ACT Labor suggests more taxpayer funding to match small donations to parties

Labor secretary Matt Byrne appeared before a parliamentary inquiry on Thursday, where he highlighted a New York scheme in which donations to political parties of up to $175 are matched by six times the amount in public funding. As a result a $10 donation is boosted by $60 in public funding.

Mr Byrne said such a scheme would encourage parties to raise funds from small contributions from individuals instead of seeking large donations from the rich or business.

In 2014, the ACT parliament boosted taxpayer funding from $2 a vote to $8 a vote, with the result that Labor was given $750,500 after the 2016 election, compared to the $172,000 it received in 2012.

Also on Thursday, the ACT Liberals said they did not support a ban on donations from developers.

Canberra Liberals president Arthur Potter told the inquiry a ban would "end up capturing the wrong people".

He asked whether a person was a property developer if they built a granny flat, or bought "four or five blocks at Throsby" to build homes, selling four and renting out the last one, or a Fluffy block to build a dual occupancy and decided instead to onsell.

"It assumes property developers are a different type of person, and I just don't see that they are. They're just like everybody else, they're trying to run a business, they're trying to make a dollar. If the issue is undue influence on governments or public officials then that's actually the real problem and we should be looking at what we can about that side of it."

The bulk of developers were small family businesses, he said. He also questioned whether donations gave developers any extra influence.

"I just don't see there is a problem, and if someone want to be corrupt they're going to get around this anyway."

Liberal parliamentarian James Milligan asked "where does it stop", suggesting lawyers had more influence on the political stage and asking whether donations from them should be banned also.

Mr Potter responded, "That's exactly the problem. You target a particular group and say that there's an issue there because of whatever issues you've decided that apparently exist, what group is the next group? Lawyers would be a good example ... Why not concentrate on transparency and leave it open for who wants to donate."

Mr Byrne said ACT Labor had recently changed its rules to ban developer donations, as promised. But he said the Labor Club did not qualify as a "developer" because its main aim was to provide services to members.

The Labor Club is building an apartment building in Torrens Street in Braddon, and has been given approval for a hotel, carpark and office building in Belconnen.

But Mr Byrne said while he was "not a constitutional expert or a legal expert", the club was seeking to diversify its income, and "in my view I don't think that would constitute a property developer".

The construction union is affiliated with Labor and donates to the party. Through its Tradies club in Dickson, it plans a six-storey apartment building in Dickson and was also reported to have a stake in the IQ apartments. Labor has not banned donations from the union.

Mr Byrne urged the inquiry to ban donations from people and firms whose "primary purpose" is property development. He points to the NSW ban which defines a developer as "a corporation" which "regularly involves the making of relevant planning applications" for development".

He did not believe there were any cases of "impropriety" in the development industry in the ACT, but the aim was to ensure no perception of undue influence "because a company may have once donated to a political party".

Mr Potter for the Liberals also opposed lowering the voting age to 16, questioning why 16-year-olds were judged not mature enough to make their own decisions about drinking and smoking but would be judged mature enough to make decisions about running the city or country.