Herman Grech
Labour makes €7.2 million State funding proposal
Donations over a particular threshold 'should be identified'
Labour is proposing that political parties receive an annual contribution from the State of €5 for each vote obtained at the last general election - a move that would cost the taxpayer €7.2 million over five years.
The PL is also insisting that political parties should disclose the identity of those making donations above a certain amount and has proposed that the Auditor General audits the accounts of both parties.
The proposals, still at an embryonic stage, were made behind closed doors during a Parliamentary Select Committee meeting after being discussed internally within the PL.
Should the €5 contribution suggestion be approved by the Nationalist Party, the PN would receive €717,340 each year, the PL €709,440, Alternattiva Demokratika €19,050, and Azzjoni Nazzjonali €7,305. The PL proposed that the €5 figure should be retroactive, starting from 2008, and amended every year according to the rate of inflation, sources told The Sunday Times. The money raised would go towards parties' salaries, research and consultation.
The two main political parties already each receive €100,000 a year from the public coffers, although there seems to be little accountability over how it is spent.
The figures being suggested largely draw on the proposals made by the Galdes Commission in 1995. The PL maintains that donations of over €23,000 should be prohibited and that those over €11,600 be accompanied by the name of the donor. However, it also suggests these donation thresholds should eventually be raised by 50 per cent.
Labour's position paper was tabled by MP Charles Mangion, but he was reluctant to give details when contacted.
"The committee had unanimously agreed that only the Speaker shall comment on specifics of discussions - and this in order to ensure a successful outcome out of the discussions," he said.
Dr Mangion said his party believed that State funding, coupled with wide-ranging transparency rules, were the best way to ensure that political parties did not succumb to external pressures of interest groups that may subsidise them.
"This, we believe, will enhance public trust in political parties and would be healthy to the development of democracy and good governance."
Labour, he said, agreed that there was a need for greater transparency and that donations over a particular threshold should be identified.
A top PL official, who preferred to remain unnamed, said that the Nationalists were reluctant to accept Labour's proposal because it did not suit them.
"The PN is against State funding, but it wants much higher thresholds for party donations. We have a problem with money, they have a problem with transparency," he said.
PN general secretary Paul Borg Olivier said the party considered it a priority to tackle transparency in political party funding, including donations, as suggested by the Galdes Report.
He said Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi recently indicated he was in favour of drastically lowering the benchmark for declared donations.
Dr Borg Olivier said his party would honour its commitment to the Speaker that it should not comment publicly on what was being discussed during the Select Committee meetings.
"This is precisely why (Labour leader Joseph) Muscat's statements during the general conference come as a surprise. His statement that he is in favour of taxpayers' money being used to finance political parties is uncalled for and unacceptable."
Dr Muscat recently renewed his call for a law on party funding, though he was short on detail. His University thesis in 1996 had specifically tackled the issue of State funding, and his conclusion was that political parties in Malta should benefit from it.
It is an open secret that both parties are experiencing financial problems, though sources said Labour's finances were in dire straits. Former PN general secretary Joe Saliba had said in 2006 that Labour's debts amounted to €7 million (Lm3 million).
The Nationalists traditionally raise far higher sums than Labour during the annual fundraising marathons and the party's companies raise enough money to deal with the day-to-day costs.
Dr Borg Olivier said: "The party has substantial amounts of money still payable to creditors, including banks. These amounts cover expenses incurred during the election campaign and the building of the new headquarters."
On the other hand, Dr Mangion said Labour was the only party whose accounts were audited by a reputable independent auditing firm.
"Labour's financial statement is published annually... we know nothing about the PN's finances."
However, sources said there were various ways in which political parties could conceal their debts as well as the names of donors.
29 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Madeleine Depasquale
Feb 18th 2009, 13:46
It is against the very essence of democracy to be forced to give our money to political parties with whom we disagree. This is a free country where we enjoy fundamental rights of political opinion, expression and creed. I give my money to whomever I want and if Labour wants to fill its "hole", it should not turn to us taxpayers but to its financial administration.
M. Catania
Feb 18th 2009, 09:16
@Mike Magri
No way!!!!! It is already enough that we sometimes pay for the administration incompetency and I mean both parties. We are still paying the salaries of the 8000+ who were employed by MLP before the 1987 election.
This is worse than the St.John's Cathedral controversy. Go and earn your money u mela issibuhom shan shan!!!!
Mike Magri
Feb 17th 2009, 18:36
I strongly believe that `Shame` should go to GonziPN, Smiiiiling on NET TV, showing Prominent PN Parliamentarians, like `magicians`, pulling out all of their pockets, packets and packets of Tens of Thousands of Matese Liri, whilst adding insult to injury, by `Declaring` that these monies came from Coffee Mornings` collections... YES... Let`s have State funding for our political parties, because that is the only way that we can eliminate the Sharks
Jeff Inguanez
Feb 17th 2009, 15:15
First Labour requisitioned people's private property to have their Kazini for free.
Now they want our hard-earned cash in so-euphemistically-called 'state-funding'!
Whatever next?
.
