The Forum > Article Comments > Can secret political donations be justified? > Comments
Can secret political donations be justified? : Comments
By Max Atkinson, published 26/8/2016There is also a need to explain just how bad the present system is, with no limits on spending by multi-millionaires like Clive Palmer, and no constraints on donations from any source.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
-
- All
Posted by Alan B., Friday, 26 August 2016 11:44:29 AM
| |
Yeah, your right Max.
Talk about Kevin Rudd sacking a Labor (that is ALP) Minister who (Rudd believed) got too close to China. On account of undeclared trips to China paid for by Chinese...? see http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8745 If anything Labor's pretensions to comradely Internationalism gets Labor Ministers into trouble http://www.smh.com.au/national/defence-leaks-dirt-file-on-own-minister-20090325-9ahq.html?page=-1 . Posted by plantagenet, Friday, 26 August 2016 12:21:23 PM
| |
plantagenet you must be a liberal party staffer, its the only sensible way to attribute your bias.
The funding declarations show that both major parties are getting funding from overseas. Also both major parties have had to sack or demote members for relationships with overseas interests. There should not be a limit to donations however as others have said all should be public and timely. Currently they have a long lag time. I like AlanB's idea of time on the ABC, i would extend it to all government advertising, would save around $1billion dollar per term. Posted by Cobber the hound, Friday, 26 August 2016 1:06:51 PM
| |
Giday Cobba
If only I was a "liberal party staffer". Then I'd be getting a huge payrise to the Canberra average wage of $86,791* :) No, I am but a simple (albeit honest) arms business investigator, sometimes of use to the Aus and US govs. * http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/act-offers-the-top-average-advertised-salaries-on-seek-20160519-goytb4.html Posted by plantagenet, Friday, 26 August 2016 3:32:23 PM
| |
the abc/sbs is given over a billion dollars a year to promote progressive dogma. That is a far more serious issue than people giving away their hard earned cash.
Posted by runner, Friday, 26 August 2016 4:36:20 PM
| |
The last election was the most pathetic and probably the most expensive Australia has ever seen.
It could also be said politicians in Australia are the most pathetic and probably the most expensive Australia has ever seen. Elections (and politicians) are now based on saturation advertising, sloganism, appeals to emotion (but not thinking), sloganism, name calling, sloganism, telling half-truths, sloganism, misinformation and hiding information, sloganism, catch phrases, sloganism and finally ....sloganism. None of this is worth anything, and political parties are not worth anything, and no donations to any political party should occur. Posted by interactive, Friday, 26 August 2016 6:34:41 PM
|
Yes, I think almost every thinking Aussie has had an absolute bellyful of electioneering advertising, confected outrage and simple siemon slognizing?
But instead could be accorded free time on our Aunty to make their case/debate the issue, where speaking for the other side needs to be outlawed! Public involvement could include an OLO type facility that could enable thinking electors to can the bell/ask pertinent questions of participants, modeled on a moderated, civil, Q+A format/town hall style debate?
The only difference I'd insist on would be soundproof chambers for the participating pollies and genuine automatic electrically operated time limits on evocation and answers! I would want to listen to a reasoned informed debate, not bombastic bellicose bullying and endless interruption; and or, point making repetition! And to conclude, no sir, secret political donations can never ever be justified!
Alan B.