

- Title
COMMONWEALTH ELECTORAL AMENDMENT (POLITICAL DONATIONS AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2008 [2009]
Second Reading
- Database
Senate Hansard
- Date
11-03-2009
- Source
Senate
- Parl No.
42
- Electorate
Victoria
- Interjector
- Page
1261
- Party
FFP
- Presenter
- Status
Final
- Question No.
- Questioner
- Responder
- Speaker
Fielding, Sen Steve
- Stage
Second Reading
- Type
- Context
Bills
- System Id
chamber/hansards/2009-03-11/0021
Previous Fragment Next Fragment
-
Hansard
- Start of Business
- TEMPORARY CHAIRMEN OF COMMITTEES
- COMMITTEES
- FAIR WORK BILL 2008
- COMMONWEALTH ELECTORAL AMENDMENT (POLITICAL DONATIONS AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2008 [2009]
- TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (TAXATION OF FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS) BILL 2008
- MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST
-
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
-
Emissions Trading Scheme
(Abetz, Sen Eric, Wong, Sen Penny) -
Economy
(McEwen, Sen Anne, Evans, Sen Chris (Leader of the Government in the Senate)) -
Climate Change
(Trood, Sen Russell, Wong, Sen Penny) -
Australia Post
(Brown, Sen Bob, Conroy, Sen Stephen) -
Emissions Trading Scheme
(Boswell, Sen Ron, Carr, Sen Kim) -
Alcopops
(Forshaw, Sen Michael, Sherry, Sen Nick)
-
Emissions Trading Scheme
- DISTINGUISHED VISITORS
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS
- NOTICES
- COMMITTEES
- NOTICES
- COMMITTEES
- HEALTH INSURANCE
- EMISSIONS TRADING SCHEME
- COMMITTEES
- INTERNATIONAL WOMEN’S DAY
- TASMANIAN RED MEAT INDUSTRY
- COMMITTEES
- VICTORIAN BUSHFIRES
- AUDITOR-GENERAL’S REPORTS
- BUDGET
- DELEGATION REPORTS
- COMMITTEES
-
CUSTOMS TARIFF AMENDMENT (2009 MEASURES NO. 1) BILL 2009
EXCISE TARIFF AMENDMENT (2009 MEASURES NO. 1) BILL 2009 - TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMENDMENT (INTEGRATED PUBLIC NUMBER DATABASE) BILL 2009
- COMMITTEES
- FOREIGN EVIDENCE AMENDMENT BILL 2008
- TAX LAWS AMENDMENT (TAXATION OF FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS) BILL 2008
- DEFENCE LEGISLATION (MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS) BILL 2008
- AVIATION LEGISLATION AMENDMENT (2008 MEASURES NO. 2) BILL 2008
-
CIVIL AVIATION AMENDMENT BILL 2009
TRANSPORT SAFETY INVESTIGATION AMENDMENT BILL 2009 - AUSTRALIAN ENERGY MARKET AMENDMENT (AEMO AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2009
- BUSINESS
- DOCUMENTS
- ADJOURNMENT
- Adjournment
- DOCUMENTS
-
QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
-
Beijing Olympic Games
(Minchin, Sen Nick, Carr, Sen Kim) -
Proposed Pulp Mill
(Milne, Sen Christine, Wong, Sen Penny) -
Finance and Deregulation: Media Monitoring
(Ronaldson, Sen Michael, Faulkner, Sen John) -
Finance and Deregulation: Media Monitoring
(Ronaldson, Sen Michael, Sherry, Sen Nick) -
Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs: Consultancies
(Ronaldson, Sen Michael, Evans, Sen Chris) -
Proposed Pulp Mill
(Milne, Sen Christine, Wong, Sen Penny) -
Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government: Program Funding
(Abetz, Sen Eric, Conroy, Sen Stephen) -
Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area
(Brown, Sen Bob, Wong, Sen Penny) -
Tibet
(Brown, Sen Bob, Faulkner, Sen John) -
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry: Moncrieff Electorate
(Mason, Sen Brett, Sherry, Sen Nick) -
Resources, Energy and Tourism: Moncrieff Electorate
(Mason, Sen Brett, Sherry, Sen Nick) -
Resources, Energy and Tourism: Moncrieff Electorate
(Mason, Sen Brett, Carr, Sen Kim) -
Exceptional Circumstances Relief Payment
(Cormann, Sen Mathias, Sherry, Sen Nick) -
Black Spot Program
(Cormann, Sen Mathias, Conroy, Sen Stephen)
-
Beijing Olympic Games
Page: 1261
Senator FIELDING (Leader of the Family First Party) (11:57 AM)
—Australia is often described by people as ‘the lucky country’. Unlike many other nations, since Federation the Australian people have known only one form of government—democracy. Even though there are plenty of countries around the world that are democratic, our democracy is special. Just like anything special in life, we need to protect it from harm’s way and make sure that it is safe and sound. That is why we have laws regulating how democracy works. It is too important to be left to operate without boundaries or controls. Power is vested in political parties, and these same parties are responsible for setting the rules for themselves. This makes it all the more important that, as self-regulators, we do everything we can to retain the public’s trust. The Australian people place a lot of trust in their elected representatives and we owe it to them to demonstrate the principles of responsible government.
