Elections should be about policy not money

Elections should be about policy not money

Green Media Release 23rd July 2007

While there are some positive elements in the electoral finance reform proposal tabled by the Labour Government today, it will not stop the faceless money from secretive trusts and anonymous donors funding the National and Labour parties in the 2008 campaign, says the Green Party.

In 2005, National received $1.7m from shadowy trusts while Labour received $300,000 from anonymous donors.

“Elections should be a contest of ideas and policy, not a contest of who can raise the most money from secret trusts and anonymous donations. This bill does almost nothing to stem the flood of anonymous money into the major political parties,” says Dr. Russel Norman, Green Co-Leader and Electoral Matters Spokesperson.

The greatest threat to freedom and democracy is the influence of money on politics. We need to avoid our political system becoming captured by secret financiers who may expect a return on their ‘investment’.

“The Greens believe that the electoral finance law should be changed so that the actual source of any donation greater than $1000 must be identified or the donation handed over to the Electoral Commission.

“It is remarkable that any anonymous donation larger than $500 to a non-political party has to be handed over to the Electoral Commission while political parties are free to accept as much ‘anonymous’ money as they like and only have to declare that they’ve accepted secret donations when they are over $10,000.

“The Greens would also like to see a $35,000 limit on how much any one person or organisation can donate to a political party. Why should a few people get to influence the direction of our political parties by bankrolling them?

“The new requirement that parties declare when they receive a donation greater than $20,000 makes sense but it hardly means anything when the identity of that donor can be kept secret.

“We welcome the controls on the intervention of non-political parties in the election campaign. Placing caps on how much the Exclusive Brethren and others can spend in the campaign, and making them transparent about their involvement in the campaign, is a positive step.

“And the extension of the period covered by the parties' campaign spending cap to the beginning of the election year makes sense – as National Party Campaign Manager Steven Joyce said, ‘the lead up to the campaign is just as important as the campaign itself’.

ENDS