Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on behalf of the opposition to support this legislation in its amended form. The Electoral and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2017 is proposed to address the matters canvassed by the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters in the committee's Interim report on the authorisation of voter communication. Before I speak to the legislation itself, I acknowledge the Special Minister of State, Senator Ryan, who has attempted to answer the opposition's many questions on the provisions before us, and the opposition wishes him a speedy recovery. I would also like to acknowledge members of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters the members for Scullin and Oxley in the other place and Senators Ketter and Brown for their constant and continual work on these issues.

When the legislation was introduced, in March this year, the opposition raised significant concerns with its provisions and practical application. Labor believes in protecting, fostering and encouraging genuine political communication, and any bill that seeks to affect that right should be considered very carefully. It was disappointing to listen to the contributions of some government members in the other place. Despite the opposition working constructively on all of the issues canvassed in this piece of legislation, government members sought to use this bill to talk about the Prime Minister's spectacular dummy spit on election night about the results in Queensland. Why they wished to remind the Australian people of that night is completely beyond me. However, there they were, lined up in an attempt to distract the public from the complete chaos within the government.

On the issue before the chamber, the updating of the authorisation framework is an important piece of reform. Technology is changing and with it methods of communication and political campaigning. A system that does not keep pace with this changing technology is a system that is designed to fail. The Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters rightly recommended that any new requirements for electoral authorisation be clear, concise and easy to navigate. The committee recommended that the framework of authorisation, as far as it is reasonably practical, not interfere with the primary purpose of communication—that is, to communicate with the electorate.

The opposition, through many discussions with the government, have queried many of the provisions before the parliament to ensure that we are achieving those key aims. One of the principal queries of the government has been that of digital communication. Labor wants to ensure that digital material, which is likely to be the dominant form of future communication, is appropriately catered for and protected. In this respect, the bill confers significant powers on the Australian Electoral Commissioner to determine how certain pieces of material are to be authorised—in particular, digital audio and social media. Through this process, the opposition has received advice from both the Special Minister of State and the Australian Electoral Commissioner, Mr Tom Rogers, as to the use of these powers. We thank the commissioner for his time and cooperation and for the assurances received that necessary consultation will take place prior to these powers being utilised.

In ensuring that the authorisation framework is modernised, the bill addresses current key shortfalls—for example, capturing all disclosure entities, rightly applying the regime to referenda and streamlining noncompliance provisions with a civil penalty. These are simple, commonsense measures to ensure the integrity of our democratic processes. The complicated nature of authorisation and the changing methods of political communication mean that this bill is not a complete solution and will require review. Concerns remain, including from broadcasting entities, regarding the burden placed on them by this legislation. Through the excellent work of Labor's shadow minister for communications, Ms Michelle Rowland, in the other place, the opposition have heard the concerns of groups such as Commercial Radio Australia. Although already bearing some of the burden of current authorisation provisions, there are legitimate concerns by these third-party actors and broadcasters as to the practical implementation of these provisions. The opposition will continue to work with these groups as these provisions come into practice, and we trust that the government and the Australian Electoral Commissioner will assist in liaising with these actors.

Finally, I'd like to commend the reasonable exemptions provision provided by this legislation, particularly on the reporting of news and current affairs and on editorial content. Political authorisations are intended to provide the voting public with a clearer picture and should never be used to place undue burdens on genuine communication. It would be unfathomable for such regulations to restrict the information provided to the voting public through direct or indirect communication. I commend the bill to the Senate.

Lee Rhiannon (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Electoral and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2017 reflects the work of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, of which I am a member. We took a great deal of advice on this matter, and this is the bill that has now come before us. I think it's worth making a few comments about the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters. I certainly feel fortunate to be on the committee. The chair, Senator Reynolds, as well as the deputy chair, Mr Andrew Giles, and the other members all work together in a very cooperative way. Obviously there are disagreements, but I think it is worth reflecting on the fact that in many ways this bill goes to the heart of the increasing cynicism around electoral processes, politicians and politics in general. Because there is that deep cynicism, I think it is incredibly important to have a clear set of rules to help restore people's confidence in how the political process works. Let's remember that so much of how we communicate is changing so rapidly.

