Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org

azzuri · 'Our Scotland' Fossil Joined: 12 Sep 2005 Posts: 3776

see - http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2331172005

THE scale of the Scottish Tories' 2005 general election defeat was laid bare yesterday as it emerged that the party spent £1.3 million on a campaign which yielded only one MP and left it with the lowest vote share in its history.

Michael Howard, the outgoing Tory leader, authorised a 33 per cent jump in the party's campaign war chest for Scotland - four times as much as was spent by the Scottish National Party through the spring campaign.

But the SNP secured six seats, its best result since 1997, while the Tories' only reward came in the form of David Mundell, now MP for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale.

The Electoral Commission published the spending figures for the general election yesterday showing that Labour increased its overall election budget by 63 per cent, spending £17.9 million over the campaign.

With Tony Blair facing new popularity lows, the party spent £5.2 million on advertising and £2.7 million on mail-shots to voters. It ended up with the lowest share of the UK vote ever secured by a government.

In Scotland, however, Labour increased its budget by 39 per cent, to £1.53 million - more than any other party - and retained its electoral dominance by winning 43 of the 59 seats.

Yesterday, Mr Mundell said he did not consider himself a "million-pound Tory" and said the cost the party undertook was typical of campaigning for a modern political party.

"We are the main UK opposition party and there are costs associated with that when it comes to campaigning," he said. He added that the party had been shortchanged by the first-past-the-post system.

"We finished only 43,000 votes behind the SNP - we got one seat, and they had six. That is the system we all have to work with," he said.

The SNP said it had run a very focused campaign, which concentrated on seven seats, of which it won six, and it is saving its money for the 2007 Holyrood campaign.

"We're not bankrolled by unions or big business, but ran an effective campaign," said a spokesman. "What the Conservatives have to learn is that it's their message, not their budget, that is the problem in Scotland."

The SNP secured best value during the election campaign, spending only 47p for every vote it secured. The figure was 82p for the Liberal Democrats, £1.77 for Labour and £3.56 for the Scottish Conservatives.

The bill for each elected MP worked out at £32,000 for the SNP, £39,000 for the Lib Dems, £40,000 for Labour and £1.3 million for the Conservatives.

Imagine how well the SNP would do if given better campaigning funds?

_________________
"Every single person on this planet is unique. Just like everyone else..." - Random Guy in Edinburgh Pub

Possibly the funniest site in the world, 'The Daily Mash' - http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/

SLG · Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2005 4:12 pm Post subject:

IMO this just goes to further show the need for the state funding of political parties or at least to limit their budgets. In what way is it fair and democratic that the tories should be able to spend four times that of the SNP. It is a case of a small number of people disrupting the democratic process.