Concern about misuse of the internet and electronic communications is a fairly recent addition to many guidance documents. When it is included, fairly detailed instructions are given. The Commonwealth, Victorian, Tasmanian, Western Australian and ACT documents contain similar instructions. The starting point is that agencies are responsible for ensuring that government resources are not used to support any political party. For these jurisdictions, agencies play the role in determining if any material needs to be removed from agency websites and ministerial websites supported and maintained by that agency. Ministerial statements that criticise the Opposition are cited as an example of material which should be removed.
The guidances make a distinction between what can be added to agency websites and ministerial websites during the campaign. For example, it is generally agreed that agencies should only add portfolio related announcements, factual material and material on existing policies and programs. For ministerial websites, maintained by departments, it is agreed that only purely factual material should be added and no material about future policies, how-to-vote material, political speeches and media releases that criticise the Opposition. The wisdom of adding exit or entry messages, particularly to ministerial websites which link to party political sites, is canvassed. The use of these messages draws a line between what is a funded government website and what is a link outside of the government domain. The Commonwealth’s Guidance on Caretaker Conventions is supplemented in this area by the Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO) Guidance on Departmental and Ministerial Websites.
The use of government websites provoked controversy during the 2004 Federal election campaign. In September 2004, Opposition Finance spokesman, Bob McMullan, wrote to then Secretary of Defence, Ric Smith, alleging that then Minister, Robert Hill, had breached the caretaker conventions by posting four election-related announcements on a website maintained by the Department of Defence after the campaign had commenced (Kerin 2004). Of particular concern to Labor was the announcement of a new Defence headquarters at Bungendore, in the Coalition-held marginal seat of Eden-Monaro. McMullan argued that since they related to future policies and election commitments, the announcements should have been posted on the Liberal Party website.
In his letter of response to the shadow minister, the Secretary explained that Defence had closely followed the guidance document issued by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. He noted the website in question was not a departmental website, but one defined in the conventions as an agency-maintained ‘ministerial website’. In accordance with the conventions, Defence put a notice on the website stating that no political or election-related material would be available on the website. The same notice appeared as a ‘pop-up message’ to advise visitors when they were leaving the website. Smith’s letter also noted that the conventions are not infringed when decisions taken prior to the commencement of the caretaker period are announced during an election campaign. He reiterated his appreciation of the sensitivity of matters raised by the Opposition, but stated his belief that Defence was and had been discharging its duties diligently and professionally. However, he advised the shadow minister that, in order to ‘minimise the risk of controversy’, henceforth ‘all of the media materials generated by our ministers and parliamentary secretary since 31 August [commencement of the caretaker period], and all future media materials, will now be posted by ministerial staff to the website of the Liberal Party of Australia’ (Defence Media Release, 8 September 2004).
This example underscores the sensitivity of issues raised during the caretaker period, and the need for careful judgement when weighing questions of whether an incumbent government is advantaged through the support services available to ministers in the normal course of administration. It also demonstrates the contested interpretation of the conventions, particularly in areas of new and emerging practice. Notwithstanding the Secretary’s confidence that Defence had adhered to the conventions, he initiated a change in the procedure followed—a concession perhaps, that the principle of avoiding APS involvement in election activities should be the dominant consideration in this instance. As expected, more detailed advice on websites and electronic communications is included in the DPMC caretaker conventions guidance, issued in August 2007. It states that ‘as a general rule during the caretaker period, ministerial media releases and alerts should be placed on the website of the relevant political party’ (DPMC 2007, pp. 4-5). New advice about interactive and funded websites (DPMC 2007, p. 5) illustrates the impact of emerging issues and technologies on the evolution of caretaker practices.
As well as detailed guidance about the management of agency and ministerial websites, the majority of jurisdictions caution that departmental email and bulletin boards should not be used to publish political material.
Both the New South Wales and Queensland guidance documents are silent on the management of the internet and electronic communications during an election campaign. However, in Queensland, advice on the management of ministerial websites is provided in a letter from the Director-General of the Department of the Premier and Cabinet to each department head when caretaker conventions commence. It mirrors the advice provided in other jurisdictions. South Australia puts the obligation on ministers to ensure that political material is not present on publicly funded websites. Like New South Wales and Queensland, South Australia acknowledges that agencies should continue to maintain ministerial websites but should only add material relating to existing policy or that is purely factual.
The Northern Territory takes a slightly different approach, consistent with the approach to advertising material. They recommend all agency websites carry an authorisation identifying the senior officer who is responsible for comment on the website. They also recommend the use of entry and exit statements so the user is clear when they are no longer within a government site.
The need for detailed guidance on the use of electronic communications during an election campaign is a useful illustration of the dynamic nature of caretaker conventions, and their flexibility in adapting to changing imperatives—in this case, rapid developments in technology.