NZ POLITICS DAILY: Labour MP compares Electoral Committee ruling to Nazi-era Europe

The most extraordinary political statement of the year (so far) was published on Labour’s Red Alert blog site last night.

List MP Damien O’Connor wrote a blog post of just 59 words in which he protested against the recent ruling by Electoral Commission that deemed Labour Party election advertisements to be in breach of the law because they lacked authorizing promoter statements: ‘I thought we lived in a free democracy. Since when did a sign become illegal when expressing an opinion or encouraging people to act? Does this ban all signs at marches that may in any way be linked to a movement or political party. The EC needs to pull their heads in. This is not the 1930s in Europe’ – see his blog post: Signs.

Then MP Clare Curran joined the fray to say, ‘Hope the Electoral Commission is reading this. Is this what our democracy has come to? I agree with you Damien’. What’s extraordinary about his polemical statement is that Labour – together with the Greens – has been the party that has been most enthusiastic about regulating political campaigning and election advertisements, in particular with the need for all such political expressions (such as the signs used by Labour) to carry authorization statements.

Labour’s Electoral Finance Act 2007, in particularly, was particularly controversial for widening the definition of an ‘election advertisement’ and increasing the need for authorizing promoter statement on the material. The rules – now watered down a bit by the legislation that replaced the EFA – are still in force, and Labour MPs such as Damien O’Connor voted for all of this. So to hear Labour suddenly protest against these rules is rather bizarre, and this is pointed out today by both David Farrar on the right (Labour says law should not apply to them) and No Right Turn on the left (Utter denial).

Both bloggers are incredulous that Labour MPs have come up with a new stance on regulating election advertising, with Farrar explaining it like this: Labour ‘have got so used to being above the law, that they really do think it appalling that an independent agency will not kowtow to them. In fact the post is a barely veiled threat against the Electoral Commission’. No Right Turn labels Labour’s approach as ‘pig-headed arrogance’.

Nonetheless, despite the bizarreness or hypocrisy of O’Connor’s statement, it’s not hard to have sympathy for him, because – going back to first principles – it truly is rather questionable that protest placards should be deemed illegal by the state if they do not contain official authorization.

Yes, this has been a requirement since 1977, but is it really a useful and necessary one? A good argument can be made that there is simply no need for ‘disclosure of identity of the promoter’ on campaign communications. The rules for political expression should be the same for any other public communications such as media advertisements. There is no special reason that political communications requires any additional regulation, and in fact it is highly problematic to try and do so.

Such heavy-handed regulation of political activity does little, if any, good.

But the state could be improving the health of democratic debate and politics simply through fostering a healthier mediascape. Alas, public broadcasting in particular is virtually dead in New Zealand. Three very good recent opinion pieces have covered the death in different ways. David Beatson’s Pundit post, TVNZ kills ad-free channels to grow profits explains in detail the demise of TVNZ7, and Ruth Zanker’s Press piece Death by a thousand tiny cuts (not currently online) points out that the per-person funding of commercial free broadcasting is only $30 here compared to $45 in Australia, $109 in the UK, and $142 in Germany. Most interestingly, Steven Cowan’s blog post, Who killed TVNZ?, says that ‘Labour killed public broadcasting in New Zealand. National just disposed of the body’.

Bryce Edwards, NZPD Editor (bryce.edwards@otago.ac.nz)

Today’s content:

Political finance and electoral law

Damien O’Connor (Red alert): Signs

David Farrar (Kiwiblog): Labour says law should not apply to them

No Right Turn: Utter denial

Whaleoil: A question about Accounting for Salaries of Seconded Staff

Media

David Beatson (Pundit): TVNZ kills ad-free channels to grow profits

Ruth Zanker (Press): Death by a thousand tiny cuts (not currently online)

Steven Cowan (Against the Current): Who killed TVNZ?

Listener editorial: Hacking at press freedom