Strengthening democracy

One person, one vote?

In a democracy, every adult's vote is meant to count equally. In practice, influence over what governments do isn't shared out so evenly.

Our Extreme Wealth Line explainer asks a key question: at what point does private wealth become public power? This page looks at what could be done about it, and at other ways to make democracy work better for everyone.

How wealth can shape politics

Concentrated wealth can influence politics in three main ways.

When the rules fall short

These cases come from different parties and different decades. That's the point: the weaknesses are in the system, not just one party.

What's already changing?

The Representation of the People Bill, introduced in 2026 and still going through Parliament [7], would:

• Give 16- and 17-year-olds the vote in all UK elections, as Scotland and Wales already do for their own elections.
• Tighten rules on company donations, so companies must show a genuine connection to the UK.
• Introduce "Know Your Donor" checks and tighter rules for unincorporated associations.
• Ban donations in cryptocurrency, covering any made from 25 March 2026. [8]
• Cap donations from British citizens living abroad at £100,000 a year. [8]
• Raise the maximum fine the Electoral Commission can issue to £500,000.

Campaigners have welcomed many of these changes but argue they don't go far enough. [9] Apart from the planned limit on donations from British citizens living abroad, there would still be no general cap on how much one donor can give. [1]

Separately, the government has asked the Electoral Commission to review election spending limits, which were raised by 80% in 2023. [2]

Reducing the influence of money

These are the reforms that come up most often in the debate.

1. Cap donations

   The idea

   Limit how much any person or organisation can give to a party each year. Canada caps donations from individuals at a modest level and bans them from companies and unions altogether. [10]

   Why it might help

   Parties would no longer depend on a handful of very rich backers, and no single donor could expect special treatment.

   The hard question

   Parties would lose income. Should trade union donations be capped too, and where would the replacement money come from?

2. More public funding for parties

   The idea

   Give parties public money based on their votes or members, or match small donations from ordinary supporters. Germany funds parties this way [11], and UK opposition parties already receive some public money for their work in Parliament.

   Why it might help

   Parties would have a reason to win support from many small donors rather than a few large ones.

   The hard question

   Taxpayers might end up funding parties they strongly oppose. Would it also make life harder for new parties?

3. Tighter lobbying rules

   The idea

   Require all professional lobbyists to register, publish ministers' meetings promptly, and give real powers to the committee that vets former ministers' new jobs.

   Why it might help

   The public could see who is trying to influence decisions, and the "revolving door" between government and business would be harder to exploit.

   The hard question

   Charities and community groups lobby too. How do you increase transparency without burying them in paperwork?

4. Limit campaign spending

   The idea

   Lower the limits on election spending, and make sure they properly cover online advertising and campaign groups outside the parties. [12]

   Why it might help

   Elections would be won on ideas and arguments, not on who has the biggest budget.

   The hard question

   Campaigners argue spending limits restrict their right to make their case. Where is the line between fair rules and free speech?

How we vote

The voting system decides how votes turn into seats. UK general elections use first past the post: in each constituency, the candidate with the most votes wins, even without a majority.

Other countries, and other parts of the UK, use different systems. Here they are, from least to most proportional.

1. First past the post

   Used for UK general elections. It's simple, every area has one MP, and it usually produces a single-party government. But seats can be very different from votes, and in "safe seats" many votes rarely change the result.

2. Preferential (ranked) voting

   Used for Australia's House of Representatives. Voters number candidates in order of preference. If nobody wins over half the first choices, the last-placed candidate drops out and their votes pass to the next preference, until someone has a majority. Each area keeps one representative, but overall results aren't proportional. The UK rejected a version of this, the Alternative Vote, in a 2011 referendum, by 68% to 32%. [14]

3. Mixed systems

   Used for the Scottish Parliament, and in Germany and New Zealand. Voters choose a local representative and a party. Extra seats are then added so each party's total roughly matches its share of the vote.

4. Single transferable vote

   Used in Ireland, the Northern Ireland Assembly, Scottish council elections and Australia's Senate. Larger areas elect several representatives, and voters rank candidates in order. Results are proportional, and voters can choose between candidates from the same party.

5. Party list

   Used across much of Europe, and by Wales for its 2026 Senedd election. [15] Voters choose a party, and seats are shared out in proportion to votes. It's the most proportional system, but weakens the link between voters and a named local representative.

Supporters of proportional systems say every vote should count equally. Supporters of first past the post say it gives clear results, strong local links and lets voters remove a government cleanly. Proportional systems often lead to coalitions, which some see as healthy compromise and others as messy and unstable.

Getting more people involved

A democracy is stronger when more people take part. These ideas aim to widen participation.

Other ways to strengthen democracy

Some reforms look beyond elections to how power is held and checked.

1. Reform the House of Lords

   The Lords is one of the largest law-making chambers in the world, and none of its members are elected. Options range from a smaller chamber to a fully elected one.

2. Protect media plurality

   Rules on media ownership, and support for local and independent journalism, could help make sure no single owner or platform dominates what people read and see.

3. Independent watchdogs

   Bodies like the Electoral Commission need to be free from government control to do their job. Since 2022, the government has been able to issue the Commission with a "strategy and policy statement", a power the Commission opposed. Campaigners want it removed, but the Representation of the People Bill, as introduced, kept it. [9]

4. Move power closer to people

   The UK is one of the most centralised countries in Europe. Giving more powers and funding to councils and regional mayors could let communities make more of their own decisions.

What are the challenges?

1. Free speech

   The problem

   Limits on donations and spending can be seen as limits on people's right to support causes they believe in.

   A possible fix

   Set limits high enough to allow real campaigning, apply them equally to everyone, and focus on transparency so voters can see who is paying.

2. Money finds a way

   The problem

   When one route is closed, money often flows through another. In the US, court rulings in 2010 led to "super PACs", which can raise and spend unlimited sums supporting candidates. [19]

   A possible fix

   Rules that cover campaign groups as well as parties, backed by strong enforcement and fines big enough to deter.

3. Unions and business

   The problem

   Different parties rely on different funders, so any cap is likely to hit some parties harder than others. Cross-party talks on a £50,000 donation cap broke down in 2007 without agreement. [20]

   A possible fix

   Treat all large donors consistently, and seek cross-party agreement through an independent review rather than one party imposing rules on another.

4. Politicians marking their own homework

   The problem

   The people who decide the rules are the ones who won under them, so they have little reason to change them.

   A possible fix

   Give decisions on electoral reform to independent commissions, citizens' assemblies or referendums.

5. Stability under new voting systems

   The problem

   Proportional systems can lead to long coalition negotiations. After its 2010 election, Belgium took 541 days to form a new government. [21]

   A possible fix

   Design features like Germany's 5% minimum vote for a party to win list seats, which reduces the number of very small parties.

The arguments at a glance

Sources and further reading

These sources support the facts and examples on this page. They explain the evidence and the policy options, but they don't all endorse the ideas discussed here.

1. The Week: The rise of the political mega-donor — the absence of a general limit on donations, and the debate over capping them.
2. GOV.UK: Letter to the Electoral Commission on spending limits (August 2026) — spending at the 2024 election and the 2023 rise in spending limits.
3. Press Gazette: Who owns the news? (2023) — Media Reform Coalition findings on newspaper ownership.
4. GrandPrix.com: Bernie gets his money back (1997) — the return of the Ecclestone donation.
5. Civil Service World: Officials and ministers 'acted with integrity' when lobbied by Cameron (2021) — the Treasury Committee's findings on Greensill and the lobbying rules.
6. Committee on Standards in Public Life: Regulating Election Finance (2021) — weaknesses in donation rules, including unincorporated associations.
7. GOV.UK: Tougher rules on political interference to keep UK elections secure (2026) — what the Representation of the People Bill contains.
8. GOV.UK: Letter to political parties on foreign financial interference (March 2026) — planned amendments to cap donations from overseas electors and ban donations in cryptoassets.
9. Spotlight on Corruption: New Representation of the People Bill – still far to go to protect UK democracy (2026) — a campaign group's assessment of the Bill, including the Electoral Commission's independence.
10. The Canadian Encyclopedia: Political party financing in Canada — Canada's limits on donations and its ban on company and union donations.
11. Federal Returning Officer (Germany): State financing of parties — how German parties receive public funding linked to votes, members and donations.
12. Institute for Government: How is election spending regulated in the UK? — how spending limits work for parties, candidates and campaigners.
13. Wikipedia: Results breakdown of the 2024 UK general election — vote and seat shares compiled from the official results.
14. Ealing Council: UK referendum 2011 — the national result of the Alternative Vote referendum.
15. Senedd Research: Closed lists and D'Hondt – how are seats allocated? (2026) — how Wales's new voting system works.
16. Australian Electoral Commission: Compulsory voting — how and why Australia made voting compulsory.
17. Electoral Commission: Report on the accuracy and completeness of the electoral registers (2023) — how many people are missing from, or incorrectly listed on, the registers.
18. Hansard Society: Bridging representative and direct democracy – Ireland's citizens' assemblies (2018) — how Ireland's assemblies worked and what they led to.
19. Congressional Research Service: PACs and Super PACs in Federal Election Campaigns — how super PACs emerged after the 2010 court rulings.
20. Full Fact: Party funding – an imagined consensus? — the Hayden Phillips proposals and why cross-party talks failed.
21. Guinness World Records: Longest time without a government in peacetime — Belgium's 541-day government formation after the 2010 election.