Government parties close to agreement over election funding limits

Tarasti: “Nobody wants to hold on to old positions”

Lauri Tarasti

print this

The parties in Finland’s coalition government are reported to be close to agreement on new rules for the financing of political campaigns of individual candidates for elected office. Helsingin Sanomat has learned that a maximum limit is to be placed on political contributions from individual donors; the ceiling is expected to be more than the EUR 15,000 that has been called for by the Centre Party and the Green League.
      The limit for campaign spending for individual candidates in Parliamentary elections is to be EUR 50,000. The spending limit for an individual parties will be one million euros in Parliamentary elections; it is the same amount that has been proposed by a majority of members on the committee election and party financing, headed by Lauri Tarasti.
     
On Monday, a working group comprising the party secretaries of the four government parties held a meeting chaired by Minister of Justice Tuija Brax (Green) to discuss the question of campaign spending limits. There were no immediate reports on the outcome of the meeting.
      Centre Party Secretary Jarmo Korhonen said that agreement was reached at the meeting "in a positive spirit".
      Taru Tujunen of the National Coalition Party said that the matter is "moving forward as planned". However, she would not go so far as to say that the parties had agreed on the exact spending limits.
     
Tarasti’s committee is meeting on Tuesday to iron out the formal wording of the proposal.
      In mid-October the committee drew up the “guidelines”, which reflected the disagreements among members of the committee. The aim of Tuesday’s meeting is to fine-tune the language of the proposal; settling the differences that remain is up to the party secretaries on Monday.
      Tarasti said on Friday that the draft that existed at that time was a “good average level” by international standards.
      “The system that has now been planned is radical because of its requirement of timely disclosure. In this we are in the front row compared with other countries”, Tarasti says.
      He also added that setting up a watertight system is very difficult.
      “There are so many different types of money taps. For instance, a newspaper can have a paid advertisement for a political candidate next to a story about the same politician. The latter of these does not qualify as election advertising, but the effects could be similar.”
      Furthermore, it is nearly impossible to figure out a way to take voluntary work into consideration when calculating campaign expenses.
     
International comparisons of election funding are made more difficult by the fact that political conditions, and financing systems differ in different countries. The Finnish system stands out; while it is a system of proportional representation, the focus of campaigning, and campaign funding, is on individual candidates.
      “Two thirds of campaign funding comes from support groups of the candidates, and the share of the parties is about a third. Elsewhere the situation is the reverse”, Tarasti says.
      Sweden is an example of a party-centred system. In Swedish elections voters primarily choose a party-based list of candidates, and not an individual candidate to vote for. Many other countries have single-member constituencies, in which the candidate gets a majority, or a plurality, of the votes, is elected.
      So what country has the most open system?
      “Theoretically, it is the United States, where even very small donations have to be disclosed, and where the money passes through campaign organisations.”
     
Tarasti’s committee is to submit its proposal on Friday next week. Tarasti acknowledges that the election campaign funding controversy which ignited in the summer has affected the outcome of the committee’s work.
      “If the committee’s proposal had been given in May, it would have been much blander. Now everyone on the committee has been strongly in favour of openness. Nobody wants to hold on to old positions.”


Previously in HS International Edition:
  Election funding causes rumblings in government (25.9.2009)
  Election funding row sparks serious discussion of dissolution of Parliament (24.9.2009)
  Restrictions on election campaign financing would be most perceptible in Greater Helsinki area (15.10.2009)
  Chair of campaign finance working group doubts effectiveness of punishment (17.6.2009)
  Government parties split on political financing (13.10.2009)

Helsingin Sanomat