Donor row exposes fund dilemma

SIMON Lee’s article on the sourness created by the new spat over the treatment of large donors to party funds (We’re all in this together? Not until Cameron regains trust on donations, Yorkshire Post, March 27) fails to deal with the two key objections of principle to public funding.

First, every formula for determining the figure to go to each party from public funds has to be connected to the votes cast for them at the previous general election. As such it is a huge benefit to the government party, entrenches the existing party structure and is a great inhibition to new or emergent parties.

Second, it reduces the need to recruit members and therefore actually accelerates the decline in political participation. It would be far better to have a system which encourages recruitment, such as giving pound-for-pound for sums donated to parties up to a set limit and making such political donations tax deductible on the ground that supporting politics is a commendable public benefit.

It would also be possible to limit party funding to the research and policy making functions of parties, leaving them to fund promotion and campaigning out of their own fund-raising.

From: Max Nottingham, St Faith’s Street, Lincoln.

ON Tory fund-raising, it would be less devious if businessmen just sent a note saying:

“Prime Minister, £250,000 cheque enclosed. Looking forward to seeing you and your lovely wife soon. Martini and lemonade, no ice.”

We are certainly not all in this one together.

From: Nick Martinek, Briarlyn Road, Huddersfield.

DAVID Cameron’s approach as Prime Minister seems very reminiscent of the 1970s Tory europhile PM, Sir Edward Heath, yet he lacks Sir Edward’s intellect. So for a long time I have considered David Cameron to be ‘Heath-without-brains’. Nothing Mr Cameron has done in the last two years makes me change my mind.

Just one example: Mr Cameron has increased the UK government’s spend on foreign aid when evidence shows it is counter-productive for the recipient nation, fostering corruption; and when India, for one, was telling him that they did not want the £280m a year we have been giving them.

At the same time, he sold our defence Harrier fighter planes to the USA’s Marine Corps (USMC) for a paltry £112m.

If we had cut the aid to India when they asked us to do so, the money saved would have been sufficient to retain the two existing aircraft carriers and their complement of Harriers. The consequence of Mr Cameron’s cupidity is that he has catastrophically reduced our defence capability to please a few middle class Labour voters and aid-junkies, who would never vote for him anyway.

Festival idea was not first

From: David Nortcliffe, Cobden Terrace, Halifax .

MAY I comment on the article by Sarah Freeman (Yorkshire Post, March 26) regarding walking festivals. She writes that “...when Hay on Wye launched its first book event in 1998 it provided a blueprint which became much copied”. She goes on to tell us that what “happened to books is happening to walking”.

Not quite right, I fear. The first walking festival in England (as proclaimed by Great Outdoors magazine at the time) was the Calderdale Walking Festival organised by the district council here in 1997.

That festival continued annually for seven or eigjt years and was then subsumed into a larger grouping of authorities which now organises the current series of South Pennine Walk & Ride Festivals. I have always wondered if Hay on Wye actually copied the idea for their Festival in 1998 from Calderdale.

Bank security held to account

From: MP Fitzgerald, The Crescent, Northallerton.

IT is about a year now since I wrote to the Yorkshire Post concerning the Santander Bank, and nothing has changed as far as their strict security to prevent fraud and theft is concerned.

They still have my money and will not allow me access to it as I do not comply with their security, which says that to get a withdrawal, a passport and driving licence must be shown.

I was therefore amazed to hear that Owen Danter, a branch manager at Beverley in East Yorkshire, was able to access and steal money from their customers’ accounts (Yorkshire Post, March 27).

It is good to know that the person has been caught, but I would like to know if a customer cannot access their own money, then how can someone else do it?

I have had letters explaining their prevention of theft security measures, and they blocked my card PIN because I cannot prove my identity; so to prevent me from drawing cash, they print “no guarantee” on their cheques so no shops will accept them.

They will not allow me to transfer money to another bank.

On the TV news about the theft, the news reader said the bank were “stepping up” security. How much harder can it get, I wonder?

I am nearly 69 years old and have no intention of starting to drive, or go abroad so applying for a passport or licence is out of the question.