Diminishing Democracy: The Threat Posed by Political Expenditure Laws

Andrew Norton
31 July 2009 | IA114
Diminishing Democracy: The Threat Posed by Political Expenditure Laws

Electoral law reforms nearing a Senate vote risk making political activists inadvertent lawbreakers, deterring financial supporters of Australia’s civil society, and creating unnecessary bureaucratic burdens.

These provisions are included in the Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Political Donations and Other Measures) Bill 2009, which has already passed through the House of Representatives.

Political activists could be convicted and fined for failing to report their political expenditure and donors to the Australian Electoral Commission. They face jail for political expenditure financed from foreign sources or, in some cases, anonymously. Foreign sources include Australian citizens using overseas bank accounts or credit cards.

The proposed reforms modify current rules applying to ‘third parties’—non-government organisations that express views on political parties, candidates, or election issues. Which groups must report to the AEC is currently unclear. Organisations that run political campaigns are covered, but the media, universities, charities, think-tanks, and community groups whose staff sometimes comment on political matters could also be caught by the disclosure system.

Political expenditure laws have high red-tape compliance costs. Third parties have more complex obligations than political parties. Third parties are expected to report their spending on election issues even if the election is two or three years in the future. They must itemise political expenditure, while political parties need report only a single lump sum of all payments. If the current bill passes, detailed records will need to be kept and reported on for money-in-a-bucket fundraisers.

Organisations involved in political commentary risk losing donors who do not want their names and address placed on the public record. Under existing rules, donors must be disclosed even if they do not know how their money is being spent.

Currently, no AEC reports are required unless political expenditure reaches $10,900 a year. Enabling donations are also private up to $10,900 a year. This threshold keeps organisations and individuals with minor political activity out of the disclosure system.

The political donations bill would reduce the disclosure thresholds to $1,000 every six months. Minor and incidental political activity will be caught by the law, putting people unfamiliar with political bureaucracy at much greater risk of unintentionally breaking the law.

Political expenditure laws are intended to close loopholes in the political party donations system. But they go way beyond what is required. Most third-party political activity poses no threat to the political system’s integrity. To the contrary, third parties play a vital role in monitoring government, raising issues, and providing opportunities for political participation. Laws that sabotage third parties by deterring their donors, placing their activists at risk of prosecution, and wasting their time providing low-value information would diminish Australia’s democracy.

Andrew Norton is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies.

 

 

 

Latest Publications

Eight Housing Affordability Myths
Stephen Kirchner
10 July 2014 | IA146

Australians are conflicted in their attitude to this long-run change in real house prices because they are both investors in housing as an asset class and consumers of housing services. This conflicted attitude on the part of the public is reflected in confused public policies followed by Australian governments. Unfortunately, many of the policies pursued by Australian governments in the…

READ MORE
Still Damaging and Disturbing: Australian Child Protection Data and the Need for National Adoption Targets
Jeremy Sammut
16 April 2014 | IA145

In December 2013, the Abbott government announced plans to make it easier for Australian parents to adopt children both locally and from overseas. Acknowledging the official ‘taboo’ on adoption in Australia, Prime Minister Tony Abbott ordered an inter-departmental committee to recommend ways to take adoption out of the ‘too-hard’ basket. The chief barrier to raising the number of local adoptions…

READ MORE
Why Jaydon Can’t Read: A Forum on Fixing Literacy
Jennifer Buckingham, Justine Ferrari, Tom Alegounarias
18 February 2014 | IA144

Many thousands of Australian students have very low levels of literacy after spending four or more years at school. The Spring 2014 issue of the CIS journal Policy contained an article called ‘Why Jaydon Can’t Read: How Ideology Triumphed Over Evidence in Teaching Reading’, which concluded that students were not being provided with the most effective evidence-based reading instruction in…

READ MORE
Independent Charities, Independent Regulators: The Future of Not-for-Profit Regulation
Helen Andrews
06 February 2014 | IA143

The Australian Charities and Not-for-Profits Commission was established by the Gillard government in 2012 with the intended purpose of cutting the red tape faced by Australia’s charities. So far, the regulator has failed to make any significant progress on this goal or on its two other main goals: increasing public trust in charities and improving the quality of regulatory oversight…

READ MORE
The New Silence: Family Breakdown and Child Sexual Abuse
Jeremy Sammut
30 January 2014 | IA142

Despite family breakdown exposing children to greater risk of sexual abuse, the issue receives scant attention in this country. Child sexual abuse is not fully and frankly discussed because the public discourse is self-censored by politicians, academics, social service organisations, and the media in compliance with politically correct attitudes towards ‘family diversity’—the socially ‘progressive’ and ‘non-judgmental’ fiction that says the…

READ MORE