Where does the money actually come from then? Does that mean that the candidate with the most money has the best chance of winning the election?
Not the most money salemoorgirl, but the candidate with the most resources should have the best chance of winning, at least in theory.
All candidates are allowed the same monetary limit. Which is based on an equation against the number of electorate in any given ward. If my memory is good each candidate is allowed a maximum £740 PLUS 6pence for each member of the electorate. In the case of Marple North, it amounts to just under £1,300 maximum for each candidate. Where does the money come from? If you take the David and Goliath situation that exists in the ward with the libdems being Goliath and me being David. The candidate's money comes from party funds whereas mine comes out of my own pocket. Councillors also make financial contributions, on a percentage basis to their party's from the councillors allowances they get from the tax payer.
As well as this Goliath has approaching 200 local members whereas David has but a handful of volunteers. So when it comes to all the activities associated with elections; canvassing, putting posters up, writing/delivering leaflets etc, Goliath has a queue of people fighting each other for the task whereas I usually have to do it myself.
So yes the libdems in theory should easily win Marple North. Then again we all know what happened to Goliath.