POORLY DESIGNED THIRD PARTY ADVERTISING RULES CHILLED ELECTION DEBATE,
REDUCED VOTER ACCESS TO INFORMATION: STUDY

VANCOUVER, Oct 6 /CNW/ - A new study finds that BC's third party advertising rules caused extensive problems for "small spenders" such as non-profits and charities during the 2009 provincial election. The rules - brought in through the controversial Bill 42 in 2008 - led to widespread confusion, wasted resources, anxiety and self-censorship among organizations that spent little or nothing at all on election advertising.

The study was released today by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, BC's Freedom of Information and Privacy Association and the BC Civil Liberties Association. "When the provincial government introduced these new rules, its rationale was to limit election advertising by 'big spenders', " says Shannon Daub, lead author of the study. "But major flaws in the legislation mean that in practice, the rules extensively regulated small spenders and cast a chill on the democratic process."

The study examined the experiences of 60 charities, non-profits, coalitions, labour unions and citizens' groups.  Among the key findings:

• Because most non-profits are careful to remain non-partisan, the prospect of being publicly labeled as a "third party advertising sponsor" created anxiety for many of the study participants, with some choosing to opt out of public engagement during the election entirely.
• More than one in four participant groups self-censored as a result of the rules. Six groups censored public communication activities specifically to avoid having to register as advertising sponsors. Others self-censored due to confusion and/or concerns about the risks of inadvertently breaking the rules.
• Most of the activities groups censored had little to do with commercial advertising, eg, nine groups did not post new material on their websites; four removed existing material from their websites; and four refrained from issuing or endorsing a call for changes to government policy.
• Particularly troubling is the revelation that five groups avoided commenting in mainstream media stories due to confusion about the rules or a desire to keep a low profile during the campaign and avoid coming to the attention of Elections BC.

NOTE: PARTIAL NEWS RELEASE ONLY. COMPLETE RELEASE AND FULL STUDY AT http://www.policyalternatives.ca/chilleffectnews

For further information:

For interviews: Terra Poirier, 604-801-5121 x229. Interview requests before 9am call Shannon Daub, 604-780-9133. Election Chill Effectis available at www.policyalternatives.ca/chilleffect