Cameron says it would be "unrealistic" to believe that small donors could replace large donors

Just back from David Cameron's latest press conference and I asked him a question about state funding of political parties.  I quoted ConservativeHome research that said that four-fifths of party members would be prepared to give more to central funds if the party could no longer rely on big donors like Lord Ashcroft.

David Cameron replied that he thought that it "unrealistic" to impose a £50,000 limit on private donations and say "no additional state funding."

Other highlights of the press conference:

• Conservatives would only accept a deal on extra state funding of political parties if the £50,000 cap was imposed across the board and if there was an overall reduction in the cost of politics.  He specifically highlighted the abolition of regional assembly structures and the end to the new MPs' communications allowance.
• £30m had been raised by the party since he became leader.
• There were now 120 donors giving £50,000.
• Lord Ashcroft gives less to the Conservative Party than Mittal and Sainsbury give to Labour and only 4% of total Tory income.
• He refused to be drawn on questions about Lord Ashcroft's income tax status from Newsnight's Michael Crick.  Only saying that he had complied with the undertakings given when he became a peer.
• The Conservative Party wasn't perfect but had good systems and good people for its fundraising.
• He opposes controls on political spending between elections because it (1) wouldn't be fair - opposition parties need to be able to combat the advantages enjoyed by incumbent MPs and by governments with "thousands of press officers" and (2) it would nationalise politics - activists would be driven out of politics by the need to record what was raised at every cheese and wine evening and spent on every leaflet drop.
• He opposed a ban on billboard advertising - "That would be more Stalin than Bean".

Mr Cameron said that the recent issues surrounding Labour donations suggest that the Labour machine is either "utterly dysfunctional" or we weren't being told "the whole truth".

The Conservative leader confirmed that Patrick Mercer had agreed to advise the Conservatives on military welfare issues.  Although Mr Mercer had made a "serious mistake" when he was forced to resign he was a "valued MP" with "valuable expertise".

Also in the press conference, Mr Cameron noted a conversation he had just had with Sayeeda Warsi who has helped to successfully negotiate a pardon for Gillian Gibbons in Sudan.

He announced that he and George Osborne were going to China from 17th to 20th December for meetings with politicians and business leaders for discussions on economic and environmental issues.

Comments

[Chad Noble]

Cameron's plans are as confused as ever and provide cover for Brown to force through the state funding extension.

The official proposals on conservatives.com say that caps should be voluntary (ie no limits if you don't take the state funding route - point 2 iii).

Anything but 'no more state funding' is doing Brown's work for him.

[Malcolm Dunn]

I would like to hear the whole interview before commenting on the State Funding of political parties. If David Cameron thinks that state funding can be introduced without attracting a very significant amount of anger from grassroots Conservatives, he's wrong. I've yet to meet one person who is prepared to defend it in real life or by revealing their real name on a blog.
Well done Sayeeda Warsi, now let's hope our government makes the disgusting Sudanese who did this pay. I'm not holding my breath though.
Glad Mercer is going to advise the party but as a Conservative MP shouldn't he do this anyway?
Crick deserves a kicking. The fact that a Labour toady like him is the chief political correspondent of a flag ship BBC political show is a disgrace.

[Comstock]

"Well done Sayeeda Warsi, now let's hope our government makes the disgusting Sudanese who did this pay. I'm not holding my breath though."

Great idea, Malcolm. And having yet *another* nation that hates our guts would help how, exactly?

[John Broughton]

State funding of political parties is simply wrong and should be resisted by anybody who believes in democracy.

Labour have done much more than take dubious donations. They have recruited, at public expense, all manner of advisers paid through the public purse and their mission is solely to promote the labour party.

On the donations fron t I simply do not believe that a control freak and party leader like Brown could not know who gives what to his party.