Home > 'None of the Above' Campaign, Current Affairs, Politics - Domestic, The EYE-BALL Opinion, The EYE-BALL PoliticalZone > EYE-BALL Opinion’s “None of the Above” campaign – New Cash Grab to cover Political Party Administration Costs –

EYE-BALL Opinion’s “None of the Above” campaign – New Cash Grab to cover Political Party Administration Costs –


Latest EYE-BALL ‘None of the Above’ Posts:

– 5th Nov – Referendum Discussion No 1 – Compulsory Voting – “None of the Above” Campaign –

– 3rd Nov 2012 – ALP voters beware – The Labour Party is not what it seems –

– 2nd Aug 2012 – New Q’LD LNP amends Party Funding arrangements ….

– 13th July 2012 – The Consequence of Poor Political Leadership

– 12th July 2012 – This Labour Party is Diseased

– 10th Jan 2011 – Australia Votes – “None of the Above” Campaign

Link to 2011 JSCEM Submission

(PDF file format)

– new cash grab to cover Political Party Administration Costs –
– part of Eye-Ball’s – “None of the Above Campaign” –
| Author: EYE-BALL Opinion | 28th May 2013 |
The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2Link to the Eye-Ball – ‘None of the Above’ campaign Front Page …

New Cash Grab:

Abreaking news story that will threaten all MP’s creditability has shocked all and sundry. The ALP, the Liberals, and the Nationals are all in bed together to secretly pass new legislation that will give then an annual “Administration” vote levy of $1 per vote won at the previous election for the period until the next election.

This story broke late last night and the media are all over the story this morning. The consensus is that the legislation will pass because all major Political Party’s will benefit.

In cash terms the cost to taxpayers will be almost $60 million over the next three years between elections – i.e. $20 million per year spread across the major parties. The Greens have indicated that will not support the legislation.

The ‘Australian’ story is pasted below:

Parties join forces to secure $20m campaigning bonus

| Author: Tom Dusevic, National chief reporter | Date: May 28th, 2013 | Link to On-Line Story. |

SWEEPING changes to electoral law being pursued by the Gillard government could deliver a windfall $20 million to the two major political parties to cover their campaigning costs for the upcoming election.

Despite budget deficits of almost $50 billion forecast for this and the next two years, Labor will introduce legislation in this sitting period to facilitate so-called “administrative funding” of $1 per primary vote gained in the House of Representatives and Senate at the September 14 election, and other measures, at a cost over the forward estimates of $58.1m.

As well, the federal government plans to tighten disclosure rules, targeting political donations of $5000 or more, down from the current threshold of $12,100, yet well short of its long-held aspiration of $1000.

To gain the support of the Coalition parties for the suite of proposed measures, which have been negotiated in secret over several months between the major parties, the cash-strapped ALP has broken a core promise contained in its September 2010 agreement with the Australian Greens.

With 14.4 million Australians on the electoral roll, the total cost to taxpayers of public funding of parties for this year’s poll could be as high as $100m, based on the proposed change plus the current election funding rate of $2.473 per vote (which will be adjusted for inflation from July 1).

But if recent poor rates of voter turnout and the high incidence of informal voting continue, the cost would be about 10 per cent less.

The bold move by Special Minister of State Mark Dreyfus has attracted the private ire of Labor elder John Faulkner, whose long-standing campaign to lower the disclosure threshold for political donations to $1000 has failed.

The Coalition parties have been firmly opposed to tightening of the disclosure rules, claiming that a clampdown would discourage donations from supporters, particularly small business operators. The $5000 threshold is seen as a compromise to lock in the support of conservatives.

Greens leader Christine Milne declared last night that her party would strongly oppose the changes.

“The Greens will oppose any legislation that doesn’t clamp down on corporate donations and runaway electoral spending to stop what is now an arms race,” Senator Milne said.

“We have long campaigned for donation reform. The whole point of a public funding model is to stamp out the growing influence of corporate donations on public policy.

“Any increase in public funding without caps or curbs on corporate donations will only accelerate the arms race.”

