PARTY RULES? Dilemmas of Political Party Regulation in Australia

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

PARTY RULES? Dilemmas of Political Party Regulation in Australia PARTY RULES? Dilemmas of political party regulation in Australia PARTY RULES? Dilemmas of political party regulation in Australia Edited by Anika Gauja and Marian Sawer Published by ANU Press The Australian National University Acton ACT 2601, Australia Email: [email protected] This title is also available online at press.anu.edu.au National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry Title: Party rules? : dilemmas of political party regulation in Australia / editors: Anika Gauja, Marian Sawer. ISBN: 9781760460761 (paperback) 9781760460778 (ebook) Subjects: Political parties--Australia. Political parties--Law and legislation--Australia. Political participation--Australia. Australia--Politics and government. Other Creators/Contributors: Gauja, Anika, editor. Sawer, Marian, 1946- editor. Dewey Number: 324.2994 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Cover design and layout by ANU Press. This edition © 2016 ANU Press Contents Figures . vii Tables . ix Abbreviations . xi Acknowledgements . xiii Contributors . xv 1 . Party rules: Promises and pitfalls . 1 Marian Sawer and Anika Gauja 2 . Resisting legal recognition and regulation: Australian parties as rational actors? . 37 Sarah John 3 . Party registration and political participation: Regulating small and ‘micro’ parties . .73 Norm Kelly 4 . Who gets what, when and how: The politics of resource allocation to parliamentary parties . 101 Yvonne Murphy 5 . Putting the cartel before the house? Public funding of parties in Queensland . 123 Graeme Orr 6 . More regulated, more level? Assessing the impact of spending and donation caps on Australian State elections . 147 Jennifer Rayner 7 . Dilemmas of party regulation: Hands-on courts versus hands‑off legislators? . 173 Anika Gauja 8 . Party rules: The regulatory ‘gap’ . 197 Anika Gauja and Marian Sawer Appendix: Federally registered political parties, 1984–2016 . 215 Figures Figure 3.1 Number of registered parties at federal elections, 1984–2013 ...............................84 Figure 5.1 Growth in public funding rate (Commonwealth elections) ..........................128 Figure 5.2 Queensland Greens’ income from public funding ....132 Figure 6.1 Queensland campaign spending, 2006–12 ..........159 Figure 6.2 Queensland major party donations relative to spending, 2006–12. .161 Figure 6.3 Queensland minor party donations relative to spending, 2006–12 .............................161 Figure 6.4 NSW campaign spending, 2003–11 ...............165 Figure 6.5 NSW major party donations relative to spending, 2003–11 .............................165 Figure 6.6 NSW minor party donations relative to spending, 2003–11. .166 vii Tables Table 1.1 Date of first acknowledgement of political parties in national constitutions: Europe . 4 Table 1.2 Date of initial introduction of party regulation by jurisdiction . .14 Table 1.3 Additional resources allocated for minor parties and Independents in the federal parliament ..............22 Table 2.1 Levels of legal intervention in political parties ........44 Table 3.1 Party groups contesting Senate elections, 1998, 2013 and 2016 ...............................85 Table 3.2 Parties refused registration in 2013: 500-member test ...89 Table 3.3 Party membership requirements for registration .......89 Table 3.4 Candidates contesting Senate elections, 1983–2016 .....94 Table A3.1 Parties registered between the 2010 and 2013 federal elections. 98 Table A3.2 Parties that applied prior to the 2013 election and registered after the 2013 election. 99 Table A3.3 Newly registered parties, 2014–16 ................99 Table 6.1 Australian party finances, 2007, 2010 and 2013 ......152 Table 6.2 Australian State party finances, State elections, 2011–13 . .153 Table 6.3 NSW and Queensland caps introduced in 2010 and 2011 .................................157 Table 6.4 Queensland party funds: Dollars per voter ..........162 ix Party RULES? Table 6.5 Ratios of major and minor party finances: Queensland. .163 Table 6.6 NSW party funds: Dollars per voter ...............166 Table 6.7 Ratios of major and minor party finances: NSW ......167 x Abbreviations ABC Australian Broadcasting Corporation ACT Australian Capital Territory ADI Australian Defence Industries AEC Australian Electoral Commission ALP Australian Labor Party AMEP Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party ANAO Australian National Audit Office APA Australian Progressive Alliance APPDP Australian Political Parties for Democracy Program AusAID Australian Agency for International Development CDP Christian Democratic Party CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women COAG Council of Australian Governments DLP Democratic Labor Party FOI freedom of information GVTs group voting tickets HEMP Help End Marijuana Prohibition Party ICAC Independent Commission Against Corruption ICT information and communication technology IDEA Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance IDU International Democratic Union IFES International Foundation for Electoral Systems JLN Jacqui Lambie Network JSCEM Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters xi Party RULES? JSCER Joint Select Committee on Electoral Reform LC Legislative Council LDP Liberal Democratic Party LFF Liberals for Forests LNP Liberal National Party MP Member of Parliament NAA National Archives of Australia NLA National Library of Australia NSW New South Wales NT Northern Territory NXT Nick Xenophon Team OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OPV optional preferential voting OSCE Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe PAA Parliamentary Activities Allowance POP partial optional preferential PUP Palmer United Party SA South Australia SASP Save the ADI Site Party SBS Special Broadcasting Service STV single transferable vote TAA Travel and Accommodation Allowance UK United Kingdom UN United Nations US United States xii Acknowledgements This book arose from a workshop entitled ‘The Legal Regulation of Political Parties in Australia’ held at the University of Sydney in June 2014. We are grateful to the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia for funding this workshop and to all those who contributed to the discussion and presented stimulating papers. In addition to the authors in this volume, the paper-givers included Brian Costar, Stewart Jackson, Ron Levy, Narelle Miragliotta, Zim Nwokora and Nicholas Reece. One feature of the workshop was a roundtable on party law in practice, cosponsored by the Electoral Regulation Research Network. The roundtable had the following participants: Colin Barry (former NSW Electoral Commissioner), Gareth Ward MLA (Chair, Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, NSW Parliament), Luke Foley (then Leader of the Opposition in the NSW Legislative Council) and Geoff Ash (Registered Officer, Greens NSW). The book has benefited significantly from the attention of the Social Sciences Editorial Board of the ANU Press and the excellent reviewer reports it commissioned. It has also benefited from numerous helpful suggestions by Graeme Orr and from the work of Emily Tinker at ANU Press. xiii Contributors Anika Gauja Anika Gauja is an Associate Professor in the Department of Government and International Relations, University of Sydney. Her research focuses on party regulation, reform and partisan engagement. She is the author of Political Parties and Elections (2010), The Politics of Party Policy (2013) and Party Reform (2017). Sarah John Sarah John is the Research Director at FairVote, a non-partisan non- profit organisation based in Washington, DC, that researches the impact of electoral systems in the United States. She received her PhD and LL.B at Flinders University and has published on electoral reform and electoral systems. Norm Kelly Norm Kelly is author of Directions in Australian Electoral Reform (2012) and has published articles and book chapters on electoral law. He has worked in the international democracy development field for the past decade, including in party development, candidate training, election observing, research and writing, working throughout Melanesia, Australia and Afghanistan. Previously, Norm was a Member of Parliament in Western Australia. He is now based in Wellington, New Zealand. Yvonne Murphy Yvonne Murphy is a PhD candidate and part-time lecturer in the Department of Government at University College Cork. Her research interests lie in parliamentary and electoral politics, with particular emphasis on institutional design and influences on the decision-making of politicians. Prior to her career in academic xv Party RULES? research, Yvonne worked as a political advisor and researcher in the Irish Parliament. She is currently co-editor of the Irish Political Studies: Data Yearbook. Graeme Orr Graeme Orr is Professor of Law at the University of Queensland, specialising in the law of politics and, until recently, was the international editor of the Election Law Journal. His books include The Law of Politics: Elections, Parties and Money in Australia (2010), Ritual and Rhythm in Electoral Systems (2015) and The Law of Deliberative Democracy (with Ron Levy, 2016). Jennifer Rayner Jennifer Rayner received her PhD in Political Science from The Australian National University in 2015. She is the author of Generation Less: How Australia is Cheating the Young (2016) and currently serves as an adviser to the
Recommended publications
  • List of Organizations Invited to the National
    List of organizations invited to the national survey (Re- imagining Quality of Life project) 10 Deserts Project 3000acres 350.org Australia 44 Playbook 8 Ways AADII (Agency for Advanced Development of Integrative Intelligence) Ability Made Inc Aboriginal Medical Service Cooperative Ltd Redfern ACOSS ACTCOSS Action Foresight ActionAid Addison Road Community Garden Aid Watch Aldinga Arts Eco Village Alternative Futures Research Network Alternatives to Violence Project Western Australia AlterQuest Altus Impact Amnesty International Australia Anarcho-Syndicalist Federation Angelica Organic Farm Anglicare Southern Queensland ANTaR Victoria Anthropos Consulting Artabana Australia Ashurst Assembled Threads Atwea College AUDAcities AusBiotech Australasian Association of Bioethics and Health Law (AABHL) Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility Australia 21 Australia I-Kuan Tao Headquarters Inc Australia ReMADE Australian (Nationwide) I-Kuan Tao Headquarters Inc Australian Association for Restorative Justice Australian Centre on Quality of Life (ACQoL) Australian Circular Economy Hub Australian Citizens Party Australian Communist Party Australian Communities Foundation Australian Conservation Foundation Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) Australian Earth Laws Alliance Australian Ethical 1 Australian Food Sovereignty Alliance Page © NENA – UON AFRHub – 2021 - https://www.newcastle.edu.au/research/centre/alternative-futures-regional- prospects/the-well-living-lab/reimagining-quality-of-life-survey-research Australian Food Sovereignty
    [Show full text]
  • Which Political Parties Are Standing up for Animals?
