Downing Street Says » Party funding

Put to the PMOS that Jack Straw had seemed receptive to possible changes of disclosure rules for party funding and had he been reflecting government views, the PMOS said, as they knew, that there was some difficulty for him to discuss these matters because largely they were in the party domain. What he could say was what the Prime Minister’s approach was. The Prime Minister was open minded on these issues but equally and importantly he believed that there had to be a consensus across the parties. It was much easier to move on such matters if there was a genuine consensus. Asked if the Prime Minister was prepared to sit down with opposition parties to discuss it, the PMOS said that this was party territory, but he believed there had been comments from the Labour party over the weekend. The Prime Minister believed there should be a consensus among the parties. Likewise in regard to state funding he believed there was an issue, but that you could only move forward if there was a genuine consensus amongst the parties. Asked how you could get that consensus, the PMOS said that there were usually ways through the normal channels to get such things going. The Prime Minister recognised there were genuine issues here. If you were going to move to a system of state funding then you needed genuine consensus. On the other hand if you had a situation where political donors to any party immediately became subject to a level of media scrutiny that deterred anyone from contributing to political parties then you had an issue there too. It was in the public’s interest to have properly funded political parties. These issues should be a matter for open debate and a genuine consensus. Put that the Prime Minister was not taking this forward, the PMOS referred journalists to statements made by the Labour party over the weekend.

Asked if the Prime Minister had a view on Dr Chai Patel, the PMOS said that the normal process was that these matters remained private until published, a reason that did not need spelt out at the moment, so he would not comment specifically. We did not think that it was right or proper that individuals were put under the spotlight in this way during the process of deciding peers. Asked if there was a fear within Downing Street that the system could break down because of that deterrent, the PMOS said that it was a legitimate question to ask whether people wanted to put themselves at risk of facing this sort of scrutiny simply through making a political donation.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Monday, March 13, 2006

Party funding

No Comments »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries