PressEthic

In New Zealand, broadcast campaign funding comes solely from a pool of funds administered by the Electoral Commission. Allocation is based on the results of the last election, measures of recent public opinion and several other factors, which are outlined here . The funds allocated are also the limit on spending for radio or television advertising. The idea is that “parties be provided a fair opportunity to convey their policies to the public.”

It seems strange to limit the funding of broadcast campaigning and not other forms of campaign marketing in the name of fairness. Funds can be drawn from other sources, to finance all other aspects of a campaign. This article in the Sunday Star Times provides an example about how elements of the National party’s strategy under Don Brash have been backed by the ‘non-partisan’ Business Roundtable and reveals how private individuals donate to various parties. These funds can be used to fund newspaper, magazine, billboard and public relations campaigning.

Based on the criteria administered by the Election Commission, the two largest parties receive considerably more funds for broadcast campaigning than any other party. For instance the current Labor government received $1.1 million of the total pool of $3,212,000. Their main rival, National, received $900,000.The next rung of parties only receive $200,000. In addition, Labour and National will have greater budgets, based on private donations, to fund other forms of campaigning. These limits are intended to stop smaller parties being shut out by richer larger parties. However it is debatable whether this really works. The larger parties can use their added resources to achieve greater public relations leverage and fund other campaigning strategies. So while small parties do have funds to do some mainstream advertising, they are still easily overwhelmed by all other forms of campaigning.

The idea of limiting the funding for broadcast campaigns also gives rise to the notion that private individuals could well be in a position to outspend a political party. In the run up to the national election in New Zealand it has been reported in the New Zealand Herald that two New Zealand millionaires are using their own finances to launch political advertisements, in bid to influence the election. It is legal in New Zealand for private individuals to unofficially campaign for a party. However a private individual cannot directly state support for a party, but it can for a policy. This law is easily circumvented, for instance Selwyn Pellett’s campaign stated; ‘do the right thing - tick left’. The Labour party is considered New Zealand’s mainstream left wing party.

While these advertisements were done through print media, and totaled about $24,000 each, it is feasible that a private individual with a particular political agenda could outspend the campaign broadcasting budget of any parties, and therefore have serious affect on the outcome of the campaign. It could be extremely profitable for a business entrepreneur to support a party that would enact a policy advantageous to their business.

The limits imposed on New Zealand election broadcast campaigning do have good intentions. However they are probably not altogether successful in meeting their goals of achieving fairness. Furthermore these limits could well allow private individuals to hijack political campaigning in New Zealand.