freediver
Gold Member
Online
www.ozpolitic.com
Posts: 47053
At my desk.
|
Some changes and additions:
Draft feedback:
Part A:
A1) Political donations:
I support option C - we should copy NSW's ban on donations by corporations and organisations (ie donations from individual people on the state electoral roll only).
I support option G - The law should focus more on continuous disclosure rather than limiting or capping donations.
Reporting requirements should be extended to cover all donations, not just those intended for use during campaign periods.
It is not too onerous to expect parties to maintain state campaign accounts.
I do not support the UK model that allows donations from unions provided there are internal voting systems, unless voting is a compulsory part of membership.
A2) Public funding:
I support option A.
All additional funding introduced in 2011 should be scrapped. An amount of approximately $1.7 per first preference vote is reasonable. The expenses included should be broadened beyond campaign funding. Proof of expenditure requirements should be scrapped if these are unlikely to make any difference to the amount spent or the amount claimed (ie, if profiteering is unlikely). If profiteering is likely, this is evidence that the per vote funding amount is too high.
The method of calculating reimbursements (fractions of percents) is absurd. As far as I can tell it is equivalent to a fixed percentage of total expenditure.
The party or parties that gain office should have their reimbursement reduced by 20%, to account for the additional exposure they obtain with office.
A3) Election Expenditure:
I support options A and E, and may support options C and D with the qualifications below. I oppose option F.
I am in favour of caps on expenditure as a means of leveling the playing field for parties that do not get as many private donations. Given the lower population and lower advertising costs, these limits should be lower than those in NSW (as they currently are).
I am concerned that attempts to aggregate affiliated entities may create bias. Defining an affiliated entity by the formality of the links with the party is too arbitrary. I would oppose a definition of affiliated entitties that included unions, but excluded industry lobby groups, for example the groups that campaigned against the carbon and minin taxes.
I would also support aggregation of expenditure by other organisations based on the purpose of the advertising, rather than the nature of the organisation and the formality of links to the parties involved.
I support the proposed amendments regarding the exclusion of 'non-partisan' polling as expenditure.
I oppose the suggested change to the definition of volunteer labor. The cap on expenditure should focus on advertising reach rather than 'behind the scenes' effort.
Part B:
B1) Truth in Advertising:
I oppose the introduction of truth in political advertising legislation, for the reasons outlined in the discussion paper.
B2) How to vote cards:
I support option A, oppose option B, C and D.
I support the measures introduced in Victoria for greater transparency in how to vote cards (ie they should be published on the ECQ website). I think the requirement for lodgement 7 days prior to election day is excessive. I think it should be allowable to submit on the day prior to polling, pending administrative issues.
I oppose any penalty for misleading statements on how to vote cards or any requirement for review of how to vote cards. I think that transparency alone is sufficient.
I oppose bans on how to vote cards, except based on distance from the polling booth. Six meters is an apporpriate distance. One exception to this is under Optional preferential voting. Under this scheme how to vote cards should be banned as they encourage voters to disenfranchise themselves.
I do not see a need to regulat the behaviour of people who hand out how to vote cards.
B3) Proof of identity
I oppose requirements for proof of identity to be provided.
B4) Enrollment on polling day:
I support enrollment on polling day, provided appropriate measures such as quarantining are taken.
B5) Electronic Voting:
I support electronic voting for all voters, including over the internet, provided security issues can be resolved.
B6) Postal voting.
I support all options proposed. Postal voting should be open to all voters and made as convenient as possible. I think deadlines should be brought forward and there should be a requirement that postal votes are recieved by the ECQ prior to the close of polls. A separate class of postal votes could be introduced for this purpose, that allow people who need a postal vote by the cuirrent restricted criteria to submit later.
|