Page 1541 - Week 06 - Thursday, 2 July 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
effect, a lower cap. I note that the Queensland Labor Party has recently implemented a similar reform.
Fifthly, I turn to restricting receipt of donations to $10,000 per year from any individual or corporate group. I note that in 2012 the Assembly passed legislation which restricted donations from non-individuals. It is still the preferred position of the Greens that if you cannot vote in the election why should you be able to financially influence it? But that was deemed to be an unconstitutional restriction of freedom of speech. Given that, the amendment is structured so that related companies, sub-entities and board members are bundled together in a single corporate group. An amount of $10,000 a year is very generous compared to some other jurisdictions—Victoria, for example, has a limit of $4,000 across an entire four-year electoral cycle.
Sixthly, I turn to restricting gambling businesses. These are entities who have bought land directly from the government—such as englobo property developers who have purchased a single site for an entire suburb but who would otherwise not be caught up in the definition of a property developer because they have not submitted the threshold number of development applications in the preceding years—as well as not-for-profit developers, such as community housing providers, or incorporated associations, such as licensed clubs from donating to political parties.
This is an extension to the restrictions that were included in the government’s 2018 legislation which was attempting to implement the commitment to ban donations from property developers. The Greens are trying to have a more fulsome and inclusive definition of property developer while recognising that doing this is a very hard job.
All of these amendments are, I am afraid, far more contentious than the ones being debated today, so I will leave it at that. I just want to put it on notice that it is my hope that we will able to debate this later this month and that I will table them at that time. I understand the Liberals also have some amendments to the Electoral Act that they may table at that time.
Regardless of whether members of this Assembly agree on the various amendments, it is important, in the lead-up to the October election, that members of the public get to see what each of the parties’ positions are regarding changes to how our democracy works in the ACT. I look forward to this debate. The Greens will be supporting this bill today.
MR RAMSAY (Ginninderra—Attorney-General, Minister for the Arts, Creative Industries and Cultural Events, Minister for Building Quality Improvement, Minister for Business and Regulatory Services and Minister for Seniors and Veterans) (4.42), in reply: I thank Mr Coe for his contribution and his support for at least most of the provisions of the bill and I thank Ms Le Couteur not only for her support for the provisions but also for her preview of a debate we are likely to have later in this sitting. Returning to matters that are before us today, I am very pleased to speak in support of the Electoral Legislation Amendment Bill 2019, presented in August last year.
The independent, fair and transparent conduct of elections is an essential feature of democratic governance, and this bill demonstrates the government’s commitment to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video