NSW campaign finance law likely to end up in the High Court

What issue has me lining up with NSW Labor, the ETU, the CPSU and the Shooters and Fishers Party against the NSW Liberal Party? Barry O’Farrell’s campaign finance laws, which were passed by the NSW Parliament this week. The report of the Legislative Council inquiry into these laws shows these organisations were my odd issue bedfellows.

As with the federal inquiry last year, I think my views were given a fair hearing. The final report quoted from my submission many times, though for once I was not a solitary voice on many of the issues I raised. Even many of the usual champions of a more regulated political system thought that this bill went too far.

Unfortunately, despite the report clearly expressing significant concerns with the bill, both on its merits and its constitutionality, the Greens in the end backed the bill with a minor amendment.

The two main effects of the legislation are to:

* during the campaign period starting 1 October the year before a NSW election, any campaign spending that has as a dominant purpose the influencing of voting will be included in the spending cap of any political party to which the campaigning organisation is affiliated (in other words, union campaigns will be counted towards ALP campaign caps);

* ban all political donations at all times to political parties and third parties from organisations (coming on top of an ban on donations from people not on the electoral roll – which of course includes permanent residents and citizens under 18).

The only advantage of this over-reach is that it will now almost certainly end up in the High Court. I’d be amazed if the unions did not challenge; while they are not certain of victory there is a viable argument on freedom of political communication grounds. And a victory on this point might curb the campaign finance excesses likely to eventually emerge from the Green-Labor control of the Senate.

Young women already at 40% higher education attainment

The government has a target of 40% of 25-34 year olds holding a bachelor degree or above by 2025. Data released by the ABS today shows that for women the target has already been met for 25-29 year olds. But men are lagging well behind on 30%.

However the gender gap is much smaller if vocational education qualifications are included:

Men with upper-level vocational qualifications do ok, which makes it less clear that there is a need to boost male university participation.

The weak case for a $1,000 political donation disclosure threshold

Reflecting the current orthodoxy on campaign finance policy, the Age yesterday editorialised in favour of the threshold for political donations disclosure being lowered from $11,500 to $1,000.

Despite the popularity of the $1,000 figure, I have never seen any real argument as to why that number is the right one. The Age said this:

For as long as this situation has been allowed to continue, and various donors are – for whatever reasons – free to conceal themselves from public scrutiny, democracy is under threat. Voters must be confident that political donations are not synonymous with covertly buying influence.

But could $11,500 plausibly buy influence? In 2010-11, a donation of that much was 0.000012% of the ALP’s income. I won’t strain your eyes any further by making you count how many decimal places would be needed to calculate a $5,000 or $2,000 donation as a percentage of the ALP’s total income. And the numbers would be even lower for the Liberals, who raised more money than Labor in 2010-11. The parties have incomes that are large enough, and diversified enough, for a single donor at this level not to be important.Read More »

Crikey group subscription

If you want to get Crikey, but don’t want to pay full price, Nick Gruen does an annual service in organising a group subscription. Details here, cross-posted from Club Troppo:

It’s on again folks. Crikey subscribers on the group subscription I organise have begun getting presubscription emails. Whether you are a subscriber already or not, you can subscribe through this means and qualify for the discounts Crikey offer.

Prices keep rising, and they’ve risen again this year. Here’s the schedule.

If you want to join the subscription, please email me on

ngruen

AT

gmail

Dot

you know the rest.

Then in a few weeks from now I’ll shoot a list of names and email addresses to Crikey and they’ll follow up.

Group Subscriptions

3-5 Members – $125

6-9 Members – $115

10-19 Members – $105

20-49 Members – $95

50+ Members – $85

The rise of GetUp!

The Australian Electoral Commission’s political donations and expenditure information for 2010-11 was released today.

For the second year running, business and industry groups outspent left-wing groups, putting more than $21 million into their campaigns (this is an under-count as at least one big-spending industry association has not put in the required report). When the Coalition introduced these laws 2006, the aim was to harass the left-wing third parties that traditionally were the main players. However, increasingly they affect the business community.

