What part of 'No' don't they understand?

It appears that Tory Diary has for itself into self congratulary mode, but a little prematurely.
Francis Maude will apparently say today that,

"There should be not a penny more state funding without a single, comprehensive cap on donations - including companies, the unions and individuals".

This of course is better than their previous position I would agree, but 'No state funding' to me means just that. No state funding. It is not hard to comprehend.

I can see no reason why the Unions should not fund the Labour Party if they wish to do so, with the caveat that their members need to have an opt out of the 'political donations box' to tick on their annual subscription form. Likewise why should companies not give money to political parties if they so desire, as long as there is the possiblity at shareholders meetings to discuss and vote upon the donation.
In a similar way, if some reclusive, or even loud and obnoxious, individual wishes to spend their hard earned, gosh or even inherited wealth on a political party, then fine. If donations over say £1000 are registered and transparent why on earth not. It is their money after all.
And I thought we lived in a free country.