The Malta Independent
The Treaties of the EU expressly acknowledge the role of the European political parties as important factors for integration. The Treaty of Nice, which entered into force on 1 February 2003, stipulated that the statute and financing of political parties at European level should be regulated. The Treaty changed the decision-making procedure on this issue from unanimity to qualified majority, and gave co-decision - as well as registration - powers to the European Parliament.
Now that we have decided to adopt EU standards for regulating the most trivial matters of the way we do things, I trust there will be no resistance in adopting EU benchmarks also regarding party finances.
Political parties are the backbone of our democratic system.` Parties spend hundred of thousands liri each year just to keep their operation going. They made, and in the case of the PN continue to make,` substantial capital investment in immovables and equipment.` Each year they have to run expensive elections at local level and once every five years, at least, they have to meet the exorbitant cost of running` general elections.
Political parties source their revenues from three main sources. Membership fees collected annually, fund raising leisure activities, and donations. I could have included a fourth in the form of commercial profits earned by subsidiary commercial enterprises. These are` engaged in exploiting a loyal captive market through provision of services in media and travel. However, I am under the impression that such commercial activities are more a drain rather than a source to central finances at least on a cash flow basis.
Of the three sources identified donations by far constitute the largest source of income for political parties. It here that the issue of democratic governance comes in. Are the interest of democracy prejudiced by allowing political parties, as the principal mechanism for execution of democracy, to raise their finances by private handouts beyond any democratic control?
Both main parties try to give the impression that such donations are collected in the form of small donations from their followers on a no strings attached basis. In the absence of any serious regulatory controls doubts remain that this is just a fa`ade to justify a situation which is far less innocent. Stories about donations demanded or given which run into sizeable thousands abound. It is here that democratic governance risk serious offence as the larger the size of the donation the more difficult it becomes to justify its no strings attached status.
For as long as political party finances continue in their unregulated state the feeling will continue to prevail that the capital rich sector of the economy can use its resources to invest in giving political power to the party that best protects its interest. Living in a media dominated society it is a small step to deduce that whoever has the financial resources to dominate influential opinion forming sectors of the media, will gain a substantial electoral advantage over adversaries who do not have access to similar financial resources.
The need for democratic governance through controlling the way political parties finance their activities is loud and clear. The EU has acknowledged and is addressing this need. It is time that we acknowledge it too by setting an autonomous Commission to study the situation and submit recommendations.
To my mind once citizens pay their taxes it is fair to expect that political parties get the finance they need from the state in whose service they exercise their democratic role. State financing would bring in two disciplines. Control over the way the money is spent to ensure that it is used for the approved purpose and the abolishment of all forms of donations, large or small, to ensure that citizens are not subjected to indirect taxation or are tempted to make donations in the form of an investment to be traded for political favours.
The Treaties of the EU expressly acknowledge the role of the European political parties as important factors for integration. The Treaty of Nice, which entered into force on 1 February 2003, stipulated that the statute and financing of political parties at European level should be regulated. The Treaty changed the decision-making procedure on this issue from unanimity to qualified majority, and gave co-decision - as well as registration - powers to the European Parliament.
Now that we have decided to adopt EU standards for regulating the most trivial matters of the way we do things, I trust there will be no resistance in adopting EU benchmarks also regarding party finances.
Political parties are the backbone of our democratic system.` Parties spend hundred of thousands liri each year just to keep their operation going. They made, and in the case of the PN continue to make,` substantial capital investment in immovables and equipment.` Each year they have to run expensive elections at local level and once every five years, at least, they have to meet the exorbitant cost of running` general elections.
Political parties source their revenues from three main sources. Membership fees collected annually, fund raising leisure activities, and donations. I could have included a fourth in the form of commercial profits earned by subsidiary commercial enterprises. These are` engaged in exploiting a loyal captive market through provision of services in media and travel. However, I am under the impression that such commercial activities are more a drain rather than a source to central finances at least on a cash flow basis.
Of the three sources identified donations by far constitute the largest source of income for political parties. It here that the issue of democratic governance comes in. Are the interest of democracy prejudiced by allowing political parties, as the principal mechanism for execution of democracy, to raise their finances by private handouts beyond any democratic control?
Both main parties try to give the impression that such donations are collected in the form of small donations from their followers on a no strings attached basis. In the absence of any serious regulatory controls doubts remain that this is just a fa`ade to justify a situation which is far less innocent. Stories about donations demanded or given which run into sizeable thousands abound. It is here that democratic governance risk serious offence as the larger the size of the donation the more difficult it becomes to justify its no strings attached status.
For as long as political party finances continue in their unregulated state the feeling will continue to prevail that the capital rich sector of the economy can use its resources to invest in giving political power to the party that best protects its interest. Living in a media dominated society it is a small step to deduce that whoever has the financial resources to dominate influential opinion forming sectors of the media, will gain a substantial electoral advantage over adversaries who do not have access to similar financial resources.
The need for democratic governance through controlling the way political parties finance their activities is loud and clear. The EU has acknowledged and is addressing this need. It is time that we acknowledge it too by setting an autonomous Commission to study the situation and submit recommendations.
To my mind once citizens pay their taxes it is fair to expect that political parties get the finance they need from the state in whose service they exercise their democratic role. State financing would bring in two disciplines. Control over the way the money is spent to ensure that it is used for the approved purpose and the abolishment of all forms of donations, large or small, to ensure that citizens are not subjected to indirect taxation or are tempted to make donations in the form of an investment to be traded for political favours.
No comments:
Post a Comment