Mr PETER BESSELING (Port Macquarie) [6.50 p.m.]: I rise to speak on the Election Funding and Disclosures Amendment Bill 2010 and would like to read into Hansard the overview of the bill. I think it is important to have that on the record. The object of the bill is to amend the Election Funding and Disclosures Act 1981 to make major reforms to political donations and election campaign expenditure and funding for State elections. In particular, the bill imposes caps on political donations and electoral communication expenditure and provides instead for an increase in public funding for State election campaigns.

I do not think the current system of election funding and donations has any greater impact than that on Independent members of Parliament. I will raise a number of points relating to that aspect during my contribution. During the inquiry into the public funding of election campaigns in February this year I raised some issues with the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters and I would like to read from my submission.

A system should not discriminate against a group or individual, confer neither benefit nor disadvantage and should encourage equal participation from all members of our communities. There are currently different reporting processes in place for candidates seeking election, where public reporting procedures vary depending on whether or not a candidate belongs to a political party.

This discrepancy between public political disclosures needs to be rectified so that each candidate has the same reporting obligations, so that voters have access to consistent, comparable data on which they can base their political support, and exercise their political freedom to vote accordingly.

This goes to the very heart of transparency. At the Port Macquarie by-election, there were different rules for parties and individuals. That applied not only to that by-election but also throughout the State election and other by-elections. Political parties do not have to disclose the amount of funding they apply to a particular election campaign. The only reason we were able to obtain figures for the Port Macquarie by-election campaign in 2008 was that it was the only seat The Nationals contested in four by-elections. If it had been a general election we would have had no idea how much any political party spent. That applied also to the elections in Cabramatta, Lakemba and anywhere else.

Mr Andrew Fraser: That is not right.

Mr PETER BESSELING: That is definitely correct. The Nationals outspent the 10 candidates combined by a significant margin because there was no cap. It would benefit parties generally as well as Independents if a cap were imposed. The bill will curtail this inequity and bring all candidates closer to a level playing field. In my submission to the committee I noted the following issues in relation to political expenditure raised by Dr Anne Twomey in her report entitled, "The reform of political donations, expenditure and funding":
Expenditure limits applied to political parties and candidates have a direct effect on their capacity to communicate with the electorate. Accordingly, any such law must be very carefully balanced in order to be held constitutionally valid. The most contentious area is the imposition of expenditure limits on third parties. If no such limits are imposed on third parties, the effectiveness of limits imposed on political parties or candidates will be undermined by third party electoral campaigning. If limits are imposed on third parties, there is a high risk of constitutional invalidity. Practical issues must also be considered, such as the periods for which expenditure limits apply, the types of expenditure to which they apply and the level at which they ought to be set. Expenditure limits may also need to be considered as part of an entire scheme, involving limits on donations and funding.

It has been recognised in the past that a political "arms race" is not in the best interests of our political process and certainly not in the best interests of encouraging new players, whether they be political parties or individuals, to actively participate in politics and put themselves forward as candidates for election. Whilst acknowledging the issues surrounding any proposed cap on political expenditure, this should not preclude us from investigating some form of spending restriction that encourages and protects broader participation in our democratic processes. I am glad to see that this has been taken up in the bill and third party caps have been put in place. In the past we have seen heavy union advertising—even in the most recent Federal election—and very expensive mining company campaigns, all designed to influence election results. We must be careful that what we put in place through this legislative reform does not shift our concerns from political donations to third party domination of influence, particularly in individual electorates, although it is better than the current situation.

With regard to the public funding model, there should always be an element of public funding of political campaigns to encourage broad participation in our democracy by those wishing to do so. The current model of funding candidates who achieve over 4 per cent of the primary vote in the Legislative Assembly elections in our State certainly encourages not only active participation but also competition for all candidates to give their best efforts. Private donations should also form part of any funding model as a safeguard for the political freedom of expression that is a foundation of our democracy.

Our political system should not be dominated by those with access to large amounts of cash, lest political influence be vested in a minority and the emphasis on fundraising become the driving force behind political machinations at the expense of policy development and broad community representation. This is certainly the case for Independent members of Parliament. We should not be spending all our time chasing up fundraising efforts; we should be concentrating on working hard for our community and developing good policy and good legislation that will be for the benefit of the State.

[Full Transcript]