“Political donations are a blight on any democracy. As the Human Rights Law Centre has pointed out, ‘the free flow of money into Australia’s political system threatens the integrity of our democracy’,” writes politcal columnist MICHAEL MOORE. 

The donation of an aeroplane by Gina Rinehart to Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party raises the hoary question of the role of political donations. Where do “donations” end and where does corruption start?

The Cirrus G7 aircraft costs about $2.1 million, and this one was donated by a company owned by Gina Rinehart, who is Australia’s richest person and a loyal supporter of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party.

It is not as though Ms Hanson does not understand the implications. “Yes, it’s going to annoy the Guardian” was one of her comments on the announcement of the donation.

Let’s hope that the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) investigates this issue. Political donations are a blight on any democracy. As the Human Rights Law Centre has pointed out, “the free flow of money into Australia’s political system threatens the integrity of our democracy”. 

There are some jurisdictions working to improve transparency and accountability, including SA and the ACT.

Gift “caps” under federal legislation come into effect in January 2027. Depending on the circumstances, donations will be limited to a cumulative $50,000 to $1.6million. It is a start, but federally there is a long way to go.

In November 2020 I outlined how the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2020 came under fire from a range of crossbench members. 

It allowed developers in Queensland, NSW and the ACT, for example, to ignore anti-corruption laws in those jurisdictions and make undisclosed donations of up to $14,300. These donations had to be made “for federal purposes”. 

Independent MP Andrew Wilkie at the time levelled the accusation of “state sanctioned money laundering” and identified how political donations undermine our democracy. 

The members of the two big parties, he argued, were so wedded to their donations from big corporations that they were prepared to make it much easier for donations to go undeclared.

The donation of the aeroplane by Gina Rinehart might well be declared. It would be hard to hide. However, the happy face of Senator Hanson, as she sat in the pilot’s seat, had me wondering about the system of declarations of conflict of interest. Of course, the plane went to the party – not to her personally.

Developer donations by federal law were challenged and over-ridden in the past by the High Court. Luke Beck, of Monash University, explained in The Conversation: “The High Court also struck down a 2018 federal law that said property developers could ignore state laws banning them from making general donations to political parties (yes – federal parliament really did pass a law overriding state anti-corruption powers!).”

In late 2022 things changed with the NACC legislation passing through the Federal parliament. The NACC is charged with investigating matters involving serious or systemic corrupt conduct.

Under the NACC Act, the NACC can investigate public officials if they:

• adversely affect their own, or another public official’s honesty or impartiality in the way they carry out their official duties
• breach public trust
• abuse their office as a public official
• misuse information they have gained in their capacity as a public official.
• MPs and senators are public officials. Some do not seem to understand these concepts.

A relatively new defector from the Nationals to One Nation, Barnaby Joyce MP, defended Senator Hanson’s decision to accept the private plane arguing: “I’m always flummoxed how travelling on the taxpayer’s dime is morally correct, but on a supporter’s dime covers for a maligned purpose.” 

It is simple, Barnaby. One system buys influence and favours – the other does not.

I was impressed with the reaction of Treasurer Jim Chalmers who said: “Pauline Hanson is a wholly owned subsidiary of Gina Rinehart. 

“Whether it is in industrial relations, whether it is in cost-of-living relief… what we have seen again and again from One Nation is they typically vote the way Gina Rinehart wants them to, rather than how the workers and battlers need them to.” 

This answers Barnaby Joyce. However, the Labor Party could also use a mirror to consider the influence on their own party when they receive large donations from such industries as alcohol and gambling.

The real sting in the tail is that businesses associated with Gina Rinehart have tipped around $4 million into One Nation’s bucket (including the plane) just before donation caps come into effect at the start of 2027.

Michael Moore is a former member of the ACT Legislative Assembly and an independent minister for health. He has been a political columnist with “CityNews” since 2006.