« Number Ten to fly flag of St George's tomorrow... | Main | Headcases »


UKIP oppose the extension to state funding of political parties. They may be small and disorganised, but please stop insulting them by excluding them from 'the mainstream' as they have councillors, mep's, peers and an MP.

How about stopping the smears as you clearly agree with ukip policy on this.

One of Cameron's first policy docs was the proposal of state funding in March 2006.

The greedy piggies of the political class are safe under all of the big 3 parties.

Sure Cameron might sacrifice a handful of them to appease the increasingly angry masses, but this token gesture aside, Cameron is happily gorging at the trough and as such, is as much part of the problem as New Labour.

Not sure that the electorate will be too happy about more taxpayers' money going to political parties after the way that politicians tend to abuse financial assistance of any kind.

Why doesn't Francis Maude address the Tory claim for more state funding?

Chad: I do agree with UKIP policy on this issue - that's true - but I stand by my contention that UKIP are not a mainstream party. They are only seriously competitive in the European Elections and without Kilroy-Silk they'll lose MEPs next year.

Anyway - let's not make this a thread about UKIP. We did that yesterday.

Thanks Tim - definitely keen to avoid unproductive slanging matches, but i just thought you have been displaying unnecessary sour grapes recently, when considering as you note, that you suport UKIP policy on this, a little generosity might be useful if only to put pressure on your mob! :-)

Even 2 years after Cameron proposing the extension to state funding, I still find it hard to believe that the Tory Party has actually proposed to become a benefit scrounger, and sign itself off on permanent state benefits.

Francis Maude founded Policy Exchange with Michael Gove. It has smashed the case for extra direct state funding of political parties, a key Cameron policy. Francis Maude must address the issues raised in the report even though it he may embarrass him personally.

Counting all MP allowances and expenses, and all councillor pay and allowances, as state funding of political parties themselves, strains credulity to breaking point. A council leader who has no other job (the norm in larger councils) is dependent on their special responsibility allowance to put food on the table. Is that a party political activity?

PX and Maude seem to have ignored the existemce of pernicious Quangoes.
They are peopled at the whim of political nepotism, cost millions and are yet again an example of how the divide between taxpayers / electorate v the poltical elite is growing. They are also highly undemocratic in that personnnel are unelected and unaccountable, despite having an immnese and direct influence on the community.
One typical example of the arch Quangoist is, Nikki Gavron, the so-called "Deputy Mayor" of London's GLA.

The comments to this entry are closed.



ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker