Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Special Minister of State) Share this | Hansard source

What we saw last year was the failure of the government to bring this matter on. They had the opportunity to bring that bill on last year. From recollection, I think they had two opportunities in February to bring it on. They did not choose to do so. The urgency does not lie in relation to this bill. It was rejected by the Senate, it was then rushed through the Reps and brought back here. If this were urgent, they would have had this matter dealt with last year. They had opportunity to do so. There was nothing on this side of the chamber standing in their way in relation to having this matter debated when it was on the Notice Paper at least three times.

The other matter which seems to have escaped the Special Minister of State is that this has a start-up date of 1 July. Please tell me why this matter cannot be debated in May for a July start-up. We had all this talk about a sense of urgency before an election. On a rough count, even if a trigger were given today I do not think they could have a double dissolution before about 26 July anyway—so do not run that line about urgency in relation to this bill. The minister, the Manager of Government Business in the Senate, knows that this is not urgent to the extent that this will not interfere with a 1 July start-up if that is indeed the will of the parliament. There is absolutely no reason why this cannot be dealt with in May. There is not a sense of urgency.

I want to talk about this so-called push for campaign finance reform. I have already indicated that the Labor Party stood in front of proper references to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters last year. Where has been the government’s drive for change? If you read through the green paper, which was indeed a collection of all those things that had been articulated by others anyway, is there anything in that green paper which is making recommendations in relation to campaign finance reform? No, there is not. Have the government in any way attempted to put on the table some options that must be discussed? No, they have not, and they have dragged this out themselves and then they have had the gall to come into this place today and say this is urgent. Well, they know this is not urgent and the Greens and the Independents know that this is not urgent, because if this were urgent the opportunity to debate the previous bill would have been taken up on those three occasions that I referred to when it was on the Notice Paper.

I want to make absolutely sure that there is no doubt in anyone’s mind about the commitment of the coalition to campaign finance reform. Let us go back and see where this started. When did the Australian Labor Party suddenly become interested in campaign finance reform? It started with the Wollongong sex and bribery scandal. That is when the Australian Labor Party became interested in campaign finance reform. That is when we saw the appalling behaviour of Labor Party apparatchiks in Wollongong in the sex and bribery scandal. That is when we saw the start of the government’s interest in this process. The first time they had the opportunity to respond to Wollongong was in this chamber and they squibbed it. They squibbed the opportunity to respond to the Wollongong sex and bribery scandal. They squibbed it by not being prepared to support the reference from this chamber to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, and they have squibbed it ever since. They squibbed it then and they squibbed it when it was on the red and on the Notice Paper. They have had four occasions to actually show their bona fides.

Let no-one be in any doubt about where we stand in relation to campaign financial reform. We drove this process in March last year and we will help drive it through to a proper conclusion, which will give the Australian people some sense of confidence that the campaign finance system and the whole electoral system has a degree of openness and transparency which will reinforce their trust in this fantastic democracy of ours. That is what this has got to be about. It has got to be about giving some ownership back to the Australian people with a level of comfort that the democracy we cherish is not in any way being bastardised by campaign finance laws or anything else.

We are determined to see this through to a proper conclusion, but we are not prepared to sit back and let the Labor Party, which is apparently committed to campaign financial reform, leave hanging a funding group such as the trade union movement, which has become so brazen that a leaked document I referred to last week actually had in one of the annual reports from one of the New South Wales unions a subparagraph in it titled ‘Marginal Seat Campaign’. So let us be absolutely sure about who is the piper and who is being paid. Let us be absolutely sure about this. While the minister point-blank refuses to address the undue influence of third parties and associated groups in this country, he stands condemned for his insincerity. While he refuses to take on those bodies that have a level of influence unbelievably greater than those that we are talking about today, and while he still insists on refusing to bring them into campaign financial reform, he stands condemned for his own hypocrisy. That is what we want to see coming out of this debate.

I do not think there is anyone in this chamber on the non-government side who does not believe that we are genuine in our desire to have appropriate and proper campaign finance reform. We are absolutely on the record. We started the process and we will complete it to the satisfaction of the Australian community so they can have some restored confidence. This is a matter of confidence. The Wollongong sex and bribery scandal was such that people started to lose confidence in the system and they need to get that back. They need to be able to say that the openness and transparency means there is not one group within the community that can buy the sort of influence that we are seeing from the trade union movement.

The Fair Work Bill is a constant reminder that we need to do something, and we need to do it holistically. There is no greater example in the last two weeks than the Fair Work Bill where we have seen a non-mandated aspect of that bill giving to the union movement unfettered power to go in and breach the privacy of Australian workers. That is what it is. When you get down to it, it is about breaching the privacy of Australian workers. We do not think that is reasonable. We think it is even more unreasonable when it is driven by a payback for the $31 million. That is what this debate is about. This was not in the original proposal the Australian Labor Party took to the people. It is not in there because the donations at that stage were still rolling in. Post the election, the unions demanded their pound of flesh for their $31-plus million.

We are absolutely committed to campaign finance reform, but we are not going to let people be conned by a notion that there is some high priority for the government in this. I will finish on this note: the minister said, ‘This is a high priority for me.’ It has not been a high priority for this minister at all. He had at least three occasions on the red to make this a priority. He chose not to do so. This does not need to be debated this week. This can be debated in May for a July start-up, if that indeed is the will of the Senate.