It'S TIME TO BAN POLITICAL DONATIONS

No it is well past that time.

John Smith wrote on Jul 30^th, 2016 at 10:14am:

bogarde73 wrote on Jul 30^th, 2016 at 1:30pm:


Firstly, learn to quote ... you've been on here long enough.

Secondly, I don't care what the CFMEU does, as long as they stop ALL donations to political parties. You guys cry that labor does the unions bidding, but then when someone suggests a way to stop that, you cry even more.

As to how to fund it

Provide a govt. funded central pot that gives each candidate an equal amount to spend on political campaigning only. If they blow it all in a week, that's their tough luck. If they have any left over, it gets refunded to the pot.  They can't use it for any purpose other than what it is intended for .. ie election campaigns.  Any money must be accompanied by a receipt. If the altruistic want to donate towards democracy, that money goes into the central pot, which then gets distributed amongst all candidates. No one person becomes beholden to any corporation or union. No corporation can attach conditions to their donation because by the time it gets distributed equally, its not enough to affect each candidates vote to change.

bogarde73 wrote on Jul 30^th, 2016 at 2:09pm:


I would think that there is no limit to the size of the pot, only to the size of the govt's contribution to it. 

some interesting points ....


To take just one issue, Australia is not one of the 114 out of 180 countries that ban donations to political parties from foreign interests. Transparency can be impossible to achieve when donations come from other countries.

.................

Canada has extensive regulation, banning corporate and union donations, imposing caps on individual donations and limits on candidate, party and third-party expenditure – that is, expenditure by groups other than candidates or political parties during an election campaign.

New Zealand also limits expenditure by parties and third parties. Its electoral commission is responsible for party broadcasting allocation (free time and money for paid advertising).

The United Kingdom has limits on expenditure by political parties and third parties. Paid advertising in electronic media isn’t allowed at all.

In 2008, the House of Lords upheld the prohibition. It argued the ban was necessary to maintain a level playing field and prevent “well-endowed interests" from using “the power of the purse to give enhanced prominence to their views”.

In Australia, the cost of television advertising and associated market research has driven political parties to chase ever-greater donations. Both political donations and the negative advertising these buy increase distrust in politicians and political parties.

..................

To safeguard integrity, we need transparency and other measures so that those with vested interests in government contracts or regulation cannot buy access and influence.

The second reason for regulating political donations is to promote political equality, a defining feature of democratic citizenship.

Parties without wealthy backers should not have their message drowned out by those that do. And corporate donors should not be able to buy political access far in excess of what other citizens enjoy.

A third reason for regulating donations is to ensure those elected to be political representatives don’t instead spend their time chasing donations.



http://theconversation.com/australia-trails-way-behind-other-nations-in-regulati...