KEY POINTS:
Critics of the Electoral Finance Bill say the amendments by Parliament's justice and electoral select committee have done nothing to allay their concerns.
The president of the Law Society, John Marshall, QC, did not want to give a "kneejerk reaction" given the bill's significance. "In the submissions that we made to the select committee, we said the bill wasn't capable of being patched up and should be withdrawn and rewritten. On a quick initial reading of the report, I haven't changed my view on that.
"We want to consider the select committee reports and the amendments in detail before commenting and hopefully we'll be able to do that in the next day or two." Auckland accountant John Boscawen, who organised a protest march down Queen St on Saturday, said the committee has not amended a crucial aspect of the bill - an 11-month period restricting election advertising.
"If you're talking about an October or November election, which is normal in New Zealand, you're gonna have free speech gagged for 10 or 11 months of every three-yearly electoral cycle.
"That will be the most restrictive period of any Western democracy."
Mr Boscawen, an Act Party member, said Australia had no restrictions, Canada's was for six to eight weeks, while Britain's was a year in their five-yearly electoral cycle.
"Our restriction will be one year in three. It is the most restrictive in the Western World."
The Institute of Chartered Accountants said it was concerned that expert advice had been "substantially ignored".
David Pickens, the institute's director of government relations and strategic projects, said the only way to get a workable solution was to dump the bill and redraft it from scratch.
Another march against the bill takes place in Wellington tomorrow, with a third planned in Christchurch.
