DOCSLIB.ORG

Contents Introduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Contents Introduction EMC Submission No. 103 Received 9 September 2019 Submission to the Victorian Parliament's Electoral Matters Committee Inquiry into the Conduct of the 2018 Victorian State Election By Antony Green Election Analyst Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 2 Background on Preferential Voting ..................................................................................................... 3 The Introduction of PR-STV in Australia.............................................................................................. 5 Further Developments with Hare-Clark .............................................................................................. 5 The Development of the Senate's Electoral System ........................................................................... 6 Electoral Changes at the 2016 Election .............................................................................................. 9 How Voters Reacted to the New Senate System in 2016 ................................................................. 10 Changes to Nominations under the Senate's New Electoral System ............................................... 12 Turning Votes into Seats Under the Senate's New Electoral System ............................................... 13 Lessons for Victorian Legislative Council Elections from the Senate Experience ............................ 16 A Note on Victorian Informal Voting ................................................................................................ 19 Discussion on Options ....................................................................................................................... 20 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 22 Appendix 1: Hare-Clark Ballot Paper Examples – ACT ...................................................................... 23 Appendix 2: Sample Senate Ballot Paper (Post 2016 changes) ........................................................ 24 Appendix 3: Ireland Ballot Paper Example ........................................................................................ 25 Appendix 4: Sample PR-STV How-to-Vote recommendation from 1922 NSW Election ................... 26 Appendix 5: 1974 NSW Senate Election – Labor How-to-Vote......................................................... 27 Appendix 6: 1999 NSW Legislative Council Ballot Paper (the 'tablecloth') ...................................... 28 Introduction When Victoria introduced proportional representation for Legislative Council elections in 2006, it adopted most of the features of the electoral system then used to elect the Senate and all other mainland Legislative Councils. As shown in Table 1, there has been a pattern for Australian state parliaments to follow the Commonwealth's path in upper house electoral reform, first with the use of proportional representation, then with the adoption of a divided ballot paper and group voting tickets. Table 1 - Following the Senate Example Year of Election where rules first applied Introduction of Introduction of Divided Ballot Paper Proportional and Group Voting Abolition of Group Jurisdiction Representation Tickets Voting Tickets Senate 1949 1984 2016 New South Wales 1978 1988 2003 Victoria 2006 2006 .. Western Australia 1989 1989 .. South Australia 1975 1985 2018 Note: The Queensland Legislative Council was abolished in 1922. The Tasmanian Parliament uses proportional representation in the lower house and single member electorates in the Legislative Council. The ACT uses proportional representation for its one chamber while the Northern Territory uses single member electorates. Majoritarian voting in the Senate was abandoned for proportional representation in 1949. The upper house proportional model was followed by South Australia in 1975 (it used a form of D'Hondt proportional representation initially), and by NSW when popular election for the Legislative Council was introduced in 1978. Western Australia abandoned majoritarian voting in favour of proportional representation in 1989, followed by Victoria in 2006. As will be explained later, a divided ballot paper with group voting tickets was adopted for the Senate in 1984, largely as a solution to high rate of informal voting. South Australia in 1985 and NSW in 1988 incorporated the Senate changes into their existing proportional systems, while Western Australia and Victoria introduced proportional representation and the Senate electoral system at the same time. Introduced at a time when there were fewer political parties, group voting tickets essentially institutionalised party how-to-votes. It was not anticipated that new parties would form entirely to use group voting tickets. Over three decades, parties learnt to 'game' the system with tickets, to engage in exotic preference swaps that became known as 'preference harvesting'. The number of groups on state Senate ballots rose from an average 7.7 in 1984 to 33.7 in 2013. The proportionality of party representation was increasingly distorted compared to the proportionality of party vote. The problems created by group voting tickets were exposed by the 1999 NSW Legislative Council election. Voters were presented with what has become known as the 'tablecloth', a triple-decked ballot paper one metre wide by 700mm deep with 81 columns, 27 per row, and 264 candidates. (See Appendix 6). South Australia experienced similar problems after 2002. 