I fear going along the lines that the right hon. Gentleman wants me to, but the answer is yes. A fundamental problem in the politics of this country is that foreign-owned media groups are so influential. However, that is not the issue before the House at the moment.
I do not think that the article 10 point raised by the hon. Member for Huntingdon works. His argument was that there is no legitimate purpose in the restriction. If that were right, it would be equivalent to the £5 limit on third party activity in the Bowman case. I disagree with him, however. There is a legitimate purpose. It is the purpose that was put forward in the Bowman case, which is the need to protect the equality of arms between different candidates—in other words, as the Secretary of State said, to keep big money out of politics. That is a legitimate aim and the European Court of Human Rights recognises it as a legitimate aim. The Court said that the provisions in the Bowman case went beyond that and amounted to a bar on any expression by Mrs. Bowman at all. That cannot possibly be the case with this proposal, because, first, it applies only to donations and, secondly, it applies only to donations of more than £7,500.
Political Parties and Elections Bill
Proceeding contribution from
David Howarth
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 13 July 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Political Parties and Elections Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
496 c78 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:45:54 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_577107
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_577107
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_577107