Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 12 Hansard (21 November) . . Page.. 4010 ..

MR WHITECROSS (continuing):

obligations of public declaration compared with the previous Act. The Commonwealth went about a process of strengthening its own legislation under the previous Federal Labor Government, and this legislation takes that same strengthening through into the ACT Act.

As a result of the new provisions, it will no longer be possible for people wishing to make donations to political parties to use third party intermediaries to disguise the fact that they are making a donation to a political party. As a result of these changes, any organisation making donations to a political party in excess of $1,500 will have to explain where they, in turn, got their money from. I think that is a very worthwhile tightening of the legislation. It was a great initiative of the former Labor Government to introduce this legislation federally, and it is commendable that the current Government in the ACT has brought forward legislation to pick up those worthwhile amendments.

There are a range of other amendments in this Bill that are designed to streamline the process, to eliminate a lot of the cumbersome bureaucracy associated with obtaining public funding in relation to elections. Previously, lots of forms had to be filled out to get access to money which everybody knew they were entitled to. As a result of this Bill, the Electoral Office will have less expense in administering the Act; there will be less unnecessary expense for candidates for election and parties fielding candidates in an election; and at the same time there will be a greater level of disclosure, so that the people of the ACT, in relation to ACT elections as in relation to Commonwealth elections, know who is donating money to political parties. No longer can people wishing to make donations to political parties disguise those donations by going through third party fundraising organisations.

Mr Speaker, I see that there are a number of amendments foreshadowed. I will speak on those amendments in the detail stage. However, the principles I will be upholding are the principles encompassed by these amendments, which are a higher level of disclosure in relation to third party intermediaries and streamlining of the unnecessary bureaucracy encompassed in the original Act, which the Commonwealth legislation has achieved. I think the legislation takes us forward and, while we will consider the individual amendments on their merit, I think the basic legislation is very good.

MR MOORE (5.16): The Bill before the Assembly, which was introduced by Mr Humphries, and parts of it have been lauded by the Leader of the Opposition, would seriously weaken the strength of our electoral disclosure laws. I do not disagree with what Mr Whitecross has said. He was quite specific about the areas of the Bill that actually strengthen the Act, and those I will certainly be supporting. My initial inclination was simply to oppose the Bill, but the particular areas Mr Whitecross has identified are indeed strengthening the Act, and for that I congratulate Mr Humphries and agree with Mr Whitecross. However, the other parts of the Bill really do require very careful assessment.

On the strengthening of the Bill first, there are new provisions to require detailed returns from associated entities, which are organisations separated from the parties but which nonetheless provide them with non-disclosable fundraising. It would be the same for Independent members. One of the best known examples of this is the Liberal 250 Club,

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .