The way this law has been written is actually going to force huge unintended change. Interpreting bill 'almost impossible'.
The problematic clause 80 says parties' election expenses do not include anything done by an MP if it was "in his or her capacity as a member of Parliament".
I would argue that any inclusion of a party logo on any advertisement or any link to a party site would make this an election expense.
If indeed the publication of a information on a subject such as WFF is required it does not follow that the party that promoted that policy is part of the information required except for one reason. That reason is promoting votes for that party or person.
The publication of an MP office hours for consituents to visit is clearly acceptable. Publishing their views on any topic makes it election advertising.
Look forward to some challenges in court for anybody attempting to combine parliamentary services crest and a party logo. This law will make advertisments like this party political.
I really doubt the public will look kindly at state funding by the back door.
Comments