THERE is no doubt $179 million can buy you a lot of things, but can it buy you influence over the political process?
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
You bet it can.
The Australian Electoral Commission has revealed political parties received $179 million in donations from individuals, businesses and organisations in the 2014-15 financial year.
It is, by any measure, a staggering amount of money, with the Liberals attracting $75 million and Labor $66 million.
Coalition partner the Nationals was handed $11 million, while the Greens – which has lobbied for donation reform – gladly accepted $9 million.
Surprisingly, given its minuscule following, the Palmer United Party racked up $10 million in donations.
Not surprisingly, the majority came from Clive Palmer himself, including almost $6 million from his Queensland Nickel operation, which sacked 237 workers and went into administration last month.
What is even more astonishing, though, is that receipts were down some $100 million on the amount bequeathed the year before.
The bottom line is that there is an awful lot of money circulating around the country’s political system.
The Australian Hotels and Hospitality Industry forked out $414,000 to the Coalition and Labor, Pratt Holdings gave $210,000 to the Liberal Party, while business tycoons Charles and Sylvia Bass and Chinese-owned property developer Ever Bright each donated $200,000 to the Liberals.
Despite persistent denials from both the parties and donors, no one is naive enough to believe all this money does not come with strings attached.
Political parties are not charities and there is a reason why these individuals, businesses and organisations make such large donations.
They are designed, to put it bluntly, to buy access to and influence over decision-makers at the highest level.
These donations are an investment and, like with any investment, a return is expected.
With each corruption scandal comes renewed calls for political donations to be outlawed and election campaigns funded via the public purse.
But with all parties reaping the benefits from this system, it is difficult to see where the motivation for change will come from.
- Ross Tyson, deputy editor