    Which political parties are standing up for animals? Has a formal animal Supports Independent Supports end to welfare policy? Office of Animal Welfare? live export? Australian Labor Party (ALP) YES YES1 NO Coalition (Liberal Party & National Party) NO2 NO NO The Australian Greens YES YES YES Animal Justice Party (AJP) YES YES YES Australian Sex Party YES YES YES Pirate Party Australia YES YES NO3 Derryn Hinch’s Justice Party YES No policy YES Sustainable Australia YES No policy YES Australian Democrats YES No policy No policy 1Labor recently announced it would establish an Independent Office of Animal Welfare if elected, however its structure is still unclear. Benefits for animals would depend on how the policy was executed and whether the Office is independent of the Department of Agriculture in its operations and decision-making.. Nick Xenophon Team (NXT) NO No policy NO4 2The Coalition has no formal animal welfare policy, but since first publication of this table they have announced a plan to ban the sale of new cosmetics tested on animals. Australian Independents Party NO No policy No policy 3Pirate Party Australia policy is to “Enact a package of reforms to transform and improve the live exports industry”, including “Provid[ing] assistance for willing live animal exporters to shift to chilled/frozen meat exports.” Family First NO5 No policy No policy 4Nick Xenophon Team’s policy on live export is ‘It is important that strict controls are placed on live animal exports to ensure animals are treated in accordance with Australian animal welfare standards. However, our preference is to have Democratic Labour Party (DLP) NO No policy No policy Australian processing and the exporting of chilled meat.’ 5Family First’s Senator Bob Day’s position policy on ‘Animal Protection’ supports Senator Chris Back’s Federal ‘ag-gag’ Bill, which could result in fines or imprisonment for animal advocates who publish in-depth evidence of animal cruelty The WikiLeaks Party NO No policy No policy from factory farms.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Political Writings 2009-10
    Parliament of Australia Department of Parliamentary Services Parliamentary Library Information, analysis and advice for the Parliament BIBLIOGRAPHY www.aph.gov.au/library Selected Australian political writings 2009‐10 Contents Biographies ............................................................................................................................. 2 Elections, electorate boundaries and electoral systems ......................................................... 3 Federalism .............................................................................................................................. 6 Human rights ........................................................................................................................... 6 Liberalism and neoliberalism .................................................................................................. 6 Members of Parliament and their staff .................................................................................... 7 Parliamentary issues ............................................................................................................... 7 Party politics .......................................................................................................................... 13 Party politics- Australian Greens ........................................................................................... 14 Party politics- Australian Labor Party .................................................................................... 14 Party politics-
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Assembly
    11282 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Wednesday 22 September 2004 ______ Mr Speaker (The Hon. John Joseph Aquilina) took the chair at 11.00 a.m. Mr Speaker offered the Prayer. MINISTRY Mr BOB CARR: In the absence of the Minister for Tourism and Sport and Recreation, and Minister for Women, who is undergoing an operation, the Deputy Premier, Minister for Education and Training, and Minister for Aboriginal Affairs will answer questions on her behalf. In the absence of the Minister for Mineral Resources, the Minister for Fair Trading, and Minister Assisting the Minister for Commerce will answer questions on his behalf. In the absence of the Minister for Infrastructure and Planning, and Minister for Natural Resources, the Attorney General, and Minister for the Environment will answer questions on his behalf. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Mr SPEAKER: I welcome to the Public Gallery Mrs Sumitra Singh, the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of the State of Rajasthan in India, who is accompanied by her son, and Mrs Harsukh Ram Poonia, Secretary of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly. PETITIONS Milton-Ulladulla Public School Infrastructure Petition requesting community consultation in the planning, funding and building of appropriate public school infrastructure in the Milton-Ulladulla area and surrounding districts, received from Mrs Shelley Hancock. Gaming Machine Tax Petitions opposing the increase in poker machine tax, received from Mrs Shelley Hancock, Mrs Judy Hopwood and Mr Andrew Tink. Crime Sentencing Petition requesting changes in legislation to allow for tougher sentences for crime, received from Mrs Shelley Hancock. Lake Woollumboola Recreational Use Petition opposing any restriction of the recreational use of Lake Woollumboola, received from Mrs Shelley Hancock.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Hyperlinks and Networked Communication: a Comparative
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by The Australian National University 1 Hyperlinks and Networked Communication: A Comparative Study of Political Parties Online This is a pre-print for: R. Ackland and R. Gibson (2013), “Hyperlinks and Networked Communication: A Comparative Study of Political Parties Online,” International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 16(3), special issue on Computational Social Science: Research Strategies, Design & Methods, 231-244. Dr. Robert Ackland, Research Fellow at the Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia *Professor Rachel Gibson, Professor of Politics, Institute for Social Change, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. *Corresponding author: Professor Rachel Gibson Institute for Social Change University of Manchester, Oxford Road Manchester M13 9PL UK Ph: + 44 (0)161 306 6933 Fax: +44 (0) 161 275 0793 [email protected] Word count: 6,062(excl title page and key words) 2 Abstract This paper analyses hyperlink data from over 100 political parties in six countries to show how political actors are using links to engage in a new form of ‘networked communication’ to promote themselves to an online audience. We specify three types of networked communication - identity reinforcement, force multiplication and opponent dismissal - and hypothesise variance in their performance based on key party variables of size and ideological outlook. We test our hypotheses using an original comparative hyperlink dataset. The findings support expectations that hyperlinks are being used for networked communication by parties, with identity reinforcement and force multiplication being more common than opponent dismissal. The results are important in demonstrating the wider communicative significance of hyperlinks, in addition to their structural properties as linkage devices for websites.
    [Show full text]
  • Independents in Federal Parliament: a New Challenge Or a Passing Phase?
    Independents in Federal Parliament: A new challenge or a passing phase? Jennifer Curtin1 Politics Program, School of Political and Social Inquiry Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. [email protected] “Politics just is the game played out by rival parties, and anyone who tries to play politics in some way entirely independent of parties consigns herself to irrelevance.” (Brennan, 1996: xv). The total dominance of Australia’s rival parties has altered since Brennan made this statement. By the time of the 2001 federal election, 29 registered political parties contested seats and while only the three traditional parties secured representation in the House of Representatives (Liberals, Nationals and Labor) three independents were also elected. So could we argue that the “game” has changed? While it is true that government in Australia, both federally and in the states and territories, almost always alternates between the Labor Party and the Liberal Party (the latter more often than not in coalition with the National Party), independent members have been a feature of the parliaments for many years, particularly at the state level (Costar and Curtin, 2004; Moon,1995). Over the last decade or so independents have often been key political players: for a time, they have held the balance of power in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory. More generally, since 1980 an unprecedented 56 independents have served in Australian parliaments. In 2003, 25 of them were still there. This is more than six times the number of independents elected in the 1970s. New South Wales has been the most productive jurisdiction during that time, with fourteen independent members, and Tasmania the least, with only one.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Compliance by Former Ministers of State With
    September 2018 Who’s in the room? Access and influence in Australian politics Danielle Wood and Kate Griffiths Who’s in the room? Access and influence in Australian politics Grattan Institute Support Grattan Institute Report No. 2018-12, September 2018 Founding members Endowment Supporters This report was written by Danielle Wood, Kate Griffiths and Carmela The Myer Foundation Chivers. Grattan interns Tim Asimakis, Matthew Bowes, Isabelle National Australia Bank Hughes and Anne Yang provided research assistance and made Susan McKinnon Foundation substantial contributions to the report. We would like to thank the members of Grattan Institute’s Public Policy Affiliate Partners Committee for their helpful comments. We also thank AJ Brown, Ken Medibank Private Coghill, Belinda Edwards, Darren Halpin, Serena Lillywhite, Cameron Susan McKinnon Foundation Murray, Joo-Cheong Tham and Anne Twomey for their suggestions, and staff of the Australian Electoral Commission, NSW Electoral Commission, NSW ICAC and other government and industry bodies for Senior Affiliates their technical input. Google Maddocks The opinions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Grattan Institute’s founding PwC members, affiliates, individual board members, committee members or McKinsey & Company reviewers. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors. The Scanlon Foundation Grattan Institute is an independent think-tank focused on Australian Wesfarmers public policy. Our work is independent, practical and rigorous. We aim Westpac to improve policy outcomes by engaging with both decision-makers and the community. Affiliates For further information on the Institute’s programs, or to join our mailing Ashurst list, please go to: http://www.grattan.edu.au/.
    [Show full text]
  • Still Anti-Asian? Anti-Chinese? One Nation Policies on Asian Immigration and Multiculturalism
    Still Anti-Asian? Anti-Chinese? One Nation policies on Asian immigration and multiculturalism 仍然反亚裔?反华裔? 一国党针对亚裔移民和多元文化 的政策 Is Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party anti-Asian? Just how much has One Nation changed since Pauline Hanson first sat in the Australian Parliament two decades ago? This report reviews One Nation’s statements of the 1990s and the current policies of the party. It concludes that One Nation’s broad policies on immigration and multiculturalism remain essentially unchanged. Anti-Asian sentiments remain at One Nation’s core. Continuity in One Nation policy is reinforced by the party’s connections with anti-Asian immigration campaigners from the extreme right of Australian politics. Anti-Chinese thinking is a persistent sub-text in One Nation’s thinking and policy positions. The possibility that One Nation will in the future turn its attacks on Australia's Chinese communities cannot be dismissed. 宝林·韩森的一国党是否反亚裔?自从宝林·韩森二十年前首次当选澳大利亚 议会议员以来,一国党改变了多少? 本报告回顾了一国党在二十世纪九十年代的声明以及该党的现行政策。报告 得出的结论显示,一国党关于移民和多元文化的广泛政策基本保持不变。反 亚裔情绪仍然居于一国党的核心。通过与来自澳大利亚极右翼政坛的反亚裔 移民竞选人的联系,一国党的政策连续性得以加强。反华裔思想是一国党思 想和政策立场的一个持久不变的潜台词。无法排除一国党未来攻击澳大利亚 华人社区的可能性。 Report Philip Dorling May 2017 ABOUT THE AUSTRALIA INSTITUTE The Australia Institute is an independent public policy think tank based in Canberra. It is funded by donations from philanthropic trusts and individuals and commissioned research. Since its launch in 1994, the Institute has carried out highly influential research on a broad range of economic, social and environmental issues. OUR PHILOSOPHY As we begin the 21st century, new dilemmas confront our society and our planet. Unprecedented levels of consumption co-exist with extreme poverty. Through new technology we are more connected than we have ever been, yet civic engagement is declining.
    [Show full text]
  • Fairness Versus Choice: the Contested Discourses of 'Australian'
    Fairness Versus Choice: The Contested Discourses Of ‘Australian’ And ‘UnAustralian’ Values In The Industrial Relations Debate. Dr Kathie Muir Senior Lecturer, Gender, Work and Social Inquiry, School of Social Science, University of Adelaide Email: [email protected] Abstract The ACTU’s ‘Your rights at work’ campaign has broken new ground in employing SkyChannel and television advertising to deliver a unified and slick message about the dangers of the government’s WorkChoices legislation. President Sharan Burrow applauded ‘courageous working Australians’ prepared to stand up for their rights, families and communities by fighting to preserve national values of fairness, decency and a fair-go in the face of an ‘unprecedented attack’ on the rights of ordinary working people by the Howard government. The campaign therefore relied upon romanticised visions of nationalism as fairness, decency and people caring for each other, which Secretary Combet argued ‘beat as strongly in the hearts of [contemporary] Australians as they have for generations’. The appeal of this vision of fairness was (and is) essential to their on-going campaign to defeat the legislation and the coalition at the next federal election. Similarly, the government has sought to delegitimise the union campaign as undemocratic, bad for the economy, and out of date with current workplace realities; in other words, ‘unAustralian’. This paper examines the competing ways nationalism, fairness and choice have been deployed within both the government’s promotion of WorkChoices legislation and in the ACTU’s campaign to overturn the legislation. Fairness Versus Choice: The Contested Discourses Of ‘Australian’ And ‘UnAustralian’ Values In The Industrial Relations Debate.
    [Show full text]
  • File of Candidate Statements 1
    ACTwww.canberra CANDIDATE STATEMENTS-alliance.org.au FOR FEDERAL ELECTION 2019 Completed Statements are CANDIDATES WHOSE NAMES AND PAGES ARE SHOWN IN RED Responses to CANDIDATES FOR THE ELECTORATE OF BEAN [email protected] David Smith (ALP) Ed Cocks (Liberal) Johnathan Davis (Greens) Matt Donnelly (LDP) Enquiries to Bob Douglas Therese Faulkner (Prog) Tony Hanley (UAP) Ben Rushton (GAP) Jamie Christie (Ind)Tel 02 6253 4409 or 0409 233138 CANDIDATES FOR THE ELECTORATE OF FENNER Dear Dr Christie, Andrew Leigh (ALP) Leane Castley (Liberal) Andrew Braddock (Greens) Glen Hodgson (UAP) Kagiso Ratlhagane (Prog) I understand you are a candidate for the forthcoming Federal Election. CANDIDATES FOR THE ELECTORATE OF CANBERRA Congratulations, and best wishes.Alicia Payne (ALP) Mina Zaki (Liberal) TIM HOLLO (GREENS) PAGE 15 Robert Knight (Prog) Greg De Maine (UAP) Tim Bohm (Ind) I am writing on behalf of The Canberra Alliance for Participatory Democracy (CAPaD), which was formed in 2014, because many CanberransCANDIDATES were FORconcerned THE SENATE at the directions that Australian democracy was taking. ALP 1. Katy Gallagher, 2. Nancy Waites. LIBERAL 1. Zed Seselja, 2. Robert Gunning GREENS 1.PENNY KYBURZ PAGE 23 22.Emma Davidson UAP 1 Peter Walter 2. Rebecah Hodgson CAPaD seeks to enhanceSUST democracy AUST 1. John Haydon 2. Joyin Angel Canberra, CONS NATIONALS 1. Shaneso van Durenthat 2.Scott citizensBirkett can trust their elected GEOUP C 1. Anthony Pesec 2. Gary Kentnn UNGROUPED Nick Houston Gary Cowton, representatives, hold them accountable, engageDavid Kim in (GDP) decision -making, and defend what sustains the public interest. In the lead up to the 2016 ACT Legislative Assembly Elections, the major1 parties were consulted for their views about individual candidate statements, and in the light of those responses, a candidate statement was prepared, which we offered to all registered candidates for lodgement on the CAPaD website.
    [Show full text]
  • Donor to Political Party Return Form
    Donor to Political Party Disclosure Return – Individuals FINANCIAL YEAR 2014–15 The due date for lodging this return is 17 November 2015 Completing the Return: • This return is to be completed by a person who made a gift to a registered political party (or a State branch), or to another person or organisation with the intention of benefiting a registered political party. • This return is to be completed with reference to the Financial Disclosure Guide for Donors to Political Parties. • Further information is available at www.aec.gov.au. • This return will be available for public inspection from Monday 1 February 2016 at www.aec.gov.au. • Any supporting documentation included with this return may be treated as part of a public disclosure and displayed on the AEC website. • The information on this return is collected under the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918. NOTE: This form is for the use of individuals only. Please use the form Political Party Disclosure Return- Organisations if you are completing a return for an organisation. Details of person that made the donation Name Postal address Suburb/Town State Postcode Telephone number ( ) Fax number ( ) Email address Certification I certify that the information contained in this return and its attachments is true and complete to the best of my knowledge information and belief. I understand that giving false or misleading information is a serious offence. Signature Date Enquiries and returns Funding and Disclosure Phone: 02 6271 4552 should be addressed to: Australian Electoral Commission Fax: 02 6293 7655 PO Box 6172 Email: [email protected] Kingston ACT 2604 Office use only Date received DAR_1_indiv.
    [Show full text]