Joseph Martino
Feb 17th 2009, 12:52
Shame on the PL and Joseph Muscat for this ridiculous proposal. Wicckom ma jisthix ukoll!
A. Azzopardi
Feb 16th 2009, 20:49
So, It is claimed that these funds are needed for "research". Maybe they getting new technology to spy on one's political affiliations? Or to find out who has voted from every street in each election? Or even to know in real time who is winning in every election , so they come out "celebrating" in the streets? Some local polical parties own several properties around their club. Where are they getting this money from? And why only those parties in Parliament? To keep the stranglehold on the two-party system in Malta? I am totally against this proposal. Were it not for the fact that (either) party supporters will vote like "in-naghag ta' Bendu", I would ask for a Referendum. But whoever introduces it will have the middle of the road voters against him. Caveat emptor!
Mike Magri
Feb 16th 2009, 18:46
Iam in full favour of such government funding. Because... By being financially accountable to the government of the day, EACH party has to Annually MAKE PUBLIC, ALL the funding received, each year. Thus, i am sure, that no one party will be SO FILTHY `RICH`, as to feel so much at ease to `TRICK` the electorate, left-right-and-centre...
Mark Zerafa
Feb 16th 2009, 17:10
Why should taxpayer's money go to fund political parties?
And why should a larger party get more funding? Would that be democracy?
Not only should state funding not be considered, but Parties should be obliged by law to make public any donation in excess of € 2330!
Sorry Joseph, Lawrence, Harry and Josie, not another bite off my wallet.
Alex Ellul
Feb 16th 2009, 12:42
@Arnold Galea: You commenced your comment with the following question:
"Why on earth most of the comments have been quite negative to the proposal of state funding?"
The answer is very simple: We don't want to fork out more money in taxes just to bail out the political parties' extravaganzas. The MLP was left with quite a big chunk of a financial hole after the 1996-98 elections in the form of the American Phil Nobel's bill for consultancy. That hole has been continuously carried forward election after failed election most probably getting bigger with each campaign. Now you want me to pay for that? Go rob an American bank if you want. Oh. BTW, these don't exist any more.
joe sant
Feb 16th 2009, 08:42
If I had to coin an expression to this last proposal, it would be 'An indecent proposal'. How can one ever think of proposing to increase the financing of the political parties in this time and age of economic turbulence and particularly considering our country's financial state? Is there a money problem or not? Does the message that the PL want to transmit across the board is the old slogan of 'Money no problem'?
Have we ALL forgotten the state of a number of needy families who can barely make ends meet? This proves ONLY one thing and this is that those who should be responsible to set the priorities to alleviate the people are not ONLY dismissing this but putting the parties interest before those who really are in need.
One thing is for sure that the more we have of these indecent proposals, the more the common citizen is getting disillusioned and moving towards a common direction: NO VOTE.
carmelo briffa
Feb 16th 2009, 06:29
I think I come to the correct conclusion that rather then draining my last 5Euros out of my pocket I rather TRASH the election VOTE . What a cheek our politicians have?. 2 days before the election 2008 they support me with a disabled parking spot and after 2 days after election came and took it off. What a cheek and face they have. They only good for blackmailing and now they are asking for extra 5 euros per vote they gain------Rubbish Sur Muscat will never work for me and my family...see you next Election
Nigel Lawrence
Feb 16th 2009, 05:18
So he wants us to pay €5.00 to vote? Besides the totally incompetent political parties, yet another reason to stay away from the polling booths.
Arnold Galea
Feb 15th 2009, 22:31
Dear All
Why on earth most of the comments have been quite negative to the proposal of state funding?
It seems that there are many around who prefer to keep things as they are and therefore without making politicians accountable.
This proposal will not be perfect, nothing is perfect, however, it would be better to know who is donating to political parties, then when we would know about the possible conflicts of interests.
This proposal and maybe some amendments to it ( I would add politician's accountability to the equation) is a step forward for the citizens not simply for the parties.
As it is now, the situation is such that who's got more money wins. This is absolutely against meritocracy, ideally we should have a battle on ideas not on money, image & other alienating factors.
So dear bloggers why do you shoot down any New proposals that come wherever they come from?
joe scerri
Feb 15th 2009, 19:31
We have a group of volunteers who for the past few years have been raising money for life saving kidney machines. Then we go and suggest spending €7.2 million to fund totally useless entities like our political parties. How many kidney machines would this money buy?
€2.8 million to build a useless bridge over the breakwater. €60 million for a new parliament/shopping centre.
Malta has truly gone to the dogs.
Stephen Borg Cardona
Feb 15th 2009, 16:38
So now i am supposed to pay to make up for the fact that the political leades who want to run the country are not even capable of running something as small and simple as a political party. As always the tax payer has to compensate for the incompetence of our politicians !
Norman Mifsud
Feb 15th 2009, 15:54
It is a SHAME that the PL has made such a State Funding Proposal at a time of economic crisis: when people are struggling to make ends meet, when all unions have come together to protest against Government because of the utilities' bills, and when people are losing their jobs. This proposal means that taxpayers are being requested to fund political parties - not that we're not but at least this to-date is voluntary and not imposed. It will be even more shameful if Governmen even considers this proposal. On the contrary, maybe in such difficult times people who are really in need, should be helped by their own political parties not vice versa!
