Robert H Halfon: Action is needed to help candidates meet the costs of standing for parliament

David Cameron gave a speech yesterday in which he set out radical plans to discriminate in favour of women, people from ethnic minorities and people with disabilities.  35% of the ConservativeHome.com Members' Panel have expressed support for this sort of A-list of preferred candidates.  A larger proportion - 44% - support some sort of financial support for lower income candidates.  This idea did not feature in Mr Cameron's speech.  Robert H Halfon - the readopted candidate for Harlow - argues that a modern, compassionate Conservative Party should offer  financial bursaries for charity workers, social entrepreneurs, teachers and others.

It is a privilege being a Parliamentary Candidate and having the chance to serve a Constituency as an MP. But, whatever the kudos, it is not much fun being financially stretched in the process.

If the Conservative Party is really intent on attracting Candidates from a wide variety of backgrounds (and the reforms announced by David Cameron are a giant leap forward), then it has to consider a bursary scheme for Candidates on lower incomes.

The real barrier to good, diverse Candidates coming forward is not always discrimination. Indeed many members and local Associations are forward looking. The problem is the financial burden.

To be a Parliamentary Candidate outside of your immediate locality costs a small fortune. Setting up home in the constituency, the travel to and from, the many Tory functions, the buying of raffle tickets and such like, can mount up to thousands of pounds. The result being that only the well off or modestly well off can afford to be a Candidate. No wonder women and aspirant individuals are discouraged from putting themselves forward.

To take my own personal example. Fighting two elections in Harlow (and now gearing up for a third) has cost well over £30,000) and depleted any savings I once had. At one stage I got into serious debt (now repaid!). I am not complaining. I chose to be a Candidate in a Marginal Seat.

But why should Candidates have to face these financial burdens? I once asked this question to a Party Treasurer and an MP and the response was that Candidates were lucky to be there and if anything should be giving the party money! This has some truth but also displays no real understanding of the daily struggle that many people have to face - merely to maintain a modest way of life. It is the wrong attitude for a modern compassionate Conservative Party.

What is needed is a special Bursary scheme for Parliamentary Candidates established with a special fund set up by Conservative Campaign HQ. Candidates should be invited to apply for busaries setting out their business plan and expected financial needs. Bursary awards should be given based on a Candidates financial circumstances.Regional funds could be established to reflect different local costs.

A bursary scheme would ensure that those who were discouraged from being a candidate because of the financial burden, would no longer face that obstacle.

More importantly it would make certain that the Conservative Party attracted Candidates from all backgrounnds regardless of income. It would show the public that Tory Candidates have been selected because of aspiration and merit, not because of privilege and patronage. The Conservative Parliamentary Party would benefit too as it would have a range of MPs who would be much more diverse than present. How much better to discuss social reform, if we have a significant range of MPs who have had to really fight hard to be there.

Of course we need the successful small businesmen, lawyers and City financiers.But just imagine if this expertise was complemented by charity workers, social entrepreneurs, teachers and nurses.

David Cameron has said that Social Justice is one of the key Conserative challenges. What better symbol of this could be to implement a bursary scheme to encourage Parliamentary Candidates of lower incomes to apply?

If we are to develop policies on social justice for the country, we must ensure that the Party reflects the same values.

Comments

[Jonathan Sheppard]

Extremely interesting. Its not just in marginal seats where this happens.

One has to ask the question why do Pafrliamentary candidates seemingly have to subsidise campaigning activities to the tune of thousands of pounds when associations are sitting on nest eggs for that rainy day

[Frank Young]

I worked with Paul Offer in the City of Chester seat at the last election and was astonished at how much it costs both in terms of lost earnings and expenditure to be a candidate in a marginal seat. It really isn't fair and touches on an issue I think is little addressed - the background of candidates. As distinct say from their sex, ethnicity etc.) Michael Ashcroft are you listening??

[Jonathan Sheppard]

Firstly I would say that as a party we want and need to attract people who are from every day walks of life.

That means that people have to work for a living. Associations have to realise that gone are the days that we will select a rich middle aged man from the City who will fund the campaign - as its just a bit of fun.

You are right to raise the issue of lost income. I used a full years worth of annual leave just to cover the period of the election proper. Im sure all candidates could tell stories of the hundreds of pounds they spend on raffle tickets/ raffle prizes/ attendance fees to go to party events - knowing that all the money raised isnt likely to be spent on the campaign - as its to go into the local party coffers for that rainy day.

The question is what do we do? Candidates have to go into the process with their eyes open - yet at the same time Associations have to realise that the rainy day is here.

I have always used a basic test (and yes it is basic - so can probably easily be criticised). If it isnt helping to get members, get votes or get money for the sole purpose of campaigning - why is the local association doing it?

For too long our Associations have become Social Clubs - leaving the candidate and core activisits to fund the campaigning.

[James Turner]

Absolutely agreed. As campaigning is now such a major undertaking we cannot afford to make it something you can only do if you've got money stashed away. AA Gill wrote an article in the Times/Sunday Times this election about his ex-wife being the Conservative candidate in Liverpool Garston and she mentions spending about four grand of her own and her friends' money on being the candidate. Of course, it would stun me if Garston is an association sitting on a six figure nest egg.

[Jonathan Sheppard]

You would be surprised by the number of "unwinnable seats" who may have some cash in the bank - not five figues - but enough to use as seed capital to start campaigning which would bring in new people and start the ball rolling.

One problem with many of the reforms that need to happen is we have many (not all and Im not an Association basher) Associations who just aren't geared up to modern campaigning.

They want to do the same thing they did 20 years ago - and then wonder that we get the same result.

[Graeme Archer]

I'm so glad Robert has been readopted in Harlow! That was the most gutting result in May.

I admit I am clueless about raising money. I have that British thing of not liking even to think about it. Am I more like Polly Toynbee than I dared believe?! My experience in elections is that everyone is uncomfortably aware both of what it's costing themselves but - more guilt-inducing - just how much more the candidate is contributing. Various words are usually murmured about sorting it all out afterwards, but if your bank account has 36 of your earth pounds in it, there's not much sorting out that can be done.

Do we employ professional fundraisers in central office? Could they be dispersed to do a stint in the various regions, raising money professionally to be dispersed back to the area councils or designated candidates? Some people are so good at this that they make a career out of it. Can't we employ them to do it for us?

[Jonathan Sheppard]

Graeme - That would be nice. I think in lots of places one of the problems is that the candidate has more than one role. They are the major fund raiser. They obviously have a vested interest - as in effect its their campaign. They often have to do the role of Chairman of the Association - as some Associations are in effect moribund. In the majority of seats I suspect they are in all but name the agent during the election.

Any money raised centrally will get pushed to the target seats (rightly so) which often means that a majority of other seats are left to fend for themselves - which can actually place a high burden - financial commitments, time and the likes back onto the candidate.

You know we candidates love it (or we wouldn't do it) but there are a few things the centre could do to make it easier.

[Graeme Archer]

Jonathan is right of course re target seats. Never having lived in anything nearly targetable I forgot!

If we don't consider the financial dimension, then the entire exercise to make our candidates more representative will be an empty process. I don't think it's good enough to drain the pockets of folk like Jonathan, Robert and this parish's own John Moss, not unless it's absolutely necessary.

What about training in fund-raising then? Does CCO offer any courses on that, suitable for low-membership, low-target seats like this one?

[James Maskell]

Hopefully weaker Associations will be able to merge with stronger ones, perhaps only temporarily, while the weaker association builds up a support base and infrastructure. I know it was part of the proposals from Howard-Maude-Monbiot and hopefully it will reappear. It was a very good idea.

Never thought Id say that an idea connected to Maude would be good...Maude's a bad bad man out to steal our votes and force us to accept their candidates... (thats better!)

