Jane Hume (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill 2024. This bill responds to this parliament's inquiry, conducted by the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, into the 2022 election. An inquiry into our electoral laws is conducted after every election, which is right and proper. These inquiries consider both the performance of the electoral system and its legislation following an electoral event and whether changes are required to keep our electoral regulations consistent with the current and practices. These inquiries are conducted by the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters and are some of the most in-depth and detailed work of the parliament. I want to thank my colleague Senator McGrath, a veteran of this committee over several parliaments, for his work in contributing to the committee's deliberations.

The bill that was introduced by the government last year seeks to implement recommendations from that committee's work, which the assistant minister referred to as being 'multipartisan'—but not multipartisan in the agreement of the recommendations of that the committee and its inquiry. Coalition members of that committee reflected our positions when they provided a dissenting report to that committee's work on several occasions. As coalition members stated, the coalition believes that any proposed electoral changes should support our system of fair, open and transparent elections which treat all political participants equally. Our system must encourage political participation that protects freedoms of speech, belief, association and thought. No participant should have fear of retribution for their belief or their support. The coalition believes those who join or actively support political parties, like those who support civil society movements or not-for-profit organisations, do so on the basis of sincerely held beliefs and a genuine desire to participate in their democratic society. Members of established political parties are not less worthy than those who support other forms of political campaigning, movements or civil causes. Changes to regulations at federal and state levels of government have increased the regulatory burden on political parties, making it harder for grassroots participation. This is not a good outcome for democratic participation in Australia. Financially stable political parties with active membership representing the broad political spectrum are important foundations for a healthy democracy. The governing legislative and regulatory framework for political parties should ultimately encourage grassroots participation, not make it harder.

This bill looks to implement recommendations 1 to 10 of the joint standing committee's interim report that was tabled in June 2023. Recommendation 1 proposed to lower the disclosure threshold of donations to $1,000. As the coalition stated in the response to the committee's report, we are concerned there must be a balance between privacy and transparency. We've seen the political intimidation by some in the community recently and often on the offices of parliamentarians. Any threshold should not be a discouragement to participation in the electoral system, where there is any fear of intimidation or retribution from the publication of the support of political parties or particular candidates. The Grattan Institute argued for a higher threshold of $5,000, noting this important balance. They stated that this would protect the privacy of small donors and keep administrative costs manageable, while ensuring that all donations that are big enough to matter are on the public record. The opposition notes that the government has taken on board many concerns of the proposed changes, including that of the Grattan Institute, and will move to amend the bill to raise the threshold to $5,000. The opposition supports this change, noting that it is a sensible compromise and acknowledging that the Prime Minister himself has advocated for a threshold of $1,000 for some time.

Recommendations 4, 5 and 6 of the interim report are also reflected in the bill's schedules. These propose to introduce donations, known in the legislation as gifts, and expenditure caps to the electoral system. The bill originally proposed to introduce a donation cap of $20,000 each year, indexed annually, which would apply to an individual donor whether they are a person or an entity. On expenditure, the bill proposes to introduce a cap of $90 million for each political party, and a cap of $800,000 would apply to expenditure by any party or candidate in an individual electorate. A Senate cap would apply for a state or territory that will be valued at the number of electorates in that jurisdiction. The key concern for coalition members through the process of the committee's inquiry on this matter was that caps be applied fairly and equitably. The ability to set caps of donations for the Commonwealth system, which has never had this limitation, is new ground and may well require review. The opposition notes that the government is intending to move amendments that will lift this cap to $50,000, and we will support this change.

Another important aspect of the government's legislation is that it will capture political entities outside parties and candidates. As Professor George Williams stated on the potential loopholes with caps when he appeared before the joint standing committee:

Unless we actually have a holistic regime, people will set up the equals, whether they be charities, third parties or the like. We need to make sure that they are equally covered with appropriate caps, disclosure and the like. Otherwise, we'll just end up with the electoral fundraising and the fight moving from parties to third parties.

We welcome the review of the government that these caps should also apply to significant third parties, associated entities and third parties who will be subject to expenditure of $11.25 million annually, with other limits at electorate, state and territory levels. Recommendations 2, 3 and 7 of JSCEM's inquiry are being implemented through measures to implement faster disclosure timeframes. These also alter the definition of a gift under the electoral law and establish a system of common accounting for Commonwealth campaign accounts. These recommendations were all supported in principle by the coalition members, and we see merit in these as improvements to the current system's integrity.

The opposition notes that these changes will not take effect until after the upcoming election. This may enable further issues to be considered by the next parliament. The government has worked with all parties and members, including the opposition, to improve this legislation. While this is not the electoral reform that we would have brought forward, and while some parts do remain of concern, we note and appreciate that the amendments that have been brought forward address the concerns around the potential impacts of the proposed laws. Our electoral system and our electoral legislation is complex and intricate. Changes should rightly be made with care, and the devil is always in the detail.

I want to thank the minister and his staff for working constructively to remove as many of those devils as could be found. In particular, I want to thank the minister's chief of staff, Ben Rillo, and the department for working through dense and complex drafting. If you'd indulge me, I'd also like to thank opposition staff who have worked on this legislation, particularly those out of my own office and that of Senator McGrath's, particularly Hughston Parle and John Harris. I'd also particularly like to thank those staff from the leader's office, who have put in long hours to check and recheck the implications of this bill, in particular Michelle Hutchinson and Mike Horner. This legislation represents some very significant changes to the electoral system in Australia, and, like all changes, they've been made in good faith with a bipartisan approach to ensure that our electoral system remains, to the extent that it ever can be, above politics.