Banning property developers from giving cash to politicians discriminates against one political viewpoint and benefits Labor, former LNP president Gary Spence has argued in his High Court challenge against the new rules.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The Palaszczuk Labor government passed laws last year, backdated until before the 2017 Queensland election, banning property developers from donating money to state and local government politicians, candidates and parties.
Then-LNP president Mr Spence, also the chairman of engineering consultancy PeakUrban, launched a challenge of the laws in the High Court in mid-2018 and in December resigned his position on the LNP.
He argued the laws prevented him from legally playing a role in the leadership of the party ahead of the federal election, for example, fundraising, due to his role in the property development industry.
In a submission to the High Court, Mr Spence said the laws did not "enhance political speech by levelling the playing field", given the extent to which money from developers was directed to the LNP.
"The discrimination is against one political viewpoint," he said.
"Any such discrimination against disfavoured voices, and the concomitant distortion of the political battlefield, requires a clear and compelling justification, especially when the practical effect of such is to benefit the governing party over its main opponent."
However, in a submission filed by the crown solicitor Greg Cooper, the state of Queensland argued the risk of corruption posed by property developers did not differentiate between political parties and therefore the law could not differentiate between parties.
"In any event, property developers donate to parties other than the LNP," Queensland's submission said.
Mr Spence said findings from a Crime and Corruption Commission investigation found a risk, or perceived risk, of corruption in councils and not the state government.
In also extending the ban to state politics, Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk said she would not make rules for councils that she was "not prepared to follow myself".
Mr Spence said the state had a very limited role in planning and many of its powers were exercised by a senior public servant, not the minister.
However, he said given the history of inquiries into local government elections in Queensland, a ban of donations for councils was legitimate.
"The point is that there is an established risk of corruption at local government level that has not been established to exist at state government level in Queensland," he said.
The state of Queensland said the case was fundamentally about whether Australia's constitutional arrangements allowed the states to legislate to protect their systems of government.
The case will be heard before the full High Court in Canberra on Tuesday.
