Helen Clark is again suggesting the solution to all problems in government is tax payer funding. This time, it's to solve electioneering. Gee, why am I not surprised? In order to avoid impropriety from our politicians, we just have to bribe them upfront. It's not a bribe, it's "normal best practice".
So on one hand we have the possibility of tax payer funding, and on the other hand we say “Let the public decide who they fund”. On that basis, the option (to me) is clearly the latter. Taxpayers funding political parties will not stop the lobbying from big business and special interest groups, and it doesn't even necessarily level the playing field.
The counter to my point is the gray area where it is not the voting public per se, but big business and overseas interests funding a party. At a stretch, they might represent the wishes of their employees, but they do not necessarily represent the best interests of New Zealand. They deserve a voice though.
Combine that with “unpaid” political advertising, such as journalists like Trotter, Misa, Hooten and Long generally for their respective camps and getting good kicks in “for free” and we see it's not all one way traffic.
And those organisations - from Unions to Special Interest Groups - that get buckets of money from the government for various reasons, have a cheek in then spending some of it on supporting a political party. I'd love to see the stats on this group.
If we are going to have a good debate on ideas, we need a much better way to manage disclosure of interest than the way we do things now. The Electoral Finance Act was *supposed* to improve matters, but from the outset the volume of criticism against it was foreshadowing to see just how much it has failed. Winston’s “legal” donations only highlight that.
I have a few ideas to redress the balance, but I don't have time to post about them right now. No-one is really listening anyway - better to wait until some party has the good sense to revisit the EFA and open up the debate with broader terms of reference and invite wider public discussion, and a series of submissions (perhaps three rounds instead of the single round we got from the EFA) that can therefore comment on the bill as it evolves.
In the meantime, Helen Clark calling for tax payer funding as a solution to stopping the kinds of donations to NZ First isn't a solution at all. If it were to be any sort of credible solution, then the terms of reference have to be much bigger - and that was exactly one of the problems with the Electoral Finance Bill.
Related Link: Homepaddock: Public Funding Would Remove Problems - Clark
So on one hand we have the possibility of tax payer funding, and on the other hand we say “Let the public decide who they fund”. On that basis, the option (to me) is clearly the latter. Taxpayers funding political parties will not stop the lobbying from big business and special interest groups, and it doesn't even necessarily level the playing field.
The counter to my point is the gray area where it is not the voting public per se, but big business and overseas interests funding a party. At a stretch, they might represent the wishes of their employees, but they do not necessarily represent the best interests of New Zealand. They deserve a voice though.
Combine that with “unpaid” political advertising, such as journalists like Trotter, Misa, Hooten and Long generally for their respective camps and getting good kicks in “for free” and we see it's not all one way traffic.
And those organisations - from Unions to Special Interest Groups - that get buckets of money from the government for various reasons, have a cheek in then spending some of it on supporting a political party. I'd love to see the stats on this group.
If we are going to have a good debate on ideas, we need a much better way to manage disclosure of interest than the way we do things now. The Electoral Finance Act was *supposed* to improve matters, but from the outset the volume of criticism against it was foreshadowing to see just how much it has failed. Winston’s “legal” donations only highlight that.
I have a few ideas to redress the balance, but I don't have time to post about them right now. No-one is really listening anyway - better to wait until some party has the good sense to revisit the EFA and open up the debate with broader terms of reference and invite wider public discussion, and a series of submissions (perhaps three rounds instead of the single round we got from the EFA) that can therefore comment on the bill as it evolves.
In the meantime, Helen Clark calling for tax payer funding as a solution to stopping the kinds of donations to NZ First isn't a solution at all. If it were to be any sort of credible solution, then the terms of reference have to be much bigger - and that was exactly one of the problems with the Electoral Finance Bill.
Related Link: Homepaddock: Public Funding Would Remove Problems - Clark
If Clark thinks tax payer funding of political parties is a good idea she could make it an election issue but I don't think she'd have the courage to allow voters to decide.
ReplyDeleteThe influence of big business is a major problem - especially in the US. I don't think many realise how much power big oil and banks actually have. Poor people just don't have the influence of Owen Glenn or whoever.
ReplyDeleteI don't know the answer to funding reform - taxpayers coughing up for it isn't the solution though. interesingly Obama seems to have attracted lots of small donors http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11905.html