Sophie Scamps (Mackellar, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I would also like to stand in support of the member for Indi's amendment. I agree that it absolutely goes to the heart of probably what is the major problem with this piece of legislation, and that is how unfair the structure is—sorry, I agree with the member for Indi, and it goes to the crux of what the major problem is, and the major problem is how it bakes in unfair spending caps. We've talked about this before when we were debating in the House. Currently as it stands, an Independent or a new entrant can spend $800,000. That is their cap. A member of a party can spend $800,000, but an additional amount—who knows how much—in the millions can also be spent on top of that, as long as that candidate's name is not mentioned specifically. It does mean that there's a very unfair advantage for that person who is the member of a party. How is it that this is fair competition? It is absolutely not fair competition. We know that our democracy should be a contest of ideas, but this is baking in an unfair advantage. But the member for Indi's amendment really goes to the heart of sorting out that major problem. Thank you.

See this speech in context