Jack Vowles: Public cash buys voters' wish lists

Want an easy target? Just kick the nearest politician. This is a regular theme in New Zealand today. Unfortunately, it's often not helpful in generating the informed and constructive debate needed in a healthy democracy.

In particular, problems that have emerged about the funding of political parties need to be discussed, not just exploited.

Trust in politicians is lower than it used to be. Many of us feel politicians don't listen to us, or tell us what their policies really are. Many people interpret politics in ways that ascribe the worst motives to politicians.

Some journalists know there is a market for this interpretation and follow it. It's easy and simple.

But as a result, people don't learn as much as they need to about what lies behind events.

Parliament allocates funds to political parties so they can run their affairs in Parliament and provide information to the public.

The Auditor-General has declared in a draft report that some taxpayer funds used in the 2005 election campaign should not have been spent as they were.

But those funds have been used in those ways before. The Parliamentary Services Commission which allocates the funds approved their use for the purposes now called into question.

All political parties except one disagree with the Auditor-General. But as his position is backed by a legal opinion from the Solicitor-General, it may be technically correct.

But there is much more to it than this. Some people are implying political parties should be paying back the funds because they are like overpaid beneficiaries. However, beneficiaries are paid to sustain themselves. Political parties are given taxpayer funds to provide services to the public.

In competition with each other, political parties give us choices between different packages of public policy. Every three years, we indicate which we like best.

A government is put together that represents the best combination of policy packages the parties that have come out on top can deliver.

The strength of the connection between what people want and governments that are formed relies on information. Political parties need to know what people want. They need to be able to communicate policies to the people. Someone has to pay for this.

Political parties are not businesses that make money to pay for what they do. They rely on a combination of dues and donations from members, non-members and other organisations, and taxpayer funds through Parliament and the Electoral Commission - the latter to pay for election broadcasting.

Political party funding poses increasingly difficult problems. Parties are no longer mass membership organisations that can rely on members' donations of money and time.

Running effective political parties is much more expensive than it used to be. With fewer members to knock on doors, parties have to rely on glossy pamphlets and sending letters to large numbers of people. They use radio and particularly television, and need professional help to do so.

With fewer members to keep them in touch with public opinion, they have to spend money on polling and focus groups.

The most expensive item at issue with the Auditor-General is the pledge card that clearly indicated Labour's main election promises. But did people not want to know about those?

If political parties relied entirely on private donations, they would be vulnerable to political pressure from people and organisations with money to spare. Parties would be more likely to promote the interests of people and organisations with money than those of the public.

Most democracies recognise this problem and many also accept that taxpayers need to fund party activities because political parties provide a public service.

We need to address this by acknowledging taxpayers already fund political parties and they need to continue to do so to make sure parties can be effective. Taxpayer support needs to be reviewed, rationalised, and made more transparent.

Some funding through Parliament is being used for purposes marginal to Parliament, and this needs to be sorted out by making funds available for other purposes. We might want to look at what some countries do to encourage more small donations from individuals by way of tax rebates.

In return, we should require more transparency from political parties about their internal financial affairs, and about the large donations they receive.

Political party funding is not just their problem, it's our problem.

If we deprive political parties of the funds they need to communicate with us, it would be unreasonable to continue to complain politicians are out of touch, don't listen to us, and don't tell us what their policies are.

Surely New Zealanders are smarter than that.

* Jack Vowles is professor of political studies at the University of Auckland.