Electoral Finance

A big deal recently has been made out of the Electoral Finance ACT (2007) (EFA). As an unregistered party it does not affect the DAFT Party just yet, but this does not mean that we do not have a view on it. The DAFT Party acknowledges the need to limit spending by political parties, and the transparency of where the funding can come from, and how people can advertise. This is why a DAFT government would scrap the EFA and replace it with the Party Expenditure Act (PEA).

The PEA would regulate all party expenditure on election costs. Donations would no long be given to the party’s themselves, but would be placed into a DAFT bank account for safe keeping until the divvy up time comes. All parties would pay into this fund – called the Saving Together Deposit (STD) – and all funding from the state that traditionally has been given out to fund election campaigns would also be diverted straight into this account.

A committee would be formed of top ranking scholars, statesmen and women, and professional comedians called the Party Expenditure National Inquiry Service (PENIS). PENIS would use a complex series of algebraic equations to allocate the money from the STD to all parties.

Fig. 83) A sample of the 1st page of the equation that will be used by PENIS to figure out how to allocate the STD

Factors that would effect how much funding a party gets:

  • The weather and moon cycles
  • How many Google hits the party’s home page receives
  • The number of vowels in all the members names
  • What the members of PENIS had for breakfast

Every year the factors would change slightly so that rigging cannot happen. Third parties, student parties, drum and bass parties and fancy dress parties would also be able to apply to PENIS for funding.

This is a much fairer system of electoral finance than we currently have. It would rule out the problem of anonymous donors because donors would have to send cheques made out the DAFT Party. All party’s have a fair chance of getting an equitable distribution of the STD. Party secretaries would only have to put their name and address on advertising if they were lonely. Because the system is seen over by scholars, states-people and comedians we would have no worries the fairness of distribution.

PEA would also stop us from having to define what an election advertisement actually is, by making all advertising for or against a political part illegal in the 3 years prior to an election.

This would clause would allow political parties to concentrate on what they do best, that is, entertain us plebs by pretending they can trick us into voting for them.



Tags: , , , , , ,

2 Responses to “Electoral Finance”

  1. Kiwiblog » Blog Archive » Daft’s EFA Amendment Says:

    […] DAFT Party has agreed with Peter Dunne that the Electoral Finance Act needs amending, and they have proposed the above formula to simplify it in relation to party spending […]

  2. Pete Says:

    Nice one, finally a party that provides some clarity for drum and bass party funding. I think I’ll have to tick DAFT so I can interact with PENIS.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: