Dear Ludwig,

I am a citizen of both Australia and the United States. In the United States party discipline is not as rigid as it is in Australia so the legislator is freer to depart from the party line. Due to this US political contributions are more liable to be directed to the individual politicians than the party. In Australia contribution are more likely to be directed to the party.

In Australia the corruption is wholesale. In the US the corruption is retail.

Interesting David. So does this mean that the Yanks have a much more tolerant view of donations or favours given to individual pollies than Ozzies do? Is it actually acceptable over there or is it all completely underhanded?

Do you think that as the result of this diference in the donations regime that the US government is significantly less biased towards big business and hence more able to make sensible sustainability-oriented decisions? Or are they still just as tied to their big biz buddies as we are?

Ludwig
The political parties lost their contact with their society, the lost citizens lost their influence and contact with the political parties, the distance between citizens and political parties is growing rapidly.
For mass majority politician means a corrupted, an hypocrity, a dishonest person.
Politicians are not any more the leaders for changes, for improvments, for justice and democracy. Most politicians are position hunters, are interested only for their own goals and interests, the people arount them are worst, the coruption in political parties is THE RULE, not the exeption.
The main two political parties in each country are fully corupted, Corporation play more important role in political parties than thousands of members, in politics win the party, the politician with the most money!
Pay money to find citizens sensitivities, what they want, pay money to find the best way to promote your policies according to people's sensitivities, pay money for the offices, for the right employees,pay money, milions for the ads, for the mass media. YOU ARE THE WINER! The real fighters desappeared! Small parties, poor politicians try to fight the tanks with arrows! No chance to win, they will remain weak for ever or they will start to hand the easy money, the dirty money.
There is a very small probability the honest, fair, sensitive citizens to return to political parties ONLY IF THEY KNOW THAT THEY HAVE A VOICE IN THE PARTIES, ONLY IF THEY KNOW THAT THAY CAN THROW THE POLITICIAN LEADERS, AT ANY TIME, TO THE RUBISH BIN!
At the moment the political system in west countries is corupted and our democracy the best way to violate democratic principles and democratic values.
THE POLITICAL DONATION IS THE DRIVING FORCE FOR THE CORUPTION OF OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM, THE DRIVING FORCE FOR AN ENDLESS VIOLATION OF OUR DEMOCRATIC VALUES, THE DRIVING FORCE FOR THE CREATION OF A CORRUPTED, INHUMAN SOCIETY.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

I say let's, as a society, expose corrupt, lazy or wasteful practices wherever we see them.

Antonios,

For every corrupt individual out there, there's another that can't stand the practice and yet another that's prepared to shine the spotlight on it. Thank goodness for the investigative media in all its forms.

Headline from yesterday’s Courier Mail:

‘ALP caught out – Labor party failed to declare $225 000 donation on time.’

The Labor party fast-tracked regulations about the public declaration of donations before the last election, specifically in response to the intimate relationship between billionaire Clive Parker and the National party.

So, will Labor have to repay the money? Er…no. Will they have to pay a fine? Not likely. Will they suffer any significant loss of face? Um no, coz those who care about such things already looked upon them very poorly, and the vast majority of people couldn’t care less.

What a total balls-up the whole donations business is!

Ludwig asked: Interesting David. So does this mean that the Yanks have a much more tolerant view of donations or favours given to individual pollies than Ozzies do? Is it actually acceptable over there or is it all completely underhanded?

As long as the contribution is transparent and below a specified amount it is accepted. Contributions are given primarily to individual politicians. They are limited in value and must be made public. Congress has passed various laws restricting and monitoring political contributions. Look up McCain-Feingold bill on the net for details.

Large corporate and union contributions are limited by law. Corporations get around this by having management make contributions as individuals. The contributions are then repaid in the form of end of the year bonuses. However, the net has made a great difference. Politicians can get campaign financing by many small contributions large in aggregate but small enough as individuals so the candidate is not indebted. Obama has been excellent at using the net.

I believe one big factor preventing political reform in the area of campaign contributions is the rigid party discipline in the major Australian parties.

The McCain-Feingold bill regarding campaign contributions was across party lines. McCain is a Republican and Feingold is a Democrat. I do not believe that would happen in Australia.

Australia is not really a representative democracy. If it were our representative in parliament would ascertain the opinion of his electoral district and considering other factors such as the good of Australia and the promptings of his conscience would follow it even if it were contrary to the decision of the party caucus. In Australia the party in power must agree to reform of the system of political donations. It is unlikely to happen.