Allow me to be very clear upfront.  I do not believe that state funding should ever be sourced for political parties.  Parties should be funded by their supporters: if they choose not to be generous, their party will collapse.  It’s got something to do with a free market, but we shall not dwell on that idea.

Politicians seem very keen to get state handouts that they have not earned, by some giant conspiracy to thieve from the public pocket.  The average guy on the street is not party political, so does not join a party or fund one.  More to the point, a growing number of average guys on the street do not vote.  I do not believe it is just for these people to be taxed so that politicians can publicise themselves.  It is bad enough that non-voters reject the opportunity to participate in democracy, but something quite different to charge them for a process they are not interested in.

There are several logistical issues with state funding of parties, too.  First, that if funding is sourced according to success at the previous election, it will favour the government.  Also, small parties, new parties, and independent candidates will be punished for being new to the whole charade.  Thus political accountability is diminished.  Second, that some QUANGO will decide how and where the money can be spent.  The Tories have used inter-election campaigns to boost their support, most recently with their advertising on Facebook.  This kind of innovative targeting would be curbed, and that’s a huge concern for those who genuinely seek political debate in this country.

It was with some concern, then, that I approached Nick Clegg’s latest public musings.  He has suggested that a box is made available on voters’ ballot paper to invite them to donate £3 of state money to the party they voted for.  (For what it’s worth, this would only work in General Elections because of STV and other voting systems.  The LibDems advocate an electoral system that would render this policy useless, but one no longer expects coherence from Clegg.)  This issue is a fairly simple idea, and it sounds rather good on the face of it.  It would allow party funding to be linked to both electoral performance and popular desire to donate.

However, at least two issues are present in this policy.  First, that tactical voters would not be able to register their financial support for a party they would have liked to have voted for.  I disagree with the principle of tactical voting, but one must accept it as a fact of collective ignorance at the polling booth.  Secondly, some party supporters may oppose the idea of state funding outright.  I do not believe that a party should receive any taxpayers’ money to squander, so I would not tick a box signing away public cash to the cause.  Voters with such scruples would, by default, be disadvantaging their party of choice.  Do they bow to the desire to see further electoral success or do they stick to their principles and oppose the idea of state funding?  Ergo, Clegg’s idea would benefit parties with unscrupulous supporters.  Any funds raised would have the spectre of guilt about them.

Political parties should survive or fail at the willingness of their membership to support them.  I respect the fact that the BNP receives donations enough to keep it ticking over: I would hate for my tax pennies to boost its campaigning capabilities.  I disagree with Tory policy, with LibDem policy, with Labour policy, with UKIP policy, with Green policy, with Christian Democrat policy, with English Democrat policy, with SNP policy, with Plaid policy, etc, etc, etc.  I resent the idea that I should fund the publicity of any one of these parties.  If I wanted to see one of them thrive, I would donate to them.  The Labour party might be smarting a little from a lack of support, but using a parliamentary majority to plunder the public pocket for money is an absolute disgrace.