Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 12 Hansard (21 November) . . Page.. 4017 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

I would say to members of the Assembly that there is great value in having provisions which line up with the Commonwealth provisions, because that makes it considerably easier for those parties and individuals who field candidates at both Commonwealth and Territory level to comply with laws at both levels. Remember that we say ignorance of the law is no excuse; and when we have two fairly different sets of laws in respect of the Commonwealth and the ACT for very similar exercises, namely, fielding candidates in elections, we increase the likelihood that people will break the law because they do not know what the law says. It is all very well for the Liberal and Labor parties, who employ staff whose job it is to read the electoral Acts and understand them; but lots of candidates in elections, sometimes at both levels, do not have that manpower resource and do not have the resources to be able to fully digest very detailed provisions in electoral legislation. It is not just the big parties that are being looked after in these reforms; it is anybody who wants to access our political system, our democratic processes, without having to have a doctorate in law to be able to do so. That is why this process is in train.

Let me respond to one last point, Mr Speaker - the claim that keeping records of individual donations of less than $500 is important and doing away with it under these arrangements is inappropriate. Let me point out that a donor is required to lodge a return if he or she has, over the financial year in question, donated $1,500 or more, regardless of the size of each individual donation. The compliance provisions of the Electoral Act would enable the Electoral Commission to identify such donors from the records of the party and follow up with any donors who have not submitted returns. These provisions do not entirely remove the provisions in this legislation that entirely remove the obligation on people to keep their records and to disclose things to the Electoral Commission, merely because the threshold that the parties' records have to be kept at is lifted. Individual obligations still remain. That is the capacity that we have to ensure that there is still a fairly high degree of accountability in our system. I commend this Bill to the Assembly.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Clauses 1 to 3, by leave, taken together, and agreed to.

Clause 4

Amendment (by Ms Horodny) proposed:

Page 2, lines 5 to 9, proposed new definition of "associated entity", omit the proposed new definition, substitute the following definition:

"`associated entity' means an entity that -

(a) is controlled by 1 or more registered parties or an independent MLA;

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .