New Broadcasting Commission rules will not result in the taxpayer funding party addresses, nor will it make Government and political broadcasts the same, Government said yesterday.

Junior Legislative Affairs Minister Michael Scott said a Royal Gazette story on Saturday headlined `Public to Pay for Party Political Broadcast' was wrong, and the United Bermuda Party (UBP) had grossly distorted the reforms.

He attacked Shadow Legislative Affairs Minister John Barritt for denouncing the changes, which were published on Friday, as "sinister" and said they make a distinction between Government and political broadcasts.

According to the new Commission rules, a Government broadcast may not be considered "political" but can include "subject matter (which) is concerned with legislative or administrative policies which either have been approved or will in the future be approved by the legislature; where the subject matter is concerned with any policy of the Government; or if it is of an informative nature".

These broadcasts will be paid for by the tax-payer out of the Consolidated Fund and will last no more than 30 minutes and be aired no more than twice a month, except with permission.

The Opposition will be given half the time to respond and that will also be financed through the Consolidated Fund.

Under the rules, in these Government broadcasts, no reference will be made to political parties, candidates or individuals, except through the expression "Government," "Opposition," and "former Government".

Government broadcasts have always been paid by through the Consolidated Fund.

However, Mr. Barritt said the changes meant the taxpayer would now through the Consolidated Fund pay for broadcasts about policy issues - which he said under the previous directives were deemed to be political.

In Senate yesterday, Mr. Scott accused Mr. Barritt of arguing a "misleading and distorting proposition". Later, Sen Scott told The Royal Gazette: "The Government now has the flexibility to address in a broadcast its legislative or administrative policies and any policy of the Government, and include material that is `informative in nature'.

"The news story is wholly wrong to pronounce or even suggest that the foregoing changes, or substitution of concepts of amendments amounts somehow to a `party political broadcast'.

"The headline `Public to pay for party political broadcast' is so hopelessly misleading as to merit clarification at best and an apology at least.

"Mr. Barritt made no attempt in his statements in the article to set out the provisions of the law as set out in the Directions, nor was there any attempt to make any analysis of the law as is used to stand and as it stands amended.

"This approach, no small wonder will have resulted in precisely the kind of news story printed, namely a controversial assertion with negative political overtones with no legal or little of no factual basis."

Sen. Scott criticised Mr. Barritt for stating the Broadcast Commissioners didn't have the right to decide how taxpayers' money was spent because they were not elected. All Government broadcasts had always been paid for out of the Consolidated Fund under 1980 regulations, so they did not need to go to Parliament for approval.

In a statement, Mr, Barritt defended his position, saying the effect of the new rules was to include matters previously considered political in government broadcasts so that the tax-payer would foot the bill.

He said: "Government has now deliberately widened the definition of a Government broadcast to include matters that were previously ruled political so as to pay for them put of the Consolidated Fund i.e. the tax-payers of the country will be footing the bills," he said.

The Broadcast Commissioners ruled last August that a broadcast by Premier Jennifer Smith last February on the eve of the Opposition Budget reply was political, but Government has not billed the Progressive Labour Party (PLP) for it.

Sen Scott said the responsibility for ensuring a broadcast was not political lay with the "undertaking" - the television companies - therefore it was wrong to bill the PLP for the cost.

Mr. Barritt said the Commission rules had been changed because the Premier had been "caught out" in her February broadcast, which meant the PLP should have to pay.

And he said the new changes didn't come solely from the Broadcast Commissioners.

"I am reliably informed that these amendments went back and forth to Cabinet before the final draft was agreed. These new direction were not solely the decision of the Broadcasting Commissioners, the hand of Cabinet is evident."