Title: Desirability of Regulating Political Parties
Abstract: As such, they should not be subjected to government regulation. The scrutiny of their behaviour is a matter for their members and the electorate should only assess the parties' public performance. However, and more recently, the parties have developed into professional machines with head offices and organisers, and they receive funds from the taxpayer and from sources other than their members. In these regards, the parties have a degree of freedom from the membership by way of professional advice and non-member sources of funds. Furthermore, the parties' status has changed to the point where their history ideological, a large membership presence in the electorate and self-supporting belies their current role. The present parties are brand names with a nominal membership presence in the electorate, where the market for political activism has shifted to interest groups and where they are heavily supported by the state. For example, Gary Gray (1997), the former national Secretary of the Australian Labor Party, estimates a third of all funds available to the ALP comes from taxpayers. The new status of registered political parties is semi-public. Ideally, then, they should be beholden to the public, both electorally and in a more direct proprietorial way, as well as to their membership. The issue is to decide the regulatory mix that would preserve free political association and satisfy the taxpayer's investment.