Ministers are being urged by a coalition of civil society groups to cap political donations and ban cryptocurrency funding as part of planned reforms to election law, warning that the current system is undermining public trust in democracy.
Nineteen organisations, including the Electoral Reform Society, Transparency International UK, Spotlight on Corruption and Unlock Democracy, said unlimited donations from wealthy individuals allow a small number of people to exert “outsized” influence over politics and risk eroding confidence in the fairness of elections.
The intervention comes ahead of a forthcoming elections bill, expected to include a proposal to lower the voting age to 16 and to tighten aspects of political finance rules. Campaigners argue that changes to who can vote should be matched by reforms to how parties are funded and how elections are regulated.
Among the coalition’s key demands is a UK wide cap on donations. The groups have pointed to previous proposals for a £100,000 limit, arguing that a clear ceiling would reduce reliance on a handful of major donors and make parties more accountable to voters rather than benefactors.
They also want a ban on cryptocurrency donations, saying digital assets can make it harder to trace the original source of funds and can heighten concerns about money entering British politics without adequate scrutiny. While political donations must come from “permissible donors” under existing rules, the organisations argue that the methods of payment and the complexity of financial structures can still create vulnerabilities.
Pressure for a tougher approach has increased since Reform UK received a £9m donation from cryptocurrency investor Christopher Harborne, one of the largest single political donations in British history. The donation, reported earlier this month, intensified debate about whether current safeguards are sufficient, particularly when large sums are provided by a small number of individuals.
Under the current framework, political donations are not capped, provided they come from permissible sources such as UK-registered individuals or organisations. Critics say this leaves parties heavily reliant on wealthy backers, even if the donations are technically lawful. Transparency International has previously highlighted how concentrated political giving has become, including findings that in 2023 two-thirds of all political donations came from just 19 individuals.
The coalition also called for automatic voter registration, arguing that the current system places too much responsibility on individuals to take active steps to enrol, potentially excluding eligible voters and reducing participation. They say automatic registration would modernise the electoral process and help ensure the voter roll is more complete and accurate.
Another central demand is for the government to restore the full independence of the Electoral Commission, the watchdog responsible for regulating political finance and overseeing elections. Campaigners have criticised changes introduced under Boris Johnson’s government in 2022 that gave ministers greater influence over the commission’s priorities, arguing this weakens confidence that rules are enforced impartially.
Vijay Rangarajan, the commission’s chief executive, has previously warned against governments being able to “instruct the people who are trying to referee [their] re-election”, a concern repeatedly raised by democracy campaigners since the oversight changes were made.
Support for strengthening the commission appears broad, with polling cited by campaigners suggesting 60% to 70% of voters back restoring its independence, including a majority of Reform UK voters.
Calls for tighter controls on political finance are not new in the UK, following repeated controversies over “cash-for-access” and “cash-for-honours” allegations over the past two decades. However, attempts to reform donations have often stalled amid disagreement between parties over where limits should be set and how to prevent unintended consequences, such as pushing money into less transparent channels.
The civil society coalition argues that doing nothing carries greater risks, pointing to declining public trust and the perception that politics is overly influenced by a small number of wealthy donors. They say a donations cap, a ban on crypto funding and stronger enforcement powers for an independent regulator would provide a clearer, more transparent system.
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!