Labour breaches Electoral Finance Act

ONE NEWS: Labour has been the first to break its own electoral finance law, just months after the law has come into effect.

The Electoral Commission has ruled a Labour Party pamphlet is illegal, but they will not have to face up to the police and have been given a warning.

The Electoral Finance Act was meant to stop big money buying elections, but it hasn't stopped Labour from using tax payer money to promote itself.

"At the very first hurdle, the Labour Party having passed the law, have gone out and deliberately broken the law," says John Key.

The pamphlets broke the Electoral Finance Act because they do not have the address of the party secretary on them, which is required under the law.

Labour says the pamphlets were printed and mostly distributed before the new law came into effect and some leftovers were then mistakenly handed out.

"It was a mistake but then I suppose you could say that the handing out of Mr Key's DVD was a mistake because it was printed last year but distributed this year, has no authorisation, doesn't fit within the electoral finance act," says Justice Minister Annette King.

Under that Act, the incident could have been referred to the police, but the Electoral Commission has let Labour off with a warning saying the breach was considered inconsequential.

But the National Party has asked why the Police considered it inconsequential.

"Does she think that spending hundreds of thousands of dollars publishing a booklet designed to get people to vote for the Labour Party is inconsequential or is it only inconsequential when Labour is spending the money?" asked Bill English in Parliament.

In a bizarre twist the Justice Minister's office says it handing out just one pamphlet could have breached the Electoral Finance Act.

Critics say that just goes to show how crazy the law is.

Bill Hodge, a constitutional lawyer and a critic of the Electoral Finance Act says this is one of the unforeseen consequences of the law.

He says there is now considerable uncertainty about the legality of that type of electoral expense and many others.