This is an important article that should be read and widely discussed.

Joo-Cheong Tha is, however, naive to believe that Senator Andrew Murray's Electoral (Greater Fairness of Electoral Processes) Amendment Bill 2007 (Cth) will 'inject much-needed transparency into funding of political parties...[and] will go some way to restoring the integrity of Australia’s democratic system...'

Andrew Murray is one of small minority of politicians with integrity and with a sense of the ethical principles needed for protecting the public good. In short, his Bill will die for lack of oxygen.

Joo-Cheong Tha is, unfortunately, right to claim that, 'Transparency of [political] funding has considerably worsened after amendments made last year that allow many political donations to be shrouded in secrecy.' These cynical changes were designed in the context of 'a debased political morality' and a conscious 'lax regulation of political funding'. Secrecy suits the major parties and they have no intention of giving Andrew Murray's reforms any attention.

Yes the comments should be taken seriously and rightly we have expectation that our elected representatives will behave honestly.
Unfortunately with a PM who does not believe in involvement of the electorate in other than home issues and limit’s the amount of information stemming from Parliament, preferring talk back radio to the questioning by the media, tightly controlling the public service and finding not knowing or seeing, hearing, a workable ploy, how does one know what happens.
As well as the media seemingly preferring trivia and opinion as news much escapes the public. Competition on a commercial scale is the end point.
Friel and Falk in The Record of the Paper (the N.Y. Times) find deliberate avoidance of issues that perhaps should, in a healthy democracy, be public knowledge. They refer in particular to the way in which this paper, and it is not alone, fails to mention international law in its postings, an absence meaning a lesser challenge to wars by the Government.
No analysis has I think been done here except concerning the reporting of Muslims discussed by Peter Manning in Us and Them 2006, indeed reading Hamilton and Maddox Silencing Dissent, one might doubt funding would be made available for such a research project.
Thus in addition to the role of players and money generally beyond the electorate ‘s ken and unacknowledged contributions from those seeking favour there are indications that the electorate is deprived of the knowledge necessary for a functioning democracy.
There seems to be, but this might be my inability to find the data, no requirement for the media to report accurately facts, all facts, not a selection. Sure they like all of us including politicians are subject to the general law but this is negative the positive of will behave in a given way is lacking. Penalty as in parliament seems at the whim of the powerful, ministerial guidelines and parliamentary elections, as it were.

This is a most important topic, and many of the points Tham make are good. However, I think he pays too much attention to Andrew Murray's bill. There is no chance it could ever pass until the public cries out for change. And the Democrats haven't always been the best when it comes to political donations. Until they shot themselves in the foot during Meg Lees' leadership and companies stopped donating, they certainly have taken some donations that a respectable party would refuse - tens of thousands of dollars from the Australian Casino Association, Distilled Spirits Industry Council of Australia and others.

Sounds good but let's toughen it up with a well resourced anti corruption commission with standing Royal Commission powers as in WA.

Coupled with a possible loss of parliamentary pensions and protections for our MPs and public servants this would be a reasonable package of anti corruption measures.

Indeed an important issue in a well written and thought provoking article.

What is "Democracy"?

Democracy in it's purest form stems from two Greek words "Demos" (people) and "Kratos" (rule)

The problem we in Australia face - and we are far from being alone - is that our system is merely an oligarchy. Nowhere do the people rule and (obnoxiously) nowhere where the people can rule during the tenure of the incumbent party.

Sure - we are fed ad-nauseum the "D" word, but as Hitler said “A lie, told often enough and loud enough, will become the truth.” Constantly the mantra "Democracy" is thrown up to placate the masses. Other mantras that exploited Hitler's were: "Weapons of Mass Destruction" and "Children Overboard" and "Safer Society" by "Getting guns off the streets". None could and none did bear fruit - which of course means we are fed a continuous stream of lies.

In fact, our system is a Parliamentary Democracy as distinct from a "Democracy" We are forced to elect (for fear of being fined) people who in the main the majority of people already mistrust. These people have no loyalty to the people who were forced to elect them (broad brush approach I know). Their loyalty is to the party dogma.

The end effect is that for some years, we suffer an adverserial system where management issues are manipulated by political party priorities so that never ending crises are created, then 'they' set about arguing and bitching to demolish what they create.

Within that system, misbehaviour and incomptence is common, and is all too often rewarded - not penalised as would we mere mortals.

We then elect them again so we can enjoy being screwed and see the nation mismanaged by short term political agendas.

So then - anybody can bitch, but who can offer a solution. I can!

Just discovered a 350 word limit - more at another time.
There IS a solution.
PC

Politicians of democracies the world over are paid too low for the amount of work put in. They should follow in Singapore's foot-steps where ministers are better paid compared to their counterparts.

Estimated yearly salaries (SGD$1.2 =AUS$1)
Prime Minister - between $4 to $6 million (including bonuses)
President (performing ceremonial role) - $3million (including bonuses)
Ministers - $1million to $3 million (including bonuses)
Junior Ministers $1million to $2 million (including bonuses)

In 2005 the top 4 CEOs were paid in US$: Barry Diller $295M; Richard D. Fairbank $249M; Eugene M. Isenberg $203M;Terry S. Semel $183M;

Gone are the days where you'd expect talented people to work for pittance. Appealing to altruism, the self-sacrificial motive will not work in a globalised world. If you want to draw talented people into politics there is a need to pay them sufficiently so as to avoid petty corruption. What the amount is, is best left to market forces.

The top three democracies of the world, USA, UK and Australia only had mediocre men to lead them. The motive of the three lowly paid leaders Bush, Blair and Howard for going to war in IRAQ is questionable. It was illegal and unprovoked. No weapons of mass destruction was found and the world is much more dangerous place.