed, if money is being given to any party that meets a threshold of support, this will mean nationalist and extremist parties being funded by a majority who despise their views. Besides, if parties are removed from the necessity of having to raise funds, they will become more unrepresentative and more detached from the day to day political realities. The artificial level to qualify for funding makes a false distinction between the spectrum of smaller parties that exist today, and gives some disproportionate influence.

It is a right for anyone to be able to make a donation to a cause they strongly believe in, and to curtail this right is to curtail liberty. State funding removes thus right, and places it with unaccountable civil servants on funding committees, who set the levels at which support will be given. These are the people who decide who big a party must be to qualify for funding, and the Proposition has simply shifted responsibility away from the public to an elite. It should be the right of any individual to lend support any party he chooses

We would love to hear what you think – please leave a comment!

Skip to content

Get Revising

Join get revising, already a member.

Advantages and disadvantages of state funding of political parties

• Created by: emlove1975
• Created on: 18-05-18 11:30

• Government & Politics
• UK political parties

No comments have yet been made

Similar Government & Politics resources:

The Funding of UK political parties 5.0 / 5 based on 3 ratings

UK Politics - Paper One Summary 0.0 / 5

NOTES ELECTIONS 0.0 / 5

The electoral process and direct democracy 5.0 / 5 based on 3 ratings

A2, Unit 3C - Elections and Voting 5.0 / 5 based on 1 rating Teacher recommended

Elections and voting 0.0 / 5

Unit 3 US Political Parties Revision 0.0 / 5

A2 Politics GOV3A Political Parties Revision Guide (AQA) 5.0 / 5 based on 1 rating Teacher recommended

A2 Government and Politics GOV3A Revision Guide (AQA) 5.0 / 5 based on 1 rating Teacher recommended

America: Democracy (2) 0.0 / 5

• TOP CATEGORIES
• AS and A Level
• University Degree
• International Baccalaureate
• Uncategorised
• 5 Star Essays
• Study Tools
• Study Guides
• Meet the Team
• United Kingdom

Discuss the view that there should be more state funding for political parties.

Thomas Smith 6F3

Parties in the United Kingdom today are funded in a variety of ways. Parties rely on a number of things to generate income. Party membership, trade unions and donations from wealthy individuals are all examples of ways parties do this. State funding, an idea of citizens in the UK paying a sum of money to the government to bankroll parties, is a topic today that is widely debated in the political side of the nation, and many, including I, believe it to be an advance which is highly recommended in government today. The reason why it is debated is because it holds both advantages and disadvantages, with strong arguments on both sides of the debate, which will be explored in this essay.

I for one agree to the idea of state funding for the following reasons. State funding brings about a number of assets to the government. Arguably the biggest advantage is that it will largely prevent something which has been controversial and talked about for a long time- parties relying on donations from wealthy individuals. The removal of this would be effective, as it has been much speculated that those who donate a lot of money to the government can have some sort of political influence- as was with Bernie Ecclestone when he donated £1 million to the Labour Party which may (and probably did) result in a subsequent delay in the introduction of the ban on tobacco advertising in Formula 1. Such controversy in politics is simply unacceptable, hence why preventing outsiders to have a say in politics, with the help of state funding, brings about a major advantage. After all, Britain is a democracy, and fairness and justness must not be undermined.  

State funding would also allow politicians to focus on representing their own constituencies. After receiving money from the people they represent in these constituencies, they would have the resources and more incentive to represent their people, who have after all effectively given money to help the MP’s. You could call state funding a natural and necessary cost of democracy- as political parties and candidates need money for their electoral campaigns and to prepare policy decisions and to pay professional staff. If a country wants to have stable political parties and/or independent candidates, some argue that they also need to be prepared to help pay for them.

