Ludwig,

Under the NSW labor government the "donations for access" was rife, and most of these "donations" were less than the $5000 and were generally handled by intermediary "lobby" groups, so the donation limit is largely ineffective.

From the people I work with in the construction industry I understand these "donations" have not continued under the coalition, and certainly the news commentary on the issue has also gone quiet. Perhaps you have something different that you know of, but I believe what I can see for myself.

<< Ludwig don't judge the coalition by Labor's corrupt standards >>

SM, I’m not. Just because it reached a chronic level of corruption with NSW Labor doesn’t mean that it isn’t also an issue with the Libs.

It is ALWAYS going to be an issue, and a fundamental violation of democracy, when we have big donations, or any donations for that matter, to political parties, especially the one in government!

The Libs / Nats / Coalition are essentially the same as Labor in kowtowing to the big-business big-donations lobby, are they not?

Looking across the whole country, over the last couple of decades, can you tell me that they are not, SM?

<< Under the NSW labor government the "donations for access" was rife, and most of these "donations" were less than the $5000 and were generally handled by intermediary "lobby" groups, so the donation limit is largely ineffective. >>

OK, so if this is true, then I would like O’Farrell to get rid of the 5000$ cap and declare a ‘no donations at all’ regime.

That’s what I’ve always lobbied for; a complete abolition of donations.

But I was still pleased to see O’Farrell take it as far as he did.

<< When I donate to the coalition, I do expecting that they will continue legislating in my interests. This is not corrupt, and is democratic. >>

Hold on SM, yes it is, yes it is, yes it IS corrupt!!

It means that those who donate can sway government decisions. And when the big donators are all on one side of the political spectrum, decisions get swayed decisively in their favour, and the whole political direction gets governed by those with strong vested interests, ruthless competitiveness and greed for ever-higher profits!!

It is the same principle for you the little individual donator as it is for the big boys!

Meanwhile, those who want a non-vested-interest-pandering government, which will genuinely work towards a healthy and prosperous society in the long term, don’t have the ability to donate 1% as much as the big end of town!

This is one of the great problems with our political setup that we call a democracy, but which has been comprehensively HIJACKED… and antidemocratised as a result!!

If you as an individual can admit that you want certain policies to prevail by way of your small donations, then what do you think big companies want? Why do you think they donate the big bucks??

Come on SM, join me and lobby for a no-donations regime across the board.

ludwig,

I'm sorry, but I strongly believe in the right of individuals to get involved in politics, whether it is donating time, money or other services. And if I donate $500 to the Liberals because I want to get rid of the carbon tax, stop illegal immigration, etc that is in no way corrupt.

If you want to preventing the unions from donating more than $5000 p.a. then be my guest, as they are the biggest political donors.

Sure SM, get involved with politics, but leave the donations out of it.

It begs the question – why would you donate 500$ or whatever? What difference do you think that would make to your favoured political party?

Not money well spent, surely!

SM, just for you a bit of Liberal corruption in Sutherland Council, what is O'Farrell doing about that. The Liberal Party is just as corrupt as Labor, but at the moment they are a bit better at hiding it.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/sutherland-council-favours-those-with-liberal-connections-20130920-2u5dl.html