Campaigning is vital for fair elections. Parties and candidates need to be able to communicate with voters to explain their policies and seek public support.
At the same time, limits on campaign spending are crucially important. Set at the right level, they promote fairness by preventing wealthier parties massively outspending others and reducing the risk that electoral success is determined by financial power alone. As Professor Keith Ewing put it, not having spending limits is akin to ‘inviting two people to participate in the race, with one participant turning up with a bicycle, and the other with a sports car’.
By preventing undue focus on fundraising, spending limits also allow parties to focus more on voters and less on donors. This helps to reduce the influence of powerful private interests over elections, politics, and policy.
Spending limits can also broaden participation by increasing the number of candidates from less wealthy backgrounds. Academic evidence shows that a 25% decrease in spending limits leads to an average candidate who is 40% less wealthy.
Despite these benefits, the government increased the spending limit for political parties by 80%, from £19.5m to £34m, in 2023. This caused the 2024 election to be the most expensive ever, with parties spending a massive £94m.
There are also broader weaknesses in the regulatory framework. These include a lack of detail and consistency in parties’ spending returns, parties not having to report local election spending, and significant costs by parties not counting towards the spending limit. With just 14% of the public trusting politicians and 80% concerned about corruption, faith in the integrity of our politics is at rock bottom. The public is right to be concerned about the influence of big money, and robust spending limit rules are vital to protecting fairness and restoring trust.
Click on the link below to read the full briefing.
-
Click here to read the full briefing
Why we need stronger spending rules for political parties at elections
