The fundamental question of any democracy is “who gets a say?”. How is power distributed, shared – and in whose interests does our democratic system work? Increasingly, voters sense the answer is not in theirs.

There is a strong public perception that power is exercised ‘elsewhere’ in the interests of “others”, and not in service of the communities up and down the country. Trust in politicians and political institutions has reached an all-time low. Today only 12% of people trust governments to put the interests of the nation above those of their own party. This is the lowest level since the question was first asked in 1986.

Persuading people that their voice matters is particularly difficult within a system that, frankly, doesn’t always facilitate it. We have an electoral system in which not all votes count, a parliament with more unelected representatives than elected, and a political finance system which leaves our democracy open for sale to the highest bidder.

This system has been tested to its limit in recent weeks as two billionaires have made record-breaking donations totalling £72 million to Nigel Farage‘s Reform UK. That’s eight times the previous donation record of £9 million given in a single sum by a living donor (one of the same billionaires). It is hard to fight the perception that voters’ voices are not the priority when the scales seem to be increasingly tipped towards those with the deepest pockets.

The public will understandably question what it is those individuals want for their money – and these suspicions have a corrosive effect on trust in our democracy and its institutions. A full 60% of people think that wealthy donors give money to gain influence, whilst only 6% believe it is driven by a desire to support that party. To compound this, the UK is out of step with other peer countries in not having any cap on donations to political parties. This leaves us highly exposed at a time when we are seeing ever-increasing sums of money offered to political parties.

Electoral Commission research on public trust in political finance has found that people want a system that serves the interests of voters, not donors. 93% of participants in that research agreed that donation limits, increasing public funding, closing loopholes and increasing the maximum fine for wrongdoing would help build trust in the political finance system.

The Representation of the People Bill, currently in the Lords, is a rare chance to improve the system to try to restore some of that trust. The bill already contains measures to close known political finance loopholes and has been strengthened by the recommendations of the Rycroft review into foreign interference. But to fully secure our democracy, and public faith in it, the bill must address the issue of domestic mega-donations by introducing a cap, something many MPs made a compelling case for during Report Stage in the Commons.

There are options as to where to set the limits. A £100,000 cap would align with the recently announced cap on overseas donations. However, a £50,000 cap could also be reached without recourse to public funding. The public favours lower caps, with two-thirds supporting under £50k (including a quarter who support a total ban). Only 15% of the public think that there should be no limit on the amount anyone can give.

Bold action is needed to ensure that our democracy remains for and by the people, not vested interests. Donation caps are just one of a series of reforms set out in a new Compass publication that could put our democracy back on a positive trajectory. Reforming the structures that underpin our politics can put our democracy on a surer footing for the future.

To reshape democracy to better fulfil its promise is an ongoing task of all democracies and one that is increasingly necessary and urgent in a world where people are losing faith in democratic institutions. It is vital at this time, when democracies around the world are under threat, that we look to our own systems and consider how they might better serve the interests of voters and communities across the country.

These ideas and more are explored in Ending Business As Usual: Policy Options for A Progressive Government.