Senator FAULKNER (4:36 PM) —I oppose this amendment and take this opportunity to briefly address the Senate on the question before the chair and the very much related issue of the motion that stands in the name of Senator Ian Campbell to propose to exempt this particular bill from the provisions of standing order 111. I think it might save the Senate some time if I try to briefly address both of those issues and indicate that the opposition, for its part, will not support the cut-off motion for this bill. It might save debate on that particular motion to make a contribution at this point because, of course, this is the related issue of the reporting date of the committee on the Electoral and Referendum Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1998 .

We do not accept the paltry arguments that the government puts forward in relation to the urgency for this bill. We wonder why, if it is so urgent, it has taken so long for this particular piece of legislation to come before us. I think that this bill contains some measures that are highly politically partisan and they are, in the view of the opposition, motivated by an attempt to gain clear political advantage before the calling of an election—hence the rush by the government to deal with this particular matter in this session of the parliament.

We have made it very clear that some of the provisions of this bill—like, for example, the proposal to increase from $1,500 to $10,000 the amount above which a donor to a political party must furnish a return for the financial year—are not acceptable to the opposition. Of course, it is the Labor Party in this country that has led the charge in relation to improved disclosure laws. We cannot accept the proposal of the government to increase from $1,500 to $5,000 the amount received from a person or an organisation that political parties are required to disclose during a financial year. Again, we think this is very much a retrograde step and very much against the spirit of what the Labor Party has long embraced in relation to disclosure.

We are particularly concerned about the issue of the Greenfields Foundation, which is not adequately addressed either in the Electoral and Referendum Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1998 or in any proposed government amendments to that bill. We view this use by the Liberal Party of the Greenfields Foundation to launder funds as one of the most serious breaches of the spirit and letter of the funding and disclosure regulations that we have seen. It is up there with the Liberal's use of the Free Enterprise Foundation. Sadly, this bill does not do anything to address this very important issue. We are concerned that the government has been complicit in allowing this rort to exist, and we intend to pursue—and pursue very vigorously indeed—amendments to ensure this multimillion dollar loophole in relation to the loan from the Greenfields Foundation is no longer able to be exploited by the Liberal Party before, during and beyond the next election.

We think that there are some very important issues here. Many of them are very politically sensitive. We think they come to the Senate with, unfortunately, the motivation being an attempt at partisan and serious political advantage on the part of the Liberal Party. We think this requires far more mature consideration. When you are going to change the electoral laws so significantly in a country like Australia, by and large, it should receive a fair degree of bipartisan support. That is the spirit with which the Labor Party is approaching these issues, and that is why we oppose the amendment that has been moved by Senator Minchin and will not be supporting the proposal. (Time expired)