Proceeding contribution from Bob Spink (Independent (affiliation)) in the House of Commons on Monday, 2 March 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Political Parties and Elections Bill.

Political Parties and Elections Bill

The hon. Gentleman is right to say that public perception is the acid test. I tend to support the direction of new clause 1, provided that it is linked to new clause 8, as he explained it was. It achieves the balance for which Labour Front Benchers called in an earlier debate. On the Hayden Phillips spending-caps pillar, can the hon. Gentleman advise the House? If there were a £50,000 limit, except for trade unions in certain circumstances, what would that give the main political parties? Has he done any research on that? I congratulate him on the way in which he has brought the debate forward; it is excellent.

Secondary information

Type: Proceeding contribution
Reference: 488 c620
Session: 2008-09
Chamber / Committee: House of Commons chamber
Subjects: Disclosure of information Data protection Candidates Finance Elections Donors Expenditure Electoral Commission Electoral register Increases Gifts and endowments Political parties Public finance Registration Standards Trade unions Electoral registration officers
Legislation: Political Parties and Elections Bill 2007-08 to 2008-09
Link: View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk

Political Parties and Elections Bill

Secondary information

Librarians' tools