Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

In fact, there are parliaments in Australia that have precisely this form of amendment. As I said, this amendment is based on the existing provision in section 113 of the Electoral Act in South Australia. Where that's been used in South Australia, the exercise of that provision has been done in a very limited way. It hasn't impacted on freedom of speech in those jurisdictions. We know that the existence of that legislation actually serves in some ways as a handbrake on false and misleading information. So we would commend this truth in advertising amendment. We would argue that it is not appropriate, and in no way is going to make any significant difference, to simply ask that somebody who advertises during an election campaign puts their name to it. We already know that that exists in practice and in law. This extends those provisions a little further but won't do what is intended to be done, and that is ensure that people are held to account.

We will argue, as we have for many, many years, that it is appropriate that statements that are simply factually inaccurate—not matters of opinion, but matters of fact—are able to be adjudicated by the Electoral Commissioner. We know that the Electoral Commissioner would exercise their judgement very judiciously in these circumstances, as they have done previously. It is important that individuals who participate in the democratic process know that there are responsibilities that come with that participation, and that is that they do not have any right, real or implied, to lie in election advertising.