[Samuel Coates]

Roberts argument is strengthened by this survey, showing a third of all MPs being educated privately as opposed to 7% in the public.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4514156.stm

[Simon C]

This is a good article Robert, which contains a lot of food for thought. Just want to register my support for the idea in principle at this stage - I will come back with any more detailed thoughts as & when.

I agree with Graeme that it's good to see you selected again for Harlow. I am sure you will be elected there next time.

[Frank Young]

I'd like to record my pleasure at Robert being re-selected. His seat is not far from my parents house so I know it quite well. I would be delighted if he entered the commons - which i'm sure he will - at the next election. Robert - if you want an extra pair of hands i'll happily come and do some door knocking!

[Hmmmmm]

Means tested?

[James Hellyer]

Awarding bursaries for something people choose to do is hardly comparable with forcing people to be means tested before allowing them to use public services, Hmmmmm.

I think bursaries are a good idea. Making candidacies more accessible for people outside the traditional source professions can only help make the party more representative.

[Sean Fear]

Up to a point, I agree. It's not unreasonable to expect a candidate to make *some* financial sacrifice, though.

As an aside, given that local councillors now get quite substantial allowances, do you think they should be required to give a proportion of them to their local party?

[James Hellyer]

"It's not unreasonable to expect a candidate to make *some* financial sacrifice, though."

Surely they do through loss of earnings?

[John T]

Completely agree the bursaries would be a good idea. Helping remove any barriers that deter people standing for parliament is far more important than trying to engineer 'the correct' gender split.

Sean - In my area councillors get around £13500. Lib Dem councillors give £1000 each per year towards campaigning. It is rare to get our councillors to even attend fundraising events. Not surprisingly it stays a Lib Dem led council.

[WelshTory]

I must say that in some parts of moribund Wales that are sitting on absolutely piles of cash reserves. I know of at least two Associations where the best the Conservative candidate can hope for is a poor third place and less than 10% of the vote but local Associations are sitting on five-figure reserves.

Come to that, I know of Target Seats which are pleading poverty yet have branches sitting on four and five-figure reserves but simply will not relinquish the funds for campaigning.

I think this franchise idea - that monies raised are raised on behalf of the Party for the Party and not just to languish in a low-interest bank account - is a sound one. I too cannot believe that I agree with a lot of what Maude says in 21st Century Party.

Until look fiefdoms realise that they have a job to do, i.e. fight and win elections, then the Party will be stuck with a load of old pensioners sitting on exorbitant amounts of money doing nothing for the Party.

[Colin MacMillan]

Can anybody explain under what provision in our Constitution do the Board have the authority to introduce a "Fast Tracking" process for past PPC's which is identical to that for sitting MP's. In a letter to Constituencies on 24th October 2005 Simon Mort, Chairman,Candidates Committee said that this would only happen if the Past PPC had the total support of the local party.Then at the selection meeting the Area Campaign Director advised the Constituency Executive that he would determine, in his sole right, what total support means and that they have no right to determine what total support should mean for their set of circumstances. It is not payment for Candidates that we need but power to Constituencies to select who they want in open and free debate. What do other Constituenices think?

Colin

[hmmmmm]

If not means tested then how? just pleading poverty? or if I appear too rich am I disqualfied? Being an MP is not a job, its a calling, and the rewards after are pretty good....

[Cllr Graham Smith]

I agree with almost everything you say, Robert. If anything, you downplay the real costs involved in seeking election to public office.

You also omit to mention those excellent candidates who, having put their all into one unsuccessful election campaign, find themselves close to being both emotionally and financially bankrupt. A truly compassionate Conservative Party would wish to provide a helping hand to those individuals that have been prepared to risk all for the Conservative cause.

[Louise]

Couldn't agree more Robert.

There are huge costs involved in being a candidate - time, financial and emotional and I think one of the things the Party must do is offer more support to candidates. Financial support is only one - albeit a major area to look at.

