Gary Gray (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Resources and Energy) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak today on this MPI because it is an important matter for the governance of our political parties and of our nation. For nigh on 30 years, Australia has been a great example to the democratic world for the way in which our donation disclosure laws operate at the federal level. I do not believe that at any time in the past three decades has there ever been a substantial allegation, and certainly never an allegation upheld, of corruption in our federal political system. It is an outstanding beacon both of decency and of transparency, and one that stands as testament to the hard work done over the years by the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, by our political parties themselves and by the leadership in this chamber.

I am so pleased that during my time as Special Minister of State I was able to work across the political divide to establish this range of reforms to our donation and funding system. The reasons I am proud about that are because what we have achieved here is a set of reforms that creates a sustainable and transparent funding system for parties of government and which also supports Independent members of parliament too and members of minor and very minor parties.

The consideration that has gone into this bill grows not only from the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters reports over the course of the past decade, but also from a tough set of learnings to this place from the Fair Work Australia investigation into the Health Services Union, a report which was presented to the Australian Electoral Commission and then resulted in a number of recommendations that, frankly, were embraced by the government and driven hard by the opposition. I do not believe there would have been another way or another time in which the compliance requirements in this act could have been achieved, and achieved in such a seamless manner. They were achieved both with goodwill and with good intention. Why? Because we in this place take seriously the need for an electoral system in which transparency works and a system which itself works.

What do I mean by that? I have been a fundraiser for my party during my time as the General Secretary of the Australian Labor Party. At that time I often sought contributions simply on the basis that moderate contributions to both sides of politics make our system stronger. They make it better. They make our system responsive and they make our system capable. They make our system professional and recognisable in the world as a clean and transparent electoral donations management system supporting great political parties, parties of government, while also creating room both for Independents and minor parties to grow and thrive.

The measures in this bill are measures that grow from years of hard work. Recommendation No. 1 grows from the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters report from 2011. In that report, consideration was given to reducing the donation threshold. The way in which we interpreted that debate was to say, 'Let us have that threshold lowered to $5,000 but without indexation.' All members would know that the removal of indexation means that the efflux of time will ensure that that threshold itself is both meaningful and operable. Reducing the disclosure period to six months, ending 31 December and 30 June respectively, creates a situation of regular financial returns from political parties. That again is a recommendation of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters. These are bipartisan recommendations carefully thought through.

Independent candidates, associated entities and third parties will be banned from receiving foreign gifts. That is again a Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters recommendation from 2011. Anonymous donations over $1,000 to political parties and associated entities will be banned. Why $1,000? I have heard people say it should be a lower number. It is simply because political parties run at multiple levels when it comes to fundraising. At the most basic level it is chook raffles. At the most basic level it is a $5 or $10 raffle ticket. Sometimes if you are really lucky it might be $20 or $50. But when you are running raffle ticket contributions of that level, to have an anonymous donation below $1,000 simply makes it impractical for ordinary branch members or for the secretary of a branch of a political party in Gulargambone, Port Augusta, Boulder, Kambalda or Darwin to run their books, to make sure that documentation is properly kept.

I advise the House that this measure is far more likely to be generous, benign and facilitating for Independent members of parliament who do not have party structures, who do not have cultures of organisations, who do not have experience as small business operators or, on my side of politics, being trade union officials who can support candidates and campaigns. That is a good measure for Independents and for minor parties.

We also took tough decisions to ensure that, as part of the Health Services Union inquiry carried out by Fair Work Australia, we carried forward the issues around compliance. I firmly believe that our electoral system is a good system and, in managing donations and in accounting for the money that goes to political parties, second to none in the world. It is pragmatic. It is understandable. It is not complex and yet at the same time it allows the variety of funding sources that drives our great political parties. You see our parties do need to have the chook raffle to support local branch activities. Our parties also need to have the $1,000 dinner. Our parties also need to be able to say to corporations, to high net worth individuals and to trade unions, 'Make a donation and it will be disclosed. Please, make your donations.'

Donations are appreciated by our system. Donations assist our system to work and a donation well given and well intended is a genuine contribution to the strength of our political system, a contribution to our democracy. It is not a grubby underhand act by a person seeking an advantage. This parliament and our parties have, to their eternal credit, put in place not just a donations disclosure system but a whole culture of behaviour and of codes of conduct that govern how we behave as individuals and each of our parties has these codes of conduct.

More importantly, through the Australian Electoral Commission we have a process that manages, as best as it possibly can, the laws that we have to ensure transparency and disclosure. Then we do more. We say after every election we will have a Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters consideration of how that election went. That is what we have done here in election after election, looking at how our elections were run and how disclosure worked. Over the years we have had many recommendations and very, very few of them carried forward into law.

This particular set of recommendations does make a very substantial contribution to the administration of our parties. That contribution is made via a dollar contribution from the Australian taxpayer to each political party on the basis of its primary vote. That contribution helps ensure our political parties are funded by the chook raffles, as I said, by the higher level fundraising activities of events and by donations. It is also funded by the internal resources of political parties. On my side of politics, traditionally that has meant John Curtin House. On the coalition side of the fence, that has often meant organisations such as Vapold. But it has also meant that with the creation of this additional pillar—and it is a pillar of support for the integrity of our system—we have a substantial contribution from the taxpayer. What that does is ensures our political system will at no point become beholden to any individual donor. That is important. It is important on my side of politics because increasingly the donations come from a smaller and smaller number of very, very big trade unions. What it means when you have this broad base of support, as I have just described, is that our party structures can operate with greater integrity, not less. And the disclosure measures themselves introduce procedures that have more integrity and not less at all levels.

I am particularly pleased that we were able to meet, as a party of government and a party of the opposition aspiring to be the government, and ensure that what we have done here is create a sustainable funding process for our political parties. A sustainable, transparent funding process that will ensure not only the professionalism of our parties but also ensure that our parties themselves can function regardless of what high net worth individuals or willing contributors from trade unions want to do. That is a good thing, and that has never happened before.

It also requires proper disclosure of expenditure by political parties on the administrative side of the equation. That has never happened to the detail that we are doing it here today. It has been speculated upon by many over the years as, 'Wouldn't it be nice to know exactly how political parties operate'. There are academics who have written PhDs on this subject; there are political operatives who just wished that it were possible to have political parties who, through their own support mechanisms, were able to ensure that they could operate with great certainty. I believe what these changes do is not only live out the letter of the agreement between the government and those Independents, but it also does it even better. It does it because the processes involved participants from all sides, and it does it because what eventually was determined as this package is a balance between pragmatism, necessary reform and transparency—ensuring at all times that the highest measure of transparency is in place for these reforms.

Now transparency in the context of donations walks a fine line between the voyeurism of who pays what to whom and a real need for our voters to know. I understand, because the member for Lyne has expressed it with great clarity, the concern of knowing when donations are made during the final 28 days of an election campaign. The fact of it is this: the final 28 days of an election campaign, should disclosures occur publicly during that period, would become entirely around the voyeuristic side of who is paying what to whom. We have that transparency; those donations are already disclosed. We in this place have parties that are made of people who work hard selling chook raffle tickets, supporting us as members of parliament, and they expect and they assume that we aspire to the highest standard of lawmaking when it comes to making our political parties as effective as they can be and for the public knowing where our money comes from, and this bill does just that.

See this speech in context