THE PRESS MONDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1988. Paying for politics

Press, 19 December 1988, Page 20

THE PRESS MONDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1988. Paying for politics

If the Government has its way, taxpayers will be funding a substantial part of the electoral expenses of political parties by the time of the next General Election. Government representatives on Parliament’s Electoral Law Committee have recommended that taxpayers should fund political parties and independent candidates, perhaps at the levels recommended last year by the Royal Commission on Electoral Reform. National Party members of the Electoral Law Committee oppose the change.

The Royal Commission proposed a formula under which the State would provide election funds to political parties, based on the vote that each had gained at the previous General Election. Parties would receive a dollar a vote, up to a maximum of 20 per cent of the total of votes cast. Beyond that, they would receive 50 cents a vote, up to a maximum of 30 per cent of votes cast. The result: parties that polled well would get paid more from the public purse; but small parties and independent candidates would get proportionately more than the two large parties. In the 1987 General Election, 1,831,902 valid votes were cast for all parties and candidates. The Labour Party received 47.96 per cent of the vote; the National Party received 44.02 per cent. Both parties would receive funding only up to 30 per cent. They would get nothing for their extra votes. On that basis, the Labour Party and the National Party would each receive about $457,000 from the State for their election campaigns. The Democrats, who gained 5.74 per cent of the vote, or 105,000 votes, would get $105,000. The New Zealand Party would get $5OOO, Mana Motuhake nearly $lO,OOO, and other parties and candidates, if they stood again, would get a total of $26,000 — including $7O for Citizens Against Political Parties.

All that adds up to rather more than $1 million, or about 30 cents a head from all New Zealanders. Measured against other demands on taxpayers, the forced support of political parties is a trivial charge on the community. For all that, there is a strong case against putting political parties on the public payroll. Party membership in New Zealand has been something like a constant referendum, a constant measure of a Government’s performance and of the potential

performance of an Opposition and of other aspiring politicians. To survive and flourish, parties need paid-up members. If performance strays too far from public concerns and desires, party membership, and party funds, suffer. The Labour Party in recent times has been made painfully aware of the displeasure of its members. Supporters have deserted the party in droves, taking their party dues with them. Once parties have access to State funds, they will be paid for their showing at a previous election, not for their showing in the run-up to a new election. The penalties of getting out of step with popular opinion will be reduced. A party in public disfavour would still be asssured of funds instead of, as now, having to mend its ways if it hopes to attract the support and money it needs to fight an election.

Until now, any political party that hoped to become the Government of New Zealand has had to show sufficient enterprise, and sufficiently appealing policies, to attract a large membership of people each prepared to pay small dues. The result has been an extra democratic step within the general democracy. It has also ensured that parties cannot become too remote from electors. When the Government has been following a vigorous policy of making users pay for services it is an absurd reversal to require all taxpayers to contribute to the funds of parties they may well abhor. The Labour Party might well argue that the present arrangements give an advantage to the party that attracts the wealthiest contributors. But New Zealand already has constraints on spending by candidates in election campaigns, constraints that have been broken by both major parties, as inquiries into the last General Election revealed.

In any case, money alone does not buy votes, unless one assumes a thoroughly corrupt or gullible electorate. In the end, policies and performance attract votes and win elections, just as they attract party members and their contributions. Before any legislation is drafted to make taxpayers support the parties, the community should make it clear that it believes democracy is best served by continuing the present arrangements of voluntary party membership and contributions.