Electoral Commission's Consultation Paper on Party Political Broadcasting

Workers' Daily Internet Edition : Article Index :

Electoral Commission's Consultation Paper on Party Political Broadcasting

On July 2, the Electoral Commission published a consultation document on the future of party political broadcasts, containing outline recommendations for changes to the present system.

The Commission had issued a discussion paper in December 2001 as the first stage in its review of party political broadcasting. This provided information about the current arrangements, and consideration of the changing media environment and of public attitudes to broadcasts and what their impact might be.

In its response to this discussion paper, RCPB(ML) pointed out that a review of party political broadcasting should firstly start from the principle of the equality of political parties, and that no privileges should be given to any political party in this respect or that some parties should be favoured over others in terms of allocation of broadcasting time. The provisions should be neutral in regard to the treatment of all registered political parties, whether they are represented in the House of Commons or not, but should also allow for candidates who are independent of the registered parties, which is a developing trend. Secondly, RCPB(ML) emphasised, it should be clear that the purpose of the broadcasting provisions is to facilitate the electorate as a whole to make an informed choice from the candidates and parties who present themselves for election. The response of RCPB(ML) went on to say that the issue therefore should be viewed from the standpoint of the involvement of the electorate in the decision-making process, and the role that broadcasting can play in this connection. It made the point that the focus of the broadcasting time allocation should be how the electorate can have access to all the information they require in order to make an informed choice between the candidates who present themselves for election.

The Commission in its consultation paper suggests there are persuasive arguments for maintaining the current ban on paid-for political advertising in broadcasting, with a warning that radical changes to the rules would benefit only the wealthiest parties.

The Commission reiterated that its priority in the review is to promote and protect the interests of the electorate. One of the Commission's corporate aims, it points out, is to encourage greater participation in and increased understanding of the democratic process. "We are therefore concerned, above all," the paper states, "that party political broadcasting should encourage participation and provide voters with information to support their voting decisions. The Commission is also committed to promoting openness and transparency in all aspects of the electoral process."

While such a priority is welcome, the Commission does not seem to have taken note of the fact that a review of party political broadcasting must be undertaken in the context of the need to change the situation whereby elections have the function of bringing one of the "major" political parties to power and continuing to marginalise the electorate. Without this context, the Commission's proposals have the danger of entrenching the very faults which it says it would like to eliminate. If the electorate is excluded from central decision-making and involvement at the heart of the political process, their understanding of it can only be as spectators and greater participation will not be encouraged.

It is clear that the overwhelming response to the original discussion paper – which came from broadcasting authorities, political parties, broadcasters, the advertising industry, interest/pressure groups, and concerned individuals – is that the system of allocations of free time to political parties, on whatever basis, must be retained. On this evidence, the Commission says, all options either discontinuing free allocations or introducing paid political advertising must be rejected. At the same time, the Commission suggests that there are persuasive arguments in favour of retention of the current system of allocations to qualifying parties. However, this system is presently based on the division of political parties into "major" and "minor". The "major" parties are stipulated as Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrats and, in Scotland and Wales, the SNP and Plaid Cymru. This arbitrary division violates the right to equality of the parties, and is contrary to the need for a level playing field for free and fair elections. Likewise, the criterion that "minor" parties may qualify for an election broadcast if contesting one-sixth or more of the seats in the election goes against the principle that smaller parties have no less of a right to present their programmes and policies to the electorate than larger parties. Furthermore, consideration ought to be given to the allocation of political broadcasting slots to independent and alternative candidates, otherwise these candidates will be put at a disadvantage.

The Electoral Commission seems to think that to extend the allocation in such ways would place an "unreasonable burden on broadcasters without a proportionate benefit for the electorate". This argument does not seem to be justified. For example, there are already frequent broadcasting slots of the "Your Shout" variety, which give the opportunity for individuals or organisations to express their concerns or campaign for various causes. This format shows that it is possible for smaller parties and alternative candidates to be given airtime, and this can be done on a regular basis through the course of the year, which would also facilitate the participation of the electorate in the political process.

The Electoral Commission also offers a warning to government ministers that without fresh legislation, the whole system could be open to legal challenge under European laws which are supposed to have the aim of guaranteeing freedom of expression. The document says that any approach to regulating political broadcasts "needs careful treatment" because of a recent judgment of the European Court of Human Rights. In a ruling on political advertising, which may not be directly applicable to Britain because of differing systems for regulating political advertising, the court found that restrictions on freedom of expression must be defensible in substance and must also be "prescribed by law". By "restrictions", the ruling is referring to restrictions on the power of wealth to buy anything it pleases, including political power. The Electoral Commission said, however, that it believed the British system would "survive scrutiny under the ECHR", but added that it needed to be written into British law.

"We doubt whether the existing arrangements for free broadcasts are sufficiently clear, formalised and predictable, as expressed in law, to satisfy this requirement as it has now been elaborated in the Strasbourg case law. These implications do not appear to have been noticed by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in their draft Communications Bill published in May 2002," the consultation document said.

Commission chairman Sam Younger said: "Party political broadcasts are the only format in which political parties can directly address the electorate via broadcasting, and they act as an important counterbalance to the ban on political advertising."

The consultation document also suggests that the rules on the allocation of broadcasts should be modernised to take account of non-terrestrial channels including digital, cable and satellite television. Initial proposals suggest using an audience share threshold to determine which channels should be required to air the broadcasts. And the current system, which sees decisions on the allocation of broadcasts being made by broadcasters, should be more clearly defined in law, the Commission said.

The consultation paper on party political broadcasting invites responses to its recommendations, which should be submitted by August 19, 2002. It is to be found in pdf format on the Electoral Commission's website at: www.electoralcommission.gov.uk/MiscPDFs/Consultation%20Paper%20(final)%2024.pdf