According to a proposal to be presented by Mr Dreyfus to Labor’s federal parliamentary caucus today, parties with five or more MPs will receive $300,000 a year to facilitate compliance audits. As well, the Australian Electoral Commission’s budget will be raised to reflect the increased administrative burden.

At the 2010 election, public funding provided more than $53m, with $24m to the Coalition, $21m to the ALP and $7m to the Greens.

In the agreement struck by the Greens with Labor in the wake of the stalemate August 2010 election, the second stated goal was: “Seek immediate reform of funding of political parties and election campaigns by legislating to lower the donation disclosure threshold from an indexed $11,500 to $1000; to prevent donation splitting between different branches of political parties; to ban foreign donations; to ban anonymous donations over $50; to increase timeliness and frequency of donation disclosure; to tie public funding to genuine campaign expenditure and to create a ‘truth in advertising’ offence in the Commonwealth Electoral Act.”

In December 2011, the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters recommended a $1000 donations threshold and called for extra administrative funding of parties in light of the expected increased burden for a tougher disclosure regime.

In a hard-edged speech last December, Senator Faulkner, a former special minister of state, said Labor’s attempts to change the electoral laws in light of the agreement with the Greens and the findings of the committee were “strong and appropriate”.

This story was reported on by Laurie Oakes on the ‘Today’ show this morning as having been fully funded in the 2012-13 budget – hidden away under the ‘contingency reserve fund’.

This ‘cash grab’ is taxpayer’s money being used to fund Political Party administration costs.

Queensland did something similar after Newman came to power in early 2012.

This is ‘referendum’ stuff – the Government should not be allowed to vote themselves additional electoral funding out of taxpayer funds for purposes like – Administration Costs. Political Parties are a business with significant cash turnover.

The existing funding the AEC already pays them runs to almost $50 million every time there is a Federal election – less for States.

WIth the increased ‘informal’ vote – the AEC refunds impact on the payments made. This new ‘cash grab’ is the Governments response to keep up its funding and is criminal in its intent.

Nothing good will come from this and for Gillard to even be fostering the legislation with her under ‘police investigation’ for ‘fraud’ like charges, this reeks worse than the Obeid scandal.

Worse because all the major parties are supporting the legislation. This points to the moral bankruptcy in our leadership. If politicians want election war chests – do what everybody else has to do – bake laminations, or walk the streets selling raffle tickets. Being an MP does not mean being unhuman – it means you care about your community more and want to represent them.

How is this ‘cash grab’ about representing the people when it is about Political Parties wanting their Administration costs funded. Have the MP’s who belong to the party pay for the Administration costs via higher membership – they only just received a 40% pay increase …

There is only one way to combat this rabid money grab – vote ‘informal’ and in that way no political party receives the existing electoral funding of $2.5 per vote – nor this new $1 per vote.

This can be your way of protesting against the legislation and the compulsory voting and/or ‘None of the Above’ option on the ballot paper this campaign is targeting.

What a gig – join a political party and get paid by taxpayers – no rules – no limits – just spend the money to get re-elected.

This is worse than ‘the mafia’ who strip monies basis protection rackets.

This new ‘cash grab’ by the Government with support from the Liberals and the Nationals indicates Australians are deserting their Political Party membership, refusing to donate, and are generally pissed at the corruption and sycophant nepotism exposed by the Obeid, MacDonald, Torbay, Slipper, Thompson, and other political frauds against the public purse.

There is no surprises is that given these ongoing corruption scandals – to even consider raiding the public purse for a morally challenging ‘cash grab’ to fund the election scheduled for later this year, truly proves how integrity has deserted our Leaders.

If you disagree with this legislation you can do something about it – use the links below to find you Federal Member and send then a message voicing you opinion about the proposed legislation. Remember that they are sensitive to abuse and if you write – make sure you lodge your objections politely … else they will ‘spam’ you and any future messages will never get read … trust me I know … I have 20 odd e-mail addresses to get around their spam lists.

I rang my MP’s office this morning – seat of HINKLER – and was asked to lodge my protest at the legislation in writing.

