Political parties

• roles of parties

  • represent the views of the people
  • encourage political participation, encourage voting, funding and membership
  • recruit future politicians and ideology
  • formulate policy which represent the views they stand for
  • form governments
• party funding in 2021

  Labour: 45,000,000

  Conservative: 31,000,000

  Lib Dem: 5,000,000
• How are parties funded: membership subscriptions

  • Labour party members pay 4.38 per moth and there are currently 430,000 members. in 2021 they received 16,000,000 from membership fees, around 35% of their total income
  • conservatives have much less members, around 100,000 and pay 3.25 per month. 2021 they received around 2 million, 6.5% of their total income
  • Lib Dems have around 70,000 members and pay 1 pound
• Labour parties and trade unions

  • have a number of affiliated unions such a UNITE, UNISON and GMB
  • in 2021 they received 5 million from union affiliations, 13% of total income
• How are parties funded: public funding

  • political parties do receive some state funding, mostly opposition parties because they lack the support of the civil service
  • 'short money' intended to support policy research, only available to opposition parties, the more support you get in the previous election, the more money you receive.
  • Cranbourne money is available for those that support the opposition in the HoL
  • Labour gets 7% of its income from public funding
• How are parties funded: Donations

  • Labour receives this from trade unions but post 1997 also richer individuals and business too e.g. Lord Sainsbury who donated lots under New labour, stopped under Corbyn, instead giving to the Lib Dems and then started again under Starmer, 2m in 2023.
  • conservatives receive a LOT of donations e.g. Lord Cruddas who donated millions over the years
  • 2019 Johnson increased funding through his popularity gaining 56 million in election year (May 34 million)
  • 2021 the conservative party got 20m, 65% of income
  • labour got 10m, 22%
• the 2000 political parties, elections and referendums act

  made to calm the idea of corruption surrounding funding. Introduced an independent electoral commission to supervise election campaign spending. Donations from people who weren't on the electoral role (foreign companies/individuals). its up to parties to get permissible donations and flag up any that aren't to the commission. Requirements for reporting donations over a certain amount were also introduced prior to the 2010 election. the current threshold is 7,500
• concerns over party funding

  • thoughts that fi you give enough money you're able to buy political influence, especially in relation to the conservative party since the majority of their funding comes from donations. both parties however have been accused of giving large donors a place inn the HoL
• Cash for Peerages

  2006/7 a scandal linking individuals who had loaned significant amounts to the labour party and being nominated for peerages in the HoL. These nominations were rejected by the HoL appointment commission. It couldn't be proven this had been agreed in advance though.
• Bernie ecclestone


  1997 Blair faced criticism following a 1m donation from Bernie Eccleston, the F1 motor racing boss. It was alleged that there was a link between this and the delay in banning of tobacco advertising in F1 driving. Blair denied this but the money was returned.
• Lord Cruddas scandal


  made a 500,000 donation to the tory party in 2021 and was made a peer by Johnson despite the fact that he failed the appointments commission vetting process, which BJ overruled
• PPE contracts


  Michelle Mone and unusable PPE after a 200m government contract which the money was transferred to an offshore trust which she was the beneficiary of.
• how would state funding work

  • funding based off the number of votes in the last election
  • match the donations from members of the public
  • funding for election campaigns
  • for further research for policy
• Arguments for state funding

  • parties are key to representing the public and upholding effective democracy, they deserve effective funding, reduce influence of donations, vested interest
  • would reduce the disparity in funds between small and large parties, the undemocratic 2 party system would be challenged
  • parties could focus more on policy and representing the public rather that trying to raise money
  • would curb the possibility of corruption by those who have money to get into positions of power
• Arguments against state funding

  • the limited public funding currently in action ensures that parties are independent from the state and therefore the party in power
  • as they no longer seek financial support, it could isolate parties from the electorate
  • would cost the state a significant amount and taxpayers wouldn't be happy to pay for parties they don't support
  • if funding was linked to past performance in elections then it would likely uphold the power of existing parties and not improve the pluralist democracy
• minor parties aren't important: Success in elections

  • FPTP greatly reduces the power and relevance of minor parties, benefits the labour parties, both of which have been in office since ww2. this was the case despite the vote share of the 2 parties decreasing from 80% in 1979 to 66% in 2015 which wasn't reflected in seats
  • Since the 2017 election there's been an increase in support for the main parties, winning 82%
• minor parties are important: success in elections

  • some minor parties that have concentrated support have been able to receive support including the SNP and Sine Fein. e.g. SNP won 56 seats with only 4% of the vote
  • minor parties also have more success in local elections and European parliament elections. e.g. the last EU parliament elections, labour and conservatives finished 3rd and 4th after UKIP and Lib Dems
• minor parties aren't important: able to play a role in government

  • Labour and the conservatives have been in government since ww2, in the Welsh parliament, the Labour party has dominated and always been in government since devolution.
  • even when in coalition the major parties dominate policy e.g. 2010
• minor parties are important: able to play a role in government

  • minor parties have a lot more electoral success in devolved bodies and have power over policy as a result, the SNP has been in power in Scotland since 2007 and made changes like abolishing tuition fees and prescription charges
  • Minor parties have also been able to have influence in coalition/confidence and supply e.g. Lib Dems drove through policies like increasing the personal allowance and introducing the 2015 recall of MP's act. The DUP also had significant influence over the Brexit policy of 2017, moving towards a hard Brexit
• minor parties aren't important: impact over policy

  • able to have a huge impact over policy since ww2, e.g. Thatcher and Blair were able to implement their economic/social policy which completely changed the policy and way of governing
  • The 2 main parties are broad churches that represent a wide range of people and there fore policies
  • minor party influence is only ever temporary e.g. UKIP influence waning post 2016
• minor parties are important: impact over policy

  • minor parties have significant indirect influence over policy even if governing isn't much of an option, using their platforms and public support to put issues on the agenda. The 2 main parties are forced to accept some of these e.g. Brexit
  • The green party, while being less of an electoral threat than UKIP also had success through it's public support and political platform has helped to raise the profile of environmental issues and force the parties to adopt them
• Factors that affect party success: funding

  • those with good funding are able to hire a lot of staff and spend big on advertising and campaigning during elections
  • labour receives funding from unions and the conservative from donations which creates a very loyal voter base and puts them far ahead of smaller parties
  • On the other hand party funding can receive negative headlines and publicity especially when it is linked to possible corruption
• Factors affecting party success: Electoral system

  • The electoral system is highly important in determining the success of parties
  • FTP greatly benefits parties with concentrated electoral support like the 2 biggest and harm the prospects of minor parties like UKIP and Green
  • in devolved elections the system is often fairer, meaning smaller parties have more success
  • Small parties can have success without having a lot of seats
• Factors affecting party success: Party leadership

  • the rise of TV and Social media has significantly increased the importance of a good leader
  • able to provide a clear position ad direct a party to a specific ideology, charismatic leaders can make a party grow beyond the core voter share and branch out e.g. Blair or Johnson being popular and May and Corbyn being uncharismatic and underperforming
  • however, leadership can be overstated. some people will vote the same party no matter the leader, and for sway voters, if both are weak it is less of a factor
• Factors affecting party success: the media

  • the media can be seen as important in shaping the views of the electorate
  • a significant majority of the press is right leaning which could be a factor relating to the dominance of the Tories in the 2010's
  • Blairs ability to court conservative media like 'The Sun' was seen important in his landslide. He was also able to portray himself very effectively in the media using labours 'spin'
  • can break key political scandals lie party gate
  • however influence shouldn't be overstated, it reflects the views already held by the public
• Factors affecting party success: party unity

  • parties that are united appeal to the electorate as it shows they have a clear vision, divided parties seem weak and in-fighting puts off voters.
  • e.g. 1997 tory party damaging division over Europe contributed to their performance, this contrasted with the unified and clear view that labour had really harmed them. The same can be said for the Labour party in 2017 where there was an ideological divide.