-
-
I just told you why it matters, because it influences the research in favour of the views of the organisation supplying the funding. Wouldn't you rather that the research and articles produced by a "non-partisan" organisation were funded by an equally "non-partisan" sponsor?
-
What do you mean by partisan? It's important because some would argue that ostensibly 'non-partisan organisations' and sponsors are also influenced by those 'who fund them' or who will be responsible for deciding about their continued access to funds. (Not a reductio ad absurdum)
-
I used the word because that's the word that they themselves use on their website: "TaxPayers' Alliance | Britain's non-partisan, grassroots campaign for lower taxes and better government" - if you have issue with the usage, take it up with them, it's their claim. :)
-
Their meaning is clear: they do not align with any political party, but are guided by two policy objectives of 'lower taxes and better government'. That makes sense and as from their point of view, they can say they are not partisan. But how do you use the concept partisan?
-
"they do not align with any political party" - what if it turns out they were funded by the Conservative party? Are they still "non-partisan" then?
-
Consider that now we are raising an issue about 'some' sponsors of campaign groups -- not about the motives of campaign groups. The motives are outlined in their objectives and their actions, surely, should be judged according to them, not their sponsors. Don't you think?
-
You, like them, keep avoiding answering the question. Unless we can agree that their source of funding is potentially conflicting with their "non-partisan" statement there's no point carrying on.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I’m for transparency for *all* organisations who expect to have a seat on BBC shows such as
#bbcqt. Thanks Julia for your support.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If the EU is behind something like say a half a trillion in trade with the EU it's bad. But if somebody wants to sabotage Britain's strategic interest it doesn't matter who they are. It's just common sense isn't it. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/20/taxpayers-alliance-received-hundreds-of-thousands-in-foreign-donations … …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Seems fair to ask if a well-connected, low-tax advocacy group is in reality funded by tax dodging corporate lackeys rather than some supposed grassroots 'movement' of ordinary citizens, no? Seems a question any journalist might ask...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I disagree. All lobby groups/'think tanks' - whatever their pet subject, whatever their political slant - should have to be completely transparent about funding. If they can't or won't do that the obvious questions are 'Why not?' and 'What are the hiding?'.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
