here is what I found on UK party funding; hope this helps

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6065322.stm

How are parties funded?

All parties receive membership subs. But that is not enough to pay for modern campaigning - especially with the general decline in membership over recent decades. The Conservatives rely mainly on donations from individuals and companies. Labour also receives these, but a large chunk of its income comes from trade unions. Lib Dem coffers have also been boosted by large donations in recent years.

So, the UK doesn't have state funding for parties, then?

Actually, yes it does. Opposition parties receive money to pay for administration and other costs. Otherwise, the ruling party - with its access to the instruments of government, such as the civil service - would have an unfair advantage, it is argued. In the second quarter of 2006, the Tories were given £1.15m by the state and the Lib Dems got £456,000.

How open is the whole funding process?

Under rules drawn up by the current government, donations worth £5,000 or more to national parties have to be declared, as well as those worth £2,000 or more to local associations.

What was the inquiry into party funding?

An inquiry, run by the former senior civil servant Sir Hayden Phillips, was set up in March 2006 to come up with proposals for reform. It reported a year later.

What did Sir Hayden recommend?

He recommended capping spending for political campaigns as well as capping individual donations. He also suggested increasing state funding by £25m a year, linked to public support - he proposed that eligible parties receive 50p each year for every vote cast for them in the most recent General Election and 25p for every vote in the most recent ballots for the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and European Parliament. He also recommended cutting spending by the largest parties between elections by £20m each;

And what do the parties themselves want?

Labour wants a small increase in state funding, stringent caps on spending and voluntary caps to be placed on donations by each party. The Tories are calling for a large increase in state funding for all parties with more than two Commons seats, a cap of £50,000 on all donations, the phasing out of corporate donations - including from trade unions, and tax relief for donations. The Lib Dems want limited state funding for parties, national caps on annual donations and a lower cap on general election spending.

While it isn’t (exactly) campaigning, I personally suspect that one of the reasons why the participation rate in Canada has dropped below 60% is because of political over-exposure. After a series of very short parliaments due to minority governments mixed in with some provincial political and municipal campaigns most Canadians are really tired of politics, and they just want the people they elected to figure out the “Small Stuff” on their own; and to only bother them when something big or important happens.

With that in mind, a week doesn’t go by without the government or one of the opposition parties playing politics with a small issue in an effort to try to win points with the electorate. While they are all successful in the short run, in the long run their efforts counter each other out; and they just turn off more and more voters.

Depends which party you're talking about. Republicans make me laugh. I didn't realize they were a real party till George W. Bush actually messed up the economy and almost every relationship with any important country.

Huh, damn...

and here I thought every major party was given a budget and then that was it.  That's the kind of system I want... rather then a voluntary cap.

Well like anything, overexposure is a bad thing. I think we are all hearing about Tiger Woods in the golf world or in the case of Nancy Grace, the exploitation of awful events in local setting for her own bitching about her crazy agenda. Problem with overexposure is not only annoying those who pay attention, but it leads to apathy. Unfortunately in our time and day with such a pervasive media, it comes with the territory. With 24 hour cable networks, internet updated more times in one second than politician's opinions, and the ability for everyday people to have their own content for the world to view there will be overexposure for any event.

So it's not surprising people will feel that way especially towards a political party which even before the mass media would get numerous amounts of attention. In America Bush and Obama have been the first presidents to really undergo this 24 hour cable and unlimited internet media world and I think we have seen how that has played out. I personally think it is turning away my generation because aside from the easily corrupted by the older generation, most are just tired of hearing about the things every second. I know numerous amounts of friends who were tired of the health care debate and having to respond to the same questions and same arguments every day.

So yes the political party campaigns that take advantage of this are definitely to blame, but I think most of the blame rests on the expansion of media in the 21st century. Even worse from it, in my opinion, is the ability for anti-intellectualism and polarization to spread from it. And really I think that's what makes these politics and agendas come off as exacerbating and makes my generation apathetic about it: this sense anti-intellectualism and forced polarization being spread through these mass media outlets that just turn the younger generation away.

sounds good to me

Conservatives/Republicans are all about making the rich richer and keeping the poor people poor. Right wing parties only care about protecting the rich people and making them richer. Tax breaks for the rich/middle class. Punish the poor people with extreme measures.

Conservatives tend to have a God and hard work philosophy on life. Poor people are being punished by God because they are lazy and chose to be poor.

Conservative politics is a very narrow view of the world. Conservatives/Republicans often start wars which they can not win. Hello Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan wars and countless other wars started by right wing administrations.

Your post is even more erroneous than your username.

Those are some pretty big generalisations. Especially when Labour, the supposed left-wing party have done more to make the poor poorer, have increased taxes on everyone, and have overseen an era of massive banker bonuses.

For politicians, campaigning is like Dakka - you can nevar haf enuff.

Fortunately nobody reasonable agrees with them.