Most campaign contributors skirt disclosure rules
In the weeks leading up to the March 3 election in Tasmania, the fur is flying about alleged campaign contributions—made to both Liberals and Labor—by the gaming industry.
Liberal Premier Will Hodgman has accused Labor opposition leader Rebecca White of accepting “money under the table” from the gaming interests even as she pledges to ban poker machines from pubs and clubs.
According to the Guardian newspaper, as evidence Hodgman said White attended a 2017 fundraising dinner in Melbourne hosted by hospitality company ALH Group, which operates pubs and sports bars that offer electronic gaming.
“It’s important that any political party that receives donations discloses them and is prepared to stand by them,” he said.
Meanwhile, the Labor side huffed that Hodgman has been “bought and corrupted by the poker machine industry.”
Tasmania has no campaign-finance disclosure laws, but federal legislation requires the annual release of each party’s total donations and the specifics of any donation greater than $13,200. The data for 2016-17 show the state’s Liberal Party took in $2.39 million, and Labor trailed with just $751,411. The Greens accepted $235,232. But most of the cash was contributed by anonymous donors below the individual disclosure threshold.
White’s pledge to remove poker machines from all pubs by 2023 likely means little support for Labor by the Federal Group, which has exclusive rights to license poker machines in the state.
Professor Joo-Cheong Tham, director of electoral regulation research at the University of Melbourne, says Australia should follow Britain’s model and disclose donation information each quarter—weekly during an election campaign.
“If we compare the federal disclosure scheme that applies to Tasmania to countries like Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom, it compares very poorly,” he said.
The lesser parties are moving to change their disclosure practices. The Greens say they will reveal donations on their website as they receive them. And the new Jacqui Lambie party, which has raised under $3,000 in its campaign so far, makes all donations public, whatever the sum.
“This is a test of democracy in Tasmania,” said Richard Eccleston, director of the University of Tasmania’s Institute for the Study of Social Change.“Given there are significant business interests at play, are we going to know who is funding what is undoubtedly the most expensive election in Tasmanian history? The answer is: no, we won’t.”
