Amends the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 to: prohibit political donations from the fossil fuel industry, property developers, the tobacco industry, the banking industry, liquor and gambling businesses, pharmaceutical companies and representative organisations for these industries; impose a cumulative limit on political donations from any source of $3,000 per election term; and extend the definition of 'gift' to include subscription and membership fees, as well as attendance at fundraising events.
The amendments seek to remove undue influence by powerful industries on policy and funding decisions and enhance individuals’ capacity to take part in public life without those influences compromising their decision-making capacity.The bill provides that any unlawful acceptance of donations can lead to recovery as a debt by the Commonwealth and imposes penalties for breaches, including imprisonment and fines. Additionally, it simplifies and clarifies definitions related to political donations and outlines the process for entities to seek determinations from the Electoral Commission that they are not prohibited donors.
The bill should be supported because it addresses the significant risk of corruption and undue influence in the political process by limiting the capacity of industries with vested interests to sway political decisions through donations. By capping donations and prohibiting them from certain industries, the bill aims to enhance the integrity and independence of Australia's democratic institutions. This is a crucial step in ensuring that political decisions are made in the public interest rather than being influenced by the financial power of specific sectors [Judgment]. Furthermore, by leveling the political playing field, the bill promotes equal participation in the electoral process, ensuring that all voices have a fair chance to be heard, not just those backed by significant financial resources.
The bill should be opposed because it imposes restrictions that may be seen as limiting the freedom of individuals and businesses to use their resources as they see fit, which is a fundamental aspect of property rights. By targeting specific industries, the bill may also be perceived as discriminatory, unfairly penalizing certain sectors over others without clear justification for why these industries alone should be subject to donation bans. This could lead to claims of unequal treatment under the law, potentially undermining the principle of non-discrimination [Judgment]. Additionally, the cap on donations could hinder the ability of political parties to effectively communicate and campaign, which is essential for a vibrant democratic debate.
2022-11-24
Before Senate
WATERS, Sen Larissa
Unspecified
Anti-Corruption, Democratic Institutions, Civics