The government says it will take “big money” out of election campaigns – or, more realistically, curb it – with its legislation imposing donation and spending caps and real-time disclosure.

But crossbenchers and other critics are up in arms, about the effect on small players and the fact the package is being rushed through parliament in a fortnight.

On this podcast we are talking with Special Minister of State Don Farrell about the bill and the criticisms.

Why the rush? Farrell argues people knew what was coming:

Nothing in this bill is a surprise to anybody who’s been involved in the process that has taken place over the last two and a half years. We went to the last election saying we were going to reduce the disclosure threshold, saying that we were going to introduce real-time disclosure of donations, saying that we were going to introduce caps on spending and donations. And that’s exactly what we’ve done in this legislation and there’s now been two Senate inquiries into this legislation. And all of the parties have absolutely adequate time to have looked at the recommendations.

Why do we need to get it through so quickly? Well, these are significant changes to the electoral system. They’re probably the most significant changes to the Australian electoral system in decades. And it’s going to take time to set up the systems that are going to be required to implement this.

Farrell has introduced truth-in-advertising provisions but he won’t push them this time, given a lack of bipartisan support. They will be a matter for another term:

We’ve had truth in political advertising in South Australia. We had a [state] byelection in South Australia last weekend and that legislation was used to clarify some statements that the opposition were claiming against the state government. So I think it’s a good provision. I’ve said all along that I want to get the maximum support for any piece of legislation in the electoral space.

Just at the moment, we haven’t been able to convince enough people that the legislation is worth their support. But I’m going to be continuing to work on that and one day we will get legislation through for truth in advertising.

Labor’s changes have also been criticised for not disallowing certain groups and industries from donating, such as those associated with the gambling industry. Farrell says:

If we were to do what you’re suggesting there, and then ban some companies, I think we would run into exactly the issues that [constitutional expert] Anne Twomey was talking about in her article in The Guardian Australia^[1]. One thing that would guarantee a challenge and perhaps a successful challenge is if we started to pick which companies in this country could donate. The cap that we’re applying, $20,000, really does limit the ability of any company, or any union for that matter, or any other party, or any individuals to dramatically influence the outcome.

We’re seeing Clive Palmer putting at the last election, $117 million dollars into the electoral process. I don’t think that’s what Australians want to want to see. But if I was to ban, say, the companies I don’t like from donating, I think that would result in a challenge to this legislation.

When asked if he intends to serve out the rest of his term as a senator (which isn’t due to end until 2028) Farrell says

Yes.

I love my job. I’ve got three terrific portfolios trade, tourism and special minister of state. I enjoy all of them equally. I think I can continue to contribute to political debate in this in this country. Just in my trade space: we started with $20 billion worth of trade impediments from China. We’ve managed to get that removed, or certainly by the end of the year to get that removed.

I think I can look back on a number of things in the tourism space – we’ve pretty much got back to where we were pre-COVID.

I like being involved in politics. I enjoy the process. And I’d like to continue doing it.

References

1. ^{^} in The Guardian Australia (www.theguardian.com)