Steph Hodgins-May (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I seek leave to table an explanatory memorandum relating to the bill.

Leave granted.

I table an explanatory memorandum and seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

I welcome the opportunity to re-introduce this bill today, and continue our efforts to get big money out of politics. I acknowledge the important work done on this issue by my colleague Senator Larissa Waters, as well as former Senators Lee Rhiannon and Richard Di Natale, academics, and civil society organisations that have assisted in the development of this bill previously.

I also note that electoral reform passed last year after a last-minute backroom deal with the Coalition. That deal kept the disclosure threshold far too high and refused to wind in donations from harmful industries with a history of seeking to influence decision-makers. This bill seeks to go further than that weak, compromised legislation, restoring some important integrity to our democratic processes.

If passed, this bill would stop dirty industries—those with a track record of using donations to shape policy and gain access—from making political donations. These include the fossil fuel, banking, defence, pharmaceutical, liquor, tobacco, and gambling industries. The bill also limits individual donations to $3,000 per election term, dramatically reducing the ability of wealthy individuals or entities to buy influence and ensuring a fairer, more representative political system.

There has never been a more urgent time for donation reform. Trust in parliament and in politicians is at an all-time low. Australians are increasingly convinced that their representatives serve corporate donors rather than the public interest.

This bill is grounded not just in principle, but in evidence. In December 2024, the Centre for Public Integrity published Hey, Big Spender: What 25 years of political party income disclosures reveal, a comprehensive analysis of a quarter-century of political finance data in Australia. The report paints a stark picture of a political system increasingly dependent on large donors, with corporate interests and wealthy individuals dominating party income while ordinary Australians are effectively priced out of political participation.

The report shows that Australia's major parties have become structurally reliant on big money, with a relatively small number of high-value donors accounting for a disproportionate share of total income. It also highlights how high disclosure thresholds and delayed reporting obscure the true scale and sources of political influence, often revealing who funded parties only long after elections are decided. Crucially, Hey, Big Spender concludes that transparency alone has failed to curb the corrupting influence of money in politics, and that donation caps and bans on high-risk donors are essential to restoring integrity.

Over the past decade, more than $230 million in corporate donations have flowed to the major parties. These funds come from banks, mining and resources companies, fossil fuel producers, property developers, big pharma, liquor and tobacco companies, and gambling operators. These are the interests that have consistently put profits ahead of people's needs.

These donations are not acts of civic generosity. They are investments designed to secure influence and ensure regulatory and policy outcomes that favour private interests. Evidence of this is clear. For over a decade, the Greens have maintained the Democracy for Sale website, tracking donations and exposing the nexus between corporate money and policy outcomes. In 2018, the Senate Select Committee into the Political Influence of Donations provided examples showing how corporate donations have directly benefited companies through legislation, approvals, and subsidies.

The public continues to pay the price through climate inaction, unchecked gambling harm, and governments that allow corporations to avoid paying their fair share of tax while ordinary Australians struggle to access essential services. Until we break the hold of dirty donations over the major parties, big corporations will keep winning and the community loses out.

We have already seen how property development donations have influenced planning outcomes in Victoria. In Melbourne, generous contributions from developers have coincided with rezoning approvals in environmentally sensitive areas, and exemptions from affordable housing obligations, undermining public trust and locking in outcomes that benefit private profit over the community. Queensland and New South Wales have legislated to restrict donations from property developers, measures upheld by the High Court. This bill extends those protections federally and acknowledges the influence of other key dirty industries.

Fossil fuel interests have continued to pour millions into the major parties. Meanwhile, federal and state governments handed out $14.5 billion in fossil fuel subsidies in 2023-24, with forward estimates of around $65-67 billion. In the 2025 federal budget, spending on housing and homelessness services was $6.9 billion, while tax breaks for landlords and investors—including negative gearing and other concessions—exceeded $12 billion, more than Commonwealth investment in social housing, homelessness services, and rent assistance combined. The most recent federal budget expanded fuel tax credits and other subsidies for fossil fuel producers and property developers, while ordinary Australians face crushing housing costs and energy bills.

It is a very high return on investment for these donors and a terrible deal for the rest of us. Donations bought the previous Liberal government's paralysis on climate change at a time when Australians faced more extreme bushfires, crippling droughts, and floods. Generous contributions continue to cloud judgment under the Albanese Labor government as new coal and gas projects receive approvals and taxpayer money flows into destructive projects.

