Login
‘Australians fed up with status quo’: HRLC argues for cap on election spending
Implementing a cap on election spending is vital to restoring democracy and achieving greater political equality, the Human Rights Law Council argues.
Naomi Neilson
In its submission to the joint standing committee on electoral matters, 12 civil society organisations called for a cap on the amount of money political parties, campaigners, candidates and third parties can spend during elections.
“Election campaigns should be a time when people with important things to say on the matters of public interest can be heard, not just those with enough cash.”
The issue was highlighted after the last federal election when Clive Palmer’s spending was revealed to be $60 million, which is double the combined projected expenditure of the Australian Labor Party and the Liberal Party.
According to a 2018 survey, Australian’s satisfaction with democracy has plummeted from 86 per cent in 2007 to just 41 per cent in 2018. Most of the respondents reported wanting a reform on the limits of how much money can be donated to political parties.
Democracy campaigner at the Australian Conservation Founder Jolene Elberth said: “What the 2019 federal election made clear was just how far behind our federal political finance regime is in regulating money in the political system, leaving vested interests to use their oversized wallets to influence election outcomes.”
Ms Elberth added the federal government’s regulation of money in politics and during elections is “extremely weak” when compared to democracies like the UK and Canada, and “even many Australian states and territories”.
The group before the committee also called for a cap on donations, an increase in the transparency and regular disclosure of donations and for better regulation of lobbying, as well as a national integrity commission to expose corruption and misconduct.
Social justice spokesperson from the Uniting Church in Victoria and Tasmania Dr Mark Zirnsak said spending caps for political parties would free them from spending their time chasing donations and from owing favours to large donors so politicians “focus more on talking about the issues that matter to citizens that might vote for them”.
Naomi Neilson
Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly.
You can email Naomi at:
