The problem with prohibiting political dishonesty

Dishonesty in politics is nothing new. It’s a key reason many view politics with scepticism, and why politicians are among the least trusted of all people in our country. This is as much the case in Wales as it is across the rest of Britain.

In Wales, the Senedd, the body responsible for legislating in devolved policy areas including health and education, has sought to capitalise on this disenchantment and discontent. 

Its method? Passing a law that specifically prohibits the making of false or misleading statements of fact to help an election candidate. 

We choose the term “capitalise” deliberately. This is because we believe the new law, set to come into force for elections scheduled to take place in 2030, was passed for nefarious purposes. 

Far from an attempt to increase the accuracy of information shared with the electorate, the legislation is in our view an attempt to limit scrutiny and debate certain politicians find objectionable. 

We already have an example of this. 

The Senedd rarely attracts Britain-wide attention. But its decision to impose a default 20mph speed limit on all restricted roads in Wales was one such example. 

People across Wales understandably began describing the policy as a “blanket” 20mph speed limit. Those Senedd members who opposed it used the term too. But to the vast majority in the Senedd, the term was completely unacceptable. 

The ludicrous objections centred on claims 20mph was not the speed limit on all roads in Wales. It was pointed out that the policy did not apply to motorways, so to describe it as a “blanket” was incorrect. It was even argued to be deceptive and deliberately dishonest. 

This was, frankly, ludicrous. Any reasonable person in Wales knew exactly what “blanket 20mph” was referring to. Opposing “blanket 20mph” is also a highly effective political message. 

Disgracefully, proponents of the 20mph policy sought to impose a ban on politicians describing it with the “blanket” term. Even worse, they succeeded.

The Senedd’s Commissioner for Standards ruled that using the term was “imprecise and inaccurate”. Consequently, any Senedd member found to have used the term would find themselves in breach of the body’s Code of Conduct. In turn, they would be liable to discipline and sanction. 

The Senedd’s Presiding Officer also ruled it out of order to use the term “blanket 20mph” in proceedings. A prohibition, relating both to statements made within and outside the Senedd chamber, was imposed. A ban was therefore implemented. 

Politicians controlling political debate in this way is nothing short of scandalous. It’s certainly anti-democratic. It limits political criticism to which politicians and their policies can be subjected. It’s very wrong. 

In our view, it amounts to an abuse of the Senedd’s standards process, a system designed to prevent financial wrongdoing and political corruption. It is not a system that should be used to curtail political debate. 

Legislating to create a specific criminal offence, under which politicians can be prosecuted for lying in election campaigns, will take this to another level. 

We’ve already seen how such measures can be abused. Involving the criminal law will only make matters worse. 

We set up our campaign, Senedd Waste, to expose public spending in Wales on inappropriate ideological projects. 

The 20mph laws are one example, introduced after heavy lobbying by taxpayer funded cycling charities. But they’re far from alone. 

The Nation of Sanctuary for asylum seekers is another. This policy, on which tens of millions of pounds of public money has been spent, is designed to help asylum seekers in Wales access housing, welfare and public services. Funds are spent advertising asylum seekers’ entitlements. We argue this is a “pull factor” that encourages people to come to Britain illegally. 

Several charities, outspoken in their support of pro-asylum initiatives but extremely shy of scrutiny of their own activities, are funded under the Nation of Sanctuary scheme. 

One of those charities, the Welsh Refugee Council, pursued a complaint against Tory Senedd member Andrew RT Davies after he questioned a highly inappropriate video shared via the organisation’s website. 

The video comprised a “welcome to Wales” advert in which schoolchildren explained to refugees and asylum seekers how they could access services to which they are entitled.  

The Welsh Refugee Council had accused Davies of sharing “misinformation”. 

 We fear the new law will be weaponised in a similar manner to the way in which the concept of misinformation has been. 

This will, in turn, limit political scrutiny and debate.  

While legislation to combat dishonesty in politics may at face value seem worthwhile, proper consideration should be given to its likely effects. This would be true even in cases in which the legislation in question is considered to be well intentioned. This is often how bad laws come about. 

When the motives of those proposing the legislation are being questioned from the very start, it would be irresponsible not to stop and think. 

The new law, which requires Welsh ministers to make it a criminal offence to make false or misleading statements of fact, does not even define what constitutes such a statement. 

 The entire policy is dangerous. It must be scrapped.