MINING and gambling interests were heavy contributors to political parties last financial year, at a time when the government was considering dropping poker machine reforms and fighting off a sustained attack over the carbon tax.
The state and federal Labor parties took more than $1.1 million from organisations with gaming interests while the Coalition parties and their state branches took $688,000, according to the release of political funding for the 2011-12 financial year by the Australian Electoral Commission on Friday.
In January last year, the government walked away from a promise to the independent MP Andrew Wilkie to dramatically limit how much people could lose on poker machines.
Andrew Wilkie … accused the government of accepting donations from gaming companies. Photo: Matthew Newton
Mr Wilkie accused the government of backing down on gaming reform because it had accepted the donations.
''No one hands over that sort of money without expecting something in return,'' Mr Wilkie said. ''Donations like this corrupt proper political process and are every bit as dodgy as bags full of cash changing hands in corrupt developing countries. No wonder the Prime Minister reneged on her deal with me for meaningful poker machine reform and the opposition resisted so strongly the government's watered-down reforms.''
Clubs NSW, which ran an aggressive campaign against the government's aborted effort to introduce tougher gambling controls, donated $51,050 to Labor and $122,850 to the Coalition.
The Australian Hotels Association donated $299,785 to the Coalition and $5000 to Labor while the Australian Hotels Hospitality Association donated $55,000 to the Liberals.
James Packer's Crown Ltd donated $48,085 to the ALP and $74,585 to the Liberals.
Woolworths, the largest single owner of poker machines through the AHL Group, gave $54,675 to the Coalition parties and $16,500 to Labor.
After winning significant concessions to the final shape of the mining tax, minerals and resource companies remained large donors to the major political parties in a year dominated by debate over the carbon tax.
Labor received $139,512 from Woodside, $61,000 from Chevron and $55,090 from Santos.
The Coalition received $122,000 from Woodside, $53,820 from Chevron and $65,383 from Santos.
The mining magnate Clive Palmer, through his company Mineralogy, remained the Queensland Liberal National Party's largest donor giving it $176,700. He later quit the party.
Mr Palmer's Mineralogy donated a further $27,500 to the Nationals.
The billionaire mining magnate Gina Rinehart's Hancock Coal donated $22,000 to the Liberal Party and $5000 to the ALP. Ms Rinehart is a major shareholder in Fairfax Media, owner of the Herald.
By far the biggest donor to any party was the health mogul Paul Ramsay. Paul Ramsay Holdings, whose investments include Ramsay Health Care and the Sydney FC football club, donated $505,000 to the Liberal Party while related entity Ramsay Health Care also donated $100,000 to the Liberals.
In contrast, donations by big tobacco plummeted from $263,539 in 2010-11 to $7780 in 2011-12. All the money went to Coalition parties as Labor no longer accepts donations from tobacco companies.
The federal government passed plain packaging laws in November 2011.
Overall, donations and other payments to political parties fell by nearly half in the last financial year, leaving each of the parties with substantial debts as they prepare for the coming poll.
All political parties received a total of $125 million in 2011-12 - down from $228.4 million in 2010-11.
The last federal election was held in 2010 and donations and other payments typically drop off immediately after an election.
The federal government wants to pass further electoral reforms by the end of June which would change the rules for the campaign later in the year.
The reforms include a further lowering of the threshold above which donations must be disclosed and subsidising political parties and independents for their administrative costs.
Lowering the threshold of disclosure of donations from $11,900 to $1000 would mean that the sources of many more donations would have to be publicly revealed after the poll.
No comments:
Post a Comment