Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased also to rise and speak to this motion which concerns itself with the allegedly corrupting influence of political donations. It seems that, in the eyes of some in this place, when it comes to political donations some donations are more corrupting than others. What is most interesting about this motion is what is not in it.

The motion appears to suggest that the 'corrupting influence' of donations pertains only to those 'from property developers and fossil fuel companies'. That is a ridiculous assertion. This government does not believe it is appropriate to create particular classes of citizens or professions and ban them from participating in the political process. So long as the rules are clear, the process is transparent and the rules are consistently applied, then our present regime for the disclosure of donations represents an appropriate balance between transparency and enabling Australians to participate in the political process.

I understand that some in this place have a certain world view—namely, that property developers and fossil fuel companies are engaged in some sort of Dickensian villainy on a massive scale. Clearly that is not a view I share, nor is it one shared by most sane Australians. But I would just mention, most especially to the Labor Party senators here this afternoon, whose Senate representatives have also been making contributions on this subject today, that if you want to have an ounce of credibility on this subject, it is important to start in your own backyard or, more accurately, in your own bank accounts. I would venture to suggest that if you spoke with most ordinary Australians and did a word association test putting to them the word 'corruption', the most likely response just now would not be 'developer' or 'fossil fuel company'; it would be 'union'. Eight weeks ago, we had the release—