A vibrant democracy is a democracy where people have confidence in the system. It is a democracy which is free from corruption. That is why I joined the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Crime Commission. Rooting out corruption is something I feel very passionate about. I have always taken a strong stand on this issue because, for me, it is black and white; there can be no grey. Corruption must be exposed, no matter what shape or form it comes in.
One of the biggest opportunities for corruption arises under public funding for federal election campaigns. Without proper controls it can easily turn into a set of kickbacks for the major political parties. Public funding of federal election campaigns began for a legitimate reason: to provide for the reimbursement of legitimate campaign expenses—and fair enough. The key word here, of course, is ‘legitimate’. But since this legislation was introduced in 1984, it has been rife with rorting, rife to the degree that public funding of federal election campaigns has skyrocketed by more than 55 per cent over the last four elections. In real terms that means that public funding for the major political parties has spiralled. It was $28 million of public funding—and that was excessive enough—but it has jumped to an obscene $43 million of public funding for election campaign spending. That is $43 million of hard-earned taxes paid by ordinary Australians that is spent by political parties to brag about themselves and what they have done and what they are going to do. It is all about them.
Times are enormously tough for so many in Australia and our leaders are telling us to expect tough times to continue. We have even heard the grim news from one of the Rudd government ministers that no job is safe. So how can political parties justify taking that money given to them by hardworking Australians and then excessively spending that money to tell those same Australians how fantastic their political parties are? If political parties want to spend huge amounts on election campaigns they can dig into their own pockets and get their hands out of the public purse. Australian families should not be expected to fund excessive spending by the major political parties. We are sick and tired of being bombarded with excessive TV ads every night and having our letterboxes stuffed full of excessive campaign mail during every election especially when we end up paying for it—that is, taxpayers are paying for it.
The government’s Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Political Donations and Other Measures) Bill 2008 [2009] fails dismally to address this rorting. Labor has only proposed to limit public funding of political parties to actual campaign expenses. This will stop profiteering but will do nothing to rein in the excessive campaign spending. That is why Family First is moving to cap the amount that each major political party can claim from the public to fund their election campaign to a maximum of $10 million.
Let us be real: $10 million is more than enough for any one political party to spend in each election. Having this cap of $10 million will save the taxpayers over $20 million per election. So by capping how much each political party can claim to be funded by taxpayers to $10 million, this will result in stopping political parties rorting the system and will save taxpayers $20 million per election. This saved $20 million could be spent on giving a fairer go to veterans and pensioners and giving more funds to hospitals and schools. All Australians would agree it would be better to spend the $20 million on these services rather than seeing it spent on politicians telling us again and again how good they are. Let us stop the real political rort and stop political parties from spending excessive amounts on the election at taxpayers’ expense. Ten million dollars is enough money for that. Let us use the rest for something much more important.