Following the
2015 election campaign and the more recent EU referendum campaign it
is clear that across the entire political spectrum we as ordinary
members of the public can no longer trust, at face value, whatever a
politician or prospective candidate says.
Time and again
we have been lied to, misled and generally had slogans pushed down
our throats as some kind of quasi fact.
One of the
reasons for this is that there is no arbiter on what constitutes an
acceptable statement or fact. The EU Referendum particularly has seen
a number of media outlets or social organisations (some semi-
political themselves) appoint themselves as fact checkers in order to
cut through the constant political / media spin. However, what none
of these organisations can do is promote best practice or impose
sanctions if and where necessary. This is the kind of action that in
most other areas of our lives would be taken by an industry
regulator.
There is in fact
no regulator of political campaigns in the UK. Only very limited
regulations takes place by the electoral commission in terms of
spending and Ofcom in terms of TV or radio advertising.
The Advertising
Standards Agency states on their website:
“Complaints
about political advertising should be made directly to the party
responsible for that advertising.”
Is that fair? If
a complaint is made about a police service you can make it to the
Independent Police Complaints Commission. “Independent” is the
key word, if we do not trust the police to investigate themselves why
should we trust the politicians and political parties.
The Electoral
Commission states that:
“In
general, political campaign material in the UK is not regulated, and
it is a matter for voters to decide on the basis of such material
whether they consider it accurate or not.”
We
are being asked to vote on key decisions that will affect everyone's
future yet the lack of regulation means a political statement can be
made and it does not have to be true or remotely based in fact as
long as you can shout the loudest over those that oppose you. How is
that working for us so far? Well it has lead to the slanging matches
we have seen in both campaigns and when we the voters feel we have
been misled it creates further alienation and a detachment from the
democratic process.
We
have all begun to question what the modern democratic process is all
about and how politicians can possibly be trusted.
I
believe that a wide ranging public enquiry similar to the Leveson
enquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the British
press needs to be set up to answer
the following questions:
1)
Is there sufficient independent regulation in place to ensure that
political campaigns are in general fought on facts and that
individuals taking part do so in line with the 7 Nolan principles.
Are sanctions required where standards fall below such requirements
for either individuals or parties or other political organisations?
2)
Should the Advertising Standards Agency (or similar body) be given
the authority to regulate all political advertising in the same way
they currently regulate product advertising / claims?
3)
Should an independent regulator (or similar) have a public duty to
promote best practice or quality standards for political campaign
material or political campaigns?
4)
Should the media (in all forms) be required to include some element
of political balance in news articles? (Editorial content would be
excluded from political bias)
5)
Should the media have a duty to ensure that all arguments are
presented to voters as opposed to just those approved by the
editorial team?
This list is
only indicative of some of the topics that could be considered. I
fully accept that if someone is appointed to lead an inquiry then
their first difficult job would be to consider the scope and range of
the inquiry.
It is imperative
that similar to the Leveson inquiry any inquiry should consider views
from any individual or group that wishes to comment. An inquiry would
be centred around what the public wants our democratic process to
look like not what politicians want.
Now is the time
to change how politics works, they work for us or at least they
should. The public is entitled to make an informed decision with all
the facts laid before us.
If you agree with everything I have said then you need to sign the position so we can raise the issues in parliament:
Thank you for joining the fight back to really take back control.
Sources:
From the advertising standards agency:
Political
advertising
All complaints of political bias in TV or radio
advertising should be made to
Ofcom.
For reasons of freedom of speech, we do not have
remit over non-broadcast ads where the purpose of the ad is to
persuade voters in a local, national or international electoral
referendum. Complaints about political advertising should be made
directly to the party responsible for that advertising.
From
the electoral commission:
In
general, political campaign material in the UK is not regulated, and
it is a matter for voters to decide on the basis of such material
whether they consider it accurate or not. This includes the design of
the material. There is one exception to this, which is making or
publishing a false statement of fact in relation to a candidate’s
personal character or conduct (not their political views or conduct),
unless there are reasonable grounds to believe the statement is true.
The Commission does not regulate this rule however, and any
allegations should be made to the police.
Nolan
principles:
Posts
