followers 2 popularity
following 4

followers  view all

following  view all

giannamiller is not in any groups

Cheat Your Way Thin Review - Funding parties: the Law and Fraud

Jun 16th 2012 at 12:19 AM

This week in Parliament have introduced restrictive budgets of our recent history and one of the elements is also cut, how could it be otherwise, to fund the allocation to political parties. The amount was increased from € 126,850,430 in 2011 to € 110,376,012 earmarked for this year, a decrease of 12.7 percent. Be a significant reduction is not enough, let alone appreciated, then, the average reduction in ministerial positions at 17%. With regard to the financing of political parties can say, more than ever that all laws have a loophole. I could not be any different if I responsible for deciding how I will collect each year probably my checking account would have been healthier. Especially when the money comes at the expense of others. Some appear to be few and far different, judge for yourself.

The fact is that after over thirty years of democracy, political financing remains controversial and difficult to integrate. Some believe that we can not fund them through our taxes and who thinks, however, that private funding will only lead to corruption and bribery. But what is the funding of political parties in Spain?

Cheat Your Way Thin Review product: In our country there is a mixed model of public and private resources through organ Law 8/2007 of 4 July, on the financing of political parties regulated. The idea is to encourage the state, the role of political parties as representatives of society, without a hostage of the company and at the same time they pave not the way for this to be overloaded to the public treasury.

Public funding
Government grants are mandatory, annual, unconditional and payable by the state budget. These are shared only between the parties represented in parliament. Third, the number of seats each party in the last elections and distributes the remaining two-thirds of the number of votes won. This assignment must be an additional amount for the cost of adding security games.

What can the private financing various origins. On the one hand, the contributions of members, members and supporters. You have to pay their contributions in bank accounts opened for this purpose and can not be anonymous. As the number of members, the political parties in Spain and meet growth failure of these contributions is not a fifth of their income.

Another source of income is donations. You must be registered and can be in cash or in kind. Ban donations from corporations or public companies and private companies with existing contracts with the government or the majority of public companies. Can not be more than € 100,000 donors per year, except in the case of a donation of a property. You can also receive bequests are always well documented.

The tax benefits of the parties can in some way, another source of funding from the state budget and the autonomous communities, should be considered because they represent significant savings. The political benefit from special treatment in the corporate tax exemptions and other taxes such as VAT and the transfer and stamp duties.

No reports since 2006
It is in this context that our leaders have the Organic Law 4/2007, given to fund their own parties. The theory is not bad, but we go into practice, or numbers. This is where we find the problem. The last official report of the Court from the year 2010 and deals with accounts, hanged, 2006. The reason? Unfathomable as the Lord's purposes. The parties are obliged to prepare their annual accounts to the court deadline of 31 June this year, deliver and publish in the second half. However, there are no reports of the years 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010, and should be published. As these figures six years later, the law went into effect that we mentioned earlier is not the time to stop them, that's odd, can follow the link, we have taken into account. Cheat The only exception to this general UPyD darkness, so that we can see all your accounts on your website. Currently before the Parliament Act, which reduced by 20% the amount of subsidies, which corresponds to the increase in these targets since 2007, aimed to reform.

The first conclusion that is a pity that in a democratic country is the lack of information about the fate of our taxes, has received on the one hand, and the origin of the money from the other parties.

With regard to public subsidies, if they should exist, it has put a spotlight on the distribution system. It seems clear that we are the first filter in the act of obtaining representation made. Otherwise it would be open to a variety of parties formed, and even granting the parties as a "subsidiary" of another for the greater part of the cake made to obtain. The problem is this, is that it prevents the emergence of new formations, but like everything in life, may have to pay for sins. Perhaps one option would be to provide basic grants to organizations, the required number of signatures to ensure the social support and general interest can. In view of the current system of distribution is obvious that the advantages of the larger parties are increasing differences. The more votes and seats to get more subsidies, more votes and seats have to win in the future. One solution would be the same amount of all parties represented in parliament and an additional amount to be incurred depending on how many constituencies. This reduces the total costs and would ensure greater equality.

Brown spots
What the private financing and the limited data we can say that sticking with the 2007 Act has in our system of financing political parties more light than before the ban, for example, are anonymous donations, but shadows still important.

We mentioned that a company with existing contracts with the administration can not give money to a party, but nothing is said that in the future, the company that your donation can not access to procurement markets. There should be a period to be participating in the dispenser in public tenders. This would increase transparency in the system, but it probably would mean a drastic reduction in donations. On the other hand, would be controlled, and not done, or to related parties in connection with a donation. In addition, foundations and associations related to the games is no legal restriction in practice, it is easy to violate the rule through them.

Please to comment

sign in

Remember Me

New to IM faceplate? join free!

Lost Password? click here