|
senate vote 2018-09-13#5
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2018-09-14 13:12:57
|
Title
Motions — International Day of Democracy- Motions - International Day of Democracy - Corruption and donations
Description
<p class="speaker">Larissa Waters</p><p>I move:</p><p class="italic">That the Senate—</p>- The majority voted against a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2018-09-13.63.1) that called for, among other things, a federal anti-corruption agency to be created as well as certain political donations to be banned.
- ### Motion text
- > *That the Senate—*
- > *(a) notes that:*
- >> *(i) 15 September 2018 is International Day of Democracy,*
- >> *(ii) Australia's democracy faces systemic challenges in the corrupting influence of political donations and the under-representation of minorities in decision-making positions, and*
- >> *(iii) Australia's Parliament does not reflect the composition of the Australian population in terms of gender or cultural diversity; and*
- > *(b) calls on the Federal Government to:*
- >> *(i) ban corporate donations from industries with a history of undue influence in Australia's Parliament, such as mining, development, tobacco, alcohol and gambling,*
- >> *(ii) withdraw proposed electoral funding legislation that restricts the ability of civil society to advocate in the public interest,*
- >> *(iii) take measures to increase the participation of women and people from minority backgrounds in Australia's political systems, and*
- >> *(iv) urgently establish a national anti-corruption body with investigative powers to address parliamentary and ministerial misconduct.*
<p class="italic">(a) notes that:</p><p class="italic">(i) 15 September 2018 is International Day of Democracy,</p><p class="italic">(ii) Australia's democracy faces systemic challenges in the corrupting influence of political donations and the under-representation of minorities in decision-making positions, and</p><p class="italic">(iii) Australia's Parliament does not reflect the composition of the Australian population in terms of gender or cultural diversity; and</p><p class="italic">(b) calls on the Federal Government to:</p><p class="italic">(i) ban corporate donations from industries with a history of undue influence in Australia's Parliament, such as mining, development, tobacco, alcohol and gambling,</p><p class="italic">(ii) withdraw proposed electoral funding legislation that restricts the ability of civil society to advocate in the public interest,</p><p class="italic">(iii) take measures to increase the participation of women and people from minority backgrounds in Australia's political systems, and</p><p class="italic">(iv) urgently establish a national anti-corruption body with investigative powers to address parliamentary and ministerial misconduct.</p> <p class="speaker">Anthony Chisholm</p><p>I seek leave to make a short statement.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Leave is granted for one minute.</p> <p class="speaker">Anthony Chisholm</p><p>This is just another hypocritical example of the Greens claiming they oppose corporate donations, having already accepted a $1.6 million corporate donation, one of the biggest in Australia's political history. The Greens were even happy to accept half a million dollars from a professional gambler, one of a secret group called the Punters Club being investigated by the Australian Taxation Office for fraud.</p><p>Labor believe in genuine electoral reform. That's why we have moved to ban foreign donations from our political system, that is why we have moved to protect civil society from the government's regulation overreach, and that is why we oppose the Greens' virtue signalling on this issue.</p> <p class="speaker">Larissa Waters</p><p>I seek leave to make a 10-second clarification.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>Leave is granted for one minute.</p> <p class="speaker">Larissa Waters</p><p>I will just note that neither of those contributions that were mentioned by the senator were made by corporations, so he is, in fact, factually incorrect and we stand by the motion.</p> <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p><p>The question is that motion No. 1057 be agreed to.</p>
|