The ACT Greens are eyeing further reform of political donor rules, as questions remain as to whether an upcoming bill to ban property developer donations could bar donations from the Labor Club.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
ACT Labor vowed to legislate against developer donations in the parliamentary agreement struck with the Greens last year.
That ban was to be based on similar laws operating in other states and territories.
Neither political parties have taken money from developers since the October election.
However it is not yet clear how a developer will be defined, given the Labor Party-controlled Labor Club has been given the green light to build a hotel next to its Belconnen club and a four-storey apartment block in Braddon.
A spokesman for Chief Minister Andrew Barr refused to elaborate on how the ACT would define developers, saying "that will be revealed when the legislation is introduced".
In NSW, a person is considered a property developer if they lodge "regular" planning applications for the residential or commercial development of land for profit.
Under this definition, the development of a head office is exempt, unless a substantial part of the building is sold or leased.
Greens MLA Caroline Le Couteur said using the NSW rules, they did not consider Labor Club donations in breach of the parliamentary agreement.
"Under the ban currently in place in NSW, we don't believe that the Labor Club Group would be considered a property developer since we believe the developments which they are involved with are primarily for the purpose of providing corporate premises for carrying out their business," Ms Le Couteur said in a statement.
Questions to Mr Barr on whether the Labor Club could be classified as a developer under the rules were redirected to ACT Labor branch secretary Matt Byrne.
Mr Byrne pointed to their submission to the Legislative Assembly inquiry into the 2016 ACT election and the Electoral Act, where the party has defined a property developer as someone whose primary business is development (i.e. not the Labor Club).
But even the NSW Electoral Commission acknowledged defining entities like the Labor Club was complicated.
"Because of its complexity, the question of whether a person/entity is or is not a property developer must be determined in the context of the individual circumstances of each case at the time the donation is made," a spokesman said.
"The NSW Electoral Commission advises people to seek their own legal advice if this issue arises in relation to a donation."
Ms Le Couteur said the Greens would welcome a further "clean-up" of the ACT's political donation laws.
"The ACT had robust donation laws in place in the 2012 election year that meant only individuals on the ACT electoral roll could donate to political parties, but these were ripped up by the Liberal and Labor parties in 2015. Greens MLA Shane Rattenbury was the only member of the Assembly to vote against these changes," Ms Le Couteur said.
"We would support further changes that restrict donations from corporations and organisations with vested interests, including those which rely on income from problem gambling to fund their business models. A ban on property developer donations is a good first step and the ACT Greens will keep working to clean up the ACT's political donation laws."
But acting ACT electoral commissioner Ro Spence urged lawmakers to wait until a review into the NSW ban was completed before following suit.
He noted in his submission to the election inquiry the difficulty of banning donors who gave money at both a federal and territory level.
"If the proposed prohibition provision were to be adopted by the Legislative Assembly, care needs to be taken to ensure that changes do not have unintended consequences and that there is sufficient clarity to constitute a workable scheme. The drafting of ACT legislation might best be informed by awaiting the outcome of the NSW legislation review process," Mr Spence said.