2 Antony Green – Victorian EMC Submission After the 1999 fiasco, NSW abolished group voting tickets for the 2003 Legislative Council election. The divided ballot paper was retained, voters given a new voting option to indicate preferences for parties above the line. The system was first used at the 2003 NSW election, and along with reform of party registration rules, it reduced the number of groups on the ballot paper from 81 to 16. The NSW problems have been repeated in other jurisdictions, but none adopted the NSW solution until the Commonwealth abandoned Senate group voting tickets in 2016. South Australia followed in 2018. Only Victoria and Western Australia retain group voting tickets as part of their electoral systems. As this submission explains, Victorian Legislative Council results are following the same path to electoral distortion played out previously at Senate elections. In particular, the 2018 Victorian Legislative Council election displayed the same electoral distortions as the 2013 Senate election, a result that led to reform of the Senate's electoral system. In this submission I will outline the problems that developed at Senate elections in the three decades after the introduction of group voting tickets in 1984. I will then compare results of the 2013 Senate election under group voting tickets with 2019 election results under the new electoral system. The comparison shows how the new system produces a more proportional result with fewer distortions produced by exotic preference deals. It is best to start by outlining some basic features of preferential voting in multi-member electorates. This will categorise types of preferences in multi-members systems, and how ballot paper designs have enhanced or diminished the ability of voters and parties to control preferences. Background on Preferential Voting Preferential voting is the dominant method of voting in Australia, used for federal, state, territory and most local government elections. Preferential voting is used to elect representatives from both single member and multi-member districts. Very few countries other than Australia use preferential voting. Preferential voting in single-member electorates is usually referred to in academic literature as the alternative vote. In recent years it has seen a revival in the United States where it is often called instant run-off voting. In Australia single member preferential voting has three variants. By far the most common form is full preferential voting where voters must number all squares. Optional preferential voting is used in New South Wales, until recently in Queensland and the Northern Territory, and is the dominant form in other countries where preferential voting is used. In Tasmania and the ACT, limited preferential voting is used, voters being asked to indicate a minimum number of preferences. Multi-member preferential voting is known in the academic literature as proportional representation by single transferrable vote, shortened to PR-STV or just STV. In Australia, PR-STV can be divided into two broad categories based on ballot paper structure. • Hare-Clark ballots - used to elect the governing lower house in Tasmania and the ACT. Hare- Clark uses a ballot paper where votes must be cast for candidates. Sample Hare-Clark ballot papers are provided in Appendix 1. • Divided ballots - used to elect upper houses at elections for the Commonwealth, New South Wales, Victorian, Western Australian and South Australian parliaments. Voters have the Antony Green – Victorian EMC Submission 3 option to vote for parties 'above the line' or for individual candidates 'below the line'. An example of a divided ballot paper is provided in Appendix 2. Recent developments in Australian electoral systems suggest that the Divided Ballot category should be sub-divided into two further categories based on how much control over preferences voters have when using 'above the line' party voting
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 23. Explaining the Results
    23. Explaining the Results Antony Green Labor came to office in 2007 with its strongest hold on government in the nation’s history—it was, for the first time, in office nationally and in every state and territory. Six years later Labor left national office with its lowest first preference vote in a century. For only the third time since the First World War, a governing party failed to win a third term in office. From a clean sweep of governments in 2007, by mid-2014 Labor’s last bastions were minority governments in South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory.1 Based on the national two-party-preferred vote, Labor’s 2013 result was less disastrous than previous post-war lows in 1966, 1975, 1977 and 1996. Labor also bettered those four elections on the proportion of House seats won. The two-party-preferred swing of 3.6 percentage points was also small for a change of government election, equal to the swing that defeated the Fraser Government in 1983 but smaller than those suffered by Whitlam in 1975, Keating in 1996 and Howard in 2007. Even over two elections from 2007 to 2013, the two-party- preferred swing of 6.2 percentage points was below that suffered by Labor previously over two elections (1961–66 and 1972–75), and smaller than the swing against the Coalition between 1977 and 1983. By the measure of first preference vote share, the 2013 election was a dreadful result for Labor, its lowest vote share since 1904.2 Labor’s vote share slid from 43.4 per cent in 2007 to 38.0 per cent in 2010 and 33.4 per cent in 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters Inquiry Into the Conduct of the 2013 Federal Election
