The case of the publication of “The Lovregana Statement” during the recent Federal Election campaign grows curiouser and curiouser, following a suggestion that Forestry Tasmania were involved.
While the physical appearance of the “Statement” — a misty panorama of trees and forest with text overlaid — was eerily reminiscent of Forestry Tasmania’s pamphlets and posters, FT has removed “the Statement” from their website and now appears to disavow any association with it.
Because the “Statement” was published during an election campaign and was political in nature, the Tasmanian Aboriginal Land Council (who authorised it) are required to declare it via a return lodged with the Australian Electoral Commission; “Cash donations and any gifts ‘in-kind’ (e.g. donated advertising) must be declared.” [http://fader.aec.gov/erDefault.asp?EventID=12246].
If, for example, Forestry Tasmania had sponsored the advertisement, they too would be required to declare this via the AEC as it would obviously be a cash donation or gift in kind, depending on how they hypothetically paid the money.
As the publisher of the advert, The Mercury newspaper must also declare the expenditure received.
The AEC website [www.aec.gov.au] reveals that:
– There is no declaration from Forestry Tasmania for the 2004 Federal Election period.
– TALC has lodged two declarations, stating that no donations were received from any source and that no expenditure was made on behalf of any third party.
– The Mercury’s declaration lists an unspecified political advert, published 2/10/04 at a cost of $6335.64 on behalf of TALC.
“The Lovregana Statement” was published in The Mercury 2/10/04 on behalf of TALC. No other advertisement in the 2/10 publication of The Mercury carries the TALC logo or name. The only other point of notable interest in the records, is that Glenn Shaw of TALC authorised “The Lovregana Statement,” but it was TALC’s Colin Hughes who actually signed off on the AEC declarations.
So the official Electoral Commission records seem to indicate that The Mercury felt “The Lovregana Statement” was political and declared it to the AEC, while TALC thinks differently and has not declared it. It’s also possible that the AEC records are actually indicating that TALC did not pay for or recieve any in-kind gift or cash in respect of the advertisement.
Therefore, despite the AEC’s records, the issue is no clearer — TALC may or may not have paid for the publication of “The Lovregana Statement” while the question of any Forestry Tasmania’s involvement is also unresolved. Given the lack of clarity in the AEC’s documents and the difficulty in proving or disproving political sponsorship, I hope Forestry Tasmania can find the time to publicly clear the air over this.
Did Forestry Tasmania pay any money or in-kind gift towards the production of “The Lovregana Statement,” or towards its publication in The Mercury during the Federal Election campaign?
Yours,
Jason Lovell
Earlier: The exclusion zone
