More public money could resolve party funding rowThis concept doesn't work in other fields, if a policeman announced that because he had been caught taking bribes the "system" must be reviewed it wouldn't be popular. A supermarket that overspent three times its budget would not be allowed to get away with demanding state funding to bail them out. Politicians are seeking to foist the bill for their own incompetence and sleaze onto everyone else.
LONDON (Reuters) - Greater levels of public funding for political parties is one option being considered in a review of party financing triggered by a recent cash-for-honours scandal.
Hayden Phillips, appointed by Prime Minister Tony Blair in March to examine alternatives for party funding, will also suggest a cap on donations in an interim report on Thursday.
It isn't as if state funding reduces corruption anyway, presumably the various scandals that have afflicted European politics notably the Helmut Kohl case are known to everybody. Still it is never the fault of the politicians:
"As members of the public we cannot have it both ways. Party politics costs," Phillips said.This patronising buffoon does not appear to understand that the public don't want it "both ways", they want parties to raise their money through legitimate means and spend only what they can afford. In what other sphere is that considered having it "both ways"?
Phillips' interim report aims to provoke a debate between political partiesThat's lovely, I can't see any vested interests there then, just groups of people deciding whether they should be given free money. Should be some debate!