The gas industry benefits not only from donations but from a revolving door between politics and industry. Former resources ministers and senior advisers routinely move into well-paid industry roles that blur the lines between public duty and corporate profit. Despite exporting nearly 80 per cent of production, governments continue to subsidise exploration and life extensions for projects like the recent Otway Basin acreage release and Woodside's North West Shelf extension to 2070. These decisions lock in decades of production, little of which benefits domestic energy security while maximising profits for exporters. Politicians continue to claim that Australia needs more gas, even though this narrative ignores reality and undermines the transition to renewables.

The cosy relationship between fossil fuel donors and policymakers has also contributed to the weak 2035 emission reduction target set by the Albanese Government last year. These targets are far from the deep cuts science says are needed to limit warming. Dozens of coal and gas projects continue to be approved, including expansions and extensions, putting even these weak targets at serious risk. Donations give industry leverage to resist reforms that would force them to pay their fair share or transition to cleaner practices.

The banking and financial sector is also a regular contributor and beneficiary. The sector has donated roughly $76 million since 2012. These contributions have historically shielded banks from accountability, delaying meaningful reforms and protections for customers. Only public outrage forced the Banking Royal Commission, which exposed widespread misconduct. How much faster would the commission have happened if the Liberal, National, and Labor parties were not on the payroll of the banks? Would we have seen stronger action if donations hadn't bought political protection?

The gambling industry is another major donor that governments have consistently failed to confront. Companies such as Sportsbet and Tabcorp have poured millions of dollars into state and federal political parties, while the gambling lobby has become the most prolific lobbying force in Australia, outspending and outnumbering almost every other industry in its efforts to shape public policy. This influence is not abstract—it is sustained, organised, and targeted at maintaining a regulatory environment that protects profits at the expense of the public interest.

The consequences are severe and well documented. Gambling harm costs Australian communities tens of billions of dollars each year, driving addiction, family breakdown, financial distress, and suicide, particularly in low-income communities. Yet despite repeated parliamentary inquiries and clear recommendations to reduce poker machine intensity, curb saturation advertising, and strengthen protections for online gambling, meaningful reform has been delayed or abandoned. Ministers continue to ignore their own evidence, prioritising the interests of a powerful donor and lobbying sector over the health and wellbeing of Australians.

These donations are only those publicly disclosed. They exclude money paid for access meetings, memberships, and subscriptions that may serve as indirect influence, as well as funds channelled through intermediary or fundraising bodies. Regardless of source, donations come with an expectation of results, eroding public trust.

By banning donations from these industries and limiting individual contributions to $3,000, this bill implements key recommendations of the Senate Select Committee into the Political Influence of Donations. It makes it an offence for a prohibited donor to make a donation or solicit another person to make a donation on its behalf. It is also an offence to accept a donation from a prohibited donor.

This bill also limits other political donations to $3,000 per election term. By aggregating and capping political donations, this bill seeks to level the playing field and prevent those with more money from gaining disproportionate influence, consistent with the High Court's recognition in McCloy v NSW.

The bill will limit political donations but does not restrict civil society organisations from fundraising for their advocacy work. The work of unions, charities, and community groups must continue. Electoral expenditure caps for these organisations should be introduced to ensure proper balance.

The bill complements ongoing reforms to strengthen disclosure, including real-time reporting, so Australians no longer wait 18 months to see who is buying influence.

Transparency alone is insufficient, but it is a necessary step to restore confidence.

Of course, much more work is required to restore trust in our Parliament. The Greens remain deeply concerned about the inadequacy of the federal lobbying regime, particularly in light of sustained calls from academics, civil society, and the broader community to rein in the influence of corporate lobbyists, close the revolving door between industry and ministerial offices, extend the code of conduct to in-house lobbyists, and introduce meaningful enforcement mechanisms with real penalties for breaches. We are also concerned by this Government's increasing reliance on secrecy, reflected in record-low compliance with Senate orders for the production of documents and the unchecked use of public interest immunity claims to undermine the Parliament's ability to hold the Government to account.

The 2025 election results confirm that Australians want a government that is transparent, accountable, and representative. This bill is an important first step toward removing corporate influence and restoring public faith in our democracy.

If we are committed to enhancing the democratic process, which surely is something that every parliament should regularly turn its mind to, this should be a priority. This bill does not stifle debate or prevent individuals from donating to support a political party. It bans donations from industries that have become associated with having a corrupting influence on how we work as decision makers and will return democracy to the community.

I commend the bill to the Senate.

I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.