Jason Falinski (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Discretion does not allow me to actually name the ranking, but I assure you, Deputy Speaker, you are very, very high on that ranking.

It is my great pleasure to speak about the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Authorisations) Bill 2022. The Electoral Legislation Amendment (Authorisations) Bill 2022 makes minor and, may I say, technical amendments to the notifying requirements for the authorisation of electoral communications. These amendments to the electoral act will ensure voters are presented with the current name of registered political parties and disclosure entities in authorisations for electoral communications. Currently, political parties and other disclosure entities are required to use their name as included on their most recent AEC financial return, which has the potential to mismatch the entity's actual name where it has recently changed. The reforms ensure registered that political parties authorise their communications in line with how their name appears on the ballot paper and that other disclosure entities appear as they are referred to on the AEC'S Transparency Register. 'Transparency' is a very important word, and we're going to talk a lot about transparency today.

The bill also provides some limited flexibility for registered political parties in how they present their current names in authorisation. This streamlines these requirements and avoids unnecessary duplication without distracting from clear communication with voters. For example, political parties who have the word 'Incorporated' in their registered name would be able to omit this word. Similarly, the bill enables registered political parties which are a branch or division of a federal party to omit the words specifically referring to the branch or division. This avoids unnecessary duplication, noting that authorisations specify an entity's location as part of their notifying particulars. The reforms also allow the flexibility for these parties to use their registered abbreviations for authorisations to provide consistent alignment with the electoral act. These reforms also apply to the Broadcasting Services Act and the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act.

I have to digress slightly here to mention one of my favourite authorisations of all times. When I first joined the Liberal Party, John Howard was running for re-election in 1998. Tony Nutt, a great servant of the Liberal Party, had become the state director in New South Wales, so all electoral advertising had to be authorised by 'Tony Nutt of the Liberal Party, New South Wales'. Of course, Tony's name is actually Anthony Nutt, so, instead of materials being authorised by 'T Nutt, Liberal Party, New South Wales', it became: 'Vote for John Howard, authorised by A Nutt, Liberal Party, New South Wales'. Maybe we should make provisions in this law to prevent circumstances like that embarrassing prime ministers or opposition leaders who are seeking election to the highest office in the land.

The second piece of legislation I'd like to speak to is the Electoral Legislation Amendment (COVID Enfranchisement) Bill 2022. This bill builds upon the government's reforms last year to provide the Australian Electoral Commission with the necessary legislative tools to deliver a COVID-safe election. The bill amends the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 to allow the option, where necessary, to provide a contingency arrangement for electors in mandatory isolation or quarantine due to COVID-19 during the final 72 hours before polling to participate in the upcoming federal election. It can allow regulations to be made to expand the Australian Electoral Commission's secure telephone voting service to persons in mandatory isolation due to COVID-19. Access to this service would be limited to persons in Australia subject to a public health order that prevents their attendance at a polling place for one of the following reasons: they have tested positive for COVID-19 using a test approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration; they are a close household contact of such an individual; or they have been otherwise directed to self-isolate or quarantine under a public health order, due to the risk of transmission of COVID-19.

Telephone voting is currently used for voters who are blind or have low vision and for voters in Antarctica. Current regulations implement this through a secure two-stage telephone system to preserve the secrecy of the ballot. Secure telephone voting for coronavirus affected individuals can only be offered after a person is no longer eligible to apply for a postal vote—that is, from 6.01 pm on Wednesday three days before the polling day until the close of polls. The Electoral Commissioner would be required to issue an instrument advising that he is satisfied on reasonable grounds that the extension of this service is necessary for the due conduct of the election. He would be required to notify the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition before doing so and to publicly inform of integrity measures that will apply to safeguard the conduct of the poll using the telephone method of participation. The regulations will have the option to specify the circumstances and the order of admission for votes cast using this method. These provisions will automatically be repealed on 31 December 2022.

The third piece of legislation that we are dealing with here is the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Foreign Influences and Offences) Bill 2022. The bill amends the Commonwealth Electoral Act and the referendum act to combat foreign influence in Australian elections and strengthen the integrity of Australia's electoral communication framework. In relation to foreign electoral communication expenditure, now more than ever, it is critical that we have the appropriate laws in place to stop foreign actors from being able to infiltrate our electoral system. Our national security agencies are warning us of threats to our democracy by malicious foreign actors. Yesterday, the ASIO director-general revealed that they had disrupted a foreign interference plot in the lead-up to an election in Australia, adding: 'We are seeing attempts at foreign interference at all levels of government in all states and territories.'

This bill will prohibit foreign individuals and entities from authorising or directly funding election campaigns. This is implemented by introducing a ban on foreign campaigners from authorising election advertisements. This amendment will support the integrity of Australian electoral processes by ensuring that only those with a legitimate connection to Australia are able to authorise electoral communications. The amendments prohibiting foreign campaigners use the existing definition of 'foreign donor', making these amendments simple to apply. Further, the bill will prohibit foreign campaigners from incurring electoral expenditure of a thousand dollars or more in a financial year or fundraising for that purpose. Together, the amendments ban foreign donors from circumventing existing restrictions within the electoral act by seeking to influence and conduct electoral campaigns.

This builds on past reforms that established prohibitions on the receipt of foreign donations. In 2018, the Morrison government introduced a ban on foreign donations to political parties in passing Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Funding and Disclosure Reform) Bill. Last year, the government tightened these laws to further extend the ban on candidates, MP, senators and associated entities through the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Political Campaigners) Bill 2021 and the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Annual Disclosure Equality) Bill 2021, which is already having an impact, as we've seen this week. Due to these reforms, the Australian Electoral Commission was able to undertake an audit of certain electoral funding by certain candidates at the previous election. The intrepid Rob Harris of the The Sydney Morning Herald and The Agediscovered that some of these candidates, notwithstanding the fact that they said that they were in favour of reducing carbon emissions, were taking donations from coalminers or coal investors.

And, indeed, they were, Member for Bradfield. I was surprised. I would go further: I would say that I was shocked and horrified at this revelation. But it gets even worse, member for Bradfield.

See this speech in context