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

My question is to the Special Minister of State, Senator Farrell. The Liberals and the no campaign unashamedly used and amplified disinformation and misinformation in their campaign to defeat the Voice referendum. It was straight out of Donald Trump's playbook. Until we have truth in political advertising laws, those tactics can be used again, likely on migration. The next election will be a horror show of scare campaigns and misinformation. Polling released today shows that 87 per cent of Australians support truth in political advertising laws. Does the government want to confront the issue of misleading political advertising or is avoiding that and doing a deal with the Liberals on electoral changes more important to them?

Don Farrell (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Waters for her question. I have made it very clear, especially in respect of your last point, Senator Waters, that it is my intention to consult with all parties, including the Greens, about electoral reform. We do have a process in place. That process has announced an interim report, and you would be fully aware of many of the items that have been raised in that process. I intend to continue that consultation process with all of the parties, with a view to trying to get a consensus position on reforms to our electoral system. We know that a whole lot of things need to be done to increase transparency and we know that a whole lot of things need to be done to limit expenditure by really rich Australians to buy election results. In that process we are going to give some consideration to the issue of truth in political advertising. I agree with you 100 per cent about a lot of the messages that were sent out to the Australian people.

Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So much for free speech.

Don Farrell (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If it were to proceed, Senator Canavan, then it would not be me making those decisions. I can tell you, Senator Canavan, it certainly would not be you who would be making— (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Waters, first supplementary?

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

Minister, the government is reportedly in discussion with the Liberals on electoral reform, which has grave implications for the one-third of Australians who didn't vote for either of your parties. Around half the money that Labor and Liberal receive is not disclosed—it's dark money that comes from exclusive cash-for-access events, donated through business forums as memberships, and undisclosed sources. Will you close these major-party loopholes and act on secret money or will this cosy arrangement that protects the two old parties stay in place?

Don Farrell (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Waters for her first supplementary question. I reject the premise of your question. I don't know how many times I can say it—I intend to have discussions with all of the parties about what electoral reform might look like. I have done it with you, Senator Waters, and I expect that we'll be doing it again shortly. I have done it with Senator David Pocock. I would be very happy to do it with the Jacqui Lambie Network. I've done it with the teals. In fact, I've done it with anybody who has asked to meet me to have a discussion about it. Would you believe I've even talked to Chris Ketter? (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Waters, second supplementary?

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

What assurances can you give that the Labor and Liberal parties will not stitch up a secret deal that will give themselves more public money, keep the secret corporate slush funds in place and enable more misinformation in election campaigns? Will we end up with electoral reform or an electoral rort?

Don Farrell (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Waters for her second supplementary question. Again I reject the underlying implication in your question. The objective of this government is to bring about transparency in the Australian electoral process. One of the ways the committee has recommended we do that is by bringing down the $16,000 ceiling for disclosure of electoral donations to $1,000. That will very significantly add to transparency in electoral processes. One of the other proposals, Senator Waters, is to have real-time donations so that any voter can know within, say, seven days who has donated to the political candidate they are considering supporting. (Time expired)