I will do as I always do – send them a link to the post where my opinion is offered, and to as many other MP’s as I have in my database – that’s everybody … a single voice cannot achieve much – but a collective voice can.

Don’t be shy – scream your angst at someone who needs your vote …

Each MP has vetting staff who screen everything – most likely the MP will never read what you write – just be given an overview of the message the correspondence is delivering … and they call this modern politics.

Don’t forget to –

– Register your Protest –

Some history from a previous post on this subject:

In Australia compulsory voting has been the Law since 1924. A Wikipedia page titled – Electoral system of Australialinked here – provides interesting history in how and why compulsory voting was introduced during 1924. Part of the page is copied below:

… The Australian electoral system has evolved over the last 150 years of democratic government, with the Australian Parliament established by 1901. The present day federal parliament has a number of distinctive features including compulsory voting, with full-preference instant-runoff voting in single-member seats to elect the lower house, the Australian House of Representatives, and the use of group ticket single transferable proportional voting to elect the upper house, the Australian Senate.

Compulsory voting

Australia enforces compulsory voting. Compulsory voting at referendums was considered when a referendum was proposed in 1915, but, as the referendum was never held, the idea was put on hold. The immediate impetus for compulsory voting at federal level was the low voter turnout (59.38 percent) at the 1922 federal election. However, it was not on the platform of either the Stanley Bruce-led Nationalist/Country party coalition government or the Matthew Charlton-led Labor opposition to introduce this requirement; rather, the initiative was taken by a backbench Tasmanian senator from the Nationalists, Herbert Payne, who introduced a Private Senator’s Bill, the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1924, on 16 July 1924. Senator Payne’s bill was passed with little debate (the House of Representatives agreed to it in less than an hour), and in neither house was a division required, hence no votes were recorded against the bill. It received Royal Assent on 31 July 1924. The 1925 federal election was the first to be held under compulsory voting; the turnout figure climbed to 91.4 per cent, an increase of 32 percentage points on the previous election.

Voting is compulsory both at federal elections and at elections for the state and territory legislatures. In the states of South Australia, Tasmania and Western Australia voting at local elections is not compulsory. About 5% of enrolled voters fail to vote at most elections. People in this situation are asked to explain their failure to vote. If no satisfactory reason is provided (for example, illness or religious prohibition), a relatively small fine is imposed ($20), and failure to pay the fine may result in a court hearing.

… read more – link to Wikipedia source …

Electoral Vote Refunds

What is not mentioned above is the Electoral Vote Refund system Australia has and how it has been a part of Australian history since the early 1920’s. read more here – Australian Electoral Commission [AEC] –

Entitlement to election funding

A candidate or Senate group is eligible for election funding if they obtain at least 4% of the first preference vote in the division or the state or territory they contested. The amount to be paid is calculated by multiplying the number of votes obtained by the current election funding rate. The funding rate for the 2010 federal election was 231.191 cents per House of Representatives and Senate vote. This rate is indexed every six months to increases in the Consumer Price Index.

Amount paid

The amount of election funding payable is calculated by multiplying the number of first preference votes received by the rate of payment applicable at the time. The rate is indexed every six months in line with increases in the Consumer Price Index.

In Mar 2012 there was a report tabled titled – Current Commonwealth political financing arrangementslinked here – and very good reading.

The report gives examples of situations where candidates/Political Parties could profit from the public purse vote refund system, when the refund due is greater then the amount spent on election campaigns.

The last two federal elections, 2007 and 2010, cost taxpayers $54.2 and $49 million a piece in electoral vote refunds. The two major parties each received –

  • ALP 2007 – $20.0 million
  • ALP 2010 – $22.0 million
  • Coalition 2007 – $23.2 million
  • Coalition 2010 – $21.3 million.

Most important is the rise in the informal vote in the 2010 election – up to near 12% when the ‘no-shows’ are added to the registered informal vote. This number registered third on the first preference list – beating the Greens.