Two-thirds of the business and industry spending was an attack on cigarette plain packaging laws. There will be a lot more declared for 2011-12, as the carbon tax and pokies campaigns intensified.

Over the time these laws have been in place, the interesting trend has been the rise of GetUp!, which has increased its spending nine-fold since 2006-07.

The ideological/issue right is much less active than the ideological/issue left in political advertising. For 2010-11 the miscellaneous right-wing groups were the conservative Australian Christian Lobby and the National Civic Council. However, the IPA has taken out a few full-page ads in the last 6 months, so this will add a small-government ideological voice to this political tactic.

Higher education 101

My first Grattan higher education report was released last night. The media coverage is mostly about the relationship between teaching and research, but the report itself is quite wide-ranging, covering

* the legal definition of higher education and universities
* the non-university higher education providers
* trends in student numbers, including what is being studied, and off-campus/on-campus
* who is studying – male/female, on campus/off-campus, low SES/high SES
* numbers of research staff and students, research fields of study, research spending and levels of research publications
* higher education finance; which institutions are eligible, total amounts spent, the HELP loan scheme, private spending
* micro issues in higher education funding: income per student, the demand-driven system
* the departments and ministers covering higher ed, including the Commonwealth takeover
* pass rates, student engagement and satisfaction
* graduate employment and income
* skills shortages, claimed civic and other benefits of higher education
* public confidence in universities

For people in Sydney, there is an event on Thursday 9 February.

Blog readers survey

Do blog readers have different views about politics to ordinary voters?

Peter John Chen of the Department of Government at the University of Sydney is conducting a survey of blog readers, with some overlapping questions with the Australian Election Study.

The survey is open to readers of the blog who live in Australia. It will be used in a forthcoming (2012) book on the internet and Australia.

The survey will take only 10 minutes, and all responses are anonymous and confidential.

The survey can be found here.

You can have results sent to you if decide to leave an email. Otherwise, I will report them when they are available.

Does anybody understand NSW campaign finance law?

I spent part of the day celebrating the founding of NSW politics reading the transcripts from a NSW Legislative Council inquiry into Barry O’Farrell’s proposed amendments to NSW campaign finance law. These amendments would ban people not on the electoral roll from making political donations and count union political campaign expenditure towards the ALP’s campaign spending cap.

While the broad policy goals can be stated simply enough, the detail and its interaction with existing NSW campaign finance law are extremely complex. My submission took much longer than I expected to write, as I worked through various different scenarios and how the actual or proposed laws would apply. Especially if these amendments pass, it would be almost impossible for political activists or NGOs that campaign on poiltical issues to stay within the law without legal training or an extensive background in campaign finance matters. This is a serious problem all in itself, quite aside from the major conceptual flaws behind the whole NSW campaign finance regime.

I’m certainly not alone in thinking it is too complex. Appearing before the inquiry, Professor Anne Twomey from the University of Sydney, a leading scholar in the consitutional aspects of campaign finance law, said:Read More »

Should HELP be extended to vocational education students?

Yesterday the Prime Minister said the government would extend income contingent loans to students studying for ‘high-level’ vocational skills (diploma-level voc ed courses already have HELP loans in some cases). Various concerns have been expressed in today’s paper.

One of my concerns is that this would be overly costly for taxpayers if the existing HELP loan scheme is used. This is because the repayment system is designed for graduate level income, not the incomes of people with vocational qualifications. It is not entirely clear what Gillard is proposing, but in 2009 the median annual income of someone with a certificate III or IV qualification was $45,600. In that year the threshold for repaying a HELP loan was $43,151.

The median is all workers, so the median for new workers would be lower (though in these lines of work, income tends to plateau early). This suggests that there would be large numbers of slow or non-repayers, with consequent interest and bad debt costs for taxpayers.