Tag Archives: campaign finance

Monitor 89: The urgency of protecting democracy and the rule of law

Posted on by

Today the Unit published Monitor 89, providing an analysis of constitutional events over the last four months. This post by Alan Renwick and Meg Russell, which also serves as the issue’s lead article, highlights welcome action by the government on devolution, commitment to the rule of law and the removal of hereditary peers from the House of Lords, but calls for stronger action on wider Lords reform, progress on the promised Ethics and Integrity Commission, and action on the pre-election pledge to strengthen parliamentary scrutiny of legislation. It warns that the governments of the UK must strive to maintain healthy checks and balances, avoid polarisation, and foster open political discourse at a time when events in the US are showing the dangers of not doing so.

Continue reading →

Elections and public participation in the 2024 party manifestos

Posted on by

The main party manifestos have now been published, allowing exploration and comparison of their constitutional proposals. In this third post in a series on the manifestos, Alan Renwick looks at the parties’ policies towards elections and public participation. What are they promising, and what should we make of their proposals?

The rules of elections are far from settled. As a recent post on this blog set out, they have changed in numerous ways – both formal and informal – since the last general election in 2019. In their 2024 general election manifestos, all parties pledge at least some further reforms. Some also advocate additional forms of public participation in policy-making, such as referendums or citizens’ assemblies. But the policies on offer differ widely. This post outlines and assesses the proposals.

Votes at 16

Just one pledge in this area has hit the mainstream headlines in the course of the campaign so far, and that is Labour’s plan to introduce votes at 16. Keir Starmer highlighted this policy within a few days of the election announcement, and it is reiterated in Labour’s manifesto. It is matched by the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party, Plaid Cymru, and the SNP. By contrast, the Conservative manifesto says ‘We will not change the voting age from 18’. Indeed, the party has sought to weaponise the issue, claiming that Starmer’s policy is an attempt to ‘entrench his power’ for many years.

That Conservative riposte deserves to be greeted with decidedly raised eyebrows, coming as it does from the party that changed the voting system for mayors and police and crime commissioners in a way that benefited itself while damaging key democratic principles.

Continue reading →

The Elections Bill: some good ideas, but more thought needed

Posted on by

The Elections Bill has been subject to both criticism and praise, as discussed by our Deputy Director Alan Renwick on this blog, and numerous contributors to a parliamentary inquiry. Justin Fisher, a panellist at the Unit’s recent seminar on the bill, argues that it has several good proposals, but that more thought about certain aspects is required.

Of all the provisions in the Elections Bill, most attention has been paid to plans to introduce voter identification and greater political control of the Electoral Commission. Those provisions are obviously important, but the bill also includes significant proposals relating to notional expenditure and ‘third parties’ – organisations that campaign in elections but do not themselves field candidates. Some of these proposals, while ostensibly positive and well intentioned, have the potential to significantly affect the conduct of elections if they emerge from the scrutiny process unchanged. Others represent a disproportionate response, which are likely to lead to difficulties.

Notional Expenditure

Notional expenditure refers to campaign spending in and around constituencies which does not promote any particular candidate. Such spending is typically ascribed to the party at national level rather than the candidate at constituency-level. It is a by-product of the fact that there are different expenditure limits for candidates and for parties, and that under our electoral system, all parties target their campaign activity as far as possible on seats that they are seeking to gain or hold. Critics argue that candidate spending limits are rendered meaningless by parties’ targeting efforts, and matters came to a head at the 2015 election when in one seat, the candidate, his agent and a Conservative Party official were charged following allegations that campaign spending had not been properly declared. The candidate and agent were acquitted, but the party official was found guilty. The bill adopts a conservative approach to the issue but a sensible and most importantly, a workable one.

Continue reading →