The Electoral Commission has published its commentary on the government's lobbying bill this morning, which it will be responsible for enforcing. The commentary is damning, not helped by the fact that they were not consulted in advance on the bill. They say:
Key points for Second Reading
It is important that, where non-party campaigning takes place on a scale that could have a significant impact on elections, it is transparent and controlled. Inadequate controls could ultimately result in voters losing trust in the fairness and effectiveness of the UK's overall framework for regulating political campaigning. We regulate the general rules relating to this type of campaigning.
The Bill both widens the scope of the current rules on non-party campaigning that affects parties and groups of candidates, and imposes some additional controls on such campaigning. In our view, as drafted, the Bill raises some significant issues of workability that you may wish to explore at Second Reading.
Areas that you may wish to focus on in particular include that:
1. the Bill creates significant regulatory uncertainty for large and small organisations that campaign on, or even discuss, public policy issues in the year before the next general election, and imposes significant new burdens on such organisations
2. the Bill effectively gives the Electoral Commission a wide discretion to interpret what activity will be regulated as political campaigning. It is likely that some of our readings of the law will be contentious and 2challenged, creating more uncertainty for those affected. While we as the independent regulator should be free to decide when the rules have been broken, and how to deal with breaches of the rules, we do not think it is appropriate for us to have a wide discretion over what activity is covered by the rules
3. some of the new controls in the Bill may in practice be impossible to enforce, and it is important that Parliament considers what the changes will achieve in reality, and balances this against the new burdens imposed by the Bill on campaigners.
The wording is diplomatic but the message is clear. They think this is a badly thought out bill for which there is no apparent policy objective which is backed by impact assessments which the Electoral Commission clearly think are risible.
But will the government listen? If not, kiss goodbye to democracy.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
The lid on the coffin of democracy has been placed there over the past 40 years, now the final nail is placed, awaiting the hammer.
In a corrupt parliament, such as we now have, you can be sure that the views above will be duly noted. The chair and nominated commissioners of the electoral commission will be replaced.
It may be necessary to move away from the representative democracy we have at present, and towards a version of direct democracy designed to severely limit the powers a government can exercise without directly, and frequently, consulting the electorate.
Let’s not forget we never had democracy anyway as the Queen and other royals can veto laws they don’t want no matter how the electorate might feel on any particular matter. I would suggest too you don’t get out of jail by being able to vote for which governor’s going to run it, which more accurately describes our situation than calling it democracy. Hey, if this is all becoming obvious now it can’t be a bad thing. It brings collective rebellion against it that much closer. Remember, it’s only a terrified government which has to resort to such measures and this lot has plenty to be terrified about!
Alas, Bill, the problem is the level of political consciousness of the British pubic is close to that of a patient in a Permanent Vegetative State. In most cases, they’d hardly recognize the truth if it reared up out of the toilet bowl and bit them on their Christmas crackers!
Having been married for nearly 43 years to a Czech emigree (not refugee, as she was allowed to come here in 1968, AFTER the Soviet invasion, and simply stayed) I’ve come to the conclusion that EVERY British household should have an Eastern bloc emigre/refugee – call them what you will – in their home, as they are bull-shit detectors par excellence, having spent a life-time reading between the lines, and understanding what is REALLY going on.
I well re-call having a flaming row with my wife, just 3 weeks after Blair’s 1997 landslide, which she said “Nothing’s going to change!” Six months later, I began to agree with her, and by the time of the Great March of 15th February 2003, I was wholly in agreement with her as to the slippery untrustworthiness and general neo-Thatcherism of “boy Blair”. Nothing he’s done since has led me to change that view of him, and his toxic legacy. Yet he won 3 Elections! Point about political awareness evidenced; and proved? You tell me, but I hope I’m wrong, and that you are right.
Many thanks for the colourful post-Andrew -I’m afraid you are right about the level of consciousness -narcolepsy rules and given that many have swallowed with alacrity the notion that people poorer than themselves must bear the brunt the sense of despair deepens. The good side of it is that sooner or later the utter moral bankruptcy will reveal itself but not before (to extend your metaphor)they are neck deep in contents of the toilet bowl! Even then the cowering will continue! Fear is the key, I’m afraid.
I understand that the Cabinet Office has given assurances on the intended scope of the Bill. But the very fact that the Cabinet Office has felt the need to give assurances shows the danger. If we ever rely on assurances to limit the scope of a law, we then depend on the whim of future officials, who may have different views. Then we become subject to the rule of men, instead of the rule of law. Even if official discretion is in fact always exercised in the way that the Cabinet Office now say it will be exercised, the lingering threat that things might change will encourage people who might be affected to self-censor, and not to get too close to the line that separates election-specific campaigning from other campaigning. If an official has discretion, people try not to provoke him or her. In that way, control can be achieved without any overt official action at all. (I here draw on Quentin Skinner’s arguments about arbitrary power, in A Third Concept of Liberty, although I have no idea what view, if any, he has on this Bill.)
I have no confidence in such assurances
The General Anti-Abuse Rule may allow them to be referred to
Most law does not
This is bad law
I’m afraid it’s already been decided that all on benefits will very soon be subject to the very rule of men not law you speak of. More here. Let’s not forget the dark hand of Unum appears to be behind all this. They came first for the disabled, you see, and everyone else did nothing. Now look who they’re coming for!
Whast did you expect us to do for the disabled? I tried, like lots of others, to make MPs do what was right. My MP did, but she is Labour and ignored/laughed at by the people who make laws.
How dare you say everyone else did nothing?
My husband was disabled, until he died of brain cancer.
It’s a shame that MPs waited until there was something that did not affect their constituents directly before they rebelled. Hopefully, they will have found out that the sky hasn’t fallen and then try to save the NHS and do something about the welfare bill.
So at the same time as bringing this bill in, they are trying to reduce the number of people going to court and ending up in prison.
Time for a bit of call my bluff?
I’m going to campaign on everything I can and see what happens.
This may have to be a case of mass disobedience
But it also looks as if the Electoral Commission will have to rule most campaigning out – after all – the government says it should
Including, presumably, campaigning by the Tories and the Lib-Dems. Well, it could make for a quiet election I suppose.
I agree Mr. M., this is Bill is going to be a huge mess.
Leaving aside the statements of ‘charities’ that get most of their funding from the taxpayer, HMG seems to have united the TUs, 38 Degrees, the British Legion and The Taxpayers Alliance in opposition to this bill.
Truly a piece of brilliance on the part of HMG to unify Left, Right and Centre against it!
For once we agree