Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Political Campaigning: Transparency

Thursday 23 June 2022 · 2 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Answered 1 Partly answered 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • The commission's view is that the digital imprints requirement in the Elections Act will increase transparency by helping voters understand who is paying to target them online.
  • The commission reviewed the spending return delivered by the Conservative party following the 2019 parliamentary general election and found that not all required invoices were provided.
  • The commission decided that enforcement action was not proportionate to the compliance of the return as a whole.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Context

The Elections Act 2022 and provisions in the Online Safety Bill are under scrutiny for their impact on transparency.

Question

What recent assessment has the Committee made regarding the potential effect of the (a) Elections Act 2022 and (b) provisions in the Online Safety Bill on the transparency of political campaigning communications?

Answer from Chris Matheson

The commission's view is that the digital imprints requirement in the Elections Act will increase transparency by helping voters understand who is paying to target them online. It could provide further transparency if the requirement were extended to cover all digital material from unregistered campaigners, regardless of whether they paid to promote it. The commission has said that other changes in the Act relating to non-party campaigners will bring limited additional transparency, while increasing the complexity of the law. The Online Safety Bill would include new freedom of speech protections for some campaigning content, but does not include any provisions that would directly affect the transparency of political campaign activities.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Context

Research highlighted by openDemocracy suggests discrepancies in the Conservative party's expenditure reporting, making it difficult to trace how over £3.6 million was spent before the 2019 election.

Question

Given that the Electoral Commission found the lack of clarity or availability of invoices provided by the Conservative Party post-2019 general election unacceptable but deemed enforcement action disproportionate, under what circumstances would such action be justified?

Answer from Chris Matheson

The commission reviewed the spending return delivered by the Conservative party following the 2019 parliamentary general election, and is aware that not all the required invoices were provided. Having reviewed the compliance of the return as a whole, it was decided that it was not proportionate to take enforcement action in relation to those missing invoices. The hon. Member mentioned local associations, and local association campaign spending and accompanying invoices or receipts at a UK parliamentary general election are submitted as part of the spending return from their central party. The commission is required to publish the returns as soon as reasonably possible, whether or not they are complete. When a return is incomplete, the commission will consider what action to take in line with the principles of proportionality, as set out in its enforcement policy.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific criteria for enforcement action were not provided, only general principles of proportionality.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)