In a submission to the – Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters [JSCEM] by this author after the 2010 Federal election – JSCEM submission linked here – a number of issues were raised with the committee including the electoral vote refund system, and why ‘compulsory voting’ feeds to the higher refunds paid for by taxpayers. If compulsory voting was not the law – the value of refunds to political candidates and political parties would diminish. The electoral vote refund would only apply to those who wanted to vote formally.

In a direct sense as it stands now – those who vote without real interest in who they vote for – ‘gift’s to the candidate/political party monies they would never receive if compulsory voting was abolished. They are linked in an adverse way that impacts on taxpayers.

– Political Parties forcing electioneering costs onto taxpayers:

Political Parties are responsible for all electioneering costs after the Parties have their official launch of their election campaigns.

In recent elections, this Campaign Launch has been delayed and this has pushed the ‘gray’ area of electioneering costs onto the taxpayer via Ministerial expenditures before the Campaign Launch.

A full listing of Federal Election costs since 1901 is provided by the AEC and can be accessed using – this link.

An example of a by-election cost contained in the table provided via the link provided shows that when Peter Costello resigned from the Opposition in 2008 – the cost for the by-election was a $710k expense dumped on the taxpayer.

History now reminds us that if Mr Costello had sat on the Opposition benches, became Opposition Leader, and given the turmoil leading into the 2010 election, the Coalition would most likely have won in a landslide and he would have been PM.

The cost of that by-election should be for the sitting member to cover unless mitigating circumstances prevails – i.e. medical, personal crisis etc. Just not wanting to be there anymore because you lost Government is not a reason. The same applies to state elections and the recent Anna Bligh dummy-spit.

The biggest embarrassment is that every other democracy in the G-20 who once had compulsory voting have now rescinded the Law and now have a voluntary voting system.

Failing a referendum on the ‘compulsory voting’ issue – vote ‘None of the Above’ at the next election – [i.e. draw a new box on the ballot, call it ‘None of the Above’ and place your mark in that box.] – unless of course you know your candidate and want to pledge your vote … do not vote the top of the ticket or the leader because you think their cute, or have your interest’s at heart … all recent evidence to the contrary.

Make a statement at the next election – it will only take a single election protest to make politicians and political parties change and alter the contempt they have for the electorate.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please click your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story.Thankyou.

Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s

The EYE-BALL Opinion …

  1. May 28, 2013 at 11:13 am

    This message was sent to my local member, and a number of other MP’s from all political parties a few moments ago –

    Dear Hon Member Mr Paul Neville, [Member for Hinkler]

    I refer to my conversation with your Electoral office staffer this morning.

    This is a formal registration of my objection to the proposed legislation to increase the AEC electoral reimbursement to major political parties.

    My shock at the proposed legislation to fund ‘administration cost’ of major political parties can’t be overstated.

    For any MP who would support this morally challenging ‘cash grab’ – runs the risk of a higher ‘informal’ vote registration as voters wise to the fact that to vote for any major party is to gift political parties the new proposed levy –

    What are MP’s thinking … Political Party administration should not be funded out of the taxpayer purse … and to even think that there is entitlement will force voters to respond in kind.

    To read more please read the post using the link provided below.


    The message was also sent to these e-mail addresses as apart of the same message – with more to follow …