Associations also have to be strongly "encouraged" to accept that their candidate is not the only member of the team. Too often the candidate is expected to campaign and become involved in all aspects of the local community (a good thing) but then frowned upon when they don't attend every single branch or association function. We have to remember that candidates aren't super-human, we do want them to have family and social lifes as well as political ones.

[Antony Little]

Quite right, Robert. The party bleats on about wanting candidates who look and sound like modern Britain. Well I'm a state secondary school teacher in a city school with a young family and a massive mortgage. Pretty average actually. I was the Conservative candidate in Norwich South in 2005. Now I am lucky that the only reason I was able to afford the election was because I was the local candidate. I live in the middle of a geographically small seat and could walk to most of the constituency and could either bus or drive to the rest. I didn't have to pay for hotels or moving fees. I didn't pay to eat out all the time or travel to and from the seat. Yet I still spent more than we could afford on various things for the Conservatives locally. If the party is serious about wanting local candidates it needs to dump this 'A' List idea. If the party is serious about broadening the profile of Tory candidates it must offer more financial support.

[Sean Fear]

"If the party is serious about wanting local candidates"

It isn't.

[Frank Young]

Being local can be a red-hearing, once there was a time when one would be born, grow up and die in a particualr place and move around seldom. I think the idea of being local is getting less and less relevent for younger voters/PPCs. People move around the country far more now so it's difficult to be local to anyway.

More important is "localising" to an area on becoming a candidate. Moving house, moving schools etc, to show you are really serious about representing a particular seat.

[James Hellyer]

"If not means tested then how? just pleading poverty?"

You're missing the point, hmmmmm. Doubtless bursaries would be means tested, but testing for a bursary is not the same as testing for something like a pension.

[Kevin Shinkwin]

I think this is an excellent idea. Robert, will you be writing to David Cameron/Francis Maude? The Party needs to avoid the risk of making candidates feel like a cash cow, to be milked for all their worth. It nees to reflect on the message it's giving to those who, but for their limited income (e.g. doctors, police officers), would otherwise consider standing for us. Could this be a proposal the Party could approach someone like Sir Stanley Kalms to support financially? It would be a very visible demonstration of the way the Party is changing to win.

[Dave J]

Frank, I have to say I think you're mistaken about the merits of local candidates. People move around here in the US a lot more even than you do in the UK, but Hillary Clinton notwithstanding, voters like knowing has been immersed in what's going on in their area. Moreover, while it may be a purely semanatic point, I'd add that what you're really talking about more than the advantages of being local are the disadvantages of NOT being local, i.e., the elitism/condenscension inherent in being "parachuted in"...I don't recall one way or the other, but does the term "carpetbagger" ever get used on your side of the Atlantic?

[Sean Fear]

I would say that localism *used* not to matter, but it certainly has done since the lib Dems started winning 30+ seats, and challenging in many more.

[Derek]

This is a very interesting article, and I can see a lot of merit in the case for financial help for candidates. The main problem is where to find the money? There may be some associations sitting on funds. Each year every association has to send in its accounts, so CCHQ should know who has these funds. The party is always in financial difficulties, so even if this money could be got hold of, it could probably be spent several times over. It is difficult to see how the party could afford to give bursaries, even if it wanted to.

[James Maskell]

I think you have a point Sean. Im just suprized its taken this long to work it out. I thought it was pretty obvious. Local candidates have the knowledge necessary to undertand the people who will be voting. If you pick someone whos been brought in from outside, they wont have the local knowledge and will be a weaker candidate. They certainly wont be recognised, a key to gaining trust and thus votes.

Its so much easier to win an election when the people who are voting in your area know who you are and what you stand for. Word and mouth works wonders...

[BW]

I would like to ask more about these 'pots' of dosh Associations are supposed to have for a rainy day.

As chairman of a marginal target seat that we have to win in order to get a Conservative Government, we are living hand to mouth.

We cannot afford an agent and spent what we had in the election. We have had to reduce the hours for our dedicated part-time staff since May to below pre-election levels.

So if some Associations are sitting on loads of rainy day dosh then perhaps that money, given to the Party to help elect a Conservative Government, should be 're-allocated' so it helps achieve the purpose for which it was given.

We are truly not 'one Party' and reading some of the posts it is clear that many of you do not understand the real world, sat in your comfortable well heeled Associations.

We really need a candidate who has the means to help significantly support his campaign. That may well rule out a local candidate and is limiting to us.

The answer is not really bursaries (means testing etc) but to ensure that we have well funded local campaigns with resources going where is it most needed and not kept stuffed in Association bank accounts.

[Kevin Foster]

Whilst I agree that there is a need to provide some assistance for a candidate on a lower income many members could help reduce the burden for their candidate. I have a spare bedroom and let our local candidate have full use of my house for six months. This meant all he had to do was drive up from London and stay. It also meant there was no excuse for not coming up campaigning for the weekend! How many associations bother to ask if one of their members would put the candidate up? Most will have at least one member who lives alone in a large house. Thus at a stroke removing all the issues of hotel bills, etc that many contributors have talked about.

[Santa]

A couple of comments to the last two points made. If you are a target seat why on earth should we expect the candidate to fund the whole campain? This should be supported cenrally.

On Kevins point - this is the whole point about the possible failings of any A list. We cant afford for all the candidates on it to have to "drive up from London" - those days have to behind us.

Merry Xmas!!

[Kevin Foster]

To reply to Santa. You are right and I am a supporter of having more local candidates in our key seats. However, there will be seats where the candidate will be from out of the area and looking to gain experience. One option would be to link any financial assistance/bursary to providing assistance to a target seat.

On the subject of needing to select a candidate who can financially support the campaign this is for me putting the cart before the horse. It does not matter how many leaflets/stamps that are paid for if they are not the right person then the electorate is unlikely to be impressed. In a target seat the first job BW is to get the candidate right, then think how you will design the campaign around them.

[paul kane]

Interesting. Asking for handouts to further a lifelong dream. Maybe we could fund Rob's campaign from the lottery.

[Mike Burnett]

Much of this - and in Katie Perrior's related piece - makes sense

But actually it's as much time as cash which matters. We will not have representative candidates until those who need to work for a living (and gaining the real world experience politicians need) can also devote the time to getting selected (knowing the people) and elected

Twice (and and thanks to the tolerance of KPMG) I managed to be a candidate (1997 Westminster) and 1999 (European elections). It was much more difficult when I stood in the 2004 European elections by which time I was self employed and travelling widely in new Europe even though what I was doing was crucial experience reelvant to what I would have to do in the European Parliament

Feels to me like "skating on thin ice" - ie hope it doesn't break before the moment I might get elected

[Susan Wade weeks]

I am an aspiring candidate, having recently passed the PAB.(Which cost around #400 once travel and hotel costs were included.)I have been advised to spend a further nine months training before being able to apply for selection.I have already lost #13,000 income in 2006 to allow me to remain in the country for the Party Conference and PAB. Many women I have met -teachers and mothers- who have responded to David Cameron's call for a wider range of potential candidates, are hampered in their progress by financial issues.I am determined to pursue my aim to become an elected Member of Parliament, but already the financial sacrifice is huge.

[Gavin McWilliams]

As an disiluisioned ex New labour voter, I was stuggling to come to terms with switching allegiance and voting Conserative at the next general Election.
Rob Halfon kindly visited me recently to discuss a problem I as Chairman of Shopmobility (Harlow) am having with the local council. I was deeply impressed with the attitude of transparent honesty and willingness to assist shown by Rob. He certainly has my vote. I feel that given a level playing ground Rob will topple Bill Rammell, and prove an excellent M.P. and Ambassador for his party. However he needs the support of his party, so get behind him and ensure his election.