Electoral and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2015
Plain English Summary
Overview
This bill toughens Queensland's political donation disclosure rules and removes voter ID requirements. It also sets up a judicial-style pension for the chairperson of the Crime and Corruption Commission.
Who it affects
Voters no longer need ID at the polling booth. Political parties, candidates, donors and third-party campaigners face lower disclosure thresholds and more frequent reporting, while the CCC chairperson gains a new pension entitlement.
Political donation disclosure
The threshold for publicly disclosing donations and loans drops from around $12,800 to $1,000, backdated to 21 November 2013. Political parties must report every six months instead of annually, and donors giving $100,000 or more must file a separate return within 14 days.
- Donation and loan disclosure threshold cut to $1,000 (from $12,400 indexed)
- Anonymous donation cap for parties cut from $12,800 to $1,000 (candidates stay at $200)
- Parties and associated entities now report every six months, not annually
- Gifts of $100,000 or more must be declared within 14 days, supporting near real-time disclosure
- Parties and candidates must re-file returns covering 2013-14, the Stafford by-election and the 2015 general election under the new rules
Voter identification
The requirement to show a proof of identity document (like a driver licence or Medicare card) to be issued a ballot paper is removed for both state and local government elections. Issuing officers can still ask questions if they suspect someone is not entitled to vote.
- Voters no longer need to show ID at state elections
- Voter ID requirement also removed for local government elections
- Issuing officers retain power to question suspected non-entitled voters
CCC chairperson pension
The chairperson of the Crime and Corruption Commission is given access to a pension scheme based on the one that covers Supreme Court judges. A chairperson must serve at least five years to qualify, accrues 6% per year up to a 60% cap, and payments do not start until age 65.
- Judicial-style pension extended to the CCC chairperson
- Minimum five years of service required to qualify
- Pension paid at 6% of a Supreme Court judge's salary per year served, up to 60%
- Pension deferred until age 65, even for ill-health retirements
- Spouses and children of deceased former chairpersons get pension rights similar to those of a judge's family
Bill Story
The journey of this bill through Parliament, including debate and recorded votes.
▸Introduced27 Mar 2015View Hansard
Vote on a motion
Vote on the Attorney-General's motion to require the Legal Affairs and Community Safety Committee to report on the Electoral and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 by 1 May 2015, a compressed timeline opposed by the LNP as rushing the bill through without adequate committee scrutiny.
The motion was agreed to.
A formal vote on whether to accept a proposal — this could be the bill itself, an amendment, or another motion.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (46)
Noes (42)
Committee report tabled
▸Second Reading7 May 2015View Hansard
▸17 members spoke12 support5 oppose
Moved the second reading and spoke in reply as Attorney-General, defending the bill as delivering on the government's election commitment to restore transparency and accountability by lowering the donation disclosure threshold to $1,000, removing voter ID requirements, and providing a judicial pension for the CCC chair.
“The hard truth is that the LNP will fight in the ditches to give big business the right to donate thousands of dollars in complete secrecy and that it just does not want vulnerable Queenslanders to vote.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Spoke as committee chair in support of the bill, arguing that the LNP government had trampled on elements of a modern transparent democracy, that voter ID requirements disenfranchised Indigenous and disadvantaged voters, and that the $1,000 disclosure threshold is appropriate and in line with other jurisdictions.
“What sort of retrograde step would we put in place if we put barriers in front of Indigenous people in regional communities?”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Opposed the bill as a committee member, arguing that removing voter ID strips away the integrity of the voting system, that retrospective disclosure requirements are unfair to those who donated lawfully, and that the constitutional inconsistency with Commonwealth law remains unresolved.
“When I go to the chemist, the post office or the bank, I have to show some form of ID. Do you know what this does for me when I produce the ID? It protects me, and that is what this legislation in its current form does.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Supported the bill as a committee member, arguing that the reinstatement of the $1,000 gift threshold will increase transparency and accountability, that voter ID requirements disenfranchised voters including farmers and country residents, and noting that voter turnout dropped 1.1 per cent at the 2015 election.
“I believe that the evidence indicates that voters were not fraudulent in any extent, but many voters were disenfranchised by the LNP's legislation.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Opposed the bill on grounds of retrospectivity being inherently unfair and a bad precedent, potential constitutional invalidity due to section 109 inconsistency with Commonwealth law, and the removal of voter ID requirements which he argued protect the integrity of the ballot system.
“Since when has our political system stooped so low that we are now making people retrospectively commit offences?”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Supported the bill as a committee member, citing strong support from the Bar Association, Anti-Discrimination Commission, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal Service for both the lower disclosure threshold and removal of voter ID, and noting his personal experience of a voter being wrongly turned away on election day.
“On election day, 31 January, I had firsthand experience of the problems caused by voter identification laws when a voter came up to me at a polling booth and told me that they had been turned away from the polling booth because they did not have photographic identification.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Opposed the bill as a committee member, arguing the examination time was too short, that voter ID provisions guard against multiple voting in different people's names, and that the retrospective disclosure provisions were unanimously opposed by all non-government submitters including the Bar Association, Council for Civil Liberties, and Professor Orr.
“It is very unfair to those individuals, who operated in full compliance of the law at the time, to now have the law changed after the fact. I think that it is a retrospective breach of their freedom to associate and freedom to participate in the democratic process.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Supported the bill strongly, citing examples of alleged LNP donor favouritism including Sibelco's sandmining extension on North Stradbroke Island, Karreman Quarries' retrospective legalisation of illegal quarrying, and the Olive Vale land-clearing approval, arguing these demonstrated the need for transparent donation disclosure.
“Roll up, roll up' is their approach when it comes to soliciting donations. 'Welcome to the LNP where donations can be exchanged for a sizzling hot deal.'”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Opposed the bill, focusing on the constitutional inconsistency under section 109 of the Constitution and the lack of any countervailing legal advice from the Attorney-General, and arguing that retrospective legislation is unjustified because there is no evil or moral wrong warranting it.
“The question here is what is the evil that the Labor Party are saying needs to be morally removed by putting in place retrospective legislation? It is simply a donation to a legal party.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Supported the bill, arguing that Queenslanders have fundamentally moved on from the pre-Fitzgerald era and will not tolerate any whiff of corruption, that voter ID laws are fundamentally about chipping away at compulsory voting, and that voting is a right and obligation, not a transaction like borrowing a video.
“The thin edge of the wedge of voter ID laws is undermining compulsory voting.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Strongly opposed the bill as retrospective and hazardous legislation designed for spite, arguing that the Labor Party is stripping away freedom of choice, that removing voter ID opens the door to electoral fraud, and that the bill should not fall out of line with federal government thresholds.
“The Palaszczuk Labor government clearly has no shame when it comes to invading the privacy of Queenslanders. These legislative changes are clearly a chance for the Labor Party to enact spite and show venomous attitude, attacking our fellow Queensland citizens.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Supported the bill as Health Minister, arguing from the perspective of his electorate where 50 per cent of residents speak English as a second language, citing international and Australian evidence that voter ID laws disenfranchise vulnerable people and that multiple voting has never affected an election outcome in Australia.
“In a free and democratic society, the most important thing for every citizen is to have a free and unimpeded right to cast their vote in an election. That is the most fundamental tenet of our democracy.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Supported the bill, thanking the Premier and Attorney-General for making it the first bill of the new government, arguing that voter ID requirements reduce democratic participation and discriminate against marginalised Queenslanders including new migrants in her electorate where almost half speak a language other than English at home.
“I cannot support the legislative change introduced by the opposition that effectively served to create additional barriers to their inclusion in our democratic process.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Supported the bill as Deputy Premier, arguing the former LNP government's $12,400 threshold allowed donors to hand over money secretly and citing the Karreman Quarries example where a donation preceded retrospective legislation legalising the company's compliance issues, and calling for the LNP to bring on any constitutional challenge.
“If that threshold had been $12,000 or more, the people of Queensland would not have known about it, and that is the disgrace of those people opposite.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Supported the bill, quoting Tony Fitzgerald's warning that the LNP's casual allocation of benefits to supporters and donors would in time lead to serious corruption, citing secret LNP fundraising events, and arguing that secrecy should have no place in the democratic system.
“When all other states around Australia were tightening up donation laws and reinforcing transparency and accountability in their democratic systems, the LNP government was taking us backwards and making us the laughing-stock of Australia.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Supported the bill, criticising the LNP for cutting electoral funding for Independents and minor parties while raising the donation declaration limit, and supporting the removal of voter ID laws which he observed deterred voters in his electorate from returning home to collect their identification.
“We need to encourage Australians to vote by whatever means necessary because people are turned off by politics.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
Supported the bill as Premier, stating the government went to the election on a firm platform of restoring integrity and accountability, that the LNP's increase of the disclosure threshold to $12,400 was a disgrace hiding thousands of dollars in secret donations, and calling for bipartisan resolution on the PCCC chair.
“For the life of me I cannot understand why this opposition has learned absolutely nothing. Why has this opposition refused, even until now, to support this fundamental change to the way electoral donations are declared?”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
▸In Detail7 May 2015View Hansard
Twenty government amendments across clauses 15, 16, 18, 22, 25 and 26, clarifying obligations on candidates and political parties to notify third parties and entities of their return obligations for gifts received before commencement, and ensuring retrospective reporting requirements capture amounts received, paid or debts incurred before commencement. These amendments arose from the committee's three recommendations seeking clarity on the application of penalties and notification requirements.
That clause 26, as amended, be agreed to
Vote on clause 26 containing the transitional provisions that retrospectively apply the reduced $1,000 donation disclosure threshold backdated to 21 November 2013, requiring disclosure of donations made during the Stafford by-election and the 2015 state election, opposed by the LNP as repugnant retrospective legislation.
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (46)
Noes (42)
▸1 clause vote (all passed)
That clauses 3 to 5 stand part of the bill
Vote on whether to retain clauses 3 to 5 which remove the voter proof-of-identity requirements from the Electoral Act 1992 and Local Government Electoral Act 2011, with the LNP seeking their removal to keep voter ID provisions in place.
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (46)
Noes (42)
Spoke against clauses 3 to 5 (voter ID removal) and clause 26 (retrospectivity provisions) during Consideration in Detail, arguing the voter ID protections were sensible and should be retained, and that the retrospectivity provisions were repugnant.
“These provisions relate to the removal of the voter ID protection. As we mentioned in the second reading debate, our view is that they are sensible protections that should not be removed.”— 2015-05-07View Hansard
▸Third Reading7 May 2015View Hansard
That the bill, as amended, be now read a third time
Final passage vote on the Electoral and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2015, which lowers the donation disclosure threshold from $12,800 to $1,000, removes voter ID requirements, and provides a judicial pension for the CCC chair.
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (46)
Noes (42)
Referenced Entities
Legislation
Organisations
Sectors Affected
Classified using AGIFT/ANZSIC Australian government standards