Political parties should be more creative and enterprising and generate their own revenue just like any other enterprise. PL should also realise that should the respective political parties have to divulge the names of their key contributors, then they should also expect their revenue to fall because certainly not all contributors will be willing to be made public. After all, if an individual or business wants to make a donation to anyone, why should it be made public?
John Borg
Feb 15th 2009, 15:26
While the PL is rightly critical of the ever-growing national debt, it apparently has no problem advocating that the Maltese taxpayer should bail out the main political parties. Nice!
Albert Bezzina
Feb 15th 2009, 15:23
€5 from taxpays' money every 5 years is very little. I have nothing against it. Maybe The Times would like to carry out a poll on this one. I would ensure that the funding increases are coupled with cost of living increases given to workers. Otherwise we will be seeing yearly jumps in the €5 contribution!
nigel fenech
Feb 15th 2009, 13:58
Labour PArty......From property snatching to pick-pocketing
Tajba din....Labour is claiming a cash payment to its party of some 3.5 Million Euros from the Tax Payer in the next five years. It is true that labour never changes.
From the snatching of our property under requisition orders in the 70s and 80s passing them to Labour Party Clubs (which the Stagun Poltiku Politico is mum about) we are now faced to pay the MLP whether we like it or not....!!!!!!!
Dear Joe, you have given little proof of change....this time round it is so blatent that change is far....how dare the PL take a cent from me when I do not want to pay it....is that not institutional robbery....L-MLP ser itini tessera b'xejn for paying forcefully????
Charles Micallef
Feb 15th 2009, 13:45
I WOULD TOTALLY AGREE IF THIS WILL MEAN THAT IT WILL FREE ALL POLITICIANS & POLITCAL PARTIES FROM THE "FAVOURS TO RETURN" EXPECTED FOR DONATIONS ............................
ESPECIALLY FROM THE BIG BUSINESS.
Alex Ellul
Feb 15th 2009, 13:21
Joseph Muscat is proposing that his party gets €5 for each vote obtained in an election, money that would be coming from my own taxes. Suppose I decide not to vote, would I get a €5 refund?
Best thing is to let things stand as they are. Let those party faithful who are eager to see their political party getting out of the finacial mire that their previous leaders got them into save their own skin. I'm fed up with politicians putting their hands in my pocket for all reasons.
BTW: Don't we have the electricity and water rates to worry about? From where would the 7 million euros be coming if not from our taxes? More taxes?
Hey Joe, take your hand out from my pocket please and go begging to your own faithful whoever these may be.
I had the impression that up to a few months ago, the PN were always publishing their accounts while the MLP was happy to pay the fine and not publish thier accounts, or something like that. Is this history being re-written?
Dr. John Zammit
Feb 15th 2009, 13:19
If this is implimented it means that the bigest the political party is will get richer and the smallest the party is will get purer - like what the proverb says. I think that if we have to give funds to political parties it must not depand on the size of the party because then the small parties will not have any chance. So there must be a minimum sum of for example Euros 100,000 to all the parties so that the small parties will organize their head office and have some full time employees to run the party and pay for the running of the party and then the big parties can add their collections of money they collect from time to time with other donations (from behind the back) etc. - Dr. John Zammit - Leader Alleanza Liberali www.freewebs.com/liberalalliance
fred grima
Feb 15th 2009, 11:44
Want to bet the parties shall agree on this? They agree that the MPs' pensions are not capped, they agreed on any raise in their wages etc. and we taxpayers pay for their antics.
M. Catania
Feb 15th 2009, 11:04
Funding my foot!!! This is ridiculous . I would not give a eurocent to both Nationalist and Labour. if you want money, go and earn it but not from my tax money.
Help the disabled to integrate them into society or increase funding to cultural and sporting activities if there is money to spare but not to political parties.
Are you serious Partit Laburista???
P Debono
Feb 15th 2009, 10:03
Yet another tax for one of Europe's highest taxed countries.
Way to go Labour. First the Guantanamo Bay fiasco and now this. Where is this new earthquake of change you so proudly and pompously announced?
Anthony Tabone
Feb 15th 2009, 09:58
Can someone explain the logic of this 'democracy'? Why is Alternattiva Demokratika (or any other Party) left out from these discussions? Is this another PLPN ploy?
Mike Borg
Feb 15th 2009, 09:53
Yes sure give them money !! and we pay no problem , so they can remain in power , expensive cars ,mobile phones , fringe benefits etc . while i work 12 hours a day to make a living !!
Gonzi PN please remove Eur 100000+ 100000 already being donated ,
Matthew Borg
Feb 15th 2009, 09:49
What an absurd proposal - if someone wants to give money to a political party, it should be donated and not forced unto people by essentially making it a tax! This is how the 'new Labour' expect people to vote for them? With trash like this being said??
Renato J. Costigan
Feb 15th 2009, 09:31
D I S G U S T I N G
SHAME SHAME and SHAME on those who accept
this kind of proposal.
7,000,000 euros are much needed in useful PROJECTS