This is a preview of the whole essay

Another advantage of state funding is that poorer parties who do not receive as much income as Labour and the Conservatives (i.e. the Liberal Democrats) would finally be able to compete on a (relatively) equal financial footing, as all three parties would be getting around the same amount of money from the public and, as previously mentioned, individual donations would be prevented. This again highlights the essence of fairness in British democracy today. Another advantage of state funding worth mentioning is that with state funding, the public can encourage or demand changes in how the country is run. In the same way as donations from wealthy individuals come with demands on party or candidate behaviour and can influence political decisions, the public can use state funds that they themselves pay to level the playing field and encourage (or force) political parties to undertake certain reforms, hold internal elections or field a certain number of women candidates, youth or persons from an ethnic minority on their ballots, for example, as it is all their own choice, due to the fact that it is them that paid the government, and so they should be able to get a say in how it is run. Again, this is what a real democracy would be like as it would show “power to the people”. It links in with the fact that public funding helps decrease the distance between political elites (party leadership, candidates) and ordinary citizens (party members, supporters, voters), because when political parties and candidates do not depend on their supporters or members neither for monetary contributions (membership, donations) nor for voluntary labour, they might be less likely to involve them in party decisions or consult their opinions on policy issues, hence why the public paying money to help run the government is important.

Another reason why state funding is important is that politics and political campaigning is an increasingly costly business. While parties and candidates used to rely heavily on voluntary labour for door-to-door canvassing, they now need to pay for expensive advertising in newspapers or on posters, or buy time on radio or television to get their message through to the voters. Staff costs have risen in many political parties over the last decades, and it essential for the public to fund parties in order for parties to operate to their full potential and cover the ever-rising costs of today’s world.

On final point is that if parties and candidates are financed with only private funds from wealthy individuals, economical inequalities in the society might turn into political inequalities in government. In many countries, the support base of political parties and candidates are divided along socioeconomic lines.  For example in the United Kingdom, the support base of labour and left-wing parties for example, tend to be traditionally less wealthy than the support base of other parties- i.e. the Tories(not always though). If political parties receive all their income from private donations, there is a risk that socioeconomic differences in the society will translate into differences in representation and access to political power.

On the other hand, one could say that parties being state funded is not at all a worthwhile idea, for the following reasons.

Firstly, taxpayers should not have to provide their hard-earned money to supply parties’ needs that they may not even support. The average civilian in the UK gives a generous amount of money to the government through taxation anyway, and so compulsory state funding would be simply unfair and largely unnecessary. And if they don’t support the parties, then they have no need or right to contribute money to help these parties. One could hardly see many members of ethnic minorities happy about funding the campaign of the British National Party for instance!

Also, making state funding the main source of funding would largely eliminate interest groups (i.e. trade unions for Labour). This may not be a good thing, as this could cause politicians to feel isolated with no guidance available, and guidance and help is something which is essential to politicians nowadays, as without the support of organisation they may not operate to their full potential. With state funding, parties may not be able to get as much money as they potentially could, which means that the system could stop the parties from prospering fully.

Also, state funds to political parties and candidates take money away from schools and hospitals to give to rich politicians.

When introduced, public funding is often unpopular among the public. Public resources are scarce and needed for everything from schools and hospitals to roads and salaries for staff. To many people, using state funds to give to political parties and candidates would be far down their list of priorities, hence why it would be a bad idea. Although the public would be paying the wages they certainly won't have any influence on who gets how much, despite providing the money it will be the politicians and candidates, and not public, who will be creating the decisions.

Also, despite the claims from the “for” side of the argument that state funding would be fairer for smaller parties, there is an inevitable flaw. Many people have touted the idea of linking state funding to the number of votes won by the party. There is a fundamental flaw with this approach - richer parties can run bigger campaigns. This may let them secure more votes, and therefore more state funding, making them even richer. The effect reinforces the cause - small parties would find it hard to grower under this system.

The introduction of state funding would mean that parties might no longer make such strenuous efforts to raise money. Under state funding the need for fund raising would be non-existent and therefore one of the most important local party member activities would be stopped. This would discourage membership of political parties and therefore reduce the amount of political participation by normal citizens and cause the political process to become further alien to the electorate and perhaps reduce turnout further.

 The vital role of MPs is to represent their constituents and the vital role of the government is to represent the nation. If money came from the state there is a danger that political parties in this country would use state funding to advance their own ends and not represent the people who voted them in. Even if this was not the case, it could well become the public perception of the situation and further alienate the public from the political process. Clearly, this is not at all a positive attribute hence why state funding could be seen as a bad thing to implement.

 Evidently both sides of the argument have strong reasons why state funding should/should not be introduced in the United Kingdom. On the one hand it would make the democratic process fairer, as all parties would supposedly receive the same amount of money and would be on a level-playing field with the “Big-boys” (Labour and Conservatives). However this statement can be argued against- bigger parties naturally get more votes, which means they may get a larger share of the state funding given out; which nullifies the idea that it is fair.