    Hon Malcolm Bligh Turnbull Mr (Malcolm.Turnbull.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Gregory Andrew Hunt Mr (Greg.Hunt.MP@aph.gov.au); ‘greg.combet@innovation.gov.au’;
    Hon Peter Robert Garrett Mr (Peter.Garrett.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Philip Maxwell Ruddock Mr (philip.ruddock.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Peter Craig Dutton Mr (Peter.Dutton.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Antony Harold Curties Windsor Mr (Tony.Windsor.MP@aph.gov.au);
    The Hon Dr Craig Anthony Emerson Dr (Craig.Emerson.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Tanya Joan Plibersek Ms (Tanya.Plibersek.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Anthony Stephen Burke Mr (Tony.Burke.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Anthony John Abbott Mr (Tony.Abbott.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Julie Isabel Bishop Ms (Julie.Bishop.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Joel Andrew Fitzgibbon Mr (J.Fitzgibbon.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Wayne Maxwell Swan Mr (Wayne.Swan.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Warren Edward Snowdon Mr (Warren.Snowdon.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Mr Wyatt Roy Mr (Wyatt.Roy.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Warren Errol Truss Mr (W.Truss.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Chris Eyles Bowen Mr (Chris.Bowen.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Kevin Michael Rudd Mr (Kevin.Rudd.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Katherine Margaret Ellis Ms (Kate.Ellis.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Kevin James Andrews Mr (Kevin.Andrews.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Andrew Damien Wilkie Mr (Andrew.Wilkie.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Mr Adam Paul Bandt Mr (Adam.Bandt.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Anthony Norman Albanese Mr (A.Albanese.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Ms Anna Elizabeth Burke Ms (Anna.Burke.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Andrew John Robb Mr (Andrew.Robb.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon William Richard Shorten Mr (Bill.Shorten.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Brendan Patrick John O’Connor Mr (Brendan.O’Connor.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Robert Carl Katter Mr (Bob.Katter.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Dick Godfrey Harry Adams Mr (Dick.Adams.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Gary Gray Mr (Gary.Gray.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Christopher Maurice Pyne Mr (C.Pyne.MP@aph.gov.au);
    Hon Stephen Francis Smith Mr (Stephen.Smith.MP@aph.gov.au)

  2. Herman O Hermitage
    May 28, 2013 at 5:00 pm

    Less than 24 hours ago i posted am extremely impassioned rhetoric “get your shit together”. Call it emotional!. Call it whatever. Who cares.

    This outrage, this is just beyond reason.

    If the opposition has given bipartisan support to this legislation then once more you might just have lost the un- lose-able election. For months the only question remains, what could lose this election?

    We have the most stupid government in memory.

    We have a rather circumspect opposition.. What is the alternative? We are sick to death of self interest. Be it John Howard, Peter Costello, Kevin Rudd, or Julia Gillard. About the only one who scores above zero is Costello, and how much of that belongs to his brother Tim?

    Rob Katter take a long hard look at yourself!. You are a joke to your mates, your brothers, your mother, your family, your constituency. What are you talking about? Your credibility is zip. Only 12 days ago Tony Abbott looked Australia in the eye and said we will work for you. Take a long hard look at yourself! You too are nothing but a joke!

    This is not about a power grab, this is about who deserves to lead. Who are real leaders!

    Contrary to the article above, make your vote count.

    Vote anyone but mainstream.

    Vote for anyone who wants to effect change.

    If you get it wrong it is OK. I am definitely not OK, I don’t believe you are ok, but all of it is OK!

    It is $1 denied to the arseholes! Deny these creeps what they consider normal, two party politics. Vote for Pauline Hanson, vote Julian Assange, any other joker (look at Beppi Grollo).
    It is better than right wing extremism

    Anyone who votes either coalition or ALP is voting for a continuation of more of the same. Apathy and ignorance. It is the only chance you get in a 3 year cycle to effect change

  3. May 28, 2013 at 7:30 pm

    Your angst is heard and agreed with – it’s not a $1, its a $1 extra on top of the $2.47 the AEC already pays. A nimber that will increase from the 20th June under a CPI indexing arrangement.

    That $1 represents a 41% increase in Electoral funding – not one media has painted the $1 as 41% incrrease … why?

    Your suggestion to vote for anybody ”but” prompts comment.

    If that were to happen and another minority Government happes is that a good thing – the integrity of Parliament will be furtehr challenged.

    The $2.47 up for grabs provided 4% of the vote is received is the voters gift – if you don’t want to gift any politician, particular one you don’t know but pick because they are not ALP or Coalition – is a donkey vote with lottery outcomes …

    I just don’t think any politician deserves your vote unless they earn it, unless you agree with their ideas and vision, unless syou know they’ll put constituency before the Party, unless you’re prepared to support the candidate n any local debate … if you don’t have that comittiment why cast a vote for someone less than you approve of …

    Settling for 2nd best hardly ever makes you happy..

    Sorry Herman – I’ll agree to disagree on this one …

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: