The review of funding political parties

Current expenditure limits - how much can political parties spend to get your vote?

According to Electoral Commission figures, at the last General Election the three main parties taken together spent in total over £15 million on advertising, over £8 million on unsolicited material sent to electors, over £3 million on market research/canvassing, and over £4 million on rallies and other events.

National campaign expenditure limits - roughly £19m per party

To get your vote at a General Election, parties can spend £30,000 per constituency, multiplied by the number of seats contested. This works out as approximately £19m for the larger parties, depending on the number of seats contested (not even the largest parties contest all seats, for example seats in Northern Ireland).

Generally, money spent on campaigning nationally, such as national billboard campaigns, etc, and publicity saying "vote for the party" counts as national expenditure, no matter where it takes place or where it is delivered.

At General Elections this spending is regulated for the 365 day period before the date of the poll, even though the start date is unknown at that particular time.

Back to top

Local candidate limits - on average £10,000 to £13,000 per candidate

To get your vote, a candidate at a General Election can spend around £10,000 to £13,000, depending on the number of people who can vote in each constituency. This is separate to what parties can spend.

Generally, publicity which says "vote for a particular candidate", or "vote for the party in this seat or region", counts as local expenditure.

This spending is regulated from the date of the dissolution of Parliament, typically five to six weeks before the date of the poll.

Back to top

Criticisms of the current situation

At national level the criticism is that there is an 'arms race', that is, that parties feel they have to compete in spending levels, and not just on policies. There is also the argument that a lot of money is spent on advertising and the like, and does not represent value for money as most people tend to get their information from the media rather than directly from the political parties.

At local level it has been alleged that money has been spent at a local level before the date of the dissolution of Parliament. This money would, if it were to be spent after the dissolution of Parliament, properly fall to be recorded as local candidate's expenditure, but because it has been spent before dissolution it is not recorded as such. This means that, in theory at any rate, large sums could be spent before dissolution in marginal constituencies, which calls into question the current local candidate expenditure controls.

Another criticism that has been made is that election campaigns don't directly engage the majority of the people but only those who happen to live in marginal constituencies.

The Electoral Commission, among others, argues that the limits for national expenditure should be reduced, and those for local expenditure should be increased. They feel that such a change would encourage parties to concentrate not just on the marginal seats but to engage with the electorate in many more seats.

Back to top

Non-election year spending

It has also been argued that there should be limits not just at election times, but that there should be annual limits on what a party can spend, whether or not we are in a General Election year. This suggestion is made partly on grounds of consistency and transparency, and partly to avoid 'election' expenditure taking place before the regulated period. Such annual limits would probably need to be higher in years when there was a General Election.

Back to top

We want your views

Should the present limits on General Election expenditure - nationally and locally - be changed?


Should the national limit be reduced or increased?


Should the local limit be reduced or increased?


Do you think that parties concentrate on too much on marginal constituencies?


Should limits be placed on party expenditure annually rather than just in an election year?


Are there any other points you'd like to raise on this issue?


You are encouraged to provide your views on these questions to us by 31 July 2006.

Back to top

Page last updated: 21 Jul 2006