Lidia Thorpe (Victoria, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

Thanks. Why is it that after over 200 years of the so-called civilisation of colonisation, this 'g' government—bleep, bleep, bleep—can't even figure out how to make sure children are fed? How is that not the No. 1 priority? That shows you exactly the values of a government that is more interested in its own survival than that of the people.

In addition to spending caps, which will disadvantage independent candidates who don't have the broader advertising and campaign infrastructure that political parties have, the expenditure cap would still allow country-wide political parties to spend up to $90 million on broad political advertisements. How can an Independent keep up with that, especially someone from a non-wealthy background who hasn't stolen any land? For many, running for office means putting their careers and livelihoods on hold, a stark reminder that the opportunity to serve is not a universal right but a privilege afforded only to those with big cash and powerful mates.

The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights pointed out that the measures in the bill may increase the relative monetary power of incumbents and bigger parties and disproportionately impact people with particular protected attributes who are already underrepresented by major political parties, such as women or ethnic minority groups. The committee pointed out that this might limit the right to equality and nondiscrimination in this country. The Scrutiny of Bills report also pointed out that this bill may impact representative government by negatively affecting the diversity of opinions, arguments and other political matters that can be in electoral communications.

This would be a further violation of our basic rights in a country where we already only have limited right to take part in public affairs. This right is supposed to include a guarantee of the right of citizens to stand for public office, to vote in elections and to have access to positions in public service. However, section 44 of the colonial Constitution prohibits those with dual citizenship to stand for federal political office, thereby possibly excluding up to half of the population unless they renounce ties with the other country. This is in a country which, apparently, prides itself on multiculturalism. Any further hurdles put in the way of diverse representation, like those proposed by this bill, need to be avoided by all means.

This bill basically means that many of us don't fit into the middle-class, white-Australian picture and we will be less likely to have real representation in this place. Have a look at it! It says it all. So many of us already don't feel represented by the major parties and their assimilation practices. We want our representatives to be able to speak freely and vote along their conscience. People in the community want parliamentarians to stand up for them, not just a tired old backbencher twiddling their thumbs, taking orders and asking 'How high?' when they are told to jump.

The disappointment with the political status quo is exactly why the Independent and minor party vote has grown over the last decade, and that's what the major parties are scared of. They're scared of the crossbench because we demand transparency and accountability, but these are basic and essential democratic measures and we owe this to the voters. This term alone has shown, so many times, that the crossbench contributes to better policy outcomes through bringing a diverse lens to negotiations, listening to communities and stakeholders—they fall on deaf ears with the major parties—and ensuring that they are being heard. That is the very heart of representative democracy.

This bill is a done deal between the major parties and is being rushed through parliament, explicitly because they know it is so flawed and they're so ashamed of it themselves and it's in breach of basic democratic rights. I want to make clear to everyone here and all voters out there that this bill represents an erosion of democratic principles, participation and representation. This is why I'm proposing to rename it the 'Sham Democracy Bill', because at least that would tell people the truth about what they're up for.

For the record, I would like to see the majority of the politicians in this place recognise how out of touch they really are and give their seats to someone who deserves it and who will actually use it for good. The younger generation know the way. Give it to them. There are too many people that have been here for way too long, crusty—and all the rest of it. I don't want to get in trouble again. After all that, I foreshadow my second reading amendment.