It was very clear from much of the evidence to the inquiry that we need to ensure that the communication channels aren't being stifled by the rules—that the rules are there to manage the communication channel, not to stifle the message that is being given out. So, it's getting that balance right that is critical. This is only part of the work that needs to be done, but there has been some important work already undertaken here.

The other thing that came through, too, is that for these rules to work they essentially need to be easy to implement. If things get too complex when it comes to managing communications, it's obviously going to fail before we get going. So, yes, there are a range of technologies that you would expect to be used more and more extensively when it comes to election time, and surely that's to be welcomed. The more people know about what's happening in elections and hear the exchange of viewpoints, the better. Hopefully, what we're ensuring is that that information is as accurate as possible.

It certainly wasn't just in the 2016 election that we had problems with truth in advertising, and it's not just with the rise in the new technology that there are problems with truth in advertising. This issue, particularly with some people issuing highly inaccurate information, often right on the eve of the election when there's very little opportunity to answer it, has been a common practice for a long time. That's why I did spend some time in my earlier remarks referring to the cynicism that is there in the political process. But now we have this legislation before us. I congratulate my colleagues on JSCEM for the work that they put into it. This is a necessary bill and it will go some way, a small way, to helping our situation.

Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As the chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, I'm incredibly proud of the work that this committee does on behalf of our nation. This is a committee that is truly multipartisan. It is a committee that is made up of very dedicated members and senators who have one focus, and that is on how to ensure the integrity of our electoral system and our processes. I would like to take this opportunity to thank my deputy chair, Mr Andrew Giles, who, again, works very diligently in this committee. I would also like to acknowledge Senator Lee Rhiannon for her deep engagement in this committee and this inquiry in particular.

In every functional and robust democracy, an effective electoral management body is essential to conduct free and fair elections, and Australia is no exception. We, like everybody else in a democracy, need to make sure that we pay constant attention to the health of our electoral processes and systems. Regardless of whether or not voters dislike or disagree with the result of an election, whether that is in an individual seat or a national election, Australian citizens, as voters, must have the utmost confidence in the system and that the results declared by the AEC accurately represent the votes cast by all Australians. So, today, I very proudly rise to support the Electoral and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2017.

The right to freedom of speech and the right to communicate campaign messages are cornerstones of all Western democracies, and they underpin our own unique Australian democracy. The right to freedom of speech and the right to communicate campaign messages should be and must be rights enjoyed by all Australians, but they also have to be protected. Every Australian voter must be confident that their voice has been heard in our electoral system and that all parties have acted within the rules, free of undue influence or foreign interference. With this bill, the government is taking the necessary and appropriate steps to ensure that all parties act within the rules and, therefore, that all Australians can have confidence in our electoral system. The bill achieves this by ensuring two things: firstly, that electoral and referendum communication is clearly authorised, irrespective of the medium in which this information is communicated; and, secondly, that authorisation requirements are harmonised across media and all mediums of communication.

In December last year, the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, which is, as I said, the committee that I chair, tabled its first interim report into the authorisation of voter communication. As part of the committee's wider inquiry into all aspects of the conduct of the 2016 federal election, the committee released its multipartisan interim report and made six unanimous recommendations to strengthen the Commonwealth Electoral Act and to ensure that every Australian has confidence with not only the electoral system but also the parties engaging in political activities and campaign communication and that they're doing so in accordance with fair and very transparent rules.

The committee, as documented in our report, found that the current Commonwealth electoral laws have not kept pace with technological change and advancement in communication methods. The committee heard evidence that loopholes have emerged which made it possible, in the 2016 election, to communicate anonymously and to send misleading messages to voters via new mediums that the Electoral Act does not currently regulate—in fact, that were not even foreseen when the electoral act was written. These new mediums of communication include social-media platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook; other evolving digital platforms, such as SMS; and the use of what are referred to as robocalls. The very same messages if communicated through more traditional means, such as flyers and print advertisements, would have been subject to the authorisation requirements under the current Electoral Act. As such, this bill is a sensible one to modernise and foolproof, in a way, the Electoral Act so that messages requiring authorisations are consistent regardless of the medium in which they are conveyed.

Authorisation requirements for electoral materials are longstanding and well understood by political participants. In fact, they were included in the earliest Commonwealth electoral law in 1902. The committee has reaffirmed the principles on which these laws were founded many times. However, the committee, in this report, identified that the current Commonwealth Electoral Act had developed in a very piecemeal fashion and, as I said, had not kept pace with rapid technological changes in methods of communication, which had resulted in the emergence of these loopholes.

This bill, amongst other things, will directly target and close these loopholes by ensuring that authorisations will be required for all paid advertisements containing electoral matter in addition to political communications, whether paid or unpaid, by or on behalf of identities with disclosure requirements under the Electoral Act. This will include political parties, candidates, associated entities and donors that exceed the current disclosure threshold of $13,200. Additionally, the bill will provide exceptions, such news and editorial content and communications for personal purposes, and it will not infringe on our democratic right of freedom of communication. This bill will also ensure that authorisations include the name of the individual responsible and their location, and, where a communication is made by or on behalf of a disclosure entity, include the name of the organisation. Under these new amendments certain printed materials will continue to include the name of the printer. In addition, the Australian Electoral Commission will have the power to issue legislative instruments to clarify how communications in various emerging media forms should be authorised. For the first time, requirements will be harmonised across all media forms, which will result in simplified compliance and assurance. The AEC will also have additional powers to identify noncompliant entities and enforce compliance with increased financial penalties and a revised civil penalty regime.

The 2016 federal election saw concerns raised regarding the authorisation of electoral material. Subsequently, questions have been asked about the current legislation and whether it is really designed to meet the needs of the 21st century. In the course of the committee inquiry, it also came to light that the AEC had inadequate powers to enforce some of the provisions within the Electoral Act. Additionally, many of the penalties associated with noncompliance have clearly been shown not to be a deterrent. Many associated entities and third parties, time and time again, continue to circumvent the rules and act in ways that many may consider to be unethical and lacking in integrity.

Through this bill, the AEC will be able to enforce authorisation requirements using additional information-gathering powers through a new ability to accept an enforceable undertaking and by seeking an injunction or financial penalties in the courts. Further, the AEC will also have the power to provide clear instructions as to how to authorise communications in a way that is appropriate for that particular medium—again, making compliance simpler. In the 21st century, these are vital measures to ensure that the laws are modernised and that the AEC have the capability to perform their very important responsibilities in our democracy.

This is a step forward in ensuring greater enforcement of the regulations so that all political actors in Australia are acting in accordance with the rules and regulations, and, ultimately, so that Australians have confidence in the legitimacy of the communication messages that they are receiving. As part of that, it's absolutely important—it's critical, in fact—that they know who those messages are coming from, which then allows them to make assessments about their validity, and about the perspective and the point of view that are being communicated to them.

The committee agreed that these amendments are based on three core principles which we've also applied to other considerations in relation to the health of the Electoral Act. We believe these three principles will add to a fairer electoral system but not impact the capacity of candidates, parties and other political actors to make their point. In consideration of the evidence provided to the committee through submissions and from witnesses at the nine public hearings we conducted right around our country, the committee recommended that the Commonwealth Electoral Act be amended to specifically address the matters of authorisation.

The three principles that have underpinned consideration by the committee in this particular inquiry and in this particular report are ones that we've continued through all of our deliberations. The first one is accountability—that is, to ensure parties and other participants are held to account and are responsible for their political statements in the public arena and the communications that they have with voters. That's the first one: accountability. The second principle that underpins all of the committee's deliberations is traceability. Traceability is very important because those who authorise electoral materials need to be identifiable and traceable (1) so people know where material has come from and (2) in case of any enforcement action that the AEC is required to do. The third principle is consistency. Consistency is important in the application of the rules and requirements to all electoral materials so that we have one simple, consistent rule for all actors.

These principles of accountability, traceability and consistency in authorising electoral materials remain essential to provide a clear context for the message and to allow all voters to have confidence in the message or the position contained in that electoral material. It also reassures voters that those disseminating electoral material in the public domain are accountable for what they say and what they do in an electoral context. I believe, as I know all members of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters believe, that this is one of the most important checks and balances built into our electoral system to ensure its integrity and its accountability for campaigning in our particular democracy. This government's commitment to electoral integrity and to ensuring that Australian voters have confidence in the electoral system is to be commended, as is the commitment by those opposite—and, in fact, by all major parties—to this, and I thank all for that.

This bill, the Electoral and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2017, reaffirms both the commitment and the recommendations of the committee. I applaud the government for taking the responsible, necessary and appropriate measures as one way of ensuring electoral integrity and the confidence of Australian voters in our electoral system. I know this bill has been meticulously drafted to ensure the primacy of voter communication being accurate so that voters can have confidence in it. Also, I believe, it doesn't infringe on the right we all have to freedom of association but particularly freedom of communication.

Given the committee's unanimous agreement that there must be a level playing field for all parties and political participants, this extension of the Criminal Code will ensure that Australians have confidence in the legitimacy of communications. In the interim report, the committee acknowledged that those three principles I outlined were essential elements, and again I congratulate all sides of politics on supporting these and supporting this bill. I think the bipartisan interim report and now the bill that we're considering here today are great examples of what we can do in this place when we all work together in the national interest.

In conclusion, again, I commend the government for bringing this bill forward, and all in this chamber and in the other place for their support for this committee and its recommendations.

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I rise to support the Electoral and Other Legislation Amendment Bill. Trust is extremely important. People want and need trust. That explains the rise again of Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party. It's because people actually trust Pauline Hanson and those who work with her. Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party is all about trust and, for 20 years, Pauline Hanson—now Senator Hanson—has led by example and has built trust, and that is rewarding her party.

How can there be trust, though, when a major party is telling lies? In the last campaign, the 'Mediscare' campaign was deplorable. Not only did it spread lies but it also spread fear—it fomented fear. The architect of the 'Mediscare' campaign, so we're told by the media, was none other than, reportedly, the daughter of the former Treasurer—the member for Lilley, Mr Wayne Swan. That seems to go to the core of the Labor Party.

But it's not just the Labor Party that is misrepresenting events and trying to create havoc. We see that, instead of using data, the Greens, when they're fomenting their policies on climate and their claims on climate and misrepresenting climate, actually use photos of billowing steam as carbon dioxide, yet carbon dioxide is clear, odourless, colourless and tasteless. It's invisible. It's a trace gas, yet we see these pictures of billowing steam. We also see the Greens Party taking pictures of cute, cuddly and colourful animals—colourful fish from the Great Barrier Reef—to say that that's their evidence. There is no such evidence that humans, through our production of carbon dioxide and the use of hydrocarbon fuels, are affecting global climate—none whatsoever—yet the Greens have deceitfully started these smear campaigns about humanity and tarnished the reputation of our country and our Great Barrier Reef.

Then we have Senator Watt's vexatious complaints about Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party in Queensland and the Prime Minister, in a speech last Wednesday, which I was appalled at when I listened to it, blaming the Labor Party for the energy crisis when, in fact, both major parties and the Greens are responsible for our current ongoing energy crisis. While people are not telling the truth and blaming others, we won't have the public understanding honestly what is happening and we won't have real policies being based on real evidence.

The Prime Minister's party, the Liberal Party, put in place the Renewable Energy Target under Prime Minister John Howard's government. The Prime Minister's party was the first to bring in, as policy, an emissions trading scheme. That led to the carbon tax, and it's now led to other similar policies and claims. The Prime Minister's party is the one that stole farmers' property rights to comply with the Kyoto Protocol. This is what's costing people in Queensland and right across our country enormously—stealing of property rights, raising of energy prices and unaffordability of energy prices. Now, in this country, with the best coal deposits in the world, we have people who have to make a choice between eating or using heat. That is deplorable. In this country, under this government and under this opposition when it was in government, we have the destruction of energy based upon a lie—one of the biggest lies ever told. While this is occurring, people are paying the price. Everyday Australians right across our country are paying the price, so we support this bill because we need to start bringing trust back into politics. Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party puts people before politics, and this bill is a start to putting the people before politics.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank all senators who have contributed to this debate and commend the bill to the Senate.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.