Comments on: Open Primaries: Who pays? http://blog.openupnow.org/2009/10/27/open-primaries-who-pays/ Just another WordPress weblog Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:44:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Edward Devoy http://blog.openupnow.org/2009/10/27/open-primaries-who-pays/comment-page-1/#comment-59 Edward Devoy Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:08:11 +0000 http://blog.openupnow.org/?p=160#comment-59 The public pays for elections already, it will just be a matter of working out the costing for open primaries, maybe someone could look at how it is done in other countries and base it on the best model. My only concern is the payment which is presently £500 to put yourself forward as a candidate for MP. This cost is easily paid for by an existing party and for someone with an adequate income, but for some such as myself who has had to rely on benefits for far longer than I prefer to remember, the cost is prohibitive. What could be done about this situation? ,it deters people who may make excellent candidates from even trying. The public pays for elections already, it will just be a matter of working out the costing for open primaries, maybe someone could look at how it is done in other countries and base it on the best model.
My only concern is the payment which is presently £500 to put yourself forward as a candidate for MP. This cost is easily paid for by an existing party and for someone with an adequate income, but for some such as myself who has had to rely on benefits for far longer than I prefer to remember, the cost is prohibitive. What could be done about this situation? ,it deters people who may make excellent candidates from even trying.

]]> By: James Graham http://blog.openupnow.org/2009/10/27/open-primaries-who-pays/comment-page-1/#comment-34 James Graham Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:32:36 +0000 http://blog.openupnow.org/?p=160#comment-34 Since you appear to have based your £20m figure on my blog post, allow me to clarify: £10m per party is not my "conservative" estimate. £20m per party is conservative. £10m per party is my "be nice to Open Up" estimate by simply assuming that it would be possible to halve all the costs <em>by magic</em>. I see that in return you are assuming that my party, the Lib Dems, would have to stump up the bill ourselves while Labour and the Tories got a £10m handout. That isn't very nice. Assuming for a second that a party which got a fifth of the national vote was eligible however, that would make the "conservative" estimate £60m not £20m. If you are calling for the state to pay for this, then you need rather more specific costs than that, and you should be more up front about it. And with an election in May, you are running out of time. Since you appear to have based your £20m figure on my blog post, allow me to clarify: £10m per party is not my “conservative” estimate. £20m per party is conservative. £10m per party is my “be nice to Open Up” estimate by simply assuming that it would be possible to halve all the costs by magic. I see that in return you are assuming that my party, the Lib Dems, would have to stump up the bill ourselves while Labour and the Tories got a £10m handout. That isn’t very nice.

Assuming for a second that a party which got a fifth of the national vote was eligible however, that would make the “conservative” estimate £60m not £20m.

If you are calling for the state to pay for this, then you need rather more specific costs than that, and you should be more up front about it. And with an election in May, you are running out of time.

]]>