Opinion: Regulate more lobbying and less campaigning: how to improve The Transparency of Lobbying, non-Party Campaigning, and Trade Union Administration Bill

Neither the current rules regulating lobbying nor those controlling so-called ‘third party’ campaigning (i.e. by someone other than candidates or their parties) are extensive enough. Both need improving.

With lobbying, the case for better regulation is easy to make: pick a scandal, any scandal.

With third party campaigning, the loopholes and relaxed existing rules are less obvious because, so far, they have either been largely under-exploited or have been made use of by ‘good guys’ such as Hope Not Hate. Yet the very same generous rules that let Hope Not Hate explicitly campaigning for people not to vote for the BNP could just as well be invoked by racists to campaign against non-white candidates. And one sure pattern of electoral expenditure controls over the last 20 years is that when one group starts doing something new then others follow over successive years.

The problem, however, with The Transparency of Lobbying, non-Party Campaigning, and Trade Union Administration Bill is that it covers too little lobbying and too much campaigning.

On lobbying, the Bill draws the net so enormously narrowly that it misses nearly all lobbyists. It is not only that it omits lobbyists employed ‘in house’ by a company or organisation rather than in a consultancy. It is also (put simply) excludes lobbyists who work for consultancies who mostly do something else other than lobbying. Yet the frequent pattern is for the larger consultancies to have lobbying teams within them. As long as the rest of the company’s work is not lobbying, then their lobbying colleagues basically escape regulation.

The government has said it does not want to put onerous regulation on firms. Yet the bizarre outcome of this is that the small firm which just does lobbying will therefore have the burden of regulation whilst the international company which wraps up lobbying with other services escapes regulation. Far from saving the smaller firms from regulation, the Bill does the opposite – it makes life harder for them than compared to many of the larger firms.

And all that is without getting into the unduly narrow definition of lobbying which means even a pure-lobbying firm may well escape the net.

That part of the Bill should be improved by casting the net wider – just as the part of the Bill which regulates third-party campaigning should draw the net more narrowly. Activities directly aimed to promote a candidate or party (or to hinder a candidate or party) at an election should be more tightly regulated.

It is sensible to say that an activity such as commissioning an opinion poll on tactical voting options in a constituency and press releasing its results should in future be covered by expenditure controls in the way that putting leaflets through letterboxes with bar charts on them would be. However, rather than restricting polls to cases where they are clearly linked to influencing an election result, the Bill as currently drafted risks capturing all sorts of more general polling (and other activities) about political issues. The broad meaning of “election purposes” needs fixing in the Bill.

Get both these points right, and the overall effect would be right: protecting our democratic system and the public’s voice in it against abuse of power –whether that comes from secretive nobbling of ministers or excessive expenditure to sway votes.

* Mark Pack is a member of the Federal Board and editor of Liberal Democrat Newswire. He is a candidate for Party President.

Read more by or more about .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

5 Comments

  • Tony Greaves 5th Sep '13 - 3:06pm

    This is very sensible stuff.

    We also need to unpick the difference between activities in the year before a parliamentary election and activities during an election campaign.

    It is also not clear why the definitions of “campaigning” activities are to be different for third parties and political parties.

    Among other things.

    Tony

  • Tony Greaves 5th Sep '13 - 3:08pm

    And also of course the differences between national activities by charties and campaign groups, and targeted campaigning in a constituency or other electoral area.

    Tony

  • Eddie Sammon 5th Sep '13 - 6:53pm

    I just think it should be a free for all when it comes to lobbying and campaigning. The least worst situation I think.

  • Andrew Colman 6th Sep '13 - 8:44am

    Agree with article. A bit of common sense at last

  • Good article.

    Realistically though, just like the NHS bill this is going to be a botch job. It should never have been drafted in such a way and Lib Dem parliamentarians should be ashamed at being involved in it. It seems they are only constitutional reformers when it suits them.

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 AvatarTom Harney 21st Oct - 3:52am
    I would like to think that it is everyone’s duty to put forward ideas on how our country should be run. There is a lot...
  • User AvatarDavid-1 21st Oct - 12:23am
    It is not merely the task of a democratic opposition to hold a government to account; it is also (and, I might add, primarily) their...
  • User AvatarDenis Loretto 20th Oct - 11:20pm
    Just on the VONC issue it can be said that Jo was too quick in pointing out the impossibility of Corbyn getting the necessary support...
  • User AvatarArnold Kiel 20th Oct - 10:51pm
    John Marriott, here is my explanation: leavers in 2016 had indeed no clue and were lied to. Their vote had nothing to do with the...
  • User AvatarJames Pugh 20th Oct - 10:20pm
    @Nigel Jones No actually. Should Bulgaria raise it's minimum wage from 1.7 euros per hour to be on part with ours? Or should Sweden, Norway,...
  • User AvatarNonconformistradical 20th Oct - 10:10pm
    "The last thing we want is a race towards the USA’s methods under which too many people work excessive hours; we have already gone far...