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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 12 Hansard (21 November) . . Page.. 4014 ..

MS HORODNY (continuing):

Let me now turn to the detail. The major problem that we have with this Bill is that it removes the need for political parties and candidates to prove their expenditure for a particular election campaign before they receive public funding. At present parties and candidates that receive at least 2 per cent of the primary vote are entitled to $1.08 per vote, up to the limit of their actual campaign expenditure. By removing this limitation on public funding, it is actually possible for a party or a candidate to make a profit from running an election campaign. If the candidate spends a relatively small amount on their campaign but receives a significant number of votes, under this amendment they will still receive $1.08 per vote, regardless. This amendment will change the nature of the public funding provisions in the Electoral Act from a reimbursement of actual election expenditure to a reward for electoral performance. This is a gross distortion of the original intention of the Electoral Act.

The Minister has justified this amendment by stating in his presentation speech that the dropping of the requirement for parties and candidates to put in claims of their electoral expenditure to the Electoral Commission after a particular election will reduce the administrative burden on parties and candidates. I think this is a very poor excuse. As Mr Moore has said already, with the computerised accounting systems available today, it is really no burden at all to produce such a claim. Mr Moore went through some examples of the very simple claims that were put forward and the simple accounting that had to be done. It certainly has not been a burden for our party.

The Minister also justifies this amendment and other aspects of the Bill by saying that it will make our Act consistent with the Commonwealth Electoral Act. However, we see no need to automatically follow whatever the Commonwealth Parliament decides. The electoral system of the ACT must be suitable to the ACT community. I, therefore, foreshadow that if the Bill passes the in-principle stage we will be opposing those parts of the Bill which remove the requirement on parties and candidates to submit claims of expenditure.

Another aspect of the Bill that concerns us is the watering down of the level of detail required to be disclosed in the electoral returns from parties and Independents. At present individual donations under $100 from a particular individual are not required to be included in determining the total amount of donations from that individual. We accept this provision, as we know from the experience of our party that there can be a problem in keeping track of small donations made at fundraising events. However, this Bill proposes to increase that amount to $500, which is a massive increase and is totally out of scale with the extent of the problem which this provision addresses.

There are also changes to the detail required to be submitted in the returns, such as the elimination of the need to report expenditure on consultants' or advertising agents' fees. There are also various parts of the Bill which reduce the reporting requirements on parties and Independents to only the production of annual returns and eliminate the need for returns to be submitted after particular elections. These changes relate to the proposed elimination of the requirement for parties and candidates to justify their election expenditure. As I have already said, we do not think the current reporting requirements on parties and Independents are particularly onerous and in need of change. Mr Moore also has some amendments to address the requirements for reduced reporting.

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