UK Parliament / Open data

Electoral Administration Bill

I rise to speak to my amendment in this group. The noble Lord, Lord Rennard, has given a trailer for my amendment and indicated support. My starting point is that any party should be free to describe itself as it deems appropriate to reflect its beliefs and approach to public policy. Any restriction should be clearly justified and narrowly drawn and should not impinge on that basic right. That approach is, rightly, reflected in the Bill. Certain restrictions are specified in the clause. The restrictions embodied in subsection (2)(a) to (f) are appropriate. Each can be justified without infringing unduly on the capacity of a party to convey what it stands for in terms of an ideology or particular approach to public policy. However, there is one further restriction that may be appropriate. It is possible for a party to be created, not for the purpose of propounding a particular set of beliefs or adopting a particular stance on an issue of public policy, but for the purpose of commercial gain. Thus it would be called a political party, but not have the defining characteristics of one. That provides a prima facie case for imposing a restriction. If it is not a party but rather a mechanism for advertising for commercial purposes, that constitutes a form of exploitation of a civic process that should not be permitted. Standing as a party for election provides the opportunity for disseminating material to a wide range of electors. One can employ a description on ballot papers. For the price of a deposit it constitutes a very cost-efficient way in which to reach a large market. It circumvents the more expensive means of advertising and does so by exploiting a statutory process created for a civil purpose. Using a description for commercial purposes is not, as far as I can see, caught by the existing specific provisions in subsection (2)(a) to (f), nor is it likely to be caught by the more general subsection (2)(g), unless it was to be employed on a post hoc basis. Given that, I propose a subsection designed to close that particular loophole.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

680 c209GC 

Session

2005-06

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top