Aren't donations tantamount to bribery?

Then how much must Labor owe to the Trade Unions?

(Donations to the Liberal Party are a drop in the ocean compared with what Labor receives).

I do agree that the pulp mill sucks, however.

And so disappointed in Peter Garrett. He was one of my heroes, but these days he is acting more like a puppet.

Good on you for standing up for what's right and fighting for something you believe in.

"Let the Franklin flow" ... one of the most exhilarating political moments ever. Perhaps we need a new song. Or maybe Kevin could try thinking up a policy of his own for a change.

I agree all the way with Mike Bolan.

“While the law may say that a cash donation does not represent influence, all common sense and past experience tells us otherwise.”

Of course! Why else would any business donate money to a political party? It is so obviously antidemocratic. So how on earth can the Australian people cop it? Why hasn’t there been an uprising against such brazen bias?

Bolan touches on the big effects of political donations;

“Until and unless we correct this bias, we are likely to be facing a very uncertain future because most decision making will be about priorities that have been effectively purchased through campaign donations.”

“With this in mind, we might ask how can we expect rational climate change responses when the fossil fuel industry is controlling party coffers…”

“The Australian federalist system under John Howard appears to be irrevocably broken. Governments can stay within the letter of the law while violating the basic principles of democratic representation.”

One of the fundamental purposes of government has been rotted out, or perhaps has never existed in Australia: the role of independent decision-maker, weighing up the desires of powerful vested-interest forces against the effects on the community, environment and future wellbeing.

We now have grave problems with securing a half-decent future. I believe Kevin Rudd is sincere when he talks about the need to effectively address climate change and other huge environmental issues and to uphold intergenerational equity. I think he would love to be able to direct this country onto a genuine sustainability platform. But how can he with these biases entrenched?

How can he undo the regime of donations, and undertake some other essential reforms without alienating powerful forces within the business community, and in his own party, which could well bring him unstuck and see a pro-expansionist highly antisustainability PM installed next time round?

I’d suggest that people like Mike Bolan, a professional change facilitator, has a hugely important job, (perhaps as important as that of the PM?) in striving for these reforms.

Funny how Bob Hawke was able to intervene to save the Franklin River wilderness.

Amazing how those dam developers had no funds available for political donations ... er, right. Or maybe they just had too many scruples. *tee hee*

Labor doesn't need money from this business transaction. They are already nicely cashed up with union dollars.

Kevin Rudd is set to be the next Prime Minister of this country, and what policy does he opt for? "Me too!" he squeaks. "Yes, Prime Minister".

At least Bob Hawke had the courage of his convictions.

If Rudd wanted to stop the pulp mill, he should try being a man not a mouse. The word is "No". N-O. Most two-year-olds can manage to say it.

And if that is the best outcome that Peter Garrett could manage to broker in his own shadow portfolio, then as a politician he makes a good rock star.

I consider donations bribery. The original intention behind the idea may be innocent enough but the reality is that something is expected in return for that money, otherwise it is illogical action (especially from a person who has a profit-motive, or special interest). A political donation is a eupehmism, like insurance or protection money paid to the mafia was in reality, extortion.

of course donations are bribery. but the system isn't broken. it works just like it was meant to do.

when ozzies grasp what democracy means they may be able to get it. right now they are enslaved by newspeak and doublethink, and consequently are bemused when apparently 'undemocratic' activities occur.

folks, parliament was devised by norman warlords to divvy up the loot.
that's what it still does, pretty much. it has nothing to do with democracy.

educate yourselves, or remain the slaves of ignorance.