Answer:
Public funding are funds or resources provided by the State/Government for political parties and/or candidates. Provisions often state that political parties and candidates should have an equitable access to public funds. Oftentimes, the rules regarding public funding are not clearly stated in law, and even if they are, there is often a (real or perceived) misuse of public resources by the incumbent party or candidate. The legal framework can be drafted in a way as to encourage the founding and sustainability of a multi-party system. Ongoing oversight from a responsible government body combined with public (civil society) oversight through CSO watchdog capacity also can improve the monitoring and full disclosure of funding across party lines and in lines and consistent with the intent of full disclosure and fairness in campaign financing.[1]
Depending on the form in which public resources are made available, public funding is divided into direct public funding or indirect public funding.
Direct public funding is given to political parties and/or candidates in the form of money – usually as bank transfers but at times in cash or cheque.
Indirect public funding is when resources with a monetary value is provided by the Government to political parties and/or candidates.
Arguments against public funding
Those who oppose public funds to political parties or candidates often use one or several of the following arguments:
Public funding increases the distance between political elites (party leadership, candidates) and ordinary citizens (party members, supporters, voters)
When political parties and candidates do not depend on their supporters or members neither for monetary contributions (membership, donations) nor for voluntary labour, they might be less likely to involve them in party decisions or consult their opinions on policy issues.
Public funding preserves a status quo that keeps the established parties and candidates in power
Public funds are often allocated among political parties and candidates in the national legislature. This may make it more difficult for new political forces to gain representation. The legal framework can limit this negative influence by providing special funds for new political parties or candidates.
Through public funds, taxpayers are forced to support political parties and candidates whose views they do not share
Many believe that ordinary taxpayers should not be forced – through the public purse – to support political parties or candidates that they would never choose to vote for. Instead they should have the possibility to decide if and when they want to donate money to a political party or candidate.
Public funds to political parties and candidates takes money away from schools and hospitals to give to rich politicians
When introduced, public funding is often unpopular among the public. Public resources are scarce and needed for everything from schools and hospitals to roads and salaries for staff. To many people, using public funds to give to political parties and candidates would be far down their list of priorities.
Political parties and candidates both take the decision and collect the money
The decision to allocate public funds to parties and candidates is most often taken in the national legislature (or in some cases in the Government). This means that the political parties and candidates who will collect the money, also take the decision.
Political parties risk becoming organs of the State rather than parts of civil society
If all or a substantial amount of the party income comes directly from the State rather than from voluntary sources, political parties risk losing their independence and become organs of the State, thereby losing their ties to the civil society.
