Page 278 - Week 01 - Thursday, 10 February 2022
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
(d) in its submission to the Standing Committee on Justice and Community Safety (JACS) inquiry into the 2020 ACT election, the ACT Electoral Commission recommended (Recommendation 22) amending the Electoral Act to include provisions to limit the amount of public funding that can be received by a political party or candidate to ensure that the amount received does not exceed the amount of electoral expenditure incurred;
(e) the ACT Labor submission to the JACS inquiry supported the Elections ACT recommendation, stating “The move towards a best practice public funding model by the ACT Labor government was never intended as a means for parties or candidates to make a profit. This appears to have provided a situation in which some parties run with the intent of making a profit, so that they can then funnel this money to other campaigns such as the federal election or to campaigns in other states. This practice does not meet community expectations”;
(f) in their evidence to the committee the Liberal Party representative stated that “… to happily take an additional $200 000 or thereabouts from ratepayers, I think, is completely inappropriate and something that should be seriously considered, moving forward. I would have thought and hoped that the political party that was in that position would not accept an amount that would get to a point where they were turning a profit”;
(g) the JACS Committee in its report into the 2020 ACT election commented that “The committee supports the policy intention of public funding for candidates and parties, in reducing risk of corruption in the political system. The committee considers it is reasonable to limit public funding to not exceed a candidate’s electoral expenditure”;
(h) the JACS Committee recommended that the Electoral Act be amended to limit the amount of public funding received by a party or candidate to not exceed the amount of electoral expenditure incurred; and
(i) the ACT government response agreed that public funding “should not necessarily provide individuals with an opportunity to gain profit”;
(2) agrees that:
(a) profiteering out of public election funding and channelling the money into Federal campaigns does not meet community expectations and is not the intent of ACT public funding; and
(b) legislation should be amended prior to the 2024 ACT election to ensure political parties do not profiteer at the expense of ACT taxpayers; and
(3) calls on the ACT Greens MLAs to write to their party and request that they pay back the $188 771 profit they made at taxpayers’ expense at the 2020 election.
This is, at its essence, a pretty straightforward motion. I would describe it as simple and common sense, but yesterday Mr Braddock opposed the Liberal motion by describing it as simple and common sense. At the end of the day, a political party has been overpaid ACT taxpayers’ money. They have used a loophole in the existing legislation, and we think that it is the right thing to do for that party to pay the money back.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video