First things first, if spending money
wasn’t felt to affect the result of an election it wouldn’t be done. We know
how much politicians like money as evidenced by their expenses claims. Generally
when we consider excessive election spending we look over to the United States where an
exorbitant amount is spent per election cycle reaching over $6Billion in 2012.
Yet in the UK we are beginning to be faced with similar questions. As an
example, I’ll provide the expenses information from across the three constituencies
of Brent.
·
Hampstead & Kilburn:
Tulip Siddiq was
elected with a total spend of £42,752.16
·
Brent Central:
Dawn Butler was
duly elected MP with a total spend of £18,823.74
·
Brent North:
Barry Gardiner
spent £25,973.24 to be elected in his ‘safe seat’.
To put this into context we as the Green
Party struggled raising the £500 for deposits to stand for election in the
first place. It was thanks to national and local Crowdfunder campaigns that we
were able to put up an almost full slate.
Once you’re over that hurdle the bare
minimum that voters expect from candidates and what you hope to provide is
information as to why you’re standing. The government provides a ‘free-post’ scheme
however you still have to pay for the printing of the leaflets which whilst
almost prohibitive for us can certainly be out of reach for independent
candidates. Indeed, the independent candidate standing for Brent North, Elcena
Jeffers MBE spent absolutely nothing. Brent Green’s total spend for Brent North
was £795.95 with the majority of that (£600) on the ‘free’ - post. Meanwhile Barry
Gardiner spent £10,457.64 on leaflets, £90 for some people to do the ‘folding’
for him, as well as £4950.77 on staff, £3352.76 on an office and utilities,
£150 on rosettes, £145 on stickers, £119.40 on Balloons, £343,95 on Helium gas
all within what was described as a ‘safe-seat’. It can feel difficult to
complete when even Labour, as a party that purports to represent the ‘working
class’ spends the equivalent of 4 newly qualified nurses salaries on 3
constituencies alone.
Does the public wish to elect people to
parliament based upon policy or plentiful purses? As with any fairground, (well
Barry bought the balloons) it appears those who have the money to throw the
most balls at the coconuts always get the prize. This presents a particularly
unfair environment for Independents who receive very limited media space and as
such he public might never know nor have the opportunity to decide if their
policies were what they were looking for.
A complaint with our political system is
that elected politicians are not representative of the communities they wish to
serve. Yet, if it’s difficult for those who might be, to achieve the parity to
even be heard, economic inequality will forever translate into political
inequality.
Whilst arguments for electoral reform are
focused upon proportional representation, it would be a mistake to forget about
the finances. Even a separate room in polling stations with poster
presentations of politicians’ policy could contribute towards making a
difference. In 2011 Sir Christopher Kelly calculated that it would cost
£23million per year to fund a state funded political system (that’s 50p per person
for reductionists out there). When as a country we spend more per year on the
upkeep of a Monarchy as opposed to ensuring a level playing field for a fair
and transparent democratic process we know the system is broken. We will
forever be disappointed that our parliament is not representative of people by
Gender, Age, Ability, Ethnicity, Education, Socio-economic status or
sexuality.
Scott
Bartle is a member of Brent Green Party and this year stood as a candidate in
the constituency of Brent North.
