Master, you wrote:

“Some companies believe it's their role to support the democratic process via donations to the political parties, and it's rarely done for any other reason. The continuation of democracy and freedom is in the companies' interests.”

What an enormous steaming pile of horse poo!! !!

“It’s the EASIEST THING IN THE WORLD to be an armchair critic and ASSUME that all political donations are given for ONLY corrupt reasons.”

It’s not a matter of just assuming this, it’s a matter of looking at the policies that successive governments have had, at all levels of government, which so strongly fly in the face of sustainability and other aspects of environmentalism, and which just happen to be right in line with what big business wants, and over which those successive governments have been extremely tight-lipped when it comes to explaining their actions.

“ANYONE can ‘lobby’ as can any group. That's part of the democratic process. It's integral to FREEDOM”

Yes! At least we agree on something!

The big problem with lobbying is that it's not always "equal". But that's the nature of the system we have. At least any citizen has the right to try. If you're poor, or don't have the "connections", your task will be immensely harder. But the chance to lobby political parties is a very basic aspect of our free society. The rich and the poor, the organised and disorganised, the political and non-political and the powerful and powerless "ALL" justly have the right to lobby political parties.

Al Capone used to say:

"You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone."

Like wise You can get much farther with a lobby and a donation than you can with a lobby alone.

Where is the line in the sand where political support becomes corruption.

We have seen too many instances where the line has been crossed.

Ludwig, I strongly agree, and with Leigh, which has to be a first.
We must adopt the Canadian system, if only for the "Peter Principle".
Just because I person is good at one job, doesn't necessarily mean he/she will be good at the next job up the ladder.
The American system seems to reward those who are best at raising campaign funds, rather than those who would make good Presidents.
Obama seems like a man who would or could make a good President, but is it only me who feels he doesn't seem to be able to do all the things he would like to do?
As for Tax payers having to pay for campaigns they disagree with... Huh?
Almost half the voters after every election have to put up with a government they didn't vote for.
I'm reminded of Voltaire:
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
I don't know if I would fight to the death for the right of (say) Pauline Hanson to speak, but I don't think a tiny tax burden is unreasonable.

In some countries it is called a bribe but in Australia it is called a political donation. Maybe if we used the bribary word more people would be in favour of a change.

Dou you remember UK labours who sold alla una alla tre the titles?
More money you pay to governing party higher title you take! knight, sir or lord! If you was a drug or weapon dealer or women traficer and pay more money you could become the lord of the lords!
Do you remember Benito Kraxy? the Italian Socialist leader who run to Lybia to avoid the prison in Italy for corruption? Mama mia he was big mafia! Not simply corrupted!
Do you know how many millions of Euro took the cinservative and socialist party in Greece from the Multinational Siemens? AYTOI KAI AN HTAN KLEFTES! They was not simple corrupted!
I was a member from the socialist youth committee in Cyprus and one Sunday asked us to put posters for the GREEN REVOLUTION OF...KANTAFI! (LYBIA LEADER) The worst of all after little arrived a man from the Lybian Embasy to inspect our work! This was not simple corruption , this was a shamefull corruption!
One time I suggested to general secretariat (top exucative body) of the Union to take a state organization to the court because it used tricks to avoid to pay labours rights. They regected and I ignored their deceision and I decided ,( as disctrict secretary of the union)to take this organizasion to court, I won very easy! Later I learned that this organization did not pay the labours but was paying the Unions, and supported employers!
Today the political parties have huge expences, rents, staff, ads, leaflets etc and even more expences for the elections campaigns, who pay all this money? Corporations of cause! For nothing? WHAT? DO NOT BE SILY!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaid