The Coalition has singled out environment groups for special
attention in a new parliamentary report that recommends banning foreign
donations. The report draws on testimony from the mining industry to
argue some some activist groups “appear to be circumventing the system”.
The joint parliamentary committee on electoral matters, released the report on Friday recommending banning foreign political donations, but as Guardian Australia revealed on Thursday, the major parties have split over the treatment of activist groups.
Coalition members of the committee recommended a prohibition on donations from foreign citizens and foreign entities to Australian registered political parties, associated entities and “third parties”, such as activist groups.
The proposed ban would not apply to dual Australian citizens either in Australia or overseas, or to non-Australian permanent residents in Australia.
Labor members agreed that foreign citizens and foreign entities should be banned from making donations to Australian registered political parties, and the ban should be extended to the associated entities of registered political parties, which would include some, but not all, trade unions.
But Labor members of the committee issued a dissenting report saying
they could not support the Coalition proposal to extend the fundraising
and financial disclosure obligations imposed by the Electoral Act “to
capture all third parties that are in any way involved in public
campaigning”.
Labor members said extending the ban to third-party activist groups “would represent a dramatic extension of scope of the current regulatory scheme under the act”.
“We acknowledge that concerns have been raised in this regard but there is scant evidence before the committee to support any such proposal,” the dissenting report says. “Indeed, the rationale for it is unclear.”
Coalition members of the committee made the case that if the ban didn’t apply to all actors in the political system – political parties, associated entities, and third party activist groups – then a significant loophole would be created.
The report authored by government MPs says third parties are not subject to the electoral disclosure regime due to their deductible gift recipient (DGR) status.
“They do not self-identify their activities as political campaigning and thus operate outside the current disclosure regime,” the report says. “This allows both foreign and domestic donors to contribute funds in support of domestic campaigns with little or no transparency.”
The JSCEM chair, Liberal senator Linda Reynolds, said third party actors were proliferating in the Australian political scene, incurring increasing amounts of unregulated expenditure.
Reynolds warned: “If this loophole is not addressed in legislation, the likely consequence of a ban on foreign donations to organisations regulated by the AEC, is that funds will be channelled through organisations that are not.”
The report authored by Coalition MPs points to testimony given to the inquiry by the Minerals Council of Australia (MCA) “that a number of environmental groups were actively participating in political campaigning but were still registered as charitable organisations, thus allowing them to avoid declaring the source of their foreign and domestic funding”.
The report quotes the MCA saying “these groups should not be exempt from reasonable disclosure obligations that help maintain public confidence in Australia’s political system.”
The MCA told JSCEM there was “evidence that a number of organisations that received tax concessions are engaging in activities in defiance of clear regulatory restrictions”.
Specific examples given included:
“Moreover, registered environmental organisations must not act as a conduit for the donation of money or property to other entities, although they may pay other bodies to undertake natural conservation work.”
Concern is raised in the report that the groups are involved in political campaigning whilst in receipt of DGR status, without being subjected to the same donations and disclosure regime as other players in the political system.
The Labor members suggest the regulation of third parties should be examined by another parliamentary inquiry.
“The Coalition proposal has a very wide ambit and Labor members of the committee are concerned that it may lead to unfortunate, presumably unintended, consequences in terms of imposing wide-ranging restrictions on the capacity of not-for-profit organisations to draw attention to their causes,” the Labor MPs say.
“These causes could very well cover the field of Australian public discourse – from overseas aid, to Indigenous advancement.”
“What sort of government would seek to shut down, or monopolise, these conversations?”
The Greens make a similar argument in their dissenting report.
“If such a law was enacted it would drastically curtail the role of civil society in Australia,” says Green senator and democracy spokeswoman Lee Rhiannon.
“This is a highly partisan approach by the Liberal-National parties that would disadvantage some community groups working for the social good while not capturing groups such as the Minerals Council of Australia which is funded by large membership fees – which are not technically donations – from companies that are completely or largely foreign owned.”
The Liberal democratic party senator David Leyonhjelm issued another dissenting report declaring foreign donations shouldn’t be banned.
“Prohibition of foreign donations is a solution in search of a problem,” Leyonhjelm says.
“There is no reason to believe regulation will achieve anything of benefit to Australian democracy, while there are grounds to believe it will have unintended consequences and harm democracy.”
The joint parliamentary committee on electoral matters, released the report on Friday recommending banning foreign political donations, but as Guardian Australia revealed on Thursday, the major parties have split over the treatment of activist groups.
Coalition members of the committee recommended a prohibition on donations from foreign citizens and foreign entities to Australian registered political parties, associated entities and “third parties”, such as activist groups.
The proposed ban would not apply to dual Australian citizens either in Australia or overseas, or to non-Australian permanent residents in Australia.
Labor members agreed that foreign citizens and foreign entities should be banned from making donations to Australian registered political parties, and the ban should be extended to the associated entities of registered political parties, which would include some, but not all, trade unions.
Labor members said extending the ban to third-party activist groups “would represent a dramatic extension of scope of the current regulatory scheme under the act”.
“We acknowledge that concerns have been raised in this regard but there is scant evidence before the committee to support any such proposal,” the dissenting report says. “Indeed, the rationale for it is unclear.”
Coalition members of the committee made the case that if the ban didn’t apply to all actors in the political system – political parties, associated entities, and third party activist groups – then a significant loophole would be created.
The report authored by government MPs says third parties are not subject to the electoral disclosure regime due to their deductible gift recipient (DGR) status.
“They do not self-identify their activities as political campaigning and thus operate outside the current disclosure regime,” the report says. “This allows both foreign and domestic donors to contribute funds in support of domestic campaigns with little or no transparency.”
The JSCEM chair, Liberal senator Linda Reynolds, said third party actors were proliferating in the Australian political scene, incurring increasing amounts of unregulated expenditure.
Reynolds warned: “If this loophole is not addressed in legislation, the likely consequence of a ban on foreign donations to organisations regulated by the AEC, is that funds will be channelled through organisations that are not.”
The report authored by Coalition MPs points to testimony given to the inquiry by the Minerals Council of Australia (MCA) “that a number of environmental groups were actively participating in political campaigning but were still registered as charitable organisations, thus allowing them to avoid declaring the source of their foreign and domestic funding”.
The report quotes the MCA saying “these groups should not be exempt from reasonable disclosure obligations that help maintain public confidence in Australia’s political system.”
The MCA told JSCEM there was “evidence that a number of organisations that received tax concessions are engaging in activities in defiance of clear regulatory restrictions”.
Specific examples given included:
- Greenpeace Australia Pacific, 350.org Australia and the Wilderness Society (Australia) participating in a pre-election rally against prime minister Malcolm Turnbull in June 2016, along with the Australian Labor party, the NSW Greens and GetUp
- The Australian Conservation Foundation hired a truck to drive through the environment minister Josh Frydenberg’s electorate during the 2016 election campaign, which displayed a banner criticising the minister for refusing to sign the foundation’s environment pledge.
- In October 2016, the Australian Marine Conservation Society attacked the Queensland Labor government’s dealings with Adani by staging protests at Labor’s state conference.
- The Wilderness Society (Queensland) authorised campaign material during the 2015 Queensland state election urging voters to “Put the LNP last.”
- On 14 August 2015, the Australian Conservation Foundation authorised a one-page advertisement against the then environment minister, Greg Hunt. The advertisement included the logos of five other entities that are both registered environmental organisations and registered charities.
- Friends of the Earth Australia passed on a donation of $262,000 from businessman and philanthropist Graeme Wood to the activist group GetUp
“Moreover, registered environmental organisations must not act as a conduit for the donation of money or property to other entities, although they may pay other bodies to undertake natural conservation work.”
Concern is raised in the report that the groups are involved in political campaigning whilst in receipt of DGR status, without being subjected to the same donations and disclosure regime as other players in the political system.
The Labor members suggest the regulation of third parties should be examined by another parliamentary inquiry.
“The Coalition proposal has a very wide ambit and Labor members of the committee are concerned that it may lead to unfortunate, presumably unintended, consequences in terms of imposing wide-ranging restrictions on the capacity of not-for-profit organisations to draw attention to their causes,” the Labor MPs say.
“These causes could very well cover the field of Australian public discourse – from overseas aid, to Indigenous advancement.”
“What sort of government would seek to shut down, or monopolise, these conversations?”
The Greens make a similar argument in their dissenting report.
“If such a law was enacted it would drastically curtail the role of civil society in Australia,” says Green senator and democracy spokeswoman Lee Rhiannon.
“This is a highly partisan approach by the Liberal-National parties that would disadvantage some community groups working for the social good while not capturing groups such as the Minerals Council of Australia which is funded by large membership fees – which are not technically donations – from companies that are completely or largely foreign owned.”
The Liberal democratic party senator David Leyonhjelm issued another dissenting report declaring foreign donations shouldn’t be banned.
“Prohibition of foreign donations is a solution in search of a problem,” Leyonhjelm says.
“There is no reason to believe regulation will achieve anything of benefit to Australian democracy, while there are grounds to believe it will have unintended consequences and harm democracy.”
No comments:
Post a Comment