REFORMS MUST BOOST DEMOCRACY
TASMANIA could be on the cusp of long-awaited electoral law reforms. As many would be painfully aware, this state has no rules in place around electoral donations, so disclosure defaults to the federal system with its $14,300 thresholds and its ponderously slow annual declarations. The cries for reform have been long and loud, but change has been slow. Finally, it appears to be on the way.
After enacting some minor tweaks — including lifting a ban on election day newspaper reporting following a campaign by the Mercury — early in their last term the Liberals seemed to lose their zeal for the task. No big surprise perhaps, given the present arrangements allowed them to outspend Labor three to one at the 2018 poll?
The principles of a fair system are not difficult to either imagine or even copy from other jurisdictions. They should include the principle of transparency at its heart and a level playing field for all to participate in our political process. This means the timely disclosure and a low threshold for disclosures, it means restrictions on who can donate and it means no incumbent, party or interest should enjoy an unfair advantage.
Each of Tasmania’s parties has proposed its own version of improvements. With the re-election of a Liberal government, its plan is most likely to be presented to our parliament and become Tasmania’s first state-based disclosure rules.
Among the reforms is the proposal to reduce political parties’ reliance on donations by allowing for public funding of election campaigns. Under the draft legislation, candidates who receive more than 4 per cent of the vote would be reimbursed their expenses to the tune of up to $6 a vote.
The change should reduce the need for parties to seek cash from donors, with the hint of obligation that implies. But independent MP Kristie Johnston says the concept is heavily slanted in favour of the major parties, who would be well-rewarded under the proposed system at the expense of newcomers, independents and minor party candidates.
Using public funds to pay for election campaigns is also unlikely to be hugely popular with taxpayers either, being in some eyes only the marginally lesser of two evils.
The government must heed the feedback from the consultation process to further refine these bills. The parliament will also play its role, with the likelihood of amendments to strengthen the laws in both houses, as so they should. Our government must commit to ongoing improvements. The debate on this topic has raged too long and hard for Tasmania to end up simply replacing one unpopular and flawed regimen with another.