Somebody who is against state funding could argue that people in the UK get taxed enough, and so shouldn’t have to pay their own money toward parties they may not even care about. However this argument can be challenged by the fact that without state funding, corruption (as seen with Ecclestonegate) will remain a key issue and that the parties are working to the benefit of their rich business backers and not representing the will of the people, and that with state funding they will work to represent the people as they are the providers of the money, and so will focus solely on them, as it should be in a democracy. However once again even this counter-argument can be countered, because if state funding were to be introduced, then the parties would not have to work as hard to gain money from their party members, which could in turn result in MP’s not fully representing the people who voted them in, possibly causing the public to feel detached from the political process, which is totally not what the government want to happen.

Although state funding has some clear advantages and disadvantages to the way the country is run, it is my opinion that the benefits of state funding outweigh the disadvantages- the elimination of corruption in a democracy is simply essential as is economic equality and fairness and representation within parties in the United Kingdom, so that smaller parties -which are a vital part of a democracy as they ensure that a complete spectrum of opinions is represented- are represented, so that just like in a proper democracy all voices can be heard. It is for these, and other, strong reasons that I agree to the idea of implementing the system of state funding in the United Kingdom today.

Document Details

• Author Type Student
• Word Count 1899
• Page Count 4
• Level AS and A Level
• Subject Politics
• Type of work Homework assignment

Related Essays

Should Political parties be abolished?

State Funding

Methods of Party Funding

Political Parties

A Level Government and Politics Essay Question

Quick Reply

Related discussions.

• Alevel Help
• I am considering A-Level Politics
• How to get an A* in Politics?
• Edexcel Politics A level
• Read & Marking History A-level Essay on American Dream
• A Level Politics
• AQA A Level History Paper 1 (7042/1A to 1L) - 24 May 2023 [Exam Chat]
• A level options
• A level subjects
• How do I improve my grades?
• AQA A Level Politics Paper 2 (7152/2) - 5th June 2024 [Exam Chat]
• Should I take a level government and politics?
• Should I do French a-level or Politics a- level?
• LNAT essay review
• AQA A-Level Politics Paper 1 - 7152/1 23 May 2023 [Exam chat]
• Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 2 (9PL0 02) - 5th June 2024 [Exam Chat]
• Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 2 (9PL0 02) 7th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
• a level history

Posted 1 week ago

Last reply 1 week ago

Posted 2 weeks ago

Last reply 3 weeks ago

Last reply 1 month ago

Posted 1 month ago

Posted 2 months ago

Last reply 2 months ago

Articles for you

What A-levels do you need to become a teacher?

What jobs could you do with a degree in criminology?

Finding a university place in Ucas Clearing 2024: 10 top tips to help you get ready

Top 10 tips for Ucas Clearing 2024

Advertisement

On Politics

Free vasectomies and an inflatable iud: abortion rights advocates hit the d.n.c..

This convention is likely to be a head-on display of a new, unbridled abortion politics.

• Share full article

By Jess Bidgood

While delegates are in Chicago for next week’s Democratic National Convention, they will engage in the typical pageantry and traditions: They’ll vote for their nominee, pose for photos with elected officials, and show off their state with cool buttons or themed hats.

They will also have the option of getting a free vasectomy or a medication abortion just blocks away.

A mobile health center run by Planned Parenthood Great Rivers, which serves much of Missouri and part of southern Illinois, plans to park itself near the convention and offer those services early next week to anybody who makes an appointment, delegate or not. (There is so much interest in the vasectomy appointments, I’m told, there is already a waiting list.)

It’s a way of showcasing how reproductive health care providers have had to get creative when operating in or near states like Missouri, which borders Illinois and has a near-total abortion ban.

But it also underscores the way this convention, more than any other, is going to be a head-on display of a new, unbridled abortion politics.

For years, many Democrats believed too much talk about abortion rights might drive away moderate or religious voters. Four years ago, at the Covid-dampened convention of 2020, President Biden did not utter the word abortion in his speech. Neither did Vice President Kamala Harris (although she did refer briefly to racial injustice in “reproductive and maternal health care.”)

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .