The Independent View: Concerns about lobbying bill are not alarmist

So the pot has addressed the kettle again. Tom Brake and Chloe Smith have accused 38 Degrees of being either alarmist or scaremongering about the effects of Part 2 of the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill. Perhaps they would like to add the  famously hysterical Electoral Commission to their list of doom-mongers, as they have also expressed serious concerns.

Mr Brake and Ms Smith claim that Part 2 will save the UK from unaccountable big-spending American-style Super-PACs. No alarmism there, then – especially when the only thing preventing this horror is that non-party spending is already limited to about 5% of what parties can spend.

So why slash this to just 2%, while adding many more activities into the mix and deliberately increasing red tape for the lowest spenders – all without any consultation with those affected or the Commission? There is no clear answer anywhere in the bill documents, so it’s not surprising people are suspicious.

Further, Part 2 restricts campaigners in ways that parties would never stomach for themselves. For example, it curtails targeting, the keystone of party election wins and losses for decades. It also includes staff costs in the limit, which most parties would, apparently, find too difficult.

Leaving fairness and proper process aside, Part 2 lacks clarity. Grappling with it is like wrestling an eel – difficult, slippery and ultimately unproductive. As with the current rules, campaigns on issues like housing, abortion, and the NHS, will be covered where they dare to raise voter awareness on issues that some parties or candidates support, and some don’t, even if they name no parties or candidates.

However, it’s much harder to work out what is definitely not covered, as the Commission has pointed out. This makes for poor regulatory law, particularly when there are criminal sanctions attached. The more questions people ask, the more grey areas and unintended consequences emerge. Some of these threaten the ability of groups to campaign at all.

With the number of concerns raised by a wide range of groups, the government should have the courtesy to listen rather than dismiss, and allay these worries with amendments. Then, maybe, it would be easier to believe that its intentions are honourable.

The Independent View‘ is a slot on Lib Dem Voice which allows those from beyond the party to contribute to debates we believe are of interest to LDV’s readers. Please email [email protected] if you are interested in contributing.

* Ros Baston is a specialist political and election solicitor. Previously she was Lead Adviser (Party and Election Finance) at the Electoral Commission. http://bastonlegal.com/. She has received no payment from 38 Degrees for writing this article.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in Op-eds and The Independent View.
Advert

2 Comments

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • User AvatarJayne Mansfield 30th Mar - 11:32pm
    @ Fiona, Young people do not need to get their advice on drug taking from drug dealers. They can access information from multiple sources. The...
  • User Avatarmatt 30th Mar - 11:18pm
    I get why a patients own GP's are reluctant to carry out assessments because it might cause friction with their patient if they did not...
  • User Avatarfrankie 30th Mar - 10:43pm
    Trust me I'm a Tory. Difficult one that, I think the answer needs to be a resounding NO.
  • User AvatarGlenn 30th Mar - 10:34pm
    The basic problem is that PIP was introduced to reduce the benefits bill. This is why it involves humiliating interviews and you can't just send...
  • User AvatarRichard Fortescue 30th Mar - 9:24pm
    Steve, my understanding is that the 9-1 grading is explicitly a return to norm referencing. But, as someone teaching 9-1 GCSEs, I am not wholly...
  • User AvatarFiona 30th Mar - 8:57pm
    I accept that theoretical premise of not wasting time and resources on cosmetic changes is reasonable, but there must be a rigorous system in place...