Squandering the moral high ground

THE Labour Government should be praised for introducing the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act, which obliges political parties to publish the names of people who give them money.

As the decline of the previous Conservative administration showed, it was a much needed reform to clean up politics.

Yet Labour has managed to lose the moral high-ground. Initially it was reluctant to name the men who had given it £2m and so flouted the spirit of its forthcoming law.

We came to understand why it might be reluctant to publicise its donors with the curious case of Peter Mandelson's birthday party. Mr Mandelson allowed a man he barely knew to throw a lavish £5,000 party. That man turned out to be Robert Bourne, who was donating £100,000 to Labour funds. He also turned out to be head of the Legacy company which stands to make a £200m from buying the Millennium Dome - which was the brainchild of one Peter Mandelson.

Labour is not stupid nor brazen enough to have linked the sale of the Dome to Mr Bourne's donation nor to Mr Mandelson's party - but with these unfortunate coincidences the moral high ground is squandered.

Mr Blair's gloat yesterday about natural Tories giving money to Labour because the Conservatives are so unelectable would have been understandable had it come at the start of last week. Now it sounds more like a damage limitation exercise.

Indeed, the £6m the party has raised is not worth the bad publicity it has generated.

While Labour's coffers have been swelled, democracy's stock has fallen further. Election turn-outs show that voters are disinterested in distant politicians. Now it appears that the only way to have a say is to have £2m to donate.

To improve matters, some people are talking about the state funding political parties. This means the tax-payer would foot the bill for the next General Election - that's £50m of your money going to assorted monster raving loonies, yogic flyers or members of the Referendum Party, and not to the health service. There would be up-roar.

Also, if the parties received hand-outs from the state, they would no longer need to appeal to their supporters for money. They would become even further distant from the electorate.

And this is the gaping hole in the new Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act. It gives parties licence to woo a few very rich people but there is no incentive for them to court their grassroots supporters.

The Act, which comes into force on February 16, needs a clause written into it limiting the amount of money an individual may donate. This would remove the impression of the wealthy few buying influence. It would also encourage the parties to become more attractive to the ordinary man in the street who has an ordinary-sized pocket.