    11 April 2014 Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters Parliament House Canberra ACT Please find attached my submission to the Committee's inquiry into the conduct of the 2013 federal election. In my submission I make suggestions for changes to political party registration under the Commonwealth Electoral Act. I also suggest major changes to Senate's electoral system given the evident problems at lasty year's election as well as this year's re-run of the Western Australian Senate election. I also make modest suggestions for changes to formality rules for House of Representatives elections. I have attached a substantial appendix outlining past research on NSW Legislative Council Elections. This includes ballot paper surveys from 1999 and research on exhaustion rates under the new above the line optional preferential voting system used since 2003. I can provide the committee with further research on the NSW Legislative Council system, as well as some ballot paper research I have been carrying out on the 2013 Senate election. I am happy to discuss my submission with the Committee at a hearing. Yours, Antony Green Election Analyst Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters Inquiry into the Conduct of the 2013 Federal Election Antony Green Contents Page 1. Political Party Registration 1 2. Changes to the Senate's Electoral System 7 2.1 Allow Optional Preferential Voting below the line 8 2.2 Above the Line Optional Preferential Voting 9 2.3 Hare Clark 10 2.4 Hybrid Group Ticket Option 10 2.5 Full Preferential Voting Above the Line 11 2.6 Threshold Quotas 11 2.7 Optional Preferential Voting with a Re-calculating Quota 12 2.8 Changes to Formula 12 2.9 My Suggested Solution 13 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Spotlight on Democracy ANNUAL REPORT 2018–2019 About the VEC
    Spotlight on Democracy ANNUAL REPORT 2018–2019 About the VEC Our vision Our history and functions All Victorians actively participating in their democracy. Elections for the Victorian Parliament began when Victoria achieved independence from New South Wales in 1851. In 1910, Victoria’s first Chief Electoral Inspector was Our purpose appointed to head the new State Electoral Office. To deliver high quality, accessible electoral services with The State Electoral Office existed as part of a public innovation, integrity and independence. service department for 70 years. However, it became increasingly clear that it was inappropriate for the Our values conduct of elections to be subject to ministerial direction. On 1 January 1989, legislation established the • Independence: acting with impartiality and integrity independent statutory office of Electoral Commissioner • Accountability: transparent reporting and effective who was to report to Parliament instead of a Minister. stewardship of resources In 1995, the State Electoral Office was renamed the • Innovation: shaping our future through creativity Victorian Electoral Commission. and leadership The VEC’s functions and operations are governed by six • Respect: consideration of self, others and main pieces of legislation: the environment • Electoral Act 2002 - establishes the VEC as an • Collaboration: working as a team with partners independent statutory authority, sets out the and communities functions and powers of the VEC and prescribes processes for State elections • Constitution Act 1975 - sets out who is entitled to Our people and partners enrol as an elector, who is entitled to be elected to The Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) has a core staff Parliament, and the size and term of Parliament of dedicated and highly skilled people whose specialised • Financial Management Act 1994 - governs the way the knowledge ensures the success of its operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Australia Turns to ABC for #Libspill
    RELEASED: Tuesday 15 September, 2015 Australia turns to ABC for #libspill Australian audiences turned to the ABC for rolling news and analysis of Malcolm Turnbull’s party room victory over Tony Abbott to become Prime Minister on Monday night, again demonstrating why the ABC is the country’s most trusted source of news. Last night’s leadership spill saw the ABC pull together resources across TV, Radio, Digital, and International divisions to provide audiences with the most comprehensive coverage of events as they unfolded. At a total network level, ABC TV reached 4.2 million metro viewers last night (between 6pm and midnight), with a primetime share of 23.3%. ABC was the number one channel from 8.30pm onwards. With continuous coverage of events in Canberra, there were 197,500 plays of the ABC News 24 live stream via the website and iview, the highest this year-to-date. ABC News recorded its highest online traffic for the year-to-date (desktop and mobile), with 1.5 million visitors, 2.1 million visits and 5.8 million page views, each up more than 80% on the same time last week. The ABC News Live Blog recorded 710,900 visits. Australian expats abroad and regional audiences were also kept informed with ABC International providing rolling multilingual coverage across platforms including Australia Plus television, online and social media sites, Radio Australia, and numerous syndication media platforms across Asia and the Pacific. ABC Radio highlighted its agility and strength, with robust coverage on ABC Local Radio, NewsRadio and RN. The Local Radio coverage was adapted to broadcast a single national evening’s program, with expert analysts and talkback callers around the country, giving the audience a strong sense of the national dialogue.
    [Show full text]
  • NT Senate Group Voting Tickets
    INDEX Group Ticket(s) Page A – PALMER UNITED PARTY 1 1 B – UNITING AUSTRALIA PARTY 1 2 C – STABLE POPULATION PARTY 3 3-5 D – A.F.N.P.P 1 6 NT E – COUNTRY LIBERALS (NT) 1 7 Senate Group Voting Tickets F – AUSTRALIAN LABOR PARTY (NORTHERN TERRITORY) BRANCH 1 8 G – SEX PARTY 1 9 H – CITIZENS ELECTORAL COUNCIL 2 10-11 I – SHOOTERS AND FISHERS 1 12 This booklet sets out copies of all group voting tickets which J – RISE UP AUSTRALIA PARTY 1 13 have been lodged in NT for the 2013 Senate Election. K – AUSTRALIAN GREENS 1 14 If you place the single figure 1 in one of the boxes above the L – AUSTRALIAN INDEPENDENTS 1 15 line for the party or group of your choice, you will have voted according to the VOTING TICKET(S) lodged by your party or group as set out in this booklet. Where a party, group or candidate has lodged 2 or 3 VOTING TICKETS, the total number of group ticket votes received by that group or candidate will be distributed evenly in accordance with those voting tickets. © Commonwealth of Australia 2013 Group Voting Ticket – Election of two (2) Senators Group A – PALMER UNITED PARTY – Ticket 1 of 1 Group A – PALMER UNITED PARTY – Ticket 1 of 1 By placing the single figure 1 in the square next to the name of this group, you adopt the ticket as marked below. A B C D E F G H I J K L 1 or or or or or or or or or or or PALMER UNITED UNITING STABLE A.F.N.P.P.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 of 11 Inquiry Into and Report on All Aspects
    The Hon Mr Tony Smith MP Chair, Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters PO Box 6021 PARLIAMENT HOUSE ACT 2600 7 April 2014 Dear Mr Smith Inquiry into and report on all aspects of the conduct of the 2013 Federal Election and matters related thereto A healthy political philosophy reflects a balanced view across many social issues. There once was a time whereby parliaments using the Westminster system consisted of progressive local representatives with a broad gamut of individual special interests. Today this type of representative is labelled as ‘single issue’ or ‘independent’ and big parties have become dominate for convenience of getting laws passed. I was a senate candidate for a micro party in the federal election on 7 September 2013. The party I represented was not a front party, not aligned with any existing political party or Member of Parliament. We were a member of the Minor Party Alliance and lodged a Group Voting Ticket. Political parties are responsible for social and national development. Misinformed and misguided choices at the ballot box can produce hazardous consequences for our society and we all then have to live with those consequences, at least for a period of time. Many millions of Australians have never been a member of any political party. The membership numbers for the major parties is said to be around 80,000 Liberal and 35,000 Labor. Yet in elections around 10 million people vote for these two parties. This situation needs to be challenged. Voters over generations have been trained to vote for one of two camps.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Science Program in the Australian National University's
    Democratic Audit of Australia – December 2005 The Mathematics of Democracy: Is the Senate really proportionally representative?1 Scott Brenton Australian National University Former Prime Minister Paul Keating memorably described the Senate, when the Democrats and Greens shared the ‘balance of power’, as ‘unrepresentative swill’. After the Liberal-National Coalition government won a Senate majority at the 2004 federal election that description has assumed an unintended – and at least partially accurate – meaning. Whilst most discussion has focused on the implications of the executive gaining control of the legislature for the first time in almost two-and-a-half decades, of greater concern is that the majority of voters did not vote for the Coalition in the Senate. The Coalition parties2 only received 45.09 per cent of the first preference vote in the Senate but won 21 of the 40 seats up for election, or 52.5 per cent of the seats. In Queensland – the state that delivered the Coalition its majority at the last election – the Liberal Party won half the seats with only 38.29 per cent of first preferences, whilst the National Party won only 6.61 per cent of first preferences. National Party Senator Barnaby Joyce, the self-proclaimed balance-of-power holder, won his seat with less than half a quota on first preferences, and after a 2.55 per cent swing against the Nationals from the previous election. How proportionally representative is the Senate’s electoral system? As many eminent psephologists note – including Antony Green3, Campbell Sharman4 and Malcolm Mackerras5 – the Senate’s electoral system of Proportional Representation 1 Thanks to Marian Sawer, Antony Green and John Uhr for suggesting some useful references and to Peter Brent and an anonymous reviewer for editorial advice.
    [Show full text]
  • Australia: Professor Marian Simms Head, Political Studies Department
    Australia: Professor Marian Simms Head, Political Studies Department University of Otago Paper prepared for presentation at the joint ANU/UBA ‘John Fogarty Seminar’, Buenos Aires, Argentina 26-27 April 2007 Please note this paper is a draft version and is not for citation at this stage 1 Overview: Australian has been characterized variously as ‘The Lucky Country’ (Donald Horne), ‘A Small Rich Industrial Country’ (Heinz Arndt), and as suffering from ‘The Tyranny of Distance’ (Geoffrey Blainey). These distinguished authors have all mentioned negatives alongside positives; for example, political commentator Donald Horne’s famous comment was meant to be ironic – Australia’s affluence, and hence stability, were founded on good luck via rich mineral resources. For Blainey, the historian, geography mattered, both in terms of the vast distances from Europe and in terms of the vast size of the country.1 For economic historian Arndt, size was a double-edged sword – Australia had done well in spite of its small population. Those commentatories were all published in the 1970s. Since then much has happened globally, namely the stock market crash of the eighties, the collapse of communism in the late eighties and early nineties, the emergence of the Asian tigers in the nineties, and the attack on New York’s twin towers in 2001. All were profound events. It is the argument of this paper that in spite of these and other challenges, Australia’s institutional fabric has incorporated economic, social and political change. This is not to say that it has solved all of its social and economic problems, especially those dealing with minority groups such as the indigenous community, disaffected youth and some immigrant groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Greens Victoria GPO Box 4589 MELBOURNE VIC 3001 The
    EMC Submission No. 87 Received 30 August 2019 Australian Greens Victoria GPO Box 4589 MELBOURNE VIC 3001 The Executive OFFicer Electoral Matters Committee Parliament House, Spring Street EAST MELBOURNE VIC 3002 30 August 2019 Dear Members oF the Electoral Matters Committee and Executive OFFicer, Please Find attached the submission From the Australian Greens Victoria to your inquiry into the conduct of the 2018 State Election. We are willing to provide more inFormation and expand on any issues raised in this submission as the Committee desires. Kind regards, Rohan Leppert Acting State Director Australian Greens Victoria SUBMISSION By the Australian Greens Victoria To the Electoral Matters Committee’s inquiry into the conduct of the 2018 State Election 1. We welcome the opportunity to provide a submission to the Electoral Matters Committee (the Committee) on the conduct of the 2018 State Election. Our submission is divided into Five themes: 1 - The distortion oF the democratic will oF voters by Group Voting Tickets in the Legislative Council. 2 - Victoria’s two-speed population growth will require a review of the Legislative Council electoral structure. 3 - The role oF Victorian Electoral Commission staFF and Victoria Police in relation to ofFences under the Electoral Act. 4 - The counting and storage oF prepoll votes. 5 - Authorisation oF online political communications. PART ONE: The distortion of the democratic will of voters by Group Voting Tickets in the Legislative Council. 2. The Constitution (Parliamentary Reform) Act 2003 was the most comprehensive reForm of Victoria’s Parliament since its inception in 1856. It amended the Victorian Constitution and the Electoral Act to, among other things, introduce a new electoral structure and voting method For the Legislative Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Pdf (572.33Kb)
    Dear Mr McCusker, Please find attached Enhancing Democracy in Western Australia, my submission to the review of the Western Australian Legislative Council electoral system. I am happy for it to be made public. Yours sincerely, Chris Curtis Enhancing Democracy in Western Australia Chris Curtis May 2021 The manufactured hysteria that greeted Ricky Muir’s election to the Senate and that ultimately led to the Turnbull government’s rigging the Senate voting system to favour the Greens over the micro-parties is getting an encore performance with the election of Wilson Tucker in Western Australia, despite the unremarked-upon election in both jurisdictions of many more candidates of major parties from even lower primary votes and with the added twist that most members of the panel established to investigate the matter have already endorsed, even promoted, the hysteria (https://insidestory.org.au/an-affront-to-anyone-who- believes-in-democracy/). While it is clear from this fact that submissions in support of logic and democracy have already been ruled out of consideration, it is worthwhile putting them on the public record for future historians to refer to and so that more reasonable politicians can revisit the issue if the hysteria dies down. Enhancing Democracy in Western Australia 2 Contents Purpose - - - - - - - - - - 3 Summary - - - - - - - - - - 3 1. Principles - - - - - - - - - - 5 2. The Single Transferable Vote - - - - - - - 6 3. The Irrational Complaints - - - - - - - 11 4. Party Preferences - - - - - - - - - 15 5. Imposing a Party List System - - - - - - - 17 6. The Value of Group Voting Tickets - - - - - - 18 7. The Real Issue and the Solution - - - - - - - 20 8. Personal How-to-Vote Website - - - - - - - 22 9.
    [Show full text]
  • Electoral Regulation Research Network Newsletter December 2013 Table of Contents
    Electoral Regulation Research Network Newsletter December 2013 Table of Contents Message from the Director 1 News 2-4 ERRN Research Collaboration Initiative 5-6 Forthcoming Events 7 ERRN Event Reports 8-9 Recent Publications 10 ERRN Working Papers Series 11-12 Case Notes: 13-17 • AEC petition to the High Court regarding Senate election • Unions New South Wales v State of New South Wales (High Court) • Queensland Police Union of Employees v Queensland (High Court) • The Age journalists admit to illegally accessing ALP electoral database • Beswick, in the matter of an Election for an Office in the Shop, Distributive & Allied Employees’ Association v Swetman [2013] FCA 642 (Federal Court, 18 June 2013) • Mylne v Return & Services League of Australia (Qld Branch) Maroochydoore Sub Branch Inc [2013] QSC 179 (Qld Supreme Court, 20 June 2013) • Horn v Australian Electoral Commission [2013] WASC 72 (WA Supreme Court, 7 March 2013) • Banerji v Bowles [2013] FCCA 1052 (Federal Circuit Court, 9 August 2013) • AA v BB (2013) 296 ALR 353 (Vic Supreme Court, 20 March 2013) • The Age Company Ltd v Liu (2013) 82 NSWLR 268 (NSW Court of Appeal, 21 February 2013, High Court, 6 September 2013) • Liberal Party of Australia (Western Australia Division) Inc v City of Armadale [2013] WASC 27 (WA Supreme Court 18 January 2013) • O’Flaherty v Sydney City Council (2013) 210 FCR 484 (Federal Court, 15 April 2013) • Muldoon v Melbourne City Council [2013] FCA 994 (Federal Court, 1 October 2013) Newsletter Team Democratic Audit Rob Hoffman & Nathaniel Reader Newsletter Editors of Australia Ben Saunders Legal Editor Jean Goh ERRN Administrator Contact Us email us: [email protected] www.law.unimelb.edu.au/errn www.law.unimelb.edu.au/errn Message from the Director The aftermath of the recent federal election has clearly illustrated the topicality of electoral issues.
    [Show full text]
  • THE AUSTRALIAN GREENS Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters Inquiry Into the 2013 Federal Election
    THE AUSTRALIAN GREENS Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters Inquiry into the 2013 Federal Election INTRODUCTION Most of the attention for this inquiry has been centred on reforming the election of the Senate. This submission will address that, but the Australian Greens believe that there are broader issues with our electoral system that need addressing. A key policy concern of the Greens is the reform of the electoral system to increase fairness, equity, transparency and accountability. This submission includes a number of recommendations in relation to the recent federal election which address these concerns. 1. ELECTION FUNDING 1.1 Public Funding for elections The Greens believe that undue influence and problems of corruption arise from unchecked private funding of election campaigns. To that end, the Greens call for the adoption of electoral funding similar to the pre‐ 2011 Canadian system with a ban on corporate donations, a cap on individual donations and public funding for political parties which includes party administration and broadcasting time in federal elections. We maintain our view that the current laws on political donations are unfair and counterproductive to the democratic process and believe that the pre‐2011 Canadian system of electoral funding – that is primarily publicly funded elections, caps on campaign expenditure (including by third parties), capped individual donations and a ban on corporate donations ‐ is the best and more democratically fair approach. The Greens also support a rigorous regime for disclosure of electoral funding, believing that this is essential to ensure accountability and transparency in the system. The current system, which has a very high disclosure threshold currently set at $12 400, permits substantial areas of funding to avoid proper scrutiny through the disclosure requirements of the Electoral Act.
    [Show full text]