The increase in public funding will see about $2 million handed to political parties and candidates at the next election. Public funding was $1 a vote for most of the ACT's political history. At the last election, it was increased to $2, amounting to $409,000 distributed to candidates.

The Greens' Shane Rattenbury is a lone voice against the changes, describing the planned $8 payment as "wildly" out of step with elsewhere.

In Victoria, candidates are paid $1.65 a vote. For Commonwealth elections, the amount is $2.56.

In a surprise move, the Bill tabled in the ACT Assembly on Thursday abolishes the limit on donations for election spending. At the moment, donations are capped at $10,000 a year from each donor.

Neither of these changes was recommended by officials or experts. A select committee made up of one Labor, one Liberal and Mr Rattenbury came up with the idea of an $8-a-vote payment, but the idea had no basis in submissions to the committee and was strongly opposed by Mr Rattenbury. The committee did not canvass scrapping the $10,000 limit on donations, which was not part of any of the inquires or reports on the subject this year.

But tabling the changes in the Assembly on Thursday, Attorney-General Simon Corbell said an $8-per-vote payment would help level the playing field between parties, "thereby allowing more meaningful exposure of candidates' election platforms and better informing voters".

Abolishing the $10,000 limit removed "an incentive for donors to circumvent the electoral funding laws and thereby reduce transparency".

Liberal Leader Jeremy Hanson said the changes would reduce pressure to go after donations.

"Increased public funding is a very sensible measure to make sure that parties are not, in essence, desperate for donations," he said, insisting it would help Canberra avoid the "disease" that had infected politics in NSW.

But Mr Rattenbury said Labor and Liberal had "stitched up a system that will see them receive a significant increase in public funding while at the same time constraints on donations are being removed".

The Bill reduces the cap on the amount candidates can spend on election campaigns. At the moment, the spending limit is $60,000 a candidate, which adds up to $1 million for parties if they field 17 candidates. The Government proposes reducing the limit to $40,000 a candidate, so when the Assembly increases to 25 members at the next election, the total spending for a major party would still be capped at $1 million.

In this change, the major parties have ignored a suggestion from Electoral Commissioner Phillip Green. He told the Assembly that a $40,000 limit could unreasonably disadvantage independents, preventing them from effectively campaigning. He suggested a lower cap for party candidates and a larger cap for independents.

The Government also plans to carve off "associated entities" - Labor's ACT Labor Club and 1973 Foundation - from the spending total, which means the two Labor fund-raisers will be able to spend an extra $40,000 each on the election campaign, on top of the $1 million limit.

The Government also appears to have ignored urgings from the Electoral Commission to reconsider the amount paid in "administrative funding" paid to parties. At the moment, they get about $21,000 a year from the taxpayer for each Assembly Member, and Mr Green has pointed out that an extra eight members would swell the overall amount significantly.

The new laws clear up confusion about when donations must be declared. At the moment, the law has two caps on anonymous donations - $250 for small gifts and $1000 for others. Mr Green recommended the Assembly choose one figure or the other, and the new Bill plumps for $1000. Above that limit, the names of donors must be declared.

Mr Corbell moved to remove restrictions on who can donate to political parties. At the moment, only people on the electoral roll can donate, ruling out unions, business groups and other organisations. But after the High Court struck down a similar law in NSW, the ACT has conceded its ban on organisations donating would also be unlikely to survive a court challenge, and has thrown it out.

The Government rejected to recommendations from Mr Green and the select committee to increase the fine for failing to vote from the current $20.