Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I seek leave to table an explanatory memorandum relating to the bill and to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

I welcome the opportunity to re-introduce this bill today, and continue our efforts to get big money out of politics. I acknowledge the important work done on this issue by former Senator Lee Rhiannon and Senator Richard Di Natale, academics and civil society organisations that has assisted in the development of this bill.

If passed, this bill would stop dirty industries with a track record of seeking to influence decision-makers through donations—the fossil fuel, banking, defence, pharmaceutical, liquor, tobacco and gambling industries—from making political donations. The bill would also limit the amount that can be donated by individuals and other entities to $3,000 per election term, minimising the opportunity for big money to buy outcomes.

There has never been a more important time for donation reform. Our democracy is in trouble. Public trust in parliament and politicians is at an all-time low, and the community feels less and less confident that their representatives represent them, rather than doing the bidding of their corporate donors.

And it's no wonder. Two hundred and thirty million dollars have flowed in corporate donations to the Labor, Liberal and National parties in the past decade from the big banks, from industries like mining, defence and big pharma, from property developers, and from alcohol, tobacco and gambling companies. These are just some of the industries that have paid the Liberal, National and Labor parties to put their private profits ahead of the needs of our community.

These industries are not donating millions of dollars because they believe in the institution of strong democracy. They are donating because it gets results.

The Greens have maintained the www.democracyforsale.org website for over a decade, tracking publicly disclosed political donations and putting a spotlight on influence-peddling. In 2018, the Senate Select Committee on the Political Influence of Donations laid out examples of the nexus between donations made by industry bodies and public policy outcomes or project approvals. The cosy relationships and the proximity of donations and policy outcomes that boost industry profits suggest undue influence. And the community continues to pay the price through climate inaction, propping up destructive gambling practices, and governments that refuse to make corporations pay their fair share of tax so that everyday people can get the education, health care, dental care, and income support that they need. Until we break the hold of dirty donations over the major parties, big corporations will keep winning, and the community loses out.

Recognising the corrosive influence that donations from the development sector had had on planning policy, infrastructure, and urban development, Queensland and New South Wales have both legislated to restrict political donations from property developers. The High Court has upheld these restrictions and this bill seeks to extend those to the federal arena. But it also recognises the influence of other key industries.

Since 2012, the fossil fuel and resources industries have donated over $9 million to both of the major parties. The Australia Institute estimates that in 2021-22 alone Australian governments handed out $11.6 billion in subsidies to fossil fuel giants in grants, loans, cheap fuel and accelerated depreciation that the rest of us don't get. That was $1.3 billion more than in the previous year, despite a COVID crisis that saw so many Australians struggling to make ends meet.

Rather than turn off the tap, in the most recent budget Labor gifted $1.9 billion of new money for gas in the Northern Territory on top of continuing the nearly $40 million in Morrison government fuel tax credits enjoyed by the industry.

It's a pretty good return on investment for fossil fuel donors, and a terrible deal for the rest of us.

Generous donations bought them a Liberal government completely paralysed by the words 'climate change' at a time when the Australian community faces a future of more extreme bushfires, crippling droughts and floods. Donations continue to cloud the judgment of the Albanese Labor government as new coal and gas projects keep getting approvals and public money.

The gas industry donates millions of dollars, so it was no great surprise when the former Prime Minister appointed his gas industry mates to the National COVID-19 Coordination Commission without even declaring their conflicts of interest. It was also no surprise that the Commission ultimately called for a "gas-led recovery" that directly benefits the gas industry, despite strong support for a renewables-led recovery from scientists, economists and policy analysts. Again, the community lost the opportunity for a sustainable recovery because governments are beholden to fossil fuel donors.

The cosy relationships and financial support have led to a situation where, despite overwhelming scientific and economic evidence that we will not reach even the weak 43 per cent emissions reduction targets unless we end our attachment to fossil fuels, the Albanese government refuses to rule out any of the 114 coal and gas projects currently under consideration. In fact, they continue to hand out public money to support destructive new projects in the Beetaloo Basin, Scarborough, and more.

