According to Veling, the reason for the amendment is not “because there are accidents”. “It has a more general, more principled background. Parties are part of society and the government obviously shouldn’t be involved, but at the same time these parties are extremely important in shaping our democracy,’ says Veling.
‘They have a crucial place and so you have to make sure it’s transparent, there’s a level playing field and there’s no improper influence. At the time (when Veling headed the advisory committee on party financing, ed) we thought that local parties should also receive a subsidy. If you don’t give a subsidy and you bind them to all kinds of rules to receive donations, then you are asking for difficulties, as has happened here in the city councils.’
Irregular playing field
In the years leading up to 2018, according to Veling, it was not often that large sums were donated. ‘So we thought, we’ll go with it. But the House of Representatives now believes the playing field is leveled with amounts from tons to a million, which they consider undesirable. I can imagine something about that.’
Understanding
He continues: “Things happen that shouldn’t. But I also want to keep it proportionate, we don’t live in a society and a nation where people with big money can determine the outcome of elections. This is also why we work on it. We don’t want a system where elections are preceded by some kind of competition to see who will bring in the most money. Then the elections don’t determine it, but in advance, and based on who raises the most money, what will happen. It feels like it’s happening in America and we definitely don’t want that.’ On the other hand, Veling shades, there’s nothing wrong with supporting a party if you find it supportive. “As long as it’s transparent, it shouldn’t get too crazy.”