To revive the Labor Party, Starmer must go to the conference with this pledge: We will clean Slaize policy | Toynbee Polly
MOney, money, money brings politicians over and over again. People expect to spoil the money from the conservatives, with the last cabinet of Zillionsaires, who are not clearly linked to financing of each type, but voters expect better than work. The first painful dent in the ethical shields of the Kiir Starmer Treasury was the revelation of the free gifts that he and others accepted in clothes, glasses and tickets. There was an opportunity to reach the front foot, using this secondary embarrassment, but the dilapidated to announce a large cleaning water flow to influence the policy of huge donations. But not 10 missed it.
The conflict over the failure of the alleged Labor Party provides the announcement of great support from the work campaign together another opportunity for Starmer to contact the time of great funds in politics. the Conservatives called for the election committee to conduct a new investigation into the allegations of this week – including that the Labor Party failed to declare the employment costs it received from work together that covered the salary of Maksini. In 2021, the Supervisory Authority fined the Labor Party party together 14,250 pounds for properly declaring large donations, which blaming the campaign blaming a “administrative error”. The Labor Party explained this week that Maksini’s salary was paid by the Starmer leadership campaign in 2020, not working together.
But this is not the point. Few will follow the scolding law points. Every time people are reminded of amounts wandering in the eye in our policy, they really believe that it is incoming. This does, even when all the rules are followed. There is no way to know what donations donated, if any, but the audience assumes that some donors expect something in return. Even if they ask for something in return, why should the wealthy preferences our elections?
He has done the money to honor the polluted parliament since the dawn of time. “Dark money” finds gaps in the law. According to the analysis last year, approximately 1 pounds comes in every 10 pounds, which is donated to parties and politicians from unknown or doubtful sources: cash from companies that have never made a profit, from unlikely unnamed societies that do not have to declare financiers and donations banned from foreign donors across the intermediaries, enter the system.
A 75,000 pounds, the donation Robert Jenrrick was steeped in the controversy after it was revealed that the donation was provided by a company that was funded by a loan from a company registered in the Virgin Islands (Jenrik said the donation was “legal and completely valid”). But you don’t care about what is hidden when the wide daylight is not antiseptic of the effect of a rich minority. Between 2001 and 2021, it came from all donations from all donations to political parties in the United Kingdom Only 10 senior donors. While the money for honor is illegal, the wealthy conservative beneficiaries donate More than 3 million pounds of the party I found themselves get seats in the House of Lords.
Fear of the rumor of Elon Musk threatening to 100 million dollars donated (78 million pounds) For reform It should be sufficient to defeat the government at work. Musk can do this legally through profits from his company in the UK. There is nothing to prevent one man abroad from doubling the total donations of political parties in the United Kingdom, which was standing in 100 million pounds in 2024. The Standards Committee in Public Life previously called for the annual maximum donation of 10,000 pounds for individuals and organizations, which cover donors for expatriates as well. The money that flows must be recorded from: Currently, Justin Fischer writes A quarterly politicianThere are no data available about the amount of donation.
Determining all donations to 10,000 pounds will require state financing to fill the gap. The party’s membership fees will never cover the parties to manage the main headquarters and public meetings, and to recruit researchers in politics, officials, local organizers of elections, choices, conferences, publications and social media. Democracy depends on party volunteers, but they also need professional organizers. The taxpayers may not like it, but the selection of people is straightforward: Do you prefer to be in a small interruption from the state of about 100 million pounds, or at this time from the huge Mega professors obsessed with the wealth of the world, will you leave it for the likes of Musk to buy political parties while buying everything else? Few people believe that democracy should be offered for sale, which is why the majority of the public Supports the maximum partisan donations. 100 million pounds is a small price to pay a policy price that is not polluted with cash.
The labor party’s dependence on trade union funds should not be any bloc on reform. Make all donations personal, not institutional, will not break the basic relationship between the work and unions that created the party. Ending inappropriate threats by unions to separate the work will be a cleansing of both. Sharon Graham, Secretary -General of Unite, the largest individual donor in favor, is to unite, and its unions in general and the Labor Party, do not prefer, like her, like her, like her, like her as old family mothers, It threatens to cut the financing To the party when you disturb her. The long -term workers ’rights bill in the Labor Party is constantly distorted through the right to recover for Al -Ittihad funds: not. It is strongly supported by the Council of Ministers, the party, and above all the public – but Sham Sham “The Federation’s salaries” harms one of the best government policies.
Canada limits annual donations to $ 3,450 per voter. The rest of the invoice is captured by the state, which pays 62 % of the cost of the parties. This is what a clean policy (though at this low limit, Activist protest The donations are very affected by the wealthy). It should take work. If this has a clean break, and goes with the pill of public opinion, it may start to dispel the general disgust with politicians who control the wealthy.
After promoting the newsletter
How do you do that? Public funds can be allocated according to the public vote in the elections. (Reform got 14.3 %). Helna Kennedy’s Energy Committee a few years ago contained a brilliant plan, where each voter will put a separate box on the ballot paper to allocate their share of the party’s general financing he chooses: with a lot of tactical vote, this would give money to small parties. However, it will now be A moment of boldness. Low labor in the polls, the risks to circumvent a abdominal scandal. Westminster should be a policy cleaning plan.