We saw bullying tactics by the Minerals Council kill the Rudd government's mining super profits tax, and right now we're seeing the Minerals Councils use the same tactics against the Queensland Labor government's current plan to get resources companies to pay their fair share. These threats only work because the major parties rely on donations. The possibility generous donations will be withdrawn is the leverage the industry uses to keep governments in check.

The banking and financial sector is also a regular contributor and beneficiary. The sector has donated about $76 million since 2012 to both sides of politics, and that support secured them immunity for some time despite the evidence of customers being ripped off all over the country. Both of the major parties had to be dragged to the banking royal commission, something the Greens campaigned for since 2014, following scandal after scandal and public backlash over their inaction. How much faster would the commission have happened if the Liberal, National and Labor parties weren't on the payroll of the banks? And would we have seen stronger action in response to the scathing royal commission report?

The gambling industry is another significant donor to state and federal political parties, and their influence can be seen in the deeply entrenched support for poker machines throughout Australia, including exemptions for clubs from COVID restrictions even when so many other venues suffered.

Property developers also continue to throw their donations weight around while fighting against planning restrictions, tax reforms, and stronger environmental laws. In Queensland, a destructive proposal for a canal estate within the Ramsar-listed Toondah wetlands should never have gotten past the first hurdle. The department recommended that the project be rejected as "clearly unacceptable". Yet the property developer, Walker Corporation, was a generous political donor and the then minister allowed the deeply flawed proposal to proceed to assessment phase. He even explored the possibility of changing the Ramsar boundaries to accommodate the proposal. I live in hope that the new environment minister will finally reject this destructive proposal, but the local community should never have had to fight so hard for so long against a clearly unacceptable development.

These are only the donations that we know about, none of which have been illegal. It doesn't include money paid to attend business forums or cash for access meetings, it ignores exorbitant subscription or membership fees, and it doesn't include money funnelled through representative and fundraising bodies.

But regardless of the source or the amount, the obvious expectation from industry is that donations will return results. They're buying outcomes. This feeds the public perception that decisions in this place are made improperly, with self-interest and the interests of donors and mates consistently overriding the public interest.

In banning political donations from those industries that have a history of seeking to influence policy decisions, the bill implements a key recommendation of the Senate Select Committee into the Political Influence of Donations. It makes it an offence for a prohibited donor to make a donation or solicit another person to make a donation on its behalf. It is also an offence to accept a donation from a prohibited donor.

Another committee recommendation that this bill seeks to implement is to limit other political donations to $3,000 in an election term. As the High Court recognised in McCloy v NSW, uncontrolled use of wealth to influence decision-making compromises equal participation in democracy. By aggregating and capping political donations made by any person or entity, the bill seeks to level the playing field and avoid those with more money gaining greater access to government.

The bill will limit donations made for political purposes but is not intended to limit donations made to third parties to support their non-campaign activities. The important work done by civil society organisations must be allowed to continue. We will continue to call for the introduction of electoral expenditure caps to balance the participation of civil society organisations in the political process.

The bill complements other reforms to strengthen the disclosure regime that the government has finally committed to acting on, including lowering the disclosure threshold and requiring real-time disclosure of donations so people aren't waiting 18 months to see who is buying whom. The Greens strongly support these measures but recognise that more transparency alone will not remove the corrupting influence of political donations.

The 2022 election results confirm that the Australian public want more transparent and representative government that acts in the public interest. This bill is an important first step towards getting big money out of politics and restoring public confidence in our democracy.

If we are committed to enhancing the democratic process, which surely is something that every parliament should regularly turn its mind to, this should be a priority. This bill does not stifle debate or prevent individuals from donating to support a political party. It bans donations from industries that have become associated with having a corrupting influence on how we work as decision makers and will return democracy to the community.

I commend the bill to the Senate.

I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.