Rolling Referendum - party funding nailed once and for all

[TonyGosling]

Julian Parry says: November 6, 2011 at 4:55 pm
Dr Matthew Ashton. Lecturer in politics at Nottingham Trent University.
http://drmatthewashton.com/about/#comment-1941

The Rolling Referendum
by Julian Parry

The impending collapse of the western economic model is due in large measure to the phenomena of the world of finance controlling the word of politics for its own ends. That has been a fact of life since 1776. Reinforced by the Jekyll Island conspiracy of 1913, it has brought mankind close to self destruction in a series of wars that could have turned nuclear at any time.

In the end it has brought our world to an end because of the way the world of finance has done business over the last 25 years during which time laws that were there to protect us all from the worse excesses of the world of finance were removed making way for the Age of the Swindlers. And now as that world goes into meltdown and resource poverty stares us all in the face the need for a new form of politics could not be clearer.

That new form of politics can come from only one place – a change in the way the political parties are funded. A new form of funding that recognises he who pays the piper calls the tune. Never mind AV what the world needs is RR – the Rolling Referendum

The way RR works.

Imagine a world in which political parties may be privately funded or publicly funded but not both.

Imagine too a world in which ‘first past the post’ is maintained as the accepted system of election.

Imagine a world in which every year on a free vote Parliament votes a budget for party funding.

Imagine a world where that fund is distributed to qualifying parties by the Electoral Commission (whose the members of the Authority are not allowed to be a member of any political party) according to these rules.

A party may qualify for funding provided always that it has a member of parliament.

The amount of that funding is calculated percentage of the fund voted for by parliament

That percentage shall be calculated as the number of votes received by the party at any given time divided by the number of votes cast for all qualifying parties at that same time where a preference had not been expressed.

The percentage of the fund paid may change at any by-election or at any time due to registered electors indicating to the Electoral Commission that they wish their individual proportion of the fund got to party X.

To give effect to this right of change all they need do is go to a post office, pick up a form, complete it with their voter number and other identifying information and send it to the electoral commission.

Modern computer systems would easily cope with the administration.

The Government Party and the Official Opposition would be required to take public funding.

If at any time the government party was in receipt of less than 20% of the approved fund then the Electoral Commission would report direct to the Sovereign that the public mood now suggest the Government Party no longer had the support of the country and it was now her right to consider suspending

The sovereign may judge that a probationary period would be appropriate so that single issues did not bring down a government because of unpopular decision taken in the country’s hour of need but that would be a matter for the Sovereign.

Thus any party that strayed too far from its mandate – such as Gordon Brown – would find itself not only loosing cash but more – giving its money to its political enemy’s.

More than enough to tighten their collective political sphincter.

And party’s like the Lib Dems would perhaps get a fairer deal whilst the country’s appetite for first past the post would also be satisfied.

The world is changing. The worlds of politics and finance have converged to every bodies disadvantage. They must be forced apart and diverge rapidly if our civilisation is to survive.

Shackle the lobbyists by all means, but give the people real power if capitalism is not too suffer the same fate as socialism and communism; for both those system failed due to their abuse by men who were of neither persuasion. Capitalism by contrast will fail because of abuse by its adherents..