Electoral Disclosure & Funding (Donation Disclosure) Amendment Bill 2025 (No 55)

Tuesday 11 March 2025

[9.04 p.m.]

Ms ARMITAGE (Launceston) - Mr President, I thank the honourable member for Hobart for bringing this bill forward in this place. I believe it is regarding an issue that is very important to healthy democracies such as ours. As has already been mentioned, the bill seeks to reduce the reportable political donation disclosure threshold from $5000 to $1000, and sets more frequent time frames. Additionally, it seeks to amend the reportable time frame to occur on a monthly basis rather than every six months.

We have had a great deal of change to Tasmania's electoral laws in recent years. I think that aligns with the expectations of regular people. Tasmanians want to know that they are governed by the people they vote for, not the people who line the pockets of politicians and parties. This bill, in my opinion, helps move us closer towards that goal.

I note that when this bill was debated in the other place, it was agreed that it should be sent for examination by a sessional Committee B. The inquiry was cordial, informative, and constructive. Without reflecting on what any other member has said in the other place, the Chair of that committee of inquiry said that the process was constructive, collaborative, and mature. That is exactly what the Tasmanian people expect from us. The inquiry's final report states, fundamentally, the objective of all members of parliament should be to act with integrity at all times and make decisions that are in the best interests of our community. Ensuring that we have contemporary legislation to inform how elections are conducted is paramount in our effort to maintain trust in public institutions and the electoral system. Ultimately, we should all aspire to a framework for the conduct of election campaigns that satisfies the objectives of transparency, truthfulness, and public service.

To that end, we now have the bill before us, which I am very inclined to support. Tasmanians need and deserve to know who is funding who, where political parties are receiving their donations from, and whether independents are truly independent. Remembering, of course, that we are not obliged to accept donations, as helpful as they might be. While I would be very happy for all donations to be disclosed, irrespective of the amount, I think $1000 is a reasonable amount. That is low enough for influential donors to be identified, but high enough to not catch more regular people, such as loyal party members or even friends or family of a political candidate who want to pitch in and help.

The reduction of the reporting time frame down to monthly rather than half-yearly is also a reasonable step. Considering that the time between elections can potentially boil down to just a few weeks or a couple of months between the time it is called and polling day, having a six‑monthly reporting time frame seems pointless as it would be scrutinising the donations after the fact. I do not believe that monthly reporting requirements add any unduly onerous requirements to election candidates, especially parties who are much better resourced than individuals and have access to a greater pool of resources. If you want to be a lawmaker, demonstrating an ability to understand and comply with the law when you are running for office is a good test.

I look forward to hearing the contributions of others here. As I mentioned, I am inclined to support this very reasonable bill. I extend my thanks again to the member for Hobart for bringing it forward in this place.