Page 1719 - Week 05 - Thursday, 8 May 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I am arguing that we should do what we can to make the existing system more transparent. While I think a good case can be made for banning donations from developers, from gambling revenue, or from the sale of drugs like alcohol and tobacco, that is a debate that can take place at another time.
The Greens support public funding of election campaigns in order to strengthen democratic power against financial power. The amendments that I am proposing today are a small but a significant safeguard against corruption, and I urge members to join me in supporting my amendment in order to show that they have got nothing to hide and that they are very prepared to show it, and to rebuild the faith the electorate has in our political system in so doing.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (11.13): This amendment is intended to require weekly disclosure of donations made to parties and candidates during the election period, through reporting made directly by parties and candidates on their own websites or in newspaper advertisements. The government does not propose to support Dr Foskey’s proposed changes to the disclosure laws at this time, and that is for two reasons.
Firstly, the government has concerns about the fairly onerous requirements this would place on political organisations and, in particular, independent candidates during the election period. For example, Dr Foskey’s requirement that it be published on their website or in a newspaper advertisement could be potentially quite onerous, particularly on small political organisations or candidates. It also puts in place an additional burden at a time when candidates and parties are focused on fighting the election itself. And we have concerns about the administrative burden that it places.
The second reason is that the government wishes to delay such major changes to disclosure laws pending the national review of disclosure laws recently announced by the federal government. We believe that there could be wide-ranging changes to electoral disclosure laws as a result of the federal government’s push for national consistency, a push that the government is very pleased to participate in.
I think it would be unfortunate if we embarked upon major changes to the Electoral Act at this time in this regard, only to have to revisit them within a relatively short period of time following the federal government’s further consideration, along with the states and territories, of this matter. For these reasons, the government does not support the amendment.
MR MULCAHY (Molonglo) (11.15): I also am opposed to this particular amendment. Dr Foskey, towards the end of her remarks, made the comment that, if we really want to demonstrate our strong stand against corruption, we should be supporting this. Throughout my career I have given a lot of weight to fighting corruption in a range of different areas of my career. It is never an easy task and it often has consequences when one refuses to in any way embrace corruption. But I am not convinced that this amendment really achieves the outcome of fighting corruption.
I agree with the attorney that this is likely to be more of a headache and a nuisance than anything else. I do not even maintain my own website; it is done by other people
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .