Upper house

Electoral law reform – Corporate donations


Question from Mrs O’CONNOR to the PRIME MINISTER, Mr GUTWEIN

Today, legislation that was bought and paid for by the gaming industry will pass through the Legislative Council and return to this House, in large part thanks to the capitulation of Labor. The debate on your future gambling bill has demonstrated to Tasmanians the toxic and corrosive influence of corporate donations on the Liberal and Labor parties, which has bought their conscience and votes against the public interest. .

Prime Minister, in this context –

Mr. Barnett – It is defamatory.

Mrs O’CONNOR – Sue me. Come on, sue me for telling the truth.

Mr. Barnett – Say it outside, see how you are.

Mrs O’CONNOR – No, I would be happy to be prosecuted for telling the truth because it is a statement of fact that your conscience and your votes have been bought by the gaming industry.

Mr. Barnett – It is offensive.

Mrs O’CONNOR – Please sue me. Prime Minister, in this context, can you explain why, after dragging its feet on electoral reform for years, your government’s proposed changes to electoral laws will still leave Tasmania with the most donation disclosure framework? weak country, no cap on donations or spending, no ban on corporate donations and every opportunity for special interests to continue to corrupt our democracy?

REPLY

Mr President, I thank the leader of the Greens, Mrs O’Connor, for this question. First of all, let me very strongly reject all this garbage. I reject all of these assertions. These are not facts and my conscience is clear.

We adopted a policy for the last election, in fact, for the 2018 election – it’s been around for some time. He was very well received by the upper house. Some will say that we may have wasted time, but that is the business of the upper chamber.

The policy has been out since 2018. It has gone through two electoral periods. As you very well know, the state will get more money out of it and we will invest more in damage minimization and other issues. We will invest more money because we get more money as a result of the deal.

Pubs and clubs themselves will have more income, which will allow them to employ more staff and invest in these facilities.

The monopoly is gone. We broke the monopoly and the revenue the state receives, the revenue that goes to pubs and clubs, is the $ 20 million loss of federal hotels.

Mrs O’Connor – Cry Me A River.

Mr GUTWEIN – Greens leader knows it’s a good deal for the state

Mrs O’Connor – I am completely distorted and you should remove this. I am interested in people with happy, productive and successful lives not spoiled by addiction.

Mr. SPEAKER – Order.

Mr GUTWEIN – My conscience is clear, I hope yours is. I hope your conscience is clear.

Mrs O’Connor – Do you want to go to the question?

Mr. SPEAKER – Order, Mrs. O’Connor.

Mr GUTWEIN – Regarding electoral reform and donations, I am proud to be the first Prime Minister to introduce electoral law reform at the state level. You were in government yourself and never got close to it.

Mrs O’CONNOR – Point of order, Mr President. The Prime Minister misled the House.

Intervening members.

Mr. SPEAKER – Before we begin, let everyone calm down so that I can hear the point of order.

Mrs O’CONNOR – So that the Prime Minister does not mislead the House, we adopted electoral reform in this House in 2013. It was blocked upstairs.

Mr. SPEAKER – I do not accept the point of order. This is not a point of order. The Prime Minister has the call. Other voices should not be heard.

Mr GUTWEIN – We remain today, as we were then, under federal law. It is an observation. Regarding electoral reform, this file will be brought forward next year. Before the next elections, a state system will be in place. It is an observation.

I don’t know how much the leader of the Greens was trying to make –

Mrs O’Connor – Why don’t you have limits on donations?

Mr. SPEAKER – Order.

Mr GUTWEIN – I expect the law to be passed by this place next year and be in place for the next election.

Mrs O’Connor – We will always have the weakest laws in the land.

Mr. SPEAKER – Order.

Mr GUTWEIN – As far as the laws are concerned, we have taken a balanced approach in this regard. From what I understand, federal laws cost about $ 14,300; they may have even increased a bit compared to that in terms of electoral disclosure. We have proposed $ 5,000, which is South Australia’s, and this bill will be passed here next year and everyone will have a chance to have their say.