“In modern democracies one of the main pillars of good government and control of cor- ruption is elections and electoral accountability. The change of political leadership or the risk of such change is expected to discipline holders of political power to use it for the public good rather than for their own private benefit. In addition, a strong opposition in parliaments and local councils can also increase scrutiny of the governing party through institutional checks and balances such as setting up investigative committees or using legal challenge. …
… For the purposes of this report, corruption is understood in a broad sense going beyond outright bribery. In public procurement, the aim of political or high-level corruption is
to steer the contract to the favoured bidder without detection recurrently in an institu- tionalised fashion (Fazekas & Tóth, 2014; World Bank, 2009). This is done in a number of ways, including avoiding competition (e.g., unjustified sole sourcing or direct contract awards), favouring a certain bidder by tailoring specifications, or sharing inside informa- tion. Such corruption may involve bribery and transfers of large cash amounts, but it is more typically done through broker firms, subcontracts, offshore companies, and bogus consultancy contracts to name a few typical instruments.
http://electoral-reform.org.uk/sites/default/files/THE%20COST%20OF%20ONE-PARTY%20COUNCILS.pdf
East Devon Watch 